squire Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 . . . . It has a touch more proof but both have too much of the creek in them.Great line . . . . . . . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzhead Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 (edited) Fluff, well written but still fluff. One third of the description goes on about the water as if that's important. Why is a creek 2000 feet in elevation significant? Stitzel-Weller did alright using an underground well. The first sentence says enough by using the word 'procured' which is another way of saying we didn't make it. A mixture of three they say, well who blended it, the winemaker? Why only 1800 bottles, surely their suppliers have more. That small a run wouldn't be enough to have three distilleries set up to make contract whisky to specs so how do we arrive at 70% corn in the mashbill? An average surely but of what? The major Tennessee distillers use about 80% corn and bulk Kentucky suppliers are not far behind that. The art of the sale is in creating a desire for the product, whether it be wine, whisky or widgets. To me all this says is artfully packaged to sell at a premium ($50.00) and guile customers into thinking they're getting something special. Edited September 4, 2015 by Jazzhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Glad you liked it Jazz, I understand your appreciation of that style. Perhaps they're closed lipped about the Bourbon specs because they're aiming for a wine oriented audience.I'd still like to know howinhell they got a 70% corn average in the mix though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinjoe Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Minor clarification, but the release was 1,800 6-packs, not 1,800 bottles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts