ikewillett1 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Last night it was Rock Hill Farms out of Riedel Bourbon Glasses with four friends. We had a nice time. The bourbon and the discussion flowed freely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrbnBorderline Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Last nite I tried 1792 Ridgemont Reserve. I had bought this a couple hours before I researched it on this forum. From the comments I read, you'd think this stuff was Maker's Mark or Old Crow. I found it a very pleasent bourbon. Is it worth the $29 a bottle? Not sure yet. Is it swill? No. Is it a somewhat milder bourbon than say WT RB, Booker's, Weller Antique? Yes. But for a bourbon under 100 proof, I'd take it over the much vaunted EC12 or EWSB. Just my opinion. I will be exploring this offering further. YMMV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted January 28, 2005 Author Share Posted January 28, 2005 Ed and I got to taste some of this at a Wine Shop here in Lexington last weekend. I had not had any in a bit and I had forgot just how good it is. At first I thought they were serving Woodford Reserve...(rimshot) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 I like the 1792 very much and if it's overpriced it is only slightly so. At least they didn't just take any old anything and put it in a fancy bottle. It's some of the best bourbon ever to come out of Barton, in my opinion.I also don't consider Maker's Mark to be swill. In fact, considering the undistinguished nature of at least some of the wheated bourbons produced at the new Bernheim, Maker's Mark may be where one has to go to get a good wheater (other than the Pappys, of course). Although, on that subject, I had some Old Fitzgerald BIB last night, which could be late UD or even early HH Bernheim and it didn't disappoint. Oh yeah, Old Crow is swill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrbnBorderline Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I like the 1792 very much and if it's overpriced it is only slightly so. Still exploring this aspect. I also don't consider Maker's Mark to be swill. To my tastebuds, it is just a notch or two above swill. This is the 1st bourbon I ever bought with a serious intent of exploring. It doesn't get any better everytime I try it. Sorry. In fact, considering the undistinguished nature of at least some of the wheated bourbons produced at the new Bernheim, Maker's Mark may be where one has to go to get a good wheater (other than the Pappys, of course). Haven't tried Pappy's yet, but I will take ANY of the Weller offerings over MM any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. Oh yeah, Old Crow is swill. Roger that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNbourbon Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I haven't tried the Ridge'mont' Reserve yet, but enjoyed the original Ridge'wood' 1792 (which I opened before it became a collector's item, and of which I still have several bottles) very much.I would, however, split the difference with you on preference, Mark -- surely, I'd prefer it to EC12, but would rate it no better than equal to EWSB, perhaps not quite that.There has been some discussion here as to whether the replacement version is the same as the original. Barton folks -- including Bill Friel -- say it's the same. Some palates say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcheer Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I never had the original, so I can't compare. But, I am one of those who are underwhelmed by the 1792 Ridgemont.I will say though, that it opens up quite a bit with the addition of ice and/or water. It actually becomes fairly tasty.Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobourbon Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 The last couple of nights I have had Old Charter Proprietor's Reserve 13 y/o distilled on Frankfort. I've never had it before and spotted it in a store. Very good! Not a real strong taste but I enjoy it very much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike1 Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 With all of the chatter about the 1792 brands, I opened a bottle of the 1792 Ridgemont Reserve that I bought this summer at the Bourbon Festival. It is a much better bourbon than the Ridgewood Reserve that I bought the year before. The Ridgewood reserve ,to me , tasted no different than the Old Barton 6 year old. The Ridgemont Reserve is has more vanilla to it, and is ,all in all, a very good whiskey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrbriggs Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Tonight, I started with some EWSB '94, and am now trying some Sam Houston for the first time. Will probably move on to some EC12 or Eagle Rare 101 before the evening is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesbassdad Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Inspired by Jeff's original post in the current reincarnation of this thread, I'm having Old Rip Van Winkle 15/107 -- for the first time in perhaps a year or more. (I guess I'm in the minority, but I love the squat bottle and the rustic label with the cartoonish drawings -- but then I like the rendering of the photo of Pappy Van Winkle that appears on like-named bottlings, too.)I think I recall saying a long time ago that I prefer the 10 year-old expression. Well, tastes change. Tonight the 15 year-old has a depth that my memory of the younger expression cannot match.What I once regarded as too much oak char now suggests dried fruit and shortening-laden pie crust (with dark, crispy edges -- both sweet and slightly bitter), from nose to finish.Yours truly,Dave Morefield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNbourbon Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Always one to steal a good idea when I see one -- and having an open space in my open-bottle lineup -- I, too, opened a 15yo, 107-proof "A" series bottle tonight. Oddly, while I've experienced just about all the Van Winkles, it was only recently I purchased my 2nd 15yo bottle, so I hadn't tasted one yet. I'm sorry I waited so long. The nose alone is heaven -- a candied-apple aroma that only gets stronger and more prominent as the pour sits in the glass. Undertones of brown sugar. On either the nose or palate, there is no hint of alcohol at all (how is that, at 107 proof?). The 15 years show on the finish, with spreading oak burning along the edges of -- what? -- midway-red taffy, like fire nibbling along the edge of newspaper before the kindling catches. Oh, this is fine! Both subtle and robust at the same time! (Again, how do they do that?) I could drink myself silly with this stuff! (I know, I know, you think I already have!) Unlike Dave, I find no real depth -- but the shallows are the perfect temperature for swimming. This is straightforward bourbon -- sweet, oaky, medium-long. But each step perfectly aligned. I hope it is not just this bottle -- I have another. And I will buy whatever ORVW 15yo I find. Pappy 15 can wait. If it is better -- well, I can't even hope. An equal will suffice! "Always fine bourbon..." Julian, you did Pappy justice here! Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted February 1, 2005 Author Share Posted February 1, 2005 Right now I am having a bit of Old Heaven Hill 10yo BIB on ice. I am really enjoying this tonight. I'm getting the familiar HH house style, but with a little more octane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I just had some Weller Centennial and enjoyed it more than my last drink from the same bottle. I was so disappointed with it last time I put it away in the liquor cabinet. This time it stayed in the speed rack (i.e., out on the kitchen counter). Maybe it's because I was eating pretzels and the salt brought something out in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrbnBorderline Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I just had some Weller Centennial and enjoyed it more than my last drink from the same bottle. I was so disappointed with it last time I put it away in the liquor cabinet. This time it stayed in the speed rack (i.e., out on the kitchen counter). Maybe it's because I was eating pretzels and the salt brought something out in it. I have found that drier bourbons tend to open up and taste sweeter following food that is spicy and/or salty. Last night was Booker's. This bourbon never ceases to amaze me. Without spending alot more money, does it get any better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrbriggs Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 Last night was Booker's. This bourbon never ceases to amaze me. Without spending alot more money, does it get any better?I honestly have not been that impressed with Booker's. For $48 / bottle, I expected a lot more. I can get Pappy 15 for that price, and so far I enjoy it a lot more than the 2 bottles of Booker's I've tried (wasn't impressed with the first, figured I got a bad batch, bought a second bottle... still wasn't impressed).I think I would actually rate Booker's 3rd in the Small Batch collection, with Baker's being first, and Knob Creek second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayton Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 think I would actually rate Booker's 3rd in the Small Batch collection, with Baker's being first, and Knob Creek second.That's interesting that you say that. I've heard mostly ho-hum impressions of Baker's, and haven't bought a bottle for that reason. I'll have to give it a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyc Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I've heard mostly ho-hum impressions of Baker's, I think Baker's is the sleeper in the small batch collection. It surprizes me every time I have it, that it is so much more enjoyable, than my expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrbriggs Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I've heard mostly ho-hum impressions of Baker's, I think Baker's is the sleeper in the small batch collection. It surprizes me every time I have it, that it is so much more enjoyable, than my expectations. I mentioned this to someone in private conversation early today, and I tried to bite my tongue now... I will probably get lambasted for this...At least in my area, I don't think any of the small batch collection is worth the price they charge for it. This may put me in a very small minority (of one, even?), but there are many less expensive bourbons that I would rather drink. I keep all of the Small Batch collection on hand for guests, since they are the most well known "premium" bourbons, but I rarely if ever drink them on my own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillman Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I tend to agree. Except for Booker's, Woodford Reserve trumps anything in that line-up, I think; so do a number of Heaven Hill bourbons. I like Jim Beam Black Label though, I think that is the best of the Beam bourbons, an excellent product.Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrbriggs Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I tend to agree. Except for Booker's, Woodford Reserve trumps anything in that line-up, I think, so do a number of Heaven Hill bourbons. I like Jim Beam Black Label though, I think that is the best of the Beam bourbons, an excellent product.Gary If I'm drinking a Beam product, there's a 90% change that it's Beam Black in my glass. The value on Beam Black makes it hard for me to drink the other Beam products with any regularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I think Knob Creek, the least expensive of the four, is worth its price. I like Baker's and Booker's but rarely buy them because there are so many cheaper products I like just as well, if not better. I do have a drinking buddy who likes them so when we go out for drinks, that's usually what I have. I know, crazy. I won't pay off-premise prices for them but I will pay the even more outrageous on-premise prices. Oh yeah, did I mention the buddy is also a client?Interestingly, this drinking usually takes place in a bar less than a mile from Jim Beam's corporate headquarters. I always warn my friend to be careful what he says about the whiskey, because the person at the next table could be a Beam exec. Actually, that happened to us once, but luckily it was someone I knew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrbnBorderline Posted February 2, 2005 Share Posted February 2, 2005 I've tried Baker's several times. It was very good - until I tried Weller Antique. For a 107 proof bourbon, Weller Antique beats Baker's at half the price. There are other 107 proof bourbons out there that are better and cheaper than Baker's. Now, Booker's is the only readily available 125+ bourbon around. IMHO, it's in a league of it's own [especially given it's wide spread availablility.]. Tonight I might crack open the ER Single barrel I picked up at lunch today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrbriggs Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I think Knob Creek, the least expensive of the four, is worth its price.I guess that's where I run into a problem... Knob Creek is very close to Baker's in price up here, around $30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted February 3, 2005 Author Share Posted February 3, 2005 Baker's is really the sleeper of the Small Batch lineup. I prefer it to any other Jim Beam product. It has a sweet, nuttiness that I really enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts