db_campbell

Just bought a bottle of the Looza Pineapple "nectar" for use in a batch of Chatham Artillery Punch. Of course, being Chatham, I won't be able to report back on its usage until ~ April 1st. That said, I've played around w/ the remnant and found it works fairly well w/ Gewurtztraminer. In fact, 2 oz pineapple juice 2 oz gewurtztraminer 1 oz Appleton V/X 0.5 oz St. Germain + cocktail acid of choice is a fairly satisfying casual evening tipple

1883: "Ingredients : sugar, water, glucose-fructose syrup, natural aroma including natural almond extract. No preservative."

The Triangle's one of the tougher places to buy (unique, eclectic, worthwhile) spirits that I've encountered. Not only is NC a control state, but the closest bordering state (Va) is as well. If you haven't checked it already, the North Carolina ABC website's "Pricing Reports" page will become your friend. I also keep the VA ABC site bookmarked, though I've yet to make a liquor run there. Of course, there's always online ordering; but naturally, that too is illegal in North Carolina. When purchasing from out of state, watch the speedometer, as statutes prohibit anyone (excepting distillery reps) from transporting in excess of 4 liters of spirits purchased outside NC. Since the preceding shouldn't be an issue with mini's, the closest independent liquor store to the Triangle with a good selection is just south of Charlotte on US-521, though i haven't personally checked out their airplane selection. For the real exotic stuff, head up to DC.

The Dolin Rouge was my house IV back during this past summer. I don't recall having picked up on any unusual bitterness at the time, though I rarely construct Perfect cocktails as it seems you're describing, and of course that was some measure of months ago. I wish I could now go back and really put the tasting scruples to it, but my local supplier has switched out the Dolin, in favour of carrying Boissiere -- which, funny enough, I've had the same reaction to as you've had the Dolin. I'm not sure it's markedly more bitter than a 'standard' sweet vermouth (though I'd say it is to some degree), but it seems to offer a much deeper taste profile - the basso profundo of the sans-Carpano IV world, if you will. It does seem, however, that my Boissiere sports an older bottling label, so perhaps that has something to do with it. A special order may .. ahem, be in order.

Using an amazing bottle of tequila as a mixer!? ← Depending on where you live, that's only $0.80-0.90 worth of RDLF. Having mixed this one up myself, I can attest it does make the drink sing.

Additionally, nearly all the blends I've seen are bottled at either 40 or 43% abv. I find it interesting that such whiskies have become the standard for Rob Roys, Bobby Burns, etc., whereas for Manhattans and the like the 40% abv Ryes are held in much lower esteem than the 50% Rittenhouse BIB or the 50.5% Wild Turkey. It goes without saying that if you want a Whisky in the 50%+ range, you'd better look toward the malts. FWIW, I made a Bobby Burns once with the 59.6% Aberlour A'bunadh and it was fantastic.

There was some action on this over at John Hansell's Malt Advocate blog about a month back. The consensus seemed to be nice, vibrant, and easily quaffable neat, but too readily lost in (most) cocktails. I found it for only $26 in Florida (about $20 below suggested), so I went ahead and picked it up, though haven't opened it myself yet. FWIW, it's a Beam product (though not a part of the "Beam portfolio"), something you'd never tell from the packaging they've employed.

My (uninformed) guess is that the bartender was attempting to stage a fair fight of sorts between the Old Raj and vermouth, hence the variation in ratios; not that Junipero isn't big-boned in its own right, but Old Raj is such a massive gin that in my estimation it tends to exist within a stratum unto itself.

I'm with you there; I only excluded Junipero based on the price, which is a tad high when you consider that all the others mentioned can be had for under $25/750 and all but the Plymouth can be had for under $20/750. Around here Junipero pushes $30 for the same amount. Not that I'm going to stop buying it or anything... -Andy ← No Hendricks? ← I like Hendricks, and I use it a lot at work because it's so approachable for the vodka drinking crowd, but when I'm drinking at home I want a more traditional profile. Also, it's freaking pricey...if I have to pick just one $30 gin, and I sort of do, it's definitely Junipero over Hendricks. There's nothing wrong with it at all though, aside perhaps from the price (and the extremely bartender-unfriendly bottle shape). ← I tend to feel that the Hendricks / Citadelles / Magellans / Millers / Quintessentials of the world are so far afield of what a traditional London Dry is, that for cocktailian purposes when using one of these or another floral-oriented gin, one almost has to design a drink around the specific flavour profile of the gin he/she happens to be using. I simply don't find much use for them in classic cocktails; sure, sometimes they'll work well, but just as often they'll clash. I think this must be why Andy identifies the Junipero as the singular $30+ bottling that he likes to stock, seeing as it's essentially a big-boned, spice-laden London Dry. That said, I still own all the aforementioned bottles -- I find their iconoclastic nature as enjoyable sipped neat as I find it maddening in cocktails.

