Pot-Stilled

[slkinsey]

Interesting. Seems from what you're saying that, rather than the "pot still versus continuous still" distinction, which is largely meaningless, it would make more sense to distinguish between "alembic versus fractionating column."

Edited April 1, 2008 by slkinsey (log)

[KatieLoeb]

Bluecoat Gin, here in Philadelphia uses a copper pot still for small batch distillation. Click the link and follow the process. There are some fractional pictures of the actual still in there as well.

[Splificator]

Interesting.  Seems from what you're saying that, rather than the "pot still versus continuous still" distinction, which is largely meaningless, it would make more sense to distinguish between "alembic versus fractionating column."

←

Yep. That's certainly what I was trying to say, in my own obscure way.

[Mayhaw Man]

One thing I recently learned about is that a lot of the microdistillers who are supposedly producing "pot stilled" spirits are really using a pot still for the bottom, but then a column on top of the still instead of an alembic.  This produces a spirit that i suppose can technically be called "pot stilled" but really doesn't have the character one would associate with this distilling technique.

←

That is both slightly depressing and unsurprising. Any well-known brands you can name offhand guilty of this?

←

Just for the record, it is true that many micro distillers are doing this, BUT, it's not really a column. What it is, exactly, more or less (how's that for wiggle room) is a potstill with a rectification column on top of it. They usually have lots of copper in them (picture scrubbing pads packed into a tube) and ONE take off point. What you get, in reality, out of one of those, is a spirit that still contains the flavors that you WANT, and not the ones that you don't want.

As I type this, I have one, literally, 10 feet behind me. It's busy pushing out spirit of molasses at roughly 184 proof, which is the result of loading it with 80 proof potstill distillate. It's a pretty amazing process, flavorwise-much like someone saying "I don't like drag racing. It's dumb." Then they end up in Pamona, because someone got free tickets, suddenly realize that it ain't like TV. They're hooked. The process, the equipment, etc. are only part of the process. The personal taste and skill of the distiller (and/or the tradition involved) has just as much to do with it. The copper in the column is there for a reason-You want as much contact as possible as, really, technically, the copper acts with all of the sulfides and stuff and makes them stay, deeply, in the still). Probably, in the still behind me, we have more surface area contact that I would in an old school pot. Plus, better for me, I love what happens in that thing. While it comes out as, well, pretty close to, rocket fuel-once cut back from brain damage level, it's damned delicious as it is at 80 proof. 3, 5, 7 10 years or so in barrels (currently I get them used from Buffalo Trace) and proves, beyond the shadow of a tastebud, that there is a huge difference between a rectification column and just a big ass column

On the other hand, you ever been to Scotland? They got crazy big columns there and, happily for them, people are willing to pay crazy money for the stuff.

[Mayhaw Man]

Doesn't Tito's distill their own?

Why someone would want to go to all the trouble of distilling their pre-rectification neutral spirits escapes me.

←

It's all about solids. You don't want them plugging up a recti still. Ever. They suck to clean and don't work right when they are plugged up. That's why.

Bourbon guys, ALL OF THEM, use these stills, columns, that are continuous feed and designed to be able to not pass solids too far upward. The Scots, as well, are using HUGE stills, for basically the same reason.

Just for the record, bourbon started getting whacked out in a still almost 125 years ago. It's not a new idea or technology.