I was reading a review on Angel Envy's new Rye finished in rum barrel whiskey (Jason Pyle's Sour mash Manifesto). Reading the tasting notes basically made it seem like all the finish really did was impart (too much) rum flavor.
So I began to think about what finishing really does.
Obviously, whatever flavor was in the cask is going to mix with whatever is then added to it. I get that. But, because it's only ever in these barrels for a few months (although in this case a year and a half), I wonder if oak (if oak was used) really plays a significant influence? If it doesn't; why bother with the additional aging? So you can still call it bourbon; because technically it was left in a charred oak barrel? The rum barrel that was used in this instance had come from cognac. So we don't know how "used" the barrel was before it aged rum , so I doubt there is much wood sugar or char left to influence the "finished" bourbon. To top it all off, the LDI rye used has no age statement. We know it at least aged 1 1/2 years but how old was it before that? New make, two years, four years? Based on the tasting notes from Jason, I'm going to go with new make because the rye influence is practically taken over by rum.
I want answers because many of these bourbons or whiskeys come in at WAY beyond their price point. 70 bux for Angel's Envy? Madness. I got Parker's Heritage Collection Cognac finished for 67 dollars. By far a better product. I mean really, what would be the difference if I took Rittenhouse Rye and mixed it with Meyers Dark Rum, maybe even a splash of cognac. It would still be cheaper than Angel's Envy.