PDA

View Full Version : Michter's US1 Unbleded American Whiskey Batch# 3E1



Paradox
09-15-2003, 11:19
I received a new bottle and thought I would share a picture of it with you all. I've not heard much about it, probably because it's not a bourbon, but an Unblended American Whiskey as the label says. The label is near identical to the 10 year Michter's Single Barrel Bourbon (black label) and Rye (green label) labels, this one being blue. Inside the hangtag on one side is what is written on the back of the bottle, see photo below. The other side of the hangtag says "The Michter's legacy traces back to America's first distilling Company established in 1753. Over the years Michter's has earned praise from whiskey lovers as well as acclaim from writers for its exceptional small production American Whiskies, Ryes, and Bourbons. We hope that our Small Batch spirits show you that exceptional whiskey making in America is alive and well and as good as it gets! Thank you for trying our uniquely flavourful whiskeys. Enjoy!"

I must say that for being made in 'bourbon-soaked' white oak barrel's (I'm assuming used barrels) it is remarkebly dark in color, even at a relatively low proof of 83.4 When I can get a 2nd bottle, I'll let you all know impressions...

Gillman
09-15-2003, 17:08
Fascinating.

Could this be a recreation of Michter's Original Sour Mash Whiskey, ie. the Michter's proprietary product made until about 1980 which was a straight (certainly an unblended) whiskey but neither a bourbon nor a rye?

Gary

ratcheer
09-15-2003, 17:40
I love the way you composed that top photo. Simple but elegant.

Tim

Barrel_Proof
09-15-2003, 17:44
This non-bourbon is another Even Kulsveen mystery marketing whiskey. In July, 2002, he registered "Michter's American Whiskey Co." as one of the many assumed names of his "Kentucky Bourbon Distillers, Ltd."

robbyvirus
09-15-2003, 23:09
I tried Michter's bourbon at the Whiskey Expo in March. It was OK...good, but didn't blow me away. I haven't tried the unblended whiskey, but I have seen it on sale out here in California at Beverages n' More.

kitzg
09-18-2003, 07:35
Who's bottling this now?

While I am a marketing guy I must laugh at the marketing here: "In the Michter's tradition" -- that could likely be used by anybody but is also technically bullshit unless it is potstill bourbon

"bourbon soaked...barrels" translates used barrels like Early Times

Most of the drinking public has no clue what this really means.

Enjoy and let us know what this tastes like.

bourbonmed
10-15-2003, 10:59
Mark, all:

Check this short review in the Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/15/dining/15STUF.html

Omar

Paradox
10-15-2003, 11:14
Omar, I don't have an account set up there with the times, what did it basically say?

Oh and has anyone seen the new Michter's US1 Rye anywhere online for ordering? I saw a pic of it in a magazine, it is the same as the bottle pic I posted but the label is green. We're not talking the old Michter's 10 year small batch straight rye but the new US1 version. Thanks all.

Update: Here is a pic of the Rye I am looking to see if anyone has seen around

http://www.michters.com/pics/sr_us1.gif


You can see all 4 of the current 'Michter's' products here (http://www.michters.com/).

bourbonmed
10-15-2003, 11:30
It was a favorable review, called it smooth with a rich flavor -- nutty and buttery. It didn't go into ownership details, saying 'entrepreneurs' bought the brand and 'set it' up in B-town. (You know Who didn't get into the Times, as elusive as ever). http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Good news for you guys in the NYC area, it's available in several shops -- 79 St. Wine & Spirits, Astor W&S, Winnfield-Flynn, about $30 for the 750 ml.

Omar

Paradox
10-15-2003, 11:35
Really? Thanks for the shop locations Omar. Sounds like a favorable review. I'll definately call around now and see if I can get another one to do a tasting on in the upcoming days...

Stacy is on the case! http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif She is seeing if one of those places that is right on her way home from the city has them. If so, I plan on opening a us1 american whiskey next week.

Paradox
10-18-2003, 10:03
Ok, I just popped the cork on a bottle. Let me tell you this stuff has a distinct smell as soon as you take a whiff. I'm going to try and post tasting notes for it later on but here are just some quick 1st impressions based upon a very small pour. The smell jumps out at you like I said, almost like buttery popcorn and almost sweet-like. I really liked the smell. Taste is almost like corn whiskey/whitedog but with other flavors imparted. Some bourbon characteristics but truly in a class on its own. Overall I liked it, sweet with no noticable bite. I'll post tasting notes either later on or tomorrow but if you can get a bottle for around $27-30 it is something unique to try!

