Single Barrel and Store Picks?

[Theiano]

Many of the distilleries sometimes bend the few rules that are written down, it wouldn't surprise me at all if some are being creative with the single barrel designation. Given that bourbon doesn't need to be aged for any time at all, before it can be labelled bourbon, how long does a batched bourbon need to sit in a single barrel, before it can be labeled so?
 

[flahute]

4 hours ago, Theiano said:

Many of the distilleries sometimes bend the few rules that are written down, it wouldn't surprise me at all if some are being creative with the single barrel designation. Given that bourbon doesn't need to be aged for any time at all, before it can be labelled bourbon, how long does a batched bourbon need to sit in a single barrel, before it can be labeled so?
 

Same amount of time as it takes to be called bourbon.

[tanstaafl2]

22 hours ago, Theiano said:

Many of the distilleries sometimes bend the few rules that are written down, it wouldn't surprise me at all if some are being creative with the single barrel designation. Given that bourbon doesn't need to be aged for any time at all, before it can be labelled bourbon, how long does a batched bourbon need to sit in a single barrel, before it can be labeled so?
 

18 hours ago, flahute said:

Same amount of time as it takes to be called bourbon.

 

I think it is one of the greatest shortcomings of calling something bourbon. It should have a minimum time requirement. 2 years seems the bare minimum but 3 or 4 would be better. The whole "straight" designation isn't adequate because as best I can tell it isn't used consistently and the requirement to use an age statement under 4 years of age is routine abused or completely ignored. I no longer consider whiskey under 2 years, and really 4 years, to be bourbon, rules be damned. I am making my own rules! Distillers, craft or otherwise, are welcome to release younger whiskey but they shouldn't be able to call it bourbon.

 

I have much the same feeling about using any barrel under 53 gallons but that would be even harder to fix.

 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by tanstaafl2
Added quotes

[Jazz June]

Interestingly, SINGLE BARREL remains a registered trademark owned by Age International. As far as I am aware, it is completely unenforced and likely unenforceable, but nonetheless still registered. Renewed last year too, so AI must think it has some value.

 

I have read here and elsewhere that the TTB does not do a great job of enforcing label regulations, but I also wonder about the false advertising issues present in some of these scenarios. I have read that Buffalo Trace removed the single barrel designation from Eagle Rare when they changed to an automated bottling line because technically a bottle filled from the end of one barrel could be completed with bourbon from a second subsequent barrel. That would suggest to me that at least some in the industry take these issues seriously.

 

As a consumer I would feel mislead if a bottle labeled "single barrel" does not in fact come from whiskey aged together in a single barrel. The finishing barrel scenarios are more complicated. If the contents of one barrel were transferred to a second finishing barrel, the whiskey would all have remained together in one barrel at a time, but is this still a single barrel? Some of the other scenarios mentioned seem like a dishonest way to skirt rules and/or the true meaning of the term.

[flahute]

1 hour ago, tanstaafl2 said:

 

I think it is one of the greatest shortcomings of calling something bourbon. It should have a minimum time requirement. 2 years seems the bare minimum but 3 or 4 would be better. The whole "straight" designation isn't adequate because as best I can tell it isn't used consistently and the requirement to use an age statement under 4 years of age is routine abused or completely ignored. I no longer consider whiskey under 2 years, and really 4 years, to be bourbon, rules be damned. I am making my own rules! Distillers, craft or otherwise, are welcome to release younger whiskey but they shouldn't be able to call it bourbon.

 

I have much the same feeling about using any barrel under 53 gallons but that would be even harder to fix.

 

 

 

Preach it brother! I could not agree more.

[Richnimrod]

6 hours ago, tanstaafl2 said:

 

I think it is one of the greatest shortcomings of calling something bourbon. It should have a minimum time requirement. 2 years seems the bare minimum but 3 or 4 would be better. The whole "straight" designation isn't adequate because as best I can tell it isn't used consistently and the requirement to use an age statement under 4 years of age is routine abused or completely ignored. I no longer consider whiskey under 2 years, and really 4 years, to be bourbon, rules be damned. I am making my own rules! Distillers, craft or otherwise, are welcome to release younger whiskey but they shouldn't be able to call it bourbon.

 

I have much the same feeling about using any barrel under 53 gallons but that would be even harder to fix.

 

 

 

I halfta agree with Bruce.    I realize the rules say 2-years; but; who drinks 2-year-old Straight Bourbon any more?  

I agree about 4-years being a kinda 'minimum' ... and that THAT is routinely abused.   

Bourbon is 4-years old!     OK, I'm jumping off that soap box now.    OoooUIUCH!!!!    That hurt my ankles! 

[kevinbrink]

9 hours ago, tanstaafl2 said:

 

I think it is one of the greatest shortcomings of calling something bourbon. It should have a minimum time requirement. 2 years seems the bare minimum but 3 or 4 would be better. The whole "straight" designation isn't adequate because as best I can tell it isn't used consistently and the requirement to use an age statement under 4 years of age is routine abused or completely ignored. I no longer consider whiskey under 2 years, and really 4 years, to be bourbon, rules be damned. I am making my own rules! Distillers, craft or otherwise, are welcome to release younger whiskey but they shouldn't be able to call it bourbon.

 

I have much the same feeling about using any barrel under 53 gallons but that would be even harder to fix.

 

 

 

I mostly agree, I will add that I'm starting to think that even more offensive to me than small barrels might be kiln dried oak.

[tanstaafl2]

On 2/17/2018 at 8:49 PM, kevinbrink said:

I mostly agree, I will add that I'm starting to think that even more offensive to me than small barrels might be kiln dried oak.

Well, while we are fomenting a revolution we can certainly throw that in there!

