Page 2 of 2

Unread postPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:26 am
by bourbonv
Chuck,
I would disagree. I think that more than 10% were better quality rectifiers and it was probably closer to 40% or more. Many of the brands we drink today had their start as rectified whiskey including IW Harper, Four Roses, Old Forester and even more recently, Wild Turkey. Good quality rectifiers were common enough that they were able to prevent the "Imitation whiskey" from being applied to their products. If 90% of them were making a cheap product that contained unknown elements, I think they would have been forced to accept that label. I think Taft made his decision in a way that protected that group of rectifiers making a good product from being called "Imitation whiskey". I don't think he would have done that if they were only a small minority. It was the straight whiskey propaganda that makes people think that the majority of the rectifiers sold snake oil.

Unread postPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:50 pm
by brendaj
Today, rectifier means blender, as none redistill, few age, and maybe a few more filter. Modern rectifiers typically make other things too, such as gin and liqueurs.

So, I see that the rule might make Even a rectifier, but not Julian. I mean, Julian's stuff is all Bourbon or Rye, right? So is Julian considered a rectifier as well?

Unread postPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:59 am
by bourbonv
Julian is a rectifier. He purchases his whiskey and then ages it to meet his specifications, thus rectifying it.

Unread postPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 3:27 pm
by brendaj
I don't know, somehow there's a difference to me...ya know?
Julian isn't really adding, flavoring or filtering. At best he's blending, but even then...not so much. All he does is just hold it, and when he thinks it's right he bottles it.
So...on that note, Trey Zoeller is a rectifier. And Pogue?

Unread postPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:26 pm
by cowdery
The people who use the term are people who have vats and mix stuff, whether blended whiskey or liqueurs. They consider that a little more than being just a bottler.

Julian, of course, is now at most a marketing company, since he has no facilities of his own.

Re: Taft Decision

Unread postPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 10:32 am
by bourbonv
I do believe that Julian is still operating under a rectifier's license.

After looking closer at the Taft decision I am convinced that he made his decision on blended whiskey to protect the foriegn whiskey producers. If he had not made the decision in the way he did, then all of the imported scotch, Irish and Canadian Whiskey would have had the "immitation whiskey" label. I am sure they were not completely happy withy the "blended whiskey" label, but it is better than being labeled "immitation whiskey".

Re: Taft Decision

Unread postPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:27 am
by Bicgatepc02
I'll take a glass. Wouldn't care to have been in Ben Butler's presence. The things I do for bourbon! :shock: :lol: :roll:









__________________________________________________________
china electronics best tablet pc china brands