Perceptions and Reality

[black mamba]

It's interesting to me that Pappy thought a wheater matured more quickly than a rye bourbon. I have long felt that when comparing older whiskies, that it was just the other way around. My palate favors a woodier profile, and to me an 8-9 yo rye bourbon has the same balanced but woody profile as a 10-12 yo wheater. This holds true at the max end of the age range as well. The oldest ryed bourbons that tasted good to me were in the 14-17 yo range, while the Pappy 20 is the top of the stack for wheaters, and the 23 Pappy is over the top and too old. Of course positioning in the warehouse makes all the difference, but most premium bourbons, regardless of whether they are wheat or rye recipes, come from the middle floors, making such comparisons valid.

Another thing to consider about age statements is minimum age vs. average age. ETL at an average age of 9 years and 4R1B at around 8 years are good examples of premium whiskies without age statements. Trust (earned through long experience of consistent quality) keeps us from questioning how old these bourbons are. We trust that if they put some 8 yo bourbon in ETL it's because it belongs in there. Would these two bourbons be improved if they were age stated 9 and 8 yo respectively? I doubt it. I have done considerable vatting of young with old bourbons, and achieved a flavor profile of their average age. In fact, blending 50/50 with a 4 yo and a 12 yo gives a flavor profile much more like the older than the younger.

[WsmataU]

Gary I think of the proper aging length of time for a Bourbon as being governed by a complex series of physical, chemical and microbiological changes that occur over a fairly natural period of time. By two years the whisky has received most of it's color, by six it is rounded, smooth and just about as favorable as it's going to get, and by eight it has received all the barrel has to give and is as balanced as it will be.

I'm curious about the wide variability of color inside the same brand line. BTAC may be a bad example due to the orgination of different bottlings, but inside the same lael/brands we see significant difference in color. Maybe I'm under a bad assumption that they are using the same level of char for each batch?

[WsmataU]

Gary I think of the proper aging length of time for a Bourbon as being governed by a complex series of physical, chemical and microbiological changes that occur over a fairly natural period of time. By two years the whisky has received most of it's color, by six it is rounded, smooth and just about as favorable as it's going to get, and by eight it has received all the barrel has to give and is as balanced as it will be.

I'm curious about the wide variability of color inside the same brand line. BTAC may be a bad example due to the orgination of different bottlings, but inside the same label/brands we see significant difference in color. Maybe I'm under a bad assumption that they are using the same level of char for each batch?

[squire]

Good point, those brands are free of age limitation and have the flexibility to use barrels of any age that meet the profile. Of course Makers Mark hasn't used an age statement from the beginning, at least domestically, and that hasn't harmed their image in the least.

[squire]

I'm curious about the wide variability of color inside the same brand line.

This is just the natural by product of using individual barrels for aging. Which is the main reason Scottish producers use caramel derived coloring to even out the appearance of their whisky in bottles.

[TunnelTiger]

I'm curious about the wide variability of color inside the same brand line. BTAC may be a bad example due to the orgination of different bottlings, but inside the same label/brands we see significant difference in color. Maybe I'm under a bad assumption that they are using the same level of char for each batch?

They all have different grades of char but you have to remember that when they do that it's not an exact type of measurements so even if they say this barrell has a char level of 4 not everyone of them will be exactly the same. They aren't assembling BMW's

[DEelfinn]

For me, it depends on the product. I prefer EC 12, over the EC 18 and 20 I've sampled, finding the wood influence heavy handed in the older bottlings. I don't really care for Jim Beam white, but I really really didn't care for Signature 12 year.

On the flip side, I enjoy Weller 12 over OWA, AAA 10 yr over AA (by far), EW Vintage over EW Black.

Age, proof and retail price seems to drive my preference in VW (most to least preferred - 2011, 2012, 2013 expressions): PVW 15, ORVW 10, PVW 20, PVW 23, Lot B. (Take price out of this line-up, and for me PVW 23 still only jumps to 3rd.)

Edited December 30, 2013 by DEelfinn

[TunnelTiger]

I am going to admit that before I joined SB I just assumed if I saw a 7, an 8, or a 12 on the bottle that's how old the bourbon was and I'd bet the majority of the buying public do.

On the otherhand I don't need to have an age statement to enjoy a bourbon but I don't want them changing one after I've grown to like it.

[DEelfinn]

One other observation: when it comes to WFE, age clearly makes a difference for me in one particular way: I have yet to sample a <8 year WFE bourbon I liked.

[squire]

I am going to admit that before I joined SB I just assumed if I saw a 7, an 8, or a 12 on the bottle that's how old the bourbon was and I'd bet the majority of the buying public do.

That's true but not just the public. Do a google search on Benchmark (a first rate bottom shelfer) with it's big red 8 on the label and you will find merchants listing it as an 8 year old product and . . get this . . . bloggers who do a full review with tasting notes declaring it to be a full 8 years old.

Oh well, I didn't exactly agree with their tasting notes either but I don't believe all bloggers actually taste everything they review.

[Flyfish]

I bought a liter of WT101 at a Costco where the shelf tag--but not the bottle--proclaimed it was 8YO. I bought it anyway because I thought $22 was a good price.

[PaulO]

Recently I saw a newspaper ad that included "Dickel 12 year".

[Vadertime]

I think much of it can be the whiskey association with Scotch. Scotch does seem to get better with age IME, but this is not necessarily true with Bourbon. I had a very old bottle of EC18 year (barreled in 1983 or something) that was just way way way too charred. I couldn't really drink it, even when vatted down.

On the other hand, in the international market, Kentucky Gentleman KSBW proclaiming proudly on its label that it is aged "4 Years" is not really doing itself any favors. In this case NAS may be better serving the product, the brand may be more powerful.

[squire]

I would say the Scotch model is the source of the Worldwide perception that older aged spirits are better. Of course it's true to an extent but the perception is misplaced because most consumers are simply unaware of the different types of barrels, or types of aging warehouses, or the different climates in which aging takes place.

[brettckeen]

Gary asked why does the public associate long age in spirits with quality and whether that's logical.

I don't think logic enters into it, rather it's intuitive. If someone holds up a bottle of whisky and proclaims 'It's 20 years old and cost a pretty penny' it just seems he is correct because it sounds right.

The logic is that it is a curious thing because aging anything american straights or even scotch, at 20yrs if may be past its prime. If it is still tastey, then huzzah.

[brettckeen]

I would say the Scotch model is the source of the Worldwide perception that older aged spirits are better. Of course it's true to an extent but the perception is misplaced because most consumers are simply unaware of the different types of barrels, or types of aging warehouses, or the different climates in which aging takes place.

People like numbers. But I have had plenty of 20+ single malts that were not better than their 12-15yr sisters. Barrel curation is as important there as it would be with an American straight.