Do mixtures of bourbons age?

[fog]

When I mix two bourbons in my glass, I tend to find the result disappointing. I find that I perceive the character of each bourbon separately, resulting in a disharmonious flavor profile.

A few months ago I combined a half bottle of WT 101 with a half bottle of Russel's Reserve 90. Initial, I found the result disappointing. I would first taste the Russel's Reserve 90, and then the flavor would jarringly shift toward the WT 101.

Recently, I have been enjoying this blend. The profile seems more continuous; I taste characteristics from each at all times, rather than tasting one bourbon and then the other.

Has anyone noticed mixtures of bourbons improving with age? Perhaps, being different bourbons, some of the chemicals can slowly react with each other?

[OscarV]

I would like to see a response from Gillman the Vatinator on this question.:grin:

[NickAtMartinis]

Fog, I too have tried mixing bourbon. Some I've liked, some I have not. However, I haven't mixed and then let sit in a bottle like you have with the Turkeys so I wouldn't know.

My favorite mix has been ORVW 10/107 and WTRB. But, WTKS works well too. Of course, this is very subjective. What I like, you may not. But, that's one mix I'd suggest. Heck, I've never let it sit in a bottle. I probably should and see what happens.

[HipFlask]

Fog my question to you is... are you mixing a large enough quanity of your boubons and then letting them marry in a bottle for a few months? or mixing a pour today and not liking it but trying it again 2 months for now and finding that they mix quite well?

[Old Lamplighter]

Purely out of curiosity, I recently experimented with bourbon and rye. I combined a 3:1 ratio of Russell's Reserve Rye:WTRB and came up with a pretty delicious result. Since all WT is pretty heavy towards the rye flavor, I wanted to see how it would compliment their 6yo straight rye or vice versa. It sounds funny, but the RB seemed to slightly 'tame' the rye and the RRR lightened up the heavier side of RB. All in all, not bad......though it might be viewed as outside the norm in terms of mixing bourbon with other bourbon.

[ILLfarmboy]

Some years back I tried mixing KC and WT Rye, roughly one to one. What a disaster. Even though I left the bottle sit for a couple months, I too found the flavors jarringly "disharmonious" After that wastefully experiment I'm kind of gun shy about blending.

[mier]

Scottish blenders take measures from some whiskies in small quantities only and the endproduct they let it merry,in case of a vatted(blended)malt it goes back in a barrel again for some years so i think it ages.

ERic.

[Gillman]

Okay, I'm just catching up with this discussion.

I can only of course attest to my own experience.

The main factor in blending bourbons and ryes is what you blend, and in what proportions. Only experience can tell you what is right.

I would have thought that it makes sense to mingle RR 90 and WT 101. They are made from one mashbill albeit to different profiles. Since RR 90 is a notably soft, mildish bourbon, I'd have thought it would smooth out some of the heavy big character of 101. But a lot depends too in what proportions it is done. A small change in the proportions can make all the difference!

The original question was, does the mingle age in the bottle? I don't think it ages technically, but I agree that some time in the bottle seems to smooth out and improve many blends. The only way it could age is if the mingle was barreled and allowed to mature through storage. In fact, blending manuals advised to do this, one source I have recommends a minimum of 3 months aging in the top tier (moreover) of the warehouse. This clearly assisted the melding and improvement of flavors.

However short of this, leaving it for a time in the bottle will usually help. Still, if the commingling or blend is good to begin with, a further resting period should not be necessary.

The main thing is to have a plan going in. E.g., if you have a large amount of a relatively bland drink and want to improve the flavor with something that is in harmony with it, it would make sense to use more of the latter than the former. This would preserve the overall profile but make a small change.

It might e.g., be good to blend 10 or 20% WT 101 into RR 90.

In this field, personal preference, predeliction and experience really rule, much like with "mixology" (cocktails). Some find it fascinating and rewarding to enter this world, some don't.

Gary

[cowdery]

Remember too that the exact same drink may strike you differently on different occasions for a variety of reasons, from what else you may have eaten or drunk, to changes in your own body chemistry. Something can taste good to you one day and not so good the next, and it's not the whiskey that's changing.

Whiskey is a lot more stable than most people. If something has changed, it's more likely to be me than the whiskey.

[felthove]

My favorite mix has been ORVW 10/107 and WTRB. But, WTKS works well too. Of course, this is very subjective. What I like, you may not. But, that's one mix I'd suggest. Heck, I've never let it sit in a bottle. I probably should and see what happens.

Have you ever tried Weller Antique 107 adn WTRB? I own and enjoy both and figured it could be a close match. Your thoughts?

[Gillman]

Correction to my last post: I meant in my example given of vatting with a plan, that you might want to use more of the former than the latter (not the reverse). In other words, RR 90 might be given some zip by, say, adding maximum 20% WT 101. This might perhaps bring the drink closer to what RR was like before the drop to 90 proof, I mean in palate, not proof as such.

You could though do the reverse, add 10-20% RR 90 to WT 101. That might result in a slightly dampened down palate for the 101, no bad thing for some people.

Gary

[jburlowski]

Whiskey is a lot more stable than most people. If something has changed, it's more likely to be me than the whiskey.

