Blend Your Own Rye

[hawkeye62]

6 hours ago, smokinjoe said:

I didn't think it did.  Why is that important?

 

Because that means it could be less than two years old. If it was two years old, I think Dickel would put straight on the label just for the prestige and separation from other MGP ryes.

 

Regards, Jim  

[smokinjoe]

53 minutes ago, hawkeye62 said:

 

Nope, with no age statement and no straight rye label, it could be 1 yr old or even less.

 

Regards, Jim

Nope-nope.    Any rye whiskey that does not have an age statement, regardless of a straight designation, must be aged at least 4 years.

[hawkeye62]

2 hours ago, smokinjoe said:

Nope-nope.    Any rye whiskey that does not have an age statement, regardless of a straight designation, must be aged at least 4 years.

 

What have you been smoking Joe?

 

Regards, Jim

[smokinjoe]

6 minutes ago, hawkeye62 said:

 

What have you been smoking Joe?

 

Regards, Jim

Please refer to the following TTB DOC.  Specifically, see Pg 15, 3rd item Whisky-Rye.  In general, US rules for whiskey of any grain is that no age statement is  required if youngest part is at least 4 years old.  

https://www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter8.pdf

[tanstaafl2]

6 minutes ago, smokinjoe said:

Please refer to the following TTB DOC.  Specifically, see Pg 15, 3rd item Whisky-Rye.  In general, US rules for whiskey of any grain is that no age statement is  required if youngest part is at least 4 years old.  

https://www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter8.pdf

 

 

I was wondering when the hammer was coming down!

[GaryT]

47 minutes ago, tanstaafl2 said:

 

 

I was wondering when the hammer was coming down!

 

That's going to become a really long name (although a helluva bumper sticker - Smokin' Muthaf$%kin Hammer Joe)  

[hawkeye62]

2 hours ago, smokinjoe said:

Please refer to the following TTB DOC.  Specifically, see Pg 15, 3rd item Whisky-Rye.  In general, US rules for whiskey of any grain is that no age statement is  required if youngest part is at least 4 years old.  

https://www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter8.pdf

 

Yikes! Rules and regulations will be the dearth of us all.

 

OK, Joe, give me a week or two to sort through that stuff.

 

Regards, Jim

[smokinjoe]

18 minutes ago, hawkeye62 said:

 

Yikes! Rules and regulations will be the dearth of us all.

 

OK, Joe, give me a week or two to sort through that stuff.

 

Regards, Jim

No need to spend a lot of time on it.  It's pretty straightforward.  

[b1gcountry]

Need to read that

[hawkeye62]

44 minutes ago, smokinjoe said:

No need to spend a lot of time on it.  It's pretty straightforward.  

 

I think it is very confusing. The paragraph I think you are referencing refers to aging in used oak barrels. But, rye and bourbon are to be aged in NEW, charred oak barrels.

Much more study required.

 

Regards, Jim  

[bourbon4all]

3 hours ago, smokinjoe said:

Please refer to the following TTB DOC.  Specifically, see Pg 15, 3rd item Whisky-Rye.  In general, US rules for whiskey of any grain is that no age statement is  required if youngest part is at least 4 years old.  

https://www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter8.pdf

Thanks for the link. it's as I thought but I like the ttb list

[b1gcountry]

I'm always paranoid I'm missing the tiny letters saying "aged 7 days".

Is there any benefit to not labeling something as straight?

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[smokinjoe]

55 minutes ago, hawkeye62 said:

 

I think it is very confusing. The paragraph I think you are referencing refers to aging in used oak barrels. But, rye and bourbon are to be aged in NEW, charred oak barrels.

Much more study required.

 

Regards, Jim  

You're just confusing yourself further in trying to find a way out. Dickel is a rye whiskey that has no age statement.  Therefore, it is minimally 4 years old.  Now, stop.

[IncredulousNosco]

Anyway! Damn...this thread was about blendin' rye...

 

So I made some home-made....near HVSRW out of HWDR & AP, and had it as a SBS next to real HVSRW. Roughly a 5050 mix of the HWDR/AP "vatting."

 

Initially the nose was damn near identical, only the taste revealed the real HVSRW. And my wife picked out the home blend in a blind SBS, even though she is a huge HVSRW fan. But after each sat for more than 20 minutes, the softness of AP started overpowering the HWDR, and HVSRW was a bit better again. 

