I teach cooking in high school. I really pride myself on providing solid, traditional technique and solid recipes for specific reasons. But they're teenagers with a teenager's palate. It gets tough sometimes. So subjective and often whiney.
Its wild that the more I learn about whiskey, the more i realize that my experience with homebrewing set me up to understand ~50-60% of the whiskey process 😆. Always fun to learn something new and build on the past
I found that the most important thing I did in evaluating a drink - ALL of them - is NOT to ask myself if I like it or not, but rather WHAT AM I TASTING? I can then open my mind to explore the drink more openly, and then liking or not liking develops from there. In fact the biggest piss-off I have now with a drink is when the character of the drink has gotten so plaid that the only question you CAN ask is do I like it or NOT. Likewise my biggest turn-on is not being totally sure WHAT I think of the stuff. Then the adventure begins
Daniel's coming after the whiskey tubers... uh oh! I really appreciate that you try and get people to think outside the box and be independent; definitely goes against the algorithm but it would seem that's not your priority, unlike many others. Respect that!
i used to be very harsh toward Jim beam products but I have come to the place just lime you were speaking of where just because I dont like it does not mean that it's bad. thanks for the video .
Back almost three years ago, when I was just starting out, I came across you and Rex saying, "The best whisky is the whiskey you like, the way you like to drink it." That principle has stuck with me, and helped govern how I talk about whisky and react to what others say. 7:33 Why would bananas or buttered popcorn be faults? I frequently get bananas on the nose, and I like that note; I've not gotten buttered popcorn, but I love that aroma, and would enjoy it in a whiskey. To be frank, Daniel, I think that classing those notes as faults violates the principle you articulated earlier in the video, to the effect that tastes differ and disliking something about a whiskey doesn't make that whisky faulty.
Many people seem to think it makes them cool to hate things. It's a whole lot cooler to full throated endorse the things you love and be happy when others around you feel the same about things that you aren't so crazy about. Let everyone have their joy in life as long as it's not hurting anyone else.
There is a small Wine and Spirits store in Jackson Heights Queens, where my son and his family live. We visit him two to three times a year and I visit that store, Table Wine, almost the first thing after I get to my son's apartment. On my most recent trip, two weeks ago, the owner gave me a sample of this whiskey. I ended up buying a bottle. I liked it. (By the way, I talked the owner into stocking Balcones Lineage. He had some other Balcones products in stock and I told him about what a great value Lineage is. I bought his last bottle this last trip as well.)
I totally agree with you buddy but I would like to add that my palate can change on a daily basis and as such a bourbon that seems just 'meh' on one day can really hit the spot on a totally different day ! Obviously there's exceptions to that rule, I'm thinking here of the cheaper cocktail only bourbon expressions (JD#7, JB white label, etc.) but generally anything above the $30 mark sits well with me on differing days. I've been fooled before, fallen in love with a bourbon one day and been shocked the next day when it failed to hit the spot and then a week later it has surprised me by being better than it was the first time around, I've had this with BT, 1792 SB, MM, WT101, EC SB and even ER ! Sometimes I think it's a combination of a change in palate and your mindset on any particular day that can influence your opinion on any whisky. But to add to what you have already said, to judge a whisky mixed with our own infallibility is circumspect to begin with and combined with the knowledge that we don't know the whole story behind the process of fermentation, distilling, making the cuts and ageing is some what shallow and self opinionated to say the least. I totally agree with your motto of "Drink what you like, the way you like it" but would add the caveat that you don't need to 'diss' everything else in the process !
One example I have of a banana note that I think is intentional and I personally like is Stranahan’s. Also, I have strong opinions against Laws whiskey, mainly because it’s too floral and either tastes like soap or how a field of wild grass and lavender smells, but I understand there are people who really like that. It’s all a matter of taste, and yours will be vastly different to someone else’s. Some don’t like bourbon because of the dusty, mealy note you’ll typically get from corn while others can’t get enough of it. It’s all subjective, and that’s why rule #1 is “The best kind of whiskey is what you like to drink the way you like to drink it.” The customer’s always right in matters of taste after all.
I love this. As a Huge fan of Colorado Whiskey, I hear it with Distillery 291 and Laws Bourbon. But I want to clarify with them, it's just not your thing. And that's ok. Thank you again for another great conversation 😊. You make the world better every Dram 🥃
If buttery popcorn note is a fault then i love faulty whiskey. I own a few whiskeys that leave a buttery taste and smell. I also have a Calumet 12yr at 94proof and i love it. Cheers
There's an important line here between criticizing people and criticizing a product. I agree that calling something a money grab is an assumption about motivations when it is asserted without evidence. But I also hope that a whiskey reviewer is willing to tell me when they think that a bottle is a bad value in the marketplace because other products deliver more at a lower price. That's an opinion, not a fact, but I look to reviewers for their honest opinions.
