http://www.alcolog.com/ The Alcohol Blog en Copyright 2008 Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:55:29 +0000 http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss For those in the know, WhiskyFest Chicago took place last Friday night, and I've been in Chicago for the last week attending various events and tastings leading up to the event. It's been a long week of scribbling notes, taking pictures, and chatting with friends (both old and new). Oh, and drinking. Lots of drinking. My mind is still sorting through approximately 100 new spirits... including a cognac. Not sure how that one slipped in there. I gathered up a lot of topics that I'd like to focus on in the coming weeks. This week helped me remember why this weblog is out here: to fill in the missing gaps of information about alcohol. Some of it's a bit esoteric, while other parts are mundane. But one of the magical things about the Internet is that you can focus on the stuff that's interesting and skip over the boring parts. In closing, I want to thank everyone who helped make WhiskyFest Chicago possible. The drinking public is enriched by your efforts, and the non-drinking public doesn't know what they're missing. So to Amy, Marty, Mike, John, Brian, Gregor, Ray, Mike, Derek, and did I forget a Mike? There were a lot of Mikes... Thank you all! http://www.alcolog.com/2008/04/leaving_whiskyfest.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/04/leaving_whiskyfest.html Distilled Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:55:29 +0000 During the tasting, there were a few people who felt I misspoke when I referred to Laphroaig's parent company as "Fortune Brands". People in the industry tend to think of Laphroaig as being part of the "Future Brands" staple. Both are technically correct, though it's a bit more complicated than that. The parent company that owns the Laphoraig distillery and brand is Fortune Brands. They are traded on the NYSE under the ticker symbol FO. They have a subsidiary under that parent called Beam Global Spirits, which manages their entire liquor portfolio. From the name you can guess that Jim Beam is a prominent part of that portfolio; but it also includes brands such as Canadian Club, Sauza, Courvoiser, and DeKuyper. Underneath Beam Global is a company called Future Brands. They are the sole distributor of Fortune Brands spirits within the USA. If you buy Laphroaig at the wholesale level in the USA, you're probably getting it from Future Brands. If you're getting it outside the USA, it's probably from Maxxium. It's all the same company, and is more or less transparent than company relationships like Pernod Ricard or Diageo. Of course my blaming of some person in Kentucky dictating the whims of production Scotland is misapplied. Fortune Brands is headquartered in Deerfield, Illinois. It's probably more appropriate to point to the headquarters location rather than connecting Jim Beam Brands as being a Kentucky business. International business is way more complicated than a finger of blame, but it makes for easy scapegoats. http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_an_addend.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_an_addend.html Whiskies Tue, 26 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 Do some of these single malts end up in blends? Most likely, yes. I know that the Diageo brands end up in Johnny Walker and other blends from them. Highland Park is part of the Famous Grouse blend, also owned by Edrington. Laphroaig's parent company produces Teacher's Highland Cream, but there isn't any Laphroaig in that. Instead, Laphroaig is included in the Black Bottle blend from Burn Stewart. I don't know for sure if Auchentoshan and Glenfarclas avoid being blended, but since most Scotch produced ends up in blends, there's probably some of each of those in some blend somewhere. What's in a Dry Rob Roy? Scotch, dry vermouth, and bitters. It's essentially a Manhattan, but with Scotch replacing the rye. Why do so many Scotches have "Glen" in the name? A glen is a small, narrow valley. So the names literally translate to "valley of..." and could be a reference to the river (Glenlivet), a nearby town (Glen Moray), or just something about that valley (Glenfarclas). Another common term is "ben" and translates to "mountain of". Ben Nevis, for example, is a Scotch named after the highest point in Scotland. And "Loch" translates as lake. Loch Lomond is the lake at the base of Ben Lomond. What does it mean when you say "peaty"? For generations, peat moss was the cheapest fuel available in Scotland. This smoke gave off a pungent smell of iodine and would permeate everything near the fire. This was true of the malted barley that needed to be heated to stop the germination process. As a result, Scotch has historically had some amount of peat flavor in the final product and really defined Scotch's characteristic flavor. These days, the heating of the malted barley is done with natural gas heat which won't impart that peaty flavor. Instead, peat is burned nearby to create that flavor. The various levels of peat are requested by the distillery (most malting takes place off premises). So Caol Ila and Ardbeg get their malted barley from the same location, but order the level of peat to get each other's distinct flavors. ]]> http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_6_qu.