Whiskey Unplugged: toward an understanding

What is feckin whiskey doing on the net's leading independent rum website? There's a reason, read on, but it's not my fault! Honest...
Post Reply
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

Whiskey Unplugged: toward an understanding

Post by Capn Jimbo »

There's whiskey - then there's whisky... and then?


There's Canadian Whiskey, lol. Actually, the term whiskey is largely misunderstood, even by experienced whisky lovers so I think we should review a bit, starting in the United States.

Legally, grain spirits that are distilled at 95% or more are considered either grain neutral spirits or vodka, the so-called white spirits. And every grain spirit produced below 95% is is brown spirit or whisky. But it's not that simple. Let's start with what most of consider real whiskies - bourbon, rye, corn, wheat, malt and rye malt whisky. The first thing to note is that now "whisky" has an attached adjective, eg "rye whisky".

These two-word common whiskies may be distilled at no more than 80%, a far cry from the up to 95% that single word, just plain "whisky" may be distilled. These "real", two-word whiskies are indeed full of flavor right out of the still. Aging too makes a difference. Now we add a third word, "straight", eg "straight rye whisky". These straight, three-word whiskies must be aged at least two years. Next up...

Blends.

Now we have another three-word whisky, this time preceeded by the word "blend", eg "blended rye whisky". Now only 51% of the blend must be flavorful rye whisky (distilled to no more than 80%), and the rest can be any other grain spirit, including grain neutral spirits (eg vodka). It goes without saying that blends are intended to reduce costs and increase profits. Lighter yet is "light whisky", in which all of the whisky was distilled at more than 80% but less than 95% alcohol. You can be sure that anything labeled "light" is made closer to 95%.

Better blends are the four-word whiskies, eg "blended straight rye whisky". These are true blends of real straight whiskies - all distilled at no more than 80% and full flavored.


Bottom Line

In order of flavor...

1. grain neutral spirits or vodka (distilled at 95%)

2. light whisky (from more than 80% to less than 95%)

3. blended two-word whisky, eg "blended rye whisky" (at least 51% of whisky distilled at 80% or less, and up to 49% of light spirits including grain neutral spirits)

4. two-word whisky, eg "rye whisky" (to 80% or less)

5a. three-word whisky, eg "straight rye whisky" (to 80% or less - and - aged for at least two years).

5b. four-word whisky, eg "blended straight rye whisky" (a blend, all to 80% or less).

Next up... Canadian Whiskey
Last edited by Capn Jimbo on Sun May 05, 2013 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

Canadian, uh, whisky...

Post by Capn Jimbo »

Canadian, uh, whisky...


First let's review: the whiskies we consider "real" in America are those that are distilled at no more than 80%, full and flavorful. And the American regulations reflect that with at least five levels of increasing flavor and purity. Even the least expensive American blends are composed of at least 51% of real and flavorful, distilled at 80% whiskies. Most American whisky is not flavored, and those few that are must say so.

Prime exampe: bourbon. But as for Canada, not so!

Almost all Canadian whisky is distilled by nine huge distillers and are actually blends. Worse yet, the primary whisky in the blend are near neutral "base whiskies" (which you may have heard called "Canadian Whisky Spirit" or CNS).

And what do I mean by "near neutral"? Exactly that. Vodka and grain neutral spirits (GNS) are distilled to 95%, very thin and with very little taste. The CNS used in Canadian whiskey is distilled to within a pubic hair of 95% - as per Davin K, to 94.5% or even purer. For all practical purposes this is as close to pure and relatively tasteless alcohol as you can get.

So how does Canadian whisky get its "flavours". Three ways. First, the addition of more flavorful "flavouring whiskies" made from corn, wheat and especially rye. Second are flavors captured from wood aging. And last - and I hope you are sitting down - Canadian whisky by definition may contain up to 9.09% of (gulp) added wine! Yes, wine. And other unnamed, unlabeled "flavourings" are also allowed.


So what do we really have?

Basically, a less expensive near grain neutral spirit altered with lesser amounts of flavouring whiskies, wine and who know what. If I have called Canadian whisky a "mixed drink in a bottle", now you know why. Unlike American law, in Canada there are no legal distinctions between what we'd call real whisky and cheap blends - under Canadian law all falls under one single simple definition of what amounts to a flavored blend.

