Blended Whiskey: GNS, CWS and Proof Gallons

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:

Blended Whiskey: GNS, CWS and Proof Gallons

Post by Capn Jimbo »

Except for Scotch and Irish whiskies...


...the word "blend" is highly suspect. Unfortunately the regulations are often badly misunderstood, even by those who should know better:
"Blended whiskey (AKA whiskey--a blend) is a mixture which contains straight whiskey or a blend of straight whiskeys at not less than 20 percent on a proof gallon basis, excluding alcohol derived from added harmless coloring, flavoring or blending materials, and, separately, or in combination, whiskey or neutral spirits.

Since the final product will typically be 80 proof, more than 20% of the contents will be straight whiskey. Some blends are as much as 40% straight whiskey. The rest of the volume may be neutral spirits and usually is.

Canadian blends, like Scottish blends, start with a base of nearly neutral whiskey. It is grain spirit distilled out at at just below 90 percent alcohol, so it is not considered neutral (95% is considered neutral). It is then aged for at least three years in used barrels, typically first refill bourbon barrels. That is blended with multiple flavoring whiskeys, single malts in the case of Scotland. Canada doesn't sell any of its "straight" whiskey, it's only used for flavoring.

The only additive scotch allows is spirit caramel, which supposedly is only for color and is neutral in flavor, but everyone knows it also adds a little sweetness and caramel flavor. American and Canadian blends can use pretty much anything they want as coloring and flavoring, but they aren't using some kind of flavor house 'whiskey essence.' They may add a little of this and that.

Canadian whiskey may contain up to 9% bourbon, brandy, rum, scotch, or any other spirit.

In the USA, they use neutral spirits which they may "age" for three months or so in used wood. As a practical matter, the Canadian and Scottish base whiskeys aren't much more flavorful than the American neutral spirits, but they are technically whiskey. In all three cases (American, Canadian, Scottish) most of the flavor comes from the low proof, well-aged flavorings whiskeys that are the lower part of the volume."

- Chuck Cowdery
http://bourbonenthusiast.com/forum/view ... dde#p36094

Now mind you I've been and remain a big fan of Cowdery, and promote his two most important contributions, the book "Bourbon Straight" (paperback) and e-book "Small Barrels Make Lousy Whiskey" (99 cents, Amazon). He really knows his wood. Still, when he reaches outside of his immediate expertise, he seems subject to the same misunderstandings of many others. Let's examine some of those misunderstandings.

1. The use of GNS in American Blended Whisky and the use of "nearly neutral whiskey" in Canadian blends. Cowdery states this Canadian component is distilled at "just below 90 percent alcohol, so it is not considered neutral (95% is considered neutral)".

This is wrong. Actually this "near neutral" component has a name, "CWS" (Canadian Whiskey Spirit). Although he is right in that GNS is distilled at 95%, CWS is NOT distilled "just below 90%" but - are you sitting down? - at 94.5% to 94.8% (as per Davin de Kergommeaux in his wonderful book "Canadian Whiskey"). Canadian CWS is as close as you can get to GNS as to be for all practical purposes, indisinguishable. Were it not for the lower proof "flavouring whiskies" added to the CWS (and aged for 3 years), the CWS could easily substitute for any good Polish vodka.


2. Cowdery's claim that "The only additive scotch allows is spirit caramel, which supposedly is only for color and is neutral in flavor, but everyone knows it also adds a little sweetness and caramel flavor." is also wrong, but represents common thinking.

Legal spirit caramel, aka E150a, is literally sugar that's been burned to a crisp and is horribly and completely bitter. Fortunately it's so concentrated that only drops are needed to color a bottle of spirit. It is neither "neutral" nor "sweet". This is not to say that distillers don't cheat and add real sugar, or food (not coloring) caramel.


3. Cowdery also equates Scottish blends with American/Canadian blends (GNS/CWS), stating "In all three cases (American, Canadian, Scottish) most of the flavor comes from the low proof, well-aged flavorings whiskeys that are the lower part of the volume." Right insofar as the American/Canadian blends, but often wrong insofar as Scottish blends.

Although Scottish law sets a maximum allowable grain distillate of 94.8%, unlike the American/Canadians who tend to produce GNS/CWS at the highest possible proof with multiple column industrial stills, the Scots tend to use much smaller capacity Coffey stills with a typical output of closer to 90%, which is MUCH more flavorful. For comparison many good rums are also distilled to 90%. Quoting Dave Broom in the "World Atlas of Whisky":
"Grain whisky is conceivably the most misunderstood of all whisky's styles. For the majority of drinkers, column-still whisky equals neutral alcohol. Grain whisky? Nothing more than Scottish vodka whose existence in a blend is simply to dilute and bulk up the malts, right? None of that is true. Grain has character of its own and performs a vital function within a blend."
To be fair Broom does not discount the fewer multi-column or three-column stills that also operate in Scotland; still it is fair to say that much Scottish grain whisky is quite tasty.


3. Proof gallon is a concept that almost no one understands, and they really don't need to. Let's examine Cowdery's claim that "Blended whiskey is a mixture which contains straight whiskey or a blend of straight whiskeys at not less than 20 percent on a proof gallon basis... Since the final product will typically be 80 proof, more than 20% of the contents will be straight whiskey."

Proof gallons is of more concern to distillers/bottlers as taxes are based on "proof gallons" of whisky. The higher the spirit's proof (based on proof gallons), the higher the taxation. Here's the formula and an example:


How "proof gallons" are calculated...


Converting U.S. gallons into proof gallons for tax purposes:
1. Multiply U.S. gallons by the percent of alcohol by volume.
2. Multiply by 2.
3. Divide by 100.

Sample calculation for 40% or 80 proof product:
1. 100 U.S. gallons x 40% alcohol by volume=4000
2. 4000 x 2=8000
3. 8000/100= 80 proof gallons

Sample calculation for 86 proof product:
1. 100 U.S. gallons x 43% alcohol by volume=4300
2. 4300 x 2=8600
3. 8600/100= 86 proof gallons

The same quantity of product at a higher 43% will pay 7.5% more taxes (based on 86 vs 80 proof gallons). Now let's consider Cowdery's claim that an 80 proof blend must then necessarily contain more than 20% straight whisky (by volume).


Putting Cowdery's claim to the test...


Let's start with 20 gallons of 40% straight whiskey:
20 U.S. gallons straight whiskey x 40% ABV=800
800 x 2=1600
1600/100= 16 proof gallons

According to the regs quoted by Cowdery, this 16 proof gallons of straight whiskey must be not less than 20% of the total proof gallons of the blend, ie we must now mix it with no more than 64 proof gallons of GNS, for a total of 80 proof-gallons. Now let's see how many actual gallons by volume of 40% GNS we need:

80 U.S. gallons GNS x 40% ABV=3200
3200 x 2=6400
6400/100=64 proof gallons

The total in proof gallons is:

16 proof gallons of 40% straight whiskey
64 proof gallons of 40% GNS
Total: 80 proof gallons of blend (or 20% straight whisky by proof gallon)

Now let's test Cowdery's claim that this means that by actual volume, the straight whiskey will "be more than 20%". Based on the above:

The total in actual volume of whiskey is:

20 gallons of 40% straight whiskey
80 gallons of 40% GNS
Total: 100 actual gallons of product (or 20% straight whisky by actual volume).

QED. As for Cowdery, I honestly haven't a clue as to how he comes to his novel conclusion.


Flat Ass Bottom Line

The amount of misinformation on the net can be staggering. Unfortunately many readers take whatever the local guru says as the gospel truth, rather than taking the time to be properly skeptical and to verify the claim. This includes Moi, which is exactly why I am quite clear about being the Compleat Idiot of Rum. It is essential that no "expert" whether by reputation or by self-claim, should take him or herself too seriously. I'll say it again: I have the highest regard for Chuck Cowdery and do agree with him 90% of the time, and particularly in those areas where he is undeniably competent, namely bourbon and wood.

No matter how you cut it, the percentage of straight whiskey in a blend remains unchanged either by proof-gallon, or by actual volume.




*******
http://bourbonenthusiast.com/forum/view ... dde#p36094
http://www.ttb.gov/spirits/convtbl.shtml
http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/f511 ... tions.html
http://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/ (links to his books)
Post Reply