What is the story with JD: one distillation or two?

Talk about Tennessee, American and Rye Whiskey here.

Moderator: Squire

What is the story with JD: one distillation or two?

Unread postby gillmang » Mon Apr 03, 2006 12:22 pm

On the Lipmans new rye whiskey pages they mention incidentally that Jack Daniels is only distilled once, i.e., presumably through a beer still (column still) and not re-run through a doubler. Recently a fellow that works for Buffalo Trace told me this was his understanding too. Yet some years ago, although I cannot find it yet online, I am quite sure I read an interview in Malt Magazine with Lincoln Henderson in which it was said the spirit is put through a doubler. In one sense it would not surprise me if the whiskey is not doubled because of course it is put through the famous charcoal mellowing process before barreling. So one might think that process replaces to all intents and purposes the second, doubling, stage as done by almost all or all other bourbon distilleries. I wonder however if the unique candy/anise notes of JD at least in part may derive from the doubling step being omitted.

Does anyone know the true situation? If doubling is omitted, I wonder if the column stills may be adjusted to produce the proof that would result if doubling was included.

Come to think of it, why is doubling done at all by anyone? If doubling adds, say 15 points of proof or whatever it is to the singlings, why not just adjust or design (more plates) the column still to produce a run at that final proof? Maybe in effect this is what B-F do at Jack Daniels. Or maybe they don't if they consider the charcoal mellowing is in fact a second "distillation".

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

Unread postby bourbonv » Mon Apr 03, 2006 12:48 pm

Gary,
Chris Morris is emphasising the fact that Jack Daniel's is double distilled in a true pot still doubler as opposed to the thumper used for Old Forester and Early Times in Louisville. I would assume that means they are double distilling Jack Daniel's now.

I know that in the early 1990's when Jim Murray came to United Distillers Archive for research on a Saturday Morning. At that time he was telling me that they did not seem to be double distilling at Jack Daniel's and some of the tail boxes were dry. I was under the impression that they might have been experimenting with single distilled whiskey for Jack Daniel's at that time. I do know I thought that the quality had slipped quite a bit in the early 1990's Jack Daniel's in ways that a single distillation product would explain. I also think it has improved in quality since then.

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 » Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:05 pm

Thanks Mike, this is consistent with what I read in Malt Magazine.

Maybe the stories one hears to the contrary are based on older information, or maybe some Jack Daniels at any rate still is single-distilled.

I had some Silver Select recently and it had almost none of the candy/anise notes I associate with regular JD or even Single Barrel. I wonder if the whiskey that goes in to Silver Select might have been distilled twice and the others once. The relative quantities of each would suggest this is not true, however.

Mike, I know you have some interesting items in your personal collection. What is the oldest Jack Daniels you have tasted? I have never tasted any before the 1970's (and the 70's Jack I tasted was tasted in the same decade!). I feel it would be very interesting to taste Jack Daniels made, in, say, 1955. I wonder how close it would be to any version available today.

John L. do you have any from that time by any chance? If so have you tried it and would you say it is similar to today's version? In particular was that distinctive candy-like note in the whiskey then?

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

Unread postby bourbonv » Mon Apr 03, 2006 2:01 pm

Gary,
The Oldest Jack I have is from the late 70's or early 80's. I have never seen one older, but drank quite a bit of it in the mid 70's as some concerts here in town.

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 » Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:00 pm

Mike: I think the candy/anise signature goes back to the 70's at least. But I wonder if it was a feature of JD in the 1950's or of course, before Prohibition. That Silver Select (100 proof) was really good, a friend brought some back from the Caribbean, I feel it may resemble closely the 100 proof Jack Daniels from before 1920.

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

Unread postby bourbonv » Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:30 am

Gary,
From what I have seen of old Jack Daniel Records there was not a set proof for the brand. If you wanted 92 proof or 103 proof Old No. 7, then that was what you got. Most of the whiskey was sold by the barrel so the purchaser also had a certain amount of choice on age and flavor. Prior to 1910 (prohibition in Tennessee start in 1910 closing the distilleries), the flavor for Tennessee whiskey would be varied and inconsistant in the same way as a single barrel product of today varies.

I would be more interested in what Lem Motlow thought was the way that Tennessee whiskey should taste like when he started things back up in the 40's. That is the bottle of Jack Daniel's Old No. 7 I am looking for to taste.

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 Apr 06, 2006 2:26 pm

Yes I would go along with this but only to the extent Lem's version was some evidence of what the original was like. With an operation like this, so fixed on tradition from day 1 (other than mass production and marketing :)), I believe there was continuity from the outset. So if we can't find JD from, say 1910, 1940's JD is next best to figure out what the pre-Pro version was like. Sure it had different ages and proof then, just like whiskey has now, but there would have been a profile, a signature. That of JD is so unique I have to wonder if it was in the product from the beginning. I mean, no one would (I think) just invent that, or not later in the history of the product at any rate. Because if you wanted to reformulate, why that taste? They would pick something relatively featureless and bland, and that's one thing Jack Daniels isn't!

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


Return to Non-Bourbon Whiskey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests