BOTM, 7/06: Woodford Reserve

[Sijan]

The 2,000 barrels of 18yo S-W warehoused at Buffalo Trace, but owned by Diageo, on the other hand, is wasted in Crown Royal!

I'm puzzled by this. Surely it's worth more to someone else as a straight bourbon than it is as an additive to a blended whiskey, so why doesn't someone else (Buffalo Trace, perhaps?) buy it from Diageo. Is Diageo just stubbornly refusing to sell it...or what? Something seems odd about this whole scenario from an economics standpoint.

[TNbourbon]

...Is Diageo just stubbornly refusing to sell it..?

Yes, that seems to be it.

[Gillman]

Crown Royal is a well-known Canadian whisky. It was first sold in 1939 to commemorate the visit of King George V and the Queen to Canada. The Royal couple also visited the U.S. and had cocktails (Old-Fashioneds) with President Roosevelt. From the beginning, Crown Royal contained some notably very aged whiskies, and about 20% of these were straight whiskies. For years the label on the back of the bottle specified that some of the whiskies were 30 years old. Probably the idea to do this was borrowed from Scots blending practice which also married whiskies of different ages, although North American blending methods go back to the 1800's of course and probably had evolved such methods independenty. About 20 years ago or so, the 30 years' age statement for the oldest whiskeys was dropped. Still, it is evident that the character of Crown Royal depends on it containing some well-aged straight whiskey. Evidently the S-W 18 year old is filling the bill and getting older will just suit Diageo's purposes more. It is undeniable that some whiskey is too old to drink on its own (I am not saying that batch or all aged bourbon, just some) but can work effectively in a well-built blend. I know this because I have made blends myself using a bland base, some mid-aged whisky and a little extra-aged whisky. The Scots have done it for years and their luxury blends all contain some whisky older than the advertised age to lend the desired qualities. If Diageo does not use this S-W whisky it will need to find another bourbon or rye that is old enough to impart the right oaky qualities. Crown Royal used to be a good blended whisky, I tasted some once from the 1950's which was excellent, full-bodied and quite rye-edged. Today it seems more bourbon-edged but it still very good, despite being made or blended in different places over the years (Waterloo, Ontario, home of the original Seagram distillery, later in Lasalle, Quebec where distilling was carried on in a complex built by the Bronfman family when it owned the distillery, and in Gimli, Manitoba, the sole site of the company's operations today). The company too offers special versions of CR such as Limited Edition and Special Reserve. These are good but don't quite to my mind duplicate the whisky as it was in the 50's and 60's. It was reported here some time ago a version of CR will be released soon containing whisky distilled at the Waterloo site which was closed about 20 years ago. I would think this version might seek to present more of the original palate of CR. While this is a straight whisky board, we occasionally peregrinate into discussions on blended and other whiskies and indeed other drinks. Things are related, one to the other...

Gary

[bluesbassdad]

. . . we occasionally peregrinate . . .

Another dictionary moment from Gillman! I was already familiar with the bird of prey with a similar name, but I had no idea there was a verb from the same root.

Yet another reason why I love this place. :grin:

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[Gillman]

Dave thanks but we did discuss "peregrination" recently. Randy B. offered some interesting comments on the term as literally applied to certain birds and tall buildings in Houston!

Gary

[Sijan]

Makes sense that they need older whiskey for their blend, but why use such a rare (and valuable!) bourbon if more affordable substitutes of similar age are available? Heaven Hill has a LOT of extra-aged whiskey, and I bet Diageo could sell the S-W whiskey (assuming it hasn't overaged and become undrinkable straight) and replace it with similarly aged HH stock at a substantially lower cost. I mean, we're talking about bourbon that could be (at least some of the barrels, anyhow) bottled as Pappy Van Winkle 20 or 23 in just a few years.

[doubleblank]

Dan.....The 18yo SW is definitely drinkable......we tried some during the last Sampler. Several of us are working on Diageo to sell/release some of this.....if only for history's sake. I'm not going to post any more info until I get a definitive answer from Diageo. We're probably just dreamin...but who knows.

I used to office in a 70 story tower downtown. There was a private dining room on the 70th floor and several peregrines nested up there during their migration. It was quite interesting to watch them attack the pigeons and other prey in mid air. But I had never heard anyone use the term peregrinate Gary.....thanks.

Randy

[chasking]

By happy coincidence, I was at a friend's house yesterday and he offered me a pour of his favorite bourbon, which happened to be WR---batch 201, specifically. This was the first sample of WR I've had in a number of months, and as others have said in this thread, it seemed a bit bland. It had some interesting flavor components but they were barely there, just flitting around on the very threshold of detectability.

The experience prompted some musings on WR's marketing success. My friend is far from a bourbon connoisseur, but he thought he was really getting something special in WR. I thought it was interesting how WR, in a relatively short period of time, managed to position its product in the mind of the public at large. I don't see much bourbon advertising, but I don't know whether or how much advertising WR does. Clever advertising seems to have pulled off a similar coup for Maker's Mark, however, so that may factor into things. I also wondered whether, having the marketplace clout of Jack Daniel's in the family, Brown-Foreman was somehow able to push WR on retailers who might not otherwise stock a premium bourbon, or not many of them. Certainly, WR is available in places like some supermarkets and smaller stores, which markets other premium bourbons do not crack. So uneducated consumers, who are unaware of the full range of bourbons out there, may well see WR as the top of a limited heap, since it is probably the most expensive bourbon sold in some of those outlets.

In any event, it appears Brown-Foreman has had some success in making WR the non-premium-bourbon-drinker's premium bourbon.

[gr8erdane]

The packaging might help some too. WR bottles LOOK expensive and exceptional to me and if I were to put together a good LOOKING home bar, would definitely consider the bottling for its aesthetics alone.

[mythrenegade]

The packaging might help some too. WR bottles LOOK expensive and exceptional to me and if I were to put together a good LOOKING home bar, would definitely consider the bottling for its aesthetics alone.

Agreed. The bottle, coupled with "distiller's select" coupled with the price implies premium product. I have always wanted to try this stuff simply from seeing it on the shelf. I always *assumed* it was a high quality bourbon from the packaging.

On top of that they have a little thing hanging off the bottle with rave reviews of how great this stuff is. "Official Bourbon of the Kentucky Derby!"

I think that was why i was so disappointed when I finally bought a bottle. I expected something great, and this did not even come close to delivering.

Sigh.

Joel

[cowdery]

The main thing Brown-Forman's marketing muscle accomplishes is distribution. They can get a product like Woodford Reserve into every liquor store and every bar or restaurant that they want to be in, and get it placed in the exact location they want. So, like Joel says, every time you go to the store and you look longingly at that top shelf, there it is.

Look at how good their distribution is even on Old Forester and Early Times.

[Gillman]

It would be fun to take WR and 5 other bourbons of different price points. Then decant them and repour in another of the bottles. Say, pour a WR into an Ancient Age bottle. Then, taste and rate them, say the way Joe does. Would the ratings mimic the price points? This is hard to say. There might be "anomalies" (e.g. I could see a VOB finishing higher than some batches of WR), but in general I believe the ratings would follow the quality as priced in the market. Anyone can do this at home informally (say using bottle ends) and I'd be interested in their comments. I don't have enough bourbons of different kinds currently to do this, plus I still have my vodka tasting to do. (I bought a second corn vodka, the Canadian-bottled Iceberg vodka, which states on the label it is distilled from corn, so I'm getting there).

Gary

[mythrenegade]

On a whim, I took this bottle and put it in the freezer for an hour. My hope was to cool the bourbon without the dilution of ice. This bourbon doesn't have a strong enough flavor to be diluted...

I like it this way. Sure, it's no PVW, but it's improved over straight room temperature, and vastly improved over this stuff on the rocks.

I've never put bourbon in the freezer before. Interesting.

Joel

[Gillman]

As I've noted, in the later 1800's whiskey bottles were kept on ice by professional bartenders. This is stated as a normal practice in Jerry Thomas' How To Mix Drinks. I think at the time, it was regarded as normal in fancy establishments that whiskey was drunk cold, either as a shot from a chilled bottle, shaken cold in mixed drinks, or served with ice as in juleps and punches. It doesn't answer to say this was all white common whiskey. "Bourbon" existed by the 1860's when Thomas' book first appeared and is mentioned as such in the book, numerous times. Even at 1 and 2 years old which may have been the standard aging then, bourbon would have had good color as we know from other contemporary accounts. The practice by some of taking whiskey very cold today is a survival and echo of that old practice, in my view. Of course, some people probably stipulated for their whiskey not to be chilled, if they had a choice (e.g., the frontier and workers' barrooms probably offered fewer amenities including a paucity or absence of ice). I've never tried bourbon iced in the way mentioned, but it sounds good for some brands. Of course in general it sounds too a lot of what we like about the drink would disappear when it is taken in that form, the texture, smokey background for some bourbon, etc. Everyone will have their preference though.

Gary

[Virus_Of_Life]

Makes sense that they need older whiskey for their blend, but why use such a rare (and valuable!) bourbon if more affordable substitutes of similar age are available? Heaven Hill has a LOT of extra-aged whiskey, and I bet Diageo could sell the S-W whiskey (assuming it hasn't overaged and become undrinkable straight) and replace it with similarly aged HH stock at a substantially lower cost. I mean, we're talking about bourbon that could be (at least some of the barrels, anyhow) bottled as Pappy Van Winkle 20 or 23 in just a few years.

Dan you ask all the same questions I wonder when I heard the same thing! I just try not to think about it because it is this kind of obstinate illogical way of the world I find to be all to prevalent at times. And being a person who likes to try to improve things or change those things that I do not agree with I just frustrate myself into a tizzy and then have to get a drink of bourbon to calm me down...

Anyway as for the subject of the BOTM, I am probably going to have to pass as I finished a bottle a while ago and just have too many open right now and other things I'd like to try. I do recall it growing on me and enjoying it quite a bit though; although unlike a couple of others I don't particulary care for the bottle shape - it's hard to pack this one amongst many round "regular" shaped bottles for moving! And doesn't fit in the typical formed styrofoam/cardboard boxes.

