[DocL]

Originally Posted by BMW F22

Would JW Black or Double Black be a good option to drink around campfires? If not, any recommendations for a $25-30 bottle for camping?

If you are with a bunch of buddies hanging around, try the Costco Kirkland 12yr Blended Scotch. A 1.75L bottle is $35 and it's real easy to drink.

I also just finished a bottle of Double Black, and it has a nice, but not strong peaty flavor. It goes well with a medium strength cigar.

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by DocL

If you are with a bunch of buddies hanging around, try the Costco Kirkland 12yr Blended Scotch. A 1.75L bottle is $35 and it's real easy to drink.

I also just finished a bottle of Double Black, and it has a nice, but not strong peaty flavor. It goes well with a medium strength cigar.

That’s good value for sure. I was set on JW as my dad had some when I was a kid. Don’t think I have ever had JW as an adult and keen to try it.

[premier3is]

Originally Posted by BMW F22

That’s good value for sure. I was set on JW as my dad had some when I was a kid. Don’t think I have ever had JW as an adult and keen to try it.

You won't be disappointed.

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by premier3is

You won't be disappointed.

In JW Black or Kirkland blended?

[premier3is]

Originally Posted by BMW F22

In JW Black or Kirkland blended?

JW Black

Runs around 30-40 dollars a bottle. Check Costco, they have the best pricing usually.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Murf993

Double Black is a blend with the youngest single malt in the mix being 12 years old.

That is absolutely incorrect... that would be JW Black which has a 12 age statement on the front... the double black is unaged and allows JW to use casks that are younger... i'd be willing to bet the average of what is in there is probably closer to 10 or just a tad under...

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Murf993

So both Johnny Walker Black and Double Black are blends as are all JW Whisk(e)y. The youngest whisk(e)y in both blends is 12 years old. There are likely whiskey in the mix that are much older as well.

The age statement on any blended whisk(e)y is the youngest whisk(e)y in the mix, there may be 18 and 25 year olds in there as well.

Again... only applies to regular black which has the age statement... double black has zero aging references whatsoever.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by ASAP

That is absolutely incorrect... that would be JW Black which has a 12 age statement on the front... the double black is unaged and allows JW to use casks that are younger... i'd be willing to bet the average of what is in there is probably closer to 10 or just a tad under...

\

I miss spoke as I was reading a comparison of Black vs Double Black earlier. I'm going to touch base with my buddy who's the Whisk(e)y Consultant for Johnny Walker and see if he can let me know what the youngest single malt in DB is. I'll report back.

[Maynard]

The absolute age is irrelevant, unless you are a numbers snob - in that case just buy the Blue and impress everyone (who doesn't know about single malt) that you spent more than is reasonable. Once you get beyond 2 or 3 years, it becomes a flavor profile issue, and many taste better in younger forms.

[WhiskyPat12]

Originally Posted by premier3is

Now I'm confused since there's many different types. Enlighten us whiskypat!

These two chucklefucks have an entertaining YouTube channel (two actually, Whiskey Tribe and Whisky Vault).

They're not for everyone, but the info is very good.

Here's their explainer on Whisky vs Whiskey. You only need the first like 4 min of the video

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Maynard

The absolute age is irrelevant, unless you are a numbers snob - in that case just buy the Blue and impress everyone (who doesn't know about single malt) that you spent more than is reasonable. Once you get beyond 2 or 3 years, it becomes a flavor profile issue, and many taste better in younger forms.

Partially true... JW red is roughly 4 years and its trash... the idea behind non aged malts is to have the ability to use younger casks for a different profile but... the bigger idea is to improve your margins. In the US, people are number snobs thats why aged whiskeys do better but at least you always know what you are minimally paying for.

Would you prefer to pay $500 for a nice 25 YO or something labeled as a "reserve" that could have 10 YO whiskeys? If you like the younger profile, then maybe you'd prefer the latter... but couldnt you just have bought something to cheaper to begin with?

[jamesinaz]

Originally Posted by ASAP

That is absolutely incorrect... that would be JW Black which has a 12 age statement on the front... the double black is unaged and allows JW to use casks that are younger... i'd be willing to bet the average of what is in there is probably closer to 10 or just a tad under...

This is what I get for "assuming". I assumed since the double black was slightly more expensive that they wouldn't use any whisky in the blend younger than that used in the regular black.

I'd like to say I'll learn from that but you know at this age I think I am hopeless.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Partially true... JW red is roughly 4 years and its trash... the idea behind non aged malts is to have the ability to use younger casks for a different profile but... the bigger idea is to improve your margins. In the US, people are number snobs thats why aged whiskeys do better but at least you always know what you are minimally paying for.

Would you prefer to pay $500 for a nice 25 YO or something labeled as a "reserve" that could have 10 YO whiskeys? If you like the younger profile, then maybe you'd prefer the latter... but couldnt you just have bought something to cheaper to begin with?

Red is terrible, my buddy drinks it on hot days with Ginger ale. I can't do it.

[corn18]

I have found drinking spirits to be highly personal and it changes over time. I like red wine and I have found that what I like is drastically different than what others like. I have also found that spending $200+ on a bottle of Cab is no guarantee that it is "good". Although many other people like it a lot. So I spend a lot of time searching for my wine and I have found a couple of medium $$$ cabs that are great. Lately, I have been trying some blends and they are quite delicious. Very different from the classic Cab, but oh so tasty. But the wine snobs think they aren't pure.

I am just now getting into whiskey and I have discovered my taste is for Irish. I'm not a fan of JB Blue type whiskey. The peaty/mossy stuff just isn't for me. I like my Midletons Very Rare and just picked up some Redbreast 21. Both are just my kind of whiskey.

