Rating: 18/23 N: There's a biting citrus like when you first cut into an orange. It's backed by sweetness and some richness from the cognac. There's a hint of spice and perhaps no more than the faintest hint of alcohol, but it's hard to get much more out because the orange is so piercing. P: The citrus bite hits me immediately. Keeping in mind that experience of cutting into an orange, the reminds me somewhat of eating a slice with the peel still attached, though somewhat less numbing and oily. There is a numbing spiciness to this though and the orange's sweetness is supported by the dried fruits from the cognac (mainly raisin, but also a hint of dark cherry and just maybe sultana). There's a brown sugar tint to the caramel and possibly some additional spices that are hard to grasp. This has a less pure orange flavor than either Cointreau or Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao does. Whereas Cointreau has an orange candy flavor and Pierre Ferrand nails the bitter, oily orange peel flavor, this just has a citrusy note that is kind of like orange, but also kind of like other citrus. It could have some lemon and perhaps even lime mixed in, but it mostly just tastes like lackluster orange. Admittedly, it's the most realistic orange experience of the three, but it's a tad off-putting since this is nominally an orange liqueur (and to be clear, it still does mostly taste like orange). Partially, it's just lacking sugar, but the underlying orange is not as good as what Pierre Ferrand has either. I definitely get plenty of sweetness along with it, though not to the same extent as in Cointreau. The cognac is certainly present as well, though its particular flavors aren't terribly distinct and it doesn't taste terribly mature either. It's a richer and more syrupy liqueur than Cointreau is. F: The orange and some generic brandy flavors stay, along with a little bit of zesty spice. The sweetness becomes a bit more bitter, but the viscosity stays. I prefer the palate, but this is totally fine. This is a more complex liqueur than Cointreau is by far and I would argue that it is also more balanced. The raw alcohol stands out less in this than in either Cointreau or Pierre Ferrand Dry Curacao (which I consider to be the other two big players in the orange liqueur market) I can actually imagine myself sitting and sipping this neat. The cognac itself doesn't taste all that interesting, but liqueurs are kind of like cocktails in that they can disguise underwhelming spirits. The flip side though is that the citrus is less obviously orange than just some general citrus and the complexity muddles it slightly with the other flavors that are present (the spirit and the wood). As a result, its high notes are not as high as the Cointreau orange candy and whether they meet the level of the Pierre Ferrand oily bitter young orange spirit is open to debate (also, seasonality, as Grand Marnier has more of a winter presence). If I'm drinking something neat, I'll take this over Cointreau or Pierre Ferrand. Their underlying alcohol comes out more and they taste less mature and enjoyable to contemplate. They're all pretty easy to just sip for their sweetness though. For mixing, it's more complicated. After testing numerous cocktails with all sorts of variations, I was unable to determine a clear winner. Each of these had cocktails and particular variants of them in which it excelled and none of them was ever plain bad. Cointreau was probably the least offensive, whereas Grand Marnier was more likely to clash a bit. At the end of the day, while Grand Marnier is a 16 to 18 (probably a 17) for sipping neat, it's tied with the other two at 18 for mixing. It's a total anti-climax, but they're all getting an 18 because there are so many cocktails that they are so good in. If I just had to pick one, it would be tough to choose, but I'd likely pick Pierre Ferrand just for the value for the money. If I already had one that was not Grand Marnier, Grand Marnier would be my second choice because it is so different and more enjoyable to sip. Roll in the post-credits scene here though. I was disappointed by the outcome of my head-to-head-to-head, so I took one more stab at it and came out with a compelling result! Now, all of them are still very good and I found that each pretty consistently enhanced the cocktail I mixed it in. That said, I do think I've identified a winner and a loser this time. So I tried cocktails based on gin and tequila, with an emphasis on margaritas because, obviously. I didn't have the proper ingredients to make anything rum-based, so I skipped it and that might influence future ratings. I found this time that Cointreau decidedly trailed the other two. It added some more orange presence for sure, but it was just so simple. I did make stronger cocktails this time around, but it wasn't exactly a thimbleful of lime juice dumped into a vat of tequila. This time, Cointreau was consistently second or third and Pierre Ferrand was consistently first or second. There was one exception in which Cointreau was close to Pierre Ferrand for first (in a margarita with an anejo tequila, in case that matters), but that was the best that it did. Grand Marnier continued to be the most volatile, so it is definitely the riskiest choice when mixing a drink (though if anything I suspect it would be less risky in a rum-based cocktail). It tasted pretty good consistently though and Cointreau never quite achieved the complexity and balance of Pierre Ferrand. Considering this experience, I would have to say that Pierre Ferrand and Grand Marnier rival each other based on context and personal preference (do you want that pure tequila flavor to show through?), but Pierre Ferrand is a much safer option. It is still the easiest one to drown in a weak cocktail, but I frankly don't want to drink something watered down with margarita mix anyway. Considering all of this, I think that Pierre Ferrand wins for quality and consistency. It would be my first choice, Grand Marnier my second, and Cointreau my third. They are all still pretty close though. I'm going 19, 18, and 17, respectively.