Vatting American Whiskey

Talk about Tennessee, American and Rye Whiskey here.

Moderator: Squire

Unread postby bunghole » Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:19 pm

gillmang wrote:Are you saying whisky blending and vatting are also the "Zeitgeist", no pun intended? :)


Mine lederhosen sind gagongen! :wink:
User avatar
bunghole
Registered User
 
Posts: 2157
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:42 am
Location: Stuart's Draft, Virginia

Unread postby bourbonv » Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:24 pm

A.K.A. "Pants Away!"

Mike Veach
Mike Veach
"Our people live almost exclusively on whiskey" - E H Taylor, Jr. 25 April 1873
User avatar
bourbonv
Registered User
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Louisville, Ky.

Unread postby gillmang » Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:20 pm

I thought you were Scots-Irish. :)

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby gillmang » Tue Nov 01, 2005 10:33 am

A vatting of Jack Daniels with something "extra": 12 ounces each of Jack Single Barrel and regular Jack Daniels (the latter from three different bottles) and an ounce or so of Hirsch 16. The '74 Michter's gives some extra depth and "background", if you didn't know it was there you would not think this was anything other than Jack Daniels, but a very good JD!. The proof is around 86,a good sampling strength. The taste is deep and rich, unusually for Jack: what achieves this is the vatting: the particular Jack Daniel whiskeys used, the proportions and the light touch of super-aged straight whiskey. There is an element of luck, too, or serendipity in getting a particularly good balance. If you took another bottle of Jack Single and blended it with an equal amount from three other bottles of regular JD with the same Hirsch addition, it would (I guarantee you) not taste exactly the same as the vatting I made.

Returning to the palate, I note too Jack does not use a high-rye mash. The high rye in the Hirsch gives the blend that extra bit of taste it needs. There is not a lot of Hirsch in there but that Hirsch is a rye-heavy bourbon and it deepens the taste of the Jack (without "altering" it) even at a 5% addition. Ball that Jack, don't they say? :)

This one is a keeper (it won't be further blended) and I'll try to save some for Gazebo.

By the way when nosing the last bottle of regular Jack I used for this, for some reason "Woodford Reserve" came to my mind. Something in the nutty smell reminded me of WR. I guess inevitably there will be some resemblance when one considers both are from the same company and under the tutelage of the same master distillers and tasters.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby Strayed » Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:50 pm

One thing we should keep in mind concerning the flavor or color of Jack Daniel's is that JD isn't JUST "not-a-bourbon"... it's also not straight whiskey (in fact, there's no such thing as straight Tennessee whiskey). That means there are no legal sanctions concerning the proportions of grains used, or even about (gasp!) coloring or flavoring (just as long as grain neutral spirits aren't added). Thus, despite advertising and fanatical supporters, JD is really just a smokey version of their other product, Early Times. I like the basic idea of your vatting -- and I'll bet it's really REALLY good-tasting -- and I certainly enjoy a display of decadence myself occasionally (pre-Pro PA rye with diet ginger ale, perhaps?). But mixing Hirsch's 16 year old Michters with Coca-Cola fuel seems a little like overkill :cabbage:. Might it not be just as tasty with Old Overholt or Rittenhouse?

Jack Daniel's has a "tough guy" image, but I really think of JD more as "rough 'n' tumble for sissies" -- not so much Janis Joplin as Bette Midler. And the Hirsch/Michters product is just so suave and sophisticated. What can they possibly see in each other? It's like a sit-com.

Hey! Wait a minute... it IS a sit-com! Dharma and Gregg!

So, uh.. suppose you vatted a hot Cuban rum with a crazy, red Irish... nah, that'd never work.
=JOHN= (the "Jaye" part of "L & J dot com")
http://www.ellenjaye.com
User avatar
Strayed
Registered User
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Ohio-occupied No. Kentucky (aka Cincinnati)

Unread postby Bourbon Joe » Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:19 am

John,
Pre-Pro Pa Rye and diet Ginger Ale. STOP.......I'm getting chest pains.
Joe :roll: :roll: :lol:
Colonel Joseph B. "Bourbon Joe" Koch

Bourbon, It's cheaper than therapy!
User avatar
Bourbon Joe
Erudite Bourbonite
Erudite Bourbonite
 
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:02 pm
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania

Unread postby gillmang » Wed Nov 02, 2005 3:18 pm

John, Jack Daniel may not be legally defined as a straight whiskey but it meets the test for same except (possibly) for the preliminary charcoal leaching. It is not a smoky Early Times because unlike Early Times Jack Daniel is aged in all-new charred barrels. It is more than 51% corn and is otherwise a bourbon mashbill, is distilled under 160 proof and entered at not more than 125 proof, uses no colouring and is aged more than 2 years. Sounds pretty straight to me. :) Only the leaching arguably (even this is unclear) disqualifies it from being called a straight bourbon on the label.