I had a very similar reaction to this Calumet! I expected so much more with an 8/15 year blend and it was surprisingly dull to me. And not just because of the proof - I think if you lined it up with other 80-90 proof whiskies in a blind, it would fall to the back simply because there's nothing that separates it. I've heard other Calumets are very good, but I thought this would be a good way to judge the profile of the lineup in a cheaper offering but even after drinking the entire bottle I couldn't give you a defining characteristic.
This is one of those videos that needed to be made. It's kind of a red flag for me when someone has an insulting take on a bottle or really most things made by someone else. I know people who make things and put them into the world for a living and that thoroughly changes how I evaluate and speak about things.
Daniel, I actually have had the issue of people misinterpreting what I mean when I say something doesn't taste good "to me." It is especially annoying when I even call out what I appreciate about the whiskeys I try that I don't care for the taste of. I think I assume that if I taste a whiskey and don't like it, it's just not for me and not a bad product. Case in point, smoky scotches taste rubbery to me, though since American single malts have helped me break that flavor apart into the smoke and the brine, so maybe in the future, Islay scotches won't taste like rubber to me
One of my favorite whiskies is New Riff rye. I poured a glass of it recently and it smelled like nail polish remover so I dumped the whole bottle out thinking it was flawed because I know if a wine smells like nail polish remover, it is faulty.
My first and only bottle of Glenfiddich 12 was nail polish. Used it up in mixers and have never bought another bottle. Still can't figure out why it carries such high accolade. I did land on Glenfiddich 15 though and liked it MUCH better.
For some reason this made me think of Wild Turkey Forgiven. An accidental batched of straight bourbon and straight rye. I imagine so many people freaked out and didn't like it, but I enjoyed it very much. I'm trying to get into the habit of saying "This isn't to my taste" for any whiskey I don't seem to like. Then I think of others I know who might like it OR make it part of a sample pack for others to try. If it made it into a bottle, someone out there is sure to enjoy it. 🖖😎🥃
One of the first higher end whiskies I tried tasted like buttered popcorn, specifically buttered popcorn jelly bellies, and I really liked it. But I haven’t found that note in that whiskey sense. I wonder if that was faulty batch.
My wife drinks Gin.. Do I like it No, can I appreciate the difference in brands and bottles yes, I drink Whisky does she like Whisky No can she appreciate the difference between brands and bottles yes. It's a matter of taste just because I don't like Gin is Gin bad No because she doesn't like Whisky is Whisky bad No.. find what you like and appreciate what others like. Dram on Whisky Wizard 🥃🧙♂️🥃
Daniel, What might cause a strong petrol flavor in a whiskey? I have a bottle of Glendalough, that's been a real chameleon! Every time I try it, it's different. The first glass was sweet, fuller bodied, and had the classic Irish profile. Next one was completely different- this odd petrol- like flavor dominated, and the sweetness was less pronounced. I ended up adding some ginger ale to the glass. The next 2 tries, that flavor was still there, but not as pronounced. I don't DISlike it, it was just jarring- and not at all what I expected. I'm kinda interested what flavors the next glass will bring, lol.
Never been a huge fan of bourbon or Canadian whisky as they're both too sweet or candied to me. Having said that, just because I am not a fan doesn't mean it's a bad whiskey. I'm a big Laphroaig fan but my sister-in-law says it's nasty to her. To each their own. Nice video!
I'm willing and able to accept that we definitely need to reframe critique language to consider the human factor behind creative businesses that sell art, consumable and otherwise (although admittedly the bigger and less accountable to the consumer the business, the less grace I find myself willing to extend in a critique). I favor the idea of giving personal context or biases within reviews because it gives that review more weight and relevance to the person consuming the knowledge, just like a product label. "I do/don't like this for the price point" is good, but saying "also, I'm comfortable justifying the cost range of A-B on this kind of product" is specific context and I would argue a better review because if a product cost more than the comfort zone, then the reviewer might have a different or more stringent set of criteria for their conclusion of "I like/don't like it" for a consumer to be mindful of. Similarly if a reviewer said "I typically don't like things with cherry notes" and then they said "but I like this even though there are cherry notes" it makes the consumer sit up a little and go "okay, maybe there's something extra here." Lastly, I think there's something to be said for a constructively critical review when someone balances the intent of the artist(s) before saying something is faulty when an artist's statement or a marketing statement is given, like when you mention the process of fermentation: did the artist/business execute what they say they were aiming to do and, depending on the transparency of the operation, in the way they said that they would do it? Does that mean that everyone's efforts along the way were wasted if the outcome didn't match the intent? No, but it does give an objective base to start asking questions about ethics, sourcing, local impact, etc like "did something go awry in the process that altered the outcome, or was there misrepresentation of intent - by mistake or purposeful - that misled reviewers or consumers? And if on purpose, why did that misrepresentation occur?"
