Woodford Reserve is a relatively recent entry into the world of bourbon. Brown Forman, owners of the Kentucky distillery that produces Old Forester and Early Times as well as the Jack Daniels distillery in Tennessee, bought the old, shuttered Labrot & Graham distillery in 1993 and began selling Woodford Reserve Distiller's Select in 1996. Unlike most bourbon distilleries, which use column stills, the Woodford distillery uses pot stills, though the bourbon in the Distiller's Select is a blend of the pot still whiskey and whiskey distilled by column still at Brown Forman's other Kentucky distillery.
In addition to their regular Distiller's Select bourbon, each year since 2005, Woodford has released a new whiskey as part of its Master's Collection. The Master's Collection bottlings are experimental whiskeys distilled entirely in pot stills at the Labrot & Graham distillery. They retail for about $90. The releases so far have been as follows:
2005/2006 - Four Grain, a bourbon made with both wheat and rye (most bourbons have only one of the two) along with the usual corn and barley.
2007 - Sonoma-Cutrer Finish, the bourbon was finished in Chardonnay barrels from the Brown Forman owned Sonoma-Cutrer winery.
2008 - 1838 Sweet Mash, a bourbon distilled from a sweet mash rather than a sour mash, meaning that instead of transferring some spent mash from previous distillations, to maintain a consistent environment for the yeast, the mash was created from scratch, allegedly based on an 1838 recipe.
2009 - Seasoned Oak Finish, a bourbon finished in barrels made from wood which had been seasoned (essentially left outside) for 3 to 4 years instead of the usual 3 to 4 months.
2010 - Maple Wood Finish. The bourbon was finished in barrels made from sugar maple wood.
Thanks to some samples from Regular Chumpington, a frequent commenter here on Recent Eats, combined with some shopping luck, I was able to amass a set of all of the Woodford products except for the Four Grain Master's Collection. So here they are, the almost complete Woodford Reserve.
Woodford Reserve Distiller's Select, 45.2% abv
This is the standard Woodford Reserve. The nose on this is light and sweet with some banana notes; the palate starts sort of generically sweet but quickly turns a bit astringent with some acidic notes at the tail end and a bit of a chemical flavor with some earthy notes as well which continue into the finish. I started drinking Woodford early in my bourbon career, and it was one of the bourbons that I really took a liking to early on. It was once my go to bourbon for cocktails and sipping. I haven't had any in years, and it's either changed character quite a bit since then or it's just not as good as I remember. It's not offensive, but it has some off flavors and is overall, a bit flat.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection Sonoma-Cutrer Finish, 43.2%
The nose on this a bit sour. You can sense the wine influence in that it smells a bit like a winery, with the damp, musty old barrels, but not as pleasant. The flavor is sweet with a definite wine influence, but more like a cheap jug wine than a good California Chardonnay; the way the sweetness is integrated with the corn also gives it some Canadian Whisky notes. The jug wine notes really come out in the finish. The label says Sonoma-Cutrer, but the finish shouts Paul Masson.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection 1838 Sweet Mash, 43.2% abv
This is probably the Woodford I'm most interested to try. The whole concept of doing a sweet mash is highly innovative, and I was excited to see what the result was. The nose on this is dry, oaky and maybe a little soapy. It almost reminds me of the nose on Wasmund's Single Malt (which is also distilled in a pot still). The palate is quite medicinal and woody, maybe even a little bit briny with some orchard fruit in the background. The finish is medicinal with a bitterness that grows. This version seems to have magnified some of the harsher characteristics of the regular Woodford, not one I would rush back to try. Maybe they should have left it in 1838.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection Seasoned Oak Finish, 50.2% abv
Unsurprisingly, the nose on this is distinctively woody with some nice butterscotch notes. The palate starts sweet, has some woody astringency and finishes with the medicinal qualities that seem to be characteristic of Woodford. The woody astringency complements the medicinal notes making this pretty decent, with a dry, woody finish.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection Maple Wood Finish, 47.2% abv
The nose on this is similar to the basic Woodford but with a bit more sweetness to it. The palate has a combination of briny and sweet notes. Those medicinal notes are there but are lightened up a bit by some sweetness. I don't detect any real maple character, other than the general sweetness; it's more Log Cabin than pure maple syrup. It's a decent combination, though there is still a bit of lingering bitterness in the finish.