MurphyDawg
10-18-2003, 10:15
Mark,

Do you know how long it was aged. I wonder if that is what bourbon tastes like after 1-2 years in the barrel?

TomC

Paradox
10-18-2003, 11:06
Tom, it's 4+ years old and it is aged in bourbon-soaked american white oak barrels. I'm guessing that unique taste comes from the fact that it is aged in re-used barrels so much of the char and all that 'good stuff' has been used already. Stacy took a quick smell and she says it smells like candy or butterscotch. For her to tell a difference it is w/o a doubt unique from your typical bourbon. http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif

Paradox
10-23-2003, 05:07
It was hard to get a definative answer from the store owner on this one but it seems the Michter's US1 Straight Rye Whiskey 4 year old version still has not been bottled. There 'may' have been a batch released and it is sold out but the story sounds more like they just haven't bottled it yet. I was told that it is expected to be out on store shelves by January of next year. Again, you can see Michter's 4 bottle line-up on their website. (http://www.michters.com)

mike1
04-05-2004, 14:17
My brother gave me a bottle of Michers Unblended American,batch 3j2,this weekend, and it is quite delightful. All of the alcohol I need as an adult, and the flavor of butterscotch pudding that I remember as a child. What I do not get is how can a whiskey aged in used barrels, where much of the flavor components have already be leached out, get such a flavor and deep color. Does anyone know if as an Unblended Whiskey, aside from using a mash bill different from that required for bourbon, could also use either added colors or flavors as some Blended Whiskey's, and Canadian's do

cowdery
04-05-2004, 16:24
The only word they are using that has any legal significance is "whiskey," which merely means distilled from grain at less than 190 proof. Yes, they can add flavorings and colorings. Some believe this is the exact same whiskey as Conecuh Ridge. A correspondent of mine talked to someone at Conecuh Ridge who reported that their whiskey contains apples.

mike1
04-06-2004, 12:52
I thought that vodka was the only beverage alcohol distilled out at that high a proof. I know that bourbon,rye,etc can't be distilled out at more than 160 proof. so are you saying that named straight whiskey like rye,bourbon, or corn can'nt have additives,but that a generic whiskey can? Is there a cap on the amount and types of flavoring and coloring used. I know that so called blended whiskey can use unaged neutral spirits.Any clarification that you can give would help.

cowdery
04-06-2004, 13:47
To be called bourbon, rye, etc. it can't be distilled at more than 160 proof but to be called just whiskey it can be up to 189 proof.

27 CFR 5.22(2)(b)

Class 2; whisky. ``Whisky'' is an alcoholic distillate from a fermented mash of grain produced at less than 190 deg. proof in such manner that the distillate possesses the taste, aroma, and characteristics generally attributed to whisky, stored in oak containers (except that corn whisky need not be so stored), and bottled at not less than 80 deg. proof, and also includes mixtures of such distillates for which no specific standards of identity are prescribed.

mike1
04-08-2004, 17:18
thanks
I went to the atf web site, and looked at the rule you quoted, and I guess the stuff can also have 2.5 per cent additives to give it that 'down home' taste. It tastes good, but I vaguely feel like i am drinking tainted goods. part of the facination with bourbon is that it is a natural product.

Gillman
04-08-2004, 20:14
Isn't it possible this whiskey is made from the same type of mash bourbon is made from but simply is aged in barrels that are not new charred wood? Maybe they use first refill charred barrels. If so, there would be plenty of flavour for the cask to impart. Some would come from the bourbon in the wood from the first fill, some would come from the red layer still in there, and some would come from the plain wood itself. Chardonnay wine can have a warm butterscotch flavour from plain oak (maybe lightly toasted); would not a charred refill cask have that much more to offer? I would not assume Michter's unblended has flavouring added or is distilled at higher than 160 proof; this may be so but I believe it is not the case.

Gary

mike1
04-11-2004, 08:59
maybe,but if that is the case bourbon is going to get a run for its money as manufacturers experiment with putting whiskey up in all kinds of barrels to get different flavor profiles, and it will be cheaper for them as they will be able to use the barrels over and over. I had thought a la scotch and early times,the only amerrican whiskey I know that uses old barrels,that you would get a very light whisket,both in color and flavor if you reused barrels.

cowdery
04-11-2004, 14:52
As Lincoln supposedly wrote in his one and only book review, "if you like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing you will like." If people want to make high proof whiskey, age it in used cooperage, and add flavorings and colorings, more power to them. If anyone wants to drink that sort of thing, they can be my guest, but I don't think bourbon or other American straight whiskey styles will be particularly threatened. It's a different animal.