I'm like that with west cork whiskey, tried the bourbon finish and it was okay just took time to open up. Got the cask strength you and Rex loved and it was meh to me then I tried the first bottling of their own whiskey they made a 5 year old single pot still and it's grassy green, really young whiskey and just not to my taste. Someone out there likes their whiskey but it is not for me
Dewars White label has a heavy medicinal/band-aid flavor to me that I really don't like; it happens to be an uncle's favorite for precisely that note. We've long agreed that we just have different palates and still introduce new bottles to each other often...careful to avoid the profile that we have agreed that we don't share. I brought a bottle back from Scotland last year (bought blind, can't recall the brand/distillery) that had that same strong band-aid taste and happily "shared" the whole bottle right into his basement bar.
Daniel, on the subject of this video I had a question. From one bottle to next of the same type and brand of whiskey I had the pallet change to have a vegetal grassy note. Is that a fault or something else going on?
Never have I ever had a whiskey so banana-forward than at Southern Tier distillery. They are pretty well known for their flavorful beers though, so instead of a fault, it seemed to fit their credo pretty spot-on and I was perfectly fine with that. And no, it wasn't one of their "flavored" offerings.
There are quite a few whiskies that I tasted and thought: "This is a good whisky! But I don't like it!" However, even not making Whisky myself, I think I can by now judge whether a whisky is worth its price. And some prices are beyond the pale. That's a fact. However, getting emotional about it doesn't help. Better just drink some good stuff you can afford and be happy about that.
There is definitely bad whiskey that is objectively faulty, and I have one example though I can't remember the brand (which is probably for the better since it's been awhile and I don't need to trash the brand for one bad experience). A friend was doing a whiskey tasting and brought a regional whiskey that a friend of his recommended. We all tried it at the same time, and everyone's nose curled up. No one liked it, and it had a very unnatural flavor. Someone said it tasted like a car tire smells, and when we got to looking at the cap on the bottle it was made with a black rubber. I grabbed the cap and took a whiff of it and it smelled exactly like the rubber material I get at my workplace. That mistake with the cap material tainted the whole bottle and turned all of us off of that brand.
This is probably a “that’s the exception, not the rule” thing, but sometimes being “faulty” is the point. For example, my parents did a subscription to an ice cream of the month club, and on April 1 they said their latest flavor was Thanksgiving Leftovers, so ice cream with mashed potatoes, frozen gravy, and stuffing in it, and it was clearly meant as an April Fool’s joke the company played on their customers. Another example that comes to mind is how the potato chip came to be, where the guy intentionally cut what was supposed to be basically a French fry so thin it couldn’t be eaten with a fork in hopes of annoying a customer who always complained about his “chips” being too thick. The customer ended up enjoying the product the guy essentially designed to fail
Also while clicking on this video I couldn’t help but hear a voice in my head saying “the best kind of whiskey is whatever you like to drink however you like to drink it.” Can’t for the life of me remember who that was
Not a big fan of Elijah Craig but it's not like I would say it's horrible. Just thin and kinda soft. But very popular so what do I know ? I know I can't determine what someone else likes . Cheers !
I won't review a whiskey til I taste it so I don't express a dislike for it. Taste is subjective. I know that being a picky eater that there are things that I don't like that most people do.
Yes, hyper hopped beer is a fault, not because the brewers made a mistake, but because many people got on the bandwagon and bought those hop bombs. Ultimately we all know MY taste is superior and the fault lies with all those who disagree with me. Life would be so much easier would people just realize that. (Twirls mustache while stroking a Persian cat.)
I PERSONALLY don’t like bells 🔔 Whisky 🥃 I just think it’s to hot for me PERSONALLY! I don’t think it’s a all round bad product there’s a lot of people that love it that’s just preference right?
this is the same approach i use with music. For me there isn't a "greatest of all time " or "who is the best " cause everything is subjective, i prefer to say "this is my favourite artrist " cause what is good for me can be shit for everybody else.
Is there a fault that comes through as model airplane glue? And now I just realized that that smell may not be something a person recognizes unless they made model airplanes in the 60s. Apparently the glue sniffing craze made a change in a business model and that glue is no more, at least in a quick google search.
Faults can show up at many stages of the process. One that bothers me because it is so preventable is cork taint. It is common in wine but can occur in anything that is sealed with a natural cork. A tainted cork has within it a nasty chemical that imparts a note of moldy, wet cardboard into the booze in the bottle. There is a very easy way to prevent this. Stop using natural corks. Screw caps are easier to deal with and, if properly designed, seal the bottle better anyway. In the wine industry, they have even come up with screw caps that allow just a little air in to mimic the long term aging process that results from air slowly penetrating through corks. This still needs time to see how it works over the long term, so maybe natural corks still have a place in bottles of wine that are meant to be laid down for decades, but they no longer serve a useful purpose elsewhere. It is only tradition and habit that causes them to remain popular. Every time I taste booze that has been tainted by a bad cork, I want to throw this tradition out the window. I have learned over the years that it is good to step back from my personal preferences and evaluate booze (or anything else) from a distance. Of course, I will be drawn to those that match my personal taste, but my personal taste isn't necessarily going to translate to other people. Furthermore, it is not right to lambaste a product simply because it does not match my subjective standard of taste. To be truly worthy of scorn, a product must be a failure in some way, and that judgment must be backed up by evidence that is not solely dependent on my personal taste. Thinking in terms of success/failure rather than the vague notions of good/bad is helpful here. When considering booze, I ask the following questions. What are the stylistic expectations, given the category of booze, the region where it is made, and the producer's house style? Does it deviate from these expectations, and are the deviations justified? (This can still be highly subjective.) Is the booze in the bottle consistent with information on the label? Are there faults in the product? (Again, as Daniel noted, this can be subjective, though the tell tale signs of cork taint are about as objective as this can get.) I try to figure out what I think the product is trying to be and then evaluate it on how successful it is in getting there. This way, if I'm with someone else, and their taste is different from mine, maybe I can recommend something to them that I might not personally enjoy but that I think is successful and I think might work for them. I have a friend who is getting started on whisky. She isn't used to spirits in general, so easy going, low strength whisky is working for her. I'm a proof hound, and I like the concentration and intensity of flavor found in cask strength spirits, so I often find minimum strength spirits to be too watered down. (Still, I find them valuable as warm-up drinks, so even for me, they have their uses.) So I have been recommending to her whiskies that I wouldn't ordinarily seek out. We were in a bar, and Basil Hayden was sitting on the shelf. I immediately recognized that it would be a perfect one for her to try. I was right - she loved it and later went out and bought a bottle. It's great that there are different whiskies for different people. Even if something isn't precisely to my taste, I can still appreciate it if the quality is there.
Ok Daniel, calling a whiskey cat piss is off the table, but would it be out of bounds to call a Calumet product horse piss if warranted? Asking for science.
I'm with Daniel on some of this. But I'm sorry making moral jidgement calls based on decisions people make is not BS. It is indeed how that works lol. If not for our decisions & actions what can we be judged on?
Sign of the times. Critics in many arenas are calling every new thing the best or the worst. You have to make bold statements if you want to get noticed. Speak nothing of quality, is it good or bad?
Let’s face it a truely bad/faulty whisky will rarely make it to market. The rare times it does make it to market it won’t last long as word will get around & peope won’t buy it in the long term
Objectively I feel judging a whiskey on the neck pour is not the best idea. I find almost every type of whiskey that I've tasted changes, typically improving, after about 6 ounces have been consumed. I also see reviews of whiskey-tubers comparing a neck pour of a new release to last years offering that's been open for a year, which I think is an error lol!
Someone is 100lbs overweight and for a year put all their passion and energy into loosing weight. Then, at the end of the year, they lost 5lbs. Am i supposed to say: good job, keep working, or that's bll sht for a year's effort? I don't know that I've tasted any really awful bourbon, but I've had some horrible whiskey and down right gross tequila. I don't know how much passion went into the bad ones, but no matter how much it was it didn't make the product good.
The world needs to hear this. Not just the whisky world. Thanks!
I hear this all the time in the food world - Nothing inherently wrong with the recipe... It just wasn't to your taste.
I teach cooking in high school. I really pride myself on providing solid, traditional technique and solid recipes for specific reasons. But they're teenagers with a teenager's palate. It gets tough sometimes. So subjective and often whiney.
Its wild that the more I learn about whiskey, the more i realize that my experience with homebrewing set me up to understand ~50-60% of the whiskey process 😆. Always fun to learn something new and build on the past
I found that the most important thing I did in evaluating a drink - ALL of them - is NOT to ask myself if I like it or not, but rather WHAT AM I TASTING? I can then open my mind to explore the drink more openly, and then liking or not liking develops from there.
In fact the biggest piss-off I have now with a drink is when the character of the drink has gotten so plaid that the only question you CAN ask is do I like it or NOT.
Likewise my biggest turn-on is not being totally sure WHAT I think of the stuff. Then the adventure begins
Daniel's coming after the whiskey tubers... uh oh! I really appreciate that you try and get people to think outside the box and be independent; definitely goes against the algorithm but it would seem that's not your priority, unlike many others. Respect that!
This was absolutely wonderful. What a human way to discuss the knee jerk reactions and taking-for-granted we all have to any number of things
i used to be very harsh toward Jim beam products but I have come to the place just lime you were speaking of where just because I dont like it does not mean that it's bad. thanks for the video .
Back almost three years ago, when I was just starting out, I came across you and Rex saying, "The best whisky is the whiskey you like, the way you like to drink it." That principle has stuck with me, and helped govern how I talk about whisky and react to what others say.
7:33 Why would bananas or buttered popcorn be faults? I frequently get bananas on the nose, and I like that note; I've not gotten buttered popcorn, but I love that aroma, and would enjoy it in a whiskey. To be frank, Daniel, I think that classing those notes as faults violates the principle you articulated earlier in the video, to the effect that tastes differ and disliking something about a whiskey doesn't make that whisky faulty.
Many people seem to think it makes them cool to hate things. It's a whole lot cooler to full throated endorse the things you love and be happy when others around you feel the same about things that you aren't so crazy about. Let everyone have their joy in life as long as it's not hurting anyone else.
Dickel is a perfect example of that. It’s like it’s groupthink to hate on Didkel for the mineral note.
There is a small Wine and Spirits store in Jackson Heights Queens, where my son and his family live. We visit him two to three times a year and I visit that store, Table Wine, almost the first thing after I get to my son's apartment. On my most recent trip, two weeks ago, the owner gave me a sample of this whiskey. I ended up buying a bottle. I liked it. (By the way, I talked the owner into stocking Balcones Lineage. He had some other Balcones products in stock and I told him about what a great value Lineage is. I bought his last bottle this last trip as well.)
“The best whiskey is the whiskey you like to drink, the way you like to drink it.”
Welcome all Whiskey Vaulters to Story Time with Daniel (who needs to go to a horse race as they are a fun time)!
Daniel, I’d love to see you try calumet 16. I love it and it’s pretty easy to find.
I totally agree with you buddy but I would like to add that my palate can change on a daily basis and as such a bourbon that seems just 'meh' on one day can really hit the spot on a totally different day ! Obviously there's exceptions to that rule, I'm thinking here of the cheaper cocktail only bourbon expressions (JD#7, JB white label, etc.) but generally anything above the $30 mark sits well with me on differing days. I've been fooled before, fallen in love with a bourbon one day and been shocked the next day when it failed to hit the spot and then a week later it has surprised me by being better than it was the first time around, I've had this with BT, 1792 SB, MM, WT101, EC SB and even ER ! Sometimes I think it's a combination of a change in palate and your mindset on any particular day that can influence your opinion on any whisky.
But to add to what you have already said, to judge a whisky mixed with our own infallibility is circumspect to begin with and combined with the knowledge that we don't know the whole story behind the process of fermentation, distilling, making the cuts and ageing is some what shallow and self opinionated to say the least. I totally agree with your motto of "Drink what you like, the way you like it" but would add the caveat that you don't need to 'diss' everything else in the process !
One example I have of a banana note that I think is intentional and I personally like is Stranahan’s.
Also, I have strong opinions against Laws whiskey, mainly because it’s too floral and either tastes like soap or how a field of wild grass and lavender smells, but I understand there are people who really like that. It’s all a matter of taste, and yours will be vastly different to someone else’s. Some don’t like bourbon because of the dusty, mealy note you’ll typically get from corn while others can’t get enough of it.
It’s all subjective, and that’s why rule #1 is “The best kind of whiskey is what you like to drink the way you like to drink it.” The customer’s always right in matters of taste after all.
I love this. As a Huge fan of Colorado Whiskey, I hear it with Distillery 291 and Laws Bourbon. But I want to clarify with them, it's just not your thing. And that's ok.
Thank you again for another great conversation 😊. You make the world better every Dram 🥃
Great video. And, yes! Be kind. We are all human. We are all connected.
If buttery popcorn note is a fault then i love faulty whiskey. I own a few whiskeys that leave a buttery taste and smell. I also have a Calumet 12yr at 94proof and i love it. Cheers
Yep.
Respect-Love-Support
I had a Calumet 15 106 proof that I greatly enjoyed.
There's an important line here between criticizing people and criticizing a product. I agree that calling something a money grab is an assumption about motivations when it is asserted without evidence. But I also hope that a whiskey reviewer is willing to tell me when they think that a bottle is a bad value in the marketplace because other products deliver more at a lower price. That's an opinion, not a fact, but I look to reviewers for their honest opinions.
