Recently in Bourbon Category

For the unwashed masses (like folks who read and write beer blogs like this), Maker's Mark is probably the most common wheater out there. In bourbon nerd parlance, a wheater is bourbon where the secondary grain (after the defining corn) is wheat instead of the more typical rye. Other examples include the Weller line and the vaunted Pappy Van Winkle bourbons.

Speaking of ol' Pappy, he apparently helped out Maker's founder Bill Samuels Sr. with recipes and general advice. Unsure which recipe to use and (wisely) unwilling to make batches of each and wait a few years to find out which he liked best, Samuels simply baked a loaf of bread with each mash bill. Of the seven loaves, the one without rye was deemed the best (the mash bill is 70% corn, 16% red winter wheat, and 14% barley), and thus Maker's Mark was born. Or so the urban legend goes, as I'm almost certain this is apocryphal or at least a tongue in cheek reminiscence. Whatever the case, Samuels made the decision to use wheat because he liked it better than rye. The iconic branding, on the other hand, was the work of Samuels' wife Margie. She named it, drew the label, and devised the distinctive red wax dipped look. Not an insignificant contribution, if you ask me.

For the longest time, Maker's Mark was a pretty straightforward brand, with only one major expression (there was a limited release of a Mint Julep variant, and some export bourbons at different ages and/or proofs as well). Maker's was basically just that ubiquitous red waxed bottle stuff. In 2010 they introduced Maker's 46, which is basically regular Maker's finished on French Oak and bottled at a slightly higher proof. Then, in 2013, they famously announced that they'd be lowering the proof of standard Maker's from 90 to 84 (the notion being that this move would increase yields and thus ease some of the supply issues they were facing in this bourbon boom we're currently enduring). They quickly backtracked due to a very swift and vocal outburst from fans. And now it appears they've completely reversed course and released a cask strength expression (basically, this is undiluted juice, straight from the barrel). It's a limited release, but it's been surprisingly well stocked (at least, in PA stores), perhaps because of the small packaging mixed with high(ish) price.

I have, of course, had a few drams (er, shots) of Maker's over the years, but have never really sat down and sipped it, so I made sure to grab a sample bottle of regular Maker's to compare to the cask strength version. Standard tasting note disclaimers apply: I'm a beer nerd and thus these baby palate tasting notes are almost certainly not going to please whiskey aficionados. Cut me some slack guys, I'm giving up my preferred drink for a few weeks. Also, check out my forced perspective skills. It's not perfect Lord of the Rings style forced perspective, but I was pretty happy I managed this given my meager cameraphone and about a minute of preparation:

(Click to embiggen)

Maker's Mark - Pours a golden color with just a hint of orange and loose legs. Smells sweet, lots of soft corn, some candy, light on the spice, booze. Taste has a nice, mellow corn character, some sweet candy, again very light on the spicebox (there's something there, but not much at all, I'm guessing it's coming from the oak). Mouthfeel is light, sticky, soft but with a little boozy heat (sorry guys, my baby palate is used to beer, so all whiskey feels hot to me). Feels pretty thin when tasted side by side with the cask strength, as you might expect. Overall, this is pretty standard stuff. It's not my favorite of the slightly above entry level bourbons that I've had, but it's nice enough and I have to admit that I generally seem to gravitate towards high rye recipes. B-

Whiskey Nerd Details: 90 proof, 45% ABV bottled (50 ml sample size). Drank out of a glencairn glass on 2/27/15.

And what the hey, since the Cask Strength label was somewhat obscured by my lame forced perspective attempt, here's a closer look:

Cask Strength Maker's Mark - Pours a slightly darker golden orange color (not as big as the difference between Four Roses and Cask Strength Four Roses, my only other comparison) with thicker legs that hang around a while. Smells richer, with a more caramelized corn aspect than the regular though it's also got a sorta floral component to it, more spice (but still not a lot), some oak and vanilla come out to play too. I really like the nose after it sits for a while; caramelized corn, oak, and vanilla seem to open up and harmonize into something quite beautiful. Can definitely see the resemblance between the two, but the cask strength is more complex and powerful (as you would expect). Taste is oddly not any more sweet than the regular (maybe even less sweet), but the flavors are certainly more complex. That caramel corn, lots of floral character, almost herbal or earthy notes, heavier on the spice box, but still not especially spicy. Mouthfeel is definitely bigger and bolder, heavier, thicker, and much hotter (again, take into account my baby palate). Adding some water softens it up some, makes it easier to drink, but also mellows out some of the complexity in the nose. Overall, certainly an improvement on the standard expression, richer and more complex. Still not my favorite, but nice. B

