Getting Geeky with Union Horse Distilling Company, Part One: the Interview

As I state in my Statement of Ethics, I seldom accept review samples. And that if I do, I will disclose it at the beginning of the article. Please consider it disclosed. I would like to thank FleishmanHillard for putting me into contact with the distillery and providing the bottles being discussed and reviewed this week. 

So yes, I broke my “No Review Samples” rule. I seldom do this, but when Union Horse Distillery agreed to get a bit geeky with us and answer some questions, I felt that the exchange was worth it. The following questions are a combination of reader questions and my own. They were answered by Patrick Garcia, Master Distiller for Union Horse Distillery and Damian Garcia, Director of Sales and Marketing for Union Horse. Enjoy!


Eric: Let’s start at the beginning of the process with the water. Your press release mentions that “Union Horse is rooted in an appreciation for the unified spirit it takes to run a homegrown business and the force which runs through its products.” It then specifically mentions water along with grain and barrels. A lot of distilleries in Kentucky make claims about the quality of the water they are drawing from, even though in many cases it is just the city water. So what’s going on with your water? Was that poetic license or is there something special about the Kansas City aquifer? If not, is there a specific adjustment that you take to help the fermentation process?

Patrick: We use regular city water which is carbon filtered. All of our mashes are sour mashes which helps with adjusting the pH for fermentation. 

Eric: Along those same lines let’s talk about grain. Where do you source your grain from?

Damian: We mill locally sourced grains of the finest quality we can get from the Midwest, in particular from Kansas and Missouri farmers. And, we donate the spent grain to local Kansas dairy farmer. We like keeping it local as we believe it strengthens our local economy, and highlights the amazing products we have in the region. 

Eric: Continuing with grain and moving into the cooking and fermentation process, the mash bills on your website state that your rye whiskey is 100% rye and that your bourbon is made with “a sour mash recipe consisting of corn and rye.” So my question is: are you using commercial enzymes in place of malted barley, as they do in Canada, or are you malting one of the other ingredients such as the rye or corn? In either case, can you touch on why that decision was made instead of using the traditional malted barley?

Patrick: Yes, we are using commercial enzymes in place of malted barley. We chose to use enzymes because we can control a mash a lot easier without the need for additional grain like malted barley. Enzymes enable us to more accurately control the liquefaction, and saccharification stages. Viscosity is also another issue easily controlled with enzymes especially with a Rye Mash. 

Damian: This also makes our whiskies very different in flavor than most traditional whiskies, with the corn and rye grains being richer within the foundation. The floral notes that the malted barley brings maybe absent, but the sweet, bold and spicy notes are very prevalent. 

Eric: Let’s stay with fermentation and move into the other necessary ingredient to making fermentation happen: yeast. I’ve talked with a range of distillers. Some (like many of the large whiskey makers) who take great pride in their yeast and some who admittedly just use whatever they happened to have purchased last time. Where does Union Horse land on that spectrum? Over the years you’ve been doing this, have your thoughts about what yeast to use changed at all?

Patrick: When we first started we tried multiple yeast strains from wine to champagne, beer to whiskey. There are a lot of choices out there and we narrowed it down to a couple of strains that we liked the best and tasted the best. We have a certain yeast strains, and certain combinations of them, we use for each of our products but that information is proprietary. 

Eric: I’d like to skip distillation for a moment and move on to the other ingredient you mentioned in your press release: barrels. A lot of readers like to know about barrels so there are going to be a few of them here. First of all your press release mentions your “signature barrels.” So what make these barrels special? What size barrels do you use? What char level are they?

Patrick: The 53-gallon signature oak barrels come from Missouri forests and are made from primarily White Oak. Union Horse Distilling Co. requires that they are produced from 24 month, air dried, outdoors seasoned, aged wood at a char level of #3, with lightly charred heads and branded with the UHDCo. logo. 

Eric: One reader who I shared a sample with, asked if you used toasted barrel heads as the flavors reminded him of toasting?

Patrick: With them being lightly charred, the whiskey will bring flavors of a low-medium toast.

Eric: Skipping to aging process. Do you age in a climate controlled environment or do you just let nature take it’s course?

Patrick: Our barrels are stored in our non-climate controlled warehouse that gets extremely cold in the winter and unbearably hot in the summer. The drastic climate shifts we experience in Kansas City (Midwest) is perfect for the maturation of our whiskey. The barrels expand and contract throughout the years adding continuous depth and complexity with each cycle. 

