Products We Would Like To See

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Hello Folks,

I think it is time to start a thread on wish lists: If you were emperor, what whiskies would you direct the industry to produce. What products are you just aching to see on store shelves? John and Chuck have already expressed some of their wishes in the "what is Bourbon" thread. To get the taste buds rolling, here is my short list:

1. More barrel proof single barrel whiskies, for a reasonable price (Heaven Hill, are you listening?).

2. An eight year old rye whiskey, I think the selections from Beam and HH are a good start at 4 years, but more time is needed. One wonders what the Turkey would be like with a little more age.

3. White Dog from a bourbon mashbill. Still proof preferred. Just think of the packaging possibilities. Georgia Moon is from a straight corn whiskey mashbill, an a bit on the sweet side for my tastes.

4. More old bourbons 15+ years aged in a very lightly charred barrel.

Mark A. Mason, El Dorado, Arkansas

[rwilps]

Mark:

My wish list wouldn't be long, being as how I'm just a beginner at this wonderful whiskey hobby, and unfortunately some of it is pure fantasy:

1. A range of pot-stilled ryes from the primal Monongahela region of PA - some old, some very old (I'm also curious about the effect of aging on rye, and I'm going to ask Mr. Russell about that at Whiskeyfest), and maybe even an all-malted rye.

2. More barrel-proof single barrel whiskeys from each of the major mashbill types, so we could follow them as they age.

3. A barrel-proof version of Knob Creek.

Ralph Wilps

[cowdery]

Okay, I'll play.

<UL><LI>Oat whiskey, either straight oat or oat as a flavor grain in a bourbon-like formula. Likewise other grains, singly and in combinations. If you like wheated bourbon, what about straight wheat?

<LI>Sophisticated bourbon blends, i.e., blends of different bourbons (no GNS or unaged whiskey, no flavoring or color, just aged whiskey), made with the same care as cognac. This has long been a dream of mine.

<LI>True double-casked bourbon which, to my mind, would be aged in a new, charred oak barrel for some period (e.g., 2 years), and then transferred to another new, charred oak barrel for additional aging.

<LI>Whiskey distilled out at a lower proof than we are accustomed to, even lower than the approximately 110 proof of Wild Turkey, say 90 proof. This would, of course, produce a low proof (maybe 86 at best) final product, but it would be very flavorful.

<LI>Unlike some others here, I like the idea of finishing bourbon in barrels previously used for something else, like cognac or sherry. I would like to think it could be done for less than $250 a bottle, though.

<LI>As stated elsewhere, an American malt whiskey would be neat.

Finally, I caution everyone against wishing for extremely old bourbons. Because of the new barrels used in bourbon production, bourbon can get too much wood. I tasted some 20+ year old Heaven Hill once and it triggered my gag reflex. I have tasted even 10 year old bourbons that had been left in the wood too long.

While it is fun to speculate about radically different styles, bourbon is pretty good just the way it is and there is an endless amount of tinkering that can be done around the edges to produce subtle but interesting taste differences.

--Chuck Cowdery

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Chuck,

One of the things I found at the Glenmore Distillery in Owensboro while I was archivist at U.D. was a box of mash bills. They included wheat, oat and traditional rye and bourbon mash bills. My opinion is that if they made good whiskey, then they would still be making them today but then who knows? Maybe someone will experiment with these types of whiskey but I suspect that it is expensive enough of a process (after all at least four years time will be needed for this investment) that only someone making a true "small batch" whiskey could afford to play around with this type of experimentation.But don't loose all hope, maybe L&G will do it or inspire someone else to do so.

Mike Veach

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Mark I only have three wishes:

1. To be wealthy enough to buy my favorite bourbons by the barrel.

2. To go to the Bourbon Festival every year.

3. To have a really good time with Cindy Crawford.

Linn Spencer

Have Shotglass. Will Travel.

[RyanStotz]

Chuck:

> Oat whiskey, either straight oat or oat as a flavor grain in a bourbon-like

> formula. Likewise other grains, singly and in combinations. If you like

> wheated bourbon, what about straight wheat?

