Jump to content

ctgm

participating member
  • Content Count

    480
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I like to sip it neat (in small doses)!!
  2. not sure i would use an expensive "sipping" rum in a cocktail. I am sure that others would disagree. If I need a non-white rum I would use something like Mount Gay. One thing that was a surprise in your post is the bit about blending with Canadian rum. Unless someone can correct me (Ed, Scheer ??), this is 100% against the law. If you say product of Guyana then it has to be 100% Guyanese. In Europe with wine, if you use grapes from different countries - for example France and Italy in the same bottle - then the wine cannot be called either French or Italian - but has to be called something along the lines of "Wine from the European Union" or something like that. (Possibly "wine made from grapes from the European Union)
  3. ctgm

    New Old Rums!

    deleted - by me as not really applicable any more
  4. expanding on JLo mein's point about rum based cocktails. I think that there is a difference here in that rum is purely an ingredient in making the final product and not seen as being a rum with a few things added.
  5. Bill, I think that your GF might be right and that Bacardi has transcended the boundaries of being a rum and is a brand in its own "right" with the non-cognoscenti. I suppose that when talking about other spirits there aren't too many that have done this. Malibu - I doubt many know that this is rum based and maybe Jack Daniels (for those that mix). When it comes to wine the only example of this sort of thing happening (but different as no one prducer is favoured) is with Pinot Grigio. A lot of people will order Pinot Grigio because they (think they) like it but have absolutely no idea of who the producer is nor do they care. I presume that they know that (the majority) comes from Italy. Strange also that they would not consider the far far far superior (in a lot of cases) (Tokay) Pinot Gris from somewhere such as Alsace.
  6. going back to the original question (which I think is one of the best that I have seen on the forum). COLO(U)R. I think that the colo(u)r is very important. As we know there are 3 main types White - not important to Joe as white is white and going to be mixed away Dark - probably the same as above Gold - to which I think might be more important to the original question. I think that those buyers who want to experiment with something different (ie Joe P branching out to sipping rums) like to see what the colo(u)r is. Those rums that are in black bottles and other dark glassed ones, to me, might lose out.
  7. I have a feeling that it would be 8 years old. I don't think that they could get away with marketing it as 8, as the assumption would be there. Having said that do we think that Santa Teresa is from 1796 etc? As for complaints, I am sure that in this cut-throat world there would be numerous if anything under hand was going on. I don't think that Bacardi, Pernod, Diageo etc etc do each other many favours, unless they want to buy a company and have to sell off a few bits and pieces due to monopolies (look at the break-up of Seagram's portfolio).
  8. too olde worlde - it is ramming the image of piracy, and rum being the mysterious drink that pirates would drink, down your throught. As I said, from a personal point of view, bottle is too obvious and the name is too obvious.
  9. ctgm

    Eric Asimov interviews Michel Rolland

    From a personal point of view only: I do find that Rolland's wines are all very well made, clean and drinkable. however for me they are too extracted and too heavy. I don't really enjoy drinking a bottle to myself of his wines (but that can be said about a lot of Bordeaux at the moment - I do not drink very much American wines so cannot say). Being very very specific, I look at Pape Clement and see such a big change from what it used to be and to what it is now. To me it used to have charm and elegnace whilst still being a powerful wine. The last one I tasted was the 2005 and it was none of these things. overly powerful, overly worked and overly expensive lacking any charm and elegance. There's no right or wrong in this - just different. Magrez, under the guidance of Rolland, makes all his wines in the same style - one that doesn't particularly agree with me and therefore I don't buy them. A lot of people like that style so will buy them. As Rolland says, what/who is wine for? The consumers? No - it is a business and only the Californians will admit that they want to make high scoring wines. Me, I like wines that are still made by artisans and they make wine in a style that primarily they like. Even if there are small faults, I often find them (the faults) charming. I presume that the wines that are made to get high scores are primarily made to suit Parker's palate, seeing that he is Mr. Influential. Fine, I don't have a problem with that. Again there is no right or wrong in this but my palate is different from Parker's but it seems to me that the vineyard owners trying to get high scores think that only Parker's palate is to be trusted (commercially anyway). It sort of reminds me of advice that I sometimes give to people. You shouldn't always buy your wine from the same merchant as you tend to only buy what he likes. Sometimes you miss out on some real gems. - one man's meat being another man's poison and all.
  10. BP I quite like the label of the 1796. Classic but then again I suppose that I am not JoeP. I seem to recall that it has a wax capsule which I think always looks good (unless the rest of the packaging is pretensious). For example I think that it looks good on Makers Mark. I suppose when I said label design that it should have included packaging as well. With the 1796 I like the bottle shape - it looks expensive. The fact that what is inside is excellent is neither here nor there for Joe P. As names go, I think one of the better ones (along with the packaging) is El Dorado. I like the ship one the label - perfect connection with rum - and the name is good. A dumpy-ish bottle gets me thinking of the old days with pirates etc. Dont't know why but there you are. On the other hand Old Brigand does nothing for me - too obvious Just personal thinkings.
  11. I did a private bottling for a Japanese company but don't see that they were aiming at Joe Public. Their major bit was the name of the distillery followed by the age (year not how old which I think is more attractive if a little "dishonest") But Joe Public: 1) Price 2) Label design 3) A catchy name that makes them think of the Caribbean 4) Region 5) Age 6) Bottler For JP I really don't think that age is that important. Many rums don't include an age statement at all and then some use monikers such as XO or VSOR etc etc
  12. ctgm

    Oh my!

    Intersting about the Margaux. DT - I have had both Latour and Lafite (magnum) 1973 recently. The Latour was really quite nice and I think that I still have a bottle somewhere as it is my wife's birthyear. The Lafite was a different kettle of fish - awful, thin, insipid.
  13. Ed. out of interest do you know where Khukri get their molasses from? I am pretty sure that no cane is grown in Nepal
  14. I'll have to check - maybe I have the Anejo Reserva rather than the 7yo
  15. Ed aren't there certain Bacardis made in Spain that are much better than certain other Bacardis? I know that Cuba and Spain have a close link and am not sure if the rum is aged in Cuba and shipped to Spain for bottling > becoming a non-Cuban product or have I got everything wrong (probably!!)?
×