I think that's an important and true distinction
I had a very similar reaction to this Calumet! I expected so much more with an 8/15 year blend and it was surprisingly dull to me. And not just because of the proof - I think if you lined it up with other 80-90 proof whiskies in a blind, it would fall to the back simply because there's nothing that separates it. I've heard other Calumets are very good, but I thought this would be a good way to judge the profile of the lineup in a cheaper offering but even after drinking the entire bottle I couldn't give you a defining characteristic.
This is one of those videos that needed to be made. It's kind of a red flag for me when someone has an insulting take on a bottle or really most things made by someone else. I know people who make things and put them into the world for a living and that thoroughly changes how I evaluate and speak about things.
Daniel, I actually have had the issue of people misinterpreting what I mean when I say something doesn't taste good "to me." It is especially annoying when I even call out what I appreciate about the whiskeys I try that I don't care for the taste of.
I think I assume that if I taste a whiskey and don't like it, it's just not for me and not a bad product.
Case in point, smoky scotches taste rubbery to me, though since American single malts have helped me break that flavor apart into the smoke and the brine, so maybe in the future, Islay scotches won't taste like rubber to me
A true thought concept that plays out in other aspects of real life! BTW, I agree with the overly hoppy beer comment. But I just say its not my style!
One of my favorite whiskies is New Riff rye. I poured a glass of it recently and it smelled like nail polish remover so I dumped the whole bottle out thinking it was flawed because I know if a wine smells like nail polish remover, it is faulty.
My first and only bottle of Glenfiddich 12 was nail polish. Used it up in mixers and have never bought another bottle. Still can't figure out why it carries such high accolade.
I did land on Glenfiddich 15 though and liked it MUCH better.
For some reason this made me think of Wild Turkey Forgiven. An accidental batched of straight bourbon and straight rye. I imagine so many people freaked out and didn't like it, but I enjoyed it very much.
I'm trying to get into the habit of saying "This isn't to my taste" for any whiskey I don't seem to like.
Then I think of others I know who might like it OR make it part of a sample pack for others to try.
If it made it into a bottle, someone out there is sure to enjoy it.
🖖😎🥃
One of the first higher end whiskies I tried tasted like buttered popcorn, specifically buttered popcorn jelly bellies, and I really liked it. But I haven’t found that note in that whiskey sense. I wonder if that was faulty batch.
My wife drinks Gin.. Do I like it No, can I appreciate the difference in brands and bottles yes, I drink Whisky does she like Whisky No can she appreciate the difference between brands and bottles yes. It's a matter of taste just because I don't like Gin is Gin bad No because she doesn't like Whisky is Whisky bad No.. find what you like and appreciate what others like. Dram on Whisky Wizard 🥃🧙♂️🥃
Daniel,
What might cause a strong petrol flavor in a whiskey? I have a bottle of Glendalough, that's been a real chameleon! Every time I try it, it's different. The first glass was sweet, fuller bodied, and had the classic Irish profile. Next one was completely different- this odd petrol- like flavor dominated, and the sweetness was less pronounced. I ended up adding some ginger ale to the glass.
The next 2 tries, that flavor was still there, but not as pronounced. I don't DISlike it, it was just jarring- and not at all what I expected.
I'm kinda interested what flavors the next glass will bring, lol.
Never been a huge fan of bourbon or Canadian whisky as they're both too sweet or candied to me. Having said that, just because I am not a fan doesn't mean it's a bad whiskey. I'm a big Laphroaig fan but my sister-in-law says it's nasty to her. To each their own. Nice video!
George dickel loves this episode 😂
I'm willing and able to accept that we definitely need to reframe critique language to consider the human factor behind creative businesses that sell art, consumable and otherwise (although admittedly the bigger and less accountable to the consumer the business, the less grace I find myself willing to extend in a critique). I favor the idea of giving personal context or biases within reviews because it gives that review more weight and relevance to the person consuming the knowledge, just like a product label. "I do/don't like this for the price point" is good, but saying "also, I'm comfortable justifying the cost range of A-B on this kind of product" is specific context and I would argue a better review because if a product cost more than the comfort zone, then the reviewer might have a different or more stringent set of criteria for their conclusion of "I like/don't like it" for a consumer to be mindful of. Similarly if a reviewer said "I typically don't like things with cherry notes" and then they said "but I like this even though there are cherry notes" it makes the consumer sit up a little and go "okay, maybe there's something extra here." Lastly, I think there's something to be said for a constructively critical review when someone balances the intent of the artist(s) before saying something is faulty when an artist's statement or a marketing statement is given, like when you mention the process of fermentation: did the artist/business execute what they say they were aiming to do and, depending on the transparency of the operation, in the way they said that they would do it? Does that mean that everyone's efforts along the way were wasted if the outcome didn't match the intent? No, but it does give an objective base to start asking questions about ethics, sourcing, local impact, etc like "did something go awry in the process that altered the outcome, or was there misrepresentation of intent - by mistake or purposeful - that misled reviewers or consumers? And if on purpose, why did that misrepresentation occur?"