Whiskey Nerd Details: 113.3 proof, 56.7% ABV bottled (375 ml). Drank out of a glencairn glass on 2/27/15. Batch No. 14-02

Beer Nerd Musings: Beer is typically a straight up barley malt affair, but both wheat and rye are sometimes used as secondary grains as well (corn is generally derided as a cheap adjunct as it ferments almost completely through and provides little to no flavor in beer - like rice, it is often used in light beer to increase the alcohol without adding any residual sugars...) As with bourbon, rye can add a nice spice component to beer (often used in conjunction with hops in a rye IPA or even barleywine style) and if used in large enough doses, can have a twangy fruit character. Wheat, on the other hand, tends to be a bit more mellow, though it does provide a great platform for weizen yeasts (as in Hefeweizen, etc...) In recent years, wheat has also enjoyed increased usage in small amounts in IPAs and saisons (along with oats and more obscure grains, like spelt), as its mellow nature provides a nice platform and complexity for the other ingredients of beer (like hops or yeast). Of course, wheat has always been around beer and, for example, lambics, dating back hundreds of years. Sometimes wheat and rye even end up in the same brew. It's a crazy world.

In terms of barrel aging, I can only think of one example that I've actually had that was explicitly aged in Maker's Mark barrels. It was Cigar City Capricho Oscuro - Batch 3, which turned out to be a bit overwhelmed by the bourbon (it was not as well regarded as the other batches of that beer). Cigar City also made a variant of Marshal Zhukov's Imperial Stout aged in Maker's barrels that was much better received (albeit super limited). Of course FiftyFifty has made an Eclipse variant using Maker's (though not this year). Oskar Blues finally made a bourbon barrel version of Ten Fidy, and yes, they used Maker's barrels (this is a current release, but I have no idea how common it will be). Of course, I'm sure their barrels are put to use in larger beer barrel programs, like Firestone Walker's or Goose Island's, but those are generally blends of all sorts of barrels...

I seem to have come down on the rye side of bourbon, though obviously I'll need to try some more wheaters to see what's up (perhaps I'll take a flier on a Weller). Still, even amongst the rye recipes that I've seen, I feel like I tend to prefer higher rye recipes. Well, only one way to test that hypothesis. Onwards and upwards, twirling, twirling towards freedom.

I'll take a break from relentlessly bragging on my Vermont beer trip* to bring you a few whiskey reviews. A pair of these are from the same samples sent to me by spirits compatriot Dimitri (the guy who sent me that Duvel Distilled), so many thanks need to, again, be showered upon him for his generousity. I'm also going to review what is possibly the best Bourbon I've had yet in my admittedly paltry tenure as a whiskey dork.

Elmer T. Lee was the master distiller responsible for Blanton's, the first single barrel expression of bourbon, released in 1984 and named after Albert B. Blanton, the man who hired Elmer many moons earlier. You'll know it by its grenade shaped bottle with the little horsey on top (and something I should probably try at some point). About a year later he retired from day-to-day operations, but stayed as Master Distiller Emeritus, and it wasn't long before someone was making a bourbon to honor him. His namesake bourbon is, of course, a single barrel bourbon. It uses Buffalo Trace's #2 mash bill, with more rye than the #1 bourbons (like, say, Eagle Rare), clocks in at 90 proof, and though it has no age statement, it is speculated to be in the 8-14 year range (which some would call the sweet spot for bourbon). Near as I can tell, it's not one of the sexy brands that'll show up in best-of lists, and yet it seems to be the sort of thing you'll find in a lot of bourbon lovers' bunkers. For a $30 bottle, it sure packs a pretty solid punch, and seems to drink well compared to much more expensive Bourbons. Alas it has become more limited of late, as bourbon continues to just fly off the shelves. Let's drink some, shall we:

Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel - Pours a golden orange color, very standard Bourbon appearance. Smells very nice, caramel, booze, lots of pie spice (cinnamon, mint, etc...). Taste has a very nice balance between corn, caramel, rye spice, oak, vanilla, and alcohol. Mouthfeel is rich and full bodied, boozy but without a huge alcohol burn. Overall, among my favorite Bourbons, and definitely a gateway for newbies. I prefer this greatly to the comparably priced Eagle Rare (which is certainly fine in itself), and I think I'm starting to come down on the side of high rye recipes in Bourbon. A-

Whiskey Nerd Details: 90 proof, 45% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a glencairn glass, bottle nearly finished (but only a few months old).

Beer Nerd Musings: To my knowledge, there are no bourbon barrel beers that specifically call out Elmer T. Lee barrels, though naturally Buffalo Trace supplies many barrels to brewers for that purpose. I'm sure this has shown up in the blend for lots of beers, and I get the impression that higher spice works well with bourbon barrel beer. I could be talking out of my arse on that one though. For my part, I would consider using this in my next bourbon oaked homebrew (though I still need to figure out what to do with my barleywine, which is still having carbonation issues).

So these next two may be unfair to review at the same time, but I will note that I had these on separate occasions, so there is at least that. These are both thanks to Dimitri, so once again, thanks man!

Belgian Owl - This is a 3 year old single malt whiskey made in, you guessed it, Belgium. Pours a very light yellow color. The smell is of alcohol with very little malt, maybe some hints of herbal or grassy notes that I guess could be described as slightly gin-like, as sku suggests. The taste does not lead to much, it's just like the nose, with perhaps a bit more alcohol. Mouthfeel is very boozy, not much oak or malty richness at all. As with Duvel Distilled, the barrel character seems pretty tame here... and though 3 years isn't a ton of time, it still feels like there should be more here. Overall, it's an ok dram of boozy whiskey, slightly better than Duvel Distilled because of that gin-like juniper kick, but that didn't do a whole lot for me either. C+

Whiskey Nerd Details: 92 proof, 46% ABV bottled (sampler). Drank out of a glencairn glass.

Mystery Rye - Dimitri shared very little about this one, only noting that it's a rye. Pours a very nice, deep orange color. I've only had a few rye whiskeys, but this one has a very strong rye component. Not quite as powerful as Dad's Hat, but then, this also has some oak to balance things out (at least, I think that's oak). So the nose is lots of rye and some oak and alcohol. The taste tweaks the proportions a bit, with the alcohol coming to the fore (but nowhere near as much as, say, that Duvel Distilled or Belgian Owl stuff), yet the spicy rye and oak character come through as well. Mouthfeel is a bit harsh, but it's certainly a worthy dram. I have no idea what the ABV on this is, but it feels like substantial ABV. Overall, this is decent stuff, so good work Dimitri. B

Whiskey Nerd Details: ? proof, ? ABV bottled (half sample). Drank out of a glencairn glass.

So there you have it, and don't worry, we'll get back to beer tomorrow. But I may mix things up in the coming months with some reviews of other stuff, as I've found it illuminating.

* Editor's Note: Is that really worth bragging about? My Response: I'm the worst. This has been established. But, you know, reviews on obscure Vermont beers coming soon, so don't change that dial.

Beer has four main ingredients: water, malt, hops, and yeast. There is a tremendous amount of variation in all four ingredients (water being the most unassuming, though there are examples of famous beers that get distinctive character from water, notably beers from Burton on Trent), so whenever I venture out into the world of wine or spirits, I feel a little lost. Where are all the ingredients guys!?

With bourbon, most of what people talk about is the mash bill. Bourbon has to be at least 51% corn, but there's a lot of variation in that other 49%. Rye and wheat are common, and barley is also used. While it's common to pick out yeast character in beer, it's rare to you hear someone talk about that sort of thing with bourbon. However, there has been one exception that I've found, and that's Four Roses. They have two primary mash bills... and five different yeasts. So they have 10 different recipes, all of which are blended together to make the standard "yellow label" Four Roses. Individual variants often show up in single barrel offerings or small batch blends.