I proposed the straight wheat whiskey in another forum myself. The use of alternate grains is probably the thing I'd like to see most, but wheat would be my first choice. Main reason for wheat, aside from my liking it, would be that tasting 100% rye (that is, Old Potrero), corn whiskeys and unpeated single malts has long been my way of getting new bourbon fans to learn how to pick out what these grains taste like, and the method works well. Wheat has always been the missing component, and it'd be fascinating to taste for both newcomers and old hands.

> Sophisticated bourbon blends, i.e., blends of different bourbons (no GNS or

> unaged whiskey, no flavoring or color, just aged whiskey), made with the same

> care as cognac. This has long been a dream of mine.

Isn't this already being done to some extent? If not with whiskeys from different distilleries, then at least with different recipes made within the same distillery or company (read: Beam)?

> True double-casked bourbon which, to my mind, would be aged in a new, charred

> oak barrel for some period (e.g., 2 years), and then transferred to another

> new, charred oak barrel for additional aging.

Interesting. Expensive as hell, but interesting.

> Whiskey distilled out at a lower proof than we are accustomed to, even lower

> than the approximately 110 proof of Wild Turkey, say 90 proof. This would, of

> course, produce a low proof (maybe 86 at best) final product, but it would be

> very flavorful.

This is the other one that's at the top of my list. Seems it might draw people to bourbon who've previously avoided it for clear spirits in mixed drinks.

> Unlike some others here, I like the idea of finishing bourbon in barrels

> previously used for something else, like cognac or sherry. I would like to

> think it could be done for less than $250 a bottle, though.

Spirits would be OK, but I'm having a hard time imagining the tannins in wine meshing well with bourbon at all. They certainly don't work in the wine barrel-aged beers I've had. Is the Glenmorangie-aged Maker's Mark/Maker's Mark-aged Glenmorangie ever going to see the light of day?

> As stated elsewhere, an American malt whiskey would be neat.

Already several of those, though none I've tried have impressed me much. Too young.

> Finally, I caution everyone against wishing for extremely old bourbons.

Amen.

> I have tasted even 10 year old bourbons that had been left in the wood too

> long.

Old Bardstown 10 YO, by any chance? What a horrible bourbon. For those who don't think bourbon can be bad, give OB 10 YO a chance.

The other thing I'd like to see is some barrel experimentation by way of microwaving, as is being tried in Scotland. This could lead to very interesting longer aged whiskeys.

Stotz

[RyanStotz]

Ralph:

> 1. A range of pot-stilled ryes from the primal Monongahela region of PA -

> some old, some very old (I'm also curious about the effect of aging on rye,

> and I'm going to ask Mr. Russell about that at Whiskeyfest), and maybe even

> an all-malted rye.

See Old Potrero. Don't necessarily drink it, but do see it sometime. I actually like it quite a bit, but my experiences generally don't seem in line with too many others. It wouldn't have quite the bad rap it does if it weren't so prohibitively expensive, I dare say.

> 2. More barrel-proof single barrel whiskeys from each of the major mashbill

> types, so we could follow them as they age.

I think I'm the one of a very few who don't really care about single barrel or barrel proof whiskeys. I can think of only a couple exceptions to the rule that bourbons over 101 proof need water to be at their best. As for single barrel, it seems more a gimmick to me. I'd rather have the barrels vatted if the maker thinks it will make a better whiskey.

> 3. A barrel-proof version of Knob Creek.

Prime reason for my above thinking. KC, to me, is verging on the spirity even at its relatively low proof. A ~120° version would ruin its considerable charms.

Stotz

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Well, since Mark already mentioned us, I was only going to watch. But since you put out a list of everything *I've* always wanted I figure I'd better join in, too...

* Oat whiskey, either straight oat or oat as a flavor grain in a bourbon-like formula. Likewise other grains, singly and in combinations. If you like wheated bourbon, what about straight wheat?

I've been saying this ever since I discovered bourbon. Thank you for "legitimizing" my fantasy. By the way, I'm sure you're familiar with Gentleman Jack and how it has so much of a softer, richer "feel" than other JD products. And I suppose you also know that the folks at Lynchburg are uncharacteristically secretive about just how it's made, other than to state that it is not the same mash bill as all other Jack Daniel products. But did you also know that, unlike bourbon, with which it shares many similiarities,

Tennessee whiskey must be made from 51% of some grain, but not necessarily corn. Could they already be making a whiskey that's predominantly wheat or oats? So far, they ain't a-sayin', but maybe you could find out.

