Over thinking

[FasterHorses]

Is there any observable difference if you have the first bottle filled from a barrel and compare it to the last bottle filled from a barrel? 

[BMartin42]

Is there any observable difference if you have the first bottle filled from a barrel and compare it to the last bottle filled from a barrel? 

I wondered about this exact thing as I passed on Murray Hill Club yesterday since they had sequential bottles 7 in a row.

[Kane]

2 minutes ago, BMartin42 said:

I wondered about this exact thing as I passed on Murray Hill Club yesterday since they had sequential bottles 7 in a row.

Only one way to find out: SbSbSbSbSbSbS

[BMartin42]

Only one way to find out: SbSbSbSbSbSbS

Ok. I’m willing to go back and grab one if 6 others will pony up the Benjamin for the others. [emoji2957]

[JCwhammie]

My assumption is no since the whiskey is poured through a filter to strain out any loose charred wood from the barrel. 

Also, is the whiskey constantly on the move from the time it's pulled from the rickhouse till it's bottled? I can see that there may be barrel variation if the barrel is stagnant for weeks more likely months before immediately being bottled. But if it goes from being dumped, tanked, bottled in (basically) a continuous motion, all bottles would be the same. I have zero scientific knowledge 

[FasterHorses]

10 minutes ago, BMartin42 said:

I wondered about this exact thing as I passed on Murray Hill Club yesterday since they had sequential bottles 7 in a row.

I bought bottle 10/159 of a SB. Bottle 159 is available. If the labels were applied in the order they were filled .. well it got me wondering. Because theres no way to know if the labels were applied in order, it wouldnt be scientific. Thought some of the old timers or connected  fellas/ladies might know. 

[flahute]

I really don't think so. As mentioned above, the barrel is dumped into a stainless steel container and then goes through basic filtration to remove any solids.

All of that agitation negates any concentration that may happen at the bottom of the barrel.

[MM818]

Great question. I have 3 bottles from a store pick. 20, 29, and 80 of 122bottles. And I’m giving one to a coworker tomorrow. Which one do I give?

[flahute]

27 minutes ago, MM818 said:

Great question. I have 3 bottles from a store pick. 20, 29, and 80 of 122bottles. And I’m giving one to a coworker tomorrow. Which one do I give?

It doesn't matter.

[GaryT]

3 hours ago, MM818 said:

Great question. I have 3 bottles from a store pick. 20, 29, and 80 of 122bottles. And I’m giving one to a coworker tomorrow. Which one do I give?

 

2 hours ago, flahute said:

It doesn't matter.

 

Compare them to see if any look to be a lower fill than the others (and pick that one).  Then explain why that bottle number is special   ("29?!?!  You're not serious?  I mean - you know February only has a 29th day every FOUR YEARS for crying out loud!")

[mal00768]

8 hours ago, Kane said:

Only one way to find out: SbSbSbSbSbSbS

I laughed out loud at this one.

[Richnimrod]

Never wanting to make absolute statements about anything, I still will assert that there will be no discernible difference between ANY of the bottles, regardless of the number tattooed upon any of the bottles.

 

As an example: I've bought more than a few bottles from specific barrels of EWSB (back when this was by-and-large finer juice, and a better value than nowadays) which I found to be wonderful to my particular taste buddies.   

Twice, when I was apparently having off-days as far as tasting Bourbon; but was uncertain that was the case, I opened an additional bottle from the same barrel to check if the first one opened had deteriorated, or something.   

Both times the second (newly) opened bottle was, in all ways I could determine, IDENTICAL in aroma and flavor.   I realize this is not an in-depth proof of the theory; but, it's all I got.

[fosmith]

I don't know about first and last bottle from a barrel but I've had two bottles from the same barrel of Henry McKenna 10yr BiB that tasted WAY different.  Makes you wonder how diligent they are with the labeling...

[WhiskeyBlender]

21 hours ago, FasterHorses said:

Is there any observable difference if you have the first bottle filled from a barrel and compare it to the last bottle filled from a barrel? 

OMG, @FasterHorses, the cat is now out of the bag! 

 

Yes, there definitely CAN be an observable difference if you have the first bottle filled from the beginning of the bottling vs. subsequent bottles to the end. Part of this will depend upon what was bottled prior to what you are bottling (i.e., gin, and then bourbon, or maybe a high ester bourbon followed by something less estery or with fewer fusels, etc.), and how//IF the bottling line was CLEANED properly between bottling sessions. I can't tell you how many times I've seen issues with how flavor is impacted due to this exact issue. It's a real tragedy to see products where so much care has gone into it over the years, and at the last moment, after problems with filtration and bottling, the product is essentially ruined. 

 

And at @BMartin42, do you happen to know what bottles of Murray Hill Club you saw? If you want to pick up a bottle, I'd be happy to give you some pointers on it. No worries either way.

 

Cheers,
Nancy

[MM818]

18 hours ago, GaryT said:

 

 

Compare them to see if any look to be a lower fill than the others (and pick that one).  Then explain why that bottle number is special   ("29?!?!  You're not serious?  I mean - you know February only has a 29th day every FOUR YEARS for crying out loud!")

Brilliant. Thanks for the advice!

