What is a good Bourbon to start with?

@BlissInABarrel, $ 40 is often closer to the lower end for a lot of the new US artisanal whiskeys.

You mentioned Corsair Distilling. Connosr member @darekbell is the Corsair owner and distiller. You can go right to him to get your information if you choose.

As for taste, there will be no doubt hits and misses with the new products. I've had a number of relatively young products that I liked. Since I really like wood flavours I do usually prefer longer wood aging for my top favourites. Many of these newer products don't have age statements, so it is hard to say just how old, or young, they actually are.

I am a big fan of Balcones True Blue very young undiluted 100% New Mexican blue corn whiskey. That one costs about $ 65, by the way. Unaged Corsair Rye Moon is very nice. Corsair Pumpkin Spice unaged whiskey is interesting. Balcones Malt Whiskey is great, and extremely unusual. I've had the Corsair Rasputin. HOPS dominant is almost an understatement there. Interesting to taste, but not flavour you would normally associate with whisky.

To put this into perspective, these distilleries are carrying out massive creative projects using great inventiveness and resourcefulness, and are already showing some extremely attractive results. I have the utmost respect for Balcones, Corsair, Koval, and a number of the even newer and smaller distilleries, with respect to the creative projects which they are pursuing, and their ability to accomplish results that are worthwhile and that will ultimately be commercially successful.

Batch variations can be a big thing. I've had Catoctin Creek Roundstone Rye from two different batches, one of which didn't impress me favourably, the second one of which was very pleasant. I liked my first batch bottle of Copper Fox Rye a good bit, but had some from another batch that was not as good.

Correction: that is Corsair Wry Moon, referred to above.

@Victor It's interesting that you talk about the craft distilleries. Over here in Australia quite a few of the distilleries label themselves as such, being a craft distillery or a boutique distillery because they're small batch. I like how you stated that you really can't call yourself or label a whisky that you produce as small batch unless you also have a larger operation to distinguish from the different qualities of the different spirits. One problem that I've had is that some of these distilleries keep telling me that I can't compare the prices for their products vs the prices for say an Ardbeg or a Stagg as they put it "it's comparing apples and oranges, it doesn't work"

One of the things I do on my blog/reviews is state how much a whisky is worth AUS wise and whether I think it's a fair price or not. Would you compare the price for say a Corsair (just throwing that out as you've had it) vs a larger produced whisky, you pick the whisky, and say that dollar for dollar value should be consistent?

I hope I'm making sense as I'm really tired, but would you say it's fair to judge a "craft" distillery to the same standards as a "commercial" distillery for value per bottle?

Sorry for any rambling, and loving the discussion btw! Just too busy sadly to jump in with my two cents which would be worth more like 1 cent :D

It is easy to see the perspective of the small distiller: cost structure for a new and small operation is different than that for a long-established operation with substantial economies of scale.

From the consumer's perspective an increase in quality or the attainment of something unique in the newer products would be required to justify relatively higher unit costs. That is a highly personal individual judgment. Also, the consumer may factor in a willingness to shoulder through higher bottle costs, some of the financial burden for the purpose of furthering a new, and sometimes local enterprise to become established in the community.

@SquidgyAsh, I hear you asking me if I think it's worth it TO ME to pay more, here typically $ 40 to $ 80 for a bottle of most of the new products. The answer, at this point, is sometimes, but not often. That could change as the products change. Plus, tempermentally, I am not an early adopter, with products generally. An early taster? Yes. An early bottle buyer? Only occasionally. But then I like to taste the older products first, too, before I decide to buy bottles of them.

Thx guys for this very interesting postings. I would love to have a 'favorite button' here to save discussions like this one for later re-reading.

Nice 2013 to you!

Ask for a few bourbon bottle recommendations, receive the entire human knowledge bank of bourbon's past, present and future...connosr in a nutshell!

@Victor About Ancient Ancient, too bad I only know one Kentuckian, and he lives in Germany.

@FishInABarrel Shit I did get seduced by a "small batch": Elijah Craig.

The whiskey was great though! It's flawless. I mean, there are a lot of better whiskeys, but Elijah Craig 10 has nothing that is negative about it in my opinion. Unless you don't like oak, but I sure do like oak. It's interesting how much of the oak gets into the whisky after only 10 years, compared to scotch. So I guess this is a reason why the Scotts don't use new barrels...I imagine 18 years in a new oak barrel to taste not so good.