Is there a level of snobbery associated with single malt? I've had a few shots of Louis XIII over the years and whoever blends that stuff is a genius. If someone makes a good blended whiskey, I will gladly try it. I need to find something in the $80-$100 range so I'm not dropping $200+ on every bottle.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by corn18

I have found drinking spirits to be highly personal and it changes over time. I like red wine and I have found that what I like is drastically different than what others like. I have also found that spending $200+ on a bottle of Cab is no guarantee that it is "good". Although many other people like it a lot. So I spend a lot of time searching for my wine and I have found a couple of medium $$$ cabs that are great. Lately, I have been trying some blends and they are quite delicious. Very different from the classic Cab, but oh so tasty. But the wine snobs think they aren't pure.

I am just now getting into whiskey and I have discovered my taste is for Irish. I'm not a fan of JB Blue type whiskey. The peaty/mossy stuff just isn't for me. I like my Midletons Very Rare and just picked up some Redbreast 21. Both are just my kind of whiskey.

Is there a level of snobbery associated with single malt? I've had a few shots of Louis XIII over the years and whoever blends that stuff is a genius. If someone makes a good blended whiskey, I will gladly try it. I need to find something in the $80-$100 range so I'm not dropping $200+ on every bottle.

Good post and well said. I'm with you, drink what you like as it is all very personal like most of life's pleasures. There is definitely a snobbery with spirits as with many other things. There are some fantastic Single Malts and some stellar blends.

Cheers.

[Maynard]

This is a circular phenomenon - older casks inherently cost more: they sit around costing overhead, while losing volume over time. But then the marketing/'snob factor' takes it out of the realm of simple accounting and blows it up. Age statements or debating the quality of ingredients around ANY blends is comical, since the real elite market is for rare single malts (add a few zero's to the rarest JW has ever sold). Just like with wines, some of those old casks are really only fit for cleaning solution. Blending is an art, and one that is sadly disrespected these days = it used to be that the blends were the high-class drink, and single malts were for the poor yokels who couldn't afford the refined stuff. In truth, even the single malts are usually a form of blend, in that they select casks to maintain a consistent flavor profile, even if choosing among barrels from the same batch.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Maynard

This is a circular phenomenon - older casks inherently cost more: they sit around costing overhead, while losing volume over time. But then the marketing/'snob factor' takes it out of the realm of simple accounting and blows it up. Age statements or debating the quality of ingredients around ANY blends is comical, since the real elite market is for rare single malts (add a few zero's to the rarest JW has ever sold). Just like with wines, some of those old casks are really only fit for cleaning solution. Blending is an art, and one that is sadly disrespected these days = it used to be that the blends were the high-class drink, and single malts were for the poor yokels who couldn't afford the refined stuff. In truth, even the single malts are usually a form of blend, in that they select casks to maintain a consistent flavor profile, even if choosing among barrels from the same batch.

Yes, blends are a mixture or blend of single malts. Some of the snobbery comes from in part folks that are brand snobs. I'll only drive a cadillac for example.

[WhiskyPat12]

Originally Posted by Maynard

This is a circular phenomenon - older casks inherently cost more: they sit around costing overhead, while losing volume over time. But then the marketing/'snob factor' takes it out of the realm of simple accounting and blows it up. Age statements or debating the quality of ingredients around ANY blends is comical, since the real elite market is for rare single malts (add a few zero's to the rarest JW has ever sold). Just like with wines, some of those old casks are really only fit for cleaning solution. Blending is an art, and one that is sadly disrespected these days = it used to be that the blends were the high-class drink, and single malts were for the poor yokels who couldn't afford the refined stuff. In truth, even the single malts are usually a form of blend, in that they select casks to maintain a consistent flavor profile, even if choosing among barrels from the same batch.

Great post. The 'Single' in Single Malt means it comes from one distillery. Unless the bottle says cask strength or single barrel, it is 99% likely that it is 'blended' between that distillers casks exactly for the reason you stated. To maintain a consistent flavor profile.

[WhiskyPat12]

Originally Posted by Murf993

Yes, blends are a mixture or blend of single malts. Some of the snobbery comes from in part folks that are brand snobs. I'll only drive a cadillac for example.

Not to sharpen the point to much but one bit of conflation that people snob about is only stating Blend without the qualifier of cereal.

If something says Blended Whisky, it might contain grain whisky. If it says Blended Malt, it only has barley. Whisk(e)y can be made from any cereal grain (Barley, Wheat, Rye, Corn for Bourbon)

As stated in my above post where the Single in Single Malt denotes one distillery, Blended means multiple distilleries.

None of this is to mean better or worse, it's all about preference. I like Chivas 12 over Johnny Walker Black (never had the double black) and I'd never spend the $$$ on JW Blue (not worth in IMO).

[Hawkeye]

The whiskey tribe is a joke.

I have not found a lot of blends I really like but the few that come to mind off hand are mostly from Compass Box. I am definitely more of a bourbon and rye drinker though, those really trip my trigger.

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by WhiskyPat12

These two chucklefucks have an entertaining YouTube channel (two actually, Whiskey Tribe and Whisky Vault).

They're not for everyone, but the info is very good.

Here's their explainer on Whisky vs Whiskey. You only need the first like 4 min of the video

I have watched a lot of the Whiskey Vault videos over the last few months. They’re entertaining.

[premier3is]

Originally Posted by WhiskyPat12

These two chucklefucks have an entertaining YouTube channel (two actually, Whiskey Tribe and Whisky Vault).

They're not for everyone, but the info is very good.

Here's their explainer on Whisky vs Whiskey. You only need the first like 4 min of the video

got it now lol. I'll pretend I didn't hear how 50% of Scotch whisky sees a Bourbon barrel at some point in its life... "but that's E territory!"