Woodford Reserve Double Oaked vs OF Birthday '08

Discuss any bourbon related topics here that do not belong in a forum below.

Moderator: Squire

Woodford Reserve Double Oaked vs OF Birthday '08

Unread postby Mike » Tue Aug 06, 2013 7:22 pm

I think Woodford Reserve bourbon is high quality bourbon. It has that distinct 'acrid' copperish taste one often associates with Chris Morris' best efforts in the WR, Old Forester Birthday Bourbons. But, being one who seems to enjoy the benefits of extra years in the barrel, no WR bourbon (my opinion, of course) compares to the Birthday Bourbons (most around 12 years old) or the one of the best bourbons to come along in a long, long time - the Woodford Double Oaked.

I am comparing the '08 Birthday Bourbon to the WR Double Oaked. Both are (I no doubt do not need to, but will, remind you, that this is only my opinion), blessed (cursed?) with that acrid metallic taste that so many find objectionable, and with the tannins from the oak. The same tannins that moderate the barrel sweetness but lengthen the whole tasting experience and add organic complexity to the flavors. But, the greatest contribution of extra aging is so very hard to adequately describe - because, yes, it is subtle.

Subtlety in whiskey is what softens everything you taste. In a subtle bourbon, neither the sweetness, nor the spice, and certainly not the alcohol dominates. But it is a delicate matter to achieve this bourbonic state. The tannins are given more than the usual role in these whiskies, and therein lies a risk. Tannins are mouth drying, and offer a certain bitter quality, that, if pushed too far, are objectionable.

What is too far? Your palate, with experience, will tell you. My tolerance for, and like of, tannins, if no doubt more than most. But, it is my contention that the proper amount of tannins balance the Bourbon in terms of its sweetness, its spice, its alcohol, and its finish. To the palate attuned to their attractions, they lengthen everything, making the Bourbon body fuller and more complex.

I would like to say that experience with older bourbons tends to support my opinion, but there are those who disagree, who have more experience, and better palates than mine.

Still, how could I write from any other perspective than my own? I seem to be the lone voice here, and you are always free to ignore my opinions.
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rage at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light. - Dylan Thomas
Mike
Registered User
 
Posts: 2231
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:36 pm
Location: Savannah, GA

Re: Woodford Reserve Double Oaked vs OF Birthday '08

Unread postby gillmang » Wed Aug 07, 2013 7:56 am

I would argue that all fine whisky is a balance between its chemical-like, white dog origins and a woody blanket. In very young whisky, the oils and other secondary constituents (secondary to ethanol) dominate. In very old whisky, the wood and tannin do, and the chemical taste is hardly apparent because disguised or converted by time and oxygen to more pleasant-tasting esters and other compounds. Prior to continuous distillation and the Coffey still, the only way to bring whiskey to palatability was to store in oak containers. But they let it rest just long enough to get that balance, which was anywhere from three to 10 years or more depending on the particular results and peoples' taste. 12 year old bourbon is fine but 15 and 20 generally tend to be too woody for me, to cover over the "distillery character" of the product as famed whiskey writer Michael Jackson put it. But each has a different tolerance for this and the sweet spot.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm


Return to Bourbon, Straight

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests