PDA

View Full Version : Tasting Notes on EW 1783?



Uncle Bob
05-05-2007, 09:21
Do any of you have any notes EW 1783?? I used to drink this label years ago on the rocks and/or with added water. It was ok. Today I am exploring all the bourbons I can find. Currently 29 open bottles. Three times I have poured 1783. Three times I wish I hadn't. I am getting a nose that I can't identify nor describe. Obviously this carries over into taste/flavor. I do not get his from regular EW. I understand you can't taste with my taste buds, but if you can help me put some kind of term on this nose/flavor I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks...
Bob

bobbyc
05-05-2007, 16:12
I'd try another bottle for sure.

cowdery
05-05-2007, 19:07
Agreed, but don't become too attached to it. I suspect this one is on the choping block. It's just too cheap for a 10-year-old in today's market.

Uncle Bob
05-05-2007, 19:29
Thanks guys! I found an old bottle at my Mother's house that had to have been open for 10 years. It was about 2/3 empty. I poured a small amount, tasted, and poured it out! Then bought this new bottle just to compare. What a waste of 11.00 bucks! Currently I have 29 open bottles of bourbon. I don't know what the top 5 are, nor the middle 10, but I certainly know which one is Number 29!!!

whiskeyhatch
05-05-2007, 19:43
I have only tried a single bottle of this stuff but I think I know what you're talking about. Someone else on this forum described it as 'cooked vegetable.' I don't know if it's the yeast used or what because I can just slightly detect it in Heaven Hill. Anyway, I nearly poured it down the sink (which is something I've never done to a bottle of bourbon) but then decided that I might be able to use it for cooking.

Gillman
05-05-2007, 19:59
I just had some of the 1783. It has a combination of youthful tastes and maturity. Even though it is all 10 years aged, part of it must be slow-maturing stock because the scents of corn oil and that "green" flavor it has are characteristic of young whiskey. But it also has good char and sweet flavors, it is an odd but interesting combination I find. I like it because I like whiskey that retains its distillery character, but it is an acquired taste. Some whiskeys show a similar profile, e.g., I agree that Maker's Mark shows a youthful, almost piney flavor, but again this is a taste many enjoy. I just had a OF 100 where (although in a different way to 1783) again I sensed a combination of barrel char and more younger whiskey tastes.

Gary

bobbyc
05-05-2007, 20:02
It's hard really to put this together, you have 29 open bottles, that doesn't give us a picture of what you have, for instance if you have every single barrel made and all the VanWinkles that would get you close to 20 bottles. Do you have Jim Beam White label? Ten High? Do you have Evan Williams Black label to compare it to? 1783 isn't one that I drink a lot but I can think of 10 Bourbons I like it better than, so it's not dead at the bottom, which made me think you got a stinker bottle.
One thing, if it doesn't agree with you don't force it.

Gillman
05-06-2007, 04:58
I agree that bottlings can vary of the same brand. This is one of the good things about bourbon because it is not completely an industrialised product. A given brand is the result of a profile but also the specifics of each batch (or barrel if single barrel) which themselves reflect many variables. I'd try once more the 1783, you may find another bottle gives more what you are looking for. If not, Heaven Hill alone offers many well-priced bourbons including Evan Williams black label, J.W. Dant, and McKenna 10 years old Single Barrel. These last three have less of the distillery character I find in 1783 although EWBL has some.

Gary

Uncle Bob
05-06-2007, 06:16
It's hard really to put this together, you have 29 open bottles, that doesn't give us a picture of what you have, for instance if you have every single barrel made and all the VanWinkles that would get you close to 20 bottles. Do you have Jim Beam White label? Ten High? Do you have Evan Williams Black label to compare it to? 1783 isn't one that I drink a lot but I can think of 10 Bourbons I like it better than, so it's not dead at the bottom, which made me think you got a stinker bottle.
One thing, if it doesn't agree with you don't force it.

Bobby...

Maybe I mis-spoke. This is a new hobby for me. This is what I have open.

