PDA

View Full Version : Went for some Rye for a change



imbibehour
01-28-2011, 15:54
And had lots of enjoyment. I made another tasting video this time trying some basic straight American rye (JB, Pikesville, WT-R 101) :grin:

Nice to dig into something a little different, had to take a bourbon site to make it happen

Cheers!

Blog write up: click link (http://imbibehour.blogspot.com/2011/01/american-straight-rye-whiskey-to-rescue.html)

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=226LMDj57RM

SMOWK
02-02-2011, 08:44
They are filled up with GNS and sometimes even have caramel coloring in them

Davin says that they are not.

cowdery
02-02-2011, 11:22
Davin says that they are not.

Davin is correct.

Many people mistakenly believe Canadian whiskey contains GNS because American blended whiskey contains it. American blended whiskey is typically 80% GNS.

Canadian whiskey does not contain GNS. It does, however, usually contain a large amount of corn whiskey distilled at a fairly high proof and aged for at least two years, generally in used bourbon barrels. The typical Canadian whiskey, therefore, contains a lot more corn and other grains than it does rye.

The rye component, however, is distilled out at a lowish proof (e.g., 140) and made to be flavorful. Although rye may be a small amount of the overall volume it is the source of most of the flavor, so the term is not misplaced in that sense.

imbibehour
02-02-2011, 13:51
more fixin to do...

who is Davin?

callmeox
02-02-2011, 14:02
more fixin to do...

who is Davin?

Oh boy.
Now you did it...

imbibehour
02-02-2011, 14:14
Oh boy.
Now you did it...

heh heh, user on the board I thought...

I am assuming this is who you are refering to.,..

http://sourmashmanifesto.com/

silverfish
02-02-2011, 14:20
I am assuming this is who you are refering to.,..

http://sourmashmanifesto.com/

I thought this Davin (http://www.canadianwhisky.org/about) was who we were referring to.
The SMM is Josh.

imbibehour
02-02-2011, 15:17
ah I see... it's the Blog write up you are referring to...

I was watching my video and talking to myself... did I say that? wait a minute no I didn't you're messing with me... yeah that's it...

Ah okay I guess I threw that up in the write up. I was researchin a thread here on coloring and I guess I didn't read the whole thread correctly...

This is good now I don't have to re-edit the dang video.

Man you guys/gals keep me on my toes!






I still don't know Davin... but I guess now I do.

(googling Davin and Canadian Whisk(e)y Josh's site came up first which I just checked quickly before leaving the office)... So guess Davin and Canadian whiskey brings up a bourbon site... heh heh...

CorvallisCracker
02-03-2011, 15:04
Many people mistakenly believe Canadian whiskey contains GNS...


and many people (you, me, Gary, others) have posted here that it does not. For some reason, that doesn't stick. It's one of those beliefs that just refuses to die, like cavemen coexisting with dinosaurs or that "bipartisan" is something that could ever happen. I'm perplexed by its persistance. Could it be that it's...



...because American blended whiskey contains it. American blended whiskey is typically 80% GNS.

Misdirected patriotism? As in, your blended whiskey is just as crappy as our blended whiskey! That, and/or the functional interchangeability of the two products (you can mix both with Coke, something you'd never do with blended Scotch)(well, you could, but who would want to drink it?)(aside from Tim)

Whatever reason, it's there and it's not going away. Posting to the contrary will have an only temporary effect. I'll bet you that within a month there will be someone posting on SB.com that "Canadian whisky contains GNS" (a purely rhetorical challenge, 'cause I know you recognize a sucker bet when you see one).



Canadian whiskey...does, however, usually contain a large amount of corn whiskey distilled at a fairly high proof and aged for at least two years...

Three years, I believe (reference (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-27/C.R.C.-c.870/section-B.02.020.html)).

I'm sure at least one of your loyal minions will take me to task for posting a "got-cha". To them I say, it would be hypocritical for Chuck to take to task others for their "ill informed" posts but to expect to be let off the hook for any errors he himself makes. Rocks, glass houses and all that.

We all have a common interest in ensuring that the information presented here is as accurate as possible...even if some reading it won't remember it by this time tomorrow. :rolleyes:

Gillman
02-03-2011, 17:43
I definitely agree that Canadian whisky sold in Canada can't contain GNS. It's because of the 3 year aging rule Scott mentioned.