* Sophisticated bourbon blends, i.e., blends of different bourbons (no GNS or unaged whiskey, no flavoring or color, just aged whiskey)...

I think that's already going on. Isn't that pretty much what's being done with old Willet stock, old Boone stock, old Glenmore stock? The people who are bottling these products couldn't possibly be using them just straight out of the barrel (some have been around for decades), and there isn't any new Willet or Glenmore or Boone whiskey, so they must be using a little Heaven Hill here, a little Ancient Age there... whatever it takes to make a fine-tasting product. That pretty much sounds like blending bourbon to me. But really that's just "bourbon"; "blended bourbon" is actually a legally defined type. It requires only 51% of the whiskey to be straight bourbon; the rest can be GNS. Since that's a long way from the 70%+ GNS usually found in blended whiskey it's an improvement, but not what you're looking for.

* True double-casked bourbon which, to my mind, would be aged in a new, charred oak barrel for some period (e.g., 2 years), and then transferred to another new, charred oak barrel for additional aging.

It's been done. And abandoned. It was the bourbon that got me started on this wonderful trip... Jacob's Well. It was made by selecting casks of aged bourbon, dumping them and marrying to create a product such as would normally have been bottled, and then putting it all back into (I believe) new charred barrels and aged some more. I've never understood why it was always the stepchild brand, left out of the small batch collection. Internal politics I suppose.

* Whiskey distilled out at a lower proof than we are accustomed to, even lower than the approximately 110 proof of Wild Turkey, say 90 proof. This would, of course, produce a low proof (maybe 86 at best) final product, but it would be very flavorful.

OOOooooooooo! That would be something to behold. Back in the days when about all you could tell about whiskey's proof was whether it struck a bead or not (or flashed the gunpowder), 100 proof was the "magic number". That's how it came off the still and that's what ya drank (or put into the barrel). I'd like to taste something like that. By the way, @110 is WT's barrel proof, but I think it gets reduced to that from something higher. I don't know what it comes off the still at.

* Unlike some others here, (Now Chuck, where on earth did you ever get that idea?[grin]) I like the idea of finishing bourbon in barrels previously used for something else, like cognac or sherry.

So do I, Chuck. Honest. I just think it's a mistake that a loophole in the law allows it to be called "straight bourbon". It fits in perfectly with these other fine suggestions, none of which should be called "straight bourbon". I don't mean to degrade a fine product; I only want to preserve the intent of the "straight bourbon" designation.

* As stated elsewhere, an American malt whiskey would be neat.

Someone, I think it was Ryan, said there already are some of these? Maybe he'll tell us what they are and where to get some? This would be American as opposed to Canadian I suppose?

Other than the desire to see what barrels made of different woods might produce, which I mentioned in another thread, I really can't think of anything you haven't already mentioned. It's really neat reading the responses this topic is getting, though. Thanks, Mark!

-John Lipman-

http://w3.one.net/~jeffelle/whiskey

[cowdery]

John's comments caused me to go look at the regulations and what I found surprised me. What I described is perfectly acceptable under the definition of "bourbon," which is now defined rather simply as: "whisky produced at not exceeding 160 deg. proof from a fermented mash of not less than 51 percent corn and stored at not more than 125 deg. proof in charred new oak containers; and also includes mixtures of such whiskies of the same type." The storage has to be for at least two years to add the word "straight."

I was under the impression that there was a rule that the whisky had to be produced in the same distilling season by the same distiller at the same distillery, but that is just a requirement (one of them) for use of the term "bonded" or "bottled in bond." It is not a requirement for "straight bourbon."

If different whiskies are used and an age statement is made, the age of the youngest whiskey in the mixture must be the age stated.

There is a further designation for "a blend of straight bourbon whiskies," but the only difference between that and the definition of "straight bourbon" seems to be that "harmless coloring, flavoring, or blending materials as stated in 27 CFR 5.23(a)" can be added to the former but not the latter. Another designation exists for "blended bourbon," which John described in his post.

Interestingly, the term "Tennessee Whiskey" appears nowhere in the regulations.

On a completely different matter, Jacob's Well was not rebarreled into new cooperage. Essentially they were trying to make a benefit out of what was really just a way of saving warehouse space. Because of evaporation they could take aged whiskey and consolidate 10 barrels into maybe six, but they were six of the barrels they were already using, not new ones.

--Chuck Cowdery

[cowdery]

The 10-year-old I thought was too woody was 10-year-old Ten High.

--Chuck Cowdery

[shoshani]

Mike Veach wrote:

One of the things I found at the Glenmore Distillery in Owensboro while I was archivist at U.D. was a box of mash bills. They included wheat, oat and traditional rye and bourbon mash bills.

Did you have the presence of mind to make copies of these for your personal archives? I would think these would make fascinating additions to any history books on bourbon. Who knows if one of these Glenmore mashbills was actually the handiwork of, say, Col. Blanton.

(Would there be such a thing as a copyright on discarded mashbills from defunct distilleries? Jim Murray doesn't seem to be suffering for his printing the mashbill for Old Crow as made by James Crow,as taught to William Mitchell, who taught it to Van Johnson, who quoted it in a legal document in 1904.)

Michael Shoshani

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Thank you all for your insites of voyages up to and beyond the limits of the Bourbon universe. I left out one of my most imprtant dreams:

- Bourbon offered in small wooden (oak) kegs, in the three to five gallon size. The intension here is to use a miniature of a regular bourbon barrel, charred oak and all, that has rested in a distillary warehouse for at least four years. After purchasing, one could sample, and then store for a while, noting the whiskies progress as it ages with you. A sutible tapper and some way to keep oxygen out would need to be devised. I would think that there would be a real market for something like this, especiall in the well known name brands. I know of several non bourbon lover party animals that would have to have a keg of Jim Beam or Evan Williams on their bar if they suddenly came face to face with one in a liquor store.

Chuck, this also might be a way to try out your double barreling idea. The first four years could be aged in a standard whiskey barrel, and then transferred at barrel proof to the small keg. Easier storage for the distillaries.

One added benifit, I think, is that smaller containers have a greater surface area to volume ratio, meaning more barrel and char per gallon in a smaller package!! Perhaps this could mean faster aging in the right temperature conditions.

- While we are on packaging, how about more small bottles of premium bourbons to stimulate the "try before you invest" part of the market.

- How about a Corn beer? Or whatever beer would be good that is close to a bourbon mashbill?

Please feel free to keep those cards and letters coming,

Mark A. Mason, El Dorado, Arkansas

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Mark,

The product I would most like to see is a bourbon made it was 150 years ago. I am talking about using wild yeast, non-hybrid corn, rye and barley, true small batch with a couple of 70 gallon capacity pot still cooked over an open fire and aged in barrels charred by using straw to do the burning. Do I think this would make a great bourbon? No! But I would like to see it done and to try some whiskey that truely is "Just like Great-Granddad drank". I think it would be interesting and it would make people realise how good some of the bourbons made today really are.

I do think that a good bourbon could be made this way but it would take a lot of practice and some plain old good luck.

Mike Veach

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Michael,

I will have to check my files but I don't think I copied these mash bills. I did copy A LOT of things that I felt would be useful in the future but I am not sure that these files were among the files I copied.

Mike Veach

[RyanStotz]

John, re: 'merkin malt whisk(e)y:

> Someone, I think it was Ryan, said there already are some of these?

'twas me.

> Maybe he'll tell us what they are and where to get some?

Maybe I will, maybe I won't...

> This would be American as opposed to Canadian I suppose?

Yup. Aw, you broke me down. McCarthy's single malt is made in Oregon at the Clear Creek distillery from barley prepared by the folks at Widmer Bros. Brewing. Clear Creek also makes excellent fruit brandies and eaux de vie if you like that sort of thing. There are a couple in California: Anchor, obviously, and one called Peregrine Rock that's pretty good. There might be more, but I know of these three.

McCarthy's and Old Potrero I know you can get through Sam's, and the McCarthy's is available through Randall's/Internetwines.com but I've not yet seen an online source for Peregrine Rock. D & M in San Francisco would probably be able to get their hands on a bottle.

