Head-to-head review: Elijah Craig 12 Year vs. Elijah Craig Barrel Proof

View fullsize

Ever have one of those days where you know you really should come home from work and drink bourbon, but aren't sure that you want to?

...

No?

Normally I don't either. But today...today I was tired. Tired and hungry. And a little cranky. And did I mention hungry? I mean, analyzing a bit of bourbon means pushing supper off so you can save your taste buds for the finding of all those flavors in the bourbons. 

It's been a while since I did an analytical tasting. You can tell because these thoughts were actually going through my head at first. I was looking at it as if it were something I had to do not something I should want to do.

But that's the beauty of bourbon. Pouring the samples, nosing them. Making notes along the way... yeah I got right back into it. Irritation? Gone. Hunger...still there, but manageable. Bourbon? Oh yeah. It smelled so good.

I've been doing a lot more beer drinking this summer than I have bourbon drinking. But tonight I realized again why I love bourbon. I love the smell. I love the way it hits you like a wave of sweetness that is a mix of caramel, vanilla and tannins. I love how it feels when you breathe in after you swallow, how the air cools your tongue and the burn lingers in your throat. I love that every bourbon is similar, yet different. They are all speaking the same language, but the dialect is different. 

Oh geesh, think of the difference between someone from Minnesooota, like me, don'tcha know...and...someone from Chahlston, South Carallina, where I might, someday, move. 

They both speak English, but you'd know they were different. Bourbon is the same way. Each one is similar, but each one is a variation on the theme. 

I love that!

And as a continuation of the theme of similar, yet different, tonight I decided to taste two that are supposedly the same except for proof. Elijah Craig 12 year and Elijah Craig Barrel Proof. These are supposed to be exactly the same, but at they are different proofs. Does it make a difference. Yeah, yoo betcha. I didn't do it blind tonight because, if you've ever seen Elijah Craig Barrel Proof you know it's as dark as a cup of coffee. You'd know them apart just by looking at them.

Elijah Craig 12 Year

Color: Amber in color as are most bourbons.

Nose: At first sniff, this hits with a alcohol burn to the nostrils. After that, it reminds me most of standing in the aging warehouse at Heaven Hill's Bourbon Heritage Center. It smells like oak and dust and bourbon. Digging just a little deeper I get some toffee and a clove/allspice scent.

Mouth: This has a vague sweetness. Carmel, vanilla, etc. But there is also some oak and a bit of spice. Not a one-note wonder.

Finish: dry, tannic with a bit of a burn.

Overall: I like this, but just barely. It's not bad by any means, but it's trending a bit too hot and dry for my tastes. Not so far outside the realm that it's meh, but it's the closest like to a meh, I've ever given.

Elijah Craig Barrel Proof

Color: this is brown. Like cup of coffee brown.

Nose:  Very sweet and much less burn than the regular release. I'm getting a buttery baked apple loaded with cinnamon and warm brown sugar.

Mouth: Very sweet with some spicy clove. A bit fruity on the tip of the tongue. 

Finish: sweet again with a warmth that sits right over your heart for minutes. After my first swallow, I got a burst of a burn coming back up my throat.

Overall: Hoo momma, this is strong. I recommend water. But don't water it down to the 94 proof of the regular release, that's a bit much. But when not adding any, I burned out my tongue pretty quick. This one is really good. 

I was curious so I added water to bring it down to about 95 proof. On the nose, the alcohol burn came back but it was fruitier with bigger clove/allspice than either of them right out of the bottle. The taste just fell apart. Though, my mouth was plenty burned out by this point so who knows.

These are both good, but for my money I'd go barrel proof if you can find it anywhere.

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

View fullsize

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.

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.

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.

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.

Old Pogue, Collier's Powerful Welsh Cheddar & a Ritz: Powerfully Tasty

View fullsize

Last weekend I had what might have been the most transcendent bourbon experience I've ever had.

I was watching MadMen as the finale to a really good weekend of visiting with family (and playing my first ever game of laser tag). Along with some really tasty bourbon, I had picked up what I hoped was some really tasty cheese. Toss that on a few crackers and I figured I had a yummy, though not necessarily healthy, snack to add to my tv viewing pleasure.

The bourbon: Old Pogue Master Select. The cheese: Collier's Powerful Welsh Cheddar. The crackers: Ritz. Yes, Ritz. I love the greasy buttery goodness of those things...

On their own each are tasty. Together they form a super-group that would make all those mulleted rock super-groups of the 80s quake in their odd-looking and inappropriate-with-tight-pants cowboy boots. (Looking at you Damn Yankees.) I mean, this combination is just heaven in the mouth... 

...or so I remember. Knowing that memories that come from a relaxing session of drinking bourbon are notoriously suspect, I decided tonight that I was going to try to recreate the experience in a more scientific (read that non-tv watching) manner. 

First I tasted the Old Pogue on it's own. Here are my notes:

Old Pogue Master's Select

Nose: initially there is a big hit of alcohol. After sitting for a little while I start to pick up caramel apple, baking spices and some vanilla. This is a pleasant nose. Almost comforting. 

Mouth: Repeats a lot of the nose. Tasty, but nothing spectacular. 

Finish: A spicy, sweet burn that lasts a while and is then replaced by a bitter and slightly vegetal after taste. 

Overall: I liked it. I'll certainly buy it again. It's not a go to bourbon, but it'll do when the mood strikes. 

The Combo

After a fairly thorough tasting to set the baseline, I add the cheese and cracker to the mix. This is where it gets fun. In order to most accurately recreate the initial experience I add a bit of water to the bourbon as well. The cheese and cracker cancel a bit of the burn left after adding the water. The sharp cheddar completely overpowers the bitterness in the finish. It adds a caramel sweetness to the slightly sweet, salty, sharp, nutty taste of the cheddar and buttery crunch of the ritz which is amazing. It's just as good as I remembered. Damn Yankees have been put on notice. 

And I have to say, it made for one hell of a supper.

Double Blind Review: Evan Williams vs. Evan Williams 1783

I like to travel. A lot. It's pretty much my second favorite hobby. I like it so much that I'd write a travel blog if it wasn't cheaper to go buy a bottle of bourbon than catch a flight to Louisville. And if so much of my travel didn't involve bourbon in some way shape or form. Last September I was in Kentucky. I believe I've mentioned this. One of the little highlights of my trip was stopping into the liquor stores to scope out all the tasty things I couldn't get (or didn't think I could get) at home. One of these was Evan Williams 1783. Since September, I've had it neat a half dozen times or so, used it in a few cocktails and even for cooking on occasion. All in all each experience was enjoyable.

Of course, sometimes you buy something just because you want to compare it to something else. This was the situation I found myself in as I bought a tiny little mini of Evan Williams black label. It was something I'd had and liked before, but with so many other tasty things to try, it had taken a while for me to go pick it up again. Black label was one of the first non-premium bourbons I'd had after I decided I liked bourbon. I'd read that it was a pretty good value bourbon and decided on a whim to pick it up. Good whim. I immediately realized that as far as bourbon was concerned, you didn't need to spend $30-40 to get something really tasty. 

So, having the 1783 in hand and having picked up the mini of the black label, I decided tonight to go head to head. Just to see if different was necessarily better.

Here comes disclaimer-time: I did this in my normal double blind tasting routine where I draw a circle with an A in it, one with a B in it, one with a 1 and then one with a 2. I pour into the glasses labeled A and B and my wife moved them to either 1 or 2. So I know what A and B are, and she knows what 1 and 2 are, but neither of us know what bourbon is 1 and which is 2.

Bourbon 1:

Nose: This is a sticky sweet caramel roll in a glass. 

Mouth: Very sweet on entry. It gets hotter as it moves back in the mouth. Other than that there isn't much else going on here.

Finish: There's a little heat, but it fades pretty quickly.

Thoughts: This is a very pleasant, uncomplicated bourbon. It isn't going to make you sit and think, but that makes it perfect for playing cards. Something to sip on while your attention is somewhere else. 

Bourbon 2:

Nose: right away, I'm reminded of sour milk. not something I want to nose at all. After letting it sit for a 5-10 minutes the sour milk fades and is replaced by a sweet caramel much like bourbon 1.

Mouth: The sweetness is repeated here. It's soft and full in the mouth. 

Finish: Short with almost no heat, but there is a lingering sweetness that I like.

Thoughts: This is so uncomplicated to be almost boring. But sometimes that's a good thing. I'd like this as I watch tv at the end of a rough day. It lends itself well to just vegging out watching an implausible prime-time action drama.

Verdict: I shouldn't have been, but I was pretty shocked to find out how similar these two were. The little bit of heat in bourbon 1 was not as pleasant as the softness of bourbon 2. Sweet, sweet, sweet as most inexpensive bourbons are, but pleasant none-the-less. I like these for drinking, not tasting and wouldn't hesitate if offered either during a hand of cards. 

