GatewayRedbirds.com

stlouie_lipp wrote:

stlouie_lipp wrote:Was fortunate enough to have some 12 year Pappy Van Winkle today. I have seen the light on bourbon.

My buddy was able to score me a bottle. 2017 is off to a good start.

Very nice.

Have V-Day dinner reservations with Mrs. Swirls at Handsome Hog tonight. We've heard good things from friends and are anxious to try some of the menu items. Any recommendations from the GRB experts from their huge bourbon menu?

I kind of love Jefferson's Reserve. I see they also have the Jefferson's Reserve Very Small Batch, but I can't vouch for that one. I have no doubt it'll be good, though.

I don't like the Koval, and it's one I personally would avoid. I'm also not a big fan of the 23 year Pappy, it's way too oaky for my taste but if you like massive oak and have never had it I'd go for that. The Van Winkle 15 is my favorite of that line. Stagg Jr is so high-proof (Weller 107 too) that it's not a good choice with food.

There are several on the list that are pretty easy to get in a store: Buffalo, Basil Hayden, the Bulleits, the Evans, the FIghting [expletive], 4 Roses, the High Wests, Beams, Knob, Makers, the Turkey, the Woodford. So I'd avoid paying a premium on those in a restaurant.

I'd probably have one of the Jeffersons or one of the Elijah's before dinner, or ask the bartender to make me a Sazerac with their 6-year Sazerac rye. Then I'd move to beer or wine with my food.

Thanks for the heads up. I know I've seen a lot of those in stores, but several I've never even heard of so I figured they were more on the rare/hard to find end of the spectrum.

One of the things I found interesting on that is that they list Jack as regular whiskey (basically just the Irish and Canadian stuff) rather than with the rest of the bourbons. Does it fail one of those principle laws of whiskey/bourbon?

Also annoying is that on that same page they spell it both as whiskey and whisky. I realize both spellings are accepted, but just stick with one or the other.

Swirls wrote:Thanks for the heads up. I know I've seen a lot of those in stores, but several I've never even heard of so I figured they were more on the rare/hard to find end of the spectrum.

One of the things I found interesting on that is that they list Jack as regular whiskey (basically just the Irish and Canadian stuff) rather than with the rest of the bourbons. Does it fail one of those principle laws of whiskey/bourbon?

Also annoying is that on that same page they spell it both as whiskey and whisky. I realize both spellings are accepted, but just stick with one or the other.

http://www.thekitchn.com/whiskey-vs-whi ... -di-100476

Up until quite recently, The New York Times tackled the problem by spelling everything the American way (with an E), regardless of the spirit's country of origin. From Kentucky bourbon to Islay malts, everything was "whiskey" to The NYTimes. But then, last February, the venerable newspaper made a decisive change.

After receiving a raft of complaints from some serious Scotch whisky drinkers, the paper re-tooled its approach to follow that of many specialized spirits publications, spelling each type of spirit according to the way favored by its country of origin. So, while American-produced varieties such as bourbon, rye, and Tennessee - as well as the Irish stuff - kept their previous NYTimes-styled "whiskey" spelling, the stuff from Scotland, Canada, and Japan now would be referred to as "whisky." Makes a lot of sense, I think.

lukethedrifter wrote:

Swirls wrote:Thanks for the heads up. I know I've seen a lot of those in stores, but several I've never even heard of so I figured they were more on the rare/hard to find end of the spectrum.

One of the things I found interesting on that is that they list Jack as regular whiskey (basically just the Irish and Canadian stuff) rather than with the rest of the bourbons. Does it fail one of those principle laws of whiskey/bourbon?

Also annoying is that on that same page they spell it both as whiskey and whisky. I realize both spellings are accepted, but just stick with one or the other.

http://www.thekitchn.com/whiskey-vs-whi ... -di-100476

Up until quite recently, The New York Times tackled the problem by spelling everything the American way (with an E), regardless of the spirit's country of origin. From Kentucky bourbon to Islay malts, everything was "whiskey" to The NYTimes. But then, last February, the venerable newspaper made a decisive change.

After receiving a raft of complaints from some serious Scotch whisky drinkers, the paper re-tooled its approach to follow that of many specialized spirits publications, spelling each type of spirit according to the way favored by its country of origin. So, while American-produced varieties such as bourbon, rye, and Tennessee - as well as the Irish stuff - kept their previous NYTimes-styled "whiskey" spelling, the stuff from Scotland, Canada, and Japan now would be referred to as "whisky." Makes a lot of sense, I think.

But they lump all the Irish stuff in as whisky, also.

Generally speaking if there is an 'e' in the country of origin it is 'whiskey' and if not it is 'whisky.'

America, Ireland - whiskey
Canada, Scotland, Japan - whisky

If they are calling Irish 'whisky' they've made an error. You can call it all 'whiskey' and no one will care or you can segment it properly.

Jack does not qualify as bourbon or rye. It goes through a special filtering step that disqualifies it as true bourbon.

It's cool that they put the bourbon thing on there, because there are actual laws that make bourbon bourbon and it's nice to educate the public when they drink sometimes. Besides the mash being at least 51% corn and aged in charred new American oak, just as an aside, and not relevant to the 'is Jack bourbon?' question, there's another important thing to make something bourbon. It must be distilled to no higher than 160 proof and barreled at 125 proof or less. That's important. At 160 proof, a lot of the congeners remain after distillation--those little flavor bugs in the mash. This is unlike, say, vodka, which must be distilled in a column still to at least 190 proof, removing as many of the congeners as possible and creating a truly neutral spirit.

If you pre-empt your list with a bunch of patronizing liquor definitions, it should be better than that.

Jack does not qualify as bourbon or rye. It goes through a special filtering step that disqualifies it as true bourbon.

Charcoal filtering doesn't disqualify it. They just wanted to distinguish themselves and their process.