Eric: Now onto the whiskey in the bottle. I was sent a bottle of Batch 1 of the Rye and Batch 2 of the bourbon. How big are your batches and how long do you let them marry before bottling?

Patrick: One batch could be anywhere from 1000-2000 bottles. We will blend different lots of barrels to create a batch and then yes we let it marry or rest for a period of time before filtration and bottling. 

Eric: I’ve talked with other craft distillers who, for marketing reasons, have decided to not use the word “Straight” on their label. Union Horse uses it prominently on the label. Whiskey lovers everywhere applaud that, but what was your reasoning for including it?

Damian: We started distilling and aging our whiskies back in the spring of 2011. Our plan at that time was always to move into a “Straight” whiskey when the whiskey was ready and that time has now come. We feel these whiskies not only highlight the maturation of the spirit, but the maturation of our distillery. 

Eric: I get this reader question a lot when I review craft whiskies. Mostly because, unfortunately, some bad actors have poisoned this well and trust levels are low among a section of whiskey geeks. So to stave off the inevitable, I like to ask this. Union Horse doesn’t add any flavorings or additives to their straight bourbon or straight rye whiskey, correct? 

Patrick: No, no flavorings or additives are added. The #3 char caramelizes the natural sugars in the wood giving the whiskey a sweet caramel, smoky spice and vanilla flavor during the aging process.

Eric: The press release mentions that there is whiskey up to five years old and the label states the whiskey is two years old. So I’m assuming that these contain whiskies of varying ages (as most non-single-barrel whiskies do). Yours being from 2-5 years old. What’s the distribution of the whiskies in question? Is it mostly 2-3 year old whiskies with some 4 and 5 year olds thrown in to give it some depth? Or does is trend older than that?

Patrick: The ratio really depends on the taste of each lot ranging up to 5 years. We’ll test (taste) each barrel individually, then blend, proofed down to spec and test again to see what flavors are being brought to every single batch. 

Eric: As a follow on question, are you holding back some of those older stocks to release on their own some day?

Patrick: Our first barrels that were laid down are being used in these whiskies, but we also have others that we’re saving for future use; we’re really anxious to taste those in the next few years to see what they will continue to do.

Eric: I have another reader question regarding style. What style of whiskey are you aiming for? For example, some places want more oak, some want to be cocktail friendly, etc.

Damian: The aim is for our whiskies to be as well rounded as possible so that they can be enjoyed, neat, on the rocks or in a cocktail. 

Eric: What have you guys at Union Horse learned since the beginning? Have your processes changed between the older stocks you are using in these batches and the younger ones? Fermentation times, barrel entry proof, barrel size, etc. 

Patrick: There’s always growth in anything you apply yourself too and yes we’ve evolved and continue to do so, but we’ve pretty much tried to keep the processes the same from day one. Before we started our distillery we did a ton of research and worked behind the scenes on this craft which has enabled us to keep things pretty consistent.

Eric: And finally, where can we buy these whiskies? Is this a regional release or are there plans for going nation-wide with it?

Damian: These spirits are distributed in Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, in and soon to be in Oklahoma, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Anyone not in those states can visit unionhorse.com/where-to-buy to see where our spirits can be purchased online.

Eric: I would like to thank Patrick and Damian for getting geeky with us and answering questions from both your fellow readers and myself. And once again thank FleishmanHillard for putting us into contact. Looking for the reviews? Due to the length of the article, I've broken it into two parts. The next part, coming Thursday, will be the whiskey reviews.


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!

Observations on old liquor marketing and a 1979 Ezra Brooks

Ezra Brooks from 1979 aged 101 months.

I’m a big fan of old liquor bottles. We’ve talked about this. I tend to go to antique stores, estate sales and bottle shows to look at and occasionally buy old bottles. Most of these are empty and I almost always get the comment: “too bad this isn’t full, huh?” But sometimes they are full. And when they are, I like to check the contents and the seal. If it’s bourbon, it hasn’t been opened and isn’t very expensive, I’ll bring it home with me. 

When I search through old bottles, I also see a lot of decanters. Collectable decanters were a way for a struggling bourbon industry to try to stay afloat while tastes changed. And it must have worked because we have bourbon today, and there are a lot of old decanters for sale out there. 

At some point in the mid-Twentieth Century, whiskey making changed. In the United States, the uncertainty of war coupled with changing fashions led whiskey makers to lobby for an increase in the bonding period of aging whiskey. In other words, they wanted to be able to sit on their aging stocks a bit longer before needing to pay taxes on it. It was granted and whiskey making and marketing started to focus on longer aging times. Larger age statements begins to appear and age became associated with quality. Around the same time proofs started dropping as well. Where 100 (and 101) proof were once fairly standard 86 proof was becoming more and more common. 

With an increasing focus on age and decreasing proofs, it isn’t terribly surprising that the largest number on many of the old decanters you find is the age. What is surprising is that the age is stated in months not years. Unlike many of today’s whiskeys who use months for their age statements, it isn’t because the whiskey is young though. 100 months is the most common age I’ve seen on Jim Beam decanters (though I’ve also seen 155 on a few occasions). And I’ve seen numerous 101 month Ezra Brooks decanters. 

I can think of a couple of reasons why 100 months might have been used. Much like the producers who put out three year old whiskey today and label it 36 months, 100 just sounds bigger than 8. The other reason I can think of is that 100 and 101 months bear a striking resemblance to the 100 and 101 proof that consumers had been used to seeing before proofs started dropping. Kind of an early version of the Very Old Barton “6” that Sazerac uses today. I don’t know if the actual answer is one, the other, or both. In any case, 35 years later, it is fun to ponder. 

1979 Ezra Brooks Bengal Tiger decanter

Ezra Brooks - Bengal Tiger, 1979

Purchase info: $15 at a bottle and advertising show

Details: From the Ezra Brooks Wildlife Collector Series. 101 months old (8.417 years). 80 proof.

Nose: Green apples, baking spices and a faint earthiness to go along with some oak. After some time it transitions to a strong butterscotch bomb.

Mouth: Not as sweet as I was expecting. Baking spices, brown sugar, oak and earthiness. 

Finish: On the longer side of medium. Sweet with lingering baking spices and green apple. 

With Water: The mouth gets a bit livelier and the green apple comes through more. The nose gets spicier with a touch of anise. Water kills the finish. 

like.gif

Thoughts: As Ezra Brooks has always been a sourced whiskey, it was really interesting to see what was being sourced in 1979. With it’s apple and spice notes, it reminds me a bit of a Brown-Forman bourbon. (Though I doubt that it is since Ezra Brooks debuted by impersonating their biggest brand and were sued by them). Based on this bottle, it is the equivalent of an ok $30-45 bottle today. But that said, I don’t know that I’d seek out another bottle of it. It’s pretty good, but not the best I’ve ever had.

A word on lead: There is a forum thread on straightbourbon.com that details the story of a man getting the whiskey from one of his decanters tested for lead and finding very high levels of it. I do not have the equipment to test this myself. I did however allow the bourbon from this decanter to evaporate and then drip the contents of a lead paint tester into the residue (saving a drop or two for the conformation strip) and there was no "red for lead." I won’t say this bourbon doesn’t contain lead or that any of the bourbon from old decanters you find will or will not contain lead. But this test satisfied my curiosity enough to allow me to do the small tasting I did for this post.

For more information on lead poisoning visit: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002473.htm


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!

Black Eagle Bourbon

You’re sitting in a meeting. You’ve run out of things to say. Everyone is looking at you. You know you have to say something, but you’re not sure what. It’s awkward. You just sit there looking around. Thinking to yourself that eventually maybe someone else will say something.

The silence get longer. It gets more awkward. You’re starting to fidget now. People around you are looking out the window, trying not to stare as you just sit there. 

Finally you squeak: “Individually barreled?” 

This is how I picture the label meeting going for Total Wine’s Black Eagle Bourbon. I mean when you describe your bourbon as “Old-style, individual barreled bourbon whiskey, distilled from only the finest ingredients for a genuine full-bourbon character” you know someone somewhere was wracking their brain trying to come up with something nice to say on the spot.

I find this label to be hilarious. So much so that I had to buy this bottle immediately. I mean, no matter the size of the barrel, it is going to be an individual. And what the hell is full-bourbon character?

I guess we’ll find out.

Black Eagle Bourbon Whiskey

Purchase Info: $11.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Total Wine, Burnsville, MN.

Details: 40% ABV. 3 years old.

Nose: Lightly fruity with delicate floral and mint notes

Mouth: Grain forward with light notes of baking spice and mint.