I seriously thought I was the only person on these boards to own a bottle of Leopold's .. .. On topic, I guess my advice would be to not feel like you have to store every bottle in or near the kitchen (or, perhaps more accurately, there is no need to feel like you must consolidate your collection in a single area). Sure, you end up having to tote bottles around every time you want to mix something, but there's a certain comfort in looking about nearly every room of the house or apartment and spying alcohol. My bedroom drawer currently houses backup bottles as well as discontinued bottlings, bedroom bookcase has a shelf each for amari/liqueurs, 'well' spirits, and single malt scotch, hallway blanket/towel closet has a shelf each for rum, gin, bourbon, tequila/brandy, and Irish/Japanese/Blended Scotch/Rye whiskey, nightstand contains wine & mid-level brandy, cardboard box on the floor houses vodka, and my bedroom closet keeps the expensive items away from prying eyes. All vermouth, syrups and sodas I store in a mini-fridge. I guess I only really keep bitters, bar tools, and citrus in the kitchen itself. Wish I had pics

HOST'S NOTE: This discussion on premium vodkas was moved from a more general discussion on spirits over here. Just pour them Smirnoff or Luksusowa out of an Elit bottle and see if they can tell the difference. ← As probably the only owner of Stoli elit on these boards, I figured I should drop a post here. And before everyone immediately revokes my cocktailian credentials, hah, the reason for buying it was to elicit a reaction of impressional jealousy from my college friends who've merely strolled thru the alphabet store leering at the bottle with a lusty gaze. So, I just poured myself a half ounce into a Riedel Cognac glass. It noses of little more than a faint alcoholic ether -- there may be a hint of vanilla in there, but I'm more than likely grasping at olfactory straws. The palate strikes immediately on elements of grass, but moves quickly to confirm the nose: a light plumage of alcoholic fume, with an ever so faint & fleeting hint at (phantom?) vanilla bean. I wouldn't say it is vanilla, so much as it's evocative of vanilla. The grass seems to return on the naturally abbreviated finish. So is it worth $50+ as a spirit? Not a chance. As a means of slyly aggravating one's friends? Perhaps. As an aside, I'm probably the only individual here who doesn't care for Luksusowa. Perhaps it was owing to the refrigerated temperature I kept my bottle at, but it just tasted so daggum metallic everytime I pulled it out to sip on. And it wasn't the potatoes, either, because as vodkas go, Chopin is right up there with Kutskova and Krolewska as one of my favourites. Wow, this post makes me sound like so much of a vodka person; I'm really not -- probably only about 2.5-3.0% of all bottles I own are water.

The cool thing with McClelland's is that it's owned by Morrison Bowmore. Can't remember where I read this, but essentially each of their regional bottlings is a younger version of a 'name' distillery. McClelland's Highlands? A ~6 yr Glen Garioch. McClelland's Lowlands? A ~6 yr Auchentoshan. McClelland's Islay? A ~6 yr Bowmore. The latter is great if you're like me, and like to vat your own whiskies, since it's an economical means of upping the peatiness. You seem to favour the more Highlands / Speyside style of bottlings. I'd definitely third the Balvenie recommendations, as it's probably my favourite mainland distillery. You can also never go wrong with any of the bottlings from Highland Park or The Macallan (as brinza notes). Brinza's also right on w/ the Glenfarclas rec: it's a poor man's Macallan (to steal a sports analogy), in that it's a heavily-sherried Speyside, but I bet many would have difficulty telling the two apart in a blind taste test. I think you also owe it to yourself to try something a bit more Island-y. The closest you have right now is probably the JW Black, which uses a fair amount of Talisker and I believe Caol Ila in the mix. I'd pick up the Talisker 10 - or 18 if you can find it, as it's fantastically priced relative to other 18s - and if you like it, perhaps migrate along the peat spectrum to an Islay.

The whiskies I tasted over two days, Thursday & Friday of last week. Since I decided to sample all the rums on Saturday afternoon, I set up both my tasting glass as well as a "refuse glass." Once I had sipped enough of the drink to glean all the impressions I needed, I'd simply pour the remainder of each of the 12 into the additional glass. I figured this to be the best way of ensuring both accuracy of impressions and lucidity of prose. Of course, after I had posted, I then settled down to play some video games while polishing off the contents of the refuse glass. Incidentally, it was the third time I had mixed the Zacapa 23. The first was before I was truly aware of what I had gotten my hands on, and the second when a buddy of mine challenged me to the "Abominations in Drinking Game" -- using infinitesimal amounts of one's most valuable liquors in short versions of highballs and cocktails. It's the drinking game where no one ever wins Have you ever tasted the Zacapa 15 yr? It's my goal to pick that up the next time I'm down in Florida ..

Wow, that's impressive. In Florida, the best price I've seen on the Zaya 12 yr is low 30s. Rums; same rules and procedures as before. Ed Hamilton will most likely have my head for this .... Flor de Cana Extra Dry 4 yr: Seems to really highlight the floral aspect of the rum; spirit does a good job of not allowing the coke to take over, considering it's a white rum. Nothing spectacular, but perfectly acceptable Spring/Summer drinking. 7 Ten Cane: Fairly astringent nose. Features a really biting attack, sort of evocative of what I imagine thorn bushes would taste like. Of course that makes it sound far worse than it actually is, but this is a remarkably harsh beverage (not alcohol-wise, but from an integration of flavour standpoint) for such a simple concoction. **In the interest of full disclosure, I've had this bottle open for just over two years now, though it's still at least 2/3 full, so oxidation shouldn't be at play. Perhaps there's a reason so little has been emptied. 4.5 Appleton V/X: Surprisingly, tends to possess the same general flavour profile of the Ten Cane version, but with more depth, better integration, and a bit of a honeyed character. Still isn't close to being the best representative of the style, though. From sampling these last two, it seems that the more dry, edgier, idiosyncratic rums tend to not play as well with cola as their tamer brethren might. 6 Cruzan Blackstrap: Deep, caramalised nose. Huge syrup note on the palate, borders on becoming too sweet, but then the inherent heaviness of the Blackstrap dials this back. Enjoyable drink, though the rum tends to dominate the cola a tad too much for my liking. 7.5 Pyrat Pistol: Tastes like a thinned-out version of Creole Shrubb with a heavier emphasis on the orange peel. Having just opened the bottle for this exercise, I can't imagine how orange-y the rum must taste on its own, sans cola. Late emphasis on spice comes through, once your palate's finished wrapping itself around the gigantic orange presence. Slightly musty. Not bad, just - - wow, how's this not a flavoured rum? 7.5 Pyrat XO: I can detect no discernable difference between this rum and the Pistol when mixed with cola, except the XO seems to taste slightly deeper, and smell a smidge more musty. 7.5 Ron Centenario Conmemorativo: The honey flavour of the rum really comes through here, with just enough age to balance the sweetness of the cola. A couple integration issues seem to persist, as the cola and rum appear to be engaging in a bit of a tussle for the palate's affections, but overall a very enjoyable drink. 8 Diplomatico Reserva: The rum's heavy vanilla note explodes through the palate, but effortlessly welcomes the cola without any issues of balance. Fully integrated, this is a single coherent beverage, devoid of any infighting amongst the constituent elements. Only marked down due to the extremity of the vanilla at the exclusion of any other flavours. 8.5 Diplomatico Reserva Exclusiva: Spice explosion. The spice-laden Reserva Exclusiva carries the cola perfectly with seamless integration. Think the Diplomatico Reserva, but replace the vanilla with a plethora of less-distinct spices. Wonderful. 9.5 Barbancourt 15 yr: I was expecting this to suffer from the same issues that plagued both the Ten Cane and the Appleton V/X, knowing the Barbancourt 15 to be among the drier of the aged rums. Surprisingly, while hinting at that thorny / bushy characteristic that I'm not terribly adept at describing, the age of the rum really serves to carry the beverage through toward enjoyability. It's still not nearly as suave as the Diplomaticos, or even the Conmemorativo, but relative to expectation this drink accounted itself well. 7.5 Ron Matusalem 15 yr: Very deep. The Matusalem's vanilla shines initially, though gives way on the end-palate and finish to a heavier, more nuanced spice tone. Fully integrated. Almost completely splits the difference between the two Diplomaticos, though carries with it an overall deeper character. 9 Ron Zacapa 23 yr: In terms of depth, this is the Russian bass of the dozen. Flawlessly suave, this itself is ironically also the largest flaw of the drink -- the Zacapa 23 is so smooth and understated, that one feels as if he/she is drinking a heavier form of Coca-Cola. Little flavour development ensues, beyond what is inherent within the cola. Simply put, this is a misapplication of an eminently suave rum. 8