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_6_qu.html Whiskies Sun, 24 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 Why did you pick the list? I picked the list of Scotches as an attempt to cover a broad range of regions and styles. The main goal was as an introduction to the various kinds of Scotch one can expect at a well stocked bar or reputable liquor store. The last whisky, the Laphroaig 30, was what I considered to be Town Hall's best whisky, so that was the first whisky picked. Then the Auchentoshan as the best lowland on offer, and then the Cragganmore. The middle three were picked for their dominant traits: Highland Park for its dry fruitiness, the Glenfarclas for sherry, and the Talisker for being double matured. Lowlands are lighter than Highlands? It's a generalization, but yes. The three remaining Lowland distilleries have very light offerings compared to their brethren to the north. There's nothing intrinsic that causes that, since these are preferences of the master distiller. But generally the regions will produce a unique single malt that conforms to what people expect from a region. Distilleries have an incentive to do that because many of their customers have regional preferences. Making something in the highlands that tastes like a Highland will ensure those customers are not disappointed. What do you mean by "Bourbon" casks? This means that the first thing to fill the cask was American Bourbon. Casks are classified as to what filled them first, be it Bourbon, sherry or Port. Scotch cannot use "new oak" barrels and therefore must re-use someone else's barrel for aging. Most Scotch produced today uses Bourbon barrels, primarily because American law requires that all Bourbon be aged in new oak. This creates a unique relationship between Bourbon and Scotch, since they are excluded from using casks that each require by law. Is there something that defines what can be called Scotch? The Scotch Whisky Order of 1990 is quite clear on what can be called "Scotch Whisky". Additionally, the European Union has stepped in recently to protect the regional terms of Scotch, so that anything referred to as "Highland Whisky" would need to be from Scotland. But ultimately Scotch must be: -Made from water and malted barley (though grain can be added to this) -Processed into a mash (a soupy mix of the above two) -Grains converted to sugar naturally from the enzymes created during malting -Fermented with yeast -Distilled to less than 95% alcohol, so as to preserve some of the original flavor -Aged in oak casks smaller than 700 liters -Bottled at an ABV of at least 40%., and -Only water or caramel color added to the final bottled product.]]> http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_5_qu.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_5_qu.html Whiskies Sat, 23 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 About a month ago, I led a Scotch tasting at Town Hall Brewery in Minneapolis. Over the next few days, I will be posting the notes I used, and ending with some of the questions people asked during the event. The fifth whisky of the night was Talisker's Distillers Edition from 2005. Talisker is distilled on the island of Skye off the east coast of the Scottish mainland. Since it's part of the Diageo Distiller's Edition line, this means that it's double matured. What this means is that the spirit is aged in standard Bourbon barrels, and then later is transferred to a second kind of barrel to age for at least a few more months. In the case of the Talisker, it spends about ten years in the first barrels, then transferred to Amoroso Sherry casks for a couple more years. The 2005 edition was distilled in 1993, so roughly twelve years split between to the two kinds of casks. Distiller's Editions are limited edition, and each year they might change what they decide to do with the various varieties. The fact that we were tasting a 2005 edition in 2008 suggests that it's a bit of an old stock. Once the distributor and the bar run out, you won't be able to get any more of it. So if you're really blown away by a limited edition, make sure to get a lot of it. The last of the night was the only Islay: The Laphroaig 30. The island of Islay is known for its smoky, peaty whiskies... sometimes referred to as "band-aid" whisky. Laphroaig is currently owned by Fortune Brands. They produce brands such as Jim Beam and Knob Creek to name a few. As mentioned before in the convenience of Bourbon and Scotch's requirements on casks, Fortune Brands is most likely supplying its former Beam casks to Laphroaig to keep them in the family. The Laphroaig 30 is a very old whisky, two to three times older than the other whiskies in the tasting. And like with the Talisker being a limited edition, this whisky is rare. But not because it's a limited edition. Within the last few months, the parent company decided that it would stop producing the 30-year and replace it with a 25-year expression. The ten year old espression is being phased out and replaced by their quarter-cask expression. The 15 year is being phased out as well, possibly replaced by the cask strength or a 12 year old. This is scarcity, in a nutshell. The 30-year old stock that's available now will not be replenished. It will likely be many years before the 30 year old is re-introduced, if at all. Eventually what'll happen is that the local distributors will run out of stock, followed closely by the liquor stores. Bars will be able to stretch out their stock for a while longer, but the bars will be the last place you'll find the 30 just before it all runs out. So if you like the Laphroaig 30 and have access to it; relish it. Because someone down in Kentucky decided that Scotland shouldn't produce it anymore. http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_on_a_tasting_part_4_tali.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_on_a_tasting_part_4_tali.html Whiskies town_hall_tasting Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 The third Scotch is a Highland Park 12, from the island of Orkney. It's produced by the Edrington Group. This, along with The Macallan, are the primary single malts blended into The Famous Grouse which is the most popular whisky in Scotland. Highland Park is the northernmost distillery in Scotland. It, and its island neighbor Scapa, are on the island of Orkney which is just off the northeast corner of the Scottish mainland. Farther out from there are the Shetlands, if you're familiar with that name. One thing about the Highland Park line is that, in America, it comes in at 43% ABV. Most Scotch will tend to be at 40%. It's not a major difference, but the higher the alcohol content the easier it'll be for the drink to numb your tongue. It's always a good idea to have plenty of water on hand either to dilute or to drink between sips. The fourth whisky of the night, Glenfarclas 17, is from Speyside. It's a sherried whisky, meaning that it was aged in casks that formerly held sherry. This is the traditional method for aging Scotch, and the use of Bourbon casks is fairly new. The story goes that sherry was brought from Spain to England in oak casks. It didn't make sense to send empty casks back to Spain, so the innovative Scots bought them up and used them to store their whisky. This started the tradition of using used oak barrels, which is a contrast from American Bourbon that's aged in new/unused casks. This contrast led to the now common practice of using used Bourbon barrels to age Scotch. Sherried whiskys are notable for how they tend to dry out the mouth. The most common example of this is The Macallan, but you'll also notice that in the Glendronach as well. This can be a turnoff, but it's at least an easy way to pick up that you're drinking a sherried whisky. http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_on_a_tasting_part_3_high.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_on_a_tasting_part_3_high.html Whiskies town_hall_tasting Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 About a month ago, I led a Scotch tasting at Town Hall Brewery in Minneapolis. Over the next few days, I will be posting the notes I used, and ending with some of the questions people asked during the event. The first Scotch of the tasting was a Lowland, the Auchentoshan 10. Ironically enough it was not on the menu at the time of the tasting. Instead, they had the Three Wood expression. That doesn't have an age statement, but is roughly aged for eight years in Bourbon casks, then for various periods of time in sherry and port casks. The Auchentoshan 10 is a light, accessible whisky. If you're familiar with Irish whiskies, it will be fairly similar. Auchentoshan is rather unique in that it's one of the last Scotches that's triple distilled. Irish whiskey is also, generally, triple