As for adding Hirsch, it is just another whiskey, composed also of corn, rye, malt and aged in new charred wood. Adding Rittenhouse or another straight rye is not a bad idea but there is noting unusual in adding a well-aged liquor like Hirsch to JD. If JD added (and they might for all I know) a very much older JD (at one time they played with a 21 year old expression) to their barrels to deepen the taste a bit - something other distillers do all the time - that is similar to what I'm saying. In fact I'd wager a 16 year old JD would taste quite a bit like the Hirsch 16, only (probably) somewhat less rye-e.

JD is in every sense a bourbon; as Chuck Cowdery writes, with respect to whether JD is bourbon, "we need to get over it". :)

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby Strayed » Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:21 pm

Gary,
I absolutely and wholeheartedly agree(d) with you about JD's qualifications toward bourbonity. At least, I did before it's recent reduction to, first, 86 and then 80 proof. I'm not so sure anymore. JD's real market strength is very similar to that of Budweiser or Miller-Lite's... an identification with the brand that supercedes any semblance of reason. I contend that today's 80 proof Jack Daniel's is as legitimate a "fine bourbon" as today's Early Times*... charred barrel or no charred barrel. I'll bet all three of the JD's you "chose" (i.e., drank until nearly empty :-)) for your vatting were the REAL, 90-proof versions.

* which, by the way, I feel also deserves a better "rep" than its non-bourbon legal status gives it. I can name at least five "straight bourbons" that would fail miserably in a contest with Early Times, even if based solely on "characteristic bourbon flavor". I'll bet you can, too.
=JOHN= (the "Jaye" part of "L & J dot com")
http://www.ellenjaye.com
User avatar
Strayed
Registered User
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Ohio-occupied No. Kentucky (aka Cincinnati)

Unread postby gillmang » Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:30 am

John, thanks for these additional thoughts. I can't see though that a 40% ABV Jack Daniel makes it any less a "bourbon" than 86 or 90 proof. The proof issue for me is simply price related - not unimportant but it does not define the bourboness of a product. For years in the 1980's I enjoyed AAA 80 proof because I liked the balance and "pre-dilution", it was no less a bourbon for that. I like bourbon at all proofs but often dilute it to around 80, so Jack has done the work for me (adding older whiskey in the bargain to ensure the colour isn't too pale - how can I lose..?). I used a combination of 80 proof Jack and 94 (the Single Barrel) and that allows me to adjust the final proof of course, 50/50 is 87 proof. If I use a little less 80 that gets me to 90 proof, and so on. I know Early Times and the use of some reused cooperage really does make a difference to the palate, it is milder and offers someting of the blended taste because of that, which many people like of course (me too). But Jack is all-straight-type whiskey. I recall reading, I think on the other board, that its fusel oil content ranks amongst the highest in the business. To me that is a sign of genuiness.

To those who miss the old 86 proof (and the 90 before that), buy a bottle of Single Barrel and vat it with a bottle of 80 proof in the proportions that will produce 86 or 90 proof. It will make the drink exactly what it was.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby bourbonv » Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:08 am

I agree with John that Early Times does get a bad rap - it is a brown vodka type whiskey, but not offensive. The bourbon they sell overseas is actually a fairly decent product. I like it better than Jim Beam White.

Jack Daniel's lower proof is dissapointing to me since I like 90 or 100 proof products as a whole, but it did not change the flavor too drastically from the 86 proof. I wish they would come out with a "Tennessee Proof" version at 90 or 100 proof for the american market. I think it would do well.

Mike Veach
Mike Veach
"Our people live almost exclusively on whiskey" - E H Taylor, Jr. 25 April 1873
User avatar
bourbonv
Registered User
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Louisville, Ky.

Unread postby gillmang » Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:48 pm

Mike, there is such a whiskey, a 90 proof special release JD with a kind of medallion on it. This was discussed on the other board recently. But again, if you want 90 proof JD and can't find the special release it's easy to make if you have a bottle of Single Barrel and regular Jack.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby bourbonv » Sun Nov 20, 2005 2:36 pm

Gary,
I may have found the perfect avatar for you if someone wishes to use their artistic ability to change it a little from "Batman" to "Vatman". It is a 1905 political cartoon of Thomas J. Batman. I am working on getting it scanned and I will send it to you to consider.

Mike Veach
Mike Veach
"Our people live almost exclusively on whiskey" - E H Taylor, Jr. 25 April 1873
User avatar
bourbonv
Registered User
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Louisville, Ky.

Unread postby gillmang » Sun Nov 20, 2005 2:41 pm

Thanks Mike!

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Previous

Return to Non-Bourbon Whiskey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests