MTNBourbon Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Looking forward as well to hear about this new ECBP bottle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbstout Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Really enjoying the batch 13 bottle I just opened. As far as being thin...The legs coating my glencairn don't lie even if my palette does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeTerp Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 7 hours ago, garbanzobean said: I almost always have good luck with lower proof barrel strength whiskies. I actually made a point of seeking them out in the past. Heck, the 48ish percent BP SAOS I have open right now is outstanding. My next point is that 127 proof is what I would personally consider to still be quite high. It is quite high, but it's the lowest to date for ECBP and only the second one under 130. So given they standard that they have set it is relatively low. If you were to compare it Booker's it would be more in line with a typical release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garbanzobean Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) How is high alcohol % a meaningful standard? Barrel proof is barrel proof. Edited February 22, 2017 by garbanzobean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeTerp Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 1 hour ago, garbanzobean said: How is high alcohol % a meaningful standard? Barrel proof is barrel proof. It's not, but I can see a materially different proof leading to a different taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garbanzobean Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 18 minutes ago, JoeTerp said: It's not, but I can see a materially different proof leading to a different taste. Variety is the spice of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeTerp Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 2 hours ago, garbanzobean said: Variety is the spice of life. Which is why our bars have more than one bourbon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madhatter Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Re: ECBP range of proofs. I'm beginning to think that whether a bourbon has been chill-filtered or not can have a greater bearing on perceived 'strength' and 'weight' than the proof number (within reason). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWBadley Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 3 hours ago, garbanzobean said: Variety is the spice of life. And the corollary would be Spice is the Variety of Life! (I like me some spicy food ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flahute Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 2 hours ago, Madhatter said: Re: ECBP range of proofs. I'm beginning to think that whether a bourbon has been chill-filtered or not can have a greater bearing on perceived 'strength' and 'weight' than the proof number (within reason). That's because it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinbrink Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 On 2/21/2017 at 4:32 PM, garbanzobean said: I almost always have good luck with lower proof barrel strength whiskies. I actually made a point of seeking them out in the past. Heck, the 48ish percent BP SAOS I have open right now is outstanding. My next point is that 127 proof is what I would personally consider to still be quite high. I cracked a 45.9 11 yr SAOS yesterday, I need to get back to it but my first impression was only OK, on the flip side I chased it with some of the last ounces of my open ECBP batch 9 which was undoubtedly great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlutz Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 I was finally able to do my SBS of 'old' ECBP (batch 9) and ECBP in the new bottle (batch 13). With a little help from my daughter I did it blind. Note: this was the last pour of the 9 and the first pour of the 13, so 'air time' and 'bottom of the bottle' were some differences. Anyway, I'm no expert, but here are my notes: Color Batch 9 is slightly darker but it's hard to tell. If you're pouring hand was a bit heavy on the 13 it would look darker. They are very close in color. Both are a nice, rich brown. Nose Both batches throw off strong caramel, toffee and brown sugar and are very typical of ECBP as I know it. The batch 13 had a better nose. It was stronger, and deeper, but not toxic alcohol or burning. Neat All 12 years of the wood were evident in the 9, in a good, familiar EC way. The typical brown sugar was there and the finish was long. On the first sip of the 13, the wood was there but a strong alcohol note hit me. I may have taken too large of a slug as I made sure to take a smaller sip the second time and it was much better. No overpowering alcohol note, but 13 may be a bit harder to tame. I thought the 9 had a bit longer finish, though both were plenty long. The 9 was deeper and a bit more complex, at least neat. With a Bit of Water At this point, I was starting to feel the beginnings of the effects a few sips of the barrel proof, so I added a bit of water to each. Not surprisingly, both held up well. The 9 was a bit flatter than the 13, yet very drinkable and less of a punch in the face than it was neat. Water really brought out the wood and brown sugar sweetness in the 13, and any remaining alcohol burn dissipated. Overall, I preferred the 9, but like all batches before them, ECBP still delivers and is worth its price point at $65. I'm still bunkering when I have the opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlutz Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Also, if I hadn't been tasting SBS I don't know if I would have picked out much of a difference. Corks are smaller on the new bottles though the cap is same size with a classier, 'engraved' brand name. Hopefully less cork breaks with this style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeTerp Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Thanks for the notes. Hopefully I'll be able to get one when they roll out at VA ABC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlutz Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 No problem! Please also note that I did not use the adjective 'thin' anywhere. I detected no difference in legs, mouthfeel, viscosity or however you want to describe thickness/thinness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinbrink Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 2 hours ago, Charlutz said: Also, if I hadn't been tasting SBS I don't know if I would have picked out much of a difference. Corks are smaller on the new bottles though the cap