Stotz

[cowdery]

I also have a copy of Crow's mashbill and have published it in The Bourbon Country. It is essentially a recipe, which can't be copyrighted per se. Even if it were copyrightable, it would have expired long ago.

--Chuck Cowdery

[cowdery]

I haven't noticed McCarthy's at Sam's. Do you know where they shelve it? Is it with the other North American Whiskeys?

--Chuck Cowdery

[Guest **DONOTDELETE**]

Thanks, Ryan. Although I'm afraid Sam and Randall are better at keeping a secret than you.

A search on the SAM'S site showed all kinds of hits for McCarthy, including 10 in "spirits". However, clicking on that category gave only a "Sorry, Charlie, try again" message.

RANDALL's (internetwines) search engine didn't know what a "McCarthy" is, but then, what would I have expected from an outfit whose web marketing department apparently has absolutely no clue what products they sell? Shopping their online listings is always such an amusing challenge, and this time I particularly enjoyed looking through the RYE listings, which include Ancient Age Preferred Blend, Platte Valley Corn Whiskey, and Bel Arbor White Zinfandel (no, I'm not making this up!). I didn't try looking under Alsatian Spatlesse; it's probably listed there.

Do you have an actual contact at either of these fine establishments? One who might correspond if given an encouraging word from yourself?

=John=

http://w3.one.net/~jeffelle/whiskey

[RyanStotz]

John:

> A search on the SAM'S site showed all kinds of hits for McCarthy, including

> 10 in "spirits". However, clicking on that category gave only a "Sorry,

> Charlie, try again" message.

Damn, now I can't find it either.

> RANDALL's (internetwines) search engine didn't know what a "McCarthy" is, but

> then, what would I have expected from an outfit whose web marketing

> department apparently has absolutely no clue what products they sell?

Heh. Very true. I'm currently in the midst of the second correction of an order with them. But what am I gonna do? Can't get Kentucky Tavern out here (or $17.00 Joseph Finch -- now those were the days), so they get my business.

> Shopping their online listings is always such an amusing challenge, and this

> time I particularly enjoyed looking through the RYE listings, which include

> Ancient Age Preferred Blend, Platte Valley Corn Whiskey, and Bel Arbor White

> Zinfandel (no, I'm not making this up!).

No, you're not. I can't believe it's gotten even worse. Searching for products at Randall's is like Glenallen Hill fielding a long fly ball -- every time's an adventure.

> I didn't try looking under Alsatian

> Spatlesse; it's probably listed there.

There are worse guesses. FWIW, I can no longer find it there, but did find it at http://www.spiritsofstlouis.com, which is Randall's under a different name (shhhhhhh...). Caveat Emptor: Much like some people feel toward Old Potrero, it's expensive for what you get. It's only 3 YO, and while rough it does have a brusque charm to it in the right weather and mood. $37.50 plus shipping's worth of charm? IMO, no, but you're paying for the novelty and experience and it's an experience worth having if you're interested in American whisk(e)y.

> Do you have an actual contact at either of these fine establishments? One who

> might correspond if given an encouraging word from yourself?

Sam's or Randall's? Hell, if I had a contact at Randall's you'd only see rye on the rye page and I'd have three bottles of Johnny Drum 15 YO in my cabinet instead of 5 Johnny Drum 12 YOs.

Stotz

[RyanStotz]

Chuck:

> I haven't noticed McCarthy's at Sam's. Do you know where they shelve it? Is

> it with the other North American Whiskeys?

Unfortunately, I've never set foot in the store, only visited/ordered from the website. IME, McCarthy's doesn't enjoy anything resembling consistent shelf placement. Some (most, probably) stores it's in with the malt scotch, some with the bourbons, some with the American blends, some with the rye and -- really -- some even put it in with the Canadians. I know they had it at one time, though, as did Binny's. Can't see why they'd discontinue it as it actually sells pretty well.

FWIW, the Randall's a.k.a. spiritsofstlouis.com link is http://www.spiritsofstlouis.com/abor00200800.html. Good luck, you'll need it.

Stotz

[TNbourbon]

Okay, I'll play.

