Jump to content

jefferson 10 year rye


This topic has been inactive for at least 365 days, and is now closed. Please feel free to start a new thread on the subject! 

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • squire

    22

  • cowdery

    7

  • Shell

    7

  • tanstaafl2

    6

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The label on TTB COLA still says 100% Rye. If it has switched from Canada to KY, then who made it? Who makes a 100% Rye formula in KY? Nobody that I know of. Even LDI (or MGP) hi rye is 95% rye. 100% rye is unusual.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Does the TTB still have labeling rules? I thought they gave up on that.:rolleyes:

Excellent point. I think they're more like 'suggestions.'

I'm coming to the point where trying to figure this stuff out isn't worth the effort. My attitude is becoming, if someone won't tell me where something was made then fuck them, I won't buy it. I've never done this before, but I'm thinking I may also refuse to taste it and write about it. Please, everybody, keep me honest on this, as I know you will.

Edited by cowdery
Link to post
Share on other sites
The label on TTB COLA still says 100% Rye. If it has switched from Canada to KY, then who made it? Who makes a 100% Rye formula in KY? Nobody that I know of. Even LDI (or MGP) hi rye is 95% rye. 100% rye is unusual.

Barton was making some before they were acquired by Sazerac.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I picked up a bottle the other day in Cincy for $22. I really enjoy this pour, especially for that price. It's no WhistlePig....but it's still very tasty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

So any further insight as to the source of the rye in the newer version of Jefferson's? I know it is frustrating that the producer won't give it up and if it is good and priced well then I suppose it doesn't matter much unless you want to stick to your guns and refuse to buy from those companies that won't provide any details (an admirable goal but one which I probably wouldn't be able to hold myself up to!).

But my natural inclination is to continue to try to find out if I can! haven't bought it yet but may when I finish the bottle of the older Canadian sourced Jeff rye since the reviews seem to be positive. Last time I checked locally it was still the older Canadian sourced bottle. I guess I need to look again to see what is out there now!

Link to post
Share on other sites
unless you want to stick to your guns and refuse to buy from those companies that won't provide any details (an admirable goal but one which I probably wouldn't be able to hold myself up to!).

It has an age statement, so I make an exception.

Somebody earlier noted that Barton was making a 100% rye at one point. At the very least, we know that they have made a few different mashbills based on what we know about them indirectly via Highwest. But please note that I'm merely speculating off of that one post and have no real information.

I think it's good whiskey and one that I wouldn't hesitate to buy more of. At least for <$30. But you have to like that high-rye style. It's not for everybody.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And an excellent rye it is, with a slightly sweet, appetizing taste. I only get to try it when someone brings it to Gazebos. A hidden gem IMO.

Gary

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the brand I'm hoping Sazerac takes an interest in promoting. What's Barton got in the warehouses, half million barrels? Gotta be some older rye hanging around somewhere in that supply.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If it's 100 percent rye, it more or less has to be Alberta Springs, doesn't it?

But then why go to the trouble to take the "Product of Canada" designation off of the bottle? Even if somebody in Kentucky bought it first and then resold it to Jefferson it would still be a Canadian product, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
... I'm coming to the point where trying to figure this stuff out isn't worth the effort. My attitude is becoming, if someone won't tell me where something was made then fuck them, I won't buy it. I've never done this before, but I'm thinking I may also refuse to taste it and write about it. Please, everybody, keep me honest on this, as I know you will.

There are many, many examples of spirits which are not transparent about their sourcing. There are many, very well-regarded blended and single-malt scotch private label producers that do not reveal their distillery source. Fine Cognacs and aged rums don't necessarily reveal where the grapes/rum are sourced. And, here in the U.S., whiskies may be private labeled or distilleries help each other out, and the exact sources are not revealed. I enjoy the discussion of where spirits are made and the mash composition of whiskies. But, the bottom line for me is: If I enjoy the drink and the price gives me value, I will continue to enjoy it even if the sourcing is not revealed. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Viz. the national designations, maybe that Canadian whiskey was dumped into barrels and further aged in Kentucky. I haven't checked the rules, I don't know what effect doing that would have, I'm just throwing it out.

Gary

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being the staunch individualist I am I stand right in the middle of the views expressed by Shell and Chuck.

Luxco Co. provides me with a 7 year old 101 proof Bourbon under the Ezra Brooks label. They won't tell who made it, or much of anything about it, but I will buy it no questions asked because a a 7 yr 101 by any of the major distilleries is worth the retail price of 12.99

.

Another producer offers me an NPP premium whisky for $159.99 and won't tell me anything about it except it's special because is was custom made to their family's secret recipe passed down from their grandfather who wrote it out in longhand on his death bed and it was specially made and specially aged and specially bottled in this special bottle and, it's sooo special really (says so right on the label!) that only special people should have it and you know you are one of those, and especially, all the cool kids already have a bottle.

The second group won't get a dime from me. They insult my intelligence with intentional false misrepresentations and expect me to pay the equivalent of a case of Barton for one of their bottles. I won't let that mule kick me once.

Edited by squire
Link to post
Share on other sites

Luxco Co. provides me with a 7 year old 101 proof Bourbon under the Ezra Brooks label. They won't tell who made it, or much of anything about it, but I will buy it no questions asked because a a 7 yr 101 by any of the major distilleries is worth the retail price of 12.99.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think of it as the Barton factor. If it cost three times more than Barton I expect it to be three times better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is yet another example of why I wish I had found this site a year ago or more.

Heh, I bet more than a couple of us had

this exact same thought when we joined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jefferson's illustrates the point. Too often folks here twist themselves into pretzels trying to reconcile some anomolous label information only to discover (if we ultimately discover anything) that the product was mislabeled, or there's some other simple but unsatisfying explanation. It's not in my nature to be absolute about anything although I may sound that way sometimes. Obviously, there have been some good and interesting whiskeys that were less than transparent about their source. I don't know of anyone other than Alberta who was making 100% rye whiskey 10 years ago in sufficient quantities to supply even a small brand. Since straight rye is not a product of distinctive national origin, it may not be necessary to indicate its country of origin. Perhaps they found that it was causing confusion among consumers and was not necessarily viewed as a positive. My guess is that it's the same stuff, from the same source, but they decided to drop 'product of Canada' from the label, probably as a marketing decision. There. Now I'm bored and will think of it no more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think of it as the Barton factor. If it cost three times more than Barton I expect it to be three times better.

I've seen you mention this Barton Factor several times, and - no pun intended - I think it's a fantastic benchmark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SOI state that labels of imported spirits must state country of origin, so I'd have thought that Canada would still be stated if it was imported in bulk and bottled in the U.S. This is from a perusal and I haven't looked at it chapter and verse, but this is why I thought if it was further aged in the U.S., it is not imported perhaps in the sense intended by the SOI.

I think too it might be make solely from and aged in KY, there might be "industrial", e.g. for blending, makes made which depart from the usual specs for straight rye.

My inclination though, without knowing more and assuming it is 100% rye feedstock whiskey, is that it got some further aging in the States.

Gary

Edited by Gillman
Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked it up. I thought it might just be required for types associated with certain places of origin, such as scotch. I was wrong. 5.36 (e) says all imported spirits have to state the country of origin. Imported in bulk and U.S.-bottled is still imported. So either the Jefferson's is U.S.-made or mislabeled. My money is on mislabeled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.