distilled. Most Scotch is double distilled. As a result, the Auchentoshan will be a bit lighter due to that third distillation. The subject of pronunciation did come up during the tasting, and my advice was that if you make a half-hearted attempt to prononuce the name, then no one should fault you for trying. The Auchentoshan website used to have a recording of the distillery manager pronouncing the name, but it looks like that went away in one of their site redesigns. If you want a good transliteration, shoot for "Ockh-in-tosch-in" and you'll be mostly right. And if you have a menu, there's no shame at pointing at the name. The second Scotch is the Cragganmore 12, from the Speyside region. It's a bit more floral, herbal, and honeyed when compared to the Auchentoshan. Cragganmore, as the label implies, is one of the most complex whiskies you can find. It's produced by Diageo, the makers of Johnny Walker, and is their Speyside representative in their line of Classic Malts. These are six to eight distilleries selected from their brands to represent specific Scotch regions. A second Classic Malt, the Talisker, is represented later in the evening. Cragganmore is rather interesting because it is such a complex single malt, but isn't as well known as other Diageo brands like Lagavulin and Oban. This means that it's a relatively inexpensive Single Malt Scotch, but its price is well below its stature. http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_2_au.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_2_au.html Whiskies town_hall_tasting Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 About a month ago, I led a Scotch tasting at Town Hall Brewery in Minneapolis. Over the next few days, I will be posting the notes I used, and ending with some of the questions people asked during the event. First, an introduction. The tasting involved six Scotches: A lowland, two Speysides, two Highlands (Islands), and ending with an Islay. The first three had lighter tones, and the second set of three were more robust. Now an overview of Scotch. It's a whisky, from Scotland, hence the name. The six Scotches were single malts, which means they come from a single distillery. There are approximately 100 distilleries in Scotland, and most of their whisky is put into blends. The largest variety and most uniqueness are in the single malt category. And though you can legally call it Scotch once its aged at least three years, most single malts won't carry the distillery name until the whisky is at least ten years old. The oldest whisky at the tasting was a 30 year old, but most of them were in the teens (12-18). The regions typically break down as the Lowlands, Highlands, Speyside, and Islay. Depending on who you talk to they might mention the Islands or Campbeltown, but they're all used to geographically classify the distilleries. Lowlands tend to be lighter, the Islays more peaty, the Highlands more smoky, and the Speysides more floral. These are broad-stroke generalizations, but safe expectations when dealing with single malts. http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_1.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/02/notes_from_a_tasting_part_1.html Whiskies town_hall_tasting Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:00:00 +0000 There's two things I try to avoid around here: Excuses for not posting and self-promotion. But considering the circumstances, I'm willing to look the other way this time. Posting took a bit of a back seat lately because I've been preparing a Scotch tasting here in Minneapolis. The final details are set and I can now say that I will be hosting the tasting this weekend at the Town Hall Brewery. The event will start at 5:00pm on Sunday (January 20th) and run for about a couple hours. I will be going through a list of six Scotches collected from Town Hall's offerings. They are: Auchentoshan 10 Cragganmore 12 Highland Park 12 Glenfarclas 17 Talisker Distiller's Edition (2005) Laphroaig 30 Tickets are $40, and as of tonight there are about 25 tickets left. You can reserve your spot in advance by stopping in at the bar or calling them at 612-339-8696. http://www.alcolog.com/2008/01/an_evening_with_brian.html http://www.alcolog.com/2008/01/an_evening_with_brian.html Whiskies Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:21:35 +0000 before, distilled liquor can suffer some bad effects once it's put in the bottle. But in some contexts, that static nature of liquor can be a good thing. Especially when proper storage and care is performed on the aging bottle. In some context, a bottle of liquor is a time capsule. Not just in the label, but the contents themselves. Once a liquor is bottled it becomes a point on a