It ain't the heat it's the...

[Flyfish]

Over on the Legacy/Larceny thread there are several comments about "hot" bourbon that seem to imply that we know what "hot" means and where it comes from. In my experience, "hot" is not an attribute of proof. But, then, I catch myself using a term that I'm not really clear on. Sometimes there is the pleasantness of cinnamon red-hots. Sometimes there is an off putting sensation. Is there anyone out there who has thought this through enough to define "hot" in a way that might garner general acceptance. This afternoon, for example, I have  been enjoying some OWA. At 107 proof, I find it not hot at all. But I don't really know what I mean by that.

[Richnimrod]

Food can be HOT, if jammed into one's mouth straight from the oven.   However, Bourbon is always pleasantly warm or even cool, if ice was in the glass.   Never; 'hot'.    So, for me not a very accurate term for any attribute of Bourbon.

[Bourbonmakesmepoop]

"Depends on what you consider the definition of "is" is......"

-Bill Clinton

[dcbt]

For better or worse (as I realize many bourbonites hate both of these terms), I think most people use the term "hot" as an antonym of "smooth."

[Thig]

There are definitely two kinds of hot, Tabasco Hot Sauce and hot coffee. I think when we talk about a bourbon being hot everyone knows we mean the hot sauce kind of hot, certainly not the temperature kind of hot. To me hot, when talking about bourbon, means a burning sensation on the tongue and throat.

[Harry in WashDC]

17 minutes ago, dcbt said:

For better or worse (as I realize many bourbonites hate both of these terms), I think most people use the term "hot" as an antonym of "smooth."

Hhhhhmmm.  While mulling over the Flyfish's OP and the comments on the Legacy/Larceny thread, I also got wondering what I myself mean when I say a bourbon enters "hot".  dcbt sort of captures it for me - hot vs. smooth - and I think it's what I call the reaction to a bourbon when I take TOO big a swallow which makes me cough or makes my eyes water.  I thought it was simply alcohol "burn" but now I'm not sure.  Keep me confused, you guys - I need encouragement to vary the size of my sips and swallows over the next few hours - the Skins are playing the Falcons tonight - so I can pin down just-what-IT-is.

[Bourbonmakesmepoop]

I agree Harry, I think dcbt explained it best for me. But what is "is"?

[Tennessee Dave]

To me "hot" has to do with dryness.  What I have eaten or what I have been doing seems to effect it.  Often times i find that chocolate or a good cigar mellows it right out.  So I believe it has something to do with whatever is going on chemically in your mouth at that time.

[Charlutz]

I find myself calling a whiskey 'hot' when the burn on my tastebuds overwhelms all or almost all sense of flavor. For me, it's loosely associated with proof, but if I'm expecting a burn I take a smaller sip. OGD114 was very hot to me initially and Baker's sometimes is as well.  I enjoy both. 

[flahute]

I've always thought of hot as being indicator of alcohol burn. As we all know, higher proof does not necessarily correlate to more burn. It's a function of whiskey quality and other subjective components such as individual makeup, what the palate is doing, what you've eaten that day, etc.

Some whiskeys at low proof can be hot to me whereas George T Stagg is never hot to me. It can have a high proof bite, but not the burn that I put into the negative category.

Some whiskeys can be hot one day and fine the next. This is a function of palate variation.

Some whiskeys can be hot because I ate the wrong food right before, such as something acidic that have left the taste buds vulnerable.

 

Larceny is one that tends to taste hot to me on multiple occasions. I don't care for it really.

[Paddy]

2 hours ago, Charlutz said:

I find myself calling a whiskey 'hot' when the burn on my tastebuds overwhelms all or almost all sense of flavor. For me, it's loosely associated with proof, but if I'm expecting a burn I take a smaller sip. OGD114 was very hot to me initially and Baker's sometimes is as well.  I enjoy both. 

^^^^This defines it pretty well for me.  When my tastebuds are short circuited upon entry and it's all I can do to not gasp and/or spit the drink out, I'd define that as hot as hell!