About adding flavors to whiskey: Of course it's always good to explore and discover new methods and products. But should it be called whiskey? I feel it's a bit like putting neon lights on the great pyramids in Egypt. Maybe it will create a new interesting experience that is fully satisfying for the senses, but you stray away from the essence of it. ...Hold on... I start sounding just like someone who's arguing that electronic music is not "real music" cause it's not made the traditional way, but with a lot of gadgets and tricks to enhance the sound beyond what is possible in a natural way. But to me that's the very beauty of electronic music; it can go beyond music. So, I should accept that it can be the same with whisk(e)y, even if I probably won't become a customer.

@nilsG, this is quite an interesting question that you've proposed in terms of old oak vs new oak and the age statement in the bourbon world vs. the scotch world.

here's the general rule (though i don't know how much it has changed so if anyone would like to correct me, please do so) for bourbon by law: 1. Bourbon can be made anywhere in USA (Lyndon B Johnson passed a law that allowed bourbon to be made anywhere in the US 2. Age for 2 years in brand new white american oak barrels that have been charred. so, by law, they can only use these barrels once so they gotta sell 'em! (there are different levels of char. i.e. level 1 char= 10-15 seconds on torch; #2 level char: 15-25 seconds on torch; #3= 25-35 secons on torch and #4= 35-45 seconds on torch. that being said, i've heard from several master distillers who have different POV's on the charing process. Some say that it masks cheap ingredients and makes the whisky appear "older" than what it is. Others say it brings out the maple sugars from the staves, giving it a yummy quality. 3.there's at least 51% of corn in the mashbill 4. distilled between 80-160 proof.
5. most bourbons are distilled with the continuous distillation process 1st and the 2nd distillation process they use the "doubler".

with that being said, because the oak barrels are brand new and they can only use brand new oak barrels for at least 2 years (ah..there are some new inventions of course. lincoln henderson, the former master distiller for woodford reserve, which i think you would like, decided to let his new product called Angel's Envy finish off in port wine barrels). as a result of this rule, they sell all of their barrels off to tequila companies, scotch companies etc. for practical reasons, the scotch market buys lots of ex bourbon casks because there's a plethora of 'em and there's a shortage of european oak barrels. i believe the percentage is 90%..in terms of scotch being aged in ex bourbon casks.

european oak barrels are usually larger than bourbon barrels (this is because of the height of trees...i don't know if i can explain it clearly without using a picture diagram to show you...essentially the staves have to be solid. so with american oak trees the stump is shorter than european oak. you can only use anything below the branches to make solid staves).

so where am i going with all of this? i hope i've answered some of your questions regarding why bourbons are usually younger than scotches and why they use certain barrels in scotland and USA.

as far as brand new companies experimenting ..haha we can always agree to disagree of course. and that's the beauty of it. i like this idea of innovation because it can bring something new. david stewart, the master distiller for balvenie, was the dude who invented the idea of finishing the spirit in different barrels---transferring them to pedro ximenez casks, oloroso sherry casks, etc for its remaining life. that's ground breaking. that's exciting. :D as you can see, other companies have been inspired by his innovation. so, there's a side of me that says, "ah, come on nils! try this brand new whiskey! wink wink!" but at the end of the day it's about what you like and that's the most important thing.

btw, i'm very glad that you like your elijah craig! :D

@nilsG, son of a beesh..i rambled and rambled and i think my message got deleted. so where i was going with the oak barrels and the age statements of bourbons..they are usually released at a younger age as a result of the extreme weather climate. in the area of kentucky, for example, during the summer it gets super hot, so the alcohol expands and seeps into the oak barrels. then, during the winter, the alcohol contracts, pulling the characteristics of the oak barrels back into the barrel. as a result of extreme weather climate this kinda increases the aging process of the bourbon. in scotland the climate is moderate; it doesn't change much, so they usually sit in the barrel for longer periods of time in comparison to the spirits in USA. factors of charing the barrels (what the folks are doing in USA when aging bourbons) also make the whisky appear older than they are...the charring process gives off that kind of appearance. in scotland, you don't really see that kind of charing process..at least that's from my understanding...so again, their spirit sits in the barrel for longer periods of time. so, yes, in regard to your hypothesis about worrying if an old bourbon may taste "bad" that may be true as i've heard from master distillers from the USA, stating that the bourbon tends to age a lot quicker than scotch because of the extreme weather conditions. but of course there are always exceptions to rules...as pappy van winkle 23 year is highly prized.

the quality of the each cask offers something different to the spirit as you already know.

european oak: they air dry their staves. this allows the staves to be expose to elements and seasons as opposed to american oak, which is baked inside a kiln. the american staves--->moisture content is decreased to 12% when the staves dry. also, the dry staves leach out the oak's tannins and lignins. tannins found in barrels add longevity to the spirit and lignin adds body and texture.

i can't remember what serves as the purpose europe's split oak on grain vs american oak having a finer grain...i don't know what the grain does to the spirit. can't remember. :/ dang it!

@BlissInABarrel Here’s the definition for bourbon: Whisky produced in the U.S. at not exceeding 80% alcohol by volume (160 proof) from a fermented mash of not less than 51 percent corn and stored at not more than 62.5% alcohol by volume (125 proof) in charred new oak containers

Here’s the definition for straight bourbon: •Bourbon whisky stored in charred new oak containers for 2 years or more • “Straight Bourbon Whisky” may include mixtures of two or more straight bourbon whiskies provided all of the whiskies are produced in the same state Source: www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter4.pdf

In addition, bourbon aged for less than 4 years must include an age statement Source: www.ttb.gov/spirits/bam/chapter8.pdf

@Russ oh cool ! Thanks a lot Russ! Very informative!

My inexpensive but dependable go-to choices are Elijah Craig 12 year-old and Buffalo Trace. A lot of people love Eagle Rare, but I was unmoved by it. If you're looking to spend a little bit more, I highly recommend Booker's.

Nice this discussion gets even more interesting. I want to recap the nice input by Bliss. For Bourbon new oak is used. The casks are smaller (the surface to volume ratio scales inverted to the diameter, so for smaller barrels you have more wood-surface per whisky volume). And you have extreme weather conditions in the US, compared to Scotland. All those facts increase the wood influence.

But I am not sure if the charred oak has this effect. I also don't think this layer of coal gives aroma to the whisky. It just works as a filter and mellows the spirit. But maybe you just tried to say this by "charred oak makes the whiskey appear older"?

And the barrels introduce more tannins to the spirit because they are very dry (baked)? Also very informative.

@Davy Glad you said Bookers. That's also a bottle I've had my eyes on. Your recommendation added one more piece to an excuse to by it.

@Elijah Craig (if there's an actual connosr member by this name ignore me, I'm talking to the bottle): Hey the cork tree forest called, they want their bark back! But seriously, the cork is gargantumongus. There's easily the equivalent of four Ardbeg corks there. I like cork, but I wonder if it doesn't increase the production cost for such a low price whisky. Don't know the current market value for raw cork though.

@Bliss, master if brevity...thanks!

Speaking of the giant cork... I am a Kentucky native and love Bourbon. I got one bottle of Elijah Craig and (stick with me) it tasted like cardboard soaked in bottom shelf whiskey. I decided that it was crap and I'd never get another. I'm a fan of Basil Hayden's, Buffalo Trace, and others. I will have to go back and try it again. I have heard nice things by many respectable tasters so I must have gotten a bad bottle. But again, for my money a great starting place is Basil Hayden's.

@NilsG You mentioned your store didn't have Knob Creek but if they ever get in the Knob Creek Single Barrel, I'd recommend trying it. It has a great all around bourbon flavor plus it comes in at 60% ABV. In the US you can get a bottle for between $35-40 and at 120 proof that's a great deal considering the quality your getting. It takes a spash of water nicely and opens up beautifully after sitting for a few minutes. Good luck with your bourbon journey. I started seriously focusing on bourbons about 8 months ago and have loved every minute.

Ok I'm blessfully cursed now with recommendations, I'm gonna fall behind on my single malt journey if this continues. I should clone my self and dedicate him to bourbon while I do malts. Then we sit down once a month and update each other on the spirits we've had, and get drunk.

@JJBoud maybe hard to give a general answer, but how are bourbons when it come to variations between batches/bottles? Do you know?

@maltygirl 60% sounds good, when a spirit brings tears to my eyes after swallowing and letting the aromas creep back up the nose it's a good thing. I'll definitely be on the look out for Knob Creek.

I would agree with the Ancient Age recommendation. It is made in the Buffalo Trace distillery, and has a nice sweetness and spice profile. The Buffalo Trace is a mouthful of spice, and I love it. Maker's Mark and Knob Creek are all good go to bourbons as well.