While "flavouring" can be added to a Canadian whisky under Food and Drug Act (Canada) regulations, and flavouring is defined to include any domestic or imported spirit or wine, another rule states that for whisky consumed in Canada, any spirit in flavouring (brandy, say) must be aged at least 2 years. That excludes GNS.

Where I am less certain, is for whisky sent to the U.S. I find the law unclear whether flavouring can include GNS for exported products. Even if the law can be read to allow it, it doesn't mean in practice that Canadian whisky exported to the U.S. or elsewhere contains any.

Yet, as has been noted, you continually read of assumptions or statements that suggest it is added sometimes. Here is one I just found on a random search of the Internet, from a State alcohol authority:

http://home.liq.wa.gov/liqpurchasing/Store%20Training/Canadian%20and%20American%20Blended%20Whiskey.pdf

Is it right or wrong? I don't know.

Gary

CorvallisCracker
02-03-2011, 18:13
Where I am less certain, is for whisky sent to the U.S. I find the law unclear whether flavouring can include GNS for exported products. Even if the law can be read to allow it, it doesn't mean in practice that Canadian whisky exported to the U.S. or elsewhere contains any.

I've seen repeated reference to a 9.09% limit on "flavoring" additives for Canadian whisky meant for export to the USA, most recently in a post by Davin. Since GNS is by definition "odorless and tasteless", it's difficult to see how it could be used for flavoring.

It could be 2yo grain whiskey, I suppose. But the other 90.91% would have to be whiskey aged at least three years.

I think Davin also pointed out this 9.09% exists so that Canadian producers can put in an American produced product and get some tax advantages. I suspect that this is where you'd find the rumored S-W bourbon in the higher-end expressions of CR. Or maybe LDI-produced 2yo rye. Or maybe older LDI rye (I believe I've read that Diageo has older rye they've purchased from LDI that continues to reside on LDI premises).

Gillman
02-03-2011, 18:25
Here is the definition of flavouring, and also, grain whisky. Further in, they define vodka:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/C.R.C.-C.870/FramesView.html

Also in here is the two year aging rule for spirit contained in flavouring for whisky sold in Canada.

The definition of grain whisky, essentially GNS, doesn't state no flavour. The definition of vodka does. So the argument would go, neutral spirit has some taste even if subtle, and therefore it can be added to non-domestic Canadian whisky. The fact of the 2 year rule mentioned would seem to support this. So when I read statements such as in the WA State Internet site for its liquor authority, this is what makes me think that interpretation may apply.

On the other hand, I agree that the definition of flavouring could be read to exclude any spirit which does not add flavour of some kind, i.e., even if grain spirit is taken to have no taste. You can read it that way, but just as legal matter, I incline currently to the former view. Still, that is neither here nor there if, in fact, no Canadian whisky exported from Canada contains GNS. That may well be so, I just don't know.

Gary

Gillman
02-03-2011, 18:31
Click on Division 2, Alcoholic Beverages, on the left to bring up the right frame.

Gary

CorvallisCracker
02-03-2011, 18:40
Click on Division 2, Alcoholic Beverages, on the left to bring up the right frame.

Gary

Oh, I have the whole PDF, including sections on fruits, vegetables and chocolate, downloaded on my laptop.

As for GNS=vodka, I admit I'm confounding the issue by implicit reference to USA regs, which defines both as being distilled at 95% ABV or higher. Because there is no stated requirement for filtering or anything else to render vodka "odorless and tasteless", I've always considered it a safe assmption that it's the distillation at 95% that accomplishes that.

But, yeah, it's debatable whether something distilled at that level is odorless and tasteless. I swear I can smell the rye in Sobieski vodka.

Gillman
02-03-2011, 18:53
That statement from a U.S. State liquor authority sounds pretty specific too, about adding GNS before bottling. Maybe some of what they import does that and I'd think some doesn't.

Anyway, it's an interesting question but at the end of the day, something that is 90% or more grain spirit aged in wood 3 years will not have an assertive character, that's what it comes down to. The old jokes about brown vodka are a bit unfair, but in practice, I don't find much to choose really between Seagram 7 Crown, say, and the regular run of Canadian whisky, I find them similar. And I say that as someone who likes both products.

