“Your ego is writing checks that your body can’t cash”, I think that is what you were looking for 😊. Love the honesty in your reviews and approach. Thanks for what you do!
4:02 I'm a Texan, so I would say that between the nose and the palate it's all hat and no cattle. But I've never had this whisky, so whether I'd have that reaction I can't say. 🤠
Erin tasting notes: "Its like a library, not a modern library but a medieval library with all that old wood and in the left corner there's an area that gets a lot of sunlight and there's one book there where the sun has bleached the top pages and the front cover and the dust is baked in....its like that"
Based on the title, I was going to comment about my experience with Ardbeg Lord of the Isles, but - now I've watched all the way through - I'll just say that I like (some of) the Van Winkles at MSRP, but secondary prices are not deserved... 'Old book' whiskies, however, are among my favourites, particularly a 41-year-old Benromach 1974. For non-Scotch lovers: the A.H. Hirsch Reserve 1974 16-year-old bourbon does pretty well in that category too.
Educational to see a blind of that. I have come across any scotches whiskeys bourbons that should be more than $200 just based on taste. Granted I haven’t tasted anything in the 25+ yr category. I wish you would also specifically discuss that black pepper notes.
The only Van Winkle I have tried so far is the 12-year Lot B. Some time ago, a local bar was selling pours for a good price to reward regular customers. I thought it was good, but it wasn't different enough from other bourbons to make me want to pay a fortune for it. There are a lot of overhyped bourbons out there. It isn't necessary to spend lots of time hunting for them or to overpay for them. There are plenty of good bourbons that are easy to find and don't cost a fortune. Every now and then, I've encountered booze for which the palate doesn't match the nose very well. One glaring example was Macallan 12-year, which I hadn't had for a while and decided to order at a bar to remind myself of what it is like. The nose is wonderful, with some nice fruit notes that come from the sherry casks. I was expecting a sherry bomb on the palate, but what I got was thin, watery stuff that tasted faintly of generic whisky. The problem with Macallan is that they overfilter the whisky and water it down too much. This makes it easy to drink and suitable for beginners, but after I got used to non-chill filtered and cask strength Scotch, it was hard to come back to something like this. I bet an unfiltered, cask strength Macallan would be wonderful, but I hate to imagine how much it would cost. Like Van Winkle, Macallan is overhyped and is a status symbol for rich people. As for the Van Winkle rye, I wonder if it has a similar problem. Maybe it is proofed down too much, or maybe they have gone a little too heavy on the filtration. I would love to try it for myself, but the opportunity is unlikely to present itself at a price I'm willing to pay.
I get that. There are times when either the nose or palate will present very specific and detailed notes while the other give a more generalized, more homogenized note.
I appreciate the unbiased review. I tried Antique 107 in a restaurant. It wasn't horribly expensive or anything like that. I think it was like $12 for a pour. I thought it was good, but being able to taste it cured me of any desire to chase it or pay insane prices. Not long after that I found a bottle of Weller 12 at retail. It was about a year and a half ago and I paid about 35 bucks for it. I ended up trading it for Remus Repeal 4.
I had a my one and only pour of Eagle Rare at a bar last year. I swear they must have put Senators Club in that Eagle Rare bottle because there is no way people are spending into the hundreds for ER if it is genuinely that bad. I wanted to like it but I just couldn't. I passed up a bottle of ER for Knob Creek 12 year and some people looked at me like I had a third eye.
If price scaled perfectly with drinking enjoyment, whisky's would never cost more than $200 (somewhere in the neighborhood of). That's my estimate based on my giant spreadsheet of 300 different reviewed bottles of whisky/whiskey. In reality, we all make different allowances for rarity, but my own tolerance/budget for paying a rarity premium (TRUE! not manufactured thank you very much) is very very low. Still always a little jealous that I won't likely get the chance to try these types of bottles though! Glad I at least got the chance to see you two review it. CHEERS!
Yeah after everything ive had, 200 is a hard cutoff. Most ive spent on a bottle was $180, and it was for my favorite whiskey ive had, on my birthday, after a work bonus.
Was literally at a buddies house last week and he just got this bottle and gave me a pour. He also thought it was okay but let him down, I thought it was great.
I don't understand why people pay more then retail for a bottle of anything. I recently bought a case of Early Times Bottled in Bond for 242 out the door. Tax, title and dealer prep. My local gas station has hard to find bottles. However they jack the price up double or more. I just don't buy them. If I want to try something that bad, I go to my local bourbon bar and buy a shot.
Ive had the 23 and the 10, neither of which i liked at all (the 10 was blind). The only reason id buy a pappy is if it was msrp, and id just trade it out for whiskey i like.
In retrospect, I should’ve said I’d buy one of these are up to $300 as that’s my max price on a bottle and if I got one of these I’d trade it for a King of Kentucky immediately.
good luck finding that for $120.. your crazy. not surprised that the bottle is way over hyped. its not bad, but I would not spend crazy cash for that.. your paying for the hype and the label on the bottle.