So which was which? Well, bourbon 1 was the Evan Williams 1783 and bourbon 2 was the Evan Williams Black Label. I found it a bit shocking that I found the "normal" one more to my liking, but that's why I taste blind: I don't want any preconceptions. And of course, if you haven't had them, try them out, you'll be out maybe $30 for the pair. 

Review: Henry McKenna Single Barrel Bottled in Bond

View fullsize

I bought this a while back. Probably about a year or so ago, maybe a bit longer. I'll be honest. I bought it for the bottle. It's looks a bit like it was designed as a school project. And I loved it for it. Visible hot glue, a copper neck tag that looks hand wrapped and a hand written ID tag with the barrel number and barreling date.  It just adds to the craftiness of it all. And it would have sat there just looking all crafty-cool if I hadn't taken the behind the scenes tour at the Heaven Hill distillery last September and learned a little nugget of info that sparked my curiosity. 

We were being given one hell of a cool tour and our guide was telling us a little about aging. He told us that, obviously, Heaven Hill ages their barrels all over the place. Now there are some of these barrels that end up on the sunny side of a hill (I think he mentioned this facility was up by Louisville, but that was 6 months or so ago, I might be misremembering that part). Now according to the guide, these barrels age to be a bit harsher than those barrels that are destined to become the flagship Evan Williams. But that, in a odd quirk of fate, because there are fewer of these barrels you will actually pay more for a bottle of Henry McKenna than you would for the "better" Evan Williams. 

How much of that is true? Probably some of it, but it's a good story so I'll let any embellishment slide. I'm a firm believer in not letting the truth get in the way of a good story. But it did spark my interest. I wanted to see if this Bottled in Bond version followed those same themes. And now that I've emptied it, this is my last chance to share my findings.

View fullsize

Nose: At first this is all caramel and heat. Damn near fried my nose. After letting it sit for a bit, it settles into brown sugar and cherry with just the tiniest hint of smoke

Mouth: FIRE! This is a hot one! It's just a big bucket of burn. Adding a little water calms it down a bit, allowing it to show it's sweet side.

Finish: What do you know? There's a hot finish too. After the heat fades it brings back a bit of the cherry and some bitterness that dries the mouth.

Thoughts: I like this more for the story and the bottle that it's in, than for what's inside it. Everything about this one is hot. Might be nice on a cold winter's night, but it's (finally) showing signs of spring here and it's not to my tastes right now. A small piece of ice does help to tame it though. For the time and place I'm in right now, I'm going with meh. But if you like hot bourbons that can bring the burn, this one might be just for you.

UPDATE: Do you not agree with this review? Well, guess what after four and a half years, I didn't either and I decided to revisit it. Check out the current review here. 

---

BourbonGuy.com accepts no advertising. It is solely supported by the sale of the hand-made products I sell at the BourbonGuy Gifts Etsy store. If you'd like to support BourbonGuy.com, visit BourbonGuyGifts.com. Thanks!

Review: Woodford Reserve Double Oaked

​There are a lot of bourbon drinkers out there that do not like Woodford Reserve. Not sure what it is about it. The taste? The price? I don't know. But the fact remains that I know very few bourbon drinkers that will lay claim to liking Woodford Reserve. I've yet to hear someone say it was their go-to bourbon. Of course, some like it but, don't like the price.

I'm going to tell you a story. It's a story about a man on a mission. You see this man's wife was a fan of Woodford Reserve. And she had just heard that they were putting out a second permanent bourbon under the Woodford name.

And she wanted it. 

So the man went on a multi-store search for the mysterious Double Oaked. ​It was an elusive prey. Not just there for the taking, Double Oaked had to be earned. And earn it the man did. He went to the liquor store near where he works.

Nothing. ​

He went to the store across the road from that one. Nothing. ​He stopped at his favorite. No go. He stopped at his second favorite. They had a place on the shelf, but had sold out. Finally he stopped at the one closest to his house. In desperation. This was his last chance to capture the prey that would make his lady oh so very happy. 

They had it. At first it didn't register. The copper colored embossed label. He looked right past it. But then there he came to his senses. He reached out his hand and grabbed it. It was his. ​His wife was happy. It was a good Friday.

Notes:
​Nose: brown sugar and apples
​​Taste: Baked apples with all the spices. Moves toward bitter tannins.
​Finish: This has a lingering bitterness that is lightly tinged with a carmel sweetness.​

So that story above? Pretty good, huh? Yeah, none of it is true. Well my wife did send me out after Double Oaked, but I found it at the first store. Probably because I had wisely chosen the biggest store in the richest suburb I drove through on my way home from work. And boy did you need a deep pocket to buy this one. I don't know what it goes for now, but when I bought the bottle shortly after it came out, I paid almost $60 for it. Which wouldn't be much, but it is pretty average bourbon. Good, I like it. But like the folks I mention above, I also do not like the price.