 

I'd also define anything that causes soft tissue damage as hot. 

 

But that's just me...

Edited August 12, 2016 by Paddy

[Harry in WashDC]

Paddy, you never looked so good.

[flahute]

5 minutes ago, Harry in WashDC said:

Paddy, you never looked so good.

Hahaha.....I was going to say: that's totally him!!

 

[GaryT]

8 hours ago, flahute said:

I've always thought of hot as being indicator of alcohol burn. As we all know, higher proof does not necessarily correlate to more burn. It's a function of whiskey quality and other subjective components such as individual makeup, what the palate is doing, what you've eaten that day, etc.

 

I think Steve nailed my thoughts.  I think there is SOME correlation to proof, but that isn't the whole story.  A higher proof whisky tends to have a greater chance of coming across as "hot" to me than a lower proof - but a 12 yr 120 proof bourbon might not seem as "hot" to me as a 2 yr 100 proof craft bourbon.  I don't know if it is the mouthfeel or just the complexity that might distract my palate ("Nothing high proof to see here, move along"), or maybe more the inverse that when there isn't enough else to identify - the alcohol burn is more prominent.  Although I've had some fairly complex whiskies that did seem hot to me before adding a bit of water to open them up - so I think like other sensations - there is a ton of variability involved.  

[garbanzobean]

9 hours ago, flahute said:

I've always thought of hot as being indicator of alcohol burn. As we all know, higher proof does not necessarily correlate to more burn. It's a function of whiskey quality and other subjective components such as individual makeup, what the palate is doing, what you've eaten that day, etc.

Some whiskeys at low proof can be hot to me whereas George T Stagg is never hot to me. It can have a high proof bite, but not the burn that I put into the negative category.

Some whiskeys can be hot one day and fine the next. This is a function of palate variation.

Some whiskeys can be hot because I ate the wrong food right before, such as something acidic that have left the taste buds vulnerable.

 

Larceny is one that tends to taste hot to me on multiple occasions. I don't care for it really.

In general, I have to agree with Steve.  A sense of warmth can be good or bad.  What I will say is that I often perceive alcoholic "heat" as a sort of prickly sensation in my mouth.  I think sometimes a rye forward presence can be perceived as such, as well.  Heat is like another well known product that is consumed in mass quantities by men . . . It is difficult to define, but you know it when you see it.

 

Though I do not "see" it when I drink Larceny.  Sort of wish I did, since I have to drive to Virginia to get it.

[tanstaafl2]

While I agree that "hot" tends to be the antonym of smooth I try to use "rough" instead. Not that I use smooth very much to begin with.

 

"Rough" or "hot" for me seems to have two parts. One can be proof to some degree. But the other hot that the "is" is is congeners, that nebulous term for the various fusel alcohols, esters, tannins and aldehydes that are the other byproducts of whiskey production.

 

Managed well they bring the many unique flavors we experience with whiskey. Managed poorly and they bring the burn! 

[B.B. Babington]

to me "hot" and "smooth" come from other factors than proof.  I consider GTS smooth because it goes down easy despite it's high proof.  so what gives those rough edges?  I suspect mostly smaller congeners that become more complex (through condensation, etc) when whiskey is aged, smoothing out those rough edges.

 

 

 

[B.B. Babington]

like tanstaafl2 said

Edited August 12, 2016 by B.B. Babington

[weller_tex]

IMO "hot", the sense of burning or roughness on the toungue isn't related to proof. High proof bourbons can induce this but so can bourbons at lower proof. I have had many bottle of Booker's over the years and it never seems hot to me...but I certainly sip it..no gulps. Larceny, although I like it, definitely always has a sense a roughness/hotness on the tongue.

 

I have also sometime noticed that with some whisk(e)ys..Bourbon, Scotch, Rye..etc..some are rougher/hotter AFTER adding water..