I think generally, you'd be dead on in your initial assessment, for two reasons. The first, most often when you get a whiskey & coke, it's going to inevitably be almost an entire glassful of coke, with an ounce - maybe two - of whiskey. Since I like my highballs a wee bit stiffer, I turned those ratios around, which served to really highlight what the coke does to the whiskey, rather than what the whiskey does to the coke. Secondly, whiskey & coke tends to be a slamming type drink for most people, whereas I took the time to ponder after each sip as if I were tasting a well-made cocktail or even a malt. Even minute differences will become exposed under such scrutiny. I suppose I'll cull the cabinet tonight for a dozen decent rums, and get started on that tomorrow ...

I've used this thread to give myself a little weekend project, as well as to hopefully provide some good info (if you haven't purchased the boss' hooch already). I took 12 mid-range Bourbons / TN Whiskies from my cabinet, mixed them in a 3:2 ratio with 8 oz. glass bottle Coca-Cola (0.75 Bourbon, 0.5 oz Coke, 1 large ice cube), took down tasting notes, and affixed a score out of a ten point scale. Hope this proves informative: Gentleman Jack: Classic JD aroma, a little earthy/grassy on the palate; generally mellow flavour profile, though at this ratio it still dominates the cola. As the ice melts, it rounds out the grassy characteristic, though not completely. 5.5 JD Single Barrel #6-1859: Fairly indistinct on the nose; the classic TN whiskey straw-note dovetails w/ the cola flavour to create a massively expansive earthy/sweet dynamic on the palate. The reserved nose may be a white noise of sorts resulting from this interaction. Eminently drinkable, even moreso than what would be the seemingly more restrained 80 proof Gentleman. 8 Buffalo Trace: Seamlessly integrates into the cola, retaining all the original cola character one could want, while providing the stern Bourbon backbone one would expect. Flavours of spice, with a slight hint at vanilla. 8.5 Weller Antique: The syrupy flavour of the Weller Antique - backed by its 107 proof - shines thru, merely using the cola sweetness as momentum-fuel for its steam engine-like assault on the palate. While a bit on the intense side and lacking complexity, at least the singular note it provides the palate is enjoyable. 6.5 Old Rip Van Winkle 10 yr: This is the 107 proof variety, not the more recent 90 proof iteration. Surprisingly astringent nose; attacks the palate like its stable-mate, the Weller Antique, and incorporates the same type of syrup element, yet retains a more nuanced panache - almost touching on the grassiness of the JD offerings, but then drawing back. An elegant dram, if a slight misuse of the ORVW. 7.5 W. L. Weller 12 yr: Very reserved; the oak melds with the cola, but provides a deeper-note contrasting backdrop to the higher-note cola. One almost tastes two concurrent drinks, producing a slight, though not off-putting dissonance. 7 Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel [no barrel # provided]: The HFCS of the cola merely adds an onerous sweetness to the Bourbon, resulting in a sickly cacaphony of high-flying flavours. Really underrated Bourbon; really poor utilisation. 4 Old Forester: This is the 100 proof, but not the Signature. Nose is evocative of maple; this is confirmed on the palate in a very lively fashion. It's sweeter than most, almost asymptotically approaches cloying -- and falls just shy. This is a very engaging beverage that some may find a tad sweet, though others will be inevitably entranced by its playfulness. 7.5 Elijah Craig 12 yr: The oak is prominent, yet doesn't clash with or overpower the cola. Rather, the sweetness of the cola just sort of glissades over the woodiness of the Bourbon. A much more suave Bourbon & coke, and really a new take on the genre. 8.5 Woodford Reserve: Fairly powerful stuff, surprising for the 90.4 proof. One doesn't taste the coke so much as one tastes a slightly-gussied up .. .. Woodford Reserve; which isn't a bad drink, mind you, it just sort of tends to blow apart the entire purpose of this exercise. 7.5 Old Grand-Dad 114: First off, this is just such a great-smelling Bourbon. So deep, so rich, so seductive, so cinnamon-spicy. As for the mixed drink, it's simply marvelous. The cola suffuses perfectly with the rich flavours of the OGD, never supplanting, simply highlighting. If the Elijah 12 is a new take on the genre, this is a transformative experience within the genre. 9.5 (simply because I refuse to bust out the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection on principle) FWIW, the preceding was also the first of the bunch to possess a noticeable finish. Wild Turkey Rare Breed Batch # WT-03RB: Impressive stuff; I've still yet to find a bad application for the Rare Breed. Very upfront spice notes, which eventually recedes into a gradually enveloping classical cola flavour. This drink possesses no discernable flaws, yet lacks that immediate wow-factor that made the OGD 114 such a transcendental "... & Coke" experience (and also the finish). 9 EDIT: proper spelling