So Erin, old books smell like stinky feet? I'm with you Josh, I'd buy it at $120 MSRP just to have it in the bar but $1500? No way. I'm really wondering about all the Pappy bottles...I can't think of a video where someone gave any one of them two thumbs and two big toes up. If it's not a knock your mamas socks off bourbon, why pay $1500 for it? I came across a Willett Bourbon Pot Still Reserve for $60 and passed it up because every review I saw about it was basically a disappointment but the bottle is cool.
What device or screen are you watching on by chance? We’re admittedly shifting gears a bit with the channel going forward. We’ve always wanted to be a litlte less UA-cam-y and a little more movie-inspired. We’ve been doing the “brightly lit UA-cam set” look for a while now but it’s never had the feeling we truly wanted. Our original inspiration for the studio (which we call “the lounge” in house) has always been more of a dimly lit speakeasy where you’d hang out with friends and sip whiskey while music like our signature channel song played in the background. I’ve been pulling movie screenshots and working on matching up our video exposure and contrast to look more like those. I’ll be dialing it in over the coming weeks and months. Bear with us while we’re getting it just right. It'll be worth it we think. We’re checking on multiple devices and screens ourselves to ensure we’re no darker than your usual television show or movie, but we can only check so many. Any device or screen info is useful if you do feel like it’s darker than your usual television show or movie.
@stuffandwhiskey watching on a Pixel 7, I didn't think much of it until I saw this comment but definitely some black crush going on now that it's pointed out. Comparing to previous videos I like the direction though
“Your ego is writing checks that your body can’t cash”, I think that is what you were looking for 😊. Love the honesty in your reviews and approach. Thanks for what you do!
Pretty sure it's "ass" not "body"
Your mouth is writing checks your @ss can't cash.
4:02 I'm a Texan, so I would say that between the nose and the palate it's all hat and no cattle. But I've never had this whisky, so whether I'd have that reaction I can't say. 🤠
Erin tasting notes: "Its like a library, not a modern library but a medieval library with all that old wood and in the left corner there's an area that gets a lot of sunlight and there's one book there where the sun has bleached the top pages and the front cover and the dust is baked in....its like that"
Modification - ...and the dust is baked in and there's a monk looking guy wearing leather sandals and he has stinky feet....its like that"
😂 😂
Based on the title, I was going to comment about my experience with Ardbeg Lord of the Isles, but - now I've watched all the way through - I'll just say that I like (some of) the Van Winkles at MSRP, but secondary prices are not deserved... 'Old book' whiskies, however, are among my favourites, particularly a 41-year-old Benromach 1974. For non-Scotch lovers: the A.H. Hirsch Reserve 1974 16-year-old bourbon does pretty well in that category too.
Vellichor FTW!
Educational to see a blind of that. I have come across any scotches whiskeys bourbons that should be more than $200 just based on taste. Granted I haven’t tasted anything in the 25+ yr category. I wish you would also specifically discuss that black pepper notes.
Had the same experience when I had a pour at Evergreen in Louisville. Was not bad, but surely not worth more than a bottle of Baby Saz.
The only Van Winkle I have tried so far is the 12-year Lot B. Some time ago, a local bar was selling pours for a good price to reward regular customers. I thought it was good, but it wasn't different enough from other bourbons to make me want to pay a fortune for it. There are a lot of overhyped bourbons out there. It isn't necessary to spend lots of time hunting for them or to overpay for them. There are plenty of good bourbons that are easy to find and don't cost a fortune.
Every now and then, I've encountered booze for which the palate doesn't match the nose very well. One glaring example was Macallan 12-year, which I hadn't had for a while and decided to order at a bar to remind myself of what it is like. The nose is wonderful, with some nice fruit notes that come from the sherry casks. I was expecting a sherry bomb on the palate, but what I got was thin, watery stuff that tasted faintly of generic whisky. The problem with Macallan is that they overfilter the whisky and water it down too much. This makes it easy to drink and suitable for beginners, but after I got used to non-chill filtered and cask strength Scotch, it was hard to come back to something like this. I bet an unfiltered, cask strength Macallan would be wonderful, but I hate to imagine how much it would cost. Like Van Winkle, Macallan is overhyped and is a status symbol for rich people. As for the Van Winkle rye, I wonder if it has a similar problem. Maybe it is proofed down too much, or maybe they have gone a little too heavy on the filtration. I would love to try it for myself, but the opportunity is unlikely to present itself at a price I'm willing to pay.
You're tracking right on with what we think too. Pappy products and Macallan products both have that same sort of phenomenon going on.
I get that. There are times when either the nose or palate will present very specific and detailed notes while the other give a more generalized, more homogenized note.
I appreciate the unbiased review. I tried Antique 107 in a restaurant. It wasn't horribly expensive or anything like that. I think it was like $12 for a pour. I thought it was good, but being able to taste it cured me of any desire to chase it or pay insane prices. Not long after that I found a bottle of Weller 12 at retail. It was about a year and a half ago and I paid about 35 bucks for it. I ended up trading it for Remus Repeal 4.
That’s a great trade. Remus Repeal IV is a personal favorite of ours!