UPDATE: I revisited this bourbon after five and a half years. My opinions have changed in the intervening time. Check it out!​

---

BourbonGuy.com accepts no advertising. It is solely supported by the sale of the hand-made products I sell at the BourbonGuy Gifts store. If you'd like to support BourbonGuy.com, visit BourbonGuyGifts.com. Thanks!

A Four Roses Head-to-Head-to-Head Tasting: Small Batch, Mariage Collection 2009 & Limited Edition Small Batch 2012

So I was reading my Google Reader subscriptions yesterday when I ran across a fairly alarming blog post on David Driscoll's K&L Spirits Blog. It seems that the Award-Winning Four Roses Limited Edition Small Batch 2012 Release has been reported to be oxidizing quicker than expected. (And what that means kids is this: drink your whiskey. Having it sit open on the shelf too long doesn't necessarily prolong enjoyment. Sometimes it actually lessens it.)

Well, after reading that post, I sent my wife an email. "Honey," I said "we need to take a sip of that there whiskey tonight and see what's what." 

hmm...it seems that in my memories, I talk an old prospector...

She had an even better idea. She said that after we tasted a little bit of it, if it was still ok, maybe we should sit down and do that second head-to-head-to-head tasting that we were thinking of doing. I married a smart woman. The plan had been to compare our 2009 Mariage with the 2012 Limited Edition Small Batch. But as I was setting up the two glasses, I drew a third circle on the papers and poured the regular Small Batch as well. My thought was: this is the baseline standard. A control in the experiment as it were. Plus it's my favorite every day whiskey and I don't pass up a chance to have some.

All three whiskies poured and awaiting tasting

The set up was the same as before. It was a double blind tasting which means that I poured them into glasses on a sheet of paper labeled A, B and C and then I left the room. My wife then came into the room and moved each glass onto the numbered sheet that you see above. This way I knew which bourbon was which letter and she knew which letter was which number, but neither of us knew which bourbon corresponded to which number. Fairly simple way of removing label bias.

So what were the results? Did I find that all the releases were over rated and I loved the regular release Small Batch the best after all? First: all bourbons were tasted neat. After we had our initial notes, my wife added a tiny bit of water to her glasses. Also, all of these bourbon have been open for a while. The LESB was opened in September. I didn't notice much oxidation, if any, but it was still 2/3 full. The Mariage was opened at the end of July at the celebration of a very big milestone. Same thing here. Stayed relatively full and I didn't notice much difference. The regular release Small Batch was a gift from my daughter's boyfriend at Christmas and helped me through that.

Bourbon 1:

Nose: Initially all I get is vanilla extract. But I take my time with it, figuring that it probably had a little something more to give. After a while I get an unidentified fruity odor. To me this always smells like JuicyFruit gum (my favorite gum when I was a child: five sticks, just a quarter). I get that a lot with Four Roses, so finding it here wasn't a giant surprise. With a little water it seemed to transform into an almost earthy honey smell. Reminded me of the buckwheat honey I had for a while.

Mouth: This dries the mouth, but doesn't burn. Strange. Big caramel. It has a sweet, floral taste, but not delicate. If I didn't know better, I'd think Four Roses had swapped a straight rye whiskey with a high percentage corn into my glass.

Finish: Almost no burn here. Finish brings that JuicyFruit flavor back again

Overall: Wow. This might very well be the best Four Roses, I've ever had. My wife normally puts a small piece of ice in every bourbon. She asked me to remind her that this one she wants neat from now on.  

Bourbon 2:

Nose: I'll admit, I was confused by this one. So confused that I went out to the spice cupboard and started smelling things to see what it was that it reminded me of. I settled on a mix of allspice and oregano with a little molasses thrown in. After a little water it get's mintier. (And after I move back up the line from three before tasting: wow! Big hit of alcohol. Guessing this is one of the higher proof releases).

Mouth: My first thought: "ooh, that's a Four Roses..." and I just closed my eyes and enjoyed that first sip. After I opened them again and took another sip, I got spice, and some of that JuicyFruit flavor. Sweet. Spicy. Fruity. Yum.

