Fast Aging Dept: Small Barrels, Cowdery & UV Light

[Capn Jimbo]

Book Discussion: Chuck Cowdery's "Small Barrels Produce Lousy Whisky"


Participation in this section will be most rewarding for those who care enough to part with 99 cents for Cowdery's long e-article. It's not overly long, and you'll be exposed to all the claims and issues. You do not have to have a Kindle, but simply have to register at Amazon - you can then read the article using their Cloud Reader. If any of you have a problem doing this, IM me and I'll help you do that...

I know that some posters believe that the criticism of "fast aging" may be overblown, in that belief that the ADI inspired distillers are not saying that their four month old, fast-aged spirit is the same as a 6 year old. Au contraire! That is exactly what they are saying as even the term "fast aging" clearly implies...

ADI:

"However, this six-to-eight-years (ideal aging of bourbon) applies to 53-gallon barrels... So, if a distiller aged his/her whiskey in 5-gallon barrels rather than 53-gallon ones, there would be a considerably greater surface area of wood exposed to a gallon of spirit than in a 53-gallon barrel. And, the whiskey ages much faster. Smaller barrels age the whiskey faster and impart lignin and vanillin, and also tannin, faster as well. And, a good-quality bourbon can be aged out in only three to six months in a 5-gallon barrel.".

Of course this claim is manna from heaven for small distillers, who are limited to cleverly marketed new make and very young products, and who really don't have the kind of deep pockets to tie up inventory, invest in expensive cooperage and suffer angel's losses for 7 years - before they even know whether the aged product is any good and/or will sell. he They need to attend the Death of Rum Fetstival in Miami Land for the latest techniques in fast aging.

Seriously, they have a real problem and they believe fast aging is the answer using any one of many crackpot theories from magic lights, forced air, plastic wrappers, underwater aging, loud rock music and yes - small barrel fast aging, the subject of this thread.

What I believe you will learn is what is possible and what is not, how small is small, and how this so-called "fast aged" product compares to traditionally aged product. This will be fun, and I look forward especially to seeing da'rum, Hass, and Dai to name just a few who have expressed interest in this subject...

G'wan. Spend 99 cents and "Come on down... the water's fine!"
http://www.amazon.com/Small-Barrels-Pro ... B006X9UD2W

And for now a bit of background...
http://whiskeyreviewer.com/2012/09/smal ... aging-101/

[Capn Jimbo]

Reading assignment...


Other than Cowdery's e-article, do check the link above from Whiskyreviewer for a quick background:
http://whiskeyreviewer.com/2012/09/smal ... aging-101/

And then take another 5 minutes to read this amazing article about - yup - another mad scientist who also claims to use his own proprietary, fast-aging, pressurized process to produce a finished, aged bourbon in...

Six days!

I'm fackin serious. He's absolutely convinced and his business plan forecasts $50 millon in sales.
http://www.inc.com/magazine/201306/john ... gen_2.html

This article is a must read, as it sets forth the small distiller, small barrel, fast aging environment and exposes attitudes and some of the competition for supersonic spirits. It quotes industry spokespersons and marketing consultants. This bottler is merely the latest in a long, long line of hopeful dreamers...

And for a counterpoint:
http://whiskyadvocate.com/whisky/2012/0 ... rspective/

*******
For reference only: ADI's book on craft distilling (Hass this will answer many of your questions)...
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0054/ ... ok.pdf?914

[Capn Jimbo]

A success story?


I referred above to a distiller in Ohio whose goal was to mature a bourbon in just six days via his own invented method. His theory: instead of putting the bourbon in wood, he puts his wood in the bourbon. Here's what one reporter wrote:

"(The distiller) wouldn’t go into a lot of details with me, but he did outline the basic idea. The spirit ages in a whiskey barrel like normal for the first six months of its life. Then it is deposited in stainless steel tanks. Meanwhile, the barrel it aged in is cut up, processed, and put into the tank as well. Within the tank, the spirit is agitated, and undergoes a series of differences in pressure to squeeze in and out of the wood pores. “Like a sponge,” Lix said. Once deposited in the tank, the whiskey takes about a week to create."

The idea apparently came to him when he disassembled a barrel and noted that in his opinion, the bourbon didn't penetrate all that far. It occured to him that he could cause the the bourbon to penetrate deeper, and more often, ergo his idea. In sum his idea is a combination of forced breathing, more frequent breathing, deeper penetration, agitation and more surface area.

He was so sure of himself that his business plan projects $50M in sales within five years. He claims to have conducted blind taste tests against Knob Creek, wherein his fast aged bourbon is preferred 70% of the time. Quoting one resource:

"The already 6 month old whiskey is aged this way for 6 days to create what Lix describes as the equivalent of 10 to 12 year old bourbon. Lix even states, “it makes for a fuller body, better tasting whiskey”.

http://whiskyinformative.com/2013/03/07 ... nnovation/

That's a pretty bold claim. Like all small and fast-aging distillers, this gentleman stresses "...it's the taste that count". We'll see.


Of course I thought he was nuts, but then again look who's talking...

I decided to do a bit more research and to my amazement found that this distiller is not only still in business but claims to be doing well alleging that his initial sales (last year) was about 1000 bottles a week, and is currently about 4,000 per week, with a claimed 50,000 bottles sold in the last year. Not bad, if the distiller can be believed.

As far as his method goes, the notion of using air pressure and stainless tanks reminds me of both Lost Spirits, and of a number of rums made by Daniel Watson of his own Temptryst Rum, a Texas based distiller who was once praised for his use of stainless tanks using specially prepared staves of oddball woods from various sources, eg , lemon wood, cherry wood, mesquite, apple wood, et al.

Daniel's company Au Natural Spirits, Inc. - though actually "winning" some gold medals from the Preacher and producing at least 10 or 15 different spirits never really went commercial, another dream dashed. None of them were very old and as far as taste, Sue Sea and I had the opportunity to taste four or five of them at a Big Burr rum tasting. The result:

They did not taste like rums, and the wood tones dominated. Only one of the five was interesting (the mesquite as I recall). As far as the 6-day bourbon...

"The rapid “aging” process manipulates temperature and pressure and squeezes the wood like a sponge, forcing the young whiskey through the barrel segments stored inside Lix’s top secret pressure chamber. The result – an almost black in color bourbon known as, you guessed it, Cleveland Whiskey Black Bourbon. There is no color added and it is bottled at 50% (100 proof). At least they’re bottling it at a high ABV. Oh, and non chill-filtered I believe."

http://whiskyinformative.com/2013/03/07 ... nnovation/

It is interesting that the fast aging results in a VERY dark, almost black spirit. Compare to the dark mahogany of Lost Spirit's rum which is "fast aged" for only a matter of months. Now I don't know about you, but that extreme a color change should get your attention. We'll save some real world taste tests for later...

[Capn Jimbo]

Issue #1: the descriptor "Fast Aging"


A great starting place is the claim of "fast aging". Some of the apologists misinterpret this by saying "...at least the distiller isn't claiming it's aged for a long time" or the like. But they are! Cleveland Whisky (above) is stating that they can age a 6 month old bourbon in another 6 days to be the equivalent of a "10 to 12 year bourbon" (using some kind of pressure pump). Words matter land the term "fast aging" is not chosen lightly.

First of all it refers to "aging", which directly conjures up and refers to typical and traditional aging in large barrels, most typically of 53 gallon, ex-bourbon barrels. It is said the sweet spot for bourbons is 6 to 8 years, for scotch whisky 12 to 18 years, and for rum 6 to 10 years. Now onto the word "fast".

The term "fast" when used with "aging" directly implies that what we consider proper aging (as above) can be done quickly, ie "fast". For Phil Prichard that might mean 3 years, but for many of the ADI members that means 3 to 4 months. Indeed the ADI's old distilling manual makes the direct statement that the equivalent - in every way - of a 6 to 8 year old bourbon can be accomplished in 4 months.

Mind you these distillers are not referring to "small barrel aging" or "micro barrel aging" - indeed many will not even reveal the barrel size or the miniscule amount of time their supersonic spirits spend in wood. Instead they prefer to use the term "fast aging" along with a a good marketing story about their wonderful new vibration, magic light, pulsating air, rock music methodology that achieves - yup - good "age", and "fast".