What we have here today is the regular Single Barrel (i.e. not the fancy barrel-strength limited edition). Because it's a single barrel, it's got a single recipe, called OBSV. The O means it's Four Roses and the S means it's a straight bourbon (I'm sure there's more to it than this, but bourbon has to be aged in oak for 2 years before it can be called straight). Every Four Roses recipe has those two components. The B refers to one of the two mash bills, this one a bit more rye forward than the other: 60% corn, 35% rye, 5% barley. And the V refers to the yeast, which Four Roses characterizes as giving a "Delicate fruit, spicy, creamy" character. There's no age statement, but from what I gather, these are typically in the 9-10 year range. As someone new to bourbon, it's nice to see Four Roses being so open about their recipes (though I have no idea what those letters really stand for or anything). It makes the homebrewer inside me feel all tingly. Or maybe that's just the booze talking:

Four Roses Single Barrel - Pours a golden color with an orange tint and no head whatsoever (yes, this is getting a bit tiresome*). Smells like Bourbon! Nice pie spice thing going on in the nose here, cinnamon and the like, but also that underlying sweetness, caramel, vanilla and oak. Taste again hits those pie spice notes, some delicate fruitiness, and that caramel, vanilla, and oak. Mouthfeel is rich, smooth, lots of boozy heat. Overall, I like this a lot and would be super excited to try out the barrel strength version (or the barrel strength small batch stuff). B+

Bourbon Nerd Details: 100 Proof, 50% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a copita glass. Bottle is at the half-way point.

Beer Barrel Potential: Sign me up, this Bourbon has that nice balance and I suspect the classic caramel, vanilla, and oak combo punch would fit the standard BBA styles. There are several famed beers that are known to be aged in Four Roses barrels. FiftyFifty Eclipse has a Four Roses variant and Cigar City used Four Roses with their straight up BBA Hunahpu's Stout (though this year's fiasco involved rum and brandy barrels, with no straight BBA treatments). Alas, I've had neither of those. Four Roses is, of course, part of a lot of other famous barrel aging programs, like Firestone Walker's and Goose Island's (I've heard rumors of a special Four Roses variant of BCBS, which, you know, sploosh).

So there you have it. Definitely interested in trying some more Four Roses (looks like I missed the barrel strength single barrel, but I'll definitely be on the lookout for the Limited Edition Small Batch stuff in the fall...)

* Tiresome because there's no head, or because I keep making this bad joke over and over again? Take your pick! Alright, fine, it's the latter, I admit it.

It's time to play Acronym soup. Black Maple Hill, or BMH, is what's known as a NAS NDP Bourbon. I gather that these are not normally good acronyms to have attached to your Bourbon, and yet this sucker seems to be highly sought after. Let's break it down, shall we?

NAS means Non-Age Statement, meaning that the bottle does not indicate how long the bourbon was aged in barrels before being bottled. I don't want to start a holy war here, but while most higher end bourbons tend to be 6 years or older, there's a popular notion that the older a whiskey is, the better it will be. This is probably not the case (I've heard that 6-10 years is the sweet spot, but then, tastes vary, and some folks lover their old bourbon), though obviously older bourbon is more scarce and thus probably more desirable. Those in the know seem to put BMH in the 8 year or so range, but then, how would we really know? It's labeled as "Straight" bourbon, which means it's at least 2 years old, though that's not really much help. Purists don't like NAS stuff, especially when something used to have an age statement and then dropped it. There's no real corollary to beer here, as most beers aren't made to age, though I guess we could talk about packaging dates on bottles, which to beer purists can be very important for styles like an IPA (except in this case, freshest is best).

