It seems to me that...

[Balcones Winston]

It seems to me that bourbon (or whiskey in general) is one of the few industries where the consumer base demands honesty. Maybe I'm more aware of our priority in truth due to my involvement with this community, as well as the industry. Anyone else agree or disagree? I'm sure there are plenty of examples that would negate my point, but it's interesting to observe how the bourbon community holds honesty in such high regard, compared to other consumables.

Or maybe it's just us? Maybe we're just the types that are concerned with pedigree, we want to know what blades of grass our cow ate before it was slaughtered, we want to know the name of who sewed our pants together, we want to know what square mile our coffee beans were harvested from...

[GaryT]

I think you're right - it's us. I think that the group on this forum is more interested than the consumer market at large, in part because (and this is not intended to sound arrogant) we're more educated about the process, the difference in mashbills, and other variables that influence the final product. Jim Beam is the best selling bourbon in the world, yet I don't know anyone who drinks more if it than anything else (or ever drinks very much of it at all!) Even with the current growing interest in bourbon and whiskey, I don't think the education level is growing at the same clip.

I'm personally interested in knowing as much as I can because I think it gives me a better chance to pick a bottle I've never tasted and have a rough estimate as to how much I might enjoy it. But on the flip side, bottles I have from NDPs that blow my hair back aren't loved any less because I don't know where they came from. I think they just stand less of a chance of my buying blind before I've tried them.

[squire]

Winston when it comes to the honesty issue I simply want to know what I'm getting. If a NDP like Michters sells a 10 year old sourced whisky for three times what the source charges for the same stuff under another label I want to know why I'm being charged so much.

[Balcones Winston]

Winston when it comes to the honesty issue I simply want to know what I'm getting. If a NDP like Michters sells a 10 year old sourced whisky for three times what the source charges for the same stuff under another label I want to know why I'm being charged so much.

But Michter's is distillery of the year, with that in mind it shouldn't matter where the whiskey comes from :cool:

[squire]

As for the rest there's an undeniable interest in the product and how it's made but we're no different from the watch collectors who can speak knowledgeably at length about a very expensive high end watch that uses a sourced movement identical to ones used in much less costly brands and keeps no better time.

[portwood]

... but it's interesting to observe how the bourbon community holds honesty in such high regard, compared to other consumables.

Perhaps if the alcoholic beverage industry was forced (by law) to conform to the same labeling/nutritional listing requirements as other consumables we would stop asking for so much "honesty".

[squire]

portwood has a good point. We have consumer laws to protect us with foodstuffs and consumables and very stiff fines when those laws are violated. Whisky labels should at least be mandated to disclose the DSP who actually made the product.

[Clavius]

portwood has a good point. We have consumer laws to protect us with foodstuffs and consumables and very stiff fines when those laws are violated. Whisky labels should be mandated to disclose the DSP who actually made the product.

Completely agree. Working retail, I've noticed that the DSP number is almost always on the case the bottles are shipped in (at least with whiskey). Not sure if it's required by law. But I don't see what the big deal would be to put the DSP somewhere on the bottle itself as well.

[squire]

Or if it's a mingling of barrels from different distillerys, listing them in order of percentage would not disclose any proprietary formulas.

[smokinjoe]

portwood has a good point. We have consumer laws to protect us with foodstuffs and consumables and very stiff fines when those laws are violated. Whisky labels should at least be mandated to disclose the DSP who actually made the product.

The rules and regulations legally set forth to produce bourbon are very specific. The what, where, how, etc are pretty well covered. Personally, I feel secure that I am "protected" because of these regs, without the need for additional consumer protection laws. But, the solution to your problem Squire, is exactly how you indeed, handle it. You choose to, or not to, buy!

[MyOldKyDram]

Most enthusiasts care, but we're a pretty small drop overall. I don't think the general public gives two cares about most if any of this truthfully.

[squire]

Joe I'm not suggesting Bourbon is improperly made or contains harmful adjuncts, not at all, what were are discussing is Truth in Advertising and content labeling. There are no such Federally mandated regulations regarding Bourbon because if there were the information we are talking about would already be on the label.

[AnotherCigarGuy]

There seem to be many similarities of what you all have said with the cigar industry, as I understand it.

[squire]

Good Heavens yes, it would seem that those products with a heavy sin tax are rather laxly patrolled.

[smokinjoe]

Sorry Squire, if I misinterpreted you reference to " consumer laws to protect us with foodstuffs and consumables....". If it says Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey on the label, you pretty much know what's in the bottle. Let your taste buds take it from there.

All of this is not to say that I don't welcome and appreciate any information that a whiskey seller wishes to put on his label. I just don't get too hung up on it, purchase my whiskies accordingly, and really am not looking for another Act of Congress.

Like Sean mentioned, outside of us 7,500, or so, bourbon geeks, nobody else really gives a hooey...

[squire]

Like Sean mentioned, outside of us 7,500, or so, bourbon geeks, nobody else really gives a hooey...

That's an excellent technical term to describe the lax public attitude.

[LCWoody]

Becareful what you ask for. No law cames with out a price tag. I think some times a little secrecy is a good thing. Sense Michter's was brought up Ill use them as an example. (Michter's 10y SB is a favorite of mine right now). Look at what we payed for PHC 10 wheated and Cognac finished bourbon $80. Yes we know where it was from, but it was more expensive than Michter's 10y. What if where the bourbon was sourced from they could get more money for it from Michter's than the general public. I think we should be critical of the product in the bottle more than anything. As for as where it came from their is only a handful of companies putting bourbon into the barrel. With the help of the SB members and process of elimination we should be able to figure out most of it.