"Fast aging" is a clear claim which in view of their unusual methods demands particular honesty, openness and transparency in describing just what they are doing. Most will not, and that is not a good thing, but instead begs extreme and justified skepticism.



*******
BTW for those who don't have the 99 cents available to buy Cowdery's book, I urge you to now take about 5 minutes to read a short business article about the subject which will reveal all the issues and claims:

http://www.inc.com/magazine/201306/john ... gen_2.html

[Dai]

My concern is not that a spirit ages faster in a smaller barrel. If it does it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. The demonising of smaller barrels because of some marketing hype is a dangerous thing. At the end of the day the spirit it self is the final judge. If a distiller can produce a good spirit using a smaller barrel then more power to him. My only concern is the amount of money compared to quality that I pay for that spirit. VFM (Value For Money) rules in all transactions end of story.

You pay for what you get!!

[Hassouni]

My concern is not that a spirit ages faster in a smaller barrel. If it does it does, if it doesn't it doesn't. The demonising of smaller barrels because of some marketing hype is a dangerous thing. At the end of the day the spirit it self is the final judge. If a distiller can produce a good spirit using a smaller barrel then more power to him. My only concern is the amount of money compared to quality that I pay for that spirit. VFM (Value For Money) rules in all transactions end of story.

You pay for what you get!!

Exactly. If it was called "cask-conditioned" whisky/rum would that be less of a cause for uproar?

[Capn Jimbo]

It's not about demonizing...


It's about false claims. If a distiller would state "...aged in 5 gallon barrels for 3 months", fine, and let the buyer beware. The issue is not small barrels per se; it is the claim of "fast aging". But the reality is that most either say nothing, or consider the above mentioned distiller who openly claims that his 6 days of "fast agiing" is the equivalent of a 10 or 12 year old bourbon. My point is that even the term "fast aging" implies a method of duplicating traditional aging in a few months.

I'll say it again: these distillers are not open or transparent; they are not claiming "small (or micro) barrel aging", they are falsely claiming "fast aging", a different matter entirely. We'll get to the small barrels later, but know this: what they produce in no way resembles or replaces the spirits of longer and traditional aging.

Do yourself a favor: spend 99 cents.

[Dai]

It's not about demonizing...


It's about false claims. If a distiller would state "...aged in 5 gallon barrels for 3 months", fine, and let the buyer beware. The issue is not small barrels per se; it is the claim of "fast aging". But the reality is that most either say nothing, or consider the above mentioned distiller who openly claims that his 6 days of "fast agiing" is the equivalent of a 10 or 12 year old bourbon. My point is that even the term "fast aging" implies a method of duplicating traditional aging in a few months.

I'll say it again: these distillers are not open or transparent; they are not claiming "small (or micro) barrel aging", they are falsely claiming "fast aging". We'll get to the small barrels later, but know this: what they produce in no way resembles or replaces the spirits of longer and traditional aging.

Do yourself a favor: spend 99 cents.

I'm with you all the way when it comes to hype marketing and false claims. I don't think there is an argument there.

[Capn Jimbo]

Issue #2: The Theories...


We've covered the claim "fast aged", which directly and indirectly implies or in many cases actually states outright that the small distiller's revolutionary new method achieves 6 to 12 years of traditional, slow aging in typically - just a few months and in one case, in 6 days.

Most of these methods are related in one way or another to the ADI, a seller of equipment, consulting and training. Because the greatest obstacle to establishing a small independent distillery is being financially limited to overpriced new make (for which there is a very limited market, the idea that a newbie can "fast age" his new rum or bourbon in just a few months is attractive.

The ADI's manual was quite explicit. They noted that a good bourbon normally takes 6 to 8 years to mature, but that their recommended small barrel protocol could achieve this in four months. This is exactly what potential new customers need to hear.


The basis is simple...

Actually too simple: for the ADI bunch their belief is based on the ratio of wood area per unit volume. A small barrel has much more wood contact per unit volume; therefore and as the theory goes more contact means "faster aging". The assumption that likewise underlies this is that the wood is somehow chock full of flavor goodies (like vanillan, etc.) so the more contact, the more and more quickly are these flavorful components transferred to the spirit.

All the other methods are simply variations on this theme, to wit:

1. Small Barrel (usually 5, 10 or 15 gal): more wood area per unit volume means faster exchange of flavor to the spirit.

2. Rock Music: the loud music vibrates the barrel, agitating the contents and thus - again, more contact and faster aging.

3. Inserted staves: whether in addition to a small barrel or simply inserted into stainless containers the objective is yet again - more surface area, more exchange, faster aging

4. U/V light treatment of wood: this offshoot claims that the light treatment of the wood will facilitate the release of flavor compound in the wood (as though there were more wood in the barrel). Used in conjunction with staves by Lost Spirits.

5. Pulsating pressure and/or temperature: along with the earlier techniques the pulsating pressure/temperature are sold to us with the notion that both cause rapid "breathing", as much as once a minute (instead of once a day). literally forcing the spirit in and out of the wood. Because there are 1440 minutes in a day (rather than a traditional daily cycle of breathing), this is alleged to speed up aging dramatically.

6. Aging the barrels under water: appears to be a false claim (ie claimed but not actually performed), but pitched to us on the notion that the movement of the tides causes agitation and more wood contact. Another distiller bases his pitch on aging the barrels on a classic sailing ship with the spirits aged by movement on the high seas - how romantic! And how monkeyshit.

Lost Spirits claimed a couple more theories: the first was to use an oak boiler on the theory that flavor compounds normally obtained through years of aging, would be somehow extracted during distillation thus saving years of aging. This reportedly failed because the steam heated oak boiler allegedly developed a fungus (hot, steamy environment?) and had to be destroyed.

His second theory was "fast dunder" - wherein an overripe banana tossed into the ferment for two days would somehow replicate 20 years of real dunder from a dunder pit. And last, he theorized that he could "fast season" his new oak by forcing real sherry into it under pulsating pressure in 40 hours, rather than using traditional seasoning taking years. Doest the forced sherry comes out as fast as it went in? Is that the idea?

Are you buying any of these? Don't you believe that if these schemes really worked that the big distillers would have long ago followed suit, and saved hundreds of millions of traditional aging costs?


How aging really works...

It's simple: time. You can't fast grow a baby, or a mighty oak. And you can't fast age spirits. I will once again cite Ian Wisnewski, one of the leading authorities on aging who reflects the reality of aging. There are three basic processes that occur over time in traditional, proper aging...

1. Additive processes: the wood slowly gives ups compounds like vanilla or those from the carmelization of toasting or charring.

2. Subtractive processes: the wood absorbs compounds from the spirit. In a heavily charred barrel the charcoal removes some nasties and smooths.

But here's the kicker...

3. Interactive processes: although the mad scientists think they can speed up the first two, the third is another matter. Over time - much time - chemical interactions occur. Early new compounds are formed, which may act a precursors to later, more complex compounds, and repeat.

The best the "fast aging" schemes seem to be able to do is to speed up some of the early extractives which is why Lost Spirits very young rum presents as dark mahogany, or the 6-day bourbon presents a near Coca Cola black. This means there has been a literal explosion of color compounds into the spirit.

Furthermore both of these use pressure to force spirit far deeper in the wood than would ever occur naturally, picking up raw wood tones (splinters in your teeth). As Cowdery says these techniques over load the new spirit with the easy and early extractives which overwhelm it, and lacking the time required to slowly and chemically interact to form the long term interactive compounds that only real time can achieve. Capish?


But can't these schemes create a tasty product?

Yes and no. With great care and very limited uses (like a quick finishing) a palatable and even pleasant product may result - but - it will not resemble the aged rum or whiskey that these distillers purport to achieve. As Serge observed of Lost Spirits Peated Whisky, Leviathan, the result was tasty, but he felt that the product had little resemblence to the peated whiskies he knew.

An independent review of the 6-day bourbon: "Good god! This has a rough punchy aftertaste that grabs on to your throat and won’t let go. There are some barely discernable bourbon flavors, even a sweetness, that are present for just about half a second before the harsh taste of wood and a chemical burn hit you... I really tried to give it a chance but it was pretty bad in my book. Let’s just say there’s no cheating the time required by Mother Nature to age bourbon the right way. ".


Flat Ass Bottom Line

There are any number of schemes that have been created - not to create a better spirit - but to somehow make it financially possible to sell a very young product as somehow tweaked to be a old one. The ADI in their ongoing quest to sell equipment and so-called expertise to hopeful small distillers, was one of the first to establish the idea of "fast aging" wherein a 6 to 12 year old spirit could be created in 4 months or less, using micro-barrels (10 gallon or less).

Almost all the later attempts were based on their sales pitch that aging is simply about increased wood area (and completely ignored time dependent oxidation and interactive processes). The result may be palatable but will in no real way produce the intended result; in fact in many cases will barely represent the category.

In my mind, I'd much prefer a young product, say three or four years produced in traditional fashion.

[Capn Jimbo]

Issue #3: The Motivation


In a word, it's survival. And where does this start? First of all is a love for spirits. Although there are surely many who are teetotallers most people enjoy a fine wine, a good beer, a liqueur, or any manner of well aged spirits. Some of us develop a real appreciation for spirits, in particular the truly great ones that are memorable, high quality literal works of art.

Fewer yet have such an interest that the idea of home or hobby distilling becomes quite attractive. Legal in many countries, but not here, that hasn't really stopped many from engaging in the hobby anyway, for personal use. Da'rum can speak to this. As can the tremendous Home Distillers website and forums which represent tens if not hundreds of thousands of such distillers.

Most of these either build or buy their own hobby stills using all manner of boilers, but almost always with sufficient copper contact to produce the best spirits possible. For a very few the interest goes even beyond this.


A few well-pocketed souls

There exist a number of spirits lovers who have been successful in life, and who possess the ego and love of spirits enough to want to establish their own micro-distillery as a creative endeavor and hey, maybe make a few bucks too. Some are even larger dreamers who believe they too can become the next Pappy Van Winkle. But even so, these individuals have miniscule capabilities compared to the big boys who've been around for decades and who have the finances and control to absolutely dominate the market.

Still some do try and do succeed. Think Phil Prichard who built and tested his own illegal homemade moonshine still to create a rum for himself and some of his friends. He made the leap to legal, but still small operation and succeeded using traditional methods but not - I repeat- NOT using "fast aging: (years-in-months) claims or schemes. He started by producing new make, and fortunately had funds enough to set aside some product for several years using smaller (but not micro) barrels, and knowing when to stop. He was/is honest and makes no false claims.

He is one of a very few exceptions.



Enter the ADI

As mentioned before the ADI is a seller of equipment, training and expertise - all designed to encourage these small dreamers to invest much of their net worth with the promise that they won't have to tie up major money for 6 to 10 years before selling their first drop of aged spirit, but can quickly be in business selling "fast aged" spirit in a mere 3 to 6 months.

I've read that there are over 800 small distillers who have come to believe this (of which perhaps half are members of the ADI) most of whom are true believers. Many are do-it-yourselfers who honestly believe they have invented the next electric light bulb that will revolutionize spirits aging and coincidentally, allow them to stay in business. All of these have bought into ADI's self-serving wood area pitch.

Of all independent small distillers only a very few others will survive and succeed, but not on these terms. Instead those who survive will do so based on their skillful batch production of well created and produced spirits including gin, rum, rye, specialty spirits that are new and young but that are made with exceptional skill. Some will have a family history of distilling to rely upon. Unlike the ADI or gimmick crowd, their marketing will emphasize top quality ingredients, and extreme attention to detail and their skill in fermentation, good equipment, skilled distilling and cuts and with top quality aging in very good wood.

While I reject the snake oil, gimmick-based crowd, I applaud those few small distillers who base their products on artistry, quality, skill and attention to quality and detail in every aspect of their production. I daresay we know who these distillers are. You might want to name a few...