[fishnbowljoe]

5 hours ago, tanstaafl2 said:

 

 

"Rough" or "hot" for me seems to have two parts. One can be proof to some degree. But the other hot that the "is" is is congeners, that nebulous term for the various fusel alcohols, esters, tannins and aldehydes that are the other byproducts of whiskey production.

 

Managed well they bring the many unique flavors we experience with whiskey. Managed poorly and they bring the burn! 

 

I think Bruce may have hit the nail on the head. At least for me he has.

 

I've been meaning to post my thoughts in this thread, but there was something I just couldn't wrap my head around and put in to words. Yes, hot can be a result of high proof. But there is also something else. I was grasping for that something else, and lo and behold, I believe Bruce came up with it. I've had high and low proof bourbons that were "hot". The alcohol overpowered the flavor for whatever reason. I've also tasted bourbons where the flavor was always in the forefront regardless of proof. The filtering process maybe?  IIRC, chill filtering removes most, if not all congeners. Bourbons that are not chill filtered, congeners in the mix and more flavor?????  Nice one Bruce.

 

 

[Bourbonmakesmepoop]

2 hours ago, fishnbowljoe said:

 

I think Bruce may have hit the nail on the head. At least for me he has.

 

I've been meaning to post my thoughts in this thread, but there was something I just couldn't wrap my head around and put in to words. Yes, hot can be a result of high proof. But there is also something else. I was grasping for that something else, and lo and behold, I believe Bruce came up with it. I've had high and low proof bourbons that were "hot". The alcohol overpowered the flavor for whatever reason. I've also tasted bourbons where the flavor was always in the forefront regardless of proof. The filtering process maybe?  IIRC, chill filtering removes most, if not all congeners. Bourbons that are not chill filtered, congeners in the mix and more flavor?????  Nice one Bruce.

 

 

I just tried ECBP for the first time and this is a whiskey that I see as the opposite of hot, albeit the proof. Like you said, the flavor comes first.... Very enjoyable pour

[MTNBourbon]

45 minutes ago, Bourbonmakesmepoop said:

I just tried ECBP for the first time and this is a whiskey that I see as the opposite of hot, albeit the proof. Like you said, the flavor comes first.... Very enjoyable pour

If you are talking about this one, Elijah Craig 12 Yr. Old Barrel Proof (Batch 6) (140.2 Proof). For the proof the smoothess out there hands down, well at least to me.

[b1gcountry]

 

I have also sometime noticed that with some whisk(e)ys..Bourbon, Scotch, Rye..etc..some are rougher/hotter AFTER adding water..

I find the same thing with higher proof bottles especially, and especially if you add just a little water, and especially if you don't let it sit after.

[kjbeggs]

On 8/11/2016 at 6:17 PM, Charlutz said:

I find myself calling a whiskey 'hot' when the burn on my tastebuds overwhelms all or almost all sense of flavor. For me, it's loosely associated with proof, but if I'm expecting a burn I take a smaller sip. OGD114 was very hot to me initially and Baker's sometimes is as well.  I enjoy both. 

I tend to agree with this take on it.

If I call a whiskey "Hot", what I'm saying is it's all (or mostly) burn from the sip through the finish. No real flavors come through, just the burn. Proof isn't necessarily a factor.

I may say a certain pour has "some heat to it" in a good way, if the flavor comes through, but there's still a nice kick. This usually is proof-related.

 

[Flyfish]

On 8/11/2016 at 7:17 PM, Charlutz said:

I find myself calling a whiskey 'hot' when the burn on my tastebuds overwhelms all or almost all sense of flavor. For me, it's loosely associated with proof, but if I'm expecting a burn I take a smaller sip. OGD114 was very hot to me initially and Baker's sometimes is as well.  I enjoy both. 

Now, see, I had some OGD114 neat this p.m. Nose a little. Sip a little. Enjoy a little. Repeat. I don't find it "hot." Whatever I mean by that. CEHT SmB, on the other hand, I find hot. Whatever I mean by that.