New Wiser Canadian Whiskey Out, Uses Sour Mash

[Gillman]

Wiser Last Barrels. Just out at LCBO here: http://www.lcbo.com/lcbo/product/jp-wiser-s-last-barrels-canadian-whisky/461012#.VzkScmPPBHh

 

It's a bourbon grain bill, aged 14 years in reused bourbon barrels. And it uses some type of lactic souring to emulate addition of backset, which generally isn't done in Canada.

 

My question is, is it distilled at a low proof, in the neighbourhood that is for straight whiskey (under 160 proof), yes or no? Nothing was blended in at bottling, I believe, so it seems unlikely it was distilled at close to vodka proof. If it's a real bourbon mash in U.S. terms in other words, I'm interested. Anyone know?

 

Gary

[Harry in WashDC]

Other than Davin's review last week, I've seen nothing about this.  He said Jim Stanski, MD at the time, used sour milk to sour the mash and the distillate sat it used bourbon barrels for 14 years.  Unless I see something contradicting this, . . .

 

Thanks for bringing this up.

[Gillman]

Thanks but he didn't mention (from what I recall) how it was distilled. To me that's really the key point. I've bought too much nearly neutral brown whisky and some has a different wood effect or some other twist which doesn't make it really different - for me - from other blended whisky out there.  This time I'd like to know before I pitch in.

 

Gary

[Harry in WashDC]

Went back to read his comment again, and you are correct - it is not clear how it was distilled.  Davin does say the grains were mixed then mashed, unlike the usual Canadian process of distilling each separately then blended.  "With only 132 barrels of spirit in that final run . . ."  I sure wish I knew exactly what that means.  Things like how many runs, proof in and proof out, and even whose used barrels were used would be nice to know along with whether that final run had things added before or after barreling.  Getting a headache thinking about this.  If you try it before I do, let me know what you think, BUT don't wait on me.  I'm still working on a couple of Crown Royal "LE"s I bought to try.

[Gillman]

19 hours ago, Harry in WashDC said:

Went back to read his comment again, and you are correct - it is not clear how it was distilled.  Davin does say the grains were mixed then mashed, unlike the usual Canadian process of distilling each separately then blended.  "With only 132 barrels of spirit in that final run . . ."  I sure wish I knew exactly what that means.  Things like how many runs, proof in and proof out, and even whose used barrels were used would be nice to know along with whether that final run had things added before or after barreling.  Getting a headache thinking about this.  If you try it before I do, let me know what you think, BUT don't wait on me.  I'm still working on a couple of Crown Royal "LE"s I bought to try.

 

Well, I agree all 'round Harry but "proof in" is the main thing. If it's brown vodka, I don't want to know, at this point.

[portwood]

19 hours ago, Gillman said:

 

Well, I agree all 'round Harry but "proof in" is the main thing. If it's brown vodka, I don't want to know, at this point.

We would all like to know, but given the secrecy in the Canadian Whisky industry, its unlikely any details will emerge - other than "nudge-nudge-wink-wink", from the only person writing on the subject Mr de Kergommeaux.

 

Good news is Wiser's (Corby's/Don Livermore) seems to be at the forefront* of giving nerds what they've been asking from the Canadian industry for ages:

- proofs above the bare 40% minimum (they even showcased a barrel proof version of Lot 40 at the recent Spirit of Toronto, thought apparently there are no plans to release it to market)

- age statements - 14 years in this case

- no funny juice additives (though we don't know for sure)

- low distillation proofs (though we don't know for sure)

 

*or should I say: leading the pack of turtles

Edited May 18, 2016 by portwood

[Paddy]

I'd love to see a barrel proof Lot 40...

[Gillman]

Actually I simply asked Don the questions (on Twitter) and he was kind enough to reply. The whisky was column-distilled at just under 80% abv (160 proof) and was entered at 58% abv (116 proof), therefore within the U.S. straight whisky criteria for that part of it I was asking about. It's a bourbon-type mash (80% corn, 11% rye, the rest barley malt) but aged 14 years in re-used barrels.

 

Given it is aged twice as long as would be necessary for maturity with new charred barrels, I expect the taste to be as rich as a good bourbon. I'll let you know after I try it, but am very pleased with the data revealed.

 

Gary

Edited May 23, 2016 by Gillman

[Harry in WashDC]

Thank you for following up, especially since I don't twit.  This just got a lot more interesting.

[Paddy]

Great info Gary, and what Harry said! 

[Gillman]

Well, I found a bottle and tried it last night. It is very good, with an unmistakeable "straight" quality from the bourbon mash. A good whiskey to compare it to are the bourbon or was it rye mash Hirsch whiskeys of some years ago, I am pretty sure there was one that was 22 years old or that neighbourhood. At 14 years old, it has sufficient wood certainly but the balance is almost perfect. It is quite sweet even though the reused barrels had no red layer as would a new charred barrel. There is a complex apple-spice smell and taste which must be esters formed in the aging. Not sure that the soured mash has much to do with it, but who knows?

 

My conclusion from this is, if you take a bourbon (or rye) mash, i.e., distilled under 160 proof and entered low (below 125, this one was 116), and if you age it long enough in reused barrels, you will end up with something very similar to bourbon or rye which takes half as long to age. The red layer is a kind of kickstart in other words, just as the maple stack is for Tennessee whiskey.