Gary

cowdery
02-03-2011, 18:58
Scott,

Gary and I should have conferenced you in on an email conversation we were having earlier this week. It was a result of that, and discussing the 2-year-old rule for flavoring, that caused my error. Yes, 3 years, just like the UK and EU.

I'd like a list of my minions, please. :)

Guess I'll also be criticized, though not by you, for using the abbreviations GNS, UK and EU.

I also made the same argument you did about the impossibility of using something flavorless as flavoring. It's a good argument but, as Gary points out, the Canadian equivalent of GNS is not described in their regs as "flavorless" as GNS is in ours.

imbibehour
02-03-2011, 20:09
I think my head just exploded...

CorvallisCracker
02-03-2011, 22:28
I'd like a list of my minions, please. :)


Let me go back and look at your "am I too crochety" thread and see if I can pick out some likely candidates.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuXesXivAI/AAAAAAAAAFU/G_j5wrNFtfI/s1600/minions6.jpgJosh
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYOqMz8YI/AAAAAAAAAFY/XtSx8NCpoQQ/s1600/minions5.jpgOscar
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYU5jq-0I/AAAAAAAAAFc/_vaZXnu86f8/s1600/minions1.jpgSteve
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYjwVE8tI/AAAAAAAAAFk/7OaDDzmu538/s1600/minions4.jpgChristian
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYn7X0KdI/AAAAAAAAAFo/6tb4R2JuL1E/s1600/minions7.jpgScott (callmeox)
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYrRcvIMI/AAAAAAAAAFs/Vn_rPpYfhh0/s1600/minions8.jpgwade
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYbEycwwI/AAAAAAAAAFg/r-TizypB7QM/s1600/minions2.jpgJohn
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuY2JSG4AI/AAAAAAAAAFw/DtF5O6S5pGc/s1600/minions9.jpgThomasH, harshest, T comp, dbk, GOCOUGS2002, Brisko, Imbibehour, ratcheer and sku.




I also made the same argument you did about the impossibility of using something flavorless as flavoring. It's a good argument but, as Gary points out, the Canadian equivalent of GNS is not described in their regs as "flavorless" as GNS is in ours.

It applies common sense and is thus irrelevant. These are, after all, bureaucrats we're talking about.

CorvallisCracker
02-03-2011, 22:31
Man you guys/gals keep me on my toes!


We live for that. It gives our lives meaning.


I think my head just exploded...

I wondered what that sound was.

Davindek
02-04-2011, 04:33
To my understanding, it must qualify as whisky in Canada to be sold as Canadian whisky abroad.

A distiller/blender told me not that long ago that he likes to use a dash of his own 2-year-old Canadian rye flavouring whisky to "brighten up" a blend. It falls within the 9.09% in Canada and would already qualify as straight whisky in the U.S.

Gillman
02-04-2011, 11:31
As I recall from discussions when we last reviewed on SB the 9.090% rules, the U.S. standards of identity state that Canadian whisky for its purposes must be Canadian whisky as sold in Canada (or words to that effect). If that is so, then the argument would go, no GNS can be added to imports because it can't be added for domestic consumption. Perhaps that is the final answer and the circle comes around so to speak. Yet, statements abound, including as we saw on a State liquor board site, seemingly to the contrary. I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is, and while an interesting question, it doesn't really matter IMO because for practical purposes I find a high quality U.S. blended whiskey not that different from a regular Canadian whisky. This is not to say these are inferior to straight whiskey; they are different and have their own attractions.

Gary

Gillman
02-04-2011, 11:48
Just to elaborate on the last point in my previous message: Most Canadian whisky I've had, even premium brands, has a kind of clean or "fresh alcohol" edge to it. The wood and distillation tastes are certainly there, but this other one pokes out too. I think it must come from the part of the whisky distilled-out at a high proof and aged three years or more generally in small wood (i.e., apart from where two year old whisky or other spirit is added as part of "flavouring"). As someone who likes vodka, and rye vodka in particular (I just bought Zytnia's), I like that taste when that's what I want. Even though Canadian whisky has no GNS when sold in Canada and possibly not a single brand of it sold in the U.S. does, I am good with its character as I find it.

Also, subject to a few American blended whiskeys being similar (like Seagram 7 Crown), Canadian whisky has its own taste. I find it hard to describe but the taste is always a familiar one, kind of like a light bourbon or straight rye with a tobacco- or charcoal-like barrel taste which I think comes from re-used barrels. It is unique and subtle on its own terms. Last night I had some Wiser's De Luxe which was good on its own but I added a dash of Wiser's Legacy to it and it was even better.

Gary

Brisko
02-04-2011, 12:34
Great discussion re: Canadian whiskies. As a local journalist/radio guy says, "You learn more here by accident than elsewhere by design."

Back to the OP's video:

You commented more than once that you weren't getting much on the noses of these ryes.

May I humbly suggest two things: letting them open up a little longer, (WT Rye can use 15 or 20 minutes in the glass), and adding a splash of water, even as much as a teaspoonful, after you nose them initially*? Again, the Turkey probably benefits the most from this, due to its strength and "tight" nose, but even the Beam has a story to tell when treated properly.

Apologies if this has been covered before.


*I'm not suggesting that water is essential to drinking and enjoying whiskey. But it is pretty essential to nosing it successfully. If you really want to get to know your whiskeys, cut them to 20% abv and spend some time nosing them. (not much good for drinking at that strength, unfortunately).

squire
02-04-2011, 14:57
I get a slight hint of coco in the nose of Tangle Ridge which I believe is a 100% rye whisky. Does anyone else notice this?

CorvallisCracker
02-04-2011, 15:00
I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is...


The ultimate answer would be a statment from all the Canadian producers as to what exactly is in their whisky. Like that's going to happen.



I find a high quality U.S. blended whiskey...

I wasn't aware there was any such critter.



...not that different from a regular Canadian whisky.

By "regular" I assume you mean one priced under $13 US.

As I said earlier in the thread, they're functional equivalents in that both are frequently mixed with soft drinks and, I'll add, rarely consumed neat.

When buying something in this category (we do have a couple of friends who like a lightweight whisk(e)y mixed with Seven-Up), I will always buy Canadian. At least the grain spirit component of that is distilled at a lower proof (albeit slightly) and aged at least three years, as opposed to a US blend which uses neutral spirit straight from the still, along with food coloring and water.

If anything deserves the term "brown vodka" it's the latter, and calling it "whiskey" is just plain dishonest. I can't buy into that.

squire
02-04-2011, 15:20
I have no problem with them so long as they're labeled as blended whisky. Along with bulk Canadians I find them useful as a mixer for guests who don't care for a stronger whisky taste.

imbibehour
02-08-2011, 19:51
Oh hey all, I see this thread has taken on quite a life of its own. Good thing I guess too! I am not around as often as I use to be it seems...

Opening them up is certainly one that I think does benefit, to some degree I try to swirl and aerate them in my glass sometimes, but sure why not. People talk about letting them stand.. etc..

I have other videos were I did cut the bourbons I was tasting with water which I discussed a little and found little nuances. I've also done that in the past myself with tastings as well. It does make a difference I agree, although I mention I always taste them right away. 4 seems to be about my limit.

Most of the reviews on the bourbons and I guess at this point the rye whiskeys are really very quick first impressions of them right out of the bottle. It probably doesn't make sense for me to sit there for 1/2 hour talking about one whiskey even with editing, perhaps that's a little boring. Dunno maybe not, I am not the only person who does this either. Everyone's got their own style.

The other point is to try the make the videos fun also to some extent and show the enjoyment of drink.

On a second note I am awaiting some Glencairn glasses on order to use in another bourbon tasting of BT, ER, EC12, and VWLotB [VWLotB was the bourbon that started it all for me] (HAH I went acronym on ya!). My current tasting glasses are very tapered and I was thinking they might make the alcohol a little too prominent.

I got a good deal on a set of 4 I think, but I was also concerned about it too cause I am a notorious klutz and I could see myself breaking these glasses (which is why I have about 9 simple small inexpensive snifters).

Well till then, thanks for more education on CDN whisky. Gonna have to nail down some Forty Creek perhaps ;)

Oh and Congrats Garry!

dbk
02-09-2011, 10:10
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuY2JSG4AI/AAAAAAAAAFw/DtF5O6S5pGc/s1600/minions9.jpgThomasH, harshest, T comp, dbk, GOCOUGS2002, Brisko, Imbibehour, ratcheer and sku.

35 posts in and I've made an impression as a sycophant already! Sweet.