I wouldn't quite say I'm a proponent of the hard shake; I'm simply attempting to defend the method against some criticism that I believe is resultant merely from misconceptions that have arisen. My point is more, 'if we're going to criticise the hard shake, let's criticise the hard shake, not someone's haphazard, gussied-up interpretation of it.' I hope no one thinks I'm pointing fingers or implying any particular individual's guilt with the last remark. Simply from a logician's perspective, if Method X eschews dancing, and Individual Y criticises Method X on the basis of its reliance on dancing, then somewhere along the line there must have been a Practitioner Z who bastardised Method X via the inclusion of dancing. Apologies; within the context, I thought the criticism to be implicit. Obviously it wasn't. ← This is obviously true. While perusing Ueda's site for information about his method, I had to chuckle upon reading his cubic/spherical perceptions of the cocktail art. Perhaps this slant toward quasi-mysticism is what Eben was referencing by noting the method "has just as much to do with a way of thinking as you prepare a cocktail and the idea of being conscious of what you're shaking in your shaker."

In the case of Mr. Ueda, I don't believe there's anything ostensible about it. When one reads his description of the hard shake, it is fairly apparent that he believes he is crafting a better cocktail. Obviously, as is discussed here, these claims may ultimately be specious, but I don't believe his intent can be impugned on the issue. Again, in reading Ueda's own take, the hard shake is much more than simply - - well, shaking hard. The primary aim is the production of - not ice shards, which are described as a by-product - but rather "bubbles," which he believes mitigates the harshness of a drink, while lending additional complexity. Naturally, one can argue whether this is indeed accomplished, or whether lessening the alcoholic harshness of a beverage is even at this stage desirable, but the point remains that more thought is at play here than merely shaking the cocktail harder. Also, Ueda makes clear that what instructed his development of the method was paying particular attention to economy of motion, noting that in his belief degree of shaking movement and complexity of drink are negatively correlated. Hence, most of the work done in a proper hard shake is not accomplished via the body or arms, but rather the wrists. Have flair, frippery, and dance insinuated themselves into the hard shake of many a practitioner today? Unfortunately, that may be what many of us are seeing. Let's resist the easy path, though, of conflating this with Mr. Ueda's original methodology. Only then can we have a sound dialogue on whether the hard shake truly accomplishes all that it is made to.

I must concur with all the points elucidated above. That said, I acquired my bottle of Plymouth Sloe Gin for $37.5 in Washington, D.C. Considering the norm in other areas of the country seems to be approx. $47, something is obviously at play in the pricing of this product external to Plymouth .. EDIT: adjusted for accurate pricing conveyance

I have a buddy in North Florida who's a big fan of Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt novels, and he's found that the Total Wine in Jacksonville sells the 1.75 of Cutty Sark (Dirk's quaff of choice, my friend tells me) for $3 cheaper than the liter - $21.99 vs. $24.99. I think that's a primary reason he was able to survive his first year of law school. A perusal of their website also shows the handle of Famous Grouse going for $5 cheaper than the liter - $22.99 vs. $27.99. My only guess is that these stores believe a certain category and/or brand of spirits is being unduly under-appreciated by the local consumers, and thus provide these sorts of 'enticements' in an attempt to introduce them to said category and/or brand. I say perhaps brand, because further analysis of TW's blended scotch selection shows the expected structurally-priced gradations of the more ubiquitous brands, i.e. Johnny Walker & Dewar's. That said, it's hard to imagine a local market of consumers that's under-appreciating Beefeater's. Gin - I'll second the Broker's, though I can get it for $14 locally but have seen it up to $20+ for a fifth elsewhere. I'd definitely balk at that pricing point. I absolutely adore Citadelle and once found a 1.75 for $30, but it doesn't quite work in all cocktails, IMO. Bourbon - I usually buy a couple handles of whatever the state store (NC) happens to have on sale that month in the $20-28 range (usually AAA 6 yr, Ezra 90, Evan Williams Black / 1783, Old Forester 86, Old Grand-Dad 86), and vat them together along with about 250 ml of a more mature Bourbon (usually Elijah 12 yr). The result's never a sipper, but it keeps the house pour fresh and it's fun to tinker with what Bourbons might happen to mesh well with one another. Vodka - Kutskova is an old world-style Russian brand that can usually be had for $12-14 per 750 ml. I'll have to locate the Sobieski; it's on the NC state list for $9.95. Tequila - I found some Tres Alegres Reposado priced at $15 for a fifth. It's not that great, admittedly, but it's 100% de agave and distilled at La Cofradia (they of Casa Noble fame). Personally, I find a significant difference between mixing with Blanco & Reposado, hence I generally use the latter. I wish I knew more about their regional distribution; I just happened to find it on the lower-middle shelf of a mom & pop liquor store along the North Florida coast. Curacao - I'll second Katie's Gran Torres recommendation - crystal-pure orange notes, Spanish brandy base. I no longer have need of GM.

My favourite distilleries are Talisker & Balvenie. I'll second the praise that's already been lavished on Talisker; for a Speyside, though, I prefer the Balvenie slightly more than the Macallan. Granted I've only had Balvenie's 15-21-25 yrs, but I find them to possess a perfumed quality absent in the Macallan's sherry-dominated range (with the Fine Oak series simply splitting the difference). That said, i haven't found a 25 yr yet that can match the Macallan's rich lusciousness. That'd be well worth the pickup, Chris, though I'd recommend purchasing now rather than later, as in most stores I frequent it's gone up by about $70-100 over the past 15 months - falling dollar and all. I've always been disappointed in this malt, though I recognise that places me squarely in the minority. I guess when I go Islay, I want something big, deep, rumbling, and expansively challenging, whereas I always find Lagavulin's offering exceedingly refined and eminently drinkable. Sure it's smoke & it's peat, but it almost plays like a Speyside on the palate. My favourite Islay, you can guess then, is the Ardbeg (I've had no problems locating the 10 yr even in the control state of NC, btw). Like the Talisker, it's baseline offerings come in above the semi-standard 43% abv. i haven't been able to track down the Laphroaig CS yet (but have the Quarter Cask & 30 yr, go figure), but the Ardbeg Uigeadail CS is wonderfully immense. I taste it sans water, but also in little little sips, which I tend to find the best way of experiencing a CS. If drinking a flight or conducting a whisky tasting, though, I always save those for last so everyone's taste buds aren't fried out. As for blends, I know there's a lot of love for Famous Grouse on this forum, but like so many other blends it simply doesn't do it for me - perhaps a personal failing, who knows. I find that the best blends for cocktail purposes are the ones that you vat in your own home. What got me started on the project was a bottle of Teacher's that I really liked but found a wee bit thin. I thought that if I could buttress it with more maltiness then it could end up pretty tasty, so I was able to locate a fairly cheap pure malt - I think they've taken to calling them "blended malts" in the industry now - and vatted it 1:1 with the Teacher's. The result was pretty much dead on what I was anticipating and it's now my go-to whisky for Scotch-based cocktails. Sorry for the length; first post and all.