The disappointment and redemption of Fleischmann's Straight Rye

It’s mid-March 2013 and I’m about to embark on one of the most disappointing, and yet ultimately most interesting, hunts of my life: the hunt for Fleischmann’s Straight Rye. 

I discovered that Fleischmann’s Straight Rye existed, coincidentally, by finding out that it had been replaced. As Sazerac is wont to do, a statement that hinted at an age had been removed and replaced with a bit of nonsense in the same typeface. Straight Rye Whiskey had turned to Mash Rye Whiskey. 

A label change would not normally be enough to send me searching for a whiskey. But in the article, Chuck mentioned that it was the only rye made at the Barton distillery and that it is distributed only in Northern Wisconsin. Well, that’s home. And for the next few months every time I went back home, I checked the liquor stores to see if I could find it. And in October 2013, I finally did. 

Now, Fleischmann’s, whatever the spirit, is a bottom-shelf product. There is a vodka, gin, rum, brandy and blended whiskey to go along with that rye. But it’s an old name and was born from the same company that birthed the yeast that most baker’s are familiar with. That company was born in 1868. And along with being the first to introduce yeast sold in it’s modern form, they also were distillers. Wikipedia claims that they were America’s first commercial producer of gin but it’s Wikipedia, so take that with a grain of salt.

All that is to say that I really shouldn’t have expected a lot of this product. But, yet, I kind of did. I’d read good reviews of it. The forums at StraightBourbon.com had entire threads dedicated to singing its praises. It couldn’t be terrible, could it?

It couldn’t. It was not terrible. It was close to terrible, but not terrible. It was bad enough that I didn’t want to infuse it or cook with it for fear the flavor would come through. It made the only manhattan that I’ve ever dumped out. But it was better than say, Rebel Yell. So it sat on my shelf. For months. I tried giving it away as a curiosity sample, but felt bad doing it and more often than not cautioned the recipient to not drink it. What could I do? There is no way I can throw away a whiskey, yet it was taking up valuable space on the shelf. 

And so it sat. My excitement in a successful hunt turned to disappointment. At least until I traveled to Virginia and visited the A. Smith Bowman distillery (another Sazerac location). As a souvenir, my wife bought a bag of barrel char that she could stick in a container and smell every once in a while. They said if you dumped a tablespoon of whiskey in there every so often, it would retain the smell it came with. Now there was a use for that Fleischmann’s, but 1.75 liters would take a long time to disappear a tablespoon at a time. But it inspired me to try something. Aging bourbon in a second barrel is big right now. It could be another bourbon, a cognac, sherry or even rum barrel. I didn’t have a barrel, but I did have barrel char. And I had a lot of whiskey that I didn’t know what to do with. Hmmm…

I devised an experiment. I set up four mason jars and put a quarter cup of barrel char into each one. I then took added a cup of Fleischmann’s Rye, tightened the lid and put it into a closet, shaking it every day. I strained the first through a series of coffee filters after a week. The next was strained at two weeks, the third at a month and the final at 2 months. I also poured a four ounce sample to use as a control. The results were as follows:

Fleischmann’s Straight Rye Whiskey

Purchasing info: ~$12 for a 1.75L, Northern Lakes Cabin Stop, Hayward, WI (October 2013)

Nose: Silage/grain with hints of mint and cherry

Mouth: Thin, lightly sweet, hints of mint that feel medicinal.

Finish: Gentle with a faint charcoal aftertaste

Thoughts: This was an inexpensive curiosity. I can’t imagine using this for everyday drinking/mixing/cooking. Now that it seems to have been replaced by Mash Rye Whiskey, I doubt anyone other than the Straight Bourbon forum inhabitants will miss it.

Barrel Char Finishing Experiment 

Nose

  • Even after a week’s infusion, this doesn’t nose like the same whiskey. It’s sweeter, showing much more caramel. 
  • Not much difference between week one and two.
  • By one month, the silage from the control sample is gone and the cherries are back, but now they are chocolate covered. 
  • At two months, the cherries are not only chocolate covered, but dark chocolate covered and joined by rich caramel and char.

Mouth

  • A week made a lot of difference in the mouthfeel. It’s thicker and much sweeter. The bourbon influence is clear.
  • At two weeks, the silage flavors are gone. There is more cherry presence with hints of chocolate. Think of the liquid that runs out of the Christmas candy. It’s kinda cherry and kinda chocolate, but not quite either.
  • One month: Dark, rich and thick in the mouth. Cherry notes very pronounced with black pepper spice.
  • At two months this is like drinking a candy bar: toffee, coconut, nougat, chocolate. And of course that ever present cherry.

Finish

  • Week one: getting better
  • Week two: no real change
  • One month: The finish still has hints of the original medicinal mintiness but there is much more warmth and it lasts a lot longer
  • Two months: lingering spice and sweetness in the finish. After a bit the mint returns.

