Review 175: Hornitos Reposado

Review 175

8/31/13

Sauza Hornitos Reposado: 40% abv

Background: In an effort to a have a more confusing brand marketing strategy than General Motors did in the 1990s, Sauza has multiple, indistinguishable lines of tequila, including Sauza, Hornitos, and Tres Generaciones. Sauza also has, within its own brand, three different kinds of unaged tequila. I’ve been able to figure out is that Sauza is double distilled out of 100% agave, Hornitos is double distilled out of 100% BLUE agave, and Tres Generaciones is triple distilled out of 100% blue agave. Hornitos offers three pretty basic tequilas in its range: Plata, Reposado, and Anejo. All of these whiskies are double distilled, and like you might expect, the Plata is a silver tequila which is unaged, the Reposado is aged for two months in a 10,000 gallon wooden vat, and the Anejo spends a year of its life in a bourbon oak barrel. So this tequila, which has spent minimal time in a massive oak vat, sits in front of us to be judged. It has the very uninspired 40% abv, but blessedly it is 100% blue agave to impart some quality. Because of the volume of liquid present in the vats it is aged in, wood influence will not be large. In fact, Hornitos advertises the lack of oak presence, as if it is exciting to know that this tequila has an identity crisis. Now let’s visit the facts.

Straight

Nose:  The aromas in the nose start off with a soft impression of custard, vanilla and slight caramel. You can still smell agave in the nose, but it hides behind these soft, sweet notes. There is a small presence of berries in the nose, with a little bit of banana coming through as well. This actually smells a little bit like young rum with some tropical notes in it. The agave remains a weak note, while soft fruit and cream notes dance in the foreground. Some green pear notes come through, with even a less prominent sense of green pepper coming through.

Arrival: Not surprisingly, the tequila here tastes sweet and confectionary right in the arrival. There is some vanilla sweetness, and this thing almost tastes like a sugar cookie. What is surprising though, is although the arrival is a short event, as it bleeds into the body, the suggestion of barley malt comes through quite strongly. It does have some grain flavor to the arrival, but at this point you aren’t really seeing anything scream tequila at you.

Body: For a Scotch whisky drinker, it might come as a surprise to see some maltiness in the body of a tequila. I know, I know, this is sort of blasphemy, but it works quite well. The sugar cookie flavor comes through in the body, with a soft maltiness and other sweetness, but again, there is no sign of agave or tequila-like flavors present in this glass. I’m starting to wonder if I poured the wrong bottle…

           

Finish: After the very short body, you start to get small hints of agave coming through, with some slight spice and burn coming in, but no shortage of the previous flavors found in the tequila. The finish really falls short of having much flavor, but at least a bit of pepper, agave, and pear skin come through at the end. There is even a subtlety of sparkling wine at the end. The whole event is short, as if it’s been engineered to be for shots.

With Water

Nose: So far as I can tell, with water, nothing about this smells like tequila. A sense of grain comes through, the sweet, creamy notes have backed off, and the fruit notes continue to sustain themselves. If you think hard enough, you might detect the tiniest aroma of oak coming through after water.

Arrival: The arrival is still sweet, but takes on a more wine-like characteristic, having some white-grape tendencies, some pear and now a little bit of acidity from a tart lemon.

Body: The new lemon tartness carries into the body,  and although most of the old notes still apply, it adds a layer of complexity to the whole thing. There is a slight bit of agave coming through, and vanilla complimenting it.

           

Finish: The finish is still short, custard-like, and holds some agave. By the finish, the tartness fades off and what’s left is this confusing grain flavor.

Final Comments: So here I am, thinking through tequila as I know it. I smell a different bottle of tequila and remember that, ah yes, tequila does have a distinctive smell. But this tequila doesn’t smell or taste much like tequila at all. The identity crisis prevalent in Sauza’s entire brand is present in just one bottle as well. It is not by any means off-putting, it is very drinkable, and it is certainly unique. It is not a complex spirit, but it does make me raise my eyebrows. What scares me about this, at the end of the day, is that I have to answer two questions of why and why not buy this tequila, and probably exactly as they intended it, the only reason I can think of to buy this tequila is to shoot it down. It doesn’t taste much like tequila and therefore I wouldn’t use it for mixing, but it is not that eventful and therefore I would not buy it to drink straight. At the same time, it is a relatively quality bang for the buck…so how to answer…

 

Why you’d buy it: I’m not sure…but you might? 

Why you wouldn’t: You are shopping for tequila.

Score: 7.5/10

Review 174: Death's Door White Whiskey Aging Experiment #1 - Red Maple aging

Review 174

8/29/13

Death’s Door White Whiskey Aging Experiment #1: 40% abv

Background: So now and again, the mundane nature of doing the same old review format every week gets to be too ritualistic, and we like to do something different. How about aging whiskey? This is an idea inspired by a brilliant man Ralfy, who does whisky reviews on Youtube. You might scratch your head and wonder how one might go about aging whiskey. Well, a few years back I bought a despicable bottle of white whiskey (unaged whiskey) called “Death’s Door” (I know, I need to look at context clues more), and it turned out to be pretty deathly after all. Since then, I haven’t been able to give the stuff away. So did I dump it down the drain? Not a chance. I poured two glasses of Death’s Door and put some small pieces of wood in it. The wood used to age this whiskey was red maple wood, freshly cut and pulled from the tree. As the first experiment, the aging was highly dependent on the preparation of the wood. The first glass got a piece of wood about ½ an inch thick and an inch long, cured for half an hour in the oven at 350° F, whereas the second glass got three cuts of wood that were about ¼ an inch thick and an inch long, cured for an hour and a half in the oven at the same heat. They were both covered in Marsala wine for a short period of time and then charred with a propane torch before exposing them to the whiskey. Both sat in the whiskey for a little over a week, and here’s what we found:

Unaged Death’s Door: Regular Death’s Door is not something I’m a huge fan of, for plenty of reasons. The nose emits sugary smells of buttery popcorn, marshmellows, some graininess and confectionary notes and even some of the smell you get from balloons. It is rather odd, to say the least, but it isn’t very appealing. The taste contains bits of corn and grain that come through, and translate into a pretty popcorn-like flavor, along with some other odds and ends. The natural spirit isn’t horribly great to begin with. So let’s see how it holds up with a little wood influence.

½ Hour Cure Red Maple Death’s Door: Interesting, the color of this whisky got to be a rosy red color, much like you’d see out of an 8 year bourbon or wine-aged whiskey. Remember that bit for later. The nose is significantly different, with some vegetal notes, more fruitiness, some cotton, vanilla, and earthiness. Unfortunately, the flavor doesn’t reflect all of this complexity. Although there were some slight maple notes, the raw sappiness of the wood came through, but only clashed with the original whiskey flavors. So despite the dark color, there was not dark, rich flavor to go along with it. This is just another lesson that color doesn’t mean much in the world of spirits. Either way, this glass was not much more drinkable than the first.

1 & ½ Hour Cure Red Maple Death’s Door: So the first one is a miss, but what about the one with the longer cure and smaller sticks? Well, first of all, this one is actually lighter in color, despite the additional exposure of wood. This is probably directly attributed to the extra curing of the wood. The nose on this one is not much at all similar to either of the other two whiskeys. This one contributes some spice, earthiness, oil, and slight smoke to the equation. The taste is, surprisingly much better, very drinkable, with some woody notes, a short finish, and some slight maple on the arrival.

Final Comments:  So what does it all mean? What’s next? Well, this experiment had to do with the preparation of wood used for aging whisky. There is a lot to learn from this, and the first thing that can be obviously deduced is that aging whiskey is not as simple as you might have assumed. After doing additional research, KCM has determined it will run the next experiment at a 3 hour cure. Right now, three pieces of wood (Oak, Catalpa, and Applewood) are air drying for two weeks before being prepped and placed in three containers of Death’s Door. The next time we do this, it will focus on the difference of woods, so we will be keeping the preparation of the woods the same for each container. If you have any questions regarding the experiment, please feel free to email us at kcmspiritreviews@gmail.com.

Review 173: Isle of Jura 10 Yr

Review 173

8/19/13

Isle of Jura 10 Year: 43% abv

Background: Isle of Jura is a single malt Scotch whisky off the…well…the isle of Jura, to be frank. Jura is not the most climactic of all places when you put it in perspective, netting at 142 square miles of land with one road, one pub, one distillery, and a population of 188 people. You could say then, that the people of Jura are probably pretty well familiar with each other. Despite my seemingly scathing remarks of Jura, pictures show it to be a fairly gorgeous island, not unlike most of Scotland’s landscape. How about the distillery, though? The good people of Jura had self-entitlement to distil liquor until 1781, where authorities decided that they needed a license. In 1810, Jura distillery was founded. At some point, the distillery was mothballed, only to be rebuilt in 1960. Currently, Whyte and Mackay own Jura. Jura yields a yearly capacity of about 2.2M liters a year, produced by 4 tall stills. This particular whisky is their 10 Year offering, netting 43% abv and what looks to be natural coloring. This particular Scotch has been a mystery for me for as long as I’ve owned it, because I can’t seem to place my finger on whether or not I like it. Today I do a formal review.

Straight

Nose:  The nose, on immediate visitation, relays flavors of both citrusy white wine and some amount of corn and light grain. This nose gives the impression that the whisky is fairly young, with a light, fresh smell to it. There is a slight hint of maltiness in the nose, but it is overwhelmed by misplaced smells of other grains. There isn’t a strong sense of woodiness dominant on the nose (with exception to the odd sawdust smell that you get if you spend enough time with it), but there is a consistent nuttiness that comes through. If you dig deep enough, there is almost a slight hint of sherry to it, but it smells coincidental, not intentional. There is a subtle seaweed/sea salt type implication to the whisky, but it doesn’t come through like your Old Pulteney’s would. Overall, it is a mellow nose with some interesting flavors, but it is flat and shallow flavors that come through. There is not a lot of intensity to the nose.

Arrival: The arrival starts off sweet, making it seem as if there was some play from a sherry cask that might not have been assumed before. There is a hint of maltiness, caramel, and then with enough time, some salt and pepper that burns through. There is a sweet vanilla that contradicts a sense of saltiness, with some mixed berries and orange marmalade to accompany the flavor. There is a sense of tartness that comes through, akin to sweet lemon candy flavor.  The arrival is bold and complex, and certainly a respectable entrance into this whisky.

Body: This is where you might start losing the familiarity of single malt Scotch. There is not maltiness to be found in the body. There is a strong sense of salty nuttiness that is very prevalent (maybe almonds). The body is not very climactic, which can be common after a big arrival, and especially leading into this finish. There is some sense of corn that comes through in the body, almost reminiscent of soft bourbon flavor.

           

Finish: There is a confusing mixture of flavors coming out of the finish, most unfortunate of which is the sense of burnt wood that reminds me a lot of the Dalmore 12 we just tried. The corn-like grain flavor persists into the finish, with somewhat of a fluoride-like aftertaste that acts as the last flavor standing. Other than that and some light citrus flavors, with the small hint of sherry coming through, Jura falls flat in the finish. I don’t think this finish is what it could be, and with such a promising arrival, it’s disappointing to see it come to this conclusion. The finish is short and what lasts is bitter and strained. We are still waiting to see how water may help make this whisky better.

With Water

Nose: After letting this Scotch marry with some water for a few minutes, you will find in the nose that the barley starts to come through more. There are still very similar notes as before, but some confectionary subtleties start to emerge as well. There is a slight pear-like scent that can be found, as well as a small amount of green tea smell.

Arrival: The arrival, after water, is smooth and sweet, with similar flavors as before. The sherry, mixed with some lime tartness, is a prevalent sweet and sour combo up front, with some herbal notes later on.

Body: The herbal, grassy flavors bleed into the body, presenting it with a little more character than before. All the same, the body is still pretty subtle and short, just dying off from the arrival.

           

Finish: The finish has not been salvaged from the addition of water. There is still bitterness to be found in the finish. It also comes across as slightly vegetal. The slight burnt flavor seems to reside quite a bit in this instance, and there is a bit more malt richness to carry through, but it seems compromised by an almost plastic-like flavor. This is just not hitting the right way.

Final Comments: I would like to start by saying I have nothing against the Isle of Jura or its people (all 188 of you). I think the fact that they have a distillery to represent them is excellent, and Jura does have some great representation in terms of bottlings. Personally, I am not a fan of the 10 Year, and I don’t want to drink more of it. It is unique, it has a nice arrival, and it has some complexities to it. I would recommend trying this, for anybody who wants to learn more about single malt Scotch, but I have a bottle of it that I’m not too keen on killing off. That being said, I will continue to do experiments with this bottle and learn more about it. Bottom line, this is not on the top of my purchase list, and as a casual drinker, I wouldn’t put it on the top of yours either.