[T Comp]

Most enthusiasts care, but we're a pretty small drop overall. I don't think the general public gives two cares about most if any of this truthfully.

As with most everything in life...as I get ready to smoke the ribs I bought from Costco today for $2.99 a pound versus the Farmers market guy who wants $8.99 a pound but I can know the name of the pig and its last meal and...:grin:.

[smokinjoe]

That's an excellent technical term to describe the lax public attitude.

Yeah, but each of us is one of those dunderheads in the lax public attitude on something...Somewhere, someone, is appalled at each of our uninformed decisions on something...

[Gillman]

I'm with those who look at primarily bottle contents. I don't really care where it comes from or who makes it/mingles/ages or whatever.

More laws won't really help because there are too many variables to capture.

Many years experience tasting has convinced me of the following:

1) You can't always be sure who makes what. For some years after its fire, Heaven Hill had make distilled at Jim Beam and Brown-Forman - when these whiskeys came out, no one knew for quite a while (except IIRC for Ritt bond and even then only after a period when older labels were still being used, because someone drew it to the attention of the company).

2) Companies sometimes age the product in warehouses owned by others, or in their own rick houses which may be spread across half the state. Each will confer a different character. Then they are combined to make something that will often change character over the years for this or other reasons.

3) Weather changes all the time and this inevitably will affect the whiskeys over typically the 4-6 years aging most get. It can affect the cereals being grown.

5) Yeast can subtly change character.

6) Market conditions may mean the whiskey you get is younger or older than a few years back - sometimes stated on the label, sometimes not.

7) Each bottle of a brand is in my experience somewhat different than the last one. Sometimes I won't buy a brand for a time because it's going through a blue period shall we say. (Apologies to Picasso). I felt this was the case some years ago when almost all brands of BT seemed to have an earthy loamy dank taste - that's been over for some time. But when I bought brands that had that taste (IMO), what did it avail me to know it was from BT in Frankfort?

8) Industry sales of labels and businesses mean that stock sometimes goes to the buyer - so what you get may have been made somewhere else. I believe this was so with Weller 107 and I've never liked the brand as much since the old Distillery No. 1 stock apparently was exhausted. (And some of that was older than 7 years towards the end supposedly, so how could that taste like something exactly 7 years old?).

There are other reasons but these are the main ones. I wish I could get that 18 year old BMH rye, the one bottled for that small California outfit (can't recall the name). That was great whiskey! Don't care where it's from, never did although it was interesting to hear speculation about it.

It's the whiskey and it can come down to a bottle by bottle decision even for the same brand, much less where it's from that gives me any real assurance.

Of course this is my view and people are entitled to take the opposite one or not buy non-identified brands, that's their choice, I seek only to explain why IMHO knowing what the label states, or seems to state, often is bootless to the experience the drink will actually deliver.

Gary

Edited August 25, 2013 by Gillman

[squire]

I can't respond to that Gary being caught up in the mental image of Shoeless Joe Jackson working in a liquor store where he sold a fifth of Bourbon to Ty Cobb.

[Restaurant man]

Yeah, but each of us is one of those dunderheads in the lax public attitude on something...Somewhere, someone, is appalled at each of our uninformed decisions on something...

I can see it now "your going to buy THAT dog food(insert any item here) you idiot! Don't you know that this other one is made from the same ingredients? At the same factory!!! And it's cheaper!!!! You just casually walk up to the isle and grab whatever bag looks good at the price you want to spend?" It must be so frustrating for the dog food snobs...

[Gillman]

Squire, of course. First things first.

But waiting for your rejoinder when that image fades.

Gary

[squire]

I can see it now "your going to buy THAT dog food(insert any item here) you idiot! Don't you know that this other one is made from the same ingredients? At the same factory!!! And it's cheaper!!!!

I'm reminded of a tv show years ago about food in America. Not an expose or anything, just a documentary on food from farm to factory to store. At a big factory canned corn was coming down the line when the workers switched the label from the expensive brand to a generic one. It wasn't planned that way, the cameras just happened to be rolling while filming the factory production. What was recorded though was exactly the same product was being sold under much cheaper store brands.

When interviewed by the crew later the factory workers all said they only bought generic brands.

[sutton]

I come at this from the perspective of a wine guy - "wine is grown in the vineyard". You can't make good wine out of bad grapes, but you can f- up great grapes in the making of the wine. Plenty of wine labels don't grow their own grapes - they source them. Knowing the terroir of the raw materials tells you what is likely to be in the bottle, and you can make a spot buy decision if you generally like that appellation or vineyard and what a bottle from there normally would cost given the vintage and age, and hoping the winemaker didn't mess it up. You can make a judgment in the store with this knowledge as to whether to take a flyer on an unknown label.

I want to know where it came from because it informs my purchasing decision. If I know the source is HH and I like their products generally, I'm more likely to take a chance on purchasing the NDP product especially if the person picking the barrels has a reputation of knowing what they are doing (HW comes to mind). Otherwise, I wait to see what others say about it and delay my purchasing decision, if I ever decide to pull the trigger.