OT: Scotch thread

[HuskyHawk]

So I followed it up with a Nikka Coffey Grain, which was fine and as expected; and just now with a Lagavulin 16.

@HuskyHawk or @storrsroars , or anyone else with more knowledge about this: why is Lagavulin 16 so damn smooth? What do they do to soften the edges but still deliver all the goodness? I keep trying to put other things up against it and it always prevails for me at the end of the day. I am trying to understand why.

It‘s pretty simple, age and low proof. Smooth is just the absence of bold. So they keep it at 43% and those 16 years mellow everything out, even the peat. I think you would find Glen Grant 16 similarly smooth. They have dialed Laga 16 in to that profile. Most things will be younger or higher proof or both. Many people gladly pay for that. It’s why Lagavulin 12 costs more than 16. It’s way less smooth, but has bolder flavors.

 

[8893]

It‘s pretty simple, age and low proof. Smooth is just the absence of bold. So they keep it at 43% and those 16 years mellow everything out, even the peat. I think you would find Glen Grant 16 similarly smooth. They have dialed Laga 16 in to that profile. Most things will be younger or higher proof or both. Many people gladly pay for that. It’s why Lagavulin 12 costs more than 16. It’s way less smooth, but has bolder flavors.

It’s funny that the smooth of the 16 stands up even after having other bolder ones. I feel like the secondary burn of the Lagavulin 16 is what intrigues me, when it hits the back of my tongue.

 

[storrsroars]

It‘s pretty simple, age and low proof. Smooth is just the absence of bold. So they keep it at 43% and those 16 years mellow everything out, even the peat. I think you would find Glen Grant 16 similarly smooth. They have dialed Laga 16 in to that profile. Most things will be younger or higher proof or both. Many people gladly pay for that. It’s why Lagavulin 12 costs more than 16. It’s way less smooth, but has bolder flavors.

While I'm flattered @8893 would think I know the answer, I haven't really got a clue.

"Smooth is just the absence of bold"... I wouldn't go there, but that's my coffee experience talking. In coffee, "bold" typically means "overroasted", and while that's a profile sought by many, it's not seen as a positive by those within the industry, or serious coffee consumers. In coffee, "smooth" is usually a function of expert blending in addition to expert roasting, although there are certain beans (Jamaica Blue Mountain, Kona, Bali Blue Moon) that offer a much "smoother" profile than most other single origins. But there, the lack of acidity in those beans is often viewed by connoisseurs as a negative. I'd add that phenols are always present in coffee, but need to be modulated, as phenolic flavors are very undesirable, which obviously isn't the same in scotch (see Laphroaig). So whenever I try to understand scotch using what I know about chemistry and physics in coffee, I simply get more confused. Age certainly plays a role, but I'm hesitant to suggest how much as that's an area I truly don't understand as prices also indicate that aging after bottling plays a role in flavor development.

Anyway, I dislike any suggestion that "bold" is necessarily a good thing, while "smooth" seems to be leaving something on the table because "smooth" is in the eye of the beholder - tons of scotch drinkers wouldn't consider Laga 16 as "smooth". But fans of peat might.

I think the answer is as simple as "distilling is an art as much as a science". More than any other booze category, it's a rabbit hole that's too deep for me to deal with beyond, "I like this and I don't like that as much". That seemingly every distiller has numerous expressions of its whisky would indicate distillers can obviously control pretty much everything in the process to create whatever they want. So if there's a market for the various expressions, why not? Best I can tell, it all gets sold eventually.

 

[HuskyHawk]

While I'm flattered @8893 would think I know the answer, I haven't really got a clue.

"Smooth is just the absence of bold"... I wouldn't go there, but that's my coffee experience talking. In coffee, "bold" typically means "overroasted", and while that's a profile sought by many, it's not seen as a positive by those within the industry, or serious coffee consumers. In coffee, "smooth" is usually a function of expert blending in addition to expert roasting, although there are certain beans (Jamaica Blue Mountain, Kona, Bali Blue Moon) that offer a much "smoother" profile than most other single origins. But there, the lack of acidity in those beans is often viewed by connoisseurs as a negative. I'd add that phenols are always present in coffee, but need to be modulated, as phenolic flavors are very undesirable, which obviously isn't the same in scotch (see Laphroaig). So whenever I try to understand scotch using what I know about chemistry and physics in coffee, I simply get more confused. Age certainly plays a role, but I'm hesitant to suggest how much as that's an area I truly don't understand as prices also indicate that aging after bottling plays a role in flavor development.

Anyway, I dislike any suggestion that "bold" is necessarily a good thing, while "smooth" seems to be leaving something on the table because "smooth" is in the eye of the beholder - tons of scotch drinkers wouldn't consider Laga 16 as "smooth". But fans of peat might.

I think the answer is as simple as "distilling is an art as much as a science". More than any other booze category, it's a rabbit hole that's too deep for me to deal with beyond, "I like this and I don't like that as much". That seemingly every distiller has numerous expressions of its whisky would indicate distillers can obviously control pretty much everything in the process to create whatever they want. So if there's a market for the various expressions, why not? Best I can tell, it all gets sold eventually.

Oh I totally oversimplified it. In the Scotch world they can use many tools to get the profile they want. The malt, the roasting of the malt, the yeast, the distillation cuts, water/ABV%, the barrels chosen, the length of aging etc. Lagavulin and Caol Ila start with identical malt from the same roaster, roasted to the same specifications. So the profile differences come after that.

Scotch is such a diverse product. The low end (JW Red), you've got a young blend, with a lot of grain rather than malt, and not much age. It's not very "smooth", not because it's "bold' and flavorful but because it's cheap, it's a lesser product. Then you get the inexpensive base single malt expressions, like Glenfiiddich 12, Glenlivet 12 that are in ex-bourbon. Those are lower proof 40%-43% and are pretty smooth and approachable. Then you've got the same, but peated or partially peated, something like Caol Ila 12, Talisker 10, Laphoaig 10, Ardbeg 10. Or you've got upeated, but Sherry cask, like Glendronach 12, Macallan 12, Tamdhu. A few like Hazelburn and Tobermory go in a different direction, and use the cuts and yeast to give their base expression a notable funk that is quite different from something like Glenmorangie 10. Then things get wild, as you go to cask strength independent bottlings, wine/port cask stuff, etc. Even with sherry cask, Genfarclas is known to reuse those casks many times, the sherry influence is muted. Others use first fill sherry casks, and the influence is very strong. Same happens with ex-bourbon barrels. So you can create very unique things. Then was it "finished" or fully matured in sherry, wine/port? Big difference there as well. Prices will climb with all those elements plus proof. But prices also climb for super smooth and frankly bland stuff like JW Blue.

Lagavulin 16 is pretty aggressively peated, lots of smoke, but then they water it down to 43% and age it 16 years in ex-bourbon, which cuts the peat down. It's a pretty damn dialed in product, which is approachable and "smooth", yet has more flavor than a regular base unpeated Speyside.

As for aging after bottling, there isn't any real benefit. That pricing is likely just scarcity. People are interested in trying something made long ago. I mentioned trying old JW Red for example, it was far better than the modern stuff. I also had a bottle of Cognac VSOP from 1969. Tried side by side with the same product today, there is no comparison. The older one was clearly aged much longer before they bottled it.

 

[HuskyHawk]

@storrsroars @8893 If you want to go down the rabbit hole a bit, this may be interesting. It will also show why Irish, which is triple distilled, is usually so "clean" and free of some of the more unusual notes.

Single Malt Scotch Whisky Production - Distillation (diffordsguide.com)

 

[Drumguy]

Oh I totally oversimplified it. In the Scotch world they can use many tools to get the profile they want. The malt, the roasting of the malt, the yeast, the distillation cuts, water/ABV%, the barrels chosen, the length of aging etc. Lagavulin and Caol Ila start with identical malt from the same roaster, roasted to the same specifications. So the profile differences come after that.

Scotch is such a diverse product. The low end (JW Red), you've got a young blend, with a lot of grain rather than malt, and not much age. It's not very "smooth", not because it's "bold' and flavorful but because it's cheap, it's a lesser product. Then you get the inexpensive base single malt expressions, like Glenfiiddich 12, Glenlivet 12 that are in ex-bourbon. Those are lower proof 40%-43% and are pretty smooth and approachable. Then you've got the same, but peated or partially peated, something like Caol Ila 12, Talisker 10, Laphoaig 10, Ardbeg 10. Or you've got upeated, but Sherry cask, like Glendronach 12, Macallan 12, Tamdhu. A few like Hazelburn and Tobermory go in a different direction, and use the cuts and yeast to give their base expression a notable funk that is quite different from something like Glenmorangie 10. Then things get wild, as you go to cask strength independent bottlings, wine/port cask stuff, etc. Even with sherry cask, Genfarclas is known to reuse those casks many times, the sherry influence is muted. Others use first fill sherry casks, and the influence is very strong. Same happens with ex-bourbon barrels. So you can create very unique things. Then was it "finished" or fully matured in sherry, wine/port? Big difference there as well. Prices will climb with all those elements plus proof. But prices also climb for super smooth and frankly bland stuff like JW Blue.