timeline. That bottle will remain static but the world around it will change. Countries change their names, distilleries close, and copyrights change hands. But that bottle, and the label on it, will never change. This phenomenon is the glory of the astute liquor buyer (either at the wholesale or retail level) because they can come across some rare finds when shopping around. Months ago I came across a local liquor store with some curiously old bottles. I didn't buy them at the time, but their presence gnawed at me until I stopped by and bought a few bottles. Only after I got them home did the age of the bottles really set in. The first, most common, was Buchanan's Black & White Belended Scotch Whisky. This is still available and is probably unchanged, but it's not really sold in the US anymore. Once the merger that formed Diageo happened in 1997, Black and White was one of the casualties of the merger. It's still available in France, Venezuela, and Brazil. But none is shipped to North America anymore. Any bottles found are likely holdovers from the days when the brand was owned by United Distillers. The way to be sure is to look at the name of the importer. The second, most interesting, was the Glenfiddich Special Reserve Pure Malt/Single Malt. This bottling pre-dates the Cardow/Cardhu debacle of 2003 that tainted "pure malt" forever. Instead this harkens back to a time, again in the late 1990s, when Scotch was finding its footing in the drinking culture. Back then it was more important to distinguish between blends and malts than to specify ages or the origin from a single distillery. So this bottle is the progenitor of the Glenfiddich 12 - the staple of the William Grant line of single malts. What makes it very interesting is that its taste profile is notably different from the modern Glenfiddich. It's more buttery/marshmallowy than modern Glenfiddich. Possibly a sign of changing times, or at least the maturation/aging of a master blender's taste. The last bottle, and possibly the most special of the set, is a Black Bull Blended Scotch Whisky. This also dates from the late 90s, isn't likely to ever come back. A few years after this was bottled, a sprightly Austrian company called "Red Bull" contested the trademark in the US. The local importer at the time was either out of business or in no position to contend it, so the trademark went inactive in 2002. Red Bull trademarked "Black Bull" but only for non-alcoholic drinks. Later, the new owner of the brand, registered it in the US but did not start bringing the brand back. Later, a US company started marketing a "Black Bull Vodka" and so the chance we'll ever see the Black Bull Scotch in the US any time soon is quite slim. End result? The bottle I'm holding on to now will be part of a dwindling stock of Black Bull in the US - unlikely to be refreshed and definitely will never be the same. An epilogue: This moment of clarity would not be possible for two very important players. The first was a diligent liquor manager at the store, ensuring that these bottles did not suffer the same fate as the All Saints brands. These were well preserved specimens of history. Second, I would like to thank these bottlers of the late 90s for having the foresight to use screwcap closures because they avoided the fright of cork taint. Sure cork is a romantic closure - but it sure isn't a long-lived one. stryrofoam barriers and plastic/metal screwcaps preserved these beautiful bottles for nearly a decade. Had they been cork, I'd expect that the bottles would be worthless today. ]]> http://www.alcolog.com/2007/10/snapshot.html http://www.alcolog.com/2007/10/snapshot.html Distilled Mon, 29 Oct 2007 00:55:29 +0000 One year ago, I started this web log as an attempt to educate people on alcohol. Not necessarily in the ways most web logs had started, either focusing on mixology, a specific kind of alcohol, or the experience of drinking. This is about alcohol, and the study of its history and experience. Throw in a little bit of the business side of things and that's a good explanation of the last 24 posts. Underpinning all things related to alcohol is how they are classified. Governments typically split them three ways: beer, wine, and spirits. The drinks industry separates that last category into white and brown spirits. But these really aren't very useful categories. Are vodka and tequila the same drink? Are moonshine and whiskey all that different? I find it useful to think about these drinks based on their roots. At is core, all alcohol is produced from yeast. Without yeast, you would not have any alcoholic drinks because that's how every one starts. So at the top of the taxonomy is the yeast and how it produces alcohol. It does this by consuming