Breweries naming which bourbon brand they source for barrel aging

Really? You're talking about Bourbon Street right? I was under the impression it was all pappy.

 

Nope. Bourbon by law has to be 51% corn for the mashbill and aged in new, charred American oak. There is blended whiskey( grain neutral spirits and bourbon together) but no blended bourbon.

 

Thanks, I knew that but had the word "whiskey" on the brain because of the Gulden Draak label and neglected to make the differentiation when I read the thread title.

 

Sure. But spelling on the label is predictive of country of origin.

Add in that the brewery seems to use the "e" spelling and the brewmaster seems to have been influenced by multiple visits to the US the beer mentioned in the post I was responding to is probably not aged in Scotch Whisky barrels.

 

That's a useful Mnemonic, thanks!

But, its not entirely a regional preference. If its made in Scotland its not spelled with an "e."

Add in that the brewery seems to use the "e" spelling and the brewmaster seems to have been influenced by multiple visits to the US the beer mentioned in the post I was responding to is probably not aged in Scotch Whisky barrels.

 

yup, that's the beer. I talked to my local Abita Rep about it and that was what she said (and later had it confirmed at another Abita event in DC). do note that the same company that owns Buffalo Trace and Pappy also own Abita. makes nice bed partners.
As for the beer, I thought it was a bit thin, but given the price point, it wasn't bad.

 

I think it's mostly another way to imprint another variant or rarity factor the beer. Although I don't mind it, I will mind the higher prices that come with it. I mean honestly, other than vanilla, oak and a few more subtle notes, it's pretty hard to pick out more barrel flavours on an imperial stout as the malt is still pretty dominating. You can pretend all you want that you'll notice the different chars, or where the oak comes from, but in reality that's most likely the malt bill or the hops you're tasting.

Now types of spirits make a big difference, but varieties of bourbon the difference is very subtle. Scotch, the peatiness will vary and have an impact, but not much else by the time it hits the beer. If anything, I'd say it's pretty subtle and always subject to blending anyways.

 

It's because the bourbon get's a good portion of it's flavour from the wood, just like the beer does.

 

Have you some source to back up your claims about costs of virgin barrels. Its my understanding that new, unused, charred barrels are much more expensive than the one use Bourbon barrels that can no longer be used for Bourbon.

If would also be helpful if you could identify the beers and breweries using new oak barrels for beer. Some might like to try those beers.

 

i'm hoping you truly are a brewer. maybe hearing the details from someone in the industry will finally get some of these cats to open up their ears... and minds. it's annoying to no end witnessing this discussion over & over, with numerous responses piling up that are obvious guesses & misinformation. most of which are never prefaced with any indication what's provided is based on how they think or feel not what they KNOW or have a solid UNDERSTANDING of. then again, it's still early. maybe i'm too optimistic & the cavalry just hasn't had enough to drink or visited the forum yet to tell you it doesn't matter & basically you're a dunce for paying a $10 premium etc.

technically, correct, but for all intents and purposes, there is no regulation specifying what type of filtration is unacceptable. the sugar maple charcoal doesn't really bar JD or Dickel from *LEGALLY* being termed bourbon. they could be called bourbon & labeled as such with zero objection or repercussion.

 

it can be confusing. i believe Canadians also use the (E). so do the Irish. meanwhile, U.S. based George Dickel, iirc, does not use the "E" & spells theirs whisky just like the Scots.

 

Confusing? An understatement for sure.

Dickel no "e." Canadian Club no "e."

Use an "e" in Scotland for their locally made whisky and corrections will follow. Don't use an "e" in Ireland for their locally made whiskey and corrections will follow.

Quite possibly more confusion and myths abound about whiskey/whisky than even about beer.

 

I think the base beer and the skill of the brewer are much more important than the origin of the barrel. You could give me the rarest Pappy barrel and Matt Brynildson an empty barrel that held Old Crow and I will tell you right now I'll take his end product over mine 8 days a week.

 

I would like to see that also. Which ones are?

 

Lol, yes I am truly a brewer. I have been brewing at the Blue Pants brewery since 2011 here in Madison, Al. I think people get some things confused, and several of the points have been made on here already...

1. Barrel aging a bad beer in a fantastic barrel still nets you bad beer
2. You won't be able to distinguish the brand in the beer, but the beer will still have differences from different brands.
3. Sometimes, the best whiskey is not the right addition to certain beers.

My theory, based on experiences I've had, is that the barrel should be thought of almost like it is an ingredient. Just like how an American Caramel Malt may not be the best ingredient for one beer where English Crystal malt is well suited, some beers will pair better with Jim Beam than with Buffalo Trace barrels. In our case, the buffalo trace barrel's vanilla flavor paired wonderfully with our Wee Heavy. The Heaven Hill did not pair well with the Wee Heavy, but I could see using it in a different beer such as an American Barleywine or American Strong Ale.

 

One caveat. "Oak Aged" doesn't necessarily mean its been aged in a barrel. Standard procedure is adding oak chips to the aging tank. (Sort of like "Beech Wood Aged." )

 

A better analogy may have been to compare the differences in flavor to different maltsters malts... Weyermann Pils malt for example tastes similar Shill pils malt, or Castle Pils malt, but there are differences and brewers use the different malts as tools to achieve the beer they want to make... The same can be applied to different brands of bourbon.

 

i would point out, though i did not witness it myself, it was said Matt Brynildson was irritated as hell that he was unable to obtain the usual Heaven Hill barrels FW had been receiving. 2012 was said to use Four Roses barrels instead. & while the 2012 was good, i notice some people didn't regard it as FW's best Parabola release. maybe it does matter a lil bit more than many are giving credit?