The Woodford Reserve Master's Collection has a generally poor reputation, and I'd have to say it is deservedly so. I wasn't very impressed with any of these whiskeys. If you have a thing for astringency and medicinal flavors, you might appreciate them, and while I like some medicinal flavors in peated Scotch, this was a different sort of medicine. The maple finish and the seasoned oak were my favorites of the lot, though I wouldn't rush to buy either of them, especially at the going price. Given that I was an early fan of the regular Woodford, I must say that while I admire their experimental spirit, I'm disappointed in the outcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I wish Brown-Forman wouldn't mix Old Forester into the L&G whiskey before bottling. I'm not a fan of Old Forester in the least, and those distinctive flavors come through loud and clear in Woodford. I've heard from people who have tried it at the distillery that the L&G whiskey on its own is superb, so it's a shame they have to ruin it by blending it with low-end junk.
I promised I'd leave my take on this, so I'm just going to drop my tasting notes.
I will note that I'd actually never gotten around to Woodford on the bourbon front, so I approached this more or less with a clean slate. For whatever it's worth I tend to be more of a wheater guy but I love a good rye.
My notes are presented in the Whisky Mag style and the scores are on the LAWS scale (which feels more quantifiable and less arbitrary than a 100pt scale).
Woodford Reserve Distiller's Select C+
N: Very sweet. Rye is evident on the nose, as well as vanilla. There's a low hint of marzipan and vanilla as well. Becomes waxy with a few minutes exposure to air.
P: Sweet, with wood evident and rye as well, initially syrupy and thick on the palate but then feels watery and starts to warm. The thicker marzipan style note is evident; a little vanilla, some very faint hints of toffee. There are early faint notes of black cherry but they tone down quickly.
F: Sweet again, more brown sugar/creme brulee type sweetness. Quite a big, lasting finish. It dries off strange and slightly bitter.
Comment: It's fine but I don't know that I'd go out of my way to recommend this to anyone. Kind of pushes the sweet and syrupy direction. The marzipan is fairly pronounced which gives it a weightier sweet flavor and I see how this could be agreeable. However, this isn't one that I think you're worse off for not having tried.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection Sonoma-Cutrer Finish D
N: Funky - grapey (like grape kool-aid, not actual grapes) and kind of sour. Strong alcohol prickle even though it's not particularly strong. Dusty, farmy notes. Light wood.
P: Syrupy. Fake-grape. Quite hot for the ABV. Some wood. Sweet. Hint of marzipan. Distant hint of toffee which collides horribly with the fake grape. Vaguely chocolatey note. Unacceptably sweet once you get past the weird grape note.
F: Alcohol - tastes like cough syrup. Wood. Bitter and drying, slightly astringent. Still quite warm. Lasts longer than is welcome and manages to bring the awful grape note to the fore.
Comment: This is terrible. It's impossibly sweet and yet has a high alcohol burn - must be fairly young. There is nothing to like about this unless you are tired of mixing grape kool-aid with vodka. I would rather drink Loch Dhu and that's not hyperbole. The purple drank of whiskey.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection 1838 Sweet Mash C-
N: Sweet - corn note in abundance, a slightly vegetal undertone, turbinado sugar, toffee, maple syrup sweetness, some light wood. With a little time in the glass and some air it opens to give a little more traditional vanilla note.
P: Thin-ish, surprisingly strong alcohol note, syrupy sweetness, medium heat, some slightly bitter wood. Maple syrup, almost a medicinal hint. Some very far off notes of plum. Despite the sweetness it's still kind of bland.
F: Big alcohol flush, not particularly nuanced. Toffee, raw sugar, corn.
Comment: This is one-dimensional and tastes young. There's not a lot of complexity to the whiskey. There is an odd bitterness that clashes with the strong sweetness. It just doesn't hang together coherently. Thank god for the sour mash process. The longer you drink this, the sweeter each subsequent sip tastes.