1. WT 101
2. WT RR
3. WT RB
4. WT KS
5. EC 12
6. EC 18
7. Fighting Cock
8. Knobb Creek
9. Bakers
10. Bookers
11. Bulleit
12. Woodford Reserve
13. BT
14. Old Charter 12
15. Rock Hill Farms
16. OGD BIB
17. OGD 114
18. JBBL
19. JBWL
20 ER 10
21. ETL
22. EW 1783
23. EWBL
24. VOB
25. VW 15
26. MM
27. OW 107
28. Weller REserve
29. Rebel Yell

Are you saying that the four WT expressions I should count as 1?

Thanks so much for your help!

Bob

barturtle
05-06-2007, 06:54
I believe what Bobby was looking for is an idea about what your selection contained and therefore what you were comparing the 1783 to. For example if you were comparing it to nothing but top flight bottlings, there is little chance of viewing it favorably against them. On the other hand if you were comparing it to nothing but bottom shelf bottlings, it is unlikely that you would have had something that had been aged as long as this one.

While I would recommend trying another bottle- just because bad bottles do happen- individual tastes do vary, and just because you like bourbon doesn't mean you will like every bourbon. OTOH, this is not a bottling I particularly enjoy.

Uncle Bob
05-06-2007, 08:07
Well it's 9:30 AM. I just poured a 1 oz sample. It seems the nose I was getting that was so offensive is not quite as pronounced as the previous ones. It is slightly there however, and carries over into tatse/flavor.
I'll keep it covered and check back a little later. The wife just gave me a strange look at pouring bourbon this time of day! :lol:

bobbyc
05-06-2007, 09:02
Are you saying that the four WT expressions I should count as 1I don't mean that. If for instance you had VOB in 80,86,90,100 I'd call that four different bottlings.

Now that I see that you've compared this to Evan Williams Black, JimBeam Black and White Label, a Barton, Makers etc I'd say that barring a bad bottle, you simply don't like it. I will say this, you have ER 10 year on your list and I would say I like 1783 better than that, but I've never liked AAA 10 year much either. A matter of preference.

Uncle Bob
05-06-2007, 09:36
Thanks Bobby...
I have been nosing and sipping this AM. I do believe that if I remember whence it came I can appreciate it for what it is. At this juncture I have only had one pour of the ER 10 last night. If my memory serves me well, which the wife calls into question at times, I would have to place the ER 10 way above the 1783! A matter of preference indeed!!

Thanks so much for your comments and information! What a great journey we are on!


Enjoy!

Martian
05-07-2007, 11:37
The Wine Enthusiast rates EW 1783 in the 96-100 points range, their highest rating. I have not tried it yet. 1.75 L bottles are all I can find of the stuff. I have been hesitant to buy the large bottle. Here is their description from 5-01-04:

The early fragrance emits subtle, almost floral/fruity scents of banana, matted rose petals, field grasses and marzipan; aeration releases deeper aromas, especially oaky vanillin, sautéed butter, deep-fried pork rind and buttered sweet corn. Palate entry is semisweet, oaky and honeyed; at midpalate, toffee and light caramel tastes merge with the gentle bite of spirit. Finishes lean, off-dry and regal. The best whiskey value in the world, bar none.

luv2hunt
05-07-2007, 14:22
The Wine Enthusiast rates EW 1783 in the 96-100 points range, their highest rating.

That's why they're called WINE Enthusiasts!!! :slappin::slappin::slappin:

whiskeyhatch
05-07-2007, 16:35
The Wine Enthusiast rates EW 1783 in the 96-100 points range, their highest rating. I have not tried it yet. 1.75 L bottles are all I can find of the stuff. I have been hesitant to buy the large bottle. Here is their description from 5-01-04:

The early fragrance emits subtle, almost floral/fruity scents of banana, matted rose petals, field grasses and marzipan; aeration releases deeper aromas, especially oaky vanillin, sautéed butter, deep-fried pork rind and buttered sweet corn. Palate entry is semisweet, oaky and honeyed; at midpalate, toffee and light caramel tastes merge with the gentle bite of spirit. Finishes lean, off-dry and regal. The best whiskey value in the world, bar none.