[tmas]

[

[*]Summer 2006: Brown-Forman master distiller Chris Morris' signature replaces retired MD Lincoln Henderson's on WR bottles, which are renumbered back to Batch 1.

They must be pumping this stuff out like crazy! I was in a store today and saw liter bottles of batch # 54 with Morris's signature, or is it that the batches are just very small I wonder? Tom V

[tritioch]

I wouldn't mind this at say $10/750ml, but at the $30 it runs around here, it is terrible. Mild to the point of being boring, name brand over-hyped trash.

[Ambernecter]

The main thing Brown-Forman's marketing muscle accomplishes is distribution. They can get a product like Woodford Reserve into every liquor store and every bar or restaurant that they want to be in, and get it placed in the exact location they want. So, like Joel says, every time you go to the store and you look longingly at that top shelf, there it is.

Look at how good their distribution is even on Old Forester and Early Times.

Just watched the documentary "Wal-Mart The High Cost Of Low Cost."

Brown-Forman strikes me as the Wal-Mart of the wines and spirits industry. If I am found dead in a parking lot for making this comment then you'll know they've got to me!

[cowdery]

If by "the Wal-Mart of..." you mean the 900 pound gorilla throwing its weight around, that's not Brown-Forman in the spirits biz, that's Diageo. Jim Beam (now Beam Global) and Pernod Ricard are much bigger and more powerful too. Brown-Forman is more like LVMH, in that it isn't the biggest company but its portfolio is all blue chip.

[miller542]

I wouldn't mind this at say $10/750ml, but at the $30 it runs around here, it is terrible. Mild to the point of being boring, name brand over-hyped trash.

Gotta disagree here. I too have been turned off by the price tag of WR. Luckly, a kind friend just bestowed upon me my first bottle as a gift.

I like it. My bottle was smooth, well-balanced, no bite, sublte lingering aftertaste, no real burn to speak of, just bourbon. All in all, a nice experiece. Boring, hardly. It just doesn't smack your tongue up with certain flavors or characters. Blanced and very smooth. I am curious to try this next to some Four Roses SB to see how it really stacks up, but I was plesantly suprised to see that it lived up to the hype.

On a similar note, my first taste of Ridgemont 1792 made me feel like it was all hype, but I really began to appreciate the rest of the bottle. Have you revisited WR lately? Maybe you got a bad bottle or experienced the "new bottle effect"

[Gillman]

I just picked up a bottle and chose the Derby version (oversize bottle) made available for the 132nd Kentucky Derby.

I always assume something special goes into special bottlings (just as I assume a different or special selection went into the new OF Signature (preliminary taste reports on another board suggest this is so - uninspiring name though)).

I think B-F did select before filling these big Derby bottles. The whiskey smells of char and the taste seems to denote whiskey older than I recall from all other iterations.

I can't say it is special, though. It has the typical traits of WR (e.g. "coppery", aromatic smell, good body) but on an older frame. I'd estimate there is whiskey 8-10 years old in this. It is good whiskey and while different to a degree than the norm I did not have a eureka moment.

Gary

[NorCalBoozer]

If by "the Wal-Mart of..." you mean the 900 pound gorilla throwing its weight around, that's not Brown-Forman in the spirits biz, that's Diageo. Jim Beam (now Beam Global) and Pernod Ricard are much bigger and more powerful too. Brown-Forman is more like LVMH, in that it isn't the biggest company but its portfolio is all blue chip.

here is an interesting article talking about the explosive growth that Beam Global has had.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0607300066jul30,1,7210956.story?coll=chi-business-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

[MGades]

I'm quite disappointed with this one. Clever packaging but I don't like the product.

On pouring I get a very heavy acetone (nail polish remover) smell. Maybe this is the Listerine aspect that others have commented on. I know a little bit about chemistry and I can tell you that if you're getting acetone-like components in the distillate, the distillation process needs to be adjusted. Maybe the pot-still contributes that component.

Aside from that, the bourbon does not have much richness of flavor or depth (less than a Beam Black). I did not detect unusual amounts of char as others commented.

I've been mixing it to get rid of the remainder but I must say that even then I go 1/2 and 1/2 with a better bourbon because I don't like the sour piercing flavor of the WR. Bad value and bad product. Old Grandad was on sale here for $7 and that is a far superior product, at 1/3 to 1/4 the price. I'd gladly take Evan Williams too over this, at a steep savings.

I should add that I detect some similarity to Maker's Mark, which I also don't think is a good value.

[jwrussell]

I have a bottle of this sitting in my cabinet. Being new to bourbon I got caught up in the hype of the advertising. Have to say I was disappointed. I honestly thought that was just my taste though. I much prefer Knob Creek for instance over Makers Mark. I like the heavier, darker tastes over the lighter ones so I figured it was just that. But, and I need to try them side by side, but I think I'd take Makers over WR.

[Martian]

I didn't care for it either. I am not educated on taste subtleties yet, but I definitely got the coppery taste. Not to my liking.