(1/3)
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection Seasoned Oak Finish B-
N: Wood evident immediately, some rye on the nose. A bit of a prickle but not out of line with the ABV. Smells older. Light molasses and maple syrup notes.
P: Syrupy mouthfeel. A bit sweet on the palate, revealing some waxy notes, a hint of apple, some toffee, brown sugar, molasses, definite wood influence but not overpowering, some rye, warming slightly. Later notes of cereal and grain.
F: Big and strong, revealing more fruit notes - apples, black cherry. There's something vaguely medicinal on the finish. Lasting. A flash of orange and cinnamon. Definite drying from the wood on the finish, where the wood notes are most prominent.
Comment: This is really not bad despite the Master's Collection reviews. It's certainly better than stock Woodford to me, favoring a darker, spicier profile than Woodford which is rather sweet to me.
Woodford Reserve Maple Wood Finish C+
N: Close to the regular Woodford - definite banana and marzipan notes, some maple syrup. A lightly vegetal, corn and raw sugar note.
P: Light mouthfeel - very sweet, bringing up turbinado sugar and corn, settling down with some toffee notes. Fairly warm, some grain and earth notes, light wood but slight bitterness and astringency. Moderately drying, with a medicinal note (Robitussin to Laphroaig's Chloraseptic).
F: Reasonably light, alcohol, butterscotch, slight earthiness, and a low-grade medicinal note. Some maraschino cherry early. Turbinado sugar throughout.
Comment: Of all the Master's Collection, this one shows the least influence on taste. It's fine, slightly sweeter, but not overtly objectionable in that direction. Since I don't have a strong preference on taste vs the standard Woodford, it comes to price, and that's pretty clear-cut - just go with the regular Woodford.
(2/3)
I promised Sku I'd post these and this is my first encounter with Woodford. So, it's a pretty clean slate. Notes are in the Whisky Magazine NPF Comment format and the scores are on the LAWS scale.
Woodford Reserve Distiller's Select C+
N: Very sweet. Rye is evident on the nose, as well as vanilla. There's a low hint of marzipan and vanilla as well. Becomes waxy with a few minutes exposure to air.
P: Sweet, with wood evident and rye as well, initially syrupy and thick on the palate but then feels watery and starts to warm. The thicker marzipan style note is evident; a little vanilla, some very faint hints of toffee. There are early faint notes of black cherry but they tone down quickly.
F: Sweet again, more brown sugar/creme brulee type sweetness. Quite a big, lasting finish. It dries off strange and slightly bitter.
Comment: It's fine but I don't know that I'd go out of my way to recommend this to anyone. Kind of pushes the sweet and syrupy direction. The marzipan is fairly pronounced which gives it a weightier sweet flavor and I see how this is agreeable. However, this isn't one that I think you're worse off for not having tried.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection Sonoma-Cutrer Finish D
N: Funky - grapey (like grape kool-aid, not actual grapes) and kind of sour. Strong alcohol prickle even though it's not particularly strong. Dusty, farmy notes. Light wood.
P: Syrupy. Fake-grape. Quite hot for the ABV. Some wood. Sweet. Hint of marzipan. Distant hint of toffee which collides horribly with the fake grape. Vaguely chocolatey note. Unacceptably sweet once you get past the weird grape note.
F: Alcohol - tastes like cough syrup. Wood. Bitter and drying, slightly astringent. Still quite warm. Lasts longer than is welcome and manages to bring the awful grape note to the fore.
Comment: This is terrible. It's impossibly sweet and yet has a high alcohol burn - must be fairly young. There is nothing to like about this unless you are tired of mixing grape kool-aid with vodka. I would rather drink Loch Dhu and that's not hyperbole. This is the purple drank of the whiskey world.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection 1838 Sweet Mash Bottle C-
N: Sweet - corn note in abundance, a slightly vegetal undertone, turbinado sugar, toffee, maple syrup sweetness, some light wood. With a little time in the glass and some air it opens to give a little more traditional vanilla note.
P: Thin-ish, surprisingly strong alcohol note, syrupy sweetness, medium heat, some slightly bitter wood. Maple syrup, almost a medicinal hint. Some very far off notes of plum. Despite the sweetness it's still kind of bland.
F: Big alcohol flush, not particularly nuanced. Toffee, raw sugar, corn.
