Jump to content

How old are the oldest barrels at the major distilleries?


suntour
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

I feel very confident that anyone in possession of "ancient barrels" is doing everything they can to capitalize on them. If they are good enough to be sold as such, they are being sold as such. The only reason they would be used in another form (to add flavor to a younger whiskey), is that they are not good enough to stand on their own. With premium whiskey being a hot commodity right now, they are going to put every single barrel they can into the premium lines.

Agreed. I just read something about Jefferson's where Zoeller was quoted as saying his line wouldn't be what it was in the past. The basic indication is that the supplies of older stock have basically run out. My interpretation is that they are either gone for a time, or the distilleries that own them in the first place are tired of seeing Jefferson's and Willet get big money for these older expressions and are planning to release them themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the distilleries that own them in the first place are tired of seeing Jefferson's and Willet get big money for these older expressions and are planning to release them themselves.

That's my take on it. Aged stocks are not a recent phenomenon, 25 years ago Heaven Hill was bottling 23 year old Evan Williams for the Japanese market and as recently as the last decade had an economy brand, Old 1889 Royal, at 12 years and 86 proof, that sold locally for $8.49 a bottle. That one was replaced with 12 year old Elijah Craig at a bit higher proof and much higher price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you age bourbon normally, by which I mean without babying it, you're going to start hitting dry barrels after about 20 years. Even without empties, those very old barrels have so little whiskey left in them, you could see it as a waste of good bourbon. Simply no rational producer is going to let any significant number of barrels sit around for that long. Diageo did it, you say? No one but Diageo would and even there you have to wonder, why did they hang on to the stuff for so long? Heaven Hill is doing it, and coming out with these very old Elijah Craigs, the latest being 23, probably to test the market as much as anything.

The problem is, unless you take extraordinary measures to slow aging, you're not going to have anything to sell if you let barrels go dry. And if you do take extraordinary measures, is the product really aging? Can you honestly call something 30-years-old if the barrel was wrapped in plastic for the last ten?

Just like us, distilleries are always interested in how whiskeys age, so I'm sure they all have a few barrels sitting around just to see what they do, but not hundreds or thousands of them. The cost of letting a barrel go 20 years or more is enormous. You almost can't charge enough for the miniscule amount of whiskey that results. We started to see these not because anyone was making them on purpose but because there wasn't enough demand to sell them before they got that old. Now the demand is huge for whiskey much, much younger, so why let it go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting thread. What is it about scotch whiskey that can seemingly age out to 40 years while bourbon whiskey cannot? There seems to be a large number of aged scotch expressions suggesting that the distilleries are finding enough juice to commercially market. At prices that would make Van Winkle look like a bargain no less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it about scotch whiskey that can seemingly age out to 40 years while bourbon whiskey cannot?

using barrels that are already used and a cooler climate, primarily

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scottish whisky is aged in a far colder climate that takes about three times longer to age (a 12 year old Scotch is about equal in maturity to a 4 year old Bourbon) and the Scots age in used barrels which rely more on long, slow oxidation than new charred barrel influence. Also far less evaporation. Makes a fine whisky, just a different animal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Squire and Fox, thanks! It never occurred to me that a 12 YO scotch was not equivalent to a 12 YO bourbon. If a distillery could avoid tax and reduce loss to evaporation, I wonder why they wouldn't create a rick house in a much colder climate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do. Heaven Hill owns one of the largest distillerys in Canada and Beam owns Alberta Springs, purveyor of the 10 year old Rye to Whistlepig and others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It never occurred to me that a 12 YO scotch was not equivalent to a 12 YO bourbon.

It isn't but that misunderstanding is so widespread one can grow tired of explaining the difference to social acquaintances. It does seem a natural comparison though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again Squire for your willingness to educate a beginner. I'm a fan of Lot 40 (though not a fan of the price) and found a Forty Creek Confederation Oak Reserve in TX that is waiting for the right moment to open. All Canadian distillate I believe. Do Heaven Hill and Beam take US distillate to Canadian facilities to age?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too much added expense I should think for established brands. I mean, Heaven Hill could hardly ship Evan Williams back and forth while still retailing it for $10.99 a bottle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing in the law would stop a distillery from making bourbon in Alaska or Maine or Minnesota if they wanted to. I am not sure if aging it outside the US would violate the rule requiring it to be produced in the US and therefore not be allowed to be called bourbon or if that only applies to the distilling. In fact Yahara Bay does distill and presumably age bourbon (briefly) in Wisconsin. Not sure if the barrels are kept in temperature controlled storage and no idea what size they are. There several micros in the Pacific NW. But unfortunately nothing on the scale of the major distilleries who age for at least 4 years in full size barrels.

There is Stein/BMH Oregon bourbon and rye but I don't know what size barrels they use and reports at best are mixed on the quality of the whiskey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've wondered about that as well, distilling and aging for two years here, finish aging in Canada and still call it Bourbon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the legal and tax headaches of carrying barrels of alcohol back and forth across international borders would be enough of a disincentive. But they could certainly try their hand in the Northern states at a slow age process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bourbon and scotch are different styles of whiskey and each is made in the way that is best for realizing that style. If you didn't age bourbon in Kentucky the way it has always been aged, it wouldn't be bourbon. Oh, if you did it on United States soil it might be bourbon legally but it wouldn't taste like bourbon.

You have 40 year old scotch but not 40 year old bourbon because of the climate difference. Duplicate the Scottish climate with a bourbon and you will have a product that is really neither. It might be a good or interesting product, but it will be something else.

I suppose these are harmless intellectual exercises but they seem pointless to me. We've got a good thing with bourbon just the way it is. Why would you want to fuck with it?

There's a reason why the primary advice retiring master distillers give their successors is, "don't change a damn thing."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bourbon and scotch are different styles of whiskey and each is made in the way that is best for realizing that style. If you didn't age bourbon in Kentucky the way it has always been aged, it wouldn't be bourbon. Oh, if you did it on United States soil it might be bourbon legally but it wouldn't taste like bourbon.

You have 40 year old scotch but not 40 year old bourbon because of the climate difference. Duplicate the Scottish climate with a bourbon and you will have a product that is really neither. It might be a good or interesting product, but it will be something else.

I suppose these are harmless intellectual exercises but they seem pointless to me. We've got a good thing with bourbon just the way it is. Why would you want to fuck with it?

There's a reason why the primary advice retiring master distillers give their successors is, "don't change a damn thing."

Something else to consider is that many (though certainly not all) of the highly sought after older scotches are from distilleries that were originally built to make bulk whisky for blends. As such, a big proportion of the barrels they went into were pretty worn out, so it took a long time for the barrel to do its thing. Regardless of whether the whisky was intended to be bulk or not, there are always a much higher proportion of re-used barrels vs. first fill (and very very few virgin oak barrels) with whisky aging in them at a given distillery.

There is no such thing as a worn out barrel when it comes to aging bourbon. Couple the increased cask engagement from virgin oak barrels with the very different weather situation, and I've got to agree with Mr. Cowdery. Bourbon is awesome just the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Scots also went through a whisky glut and a lot of that old stock was created by inadvertence rather than design. Such older stuff was not always the fashion. I recall a book from the 1930s by Commander McDonald where he discussed the effects of wood aging on malt whisky and concluded "the 10 year old Mcallan makes the best glass".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Scots also went through a whisky glut and a lot of that old stock was created by inadvertence rather than design. Such older stuff was not always the fashion. I recall a book from the 1930s by Commander McDonald where he discussed the effects of wood aging on malt whisky and concluded "the 10 year old Mcallan makes the best glass".
Excellent point. Honest malt whisky fans will tell you that you have to be pretty careful about buying older single malt. Ignoring price, a lot of older single malt can start to taste pretty flat or worn out once it gets up into its 20s . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember too that the aging conditions are very different. Long aged Scotch whisky has the issue of going under proof (less than 40%) since they tend to lose ethanol in that climate (higher relative humidity, so proof goes down with age). In KY, the opposite, long agers unless on the lower floors lose water and go up in ABV. I'd be interested in knowing whether any aging whiskey in KY has a problem of going under proof, even on the lowest floor?

This is why lower barrel entry proof is interesting to me in American whiskey - perhaps reaches "maturity" sooner and without the risk of going under proof. I think some craft guys are going this way, and could give them a differentiator over the majors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to contradict the wisdom of retired master distillers, but you have to appreciate the potential for improvement that is represented by the Buffalo Trace Experimental Collection and the Single Oak Project. Of the few that I have tried, I have liked some much more than others. But the data gathered across so many variables in what appears to be a fairly scientific and methodical approach represents a real attempt to discover a positive evolution of the product: bourbon. Acknowledging the obvious problems of informing the competition, I hope someday they disclose the nature of what they learned from their efforts and how that was put to use in their products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all in favor of traditional methods.

I'm also in favor of people experimenting with methods not tried before.

Even the greatest of traditions started out as experimental, long ago.

People fucking with things is the only thing that moves us forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all in favor of traditional methods.

I'm also in favor of people experimenting with methods not tried before.

Even the greatest of traditions started out as experimental, long ago.

People fucking with things is the only thing that moves us forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know of an experiment underway at one of our major universities wherein barrels are wrapped in a specially designed, semi-permeable membrane that allows water to evaporate but not alcohol.

With the current interest in long-aged whiskey, some American distillers are deliberately storing some barrels in low, internal locations where they will age more slowly.

The warehouses at MGP of Indiana have basements, but they removed the racks from the basements years ago. Perhaps they should put them back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as four roses is delicious and ready to drink in eight-ish years and Heaven Hill maintains their core lineup, I don't give a flying owl how long anyone else ages their bourbon.

Yes, owl is now what I will be using in lieu of the f bomb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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