sugars. You can feed yeast these sugars either from direct sources or by breaking down starches into simpler sugars that can then be consumed by yeasts. Thus creates the most major split in the alcohol taxonomy: alcohol made from sugar, and alcohol made from starch. The fermented parent on the sugar side is wine. Wine is created from grapes, whose juice contains sugar. Also within this category would be cider or pulque. The key is that the starting ingredient has a sugar that can then be processed by a yeast which then produces alcohol. Starches cannot be processed by yeast naturally, and thus they require the additional step to turn the starches into simpler sugars. The most common of these are beers, who typically start from grains. One other example would be (rather confusingly) rice wine. Ultimately these fermented drinks are different from their sugar-based relatives because they must be broken down before fermentation can occur. Beneath this primary stratum of classification are the distilled drinks. These are the distillates that come from the fermented parents. For the sugar-based drinks you'll find things like brandy, applejack or rum. In the starch-based realm you'll find most commonly the whiskies and Tequila, though traditional vodka and soju will fall in this area as well. This taxonomy creates interesting relationships in modern times. Vodka is the best example as now any neutral spirit can be diluted and bottled as a vodka. This makes that bottle of Ciroc closer to brandy than Belvedere. In Central Asia, you will find whiskies made from sugar cane, thus making them more like rums than Scotch. These examples are not examples against the system, rather, help explain why some drinks are more similar than others. A martini using Ciroc and vermouth seems to work more closley together than a traditional gin or grain-based vodka. Beer pairs nicely with Scotch, mainly because Scotch comes from a rather crude beer. So as you taste a drink, it's imporant to remember where it came from. It may influence which drink you should take next. http://www.alcolog.com/2007/10/the_taxonomy_of_a_shot.html http://www.alcolog.com/2007/10/the_taxonomy_of_a_shot.html Mon, 22 Oct 2007 02:58:39 +0000 From a scientific standpoint, it's actually a bit sloppy to say that liquor is a drinkable form of alcohol. When referring to liquor, the alcohol is actually ethanol: one of the simplest and most common forms of alcohol. Pure ethanol is some pretty nasty stuff, having a flash point at 13C (55F). For comparison, diesel's flash point is around 62C (162F). You can understand why alcohol is used a propellant and fuel for vehicles. But that bottle in the liquor cabinet is not likely to spontaneously combust if you're smoking around it, nor is it going to work as a pricy alternative to your car's gasoline. There are exceptions to that rule, and these are the liquors that could be called the Hazmat (Hazardous Materials) category. The king, weighing in at 95% abv, is Everclear. This really isn't meant to be drank straight and is really a mixer for non-alcoholic drinks or making liquors. I keep a large bottle on hand as a food-grade disinfectant, emergency fuel source, and once used as a topical analgesic for a toothache. To give you an idea of how potent Everclear is: It takes one cup (240ml) of Everclear substituted in for a portion of the water in a standard grape Kool-Aid recipe in order to make a punch with the same average potency as wine. Why isn't there something above 95% abv? Alcohol is hygroscopic, which is to say that at percentages above 95% it will absorb humidity from the air in order to reach equilibrium at 95% abv. Everclear has a quaint Irish cousin, known as Poitín or Potcheen. Historically, it's an Irish moonshine but has recently been commercially bottled. The bottlings vary from 40% up to 90%, with the "good stuff" being well above 60%. This is actually meant to be consumed, though the most potent I've had has weighed in at 55%. It's hard to get ahold of the high-end stuff because it's so potent. Moving into the range of stuff with flavor, high-proof rums end to float in the 70-85% range. The most famous rum in this range is Bacardi 151. If you ever see a flaming drink in a bar, this is probably the propellant used for the show. The less famous rums are commonly toted home by Caribbean cruisers, possibly to be confiscated by righteous customs and TSA agents. Remember folks: If you're going to blow a few grand to spend a week on a ship - have the forethought to know how to get your rum booty back home. One high-proof rum of note is Austria's line of Stroh rums. I've got a bottle of the 80% stuff and it's quite nice. I especially like the pinkish tone that you'd associate