 

 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2018 by tanstaafl2

[Charlutz]

Among Bruce, Steve, Rich and Kevin we have some respected board vets making a case. As a relative newbie, let me say I don’t quite get the fuss. Are you thinking of uneducated consumers being misled by young bourbon in pretty labels? I’m as certain as I can be that I haven’t consumed anything younger than 4 years, except once or twice and that was on purpose. I’m fairly certain you guys haven’t either. Or do you just not want young bourbon on the shelves anywhere? We do need something at which to direct our scorn! 

[Richnimrod]

1 hour ago, Charlutz said:

We do need something at which to direct our scorn! 

Direction Be Damned!!!!      I shall throw scorn in EVERY  Direction!     It's my God-Given Right!  

Maybe even my Responsibility (as an American, I mean we're all expected to do this sorta thing aren't we?).

[flahute]

8 hours ago, Charlutz said:

 Are you thinking of uneducated consumers being misled by young bourbon in pretty labels? 

Nah. I just want less crap to wade through when I go to the store! Sooooo many crap labels mixed in with legit stuff these days. If they can't call that crap bourbon, it has to go on a different shelf!

I want them to make it easier for me to be lazy!

[Charlutz]

14 hours ago, flahute said:

Nah. I just want less crap to wade through when I go to the store! Sooooo many crap labels mixed in with legit stuff these days. If they can't call that crap bourbon, it has to go on a different shelf!

I want them to make it easier for me to be lazy!

Haha

[kevinbrink]

On 2/19/2018 at 12:51 PM, Charlutz said:

Among Bruce, Steve, Rich and Kevin we have some respected board vets making a case. As a relative newbie, let me say I don’t quite get the fuss. Are you thinking of uneducated consumers being misled by young bourbon in pretty labels? I’m as certain as I can be that I haven’t consumed anything younger than 4 years, except once or twice and that was on purpose. I’m fairly certain you guys haven’t either. Or do you just not want young bourbon on the shelves anywhere? We do need something at which to direct our scorn! 

Thanks for including me in with those other guys, but I would weigh their opinions higher than mine.   I can think of a more than a few that were intentional myself but tbt most of the sub 4 year stuff I have had in the last year were Rye Whiskeys, the only one that comes to mind that I did not know was sub 4 years at the time I first had it was the Ezra Brooks Straight Rye. 

[jvd99]

On 2/19/2018 at 7:56 PM, flahute said:

Nah. I just want less crap to wade through when I go to the store! Sooooo many crap labels mixed in with legit stuff these days. If they can't call that crap bourbon, it has to go on a different shelf!

I want them to make it easier for me to be lazy!

I support all stores having a "Crap Bourbon" section and having it labelled as such

[Kpiz]

Among Bruce, Steve, Rich and Kevin we have some respected board vets making a case. As a relative newbie, let me say I don’t quite get the fuss. Are you thinking of uneducated consumers being misled by young bourbon in pretty labels? I’m as certain as I can be that I haven’t consumed anything younger than 4 years, except once or twice and that was on purpose. I’m fairly certain you guys haven’t either. Or do you just not want young bourbon on the shelves anywhere? We do need something at which to direct our scorn! [emoji3]

I have to agree with Bruce, Steve, et al and it’s because of the first reason you mention. While most of us here probably don’t get bamboozled at the store too often, many other folks certainly do. It’s pretty common for me to hear from one of my friends something like “I bought this new bourbon at the store. It says it won a gold medal in some competition so it should be pretty good.” In reality, it’s a young craft bourbon with a fancy label that entered its product in a competition where everyone wins. We can’t fix the spirits competitions giving out medals to everyone, but I’d guess they probably wouldn’t have bought it if it didn’t say “bourbon”.

[musekatcher]

5 hours ago, Kpiz said:

 

While most of us here probably don’t get bamboozled at the store too often, many other folks certainly do.

I wish I could say that.  A few times, I've gone in, didn't see what I'm looking for. A pushy salesperson interceeds, and pushes a recommendation for a less familiar label, I bite usually in a rush, and it turns out to be an overpriced, NDP, NAS untraceable something-another, thinish, youngish, and uninteresting.  I finish the bottle anyway as punishment, which works as a great reminder next time. 

[Richnimrod]

2 hours ago, musekatcher said:

I finish the bottle anyway as punishment, which works as a great reminder next time. 

Heee-Heeeeee!    Psyching yerself out of doing that dumb sh_t again.     That's pretty schmart for a somebody who got 'bamboozled'.  

Good for you, musekatcher.    That's a very good way to learn.    A little tough love is gotta be more memorable than just flushing it, I'm sure.

In those cases when, in a weak moment, I've done something like this, usually, if it's truly awful, I flush it. 

Maybe I'm missing a good bet here?     But, then again, it's been a very long time since I've been 'so hooked', so maybe my lesson has been learned.

[Guss West]

Sincere bourbon-mongers don't try to sell me the NDP NAS cra(p)ft whisky. 

Those that do, I'll admit to a bit of fun at their expense with a game of cat and mouse. 

 

I guess I've been lucky, in that I've never purchased a PS barrel that was markedly worse than the standard expression (sampled a few though!).  Not everyone knows how to pick a barrel, and not everyone picks barrels that suit my tastes. 

 

Counting my lucky bottles that I have a LLS with golden palates! 

That is, what they pick is often spot-on to my preferences. 

Favorite LS in New Haven County! 

[musekatcher]

On 2/24/2018 at 12:59 PM, Richnimrod said:

In those cases when, in a weak moment, I've done something like this, usually, if it's truly awful, I flush it. 

 

Its never that bad.  Its just over-valued.  $35 for a fifth of bourbon that is better than Benchmark is still very drinkable, but I could've spent less for better bourbon.