Mike S.

I try to keep all my vermouths and aromatized wines (red and white) in the fridge. I also HIGHLY recommend the use of an inert gas wine preserver like Private Preserve. It works extremely well. Between that and the fridge, you'll find your vermouths and such will keep very nearly indefinitely with little decline in quality. Cheers, Mike

You won't be disappointed. Bluecoat is fantastic just as it is. It's only my sad obsession with things I can't have anymore that drove me to mess with it at all. Cheers, Mike

Yes. Well. Answering my own question, here's what I've found after a few weeks of on-again, off-again experimentation. Your mileage, as ever, may vary. 1. Seagram's Distiller's Reserve, while itself a very fine and IMO very underrated gin, does not taste like Malacca, diluted or otherwise. At least not to my palate, after a couple different sessions of tasting directly against my remaining stock of Malacca. Seagram's DR is one of the very few (perhaps only?) oak barrel-aged gins on the market, and this makes it very different indeed. 2. Many, many other currently-available gins also taste nothing at all like Malacca and I doubt could be made to do so. Can't say as I've tried them all, but here's the list (besides Seagram's DR) that I have been through: Beefeater, Boodles, Martin Miller’s Westbourne Strength, Boord’s London Old Tom, Cadenhead’s Old Raj “Blue Label”, Hendrick’s, Plymouth, Tanqueray London Dry, Tanqueray No. Ten, Tanqueray Rangpur, Anchor Genevieve, Boomsma Oude, De Kuyper Hollands Geneva. Some -- perhaps many -- of these were obvious non-starters, but I tried them all anyway. Nix for the lot. 3. The closest one I've found -- and I think it's actually pretty darn close -- is Bluecoat American Dry. I'd never tried this stuff before, but was intrigued by what I'd read about it. Even in a direct comparison, without any alteration of the Bluecoat, its similarities to Malacca outweigh its differences -- Malacca's signature spicy, citrus-forward flavors and smoothness are all present in Bluecoat. Even so, differences do exist. Here's what I observe, with my preliminary assessment of how to harmonize them: a. Proof. Bluecoat is 47% ABV to Malacca's 40%. Proper dilution with filtered spring water -- or perhaps even better, distilled water -- should fix this. In my small-volume taste test I eyeballed a scant dash of regular bottled water and it seemed to even out the higher-alcohol Bluecoat. Hardly scientific, but it does suggest that the right water and careful measuring would equalize the proofs and all but eliminate this difference. b. Nose. This is probably the most recognizable difference between the two, and I don't have any fix for it. Malacca has a very clean nose with a nice bright citrus (mostly grapefruit) overtone. Bluecoat, being entirely copper pot-stilled and utilizing organic American juniper berries, has a pronounced bit of earthy "funk" on the nose. While there are definitely citrus overtones present, the earthiness tends to blunt them making the overall nose very soft and smooth. Very nice, but also very different from the clean "snap" of Malacca. Can't think of anything to do about this, I'm affraid. c. Palate. As noted above, to me the three dominate flavor aspects of Malacca beneath the juniper are spice, citrus (again, mostly grapefruit) and a hint of residual sweetness to smooth it all out. In the Bluecoat, the spice and citrus are definitely there, although the citrus is more conventional and less recognizably grapefruit. That earthy funk is there too, and while different than Malacca this element seems to provide a comparable smoothness to the finish. Overall, very close indeed, and I got it even closer by adding a drop of Fee's Grapefruit Bitters to the diluted Bluecoat. The only thing really missing is that hint of sweetness, since Bluecoat is noticeably drier than Malacca, but I bet that can be worked out too. Overall, an interesting couple of weeks. If nothing else, I've come to love a new gin that I'd never encountered before -- Bluecoat is certainly outstanding on its own merits and hardly needs modification or comparison to the defunct Malacca to warrant purchase. But I still love Malacca, still pine over its demise and still hoard my declining stock with alarming greed. As a result, I still can't help but think that a few more tweaks with Bluecoat could get me there.... Cheers, Mike Edited to correct typos and add Tanq London Dry to the list of gins that taste nothing like Malacca, although perhaps that is (or should be) obvious.

