Origins and Feedback: Black and Gold Bourbon

@RianC i have not tried Black & Gold Bourbon and have no idea which distillery in Tennessee produces it. That is a good price for 11 year old bourbon, for sure, especially in the UK. The reviewers on MOM certainly like it. If I were in your position I would strongly consider trying it out, though it is unsatisfying not to know the whiskey's distillery origins. Those origins may be revealed at a later date, of course.

45% ABV is on the low-ish side, but if you can live with that, great.

@Victor - thanks. Yes, a bottle has been ordered. 45% is OK and it sounds lovely. I think the mashbill was high corn, about 92% iirc.

@RianC Oooohhh! If it is 92% (or even 82%) corn then it is almost certainly from George Dickel. They are the only big player I know of that may be playing fast and loose with the rules with respect to corn content going over 80%. If the whiskey is 80% corn or more then, by US law, it is supposed to be called "corn whiskey" and not "bourbon whiskey". Dickel's Tennessee whiskeys are consistently reported to have a corn content greater than 80%. Can they call it a "Tennessee Whiskey" if it contains more than 80% corn? I don't remember for sure, and I'm not in the mood to look up the laws and re-read them. But I AM certain that if it contains 80% corn then you should not be calling it bourbon. Bourbon is more popular than corn whiskey, so that, I suppose is why they keep doing that. "Bourbon" is a word that sells better.

@Victor My understanding was that corn whiskey required a minimum of 80% corn and had to be aged in uncharred oak or used barrels, so if GD takes a whiskey that's > 80% corn and could technically meet the definition of corn whiskey, but put it in new charred oak, it would become bourbon; I guess if they put it through the Lincoln County Process it would become Tennessee Whiskey, but the LCP isn't a requirement for distilling in Tennessee, only a requirement to call the product Tennessee Whiskey...

@YakLord I think that you are correct. It just seems very strange to me when bourbon mashbills stray into corn whiskey territory.

It makes good sense to me that US corn whiskey is defined as having been aged in used barrels. Corn, just like barley, is easily overpowered by the flavours of new charred oak. Even used oak barrels can overpower the flavours of corn in corn whiskis when the whiskis are aged for several years. Bourbon, on the other hand, gets a sufficient counterbalance to the intense flavours from new charred oak from the rye or wheat grains added to flavour the whiskey. Bourbon can hold up to new charred oak wood. Corn whiskey and barley whiski don't do as well.

Now if you toast the new oak barrels without charring them then you can do great things with both corn or barley whiskis. Glenmorangie Ealanta was a 19 yo single malt aged in new toasted oak. Ealanta really does taste different from the typical flavour profiles. Another fascinating example of toasted wood aging is Old Potrero 18th Century Style Whiskey. That one is 100% malted rye grain spirit aged 2.5 years in new toasted oak barrels. The wood flavours in a whiski like that are subtle, and the malted rye is allowed to shine.

@Victor @YakLord - thanks for the feedback. Sounds like Dickel then and the website says this about the barrels.

"... was aged in slowly-charred barrels, and it was that charring that helped to introduce brilliantly bold notes of brown sugar, decadent vanilla and rich cigar box".

Think I'll enjoy this one and a good price for an aged bourbon, cheers!