Lagavulin 16 is pretty aggressively peated, lots of smoke, but then they water it down to 43% and age it 16 years in ex-bourbon, which cuts the peat down. It's a pretty damn dialed in product, which is approachable and "smooth", yet has more flavor than a regular base unpeated Speyside.

As for aging after bottling, there isn't any real benefit. That pricing is likely just scarcity. People are interested in trying something made long ago. I mentioned trying old JW Red for example, it was far better than the modern stuff. I also had a bottle of Cognac VSOP from 1969. Tried side by side with the same product today, there is no comparison. The older one was clearly aged much longer before they bottled it.

i've been sitting on a bottle of Lagu 16 for a few years, just since I already have so much open but I will pop it open over the holiday and give it a try. Thanks for all the details. I've gotten into wines more lately (daughter working in Napa at Domaine Caneros) and had the opportunity to visit a barrel cooperage in napa - I had no idea how much the barrel impacted flavor. Showed me how much the winemaker is an artisan and can change the flavor dramatically - actually kind of like they do with anejo tequila! I assume the same is true for scotch.

 

[HuskyHawk]

i've been sitting on a bottle of Lagu 16 for a few years, just since I already have so much open but I will pop it open over the holiday and give it a try. Thanks for all the details. I've gotten into wines more lately (daughter working in Napa at Domaine Caneros) and had the opportunity to visit a barrel cooperage in napa - I had no idea how much the barrel impacted flavor. Showed me how much the winemaker is an artisan and can change the flavor dramatically - actually kind of like they do with anejo tequila! I assume the same is true for scotch.

Good stuff, enjoy it. I poured some Lagavulin 8 yesterday, noting the younger profile + 48% gives it a different more aggressive profile. I used to enjoy visits to Domaine Carneros, it's such a beautiful winery, and is really the first winery you get to coming up from the Bay Area, taking advantage of that cool air from the bay. Cool stuff that your daughter is working there, good reasons to keep visiting!

 

[Drumguy]

Good stuff, enjoy it. I poured some Lagavulin 8 yesterday, noting the younger profile + 48% gives it a different more aggressive profile. I used to enjoy visits to Domaine Carneros, it's such a beautiful winery, and is really the first winery you get to coming up from the Bay Area, taking advantage of that cool air from the bay. Cool stuff that your daughter is working there, good reasons to keep visiting

I was never much of a sparkling wine fan before, but since she started we've been there for a tasting (I found out I like caviar, creme freise with bubbly), and I've had a few cases shipped - (she gets 50% off) AND those wines are great with fried chicken and salty things like potato chips - who knew! It's also probably the busiest wine tasting room due to both the bubbly and as you said the first winery you hit from SF.

 

[Drumguy]

I was never much of a sparkling wine fan before, but since she started we've been there for a tasting (I found out I like caviar, creme freise with bubbly), and I've had a few cases shipped - (she gets 50% off) AND those wines are great with fried chicken and salty things like potato chips - who knew! It's also probably the busiest wine tasting room due to both the bubbly and as you said the first winery you hit from SF.

Funny, went down to the cellar to open the Lagu 16 and it’s actually a bottle of Laphroaig 18! Any review?

 

[HuskyHawk]

Funny, went down to the cellar to open the Lagu 16 and it’s actually a bottle of Laphroaig 18! Any review?

That's a pricey bottle now. Discontinued in 2016. You've actually found one I have haven't had. Should be quite good. The age will mute the medicinal phenols a bit. All ex-bourbon cask and 48%.

 

[8893]

Cocktails I wouldn't waste the more unique expressions. It's sort of just a smoke on/smoke off choice. The default cocktail mezcal for smoke is Vida from Del Maguey. You can certainly sip it, but I wouldn't choose it for that. Slightly smoky, Fidencio Classico. For minimal smoke, more fruity agave profile, pick an Espadin (type of Agave) or an Ensemble (usually Espadin + something else). Bozal Ensemble would be a good very low smoke option. All three of those are widely available.

I dabble, but know some guys who do way more than that. Essentially you've got different types of agave, and you've got specific mezcaleros. Most of the brands, are bottling mezcal made by a specific person, from a type of agave (or more than one). Some of these agaves can give you very unique profiles, including green pepper, tropical fruits, flint/stone/clay, really a very very diverse spirit. I'm partial to some stuff from Vago all the Espadin's are good, Ensemble en Barro is really good. This Espadin from Koch is good, I just poured myself some as a reminder. Fidencio Classico is a good starter that you can sip or put in cocktails.

Note: don't sip these in a Glencairn. They really need an open top glass. They use copitas. I ordered a few handmade ones on Etsy. Some lady in Colorado makes them.

So I have checked a couple of my usual stops for the Fidencio Classico with no luck, so tonight I settled on a bottle of Xicaro Silver Mezcal, which is a Maguey Espadin, but it said it was traditionally smoky and it is. I made a couple cocktails with it and I like it a lot.

 

[HuskyHawk]

So I have checked a couple of my usual stops for the Fidencio Classico with no luck, so tonight I settled on a bottle of Xicaro Silver Mezcal, which is a Maguey Espadin, but it said it was traditionally smoky and it is. I made a couple cocktails with it and I like it a lot.

That's not considered a good one, a mixer not a sipper (and Vida a better mixer). So if you like it perhaps you can find an upgrade for the next one. It's one of those categories that some liquor stores don't carry, or if they do, they carry the low end stuff. Glad it's working for you!

 

[8893]

That's not considered a good one, a mixer not a sipper (and Vida a better mixer). So if you like it perhaps you can find an upgrade for the next one. It's one of those categories that some liquor stores don't carry, or if they do, they carry the low end stuff. Glad it's working for you!

I got it as a mixer and not a sipper because we are on vacation next week and I have some interesting bitters and flavored syrups for fun cocktails that I want to experiment with.

I wanted one with some smoke, and this was the only one they carried that mentioned having a smoky profile. They carried around a half dozen different ones but I believe they were all Espadins. Five of them were between $35 and $40 (including the one I bought) and one, Dos Hombres--which I have seen in most stores--was around $60. They had the Vida and it was actually a few dollars cheaper than the Xicaro, and it didn't mention smoke among the flavor profile. The Dos Hombres looks like it is more expensive only because some movie stars are behind it, like a Casamigos wannabe, but that was just my take from the aisle obviously.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I got it as a mixer and not a sipper because we are on vacation next week and I have some interesting bitters and flavored syrups for fun cocktails that I want to experiment with.

I wanted one with some smoke, and this was the only one they carried that mentioned having a smoky profile. They carried around a half dozen different ones but I believe they were all Espadins. Five of them were between $35 and $40 (including the one I bought) and one, Dos Hombres--which I have seen in most stores--was around $60. They had the Vida and it was actually a few dollars cheaper than the Xicaro, and it didn't mention smoke among the flavor profile. The Dos Hombres looks like it is more expensive only because some movie stars are behind it, like a Casamigos wannabe, but that was just my take from the aisle obviously.

The Vida is definitely smoky. It's the most common bar Mezcal for cocktails. Casamigos Mezcal is a definite no.

On the Scotch front, I'm glad I bought my Springbank 15. I saw another one for $99 at a different store and I may grab it as a backup.

 

[8893]

The Vida is definitely smoky. It's the most common bar Mezcal for cocktails. Casamigos Mezcal is a definite no.

I was on vacation last week and have been experimenting a lot. The Xicaro is gone and I have to say that it is by far the smokiest one I've bought and I quite enjoyed it as a mixer because of that.

I went to the best local packy in the area where we were in RI and my daughter said that the Yuu Baal Joven they carried was one of two mezcals that they use in the mixed drinks at the place where she works--the other being Fidencio Classico, which they did not carry--so I bought the Yuu Baal and have also been enjoying that as a mixer.

Then back at home on Saturday I picked up a bottle of Bozal Ensamble and that has been the nicest one I've bought so far, again using as a mixer, not a sipper.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I was on vacation last week and have been experimenting a lot. The Xicaro is gone and I have to say that it is by far the smokiest one I've bought and I quite enjoyed it as a mixer because of that.