Does your bottle have an age statement on it? (10 yr) If so could you point me to a location in the Dallas area that sells it? My bottle did not have the age statement (which, I understand is the newer version of the 1783) and I'm wondering if that was what the problem was. I saw some in AR for 10 bucks a bottle and if that stuff tasted anything like what you describe above, then I'm going to kick myself for not picking up some.

Uncle Bob
05-07-2007, 16:42
The Wine Enthusiast rates EW 1783 in the 96-100 points range, their highest rating. I have not tried it yet. 1.75 L bottles are all I can find of the stuff. I have been hesitant to buy the large bottle. Here is their description from 5-01-04:

The early fragrance emits subtle, almost floral/fruity scents of banana, matted rose petals, field grasses and marzipan; aeration releases deeper aromas, especially oaky vanillin, sautéed butter, deep-fried pork rind and buttered sweet corn. Palate entry is semisweet, oaky and honeyed; at midpalate, toffee and light caramel tastes merge with the gentle bite of spirit. Finishes lean, off-dry and regal. The best whiskey value in the world, bar none.

Martian..

Thanks for the post. I find the tasting notes interesting as that was the point of my original post. What is this nose that I get when I pour 1783? While I am familiar with fragrances mentioned (especially the fried pork skins and buttered sweet corn) Nothing jumps out at me! Someone suggested that a new baseball glove just oiled up might be it. Now that rung a bell. It's been many years since I had a new glove or an old one for that matter but it did make sense to me.

As for ratings, IMHO they are pure bologna! Based on what/who's benchmark? In this very thread Bobby favors 1783 over ER 10, While I am just bass-ackwards favoring ER 10 over 1783. Who is right? We both are!
He likes what he likes. I like what I like! Both agreeing there are bourbons better than either of them. But, according to Wine Enthusiast it seems we all should be doing backward flips over EW 1783. Well written reviews are another matter. Ones mans opinion, one mans impressions I respect...that I enjoy reading as I have the choice to make up my own mind. Someone telling me that bourbon A is a 94, and bourbon B is a 87 indicating that A is better than B is hogwash! Anyway, this is not a personal afront to you my friend but rather the idea of Rating numbers.
Ok the old man has ranted enough. Thanks again for posting in response to my question!!

Cheers.......

Martian
05-08-2007, 09:10
Does your bottle have an age statement on it? (10 yr) If so could you point me to a location in the Dallas area that sells it? My bottle did not have the age statement (which, I understand is the newer version of the 1783) and I'm wondering if that was what the problem was. I saw some in AR for 10 bucks a bottle and if that stuff tasted anything like what you describe above, then I'm going to kick myself for not picking up some.0
The 1.75 L bottles I have seen at Goody Goody (don't you love the name) on Harry Hines and Centennial on W. Northwest Hwy. may have a misleading label. It doesn't say 10 yr. old. It says "No. 10 Brand". I just noticed that the review from Wine Enthusiast lists the 1783 as 10 yr. old. Are we looking at two different products?

TBoner
05-08-2007, 15:10
WT did the same thing when they dropped the 8-yr age statement and went to "No. 8 brand." EW 1783 doesn't sell a ton, so some stores in Dallas will have 10-yo product aroundl, as it changed pretty recently. In fact, given the turnover I've seen at that store, I'm surprised they have newer bottlings (they had ER101 until you bought the last two Martian - incidentally, I bought the three they sold before that).

Look at some other G-G stores, especially the one on lower Greenville (where I recently bought the last WTRR101). They should have 10 year old 1783.

Martian
05-08-2007, 17:05
I'm sipping the ER 101 right now. Good stuff for the price. I did a Google search for EW 1783 and came up with one reference to a 1783 7 yr. old. I'm wondering if the 1783 "No. 10 Brand" is a 7 yr. old instead of 10 yr. old?