Finish: Short burn on this one. Sweet and spicy fading into a sharpness. It leaves a tingle on the tongue for a little while. My wife: "the finish makes me want more"

Overall: This one was confusing. It was very rich and full flavored, but I had a hard time picking out what those flavors were beyond their basic "Four-Roses-ness" Once my wife added a little ice, to replicate how she would normally drink a bourbon, this was her favorite of the three.

Bourbon 3:

Nose: After the other two, this is like a sweet floral perfume. It's very delicate. After a little water, not much different.

Mouth: This has a surprising sharpness along the sides of the tongue. More alcohol flavor than I expected. But after revisiting it a little later. It's much more sweet.

Finish: Short burn with a lingering sweetness.

Overall: While this was our least favorite of the three, it is still a very good bourbon. I could drink the heck out of this one at a bar with friends, watching tv or with a good book. It's a great everyday bourbon.

So which was which? Well, the rankings my wife gave them were as follows. Neat: 1, 2, 3. With a tiny piece of ice: 2, 1, 3. I'd rank them similarly even though I only had mine neat. It's a toss up between 1 and 2 for me. Both amazing, but different enough that I'd stand there for a moment trying to decide and then choose one at random. Number three was good, but not great. So that said, it isn't too surprising that Bourbon 3 was the regular release Small Batch. Number 1 is the 2012 Limited Edition Small Batch and Bourbon 2 is the Mariage Collection 2009 Release.

2012 LE SB

2009 Mariage

Small Batch

Last time I did this, I told you "If I could only buy one going forward..." Well, it seems that is probably going to be the case in this instance. I had a hard time picking up a second bottle of the 2012. It is in the bunker. I'm working my way through my second (and last) bottle of 2009. It looks like I'll be out of luck regarding that one too. But that's ok. There will be more wonderful bourbons to taste and I've had the good fortune to pick up two of each of the rare ones. That said, if I had the opportunity to buy the last bottle of any of these and could only pick one. It would be hard. My 15th Wedding Anniversary was celebrated at the 2012 LESB Release Party. The 2009 bottle was cracked open to celebrate my wife showing no further evidence of cancer after her chemo. Both have a bit of nostalgia there. But ultimately, and after a lot of soul searching, I'd choose the 2012. I stand by my initial reaction that it might be the best Four Roses I've ever had.

This might have been the most fun I've had at a tasting with just my wife. We knew going in that we were going to really like all of these. If asked independently we'd both say that Four Roses is our favorite bourbon producer and we knew that for us, the bar started at Very Good before we sat down to analyze them. Then it just became a matter of analyzing and exploring. It was a lot of fun.

I emptied my favorite cooking bourbon: Knob Creek Single Barrel

Tonight I'm talking about my favorite cooking bourbon. Some people might think that's an insult. That it means it is a bourbon so bad that all it is good for is hiding amongst other flavors. Nothing could be further from the truth. If I want to enjoy what I eat I had better use quality ingredients.

My go-to cooking bourbon will have to meet certain factors and the most important one of them will be that I like how it tastes.

The second factor is proof. When I bake, I pull out some water and substitute a little bourbon. You might have noticed that bourbon is much more expensive than water. Hence I want to use as little as possible while still giving me the flavor I want. As you probably know, higher proof bourbons tend to have less water added. As a result, there is also a tendency toward more flavor.

Cost and availablilty are the final factors. My go-to cooking bourbon won't be a Four Roses Limited Edition no matter how high the proof or how tasty the bourbon. 

So that makes Knob Creek Single Barrel probably the perfect cooking bourbon. It is 120 proof. It's tasty. It's readily available and it won't break the bank. That isn't to say that I haven't given it the once over in the Glencairn Glass though. Here are my findings:

Nose: Earthy, lots of oak. There is some sweet underneath. Honestly, I'm finding that this smells just like the warehouse on the tour at the American Stillhouse. 

Mouth: This is a sweet one! Tasted neat, I find this to be mostly caramel and heat.

Finsh: Sharp and spicy with a cool mintiness. It leaves a tingle on the tongue that lasts forever.

Overall: I like this bourbon, but not for drinking. I really don't like to drink super high proof bourbons. They fry my taste buds way too quick. And if I'm going to water it down anyway, I might as well go with the 100 proof Knob Creek and save myself some money. But as my go-to cooking bourbon, I love it. I've used this in my Bourbon Banana Bread and my Bourbon Doughnuts with great results.

So this is a tasty bourbon that is interesting in the glass. But for me, the really high proof makes it a meh for drinking. But that same proof makes it a love for cooking. Average that out and you get a like. And I really do like this. I just had to find a way to let it's flavor shine while holding back the proof. And for me that's in food.