Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Tales of Two Drinks
The New York Times has two drink-related articles - one on people trying to position bottled water as something that can make the world a better place, and a second one on bourbon.
Regarding the first, oh, please, give me a break. Yes, water can taste noticeably different depending on the source, and, yes, it's an amazing substance, but why must everything become an earth-shattering marketing tool? Please, let the water be water, and let people enjoy it. How about a freeze on the hype?
The bourbon article I found interesting, though the initial web home page description got me frowning: "Complexity and elegance are qualities that have rarely been associated with bourbon." But getting into Eric Asimov's article was more telling - that bourbon had sat in the "unpretentious" brand category, and so couldn't underscore complexity. But things have changed, and now you can have a glass of a good bourbon without feeling the need to dress down and wear a pair of sunglasses. A tasting panel went through a number and has some recommendations - I can personally vouch for Elijah Craig.
Regarding the first, oh, please, give me a break. Yes, water can taste noticeably different depending on the source, and, yes, it's an amazing substance, but why must everything become an earth-shattering marketing tool? Please, let the water be water, and let people enjoy it. How about a freeze on the hype?
The bourbon article I found interesting, though the initial web home page description got me frowning: "Complexity and elegance are qualities that have rarely been associated with bourbon." But getting into Eric Asimov's article was more telling - that bourbon had sat in the "unpretentious" brand category, and so couldn't underscore complexity. But things have changed, and now you can have a glass of a good bourbon without feeling the need to dress down and wear a pair of sunglasses. A tasting panel went through a number and has some recommendations - I can personally vouch for Elijah Craig.
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Hello Erick,
We read Mr. Asimov’s article as well and are delighted bourbon is getting such wonderful attention. We encourage folks to taste bourbon. As people who have been making bourbon in Kentucky for 225 years, we think there has never been a better family of bourbons on the market than is right now.
We aren’t shocked or surprised at the results of the tasting since many of these bourbons are high-poof or “woody.” Maker’s Mark was designed to be the sweet, well-balanced version of traditional bourbon. We will get overwhelmed in a tasting environment comparing Maker’s Mark to a large group of big, overpowering bourbons. There’s no question our bourbon doesn’t stand up in a quest for power.
We are curious, however, how they conducted the test. If 25 were tasted, we hope they divided and conquered. We never comparatively sample more than seven and that’s if the samples are diluted to approximately 60 proof. Did they add water? We’re pretty sure 25 whiskies undiluted, even over a couple of days will kill your taste buds.
A better way to taste and compare is to take two or three, add a little water to get the proof below the shock and burn effect on the taste buds (60-70 proof), in our case, two parts Maker’s and one part water. Then taste, compare and enjoy and you’ll most likely see a different outcome.
We’d love to hear about yours.
Bill
bill.samuels@makersmark.com
Post a Comment
We read Mr. Asimov’s article as well and are delighted bourbon is getting such wonderful attention. We encourage folks to taste bourbon. As people who have been making bourbon in Kentucky for 225 years, we think there has never been a better family of bourbons on the market than is right now.
We aren’t shocked or surprised at the results of the tasting since many of these bourbons are high-poof or “woody.” Maker’s Mark was designed to be the sweet, well-balanced version of traditional bourbon. We will get overwhelmed in a tasting environment comparing Maker’s Mark to a large group of big, overpowering bourbons. There’s no question our bourbon doesn’t stand up in a quest for power.
We are curious, however, how they conducted the test. If 25 were tasted, we hope they divided and conquered. We never comparatively sample more than seven and that’s if the samples are diluted to approximately 60 proof. Did they add water? We’re pretty sure 25 whiskies undiluted, even over a couple of days will kill your taste buds.
A better way to taste and compare is to take two or three, add a little water to get the proof below the shock and burn effect on the taste buds (60-70 proof), in our case, two parts Maker’s and one part water. Then taste, compare and enjoy and you’ll most likely see a different outcome.
We’d love to hear about yours.
Bill
bill.samuels@makersmark.com
Links to this post:
<< Home