Finish: Short and grain forward.

meh.gif

Thoughts: When I saw this I expected something pretty bad. I mean the marketing people literally couldn’t say anything nice about it. When even marketing people can’t find a superlative that feels right to describe something you know that there’s nothing to say about a product. And though there isn’t much going on here, what is going on isn’t bad. It’s just sort of meh. To be honest this reminds me a lot of Old Crow. An ok well bourbon should you need one, but otherwise something to avoid. 

I’ll probably use the rest of mine in the Cherry Bounce recipe from Michael Dietsch’s cocktail book Whiskey that I reviewed a while back. After three months soaking up cherry juice, it probably won’t matter what I used to begin with.


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!

Head to Head Review: Eagle Rare, Store Pick vs Regular Release

Store picks versus regular releases. It’s a topic I find myself thinking about more and more often as I realize that I’ve examined a lot of bourbon for the blog and tasted a lot more outside of it. As my local liquor stores realize that they need to do something in order to differentiate themselves from the competition, I run across more and more store picks of things like Knob Creek, Woodford Reserve, Russell’s Reserve, 1792 and others. Plus, the price is normally either the same as the regular release or even a little cheaper. As such I’ve found myself picking them more often on my shopping trips. 

I’ve had mixed results with store picks, some are amazing and some are…well…not. But I tend to buy them anyway. While I always like a good familiar bourbon, sometimes I like a slightly different take on that familiar flavor. I say slightly very purposefully. It is rare that a store pick will fall too far outside the accepted flavor profile for a given brand. It may be the the producer didn’t offer samples that strayed too far (it is their name on the bottle too after all) or it may be that the retailer didn’t want to surprise customers with something that didn’t match their expectations. So I tend to buy them when I see them. Not because they are totally different, but that sometimes I find it interesting how fairly slight differences can extremely noticeable when you taste things side by side. Of course sometimes I just buy it because it is on sale too.

Eagle Rare is a bourbon produced by Buffalo Trace. It is dumped out of barrels that were filled with distillate made from Buffalo Trace’s Rye Bourbon Mash Bill Number 1 (though I have been told that very occasionally a mash bill number 2 barrel will hit the flavor profile and become Eagle Rare). This same distillate is also used to fill barrels that will become Old Charter, George T Stagg, Buffalo Trace and Benchmark. It is also a bourbon that I was positive that I had reviewed before. I buy it every so often when I go home to visit my family because it is readily available and tends to be pretty cheap in relation to the price I sometimes find it for in Minnesota, where it’s a different story completely. Here it is neither readily available or as cheap. I will often find it for almost $10 more per bottle. 

A local retailer peaked my interest when they sent out an email hinting that they’d solved the allocation problem by picking their own barrel. Even though I had a bottle open and on the shelf from my last trip home, I decided that the ability to taste these side by side was too tempting to pass up. 

So now I have two open bottles of Eagle Rare on the shelf.

Eagle Rare: Regular Release vs Store Pick

Regular Release:

Purchase Info: ~$27 for a 750 mL at Marketplace Foods, Hayward, WI.

Details: Single Barrel. 10 Year Age Stated, 45% ABV.

Nose: Oak, mint and a slight smokiness

Mouth: A nice viscous mouthfeel. Sweet caramel, herbal mint and anise, oak.

Finish: Of medium length with sweet and oak notes.

Ace Spirits Store Pick: 

Purchase Info: $34.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Ace Spirits, Hopkins, MN

Details: Single Barrel. 10 Year Age Stated, 45% ABV. Barrel # 170.

Nose: Oak, mint and a slight smokiness with the addition of baking spices and a light fruitiness.

Mouth: Butterscotch, oak, anise and a light fruitless.

Finish: Nice and spicy and of medium to long length.

like.gif

Thoughts: Both of these are very good. Let’s just start there. I’m a big fan of both when I have them on their own. Together though, there is a definite standout. The regular release feels almost tired compared to the Ace Spirits pick. The addition of a light fruitiness to the oak and sweetness really livens up the pour. That isn’t to say that these are miles apart from a flavor standpoint. They both taste like Eagle Rare. One just tastes like a better version of Eagle Rare.


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!

Elijah Craig 18 Year Old Bourbon: Pre-Hiatus vs. Post-Hiatus

I used to work with some amazing people. My wife was going through chemotherapy for ovarian cancer and was suffering from immense bone pain due to it. They put together a collection to get her a night in a hotel with a private hot-tub to help alleviate the pain. It was an immensely nice gesture and very much appreciated. 

While we were there I was an attentive errand boy, as I was every time a chemo weekend came up. But there were times when she was sleeping or we were watching tv when I could hop on twitter and spend a little time escaping from the reality we were living by reading about whiskey. And then I read a post from Pops over at Bourbon and Banter that Elijah Craig 18 yer old was going away. I didn’t really care too much. I never cared too much for it, but my wife was very upset. At $45 it was one of her favorite bourbons that wouldn’t break the bank. She likes oak a lot more than I do.

So I did what any good husband would do, I left the hotel to go get two bottles to put away. One I still have, we plan to open it up next year to celebrate 5 years cancer-free. The other we drank pretty quickly, but as always I put aside a few samples in my sample library to have in the future. 

It turns out it is now the future. Elijah Craig 18 year is back. It’s almost three times the price, but it has been seen off and on at my local Total Wine. I did not buy it. I didn’t want to spend that much on a whiskey that historically I did not like. But luckily a friend of mine did buy it and knowing that Robin was a fan, gave her a healthy sample. I in turn gave him one of the samples I put away so he could compare. Then I pulled out my other sample so I could compare them as well. 

It was a fun tasting. We did it blind in order to gauge which we liked better without any preconceptions being attached. So…is the one we have in the closet better than the one we could find today?

Elijah Craig 18 Year-Old Single Barrel Bourbon Pre-Hiatus Versus Post-Hiatus. 

Bourbon A:

Nose: Pear, caramel, oak and baking spices.

Mouth: Light and fruity with lively spices. Pear caramel, baking spices and herbal notes. 

Finish: Spicy and warm with lingering herbal and fruity notes. 

a smile becasue I like this

Thoughts: I would never guess this is 18 years old. It is a lively pour that almost dances across the senses. It is really good. I might even buy this one…if the price was right. 

Bourbon B:

Nose: Creme Brûlée, floral notes and dusty oak. 

Mouth: A little thin on the mouth feel. Caramel, mint and oak predominate.

Finish: Lingering oak and herbal notes along with a nice burn that sticks around for a while. Much of the flavor comes from the finish on this one.

a neutral face because this is sort of meh.

Thoughts: This is muted and accentuates the oak flavors. It feels old and a bit tired. I don’t know that I’d buy it again based on this bottle. It’s just kinda meh. 

So which is which? Can I go buy the energetic, virile, young 18 year old bourbon? Or am I stuck buying a tired, old bourbon at the end of its useful life? Well, I’m happy to say that Bourbon A was the post-hiatus Elijah Craig and that Bourbon B was the pre-hiatus version. And in a rare case of whiskey-math working like regular math, I think the bourbon that costs almost three times as much as it used to, is approximately that much better than it used to be. I’m shocked to say it, but I might even buy one of these if I see it on the shelf. Even at $130. Weird.


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!

Hoffman Originals, Mr. Lucky Series, The Carolers

A very long time ago, by today’s standards, bourbon was not popular. It was so not popular that many people selling it almost of included it as a kind of “value-add” when they sold ceramic decanters. Ceramic decanters seem to have been immensely popular during the 1970s. I have people in my own family who will reminisce about purchasing a couple of them for a decent amount of money and then claim: “I don’t know that [the buyer] ever did drink any of that…”

Now the buyer in question above was a prolific drinker. And if he didn’t drink the bourbon, you can bet that he was not an edge case. This is born out by the fact that I have bought multiple ceramic decanters that are still full and sealed at antique stores or shows for under $25. Including the one above. That one only cost me $18. $18 at a bottle and advertising show where I saw a piece of Four Roses ad signage marked up to over $100. 

The piece was put out by the Hoffman Distilling Company from Lawrenceburg, KY. Haven’t heard of them? Well, don’t feel bad, I hadn’t either. They seem to be one of those pieces of history that has left very little mark on the internet. But here is what I have collected. 

