DowntownD Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 anyone have a photo of the bottle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronHead Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indyrider Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 A few more photos.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinjoe Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 A few more photos....Thanks for the pics, fellas.The wording on the label is oddly put. "Aged in Stitzel-Weller Barrels" Kinda leaves things up to interpretation, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spun_cookie Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Thanks for the pics, fellas.The wording on the label is oddly put. "Aged in Stitzel-Weller Barrels" Kinda leaves things up to interpretation, doesn't it?I was thinking the same thing... I would like to get a DSP for distillation... not a DSP of who first owned the barrels.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 I was thinking the same thing... I would like to get a DSP for distillation... not a DSP of who first owned the barrels....So that's where that came from, the label. Odd. The press release from them is much clearer. According to that, it is SW whiskey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spun_cookie Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 So that's where that came from, the label. Odd. The press release from them is much clearer. According to that, it is SW whiskey.I remember reading about it a while back ago and it seemed that it was SW Chuck, but I wonder if it is the SW recipe with SW barrels (which I assume are the thicker oak?) but distilled elsewhere.... ???Reading the mald advocate blog, he says multiple times it is SW...http://blog.maltadvocate.com/2009/08/20/review-jeffersons-presidential-select-17-yr-old-bourbon/I originally reviewed this live online yesterday via Twitter. This is a 1991 vintage, and one of the last years that Stitzel-Weller produced whiskey.So far this year, this is one of my top two new bourbons (the other being the new Parker’s Heritage Collection Golden Anniversary). Although, I think that the soon to be released William Larue Weller and George T. Stagg from Buffalo Trace might challenge this whiskey, based on the samples I tasted in the Buffalo Trace lab last week.This whiskey is getting into circulation right now, so go out and get a bottle (and a piece of history). To me, Stitzel-Weller and Michter’s are like Brora and Port Ellen in the Scotch whisky world–silent distilleries that once produced some great whiskeys.Jefferson’s Presidential Select (Batch #1), 1991 Vintage, 17 year old, 47%, $90A wheated bourbon from the old Stitzel-Weller distillery. A gentle, richly-textured whisky, loaded with fruit and spice. Black raspberry jam, caramel apple and papaya, along with warming cinnamon and subtle teaberry, on nutty toffee, nougat and creamy vanilla. Spicy, polished oak finish. Superbly balanced, sophisticated and very drinkable. An outstanding whiskey!Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 96I would think if it was SW juice, they would clearly put that info on the bottle... but who knows... maybe it is a blend of a little non SW as well to stretch it out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rughi Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 I would think if it was SW juice, they would clearly put that info on the bottle... but who knows... maybe it is a blend of a little non SW as well to stretch it out? It could very well be, and would explain the cat and mouse on the label. Ancient Age was distilling wheat bourbon to supplement SW at that time.Of interest to me would be if that juice was barreled at AA in AA barrels, or trucked over to SW and put into SW barrels such as the ones under discussion now.Roger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronHead Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Is it possible that that McLain and Kyne just didn't want to come right out and admit to the fact that they didn't actually distill this whiskey? I am sure that everyone who reads this board regularly knows that not all bourbon bottlers are distillers. But if you consider the casual boubon drinker, is he or she really concerned with the fact that these barrels came from Stitzel-Weller? I look at the fact that they mentioned it on the label as a way of telling us (the obsessed) that, "hey, this is SW whiskey but since that really won't mean anything to the vast majority of the bourbon buying public we put it on there to let you guys know". I could be totally off base here, but I am trying to remain positive about this bottling. I know I don't post much but I read this board a lot. I am always a tad jealous when I read a thread with a bunch of regulars going on about this or that "significant bottling." Well, I believe that I finally got in on something significant with JRPS so I am trying not to look a gift horse in the mouth. Regardless of whose juice was aged in these Stitzel Weller barrels it is delicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spun_cookie Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 I could be totally off base here, but I am trying to remain positive about this bottling. I know I don't post much but I read this board a lot. I am always a tad jealous when I read a thread with a bunch of regulars going on about this or that "significant bottling." Well, I believe that I finally got in on something significant with JRPS so I am trying not to look a gift horse in the mouth. Regardless of whose juice was aged in these Stitzel Weller barrels it is delicious. You are definitely not off base. Ultimately what is important is that it is good juice. Not really worried about who makes it, just odd the way they described it. And your are again right, for the casual drinker, the SW info means nothing.... its really only us that drive the "who made, who bottled" discussions. You do have a special bottle... enjoy it and drink well.... ... just as a side note, although I love a good SW pour, my top is a WT pour in the 8 yr range. Right now that pour is the dark smooth top WTKSs that are dark juice. The 2003s I am drinking right now are as good if not better than the Pewter tops I have had... so “special†is in pallet of the beholder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronHead Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 ... just as a side note, although I love a good SW pour, my top is a WT pour in the 8 yr range. Right now that pour is the dark smooth top WTKSs that are dark juice. The 2003s I am drinking right now are as good if not better than the Pewter tops I have had... so “special†is in pallet of the beholder.I have absolutely nothing against rye, but I do tend to gravitate toward wheaters. So that makes JRPS even more significant for me. I have never tried WTKS, but I do like the Rare Breed releases I have tasted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_elliott Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 From what I've read they "found" these 400 barrels I would guess in a warehouse or rickhouse somewhere that they owned. They probably can't prove it's SW juice so they can only go by what it says on the barrel. Thus the odd wording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronHead Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I posted this in the other JRPS thread, but I went to a tasting where Chet Zoeller was pouring the Jefferson's line and Sam Houston. Unless I misunderstood him he said that the barrels were found in the old Stitzel Weller warehouses. I wish I'd thought to ask him about the 'aged in Stitzel Weller barrels' statement on the label. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I think you're all reading too much into it. Probably just someone was sloppy with either writing the label copy or with proofreading it. I'm quite confident that it's SW whiskey and there's nothing hinky going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DowntownD Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Damn it, that sucks (the uncertainty).I'm not buying any of it until the labeling is cleared up...I really do hope it's a typo or something, but unless it's clarified by someone official then I'm not spending the $ when I can definitely get old SW Bourbon via Pappy 20.Maybe it's a typo, maybe more clever bullshit; wouldn't be the first time some fucker in the marketing department decided to cloud things to make a buck or three.Grrrrr.And I was all excited about this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barturtle Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Anyone every thought that, maybe that can't call it Stitzel Weller?They can't say it was produced at S-W because they don't own the dba to that. They can't say it's S-W Bourbon, because it's quite obviously being sold as Jefferson Reserve (and they don't own the rights to the name "Stitzel Weller"). This is probably the best they could legally do to let you know the source of the whiskey. Get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Damn it, that sucks (the uncertainty).I'm not buying any of it until the labeling is cleared up...I really do hope it's a typo or something, but unless it's clarified by someone official then I'm not spending the $ when I can definitely get old SW Bourbon via Pappy 20.Maybe it's a typo, maybe more clever bullshit; wouldn't be the first time some fucker in the marketing department decided to cloud things to make a buck or three.Grrrrr.And I was all excited about this...If it's a bourbon then it has to be aged in new barrels by law. This whiskey is 17 y/o. How many distilleries were making wheaters in 1992? 2, I believe. So unless somebody put MM into S-W barrels, this HAS to be S-W juice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DowntownD Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I don't so much care about the specific wording, nor why it has to be this way or that, as long as there's zero ambiguity as to the source. Right now, it seems, ambiguity remains (for whatever reason, however valid), and that pegs my bullshit meter with no apology offered... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronHead Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Well then your bullshit meter is going to cause you to miss out on some fantastic bourbon regardless of who produced it.Like I said, according to Chet Zoeller of McLain & Kyne the barrels were found in warehouses on the old Stizel Weller grounds. This came straight from his mouth, not a publicist or a marketing manager. After SW was shut down no more Stitzel Weller whiskey went into those rickhouses, but others did and still do. So considering that it also says "Kentucky Straight Bourbon" on the label if it was "Aged in Stitzel Weller Barrels" I like my odds that Stitzel Weller put it in those barrels back in 1991. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinjoe Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I posted this in the other JRPS thread, but I went to a tasting where Chet Zoeller was pouring the Jefferson's line and Sam Houston. Unless I misunderstood him he said that the barrels were found in the old Stitzel Weller warehouses. I wish I'd thought to ask him about the 'aged in Stitzel Weller barrels' statement on the label. When he said the barrels were found in the old Stitzel Weller warehouses, did he say they were full? I don't know, and really, I don't care. If it's good bourbon, I don't care if them little artesians made it. But, this is a site for people passionate about their bourbon, and we loves us a good mystery. The label wording just seems...odd. It could be a typo, or a legality thing, or any number of things. But, it doesn't say what the proprietor has been telling everyone else. And, we as enthusiasts know why saying it's S-W whiskey is so important...Because, if it is, it would indeed be a significant bottling. Again, I just think it's oddly put. And, for the most important factor on this bottling to be questionably described on the front label, just seems a little...odd. It's probably nothing to fret over. But, the yenta in me is intrigued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rughi Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 How many distilleries were making wheaters in 1992? 2, I believe. So unless somebody put MM into S-W barrels, this HAS to be S-W juice.At least 3, including MM, SW and AA.Follow the link in post 58 of this thread.And I'm with Smokinjoe, the whiskey is what the whiskey is, but I do love me a mystery.Roger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_elliott Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I think it's SW Juice I think it's just some legal mumbo jumbo BS and the people who have had it have said it's darn good bourbon. I'm getting a bottle if I can find one at the the KBF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 At least 3, including MM, SW and AA.Follow the link in post 58 of this thread.And I'm with Smokinjoe, the whiskey is what the whiskey is, but I do love me a mystery.RogerMysteries are fine, but there's no use in making one up when a simple explanation seems more likely.I had forgotten about that link in post 58. It's hard to follow a discussion in two seperate threads, in black type too. But it amounts to is a report of what Weber said that Gayhart said that he saw. That's a lot of hearsay.What do the tastebuds say? Any S-W lovers think it tastes different than other S-W whiskey of the same age? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vange Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 400 barrels!? How many bottles of this exist? I guess it will be plentiful for awhile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CygnusX-1 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 400 barrels!? How many bottles of this exist? I guess it will be plentiful for awhile?400 sounds like alot but dont forget about angles share, theres prolly alot of evaporation after 17 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts