Hey Everyone,
I admit that I am sometimes guilty of prejudice. I just tend to favour certain brands over others and sometimes without good reason. This case occurred most recently with the fabricated competition between St. Andrews' two breweries.
I decided today to take account for what I've been saying, and have a blind taste of comparable beers side by side. I will qualify this by saying that neither of these beers was bad, but two of them did not find their way to my palate. I undertook this tasting with several friends of mine and we came to a surprisingly uniformed consensus. Here are our findings
Blind Taste Comparison... St. Andrews v Eden.
Gold 1- Very clean nose, with a hint of copper oxide. Neutral ish with a gentle spice character. Finish is short, and a touch metallic. Not bad; over all refreshing. I prefer this.
Gold 2- much richer, a bit of vanilla and a strange sharpness of aroma; vom? Palate is yeasty? strangely sweet but also bitter, a bit confused, with a short finish but awkwardly lingering aftertaste. Not as refreshing, but bigger in flavour. Not terrible but not as good. Why no bubbles?
Dark 1- Head is a bit darker, creamy in colour: Coffee and bitter chocolate aromas a hint of brine and a touch of smoked fish. A bit of a richer palate, touch of smoke. I prefer this one.
Dark 2- White-grey head. Cleaner, not as rich in aroma, lightly toasty. Palate is as light as the nose. Pleasant but not quite big enough for me.
The beers, in order were as follows: St. Andrews Brewing Co. Fife Gold, Eden Brewery St. Andrews Gold, Eden Brewery Porter, and finally St. Andrews Brewing Co. Oatmeal Stout. So, basically, the score was 1-1. I chose Fife Gold and Seggie Porter as the better of the four. Each brewery had it's strengths and I liked all the beers well enough. We even put the tasting to a few customers who were similarly split on these beers.
What this tells me is that this town is big enough for the both of them, so I think that this bodes well for the future of St. Andrews' beer culture!
Much Love,
G.
Friday 19 October 2012
Posted with Blogsy
Thursday 11 October 2012
Breaking Bad (preconceptions)- Bourbon
Hey Everyone,
It has been four years since I moved to Scotland, and therefore, nearly all of my experience with any sort of alcoholic beverage has been influenced by this tiny country with a highly disproportional influence on the drinks business. Living here, I have had much more contact with Traquhair House beers than Budweiser (which I do not lament) and have understandably given much more thought and attention to Whisky here rather than international variants. I've had my share of J.D. and wasn't impressed. I've tried a few bourbons here and there and at best found them not particularly interesting but pleasant, and at worst to be sickly sweet, boozy abominations which can fill no other purpose than to make Coke alcoholic without any noticeable change to the soft drink's flavour.
Today, however I am attending a tasting of the portfolio offered by the respectable distiller Buffalo Trace which includes a bit of a biographical experience, as it includes some of their 'White Dog' which, in Scotch-speak is basically new make, and in America would be considered more or less Moonshine. I have tried several such spirits, including new make from Balvenie, Ardbeg, Glenglassaugh and Bruichladdich and have found them often to be unpleasant, but a recognisable forerunner to the aged spirit years down the line. FOr a run down of my tasting notes, for the individual whiskies, have a look here.
Anyways, Jim Murray, the guy who puts out the Whisky Bible each year and makes tremendously sweeping statements about whisky, which can only be explained by a very specific and difficult to understand set of tastes, freaking loves this stuff. I don't really know what has made him fall so in love with American Rye whiskey, as he consistently gives rye and bourbon very generous scores, whereas single malts from Scotland draw more stringent criticisms. My only reasoning is that he either doesn't see the point in criticising a nation of such one-dimensional whiskies, or he doesn't understand them.
Either way, my experience today revealed to me that while there is a pleasant and sweetly fragranced world of bourbon and rye whiskey out there which lends itself so spendidly to session drinking, contemplating the world, and cocktails, the whiskey itself does not take long to get your head around. Sure there are different aspects to the individual bottlings, and even some traits which can pass for a fleeting complexity, but the truth, in my eyes, is that all of these whiskies had an overriding flavour of woody vanilla, banana and booze, leading inevitably to an alcoholic, watery finish.
I am not saying I didn't enjoy these whiskies... I most certaily did, but I did not see any kind of weight or body which didn't rely on either wood or alcohol content. And while I liked the blender a lot and enjoyed his presentation, I don't believe that Buffalo Trace's whiskey is what the campaign says it is. If this is the best of American whiskey, then I don't think Scotland really needs to be concerned about it's position as the king of distillation.
By all means, enjoy some good bourbons, and definitely enjoy some Buffalo Trace, because for what it is, it is good. But I'm just not really convinced.
Much Love,
G
It has been four years since I moved to Scotland, and therefore, nearly all of my experience with any sort of alcoholic beverage has been influenced by this tiny country with a highly disproportional influence on the drinks business. Living here, I have had much more contact with Traquhair House beers than Budweiser (which I do not lament) and have understandably given much more thought and attention to Whisky here rather than international variants. I've had my share of J.D. and wasn't impressed. I've tried a few bourbons here and there and at best found them not particularly interesting but pleasant, and at worst to be sickly sweet, boozy abominations which can fill no other purpose than to make Coke alcoholic without any noticeable change to the soft drink's flavour.
Today, however I am attending a tasting of the portfolio offered by the respectable distiller Buffalo Trace which includes a bit of a biographical experience, as it includes some of their 'White Dog' which, in Scotch-speak is basically new make, and in America would be considered more or less Moonshine. I have tried several such spirits, including new make from Balvenie, Ardbeg, Glenglassaugh and Bruichladdich and have found them often to be unpleasant, but a recognisable forerunner to the aged spirit years down the line. FOr a run down of my tasting notes, for the individual whiskies, have a look here.
Anyways, Jim Murray, the guy who puts out the Whisky Bible each year and makes tremendously sweeping statements about whisky, which can only be explained by a very specific and difficult to understand set of tastes, freaking loves this stuff. I don't really know what has made him fall so in love with American Rye whiskey, as he consistently gives rye and bourbon very generous scores, whereas single malts from Scotland draw more stringent criticisms. My only reasoning is that he either doesn't see the point in criticising a nation of such one-dimensional whiskies, or he doesn't understand them.
Either way, my experience today revealed to me that while there is a pleasant and sweetly fragranced world of bourbon and rye whiskey out there which lends itself so spendidly to session drinking, contemplating the world, and cocktails, the whiskey itself does not take long to get your head around. Sure there are different aspects to the individual bottlings, and even some traits which can pass for a fleeting complexity, but the truth, in my eyes, is that all of these whiskies had an overriding flavour of woody vanilla, banana and booze, leading inevitably to an alcoholic, watery finish.
I am not saying I didn't enjoy these whiskies... I most certaily did, but I did not see any kind of weight or body which didn't rely on either wood or alcohol content. And while I liked the blender a lot and enjoyed his presentation, I don't believe that Buffalo Trace's whiskey is what the campaign says it is. If this is the best of American whiskey, then I don't think Scotland really needs to be concerned about it's position as the king of distillation.
By all means, enjoy some good bourbons, and definitely enjoy some Buffalo Trace, because for what it is, it is good. But I'm just not really convinced.
Much Love,
G
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)