Comment: This is one-dimensional and tastes young. There's not a lot of complexity to the whiskey. There is an odd bitterness that clashes with the strong sweetness. It just doesn't hang together coherently. Thank god for the sour mash process. The longer you drink this, the sweeter each subsequent sip tastes.
(1/3 - of course this comes in second)
So of the five I sampled, I'd say Seasoned Oak is the best; an absolute toss-up on flavor between Maple Wood Finish and standard Woodford (though on price you have to go with the standard); sweet mash in fourth - the initial sips are OK but become bracingly sweet; and Sonoma-Cutrer in a very distant 5th, being one of the worst I've tasted. It's really amazingly fake-grape.
All this being said... obviously there are some experimentally-minded taste-seekers out there. If you happen to have a bottle of four grain, I think Sku and I would be pretty willing to complete your set between us for a shot at 4G. It's an interesting set of experiements but unfortunately they aren't very successful (aside from seasoned oak).
Interesting comparison, men. I've heard that the four grain is the best of the bunch, probably why there's none left standing.
I'm also amazed that B-F continues to diminish the Master's Collection's reputation (and their own as well) by consistently releasing big buck whiskeys of questionable quality. I wouldn't buy any of the MC, past or future, on a bet.
I find the regular Woodford expression acceptable, but it can be beaten by a bunch of less expensive pours.
As goes the L&G unblended Woodford, I've tasted the white dog, and it was like sucking on a penny...an extreme copper component that I felt must have needed to be masked by the addition of Old Forester honey barrels. Perhaps that aspect has improved...this was some time ago.
I've also wondered why B-F went so far with the three-still setup, when that system is not traditional in the least. I'd go so far to say it was designed and constructed as an untested experiment that eventually needed a lot of fine tuning to get it to even operate acceptably.
In the meantime, we all look forward to anything Buffalo Trace sends our way, the annual Evan Williams Single Barrel and Parker's Heritage are well-received, and Wild Turkey's high-end offerings are highly sought out.
Woodford Reserve Master's Collection? Hardly a blip on the whiskey enthusiast's radar screen. Time for B-F to get an experimental or quality control program in place to salvage what they can from this series, or just start over using a new concept with more experienced supervision.
Sam,
Midway through the Sweet Mash, wondering if anything was going to be good, I started to wonder how BT generally knocks out great whiskies and the BF Master's was so completely off. The Sonoma, IMO, is unbelievably bad and not worth the bucks. Plus they're producing these in ridiculous quantities - in excess of 15,000 on most bottles that I saw. I gripe about the rarity of BT experimentals but maybe that's the saner strategy here. And cutting the run in half...
I love the idea of the experimental lines - I think there's a lot of room to really question the "rules" and play within the framework, and there are certainly some great successes. Obviously there are bound to be some failures, but you'd think they'd come up with more than one or two. (I would personally rate the Seasoned Oak higher than regular Woodford but I'm also fond of reasonably woody whiskies)
I think in BF's case, mash bill experiments, double-distillation experiments, etc - are more interesting than odd finishes. You only need try a handful of oddly-finished Bruichladdichs to see how easily a finish can go horribly awry (the Kosher wine finish was painful).
Different strokes, I guess. My brother in law swears by the stuff, but I can't say I'll be back for more.
RC, thanks for your comments. We were pretty close on our evaluations of these.
Sam, I couldn't agree more. The whole time I was tasting these I was wondering how they could keep putting out these dogs. I wanted to ask the Top Chef question, "Did you taste this before you sent it out?" And the OF Birthday Bourbons are pretty good (though I'm not as big a fan as some others), so we know BF is capable of doing a quality yearly release, but jeez guys, get it together.
Agreed on the Birthday Bourbon, and its omission in my last comment was unintentional. I actually love the ones I've been able to get (remember, I'm in the Pepole's Republic of Pennsylvania).
So you're right, they ARE capable of putting out a respected annual release, but the WRMC is twice the price and half the quality.
I'm with Nathan, not a fan of Old Forester products. Especially not the OFBBs. Most 'vintages' taste like they're aged in cedar casks atop the Four Seasons Miami.
Post a Comment