  • Sam Cecil, in his book Bourbon: The Evolution of Kentucky Whiskey claims that the distillery was built in 1880 and after passing through many hands, was in disrepair by the mid 1970s. Saying on page 98 of his book: “I visited the distillery in the mid-1970s, and the still house was falling down.”
  • Mike Veach tells us on BourbonEnthusiast.com that in 1966 “The Hoffman Distilling Company of Lawrenceburg, Ky. with a capacity of 300 bushels per day is listed with Ezra Brooks as one of its four brands. The executives of the distillery are Ben G, Ripy, William R. Ripy, and Robert Ripy (1966 Red Book, p.33).”
  • He also says on another post “The Hoffman distillery is the distillery that created Ezra Brooks in the 60's. It went out of business in the 70s and Julian Van Winkle bought the old distillery.”
  • Speaking of Ezra Brooks, our friend Brian at Sipp’n Corn mentions Hoffman in his post on the lawsuit where Jack Daniel’s sued Ezra Brooks over the marketing of Ezra Brooks in the 1950s and 60s. If you want to read more about that lawsuit, you can
  • Ellenjaye.com has a post about what became of the Hoffman Distillery after it was purchased and renamed by one Julian Van Winkle III. You may have heard of him. He really doesn’t figure into this story except as a footnote though. 
  • And finally a reclaimed wood supplier in Oregon has a nice long post about the distillery from the point of view of one who might want to sell you wood from the rick houses. 

Most of the research I found claims the distillery went out of business in the mid-1970s and the location was used as a bottling house by various brands and run by a member of the Ripy family at that time. One of the brands that seems to have been bottled there was Hoffman Originals, a brand that seems to have survived the distillery proper (though I can find no mention of any actual relation between them other than having the same name and bottling location) by selling ceramic decanters of the variety described above. They put out quite a few decanters throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Jim Crawford at jimsbottles.com has an extensive set of posts on their Mr Lucky series (the series of decanters which included the Carolers decanter shown below, click for larger images).

This decanter depicts two leprechauns singing Christmas Carols. It is a full sized (4/5ths quart) decanter bottled by the Hoffman Distilling Company, Lawrenceburg, KY. And because neither bourbon nor the bottle were enough to sell this, it is of course also a music box. It is from 1979. The cork was intact and the tax stamp was unbroken. It was $18. I decided to pick it up. 

Hoffman Originals, Mr. Lucky Series, The Carolers Base (back)

Hoffman Originals, Mr. Lucky Series, Carolers, 1979: The Bourbon.

Purchase info: $18 at a bottle and advertising show. 

Details: Bottled by the Hoffman Distilling Co, 80 proof, bottle copyright 1979.

Nose: As is to be expected from a bottle that has been closed for over 35 years, this smells of acetone at the initial pouring. After letting it sit in the glass for a while, we started picking up notes of rich butterscotch, cloves, ripe apples, fresh flowers and hints of lemon zest.

Mouth: Peppery and sweet with more butterscotch and cloves along with a large dose of floral notes.

Finish: The finish follows the mouth and nose with lingering sweet, clove and floral notes along with a gentle, medium length burn.

Thoughts: This whiskey is pretty tasty though not to the standards of other older bottlings I’ve found. Being sourced whiskey, maybe this was lower end stuff bought only to fill the bottle? Or maybe, time just hasn’t been kind to this one. I don’t know. It’s fine, just kinda…meh when neat. Adding water does open it up allowing more sweet notes to come to the forefront, but it loses it’s burn. It goes to show that just because a whiskey is a “dusty” doesn’t necessarily follow that it is really good. Fun to try though.

A word on lead: There is a forum thread on straightbourbon.com that details the story of a man getting the whiskey from one of his decanters tested for lead and finding very high levels of it. I do not have the equipment to test this myself. I did however allow the bourbon from this decanter to evaporate and then drip the contents of a lead paint tester into the residue (saving a drop or two for the conformation strip) and there was no red for lead. I won’t say this bourbon doesn’t contain lead or that any of the bourbon from old decanters you find will or will not contain lead. But this test satisfied my curiosity enough to allow me to do the small tasting I did for this post.

For more information on lead poisoning visit: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002473.htm


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!

Ask Arok: 1792 and Very Old Barton

Last week, Dan left a comment on the post I did comparing 1792 Port Finish to a 1792 single barrel. 

What is the difference between 1792 and Very Old barton other than packaging? Thanks! 

Initially thought he was asking about flavor. Because I find them to be quite different, I was happy to share that I found 1792 to be hotter, drier and showing more wood influence than VOB. It turns out that his question was much more interesting than that, cutting to the heart of the difference between the juice that goes into the bottle for two brands. Since both of these bourbons are produced at the Barton 1792 Distillery in Bardstown, KY one might assume that they are just the same bourbon put into different bottles.