Thoughts

After a week or so, you start to notice that there is something interesting going on. It’s not there yet, but you know there is something. At about one month, it’s actually gotten to something I would drink on it’s own. the dichotomy between the thick, rich, spicy sweet mouth and the minty finish is very interesting. At two months, the flavors are even more complex, but they are starting to become muddied. If I were forced to chose one of these to bring to market, I’d go with the one month. 

I thought that this purchase was a bust. If this experiment hadn’t yielded something drinkable, I would have dumped it out and not thought about it again. But it turned out to be one of the most interesting redemption stories I’d ever witnessed. In fact, it was good enough that I poured the control and the one and two week infusions together and am reinfusing it. I’m starting at three weeks, but may let it go for another if it isn’t ready yet. I’m now actually quite excited about my bourbon-char finished rye whiskey.

Head-to-Head-to-Head Review of Bourbon from the Barton 1792 Distillery

I am a cheap bastard. I listen to my music on Spotify (the free account) instead of buying it. I take a sandwich for lunch everyday. I don't go to the movies every month, or even every six. I drove my last car until I was spending almost as much on repairs as I would on a car payment. I drink bourbon and I like bourbon that is under $20 per liter. 

That doesn't mean I won't spend more on a good bottle. I spent $100 on one just a couple weeks ago. I'll spend money if it is deserved. I go to movies that will benefit from the big screen and big sound. When I bought a car, I bought one with all the electronics you could ask for. I buy those few albums that I know I'll be listening to in a few years. I try to buy my dinner hot and pre-made once every couple of weeks, even if it is just delivery. 

If you wanted, you could probably call me "frugal," but I tend to be a bit more plain spoken than that. And besides, cheap doesn't offend me. Cheap means something is worth more than it costs. I love cheap. Cheap is your rough-around-the-edges uncle. Frugal is that quiet chap in your office who seems just a bit stuck up. Cheap is fun. Frugal you are afraid of offending. You don't worry about cheap. Cheap can take care of itself. 

And that is why I picked two of the bourbons I did for tonight's tasting. If you were being nice, you could call them inexpensive. Or a good value. But let's not start mincing words now. These are two cheap bourbons. Even the most expensive of the two is under $25 for a 1.75 L at the Party Source. But, that said, I made a special point of searching these out the last time I was in Kentucky. Everything I read, said that they are a well kept secret in the Bluegrass State and that they are much better than the price tag suggests.

So last time I was there, I picked up a liter of 86 proof Very Old Barton and a 200 mL of the 100 proof version for comparison. Tonight, because it is made at the same distillery and because I prefer a three way double blind, I threw in a pour of my Liquor Barn Selected1792 Ridgemont Reserve as well (second series #5 according to the label). 

Each of these pours was really hot on the nose initially. Just overpowering with alcohol. So in an unusual move, I let them sit for five minutes before coming back to them.

Whiskey A

Nose: First thing I'm hit with is dried corn sitting in a silo. After a while it shows some floral and sweet scents. After a couple sips I could swear someone is baking sweet cornbread in the glass.

Mouth: This disappoints. It's all harsh alcohol on the tongue tip and stays hot as you swallow. It does sweeten some as it moves back in the mouth though.

Finish: warm and peppery. This one definately leaves a tingle that lasts for a while.

meh.gif

Thoughts: This one is so hot that I'd drink it with a couple ice cubes or some water, but even then it wouldn't be my first choice. It's not bad, but not great. It's just meh.

Whiskey B

Nose: Strange as it sounds, the first thing I'm struck with is chocolate milk. But then moving into the smell of silage. Finally landing on sweet brown sugar. 

Mouth: Sweet at the tip of the tongue, but becomes a bit peppery as it moves back in the mouth. Adding a bit of water mutes the pepper and allows some of the wood to show itself.

Finish: This leaves you with all the stereotypical bourbon flavors. Caramel vanilla and oak. It's nice.

meh.gif

Thoughts: This is certainly more interesting to me than A was. Whiskey A was all about the heat. This is a bit more nuanced. That said, it's still just sort of...there. It'll do in a pinch, but also wouldn't be my first choice.

Whiskey C

Nose: This starts just a bit sour. But that fades. You are left with wood and brown sugar.

Mouth: This is very gentle on entry. Sweet with a mild pepper. It's almost cooling after the other two.

Finish: Very quick finish. There is a lot of vanilla along with a hint of dryness.

like.gif

Thoughts: This is easy drinking to the point of being boring. And that's why I like it. I'd reach for this while playing cards or having an animated conversation with a close friend. Something where I don't want to think about my whiskey, I just want to drink it and enjoy what's going on around me.

So which is which? Well, I was sort of surprised to find out that I had ranked them in inverse order to their price. I liked the 86 proof Very Old Barton the most (C),  the 1792 the least (A) and the 100 proof Very Old Barton landed in the middle (B).

Keep in mind that this is not the regular release of 1792 so your milage may vary. This one may very well have been chosen for it's heat. I have tasted it side by side with the regular release and I didn't notice much of a difference, but you never know.