I went to the best local packy in the area where we were in RI and my daughter said that the Yuu Baal Joven they carried was one of two mezcals that they use in the mixed drinks at the place where she works--the other being Fidencio Classico, which they did not carry--so I bought the Yuu Baal and have also been enjoying that as a mixer.

Then back at home on Saturday I picked up a bottle of Bozal Ensamble and that has been the nicest one I've bought so far, again using as a mixer, not a sipper.

I told you it was a rabbit hole. Glad you're enjoying them! Have you tried sipping the Bozal? That's a legit sipper worthy bottle.

 

[8893]

I told you it was a rabbit hole. Glad you're enjoying them! Have you tried sipping the Bozal? That's a legit sipper worthy bottle.

No, but I plan to. Just wasn't feeling it at cocktail time; and now I need to detox for a few days!

 

[Drumguy]

No, but I plan to. Just wasn't feeling it at cocktail time; and now I need to detox for a few days!

I haven't had a chance yet to try the Bozal I picked up in NH (I left it up there at our place, so its waiting for a couple of weeks) but I did pick up another tequila - the Cava de Oro extra anejo clear for $138 at the NH Merrimack store. Having some of that tonight!

 

[Umami Zen]

I haven't had a chance yet to try the Bozal I picked up in NH (I left it up there at our place, so its waiting for a couple of weeks) but I did pick up another tequila - the Cava de Oro extra anejo clear for $138 at the NH Merrimack store. Having some of that tonight!

Serious Tequila question.. What is the difference between extra Anejo clear and Cristalino?

 

[Drumguy]

Serious Tequila question.. What is the difference between extra Anejo clear and Cristalino?

I think it' the same thing but I am definitely no tequila expert. Probably a marketing term.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I think it' the same thing but I am definitely no tequila expert. Probably a marketing term.

I found this. Seems to be the same thing. I'm not sure there's a point to it really. What Exactly Is Cristalino Tequila and What Should You Drink? (liquor.com)

 

[Drumguy]

I found this. Seems to be the same thing. I'm not sure there's a point to it really. What Exactly Is Cristalino Tequila and What Should You Drink? (liquor.com)

I'd agree from what I read. Looks like a marketing thing going on. I only picked up the clear version as they didn't have the regular in that brand! Still mighty tasty!

 

[Umami Zen]

I'd agree from what I read. Looks like a marketing thing going on. I only picked up the clear version as they didn't have the regular in that brand! Still mighty tasty!

My question was strictly out of curiosity.. It seemed to me that it might be the same beverage.. Just different branding/marketing spins .

I enjoy this brand as a summer alternative to extra Anejo with the darker color. Probably psychological but seems more refreshing to the taste.

Always glad to have more Tequila sippers on board.. Whether Mezcal or other expressions of the standard variations.

My personal experiences are not as varied as some other BYers. .Hence my question.

 

[Drumguy]

My question was strictly out of curiosity.. It seemed to me that it might be the same beverage.. Just different branding/marketing spins .

I enjoy this brand as a summer alternative to extra Anejo with the darker color. Probably psychological but seems more refreshing to the taste.

Always glad to have more Tequila sippers on board.. Whether Mezcal or other expressions of the standard variations.

My personal experiences are not as varied as some other BYers. .Hence my question.

i'm a sipping tequila and mezcal newbie myself. I opened the Cava de oro cristiline last night and found it tastes much more like alchohol and less complex than the same brand's dark extra anejo. It was almost vodka like as oposed to vanilla, caramal, baking spice that I got from the dark version. I don't know if that's charactoristic of other cristalines, maybe HH knows?

 

[HuskyHawk]

i'm a sipping tequila and mezcal newbie myself. I opened the Cava de oro cristiline last night and found it tastes much more like alchohol and less complex than the same brand's dark extra anejo. It was almost vodka like as oposed to vanilla, caramal, baking spcie that I got from the dark version. I don't know if that's charactoristic of other cristalines, maybe HH knows?

Never had one (they don't make sense to me). All they are doing is filtering them through activated charcoal. That strips the color. It also strips some other barrel aging character as well (both spice and vanilla come from the barrel). The result would probably be more mild overall. I would guess somewhat fruitier. Some people don't like the wood notes, especially in a mixer.