At one point, this would have been an easy question to answer. Age. Both of these had age statements until just a few years ago. Very Old Barton was 6 years old and 1792 was 8. I assumed that this, along with barrel selection was probably still the case. But the bourbon industry has changed in the mean time. There is much less info on the label than there used to be for these two brands so I couldn't say for sure. To find out, I reached out to a contact I have at Sazerac to see if she would like to chime in. Here is what she had to say.

Age constitutes most of the difference in taste between Very Old Barton and 1792, as 1792 barrels are typically aged 3-4 years longer than Very Old Barton. We also taste, evaluate and approve all the barrels prior to use in any batch to ensure a consistent taste profile for every brand. So in other words, to ensure Very Old Barton always tastes like Very Old Barton and 1792 always tastes like 1792. 

So I was correct in my assumption that it is still age and barrel selection. But I was a bit surprised at one thing. Apparently in the last few years Very Old Barton has gotten younger at a faster pace than 1792 has. They used to be 2 years apart in age. Now they are 3-4 years different. Assuming that they wouldn't remove the 8 year age statement while making the bourbon older, we are left to deduce that Very Old Barton is now only 4-5 years old while 1792 is around 7-8. 

Toss in choosing barrels to fit the flavor profile and you get yourself a different brand that starts the same, but are pretty different when compared to one another. 

Do you have a bourbon question you'd like answered? Just get in contact with me using one of the icons in the sidebar to submit one. If I don’t know the answer, I’ll try to find it from someone who does.


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!

1792 Port Finish as Compared to a 1792 Single Barrel pick

So last night I was chatting with my friend Fred Minnick on twitter. He'd posted a shot of the bottle he'd got of Booker's Rye and I made my thoughts on the price known. He countered from a reviewers stand point and I replied with:

Yes, I was joking. I was mostly feeling salty about the fact I will never taste Booker's Rye due to both my self-imposed restriction on accepting review samples and the fact that the price is about three months worth of my (mostly poorly-followed) whiskey budget. 

I have to clarify that I was joking because I review things that few people will ever taste all the time: dusties, local retailer picks, special editions I make special trips to obtain, etc. I'd hate to be viewed as a hypocrite because someone only saw the one tweet as it was retweeted. I mean, my last post was a product that though easy enough to find right now, is out of the budget of the majority of my readers.

So to celebrate my newfound hypocrite-ness I'm going to review not one, but two things that are either limited editions or retailer picks that have been long sold out. I found the Port Finish 1792 at a local municipal liquor store and as I did my review tasting I thought to see how it compares to the regular release. I didn't have that, but I did have a bottle of a store pick single barrel. It shares at least a passing resemblance to the regular release so it would have to do.

1792 Single Barrel Pick - Ace Spirits

Purchase info: $19.98 for a 750 mL bottle at Ace Spirits, Hopkins, MN

Details: 46.85 ABV. Exclusive barrel for Ace Spirits. Barrel no. 11.

Nose: Dry and oaky with hints of chocolate and sweet fruit.

Mouth: Warm and woody with notes of ginger, nutmeg and dark chocolate.

Finish: Warm and drying with medium length. Lingering dark chocolate and spice notes. 

A smile becauseI like this. 

Thoughts: This is a bourbon I reach for when I don't want a "sweet" bourbon. It's spicy and warm and has a lovely dry "evaporating" sensation to the finish. This single barrel is tasty, but doesn't stray too far outside the 1792 wheel house. 

1792 Port Finish

Purchase info: $38.99 for a 750 mL bottle at Apple Valley Liquor, Apple Valley, MN

Details: 44.45% ABV. After normal aging, this whiskey spends an additional two years in barrels that previously aged port.

Nose: Rich and creamy with a nice port influence of fruit and honey along with oak and hints of chocolate.

Mouth: Warm and sweet with noted of ginger, sweet fruit, oak and hints of rich dark chocolate. 

Finish: Warm and sweet with lingering fruit and spices. 

A smile because I like this.

Thoughts: The combination of spice, fruit, oak and chocolate meld into a delicious whole. If you can find this and like fruity bourbons, this is one to pick up. It's quite different from regular 1792, but quite taste nonetheless. 


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!