NDP means Non-Distiller Producer, which basically means that Black Maple Hill is not actually a distillery. There's a company in San Carlos, CA that pays Kentucky Bourbon Distillers (KBD) to make a blend, then slaps a (rather beautiful) label on the bottle and sells it as his own. KBD doesn't actually make the whiskey either, they just purchase stocks from actual distillers, blend it, and bottle it. The knock against NDP bourbons is that you generally have no idea where the bourbon actually came from, and in the now-booming bourbon market, supply is becoming constrained. Rumor has it that Heaven Hill supplies KBD and thus BMH, but who's to say how long that will last or if it's even true in the first place? Again, purists tend to look down on this behavior (unless the NDP does claim specific provenance, like when Jefferson's does bottlings of Stitzel-Weller juice). I liken this to the stigma attached to contract brewing in the beer world. There are, of course, exceptions (especially since craft beer has really taken off), and there's the fine line between Gypsy Brewer and Contract Brewer, but NDP seems a little more shady to me.

So when you combine NAS and NDP, you see something that's not very appealing to purists. Not that it stops people from buying the stuff. Supply is apparently constrained all over the country, and people are asking if it's the next Pappy (regularly referred to as the "best" and thus impossible to find). Me, I strolled into a PA state store and picked one up right off the shelf. I'd heard of it, and knew it was popular, but didn't really know any of the above. I suppose I was lucky too, as it's not something I've seen since then.

So why the hype? Near as I can tell, Black Maple Hill is one of the older NDPs that are still putting out bottles today, and their early stuff was supposed to be legendary. Before the current boom in whisky, distillers had a glut of unsold bourbon and so NDPs had no problem sourcing good stock. Indeed, early BMH was bottled by Julian Van Winkle III himself (for the uninitiated, Van Winkle could probably bottle his tapwater and sell it for $100 a pop), but that connection is long since gone. Perhaps the glowing aura of Van Winkle really does cast a long shadow, or maybe scarcity is what's driving demand. Oh, and people seem to really like it to. There's also that. Like I always say, it's what's in the bottle that counts. That being said, I was unimpressed. This is the opinion of an admitted newbie with little experience in the area, so take that with a huge grain of salt, but I have to admit that I preferred several other bourbons to this (and those were all much cheaper than this too).

Black Maple Hill - Apologies in advance for what I'm sure are terrible tasting notes. I don't quite have the vocabulary down and fall back on my beer tasting instincts here. Golden orange color, pretty typical Bourbon appearance. No head at all! Smells pretty corny, not much in the way of spice, just sweet corn, some caramel, maybe a hint of dark fruit, but I have to really reach for that. Taste also seems very corn forward, sweet, not much spice at all, caramel corn, maple syrup, booze. As it opens up, I can get maybe a bit more spice out of this, but still not much. Mouthfeel is relatively light, a little boozy heat, but about what you'd expect from something like this. Goes down pretty easy. Overall, I'm finding this to be rather straightforward and definitely not worth the premium price. It's certainly drinkable (as evidenced by the mostly depleted bottle) but I wouldn't recommend it unless you already know you like it. I drank this neat with no water added, but I have to admit that a good portion of the bottle was drank after I had a big imperial stout (or something like that) and I just poured a quick dram of BMH into the unwashed glass. I will say, I rather like the confluence there and think I should experiment further with blending tiny amounts of beer with whiskey to see if I can make something more interesting. But I digress. I'll give this a B-

Bourbon Nerd Details: 95 Proof, 47.5% ABV bottled (750 ml black wax, orange label). Drank out of a snifter on 3/7/14. Bottle is almost gone at this point, but the above notes are representative of earlier tastings.

Beer Barrel Potential - I have to admit that I have no real basis for answering this question, but it's an interesting one and I like engaging in wild speculation. Again, take this with a huge grain of salt. So would the barrels used for BMH be good for a secondary use with beer? The only thing I'd worry about is that the corn forward note wouldn't stand up to a big imperial stout (9% ABV stouts might work better, but still). Barleywines might work well though, and maybe something like an Old Ale or Scotch Ale would work too. To my knowledge, no beer has used BMH barrels, but given the unclear provenance of the juice, who knows? Heaven Hill is certainly a big supplier of barrels to brewers (including heavy hitters like Goose Island, Firestone Walker, and the like).

So there you have it, my first bourbon review. Next up on the bourbon train is Four Roses, see you Thursday.