 

Anyway, a fun test.

 

 

Edited March 10, 2017 by IncredulousNosco

[b1gcountry]

You're just confusing yourself further in trying to find a way out. Dickel is a rye whiskey that has no age statement.  Therefore, it is minimally 4 years old.  Now, stop.

The table looked pretty cut and dry. The paragraphs before were confusing with the "everything except" comment at the start.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[smokinjoe]

10 minutes ago, IncredulousNosco said:

 

So I made some home-made....near HVSRW out of HWDR & AP, and had it as a SBS next to real HVSRW. Roughly a 5050 mix of the HWDR/AP "vatting."

 

 

 

Now , THAT's confusing!!!  

[fishnbowljoe]

I'll stick to my amateur Weller/wheater blends and leave this rye stuff to you professionals.

 

Cheers! Joe

[tanstaafl2]

Doesn't seem that complicated to me. Whether a company chooses to label the whiskey as "Rye" or "Straight Rye" doesn't change anything with regard to label age statement requirements.

 

But apparently it is to the TTB who seems to occasionally forget their own rules!

 

https://www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter8.pdf

Page 8-15

CLASS/TYPE	IS A SPECIFIC STATEMENT OF AGE ALLOWED?	IS A MISCELLANEOUS AGE REFERENCE ALLOWED?	IS A VINTAGE DATE ALLOWED?	IS A DISTILLATION DATE ALLOWED?
WHISKY (RYE)	YES A specific statement of age is REQUIRED if the rye whisky is less than 4 years old	YES BUT a specific statement of age must appear as conspicuously and on the same label as the miscellaneous age reference UNLESS the rye whisky is not less than 4 years old and the miscellaneous age reference is general in nature and inconspicuous (e.g., contained in back label text) on the label	NO	YES IF the rye whisky is solely the result of distillation AND a storage statement such as “stored __ years in oak barrels” appears with the distillation date

 

Page 8-16

CLASS/TYPE	IS A SPECIFIC STATEMENT OF AGE ALLOWED?	IS A MISCELLANEOUS AGE REFERENCE ALLOWED?	IS A VINTAGE DATE ALLOWED?	IS A DISTILLATION DATE ALLOWED?
WHISKY (STRAIGHT RYE)	YES A specific statement of age is REQUIRED if the straight rye whisky is less than 4 years old	YES BUT a specific statement of age must appear as conspicuously and on the same label as the miscellaneous age reference UNLESS the straight rye whisky is not less than 4 years old and the miscellaneous age reference is general in nature and inconspicuous (e.g., contained in back label text) on the label	NO	YES IF the straight rye whisky is solely the result of distillation AND a storage statement such as “stored __ years in oak barrels” appears with the distillation date

 

Reminds me of the debate a while back about the age of the NAS Old Charter "8", what "eight seasons" did or didn't mean and whether it was now a 2yo or 4yo. Rules for bourbon are the same as Rye above so the "matured eight seasons" BS is kind of the mother of all miscellaneous age references. If it were in fact less than 4 years old it would need a "conspicuous" age statement on the same label as the miscellaneous age reference which it didn't have. So it was at least a 4yo or it had a label that did not meet the TTB label requirements. 

Fortunately we can rest assured that the TTB would never allow a label that doesn't meet their own rules to get through...

[hawkeye62]

OK, after about two hours of painful browsing ttb.gov, I have to agree that any whiskey without an age statement is 4 yrs old.  But, this raises more questions for me. In general, why do whiskey reviewers play coy with the age of the whiskey they are reviewing? They will say something about the whiskey being young, but don't give the age.  

 

In particular Woodinville Micro barreled 100% rye, there is no age statement, but in small print on the back of the bottle, it says the whiskey has been aged less than 4 yrs. That seems to be in direct violation of the age statement requirement. And HW Double Rye doesn't have an age statement. But in the fine print it says the whiskey is a blend of two straight ryes aged at least two years.

 

Anyway, I guess I will have to read the fine print on the bottles before I buy in the future. 

 

Regards, Jim       

[tanstaafl2]

Because they don't want to say what the age is of course and hope you won't notice.

 

Fine print for the age statement is allowed as long as it is there and in the required format noted at the start of this chapter. Some, generally crafty things, don't even bother to do that. I rarely see a major distiller that isn't in compliance although I suppose it can happen.

 

And there are rules in theory for the fine print. You can understate the age but not overstate the age as noted in the "miscellaneous provisions on page 8-4.

