If you've read the Wolfery much at all, you should have picked up three things: he has a seemingly bitter palate (finding "bitterness" in over half the rums he'd reviewed), he freely regurgitates distiller copy and most relevent here, he frequently reports aromas and tastes for tannins!
Fact: tannins themselves do not exhibit any significant aromas or tastes whatever. None. But Wolfie - almost alone - thinks they do!
In sum, he finds tannins to exhibit aromas and flavors including oak, spice, wood, "disguised as" orange and clove, like anise and even contributes a bit of heat. Only problem: no way. Tannin is a mouthfeel, not an aroma or taste. So what's next?Per Google:"I am catching... oak tannin flavour making this ever so slightly bitter... Rising from the glass is a complex oak and tannin filled scent... a woody tannin filled smell... oak tannin tasting... nose is bitter-sweet with astringent oak tannin... oak tannin hitting my nostrils... tannin/sap seems to dominate the other flavours... oak tannin spices... (aromas of) woody tannins... rich complex aromas of oak tannins... the aroma of oak tannin becomes stronger... Spicy oak tannin... oak tannin disguising itself as cloves... woody tannin filled smell... wave of oak spices and tannin... oak tannins disguised as orange... cinnamon and oak tannin which begins to taste like anise... the mouth becomes heated with oak tannin..." (ad infinitum)
A Reader Objects!
In a recent review of Wiser's Legacy (Canadian Whisky), an astute reader named "Pinot Dude" or something like that, a wine and spirits drinker, posted a long comment noting that he was not aware of tannins having aromas or tastes, but knew tannins as a mouthfeel only. He asked the Wolfboy if he be ever so kind as to specify just what tannins smell or taste like.
In a long reply to "Pinot Dude", Wolfboy pubished an equally long reply based almost completely on this (link), an article posted by the well-known Homedistiller group, entitled "The Composition of Oak and An Overview of its Influence on Maturation". In his reply the Furry One then put on his Authority Hat, and borrowing freely from this scientific source (without obvious permission I'd add), then refered to tannins as "hydrolysable, unlike grape (wine) tannins", which then accounted, he held forth, for "woody" aromas and tastes, among others.
Just one problem.
In his mad romp to appear authoritative I'd guess that he ran to his master Mr. Google, to search on "oak tannin" and voila! This article pops up on the first page. Beautiful! He could regurgitate the article, appear very, very knowledgable and defend his position, at least insofar as his "woody" aromas and tastes, and to hell with all his other descriptors (above). Woof, woof!! Now as it happens I have had a long, long interest in the distilling and aging process and have frequently accessed the fine materials at the Homedistiller website.
I am very familiar with this article, and long ago copied it as an excellent resource regarding oak aging effects. I was mystified at Wolfie's borrow and claim, so naturally did what all internet readers should do. Don't - I repeat don't - depend on the poster's interpretation of the links they provide! Always - always - do your due diligence and actually read the link. And even if you know the source as I did...
Read it again.
You'd be amazed that the links provided often contradict the poster. Rip 'n writers often misread their own quickly gathered sources. And so it is with the Frozen Regurgitator. Actually this fine and valid article supports Pinot Dude (not to mention my long held position):
1. This article notes five basic components of oak, including the component of "tannins".
2. Tannins have no inherent aromas or tastes, but merely free up the oxygen needed by other processes.
3. Now the other oak components do produce aromas and tastes for example: Cellulose (no direct effect), Hemicellulose (sugars, caramel and color), and Lignin (color, vanillan). It is Lactones that produce Wolfboy's "woody" notes. As for Tannins: a mouthfeel (astringency), nothing more.
Believe me, I know this article very, very well. It completely justifies the Pinot Dude's tannin-doubting post. Wolfie's citation of this article was incorrect, as the article completely contradicted him.
Now for the Fun Stuff!
I found the Pinot Dude/Wolfboy lengthy interchange fascinating, particularly as I knew the linked article well enough to know smoke was being blown. I was just getting ready to write this article when I checked back at the Wolf Den for some tasty quotes when I found...
It was gone!!
This was very, very curious as Wolfie had gone to great lengths to post an unusually long reply, complete with "authoritative" link. Wha hoppen?! I can only speculate...
1. He realized his citation and borrow was done without permission? Nah, in that case he could have simply reworded his post.
2. He later actually read the article and wanted to avoid being revealed by it? Quite possible. Readers might actually go to the link and read it. Heavens to Betsy!
3. He doesn't like contradiction, or even mild questioning of his "position"? Likely.
What happened next is even more revealing. The "Pinot Dude" had also asked if Wolfie was planning to review wines. In a separate reply, our frozen friend replied (paraphrased) "No, but I am planning to review some brandy and cognacs...".
I can't wait to see what woody, orangey, clovey, aniseed, hot tannins he finds in those....