with gasoline. Whiskies have their dominant contributor to the hazmat category: barrel proof Bourbons. Buffalo Trace's George T. Stagg is the most common example of this having their 15-year old weighing in near 70% abv every year. More commonly found is Jim Beam's Booker's which is around 60-63%. This is relatively closer to the high-end of Bourbon's popular range of 43-53.5% abv. Scotch has its own contributor to this range, but is not yet available. Bruichladdich announced they distilled a spirit at 92% abv and is to be called "X4". What its proof will be once it gets out of the cask is anybody's guess. As mentioned before, Scotch's potency diminshes with age, so a few years (three years minimum) in an oak cask is likely to do a number on the spirit. It should still weigh in well above the 70% range allowed on a plane. The requisite warning with all of these drinks is to heed caution: they aren't your run of the mill drinks. If you drink them straight keep them limited to tastes and don't consume them like they were a shot of vodka or a Tequila chaser. But if you pause, taste, and relish in these high end proofs you'll experience both sides of the thin line separating liquor from perfume. These are aromas to be taken in by the nose... not the gullet. http://www.alcolog.com/2007/07/fire_water_burn.html http://www.alcolog.com/2007/07/fire_water_burn.html Distilled Fri, 06 Jul 2007 02:45:28 +0000 Normally someone would have a tasting to show off the diversity of flavors associated with a kind of alcohol. Vodka aspires to be tasteless, so it's not like you're going to get much diversity from it. So it's better to look at a flight of vodkas as being a test - who can be the most tasteless of the bunch. This is probably one of the factors about why I don't post about vodka. Another factor has to do with its popularity. Practically everyone who drinks hard alcohol will have had vodka at some point in their drinking lives. It's as common a mixer as coke and the primary ingredient in most martinis service today. Vodka shots go down quickly and when chilled tend to pour like water. Not that anything is wrong with this popularity - it just seems easier to abuse something you can't taste. Take the fine drinking stock of the Russian people. Last week, The Lancet released a study that claimed 43% of deaths in their sample were attributable to hazardous drinking. These habits were both garden-variety overconsumption as well as drinking non-potable forms of alcohol in cologne and cleaning solvents. But best be wary of wagging a finger at the Russians. The cheapest bottle of the hard stuff is almost always vodka. With a low price point it becomes a cheap default for people who want to get drunk. Ironically enough, vodka is tarred with the same problems gin had over 100 years ago. In so many ways, vodka is the new gin. Sorry for the tangent - this actually has a point. Since we aren't supposed to taste vodka, here's a test. Four vodkas of various origins to see if there's a way to draw out taste. The first part is to get the stuff out of the freezer. If vodka is "frozen", you aren't likely to pick up any volatiles or impurities. That's one of the big reasons you keep the stuff in the freezer. Once it's at room temp, open the container and take a huge snort of air from the bottle. That'll be the alcohol fumes and possibly anything else that's going to be volatile at room temperature. Now pour some into a wide-mouthed glass like a rocks glass or a brandy snifter. Swirl it around and take another noseful of the aromas. It should smell similar to the noseful from the bottle, though this time it might be easier to pick up the source of the ethanol. The most popular are wheat/rye and potato, though nowadays you can get vodka made from things like maize, grapes, barley, soy, and soon from pineapple juice. And it's not that each of those sources creates a different ethanol. They just have different volatiles that act as a signature for the kinds of ethanol in the vodka. After a good swig of water to clean your mouth, take a sip. Don't swallow it; the point is to let the ethanol fume into your nose and let what's left stay on your tongue. This is the start of when flavors come out of the vodka. They might be a subtle banana flavor or an odd butter tone. But these are the things that made it through the distillation process and ended up in the bottle. Finally, one last abuse to the vodka to really bring out the things you shouldn't taste: salt. Refined salt does not impart taste, it enhances tastes present in foods and drinks. As a result, a dash of salt into a relatively tastesless substance like vodka and you'll have those subtle flavors jump out at you. For example, the "3" Vodka made