• Oat whiskey, either straight oat or oat as a flavor grain in a bourbon-like formula. Likewise other grains, singly and in combinations. If you like wheated bourbon, what about straight wheat?
  
• Sophisticated bourbon blends, i.e., blends of different bourbons (no GNS or unaged whiskey, no flavoring or color, just aged whiskey), made with the same care as cognac. This has long been a dream of mine.
  
• True double-casked bourbon which, to my mind, would be aged in a new, charred oak barrel for some period (e.g., 2 years), and then transferred to another new, charred oak barrel for additional aging.
  
• Whiskey distilled out at a lower proof than we are accustomed to, even lower than the approximately 110 proof of Wild Turkey, say 90 proof. This would, of course, produce a low proof (maybe 86 at best) final product, but it would be very flavorful.
  
• Unlike some others here, I like the idea of finishing bourbon in barrels previously used for something else, like cognac or sherry. I would like to think it could be done for less than $250 a bottle, though.
  
• As stated elsewhere, an American malt whiskey would be neat.
  

Finally, I caution everyone against wishing for extremely old bourbons. Because of the new barrels used in bourbon production, bourbon can get too much wood. I tasted some 20+ year old Heaven Hill once and it triggered my gag reflex. I have tasted even 10 year old bourbons that had been left in the wood too long.

While it is fun to speculate about radically different styles, bourbon is pretty good just the way it is and there is an endless amount of tinkering that can be done around the edges to produce subtle but interesting taste differences.

--Chuck Cowdery

So, how's the business doin', Chuck?

[cowdery]

Interesting old post. A few thoughts.

Since I wrote that, I've learned that oats are very difficult to mash.

We now have straight wheat whiskey and it's pretty good.

No one has tried uber-blending really ...except Gary Gillman, of course.

We've had true double cask bourbon and it turned out to be not all that special.

No one has really tried to do anything with low distillation and entry proofs, maybe a micro-distiller will. That's where "hand-crafting" might be just the thing.

I've changed my mind about finishes. American straight whiskey doesn't benefit from being finished in wood that has held something else.

I've changed my mind about American malt whiskey. What the Scots, Irish and Japanese do with malted barley seems to cover it. I'm no longer interested in that.

I still haven't tasted a bourbon over 20 years old that was not overaged.

Bourbon is still pretty good just the way it is.

[fussychicken]

Great Thread! I thought about this after reading the Craft Distilling article in the January Bourbon Country Reader. (http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6693)

For the most part I agree with Chuck in that bourbon is pretty darn good as it is. Initially I couldn't think of many really unique ideas that I would want from a craft distiller. Then a couple came to me:

• What about making barrels out of different woods? (Birch? Ash? Hickory? etc...)
  
  
• Barrel with *no* char? (Is this even logical?)
  
  
• Organic whiskeys? (This would obviously depend on if you are a supporter of organics to begin with.)
  
  
• Different cereal grains? Chuck mentions oats in the above post, but what about Sorghum, Rice, Millet, or Buckwheat? (And no, I am not a cereal expert. I got my info from
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cereal
  :cool:)

What do you guys think?

[Gillman]

Other woods were tried but generally are too porous to hold whiskey and risk making it too acid. In a listing of woods by preference in M'Harry's 1809 Practical Distiller, white oak comes out on top by far. Second is red oak. I do not believe any current distiller uses red oak.

New barrels charred are part of the current definition of bourbon. Some distillers are experimenting with whiskeys aged in all reused barrels, or partly reused and party new charred wood, but it can't be called bourbon (doesn't mean the result might not be good, the new BT whiskeys coming out soon mentioned on the board recently may be an example).

Organic ingredients: I think many would support this. It has not been tried for bourbon as far as I know but Rain vodka is said to be made from oragnic corn, so the corn exists.

Gary

[ILLfarmboy]

*Above all else I'd like to see lower distillation and barreling proofs combined with more bottling proofs in the 100-110 range.

*Non-chill filtered options

*more rye whiskeys and more rye in the mash

*The chance to buy bottled or bulk white dog (for home aging) at the "proof off the still"

As far as organically grown grains I can't see it making a difference in the finished product. I don't buy organic produce because the difference in taste seems negligible if at all (aside from ripeness- "sometimes") And the difference in price is certainly not negligible!