CorvallisCracker
02-09-2011, 10:21
35 posts in and I've made an impression as a sycophant already! Sweet.

Here at SB.com we stress quality over quantity. :lol:

Gillman
02-09-2011, 10:40
In terms of U.S. blends, I like Seagram 7 Crown, which is quite full-flavoured. I'm sure most don't drink it neat, but it tastes like a lighter straight rye to me.

I also like Barton's blends I find in Kentucky (I guess Tom Moore's now), some of which are reputed to have higher percentages of straight whiskey - I read that once somewhere. The thing too about those, admittedly not widely distributed I believe, is they have a "house" taste, a formula that gives them something distinctive. There is one that is sort of dates-like.

Then there is, also mostly a KY thing, the Bourbon - A Blend category, 51% bourbon the rest GNS.

I'd compare those favourably to the best Canadian whiskies.

Gary

Virus_Of_Life
02-09-2011, 13:31
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_i0SbH3GZkhI/TUuYjwVE8tI/AAAAAAAAAFk/7OaDDzmu538/s1600/minions4.jpgChristian

Wait a minute! I seem to be missing something, oh yeah, an eye! Or is that my third eye there?

yeah, yeah off topic, I know.

CorvallisCracker
02-09-2011, 13:42
Wait a minute! I seem to be missing something, oh yeah, an eye! Or is that my third eye there?


It's a special eye, for spotting Rye.


There we go. Back on topic!

cowdery
02-11-2011, 20:13
In terms of U.S. blends, I like Seagram 7 Crown, which is quite full-flavoured. I'm sure most don't drink it neat, but it tastes like a lighter straight rye to me.

I also like Barton's blends I find in Kentucky (I guess Tom Moore's now), some of which are reputed to have higher percentages of straight whiskey - I read that once somewhere. The thing too about those, admittedly not widely distributed I believe, is they have a "house" taste, a formula that gives them something distinctive. There is one that is sort of dates-like.

Then there is, also mostly a KY thing, the Bourbon - A Blend category, 51% bourbon the rest GNS.

I'd compare those favourably to the best Canadian whiskies.

Gary

They're constantly changing the recipes on these things and always in the direction of more GNS, less whiskey. There has been another burst of it in recent years because the supply of fully-aged whiskey has gotten so tight. Back when we were still in glut mode, whiskey content was as high as 40% in some of the main blends, including some of the Bartons, but they're probably no longer. At least the law requires the GNS percentage to be on the label. I always look. These days it seems like they're all right at 20% -- the legal minimum -- except S7, which is 25%.

Gillman
02-12-2011, 04:23
Barton Reserve is shown as 70% neutral spirits on the Barton website, the others (I only took at quick look) at 20%.

It is possible though too whomever was writing what I recall reading was referring also to the Bourbon - A Blend category, which are half bourbon. One of these is shown in the same (blended whiskey) part of the site.

As always, taste tests are needed, the next time in Kentucky I'll look for some and see how they stack up.

Gary

squire
02-13-2011, 17:31
Taste tests indeed Gary, you have piqued my interest in Barton blends, I'm confident I can find a few around here.

And no Chuck, I have no high expectations but am interested looking into American blends that in a highball might please my non whisky drinking social friends.

cowdery
02-15-2011, 11:01
Interested in blends? Make your own! Use good bourbon and good vodka and I guarantee you'll like the results better than anything you can buy. To approximate the typical American blend use four parts vodka to one part whiskey.

squire
02-15-2011, 15:23
Tried that with mixed results but I was looking for a richer taste profile. Now I would like to see what the professionals are doing.

cowdery
02-16-2011, 00:34
Tried that with mixed results but I was looking for a richer taste profile. Now I would like to see what the professionals are doing.

By all means. One thing they may do, like the Canadians and Scots, is use very strongly flavored whiskey since they know they're going to dilute it so much. That's why LDI makes a 95% rye whskey, as a flavoring whiskey for blends.

Shell
05-01-2011, 20:34
I get a slight hint of coco in the nose of Tangle Ridge which I believe is a 100% rye whisky. Does anyone else notice this?

I have not had the Tangle Ridge Canadian Whisky. Although it is made with a 100% rye mashbill (and aged 10 years), I believe that it is blended with a bit of sherry after the aging.