I'm like that with west cork whiskey, tried the bourbon finish and it was okay just took time to open up. Got the cask strength you and Rex loved and it was meh to me then I tried the first bottling of their own whiskey they made a 5 year old single pot still and it's grassy green, really young whiskey and just not to my taste. Someone out there likes their whiskey but it is not for me
Dewars White label has a heavy medicinal/band-aid flavor to me that I really don't like; it happens to be an uncle's favorite for precisely that note. We've long agreed that we just have different palates and still introduce new bottles to each other often...careful to avoid the profile that we have agreed that we don't share. I brought a bottle back from Scotland last year (bought blind, can't recall the brand/distillery) that had that same strong band-aid taste and happily "shared" the whole bottle right into his basement bar.
Daniel, on the subject of this video I had a question. From one bottle to next of the same type and brand of whiskey I had the pallet change to have a vegetal grassy note. Is that a fault or something else going on?
Need to put out a book called Daniel's musings.
Just for the record, Calumet's website says it's sourced from Western Spirits Beverage Company.
Never have I ever had a whiskey so banana-forward than at Southern Tier distillery. They are pretty well known for their flavorful beers though, so instead of a fault, it seemed to fit their credo pretty spot-on and I was perfectly fine with that. And no, it wasn't one of their "flavored" offerings.
On a good sensory day I love hops, on a bad one I get the cat piss note
Thanks for the review 🥃
Can someone explain the virtues of Malort, or is it actually just faulty?
There are quite a few whiskies that I tasted and thought: "This is a good whisky! But I don't like it!"
However, even not making Whisky myself, I think I can by now judge whether a whisky is worth its price.
And some prices are beyond the pale. That's a fact. However, getting emotional about it doesn't help. Better just drink some good stuff you can afford and be happy about that.
Love it!!
There is definitely bad whiskey that is objectively faulty, and I have one example though I can't remember the brand (which is probably for the better since it's been awhile and I don't need to trash the brand for one bad experience). A friend was doing a whiskey tasting and brought a regional whiskey that a friend of his recommended. We all tried it at the same time, and everyone's nose curled up. No one liked it, and it had a very unnatural flavor. Someone said it tasted like a car tire smells, and when we got to looking at the cap on the bottle it was made with a black rubber. I grabbed the cap and took a whiff of it and it smelled exactly like the rubber material I get at my workplace.
That mistake with the cap material tainted the whole bottle and turned all of us off of that brand.
This is probably a “that’s the exception, not the rule” thing, but sometimes being “faulty” is the point. For example, my parents did a subscription to an ice cream of the month club, and on April 1 they said their latest flavor was Thanksgiving Leftovers, so ice cream with mashed potatoes, frozen gravy, and stuffing in it, and it was clearly meant as an April Fool’s joke the company played on their customers. Another example that comes to mind is how the potato chip came to be, where the guy intentionally cut what was supposed to be basically a French fry so thin it couldn’t be eaten with a fork in hopes of annoying a customer who always complained about his “chips” being too thick. The customer ended up enjoying the product the guy essentially designed to fail
Also while clicking on this video I couldn’t help but hear a voice in my head saying “the best kind of whiskey is whatever you like to drink however you like to drink it.” Can’t for the life of me remember who that was
Ya ya i agree
If I have to drink another dyed-to-match-age-statement MGP whiskey I might cry.
Not a big fan of Elijah Craig but it's not like I would say it's horrible. Just thin and kinda soft. But very popular so what do I know ? I know I can't determine what someone else likes . Cheers !
I won't review a whiskey til I taste it so I don't express a dislike for it. Taste is subjective. I know that being a picky eater that there are things that I don't like that most people do.
Yes, hyper hopped beer is a fault, not because the brewers made a mistake, but because many people got on the bandwagon and bought those hop bombs. Ultimately we all know MY taste is superior and the fault lies with all those who disagree with me. Life would be so much easier would people just realize that. (Twirls mustache while stroking a Persian cat.)
I PERSONALLY don’t like bells 🔔 Whisky 🥃 I just think it’s to hot for me PERSONALLY! I don’t think it’s a all round bad product there’s a lot of people that love it that’s just preference right?
@3:15 , unless it's about Canadian whisky 🤣 half vodka
this is the same approach i use with music. For me there isn't a "greatest of all time " or "who is the best " cause everything is subjective, i prefer to say "this is my favourite artrist " cause what is good for me can be shit for everybody else.
righto
Is there a fault that comes through as model airplane glue? And now I just realized that that smell may not be something a person recognizes unless they made model airplanes in the 60s. Apparently the glue sniffing craze made a change in a business model and that glue is no more, at least in a quick google search.