[Flyfish]

On 1/23/2020 at 8:34 AM, Richnimrod said:

 

Twice, when I was apparently having off-days as far as tasting Bourbon; but was uncertain that was the case, I opened an additional bottle from the same barrel to check if the first one opened had deteriorated, or something.   

Both times the second (newly) opened bottle was, in all ways I could determine, IDENTICAL in aroma and flavor.   I realize this is not an in-depth proof of the theory; but, it's all I got.

I think this is the main point. It is far, far more likely that my palate is having an off day than that there is significant variation in bottles from the same barrel.

[afmadd]

13 hours ago, WhiskeyBlender said:

OMG, @FasterHorses, the cat is now out of the bag! 

 

Yes, there definitely CAN be an observable difference if you have the first bottle filled from the beginning of the bottling vs. subsequent bottles to the end. Part of this will depend upon what was bottled prior to what you are bottling (i.e., gin, and then bourbon, or maybe a high ester bourbon followed by something less estery or with fewer fusels, etc.), and how//IF the bottling line was CLEANED properly between bottling sessions. I can't tell you how many times I've seen issues with how flavor is impacted due to this exact issue. It's a real tragedy to see products where so much care has gone into it over the years, and at the last moment, after problems with filtration and bottling, the product is essentially ruined. 

 

And at @BMartin42, do you happen to know what bottles of Murray Hill Club you saw? If you want to pick up a bottle, I'd be happy to give you some pointers on it. No worries either way.

 

Cheers,
Nancy

Would this only affect the first bottle (or maybe first couple of bottles), or it would influence a significant percentage of the barrel?

[The Black Tot]

Great thought @FasterHorses

 

Depends on how much of a shakeup the liquid has actually had during the dump or bottling process, I would think. 

 

Beam for example uses a pump or a vacuum to draw the liquid up into their bottle number guage tank. That appears to agitate things pretty well, which would lead to homogenous bottles if it hits the line reasonably quickly after that.

 

But if you're drawing out of the bottom of a stationary cask with a whiskey thief to fill a bottle like they do sometimes on tours in Scotland? That's a different thing entirely and I could see flavor oils hanging out in striated concentrations.

 

Nothing like a little obsessive thinking!

[The Black Tot]

For everyone with less than 100 posts rushing in asking which bottle of your cleared shelf is the honey bottle, please read the discussion.

 

We are saying we don't know for sure. We are open to this possibility, but we're not at the point yet where we're scratching our heads and wondering if tonight is a special enough occasion to open bottle #5.

 

Since it would be a very strange barrel dump/filling line that doesn't introduce significant agitation, this is likely to be a fool's errand in almost every case in Kentucky.

[Harry in WashDC]

8 minutes ago, The Black Tot said:

For everyone with less than 100 posts rushing in asking which bottle of your cleared shelf is the honey bottle, please read the discussion.

 

We are saying we don't know for sure. We are open to this possibility, but we're not at the point yet where we're scratching our heads and wondering if tonight is a special enough occasion to open bottle #5.

 

Since it would be a very strange barrel dump/filling line that doesn't introduce significant agitation, this is likely to be a fool's errand in almost every case in Kentucky.

I've only hunted down bottles from a particular barrel a couple of times - all HMcK 10YR barrels.  Since they were all in VA ABC stores that got regular distributions from the same truck AND all got their HMcK  bottles of the barrel I was seeking within hours if not days of each other, I'm supposing the bottles all came off the fill line at about the same time and likely got the same amount of agitation, heat, cold, the same "air" exposure, and stayed together during transport.  I drink them so "carefully" that I have NO IDEA if the first one I opened tastes like the latest one.  Whatever, each sip has been joyous.

 

So, keeping Nancy's observation in mind, their equal treatment turned out just fine.  RE: that a prior gin run may have tainted the front end of a batch, I learned through trial and error, mostly error, that using Bottle Brite and then running a gin bottle through a home dishwasher multiple (well, two or three) times is NOT sufficient to get all the gin flavorings out of the bottle so it can be reused without affecting the bourbon put in the empty bottle.  Imagine how LITTLE residue it takes to create such an effect.

[Bbstout]

19 hours ago, WhiskeyBlender said:

OMG, @FasterHorses, the cat is now out of the bag! 

 

Yes, there definitely CAN be an observable difference if you have the first bottle filled from the beginning of the bottling vs. subsequent bottles to the end. Part of this will depend upon what was bottled prior to what you are bottling (i.e., gin, and then bourbon, or maybe a high ester bourbon followed by something less estery or with fewer fusels, etc.), and how//IF the bottling line was CLEANED properly between bottling sessions. I can't tell you how many times I've seen issues with how flavor is impacted due to this exact issue. It's a real tragedy to see products where so much care has gone into it over the years, and at the last moment, after problems with filtration and bottling, the product is essentially ruined. 

 

And at @BMartin42, do you happen to know what bottles of Murray Hill Club you saw? If you want to pick up a bottle, I'd be happy to give you some pointers on it. No worries either way.

 

Cheers,
Nancy

The horror. Gin tainting my bourbon. Are there any Lawyers here? I'm thinking of filing a class action.