 

Why you’d buy it: You like trying new things, even if you’re told not to

Why you wouldn’t: You listen to the advice in my reviews (poor judgment call, if you ask me)

Score: 7.0/10

Review 172: Captain Morgan Sherry Cask Finish

Review 172

8/11/13

Captain Morgan L.E. Sherry Cask: 35% abv

Background: And here we are, revisiting Captain Morgan. It might seem like a huge jump in quality from our regular reviews, but it is always nice to review the basics. Captain Morgan is currently owned by Diageo, and was brought to market in 1944. Probably the most well-known rum in the states, Captain Morgan rum is actually named after Sir Henry Morgan, a Welsh privateer. Captain Morgan actually started being produced by Seagram Company, but was bought by Diageo in 2001. There has been rum produced in both Jamaica and Puerto Rico, but the stuff you’re probably used to slamming down came from Puerto Rico most likely. Captain Morgan is distilled spirit from Molasses and spends some short time in oak barrels to give it some life. What makes this unique is that it spends some time in a sherry barrel. So is that good or bad? Well, pre-emptively, we can tell you rum is sweet, and so is sherry, so it could either blend well, or be sickeningly like drinking sugar. And not to be overly critical, but you would think that if Captain Morgan was going to make a limited edition bottling, they would kick up the abv to more than a pathetic 35%. We did buy this, however, because it makes for a good experiment. So here it goes: Where has all the rum gone?

Straight

Nose:  The nose starts off with a nice, custardy fruitiness, vanilla and sweetness up front. The smell of vanilla is pretty overbearing up front. There are some hints of cinnamon you’ll catch up front. There is also a slight waxiness that comes through on the nose. This is an odd first in the KCM tasting notes history, but it’s fairly direct. There is some anise present in the nose, as well as some slight ginger and subtle lime. There is a definite strawberry/blueberry note present in the nose, with some orange sherbet and modest melon flavors as well. There is some confectionary flavor to it as well. 

Arrival: There is some definite honey flavor that comes out initially in the arrival, with a smooth sweetness throughout. There is some gentle, soft fruitiness akin to fuji apples and sweet berries, followed by a definite creaminess. There is a definite sugariness that comes through in the arrival. It is definitely sweet, but weirdly enough, it is a light sweetness, not much like the rich, overburdening flavor that you would expect out of a fortified wine.

Body: The body comes up with succulent black cherry flavors, some sweet berries and left over orange and cream flavors, along with subtle hints of vanilla and honey, without every getting too far into the sherry territory. This was probably not a nutty sherry cask, and it probably had minimal exposure, because the raison and nutty characteristics we become so fond of simply are not present. It is still sugary, lots of molasses present. This is very much similar to the arrival, and in this sense, you get what you get. It isn’t a very dynamic rum. What becomes unique about the body is a slight presence of anise and spice.  

           

Finish: The finish, which doesn’t hold much of a presence in the grand scheme of things, holds the most spiciness, but retains the sweet notes of before. The anise and some cinnamon comes through the most here, but the finish is fairly abrupt. It doesn’t last very long and besides the slight sensation of alcohol, you have forgotten what you drank. You might feel like you just brushed your teeth with the refreshing, almost fluoride-like flavor that hangs in the back of your mouth.

With Water

Nose: The nose, after adding just a slight drop of water, is even bigger in the fruity, vanilla, floral, and slight anise spicy notes. It is such a potent, but not off-putting nose, you would honestly want this as your car scent mirror tag. Other than the prominence of the nose, it doesn’t feel like much changed here.

Arrival: Although most of the notes have remained present here, and we aren’t noticing any new ones come out, it seems like there is a slightly better balance now in this one than before.

Body: The body is very much the same as the arrival, with a better balance, not much else is going on.

           

Finish: The finish is very similar, although it seems a little more dry and astringent than before.

Final Comments: Not bad…pretty clean and fairly interesting. It is unique and without water, it is pretty easy to drink, and it does everything you might want out of a rum. We are not huge fans of Captain Morgan, but what they’ve accomplished here, at $20, is pretty damn impressive, for lack of better terms. There is not a lot of dynamics to the rum, but we enjoyed it for a good sipper. This is also a good rum to experiment with, since it is so unique.

 

Why you’d buy it: You’d like to try something different, or you just want something good to mix with.

Why you wouldn’t: You are REALLY looking for something of high quality in the rum world.

Score: 8.25/10