Faults can show up at many stages of the process. One that bothers me because it is so preventable is cork taint. It is common in wine but can occur in anything that is sealed with a natural cork. A tainted cork has within it a nasty chemical that imparts a note of moldy, wet cardboard into the booze in the bottle. There is a very easy way to prevent this. Stop using natural corks. Screw caps are easier to deal with and, if properly designed, seal the bottle better anyway. In the wine industry, they have even come up with screw caps that allow just a little air in to mimic the long term aging process that results from air slowly penetrating through corks. This still needs time to see how it works over the long term, so maybe natural corks still have a place in bottles of wine that are meant to be laid down for decades, but they no longer serve a useful purpose elsewhere. It is only tradition and habit that causes them to remain popular. Every time I taste booze that has been tainted by a bad cork, I want to throw this tradition out the window.
I have learned over the years that it is good to step back from my personal preferences and evaluate booze (or anything else) from a distance. Of course, I will be drawn to those that match my personal taste, but my personal taste isn't necessarily going to translate to other people. Furthermore, it is not right to lambaste a product simply because it does not match my subjective standard of taste. To be truly worthy of scorn, a product must be a failure in some way, and that judgment must be backed up by evidence that is not solely dependent on my personal taste. Thinking in terms of success/failure rather than the vague notions of good/bad is helpful here. When considering booze, I ask the following questions. What are the stylistic expectations, given the category of booze, the region where it is made, and the producer's house style? Does it deviate from these expectations, and are the deviations justified? (This can still be highly subjective.) Is the booze in the bottle consistent with information on the label? Are there faults in the product? (Again, as Daniel noted, this can be subjective, though the tell tale signs of cork taint are about as objective as this can get.) I try to figure out what I think the product is trying to be and then evaluate it on how successful it is in getting there. This way, if I'm with someone else, and their taste is different from mine, maybe I can recommend something to them that I might not personally enjoy but that I think is successful and I think might work for them.
I have a friend who is getting started on whisky. She isn't used to spirits in general, so easy going, low strength whisky is working for her. I'm a proof hound, and I like the concentration and intensity of flavor found in cask strength spirits, so I often find minimum strength spirits to be too watered down. (Still, I find them valuable as warm-up drinks, so even for me, they have their uses.) So I have been recommending to her whiskies that I wouldn't ordinarily seek out. We were in a bar, and Basil Hayden was sitting on the shelf. I immediately recognized that it would be a perfect one for her to try. I was right - she loved it and later went out and bought a bottle. It's great that there are different whiskies for different people. Even if something isn't precisely to my taste, I can still appreciate it if the quality is there.
Ok Daniel, calling a whiskey cat piss is off the table, but would it be out of bounds to call a Calumet product horse piss if warranted? Asking for science.
Moral of the story…try not to be a dick
Isn't Jack Daniels almost famous for their banana note on the nose?
The difference between a flower and a weed? Flowers are the weeds you do not mow.
I'm with Daniel on some of this. But I'm sorry making moral jidgement calls based on decisions people make is not BS. It is indeed how that works lol. If not for our decisions & actions what can we be judged on?
If you're drinking anything that has an ammonia smell PUT IT DOWN its not whiskey!!!
Sign of the times. Critics in many arenas are calling every new thing the best or the worst. You have to make bold statements if you want to get noticed. Speak nothing of quality, is it good or bad?
97👍
Let’s face it a truely bad/faulty whisky will rarely make it to market. The rare times it does make it to market it won’t last long as word will get around & peope won’t buy it in the long term
Objectively I feel judging a whiskey on the neck pour is not the best idea. I find almost every type of whiskey that I've tasted changes, typically improving, after about 6 ounces have been consumed. I also see reviews of whiskey-tubers comparing a neck pour of a new release to last years offering that's been open for a year, which I think is an error lol!
Bleeping words… Only in America… Why? This is hopefully not a channel for kids anyways 😉
Combination of being a “charity” and TH-cam policy.
Lol... "I lack words for this right now". Is that you nice way of saying its "crap bourbon"?
Someone is 100lbs overweight and for a year put all their passion and energy into loosing weight. Then, at the end of the year, they lost 5lbs. Am i supposed to say: good job, keep working, or that's bll sht for a year's effort?
I don't know that I've tasted any really awful bourbon, but I've had some horrible whiskey and down right gross tequila. I don't know how much passion went into the bad ones, but no matter how much it was it didn't make the product good.
You're supposed to say nothing. Never comment on weight :-)
@@WhiskeyVault , I wouldn't know unless they told me, that would be obvious, much like when a garbage product gets bottled.
Stop doing nothingk and do somethingk!!! 🤭