Gillman
05-08-2007, 18:07
The 1783 I recently commented on, bought by a friend last week in Florida, states expressly on the label it is 10 years old.

Gary

whiskeyhatch
05-09-2007, 07:03
0
The 1.75 L bottles I have seen at Goody Goody (don't you love the name) on Harry Hines and Centennial on W. Northwest Hwy. may have a misleading label. It doesn't say 10 yr. old. It says "No. 10 Brand". I just noticed that the review from Wine Enthusiast lists the 1783 as 10 yr. old. Are we looking at two different products?

Thanks Martian and thanks Tboner for the references. I know the places you're refering to. My bottle just says 'since 1783' without a '10 yr' or 'No. 10' anywhere. Jeez, I'm wondering if this is just regular old black label.

whiskeyhatch
05-09-2007, 07:11
The 1783 I recently commented on, bought by a friend last week in Florida, states expressly on the label it is 10 years old.

Gary

Thanks. I'll definately grab a couple bottles next time I see the '10 Years Old' label. Looks like I have something completely different.

MGades
05-09-2007, 09:45
Forgive me for stating the obvious, but there seems to be some confusion here about which EW product we're talking about.

The EW Black Label says "Since 1783" on the label, but has no age statement.
EWBL is not EW 1783.

See below or check this link for images of the whole EW line.

http://www.evanwilliams.com/about_brands.shtml (http://www.evanwilliams.com/about_brands.shtml)

Martian
05-09-2007, 11:24
MGades, you may be correct that the 1.75 L bottles I have seen may be the Black Label. But, this label is different than the 750 ml. bottle that says "Since 1783" (7 yr.) and the 750 ml. 1783 bottle that says 10 yrs. The 1.75 L bottles I have seen have 1783 in large letters and above it the words "No. 10 Brand". There is no age statement. The price was $20.49 for the 1.75 L. The label on this bottle is confusing and different from the other two.

whiskeyhatch
05-09-2007, 11:32
Forgive me for stating the obvious, but there seems to be some confusion here about which EW product we're talking about.

The EW Black Label says "Since 1783" on the label, but has no age statement.
EWBL is not EW 1783.

See below or check this link for images of the whole EW line.

http://www.evanwilliams.com/about_brands.shtml (http://www.evanwilliams.com/about_brands.shtml)

Yep, I feel like an ass. I must have looked at it wrong when it was on the shelf because I could have sworn that there was something else next to it that was the regular black label. Likewise, the other day I reached for a Heaven Hill BIB and somehow ended up with the 80 proof when I got home. I need to be more careful.

BourbonBalls
05-10-2007, 16:58
Yeah...the labels are deceiving.....if we read it close the BOTH say "since 1783" except the what-we-are-calling "1783" should probably be called "Evan Williams 10 year old" That distinguishes from the Evan Williams black label that was "Evan Seven" and now "Evan Something"

jeff
05-11-2007, 05:14
Do any of you have any notes EW 1783??

Canned apsparagus. One of the worst bourbons I have ever tasted. I am a fan of HH whiskey, but this one is an anomaly. Admittedly, it has been about 4 years since I've had any, but it made such a bad impression on me I wouldn't take it if they were giving it away.

whiskeyhatch
06-07-2007, 00:51
I recently purchased a bottle of this stuff. It is labled 'No. 10 Brand' and does not have the '10 Year Old' age statement. I'm the dumbass above who got it confused with the Evan Williams Black Label. For the record, I really, really like the 1783. I hope that I will someday locate a wayward bottle with the old '10 Year Old' statement, but man, this stuff cost me just a bit above 10 bucks. And it's good! This just may be a new daily. I can't detect a strange aroma in this whiskey (which, I think, was the original catalyst for this thread). I think the 1783 is almost as good as EC 12 yo, but half the price. Anyway, I and my pocketbook would like to thank Heaven Hill for this very nice bourbon.