Note to self: Try good SM scotch with dark chocolate. God I love you people. Cheers, Mike

Jeff, try a wedge of meyer lemon in a stiff G&T in place of the lime. I particularly like this when the G is Seagram's Distiller's Reserve (a criminally underrated gin IMO) and the T is nothing but Fever Tree. Delicious. In fact, I think I'll make one now. 'Scuse me.... Cheers, Mike

My nightcaps tend usually to be a good sipping whisk(e)y on the rocks. Lately I've rediscovered my remaining stock of (the now-discontinued) Forty Creek Three Grain Canadian Whisky. Very smooth and sweet; in fact once it dilutes out with ice a bit it reminds me of a wonderful black walnut liqueur. Brilliant. I like it better than the current bottlings of their Barrel Select product, and still don't understand why they stopped making it. But I'm equal opportunity on this point, with various bourbons, scotches and Tennessees in the regular rotation. For mixed-drink nightcaps my standards are the Rusty Nail (mostly in winter) and the Corn 'n Oil. I also enjoyed a few Good Night Irenes around Christmastime and thought they were outstanding. Cheers, Mike

Hmm...curious. Seems like Campari had a few importers before Skyy Spirits. Don't think that changes the basic point, though -- old bottles of Campari (regardless of importer) may be labeled "artificially colored" and still be made with natural carmine dye. FWIW, the label on the old bottle I picked up the other day -- the one that says it was imported by Campari USA, Inc. -- looks exactly like the pics John posted (same colors, fonts, bottle embossing, etc.) except mine says "Aperitivo" in the fancy gold script rather than "Bitter." Mine also has a small label on the bottle shoulder that reads "ITALY" (can't tell from the pics if John's also has this). Comparison of the production codes would be very helpful if we could figure out what they mean; I also have not found anything on the web that explains them. I do note, however, that all of the natural carmine-colored bottles I have and have seen (older labeled "articifically colored", newer labeled "contains natural carmine", and regardless of volume from 50ml to 1L) have production codes that start with "LS" like the code on John's bottle. I happened by one of the larger local liquor stores today (Beltramo's in Menlo Park) and noticed that all of the 750ml and 1L bottles they stocked, all of which were the current bottle/label shape and artificially colored, had production numbers starting with "LN". Whether that's an important distinction or just a coincidence I have no idea. Cheers, Mike

As to labeling, I don't think Sertl was wrong when his article was first published in Saveur Issue No. 10, January/February 1996. As to proof, every U.S.-market bottle of Campari I've every seen is 48 proof, just as Sertl reports. I cannot speak to proofs for other markets, historical or current. Cheers, Mike

John, my discovery today of an obviously very old Campari bottle nonetheless labeled "artificially colored" caused me to ask the very same question. The answer, best I can figure, is in my post directly above yours -- which we must have been typing at the same time. Great minds, and all that. Cheers, Mike