Sure it tastes good. Sure it isn't real in the sense of American, Scotch, Irish and Japanese whisky. Any blend based on near neutral grain spirit and that may be flavored with wine, et al, is hardly a noble spirit. Now don't take me wrong, there are a precious few pot-stilled, real whiskies in Canada, and some truly old releases of their blends, but these are few and far between. Of that you can be sure.

But buy some anyway - it's cheap and it tastes good. And perfect for rum drinkers who have learned to accept altered spirits.

Carry on...
User avatar
Uisge
Cap'n
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:32 am
Location: Marvelous Madera Ranchos, CA

Post by Uisge »

Just to put a bow on your main point, Oh Cap'n, and from the Whisky Advocate Blog, an interview with Crown Royale Master Blender Andrew MacKay about the 2nd version of the Crown Royale XR that is coming out, Mr. MacKay makes this honest statement about the CNS when referencing the whiskies he used from the closed LaSalle distillery ...and I quote,

MacKay: "The whiskies are obviously from pre-1993, but when we’re putting these blends together, the idea is not to hit an age profile. It’s designed to be a smooth, gentle whisky in your mouth. That creamy character of Crown Royal is there."

"You’re going to have aged whiskies in there, and there is continuous base whisky — which comes off the still with the characteristics of a vodka — and that’s aged in used barrels. If we put that in a new barrel, it would just overwhelm it. But if you have a barrel that had just contained bourbon, and put that vodka in it, it pulls out the fruity aromas and flavors from the wood. That’s part of our arsenal. It’s interesting how the different barrels lend themselves to different whiskies."
Credit: Link to article.
User avatar
Uisge
Cap'n
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:32 am
Location: Marvelous Madera Ranchos, CA

Post by Uisge »

<Columbo>Uh, just one more thing...</Columbo> it's good to be back, and feeling at full strength after a double bout of pneumonia last month. Alas, no booze for a while for me...at least until next week when I am in the LAnd of Booze and Horses for a few days :wink:

As you were...
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

The U-man liveth...

Post by Capn Jimbo »

The U-man liveth... !


Hope you get past this bump in the road, U-one, and feel better soon.

As you know I get a lot of heat for pointing out the inconvenient truth about rum, and here about Canadian whisky and its basis on near neutral spirits (CNs). Sadly, even Davin K tries to wiggle by this point by exclaiming that Canadian whisky "doesn't contain any GNS", a myth he proudly pretends to debunk.

While technically true (GNS is distilled at 95%), Canadian "CNS" is the next best thing, with at least two that I know of distilled at 94.5% or higher! Davin's denial is a distinction without a practical difference.

So.....

I was particularly taken with your wonderful quoting of Crown Royale's Master Blender Andrew MacKay, who even calls his CNS "vodka"! It's clear that a major component of Canadian whisky is simply this aged "vodka". BTW, it should be noted this was a quote from an interview with John Hansell of The Whiskey Advocate, who also was quite surprised by MacKay's admission...
John Hansell (in the same article): "Andrew’s honesty was very refreshing–to refer to the base whisky in Canadian whisky as having the characteristics of vodka coming off the still. This is the heart of what comprises Canadian whisky, and what makes it so light and refreshing. That doesn’t have to be a bad thing. It can still be a very good whisky, which this bottling certainly is."
Thanks...
User avatar
Capn Jimbo
Rum Evangelisti and Compleat Idiot
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:53 pm
Location: Paradise: Fort Lauderdale of course...
Contact:

John John - are you there?

Post by Capn Jimbo »

The following reply was posted to John Hansel's comment (above):
Moi: "So if we mix (mostly) vodka (or a near vodka) - much CNS is distilled at 94.5% - with real whisky, it's a whisky I guess. Sorry, but that doesn't cut it with those who'd like to believe that what's in their bottle of whisky is all - 100% - whisky and not comprised largely of vodka, grain neutral spirits or the Canadian's invented "CWS" (Canadian Whisky Spirit) which is for all practical purposes indistinguishable from GNS or vodka.

If I have called Canadian whisky a "mixed drink in a bottle" this is why. Any spirit which legally can contain up to 9.09% of wine, not to mention near neutral spirits, caramel and other undefined "flavourings" is really quite a mongrel of a drink. I don't deny it - whatever "it" is - may taste good, but those of us who value purity and the freedom from additives (including E150) will tend to reject these concoctions of flavoured vodka."
It will be interesting - remembering my expose of John's heavily biased reviews - if my comment passes muster. If it doesn't it won't be because it wasn't valid...
Post Reply