But Chuck, we love you just the way you are!

[T47]

This might be a little off topic, but sort of an age related topic. I know there are a few people who have re-barreled Bourbons for more aging. Has anyone tried (or would it even work) adding toasted oak wine making sticks to a bottle to get a little more oak flavor? Or is the time re-barreling enhancing the bourbon in a different way?

[NickAtMartinis]

This might be a little off topic, but sort of an age related topic.

Speaking of which, Happy Birthday!!!!

[T47]

You are too kind...It's been a good day, and it looks like I will make it to the end to complete another year - always a reason to celebrate! a healthy pour of GT Stagg to send me off to slumber.

:toast:

[NickAtMartinis]

You are too kind...It's been a good day, and it looks like I will make it to the end to complete another year - always a reason to celebrate! a healthy pour of GT Stagg to send me off to slumber.

:toast:

Todd, since it's your Birthday, and you're drinking Stagg, I will do the same. Which year have you got?

Mark

[spun_cookie]

Has anyone noticed mixtures of bourbons improving with age? Perhaps, being different bourbons, some of the chemicals can slowly react with each other?

From a chemical standpoint, you are not getting aging, you are actually getting a homogeneous solution over time. Initially you had a mix that had pockets of the two original products... time lends to blending....

... hey... my chemical(ly dependent) engineering degree came in handy :grin:

[T47]

It is the 2006...I wish Stagg was more readily available out here, but it does make it a treasure when I can get it...

[felthove]

Happy belated B-day Todd.

[fog]

From a chemical standpoint, you are not getting aging, you are actually getting a homogeneous solution over time. Initially you had a mix that had pockets of the two original products... time lends to blending....

... hey... my chemical(ly dependent) engineering degree came in handy :grin:

I always imagined that homogenization occurred fairly quickly. Could homogenization take a few weeks?

[Gillman]

This is a very interesting question. Whether home-fashioned or the ones the distilleries give us, all bourbons not from a single barrel are a mixture to a greater or lesser degree (and even the single barrels are a kind of mixture, a condensate from different grains, aged in a barrel fashioned of oak from different trees and sources, etc.).

This being so, are some elements in the bourbon "heavier" than others and e.g. might they congregate at the bottom of the barrel, or bottle, and thus affect the taste unless re-amalgamated into the drink?

The obvious case in another thread has been mentioned of char particles (and they can affect taste, I noticed this quite palpably with a sample of a barrel strength ORVW not too long ago).

But are the chemical compounds associated with corn, say, (certain oils?) as likely to be present everywhere in the liquid in the same way as those derived from rye? True, pouring into a glass will upset whatever balance is in the bottle, but to what degree? And what if you drink from the neck of the bottle? (That last statement: read humour ).

Whenever I pour a whiskey I always shake the bottle, it is a long-standing habit that may reflect a sub-conscious thought that the compounds are irregularly spaced in the bottle and I'll get a better result by shaking the whiskey much as one would shake or stir a cocktail before pouring.

Maybe all this is fanciful, I just don't know..

Gary

[cowdery]

One point that comes to mind is that the tanks which hold the dumped whiskey until it is bottled do not agitate the product. There are no stirring paddles as there are in the cookers, for example. I have read things that lead me to believe there are homogenization issues when whiskey is blended with neutral spirit, but not when aged whiskey from multiple barrels is mixed together.

Historically, the custom of shaking a bottle of whiskey before pouring from it was to check the bead, which is a rough indicator of proof. It was a way of confirming that the whiskey was good, i.e., full proof.

[Gillman]

Interesting. I am sure there is a good answer to all this in the relevant branch of science, chemical engineering or organic chemistry. Pure spirits are lighter than water because its ethanol component is. Whiskey is lighter than water because its ethanol component is, but not as light (I would think) as pure spirits (GNS) because of the secondary constituents contained in whiskey (plus perhaps particles of char, compounds from the wood).

I wonder why the pure ethanol in either form of alcohol doesn't separate from and float on the other components, "pousse cafe"-style (or take the American-invented black and tan variant in which Guinness is layered onto Bass Ale).

It is good for we bibulants that this is not so... As for blended whiskey, whatever amalgamation issues arise seem to have been overcome but I wonder how they do that?

Gary

[Gillman]

I think (or now recall) the answer is alcohol molecules have a remarkable ability to adhere to water molecules and no doubt to those associated with the secondary constituents in whiskey and other alcohol.

This is why it is so hard to vaporize a 100% pure ethanol.

This is why too no matter your vaporization temperature, some water will always come over with the ethanol and vice versa.

Gary

[Thesh]

Remember too that the exact same drink may strike you differently on different occasions for a variety of reasons, from what else you may have eaten or drunk, to changes in your own body chemistry. Something can taste good to you one day and not so good the next, and it's not the whiskey that's changing.

Whiskey is a lot more stable than most people. If something has changed, it's more likely to be me than the whiskey.

I think a good experiment for that would to be mix two whiskies, keep the other two bottles, and then a few months later mix the originals in the same proportions and try them out. See if one tastes different from the next. Of course, they would both have to be well sealed and there should be the same amount of air in all three bottles to keep the test as controlled as possible.