I'm not really sure why, but for some reason this whole issue of natural vs. artificial coloring in Campari fascinates me, and I've spent some significant time this evening researching the situation. The best overview I've seen is a Jan. 27, 2006 article in the Wall Street Journal, available here: http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113...k_20060203.html But that, I think, is only part of the story. Natural insect-derived carmine (bright red) and cochineal (bright orange) dyes have been legal for food and cosmetic use in the U.S. for many, many years as what the FDA calls "color additives exempt from certification." (See 21 CFR Sec. 73.100.) FDA labeling rules allow the labels of products using certification-exempt color additives to declare them in a generic way as "Artificial Color." (See 21 CFR Sec. 101.22(k)(2).) In 1998, the Center for Science in the Public Interest petitioned the FDA to change its rules regarding carmine and cochineal dyes, either by prohibiting them altogether or at least requiring product labels to disclose them by name, in large part due to concerns over the potential for allergic reactions. CSPI's press release is available here: http://www.cspinet.org/new/carmine_8_24_98.htm In response, on January 30, 2006 -- nearly eight years later -- the FDA published a proposed rules change in the Federal Register (a government publication where proposed regulations are published for public comment before being codified in the CFR) dealing with carmine and cochineal color additives. In essence, the proposal would change 21 CFR Sec. 73.100 to require that all food containing cochineal extract or carmine to specifically declare the presence of the color additive by its respective common or usual name -- "cochineal extract" or "carmine" -- on the label. It would also change 21 CFR Sec. 101.22(k)(2) to disallow generic declaration of color additives for which individual declaration is required by applicable regulations in 21 CFR Sec. 73. The proposed effective date of the final rule was to be two years after publication in the Federal Register -- i.e., possibly as early as January 30, 2008. The FDA's proposal is available here: http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fr060130.html But here's the rub: I cannot find any evidence that the CFR sections cited above have actually changed as of today. Indeed, 21 CFR Secs. 73.100 and 101.22(k)(2) still read as they always have -- meaning that it's apparently still legal to sell products containing carmine and cochineal dyes labeled as "Artificially Colored." If you're interested in reading the CFR sections for yourself, the best place online is the e-CFR database on the U.S. Government Printing Office's really excellent website, GPOAccess.gov (specifically, http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-...l=%2Findex.tpl )://http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...=%2Findex.tpl )://http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...=%2Findex.tpl ). (You've heard the saying "you're tax dollars at work"? Well, here they actually are.) So, you're probably saying this is all fascinating but what the hell does it have to do with Campari and whether or not it's changed? Based on the research I've done, here's one theory (some of which is rank speculation on my part) about what's going on, at least in the U.S.: 1. For many years -- perhaps extending back to its introduction -- Campari sold in the U.S. was colored with natural carmine dye and the label identified it with the words "artificially colored" as allowed by existing law. I have confirmed this by finding, in a dusty old local liquor store, a dusty old bottle of Campari. I know it's old because the label has the original wording of "Campari Aperitivo" that the company used when it introduced the product to America, rather than the European "Campari Bitter" wording it uses today. I don't know the exact year this bottle was produced, but it has to be pre-2002 because the label reveals that it was "Imported by Campari USA, Inc." In 2002, Gruppo Campari acquired Skyy Spirits and, after that transaction, Campari used Skyy Spirits as its U.S. importer. This bottle, which I am now convinced pre-dates any possible change in coloring additive by several years at least, is clearly described on the main front label as "Artificially Colored." 2. At some point in the recent past, but presumably after January 30, 2006, Campari saw the "writing on the wall" from the FDA's proposed changes to 21 CFR Secs. 73.100 and 101.22(k)(2). Figuring those changes would become law in due course, Campari -- like many other companies -- began anticipatory compliance with the new labeling requirements to avoid potential problems with production when the rules actually went into effect. This, I believe, is what resulted in the bottles we've seen with labels that read "Contains natural carmine." All of these bottles should also say "Imported by Skyy Spirits" (in the U.S. at least) and would, I believe, be only a year or two old at the most. 3. Once companies like Campari began anticipatory compliance with the new FDA rules and printed words like "carmine" and "cochineal" on their labels, some consumers freaked out. While before Campari (and other products) could "hide" their use of these dyes with the words "Artificially Colored", now the "truth" was out and it caused a backlash. There are plenty of alarmist "bug juice" and "Campari is insects" articles on the web, and I'll bet it caused Campari some worry in its larger markets. 4. That worry (which of course I'm guessing about) may have been enough to trigger a change in coloring agent to do away with the carmine dye, along with the more obvious changes to the bottle shape/size (it's now skinnier and taller) and label (it's now smaller). And, of course, the label once again reads "artificially colored." 5. The question in my mind is this (cue mystery-movie background music): Did the coloring agent *actually* change along with the bottle and label? Has Campari *really* stopped using natural carmine dye, or has it just switched back to its original labeling practice of denoting the existence of carmine dye with the generic descriptor "artificial color"? Remember, as far as I can tell the CFR sections discussed above have not yet changed -- carmine and cochineal dyes remain "color additives exempt from certification" and thus are not yet required to be identified by name on labels. Yes...well. An interesting theory, perhaps, but probably no more than that. Even I have a very hard time believing that Campari would switch its labeling in the face of pending FDA regulatory changes only to switch it back because the FDA moves at glacial speed (a reality that can't have come as a surprise to Campari). No, the more likely explanation has to be that Campari did indeed change the coloring agent to an artificial dye when it made its most recent changes to the Campari bottle and label, for better or worse. But at least one thing does seem certain: If you're on the hunt for original bug-juice Campari, don't automatically dismiss a bottle just because it says "artificially colored." My research convinces me that older bottles (probably pre-2006 and definitely pre-2002) of the original carmine dye formula were indeed labeled this way. In the U.S., if you find one that says it was imported by Campari USA, Inc., you've found the real deal. Cheers, Mike