 

Another analogy is to single malt, 14 years is well-aged but by no means the maximum range for malt whisky and reused barrels are always used in Scotland. The Last Barrels is very similar, distilled low like malt whisky is and aged long like malt whisky is too in reused barrels. The difference is, its base grains are unmalted corn and rye vs. the all-malted barley of single malt. Perhaps Irish pot still is yet a better analogy then since it uses a measure of unmalted grains (barley). The Last Barrels is a North American version of that kind of whiskey but it ends by tasting more like a bourbon since the corn (mainly) is so distinctive.

 

Lot 40 is kind of similar except all or mostly rye (malted and non-), and also it is aged about half the time I believe of Last Barrels. So you don't get any residual "chemical" notes in Last Barrels due to those extra 6-7 years in the barrel, they are fully aged out. It's not like Canadian Club Chairman's Select Single Rye because the latter is a rye mash aged all in new charred barrels - the latter is more squarely like a U.S. straight rye of the same age (about 7 years I believe).

 

Last Barrels is somewhat like the Crown Royal releases which use all- or a good part flavouring whiskey, but is older than those in palate (or so I'd conclude from the taste).

 

Basically it is like a well-aged bourbon, if it was included in a tasting of bourbons aged 8-15 years I doubt anyone would think it is "Canadian". I'd like to have tried this at 10 years, or 12, but suspect the company waited to allow aging to iron out all distillery character such as IMO Lot 40 still has or CR Northern Harvest.  All the Wiser labels are very clean in palate and this one too except you get the additional complexity a bourbon mash adds, not just extra tannin from the wood as Wiser 18 has and other long-aged but standard-recipe Canadian whiskies.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Gillman

[Harry in WashDC]

Wonderful.  And I just finished a Lot 40 so there's a spot for a Wiiser on the shelf.

EDIT - Well, I didn't finish it this morning.  Pretty sure it was after 5PM sometime last week.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Harry in WashDC
clarification

[tanstaafl2]

Do you know if this has something in it making up the mysterious "11th part" allowed in Canadian whisky? Or is this all whisky?

 

The Hirsch whiskey was a straight bourbon mashbill aged 20 years in used cooperage (somewhere in Illinois as I recall). To me it was kind of middlin' at best. Unlike the HW 21yo rye that was aged in used cooperage which I thought was excellent.

Edited May 27, 2016 by tanstaafl2
Fixed the damn parenthesis.

[Gillman]

It is all whiskey as far as I know, no additives. This whole 11th part thing is a misnomer because like American blended you can add flavour to Canadian whisky which typically is a blend - so nothing new there. We are talking about whisky here which departs from that profile.

 

Gary

Edited May 27, 2016 by Gillman

[Harry in WashDC]

Gary, this news just gets better and better.  I may actually go hunt for this instead of just watching for it.

[Gillman]

Like a well-aged bourbon Harry, give it a shot if you can find it. Superior to both Hirsch's mentioned above, not as needlessly woody, better-balanced.

 

Gary

Edited May 27, 2016 by Gillman

[dcbt]

52 minutes ago, Harry in WashDC said:

Gary, this news just gets better and better.  I may actually go hunt for this instead of just watching for it.

Did this get released in the States?

[Harry in WashDC]

12 minutes ago, dcbt said:

Did this get released in the States?

You mean I'm driving around town and asking for no good reason???  I am chagrined.

 

EDIT - I visited a Canadian blog I rarely visit and found some info (link below).  It looks like this may, indeed, by something peculiar to Ontario.  Needless to say, I am disappointed.  OTOH, maybe this is an indication of where the Canadian market is going.  Much of what is sold down here is, in my opinion, pedestrian.  But if they are offering more of these good things at home, perhaps they will find their way down to the great consumer pit to the South.  Link - http://whiskylassie.blogspot.com/2016/05/giving-dad-iconic-canadian-whisky-jp.html

Edited May 27, 2016 by Harry in WashDC
additional info

[dcbt]

15 minutes ago, Harry in WashDC said:

You mean I'm driving around town and asking for no good reason???  I am chagrined.

 

EDIT - I visited a Canadian blog I rarely visit and found some info (link below).  It looks like this may, indeed, by something peculiar to Ontario.  Needless to say, I am disappointed.  OTOH, maybe this is an indication of where the Canadian market is going.  Much of what is sold down here is, in my opinion, pedestrian.  But if they are offering more of these good things at home, perhaps they will find their way down to the great consumer pit to the South.  Link - http://whiskylassie.blogspot.com/2016/05/giving-dad-iconic-canadian-whisky-jp.html

Yea, I was intrigued with this as well (or as intrigued as I get with Canadian product anyway), so I googled about it and discovered recently it was only released in Canada.  Oh well.  Hope you didn't drive to too many places!

[Gillman]

20 minutes ago, dcbt said:

Yea, I was intrigued with this as well (or as intrigued as I get with Canadian product anyway), so I googled about it and discovered recently it was only released in Canada.  Oh well.  Hope you didn't drive to too many places!

 

Well, you always have good U.S. bourbon to fall back on. This product is very much in that vein, so you aren't missing anything, it's more a surprise for (some) Canadian palates.

 

Gary