I had a my one and only pour of Eagle Rare at a bar last year. I swear they must have put Senators Club in that Eagle Rare bottle because there is no way people are spending into the hundreds for ER if it is genuinely that bad. I wanted to like it but I just couldn't. I passed up a bottle of ER for Knob Creek 12 year and some people looked at me like I had a third eye.
Eagle Rare is all right, but there's better bourbon that's affordable and a ton easier to find.
If price scaled perfectly with drinking enjoyment, whisky's would never cost more than $200 (somewhere in the neighborhood of). That's my estimate based on my giant spreadsheet of 300 different reviewed bottles of whisky/whiskey.
In reality, we all make different allowances for rarity, but my own tolerance/budget for paying a rarity premium (TRUE! not manufactured thank you very much) is very very low.
Still always a little jealous that I won't likely get the chance to try these types of bottles though! Glad I at least got the chance to see you two review it. CHEERS!
Yeah after everything ive had, 200 is a hard cutoff. Most ive spent on a bottle was $180, and it was for my favorite whiskey ive had, on my birthday, after a work bonus.
There are definitely diminishing returns above $80-100 and those get amplified even more over the $150-200 mark!
Would love to see that spreadsheet! I've made one of my own, only up to 100 or so bottles ranked and commented on.
@@stuffandwhiskey Except the $350 bottle of Magnus Cigar Blend for your charity. A really good bourbon and every penny was worth it!
Was literally at a buddies house last week and he just got this bottle and gave me a pour. He also thought it was okay but let him down, I thought it was great.
It's definitely not not great, but is it $1,500 great?
Oh my no, but it was free for me and I had no expectations going in I guess@@stuffandwhiskey
From the original Top Gun, "son, your ego is writing checks your body can't cash."
I don't understand why people pay more then retail for a bottle of anything. I recently bought a case of Early Times Bottled in Bond for 242 out the door. Tax, title and dealer prep. My local gas station has hard to find bottles. However they jack the price up double or more. I just don't buy them. If I want to try something that bad, I go to my local bourbon bar and buy a shot.
I am not surprised.
Ive had the 23 and the 10, neither of which i liked at all (the 10 was blind). The only reason id buy a pappy is if it was msrp, and id just trade it out for whiskey i like.
In retrospect, I should’ve said I’d buy one of these are up to $300 as that’s my max price on a bottle and if I got one of these I’d trade it for a King of Kentucky immediately.
“I’ll be honest”
Yeah I expect that, that’s why I’m here lol
It's what we do. These blinds are brutally honest at times. Cheers and thanks for watching!
Cheers! Great video!
Mouth is writing checks your butt can't cash
stunned. love the blind review. cheers
Love it, great review 👏👏
WHISKEY CHEERS 😎
good luck finding that for $120.. your crazy. not surprised that the bottle is way over hyped. its not bad, but I would not spend crazy cash for that.. your paying for the hype and the label on the bottle.
Good one
Fear the FOMO!
So Erin, old books smell like stinky feet? I'm with you Josh, I'd buy it at $120 MSRP just to have it in the bar but $1500? No way. I'm really wondering about all the Pappy bottles...I can't think of a video where someone gave any one of them two thumbs and two big toes up. If it's not a knock your mamas socks off bourbon, why pay $1500 for it? I came across a Willett Bourbon Pot Still Reserve for $60 and passed it up because every review I saw about it was basically a disappointment but the bottle is cool.
VERY good call to pass up Willett Pot Still. It's not as bad as we expected, but certainly not $60 worth!
The nose wrote a check that the palette couldn't cash.
Indeed it did!
If you paid $1,500 you got ripped off !!
You're mouth is writing checks your body can't cash.
Or your mouth is writing checks your back side can't cash
writing checks your butt can't cash
Your mouth is writing checks you can't cash.
Your mouth is writing checks your body can't cash. Imaginative but not necessarily sexual or tacky.
Not body...a##.
it tastes like an old book and yellow paper😂
This video was filmed really dark fyi.
What device or screen are you watching on by chance?
We’re admittedly shifting gears a bit with the channel going forward. We’ve always wanted to be a litlte less UA-cam-y and a little more movie-inspired. We’ve been doing the “brightly lit UA-cam set” look for a while now but it’s never had the feeling we truly wanted.
Our original inspiration for the studio (which we call “the lounge” in house) has always been more of a dimly lit speakeasy where you’d hang out with friends and sip whiskey while music like our signature channel song played in the background.
I’ve been pulling movie screenshots and working on matching up our video exposure and contrast to look more like those. I’ll be dialing it in over the coming weeks and months. Bear with us while we’re getting it just right. It'll be worth it we think.
We’re checking on multiple devices and screens ourselves to ensure we’re no darker than your usual television show or movie, but we can only check so many. Any device or screen info is useful if you do feel like it’s darker than your usual television show or movie.
@stuffandwhiskey watching on a Pixel 7, I didn't think much of it until I saw this comment but definitely some black crush going on now that it's pointed out. Comparing to previous videos I like the direction though
I watch on my computer at work.
@@brianclick7080awesome! Thanks for the info. We think we've about got it sorted out. Stay tuned!