And Mr. Kinsey, I'd sure like to know what stores in NYC still have bottles of Tanqueray Malacca for sale. I love that stuff! Cheers, Mike

The new formula is certainly well-entrenched here in NorCal, but the old stuff does still exist in small pockets. I picked up a 750ml bottle of the natural carmine formula today at a little strip-mall liquor store on El Camino in Palo Alto (only one they had), but all the big stores like BevMo, Beltramos, K&L, etc. stock the new formula exclusively and that's probably been true for months now. One place you might check is in the 50ml "mini" collections of larger stores. I went to two BevMos yesterday and the 50ml mini bottles -- dozens of them -- were all old formula. At ~$2.50 a pop that's an expensive way to fill a 750ml bottle, but it's an option for the truly desperate fanatic. I now have three 750ml bottles of the original formula, and honestly that's probably a life-time supply for me. Beyond an occasional Negroni and an even more occasional Americano, I don't tend to drink Campari that often. Cheers, Mike

This is my first time at this game, so here goes... One of my all-time favorite drinks is the Rusty Nail -- that gentle mix of smoky scotch whisky and heather-honey Drambuie works very, very well for me. I like it so much, in fact, that I've been known to have one (or two) at Cocktail Hour before dinner, especially on cold nights. Recognizing the impropriety of consuming so sweet a libation before supper (and having already been widely ridiculed for it, so you're too late ), I've often wondered how to convert this classic after-dinner sipper into a lively pre-dinner cocktail. A few years ago, I picked up a copy of Food & Wine Magazine's "Cocktails 2006" book and found, on page 107, the solution to my problem: A fantastic variation on the Rusty Nail called... The Silver Nail Cocktail 1 oz blended scotch (I used Johnnie Walker Black Label) 1 oz Drambuie 1 oz gin (Plymouth works perfectly here; Martin Miller's Westbourne Strength is also very good) .25 oz fresh lemon juice Dash Fee Bros. Lemon Bitters (optional; my addition) Lemon twist garnish Preparation is up to you. The original recipe calls for building over ice in a rocks glass and garnishing with a lemon twist. That works great (and is obviously more in line with the original) but I like it even better stirred well over ice and strained into a chilled cocktail glass. You could, of course, shake it given the lemon juice but I think it works better stirred in this proportion. And a final note on that lemon juice: Meyer lemons are in season just now, and I love them for just about anything (try a wedge in your G&T in place of the lime; awesome). This drink, however, remains quite sweet and thus really needs the more sour cut of true lemon juice (you could, indeed, up the juice quantity if you like, or lower the amount of Drambuie). No harm in using the Meyer lemon peel for the twist, however! Food & Wine Magazine credits this drink to a joint called Indebleu in Washington, D.C. I've never been there, but I'm already a big fan. Cheers! Mike

Hi, longtime reader, new poster. Malacca was one of my very favorite products during its lifetime and I've been on the hunt for left-over bottles ever since. I'm bumping this thread because I recently picked up a 750ml bottle of Malacca along with a 50ml mini, and I'm willing to sacrifice the mini in the name of research: My goal is to find a currently-available gin (or reasonable custom blend) that approximates the flavor of Malacca. I've seen some comments on other forums that suggest Seagram's Distiller's Reserve has a flavor profile at least somewhat similar to that of Malacca, with one of the biggest differences being the relative strength of the two -- Malacca, unusual for a Tanqueray product, was bottled at 40% ABV, while Distiller's Reserve is bottled at 51% ABV. Any thoughts on the truth of this proposition? Assuming there's some validity to it, my first effort would be to dilute a bottle of Distiller's reserve down to 40% ABV, with the appropriate amount of water calculated using one the on-line alcohol dilution calculators (since I do not own a proof hydrometer). Any suggestions beyond this? Has anyone come across any currently-available gins that remind them of Malacca? I'll be happy to report progress in this thread if there's interest in it. Cheers, Mike