from soy starts tasting more like a rum or tequila. Which makes sense since soybeans are more on the sugar end of the spectrum. The other three came from wheat so they have a bit of a pot-distilled gin flavor to them. Their excess flavors are a bit more subtle, but the salt does help distinguish some of the differences between them. And the least flavored of them all? Reyka. There might be some wisdom in filtering your vodka through lava rocks. http://www.alcolog.com/2007/06/vodka_testing.html http://www.alcolog.com/2007/06/vodka_testing.html Vodka Tue, 19 Jun 2007 02:42:17 +0000 both drink. Part of the pleasure of giving someone alcohol is that they're probably going to open it and offer you some. Even if you finish it that night, the experience of the evening and the enjoyment of the gift is what matters. If you want to give your dad a gift that sits on a shelf, go with something safe like ties or underwear. So armed with taste, the next big step is plunging into the local liquor store's collection and finding something. Walk through the entire store and try to match areas with the bottles you saw on the shelf. If your dad's bottles had labels peeling off and imperial volume measurements, it's better to ask for help from a manager. Preferably one who was drinking before 1980. Liquor stores are smart in that they classify their selections fairly nicely. If you find all of your dad's bottles in the same basic shelving area, good money says that the bottles on those same shelves will probably be cool for him. Even if he opens the gift and he says, "Oh man, I can't drink this because of a college party in 1965..." he might try it again and revisit those days with you. Next big tip: you've located his bottles, so now you tilt your head up one or two shelves. Those are your gifts for dad. They'll be more expensive, but it's a special occasion courtesy of Dick Nixon, so you might as well celebrate it. So what if you don't have the time to do the pre-work and you're not sure what your dad likes? Go generic and get bar tools. A corkscrew or hipflask are good bets. Just don't guess - alcohol is a consumable gift, and the last thing you want to do is sift through your late father's worldly belongings to find the unopened bottle, label peeling, and contents undrinkable because it sat on a shelf for decades. ]]> http://www.alcolog.com/2007/06/gifts_you_cant_ship_to_dad.html http://www.alcolog.com/2007/06/gifts_you_cant_ship_to_dad.html Distilled Wed, 13 Jun 2007 02:15:29 +0000 must be a cheap end to Scotch. So once you have a spirit that can be called Scotch, then what? Bottling prices are largely fixed, so the cheaper the bottle the higher the percentage paid in just packaging. Then there's shipping costs which also do not discriminate based on price. Tack on an exchange rate that makes export to the US unfavorable and you end up with the bottom end for price for Scotch in Minneapolis weighing in at $10.99 per liter. But this isn't all doom and gloom, for a quick shopping spree uncovered seven different brands of cheap Scotch available at that price in Minneapolis: Crawford, Claymore, Tyler & Lloyd, Old Smuggler, Scoresby, Bulloch Lade, and Cluny. So either these are all just names for the same stuff or there's actual competition at the bottom of the barrel. As it turns out, each of the seven do have their own distinct tastes. The Claymore, for example, tasted a lot like a middle-of-the-road Canadian Whisky. All of them had a weak peat, salt, and malt taste to them. If any of them were mixed with soda or sour, you'd be hard pressed to taste the difference between these and a higher end Scotch like Whitehorse, J&B, or Cutty Sark. And that's really the primary motivation for these Scotches. They really are intended to be mixed into cocktails or served over the rocks. These aren't brands people seek, but countless numbers drink them every night and don't know their names. To them, they're all "Scotch". To be clear, I am not about to pour any of these down the drain. Once I assembled the bottles together I realized that by the end of tonight I could have seven liters of alcohol, each bottle with a quarter shot poured from each. I don't expect to drink these quickly, but I do plan to drink them. They're actually not that bad, and definitely some of the better cheap drinks out there. In a way it's almost a backhanded compliment to The Scotch Whisky Act for ensuring that even the cheapeast Scotch is at least minimally drinkable. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some Old Smuggler left and I intend to drink it. ]]> http://www.alcolog.com/2007/05/bottom_of_the_barrel.html http://www.alcolog.com/2007/05/bottom_of_the_barrel.html Whiskies Wed, 30 May 2007 01:32:48 +0000