 

Age may be understated but may not be overstated. In the instance of a straight whisky aged 59 months, the age may not be overstated as “5 years old”

but may be understated as, for example, “over 4 years old”

 

Saying "less than 4 years" is something I dislike. To me it implies that the whiskey is more than 3 years but less than 4 years but I am not sure that is either the true interpretation of the regulation or true in all cases. To me the rule should be clear that if you say "less than 4 years" it means that the whiskey is more than 3 years. So saying "over 3 years old"  is better to me than saying "less than 4 years old".

 

But they don't let me make or enforce the rules.

 

Even though they should!

 

 

[hawkeye62]

1 hour ago, tanstaafl2 said:

Because they don't want to say what the age is of course and hope you won't notice.

 

Fine print for the age statement is allowed as long as it is there and in the required format noted at the start of this chapter. Some, generally crafty things, don't even bother to do that. I rarely see a major distiller that isn't in compliance although I suppose it can happen.

 

And there are rules in theory for the fine print. You can understate the age but not overstate the age as noted in the "miscellaneous provisions on page 8-4.

 

Age may be understated but may not be overstated. In the instance of a straight whisky aged 59 months, the age may not be overstated as “5 years old”

but may be understated as, for example, “over 4 years old”

 

Saying "less than 4 years" is something I dislike. To me it implies that the whiskey is more than 3 years but less than 4 years but I am not sure that is either the true interpretation of the regulation or true in all cases. To me the rule should be clear that if you say "less than 4 years" it means that the whiskey is more than 3 years. So saying "over 3 years old"  is better to me than saying "less than 4 years old".

 

But they don't let me make or enforce the rules.

 

Even though they should!

 

From the Frequently Asked Questions:

 

"Can the age statement include minimum or maximum ages?
As noted above, age may be understated, but may not be overstated. A minimum age (such as "aged at least __ years") is acceptable, but a maximum age (such as "aged for less than ___ years") is not acceptable."

 

So, what Woodinville is doing seems to be a violation, or at least not acceptable. They say "Aged in new, charred oak barrels less than four years."

 

Regards, Jim

[tanstaafl2]

Woodinville has been aging for awhile and I think now has some 4+ year old whiskey. So the "older than 3 but less than 4 years old" may be accurate for them.

 

But I agree, it does not seem to be in the spirit of this regulation and may well not be the letter of the regulation either. And I would prefer it not be permitted for use.

 

This blog shows how old Old Overholt is labeled now that it is a 3 year old for example. None of that "less than 4 years old" BS here! This is one of the differences between a major distillery and much of the craft distillery world. Of course the major distilleries have plenty of their own labeling BS like numbers left on labels that no longer mean either diddly or squat.

 

But if you can get the TTB to provide clarification and/or take action then you are doing better than the rest of us!

[hawkeye62]

4 hours ago, tanstaafl2 said:

Woodinville has been aging for awhile and I think now has some 4+ year old whiskey. So the "older than 3 but less than 4 years old" may be accurate for them.

 

But I agree, it does not seem to be in the spirit of this regulation and may well not be the letter of the regulation either. And I would prefer it not be permitted for use.

 

 

 

Woodinville has had the Micro Barreled Rye which has the "less than four years" age statement. I think they tried to imply that 2 yrs in a very small barrel was equivalent to 4 yrs in a full sized barrel. Now they have a Straight Rye that they say is 5-6 years old. I haven't seen a bottle so I don't know what the label says. Anyway, my impression is that the micro barreled stuff was a way to generate some cash flow until the straight rye was ready.

 

Regards, Jim   

[flahute]

5 hours ago, hawkeye62 said:

 

Woodinville has had the Micro Barreled Rye which has the "less than four years" age statement. I think they tried to imply that 2 yrs in a very small barrel was equivalent to 4 yrs in a full sized barrel. Now they have a Straight Rye that they say is 5-6 years old. I haven't seen a bottle so I don't know what the label says. Anyway, my impression is that the micro barreled stuff was a way to generate some cash flow until the straight rye was ready.

 

Regards, Jim   

No info on the label other than the "straight" designation for both the bourbon and rye. The website says 5 years in the making for the bourbon but nothing for the rye. Distillery employees will tell you its 5 years for the rye as well. You have to take their word for it since there's no info on the label. They've been distilling long enough for both to be true so it's not a stretch.