I have seen quite a few reviews on Larceny that were complimentary of that wheat bourbon, but my initial reaction to it a while back was not particularly favorable. It, like so many wheat bourbons, tends to have a poor finish (for my palate). So, wondering if I got Larceny wrong, I decided to give it another go.
Larceny is a 92 proof bourbon and I find it a bit 'hot' for that proof, along with the short finish I find in young wheat bourbons (cf. Maker's Mark). The 'hot' characteristic I speak of should not be there at 92 proof, and my conclusion is that it is the result of a poor distillation, or a poor selection of barrels. That is not to say that it is rotgut bourbon, but it lacks the softness that is the best quality (to me) of wheat bourbons. At mid-palate, I find Larceny is a mite rough, just as I did before.
So, says I to meself (when no one else is about, I often says stuff to meself), since I gots a full bottle of bourbon what ain't too much to me liking, what am i gonna do with it? Two things come immediately to mind: (1) I want to round the rough edges of Larceny, and (2) I want to see if the objectionable 'heat' comes from the proof or from the presence of what to me are undesirable constituents (as I suspect).
My first thought was that this needs either a bit of a decent high rye whiskey or the balance from a much more costly bourbon. So, I tried 4 parts of Larceny with 1 part of Bulleit. This was an improvement, but not what I was looking for.
So, I go to the E.H. Taylor Single Barrel Bottled in Bond and eventually get to a 50/50 ratio. Even there there is an edge from the Larceny 'heat' that I find distasteful. It is no where near the equal of the Taylor, which to my palate, is a much superior bourbon, and, as some would have it, not worth the $30 per bottle difference.
It does not escape my notice that perhaps it is my palate, not the other BE reviewers of Larceny, that is amiss here. But, I find Larceny, along with Elijah Craig 12 YO (in my experience of them) to be inferior and vastly overrated (I do not discount that they, like Maker's Mark, are certainly drinkable).
No Big Deal. I post this because it is my belief that anyone who would call themselves a Bourbon Enthusiast should know, and be able to defend, the uniqueness of their own palate. But it is rather rare for any palate to be truly unique, and if it is (as mine is not), it can teach us to explore our own palate to improve our own enjoyment of whiskey. We are here because we love whiskey (and a measure of its effects).
As far as I am concerned there are no other very good reasons to be here. Maybe that is why BE readership has fallen off........... were it not for the fact that we have also lost the interest of a number of very knowledgeable members, who, God willing might come back. As I so often do, I am probably pissing against the tide.