tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3462121554175947733.post518644364381116451..comments2024-03-28T21:36:56.697-07:00Comments on Chemistry of the Cocktail: The NAS Dilemma: Blessing, Curse, or Simple Reality? Part IIJordanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06448702693643593156noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3462121554175947733.post-46346817383958515512012-10-18T21:14:57.089-07:002012-10-18T21:14:57.089-07:00That would be an ideal solution. I have a bad feel...That would be an ideal solution. I have a bad feeling that the distillers would rather not. They've argued for so long that older = better that it's a bit of egg on their faces to now turn around and put in younger whiskies, especially since customers might look down on those expressions.Jordanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06448702693643593156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3462121554175947733.post-28485918233161378622012-10-18T19:09:23.642-07:002012-10-18T19:09:23.642-07:00Balvenie Tun 1401 doesn't hide its age, though...Balvenie Tun 1401 doesn't hide its age, though, and I wouldn't call it NAS. They list the ages of each cask in the mix, even if that list varies each batch.<br /><br />In many ways, I think it's a model. They blend based on flavor, achieve something reportedly awesome, and don't feel bound to make an 'ordinary' 25/30 yo. However, they also have absolute transparency. I'm perfectly fine on No-Fixed-Age, or No-Age-Priority, but I don't like the secrecy of NAS. I think most whisky drinkers don't care much if a whisky isn't that old if it's good, but many of us just like the info.<br /><br />An idea I've been kicking around in my head is a three-part age statement on whiskies [1] the minimum age of whiskies in the mix [2] the median age, where at least half the whiskies are the age [3] and the 90th percentile, where 90% of the whiskies are younger, and 10% are older. Something like that gives a good picture of what's in a whisky, but allows a bit more flexibility to distillers to bottle what they feel like.theBitterFignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3462121554175947733.post-62414979789792507522012-10-10T23:29:31.852-07:002012-10-10T23:29:31.852-07:00Great post, Jordan!
This is such an interesting t...Great post, Jordan!<br /><br />This is such an interesting time for whisky, as we witness NAS bottlings born from invention and those born from desperation / supply issues.<br /><br />I concur with Josh about the NAS successes like Uigeadail and Tun1401 (capital 'T' Tremendous noses on both). They seem like Modern whiskies, or Post-Age-Statement, as opposed to the obvious we're-low-on-our-usual-stuff NAS lineup arriving from Macallan.<br /><br />Since it's very difficult to know what to spend or how to value unknown spirits, I'm with you on the case-by-case (sadly not a case-of-whisky) basis.Diving for Pearlshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02373371259792882112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3462121554175947733.post-41218935890169357472012-10-04T20:13:21.811-07:002012-10-04T20:13:21.811-07:00An interesting and well considered analysis. NAS ...An interesting and well considered analysis. NAS expressions are a symptom and a tool both. In situations like Uigeadail & Balvenie Tun1401 they can serve to push boundaries and create stunning new flavor profiles that can transcend mere issues of age. At the other end NAS can be a way to get us to buy under aged juice camouflaged with some mature stuff. (for the record, I don't necessarily mind that stuff if it's cheap and acknowledged - such as Glen Grant Major's Reserve). <br /><br />The trouble is how to recognize when it's done for creativity and when it's done as a blanket to hide slipping quality caused by scarcity of mature stocks. In old dusty Bourbon from the 70s-80s you sometime find "Glut" stocks - where more mature Bourbon was bottled labelled a younger age because there wa too much aging warehoused juice. Now we're seeing the opposite. So NAS is a dual edged sword. We will be discussing whether NAS expressions as they come up are "Dr. Jeckyll" or "Mr. Hyde" for years to come no doubt.Josh Feldmanhttp://cooperedtot.comnoreply@blogger.com