Back when vodka was first becoming popular, in the 1960s, several whiskey companies invested a lot of money in the technology to make something called "light whiskey." It was a huge bomb. Why should someone who doesn't like the taste of whiskey choose something that tastes a little bit like whiskey over something (vodka) that doesn't taste at all like whiskey and doesn't, in fact, taste much like anything at all?

bourbonmed
04-28-2004, 09:31
More praise for Michter's.

http://www.nj.com/living/ledger/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1083137840248290.xml

Omar

cowdery
04-28-2004, 10:15
Although typically ill-informed, the article makes an interesting point. The absurdity of all these people who claim to be using 200-year-old recipes (e.g., Jim Beam, Bulleit) is that whiskey the way they made it 200 years ago would have tasted like crap compared to what we have today.

Gillman
04-28-2004, 14:02
Yes, and let me try to indicate what I think is misinformed or at least incomplete. Michter's was certainly used as the name of the whiskey in the post-Pro era before 1975, in fact I am sure from the day Forman sold the whiskey it was branded as Michter's. The distillery itself was called, I believe, Pennco, but Michter's was used to style the whiskey. Second, the Michter name certainly was associated to the one and same distillery that Bomberger owned. There was a series of families with German-derived names that owned the distillery and at some point Michter's was one of them.

The information that the unblended whiskey is aged in (presumably new) charred wood is interesting because it comes with the tidbit that a straight whiskey formula was used except with less than 51% corn. Michael Jackson wrote in 1988 that Michter's used in the mash 50% corn, 38% rye and the remainder barley malt. It sounds like Chatham may have known this. Apart from being told that, possibly, when they acquired the trademark rights Jackson's 1988 World Guide To Whisky stated what the mashbill of Michter's Original Sour Mash Whiskey was. So the unblended Michter's may be reproducing the Michter's taste as it was before the distillery closed in the mid-1980's. Chatham knows of Hirsch (being long-aged 1974 Michter's distillate) and perhaps tried to duplicate the flavor allowing of course for the Hirsch version being much older. I thought the current Unblended Michter's was from a bourbon mash but aged in plain wood; it turns out to be something of the obverse: a non-bourbon mash distillate aged in new charred oak.

The Revolutionary reference is wrong not just because at the time whiskey was drunk young but because whiskey then, certainly in Pennsylvania and at Mount Vernon, was made mostly from rye. Washington used about 64% rye according to the research reported by Mike Veach as I recall.

How could reducing the (mild) corn element in the current Unblended Michter's reduce the "bite"? Something doesn't make sense here, what about the non-corn grains in there, especially the rye (which provides a lot of taste, so if bite is to be reduced one would think rye content would be reduced, not corn).

Anyway, it is good to see attention being given to various kinds of whiskey albeit the story sounds a bit disjointed and wrong in certain particulars.

Gary

mike1
04-28-2004, 18:38
Here is my common sense take on Michners. It is not distilled and bottled by the same people,so it has to be bought from someone.It is not a big enough brand for it to be made to some esoteric formulation,so I suspect that it has a bourbon mashbill. The label says that it is matured in '...bourbon-soaked white oak barrels.' To me that means used cooperage. Michners flavor is different from other bourbons or Kentucky Whiskies. It is different enough for me to believe that the statement that '..it is further mellowed by..signature filtration.' is code for some form of flavoring being added to the whiskey before it is bottled bottled. Maybe someone in the know will devulge more .

cowdery
04-29-2004, 15:43
Your decoding is very astute.

Gillman
05-27-2004, 18:12
I had the chance to taste this whiskey, finally. A very interesting product. I can't fathom what that "signature filtration" might be. The words don't literally refer to any kind of flavoring, which is not to say it isn't flavored. The reference in the labelling to bourbon-soaked cooperage clearly denotes reused bourbon barrels, I agree. The taste reveals a clear rye edge, this whiskey derives from a high rye mash, whatever its origin. The flavour is rather unlike bourbon. The full-bore barrel character of bourbon is missing, but there is a strong woody character at the same time. It reminds me of the kind of rummy Canadian whiskey that some makers here once put out (e.g. Captain's Table, if anyone remembers that one) mixed with an older rye-recipe bourbon. Say, Trace blended with CC 15 year old with a shot of old rum thrown in. There is a persistent sweetness that may indicate flavouring of some kind, but I don't think it is sweetened or flavored. I find ice improves this one, brings out the taste. Taken neat, it shows some jagged ("granular") edges but still is tasty. A one-off, and it adds variety to the scene.

Gary