is same size with a classier, 'engraved' brand name. Hopefully less cork breaks with this style. I'll be honest I'm most excited for the new corks, the old ones were terrible since they were too big and were composites of little pieces of cork, the new ones look to be just solid cork. I now embrace the redesign wholeheartedly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTNBourbon Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 11 hours ago, Charlutz said: I was finally able to do my SBS of 'old' ECBP (batch 9) and ECBP in the new bottle (batch 13). With a little help from my daughter I did it blind. Note: this was the last pour of the 9 and the first pour of the 13, so 'air time' and 'bottom of the bottle' were some differences. Anyway, I'm no expert, but here are my notes: Color Batch 9 is slightly darker but it's hard to tell. If you're pouring hand was a bit heavy on the 13 it would look darker. They are very close in color. Both are a nice, rich brown. Nose Both batches throw off strong caramel, toffee and brown sugar and are very typical of ECBP as I know it. The batch 13 had a better nose. It was stronger, and deeper, but not toxic alcohol or burning. Neat All 12 years of the wood were evident in the 9, in a good, familiar EC way. The typical brown sugar was there and the finish was long. On the first sip of the 13, the wood was there but a strong alcohol note hit me. I may have taken too large of a slug as I made sure to take a smaller sip the second time and it was much better. No overpowering alcohol note, but 13 may be a bit harder to tame. I thought the 9 had a bit longer finish, though both were plenty long. The 9 was deeper and a bit more complex, at least neat. With a Bit of Water At this point, I was starting to feel the beginnings of the effects a few sips of the barrel proof, so I added a bit of water to each. Not surprisingly, both held up well. The 9 was a bit flatter than the 13, yet very drinkable and less of a punch in the face than it was neat. Water really brought out the wood and brown sugar sweetness in the 13, and any remaining alcohol burn dissipated. Overall, I preferred the 9, but like all batches before them, ECBP still delivers and is worth its price point at $65. I'm still bunkering when I have the opportunity. Thank You Charlie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richnimrod Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Well, it certainly comes in an elegant bottle, and with the seemingly improved cork stopper, a winner all around. My only negative comment is the additional height is gonna mean a different shelf for mine. They had been residing upon a shelf that barely accommodate the 'old' bottles. Ah, well, a good excuse to re-fabualte the whole Bourbon display, right? Now, I just gotta find me a bottle.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hop Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 I opened a bottle of the A117 on Saturday and was disappointed for the first time by any ECBP - it was all oak and alcohol which of course is what it is but no dimension. I stayed with it and tried to let it open up in the glass to no avail, added a little water, helped a little but not a lot. I didn't have any others open at the moment but opened a batch 12 (136 proof) just to see if I was having an off night, definitely more flavorful than the A117. I'm laying off these for a couple of days then going back and tasting blind - hope it was just an off night for me but I was unimpressed by the first glass which has happened before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTaylor Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 Opened the ECBP A117 last night... drier than the last batch. Not much sweetness at all. Oak & leather right up front and a shorter finish. Not at all the flavor bomb that batch 12 was. Still good, but I think batch 12 set the bar pretty high, at least for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hop Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 On 2/27/2017 at 5:11 PM, Hop said: I opened a bottle of the A117 on Saturday and was disappointed for the first time by any ECBP - it was all oak and alcohol which of course is what it is but no dimension. I stayed with it and tried to let it open up in the glass to no avail, added a little water, helped a little but not a lot. I didn't have any others open at the moment but opened a batch 12 (136 proof) just to see if I was having an off night, definitely more flavorful than the A117. I'm laying off these for a couple of days then going back and tasting blind - hope it was just an off night for me but I was unimpressed by the first glass which has happened before. Went back to both earlier this week and while the A117 was a bit better the oak was still the most powerful flavor - I'm going to decant the remaining 80% of the bottle to see if the aeration and air helps it in a few more days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlutz Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 I went back to mine and without doing the SBS it was not as enjoyable as the first time. I'm questioning my mind playing tricks on me or maybe it was just an off night. I'll go back to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry in WashDC Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 (Sorry, Charlie. I was late to the party.) Nice notes, you all - especially Chas. As EC's age (and, consequently, its taste) usually falls just outside my comfort zone, I really appreciate your blind SBS and follow-on comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTaylor Posted March 20, 2017 Share Posted March 20, 2017 Revisited the ECBP A117 last night. It still isn't up to the level the C916 batch hit, but tonight it was much more pleasant than before. Still oak forward, but much more complex this time with some spice and some red fruit coming through. The bottle is at about 3/4 full now and it seems the air has done it some good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardsandBourbon Posted March 20, 2017 Share Posted March 20, 2017 5 hours ago, JTaylor said: Revisited the ECBP A117 last night. It still isn't up to the level the C916 batch hit, but tonight it was much more pleasant than before. Still oak forward, but much more complex this time with some spice and some red fruit coming through. The bottle is at about 3/4 full now and it seems the air has done it some good. You guys are driving me crazy. I have a bottle of ECSB but can't find a bottle of ECBP anywhere, then I get on here and have to read about how much you guys like it. Give me a break here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts