3 ms·
I don't doubt that many producers aim to improve their process and flavor profile and aim to modernize. But how can they when something like Scotch must be aged
by paavoova 8y ago
I don't doubt that many producers aim to improve their process and flavor profile and aim to modernize. But how can they when something like Scotch must be aged 3 years in wood to be sold as such? That is, you can replicate the traditional Scotch aging process in a pressure chamber in a matter of days, and it tastes similar, and the chemical profile is similar, but you cannot sell it as Scotch unless you stick it in a wooden barrel for years. It's arbitrary and ridiculous.
But the article linked in the OP describes traditionalism. Nothing is stopping these Japanese distillers from innovating and expediting the aging process. So really, those low-stocks are artificially inflated in value.
Here is an interesting article [1]:
We put the distillate into a pressure capable stainless steel tank and then we cut up the wood from the barrel into measured segments. We control for size and shape and surface area and moisture content and weight.
Once Cleveland’s spirit is in the tank, the pressure is ratcheted up and then plunged down to a near vacuum. Supposedly, the process is similar to what happens when the temperature fluctuates in a rickhouse. Although “essentially, we’re squeezing that wood much like a sponge,” Lix says. “We pull a tremendous amount of flavor in a short time.”
“By the traditionalists, we’re considered heretics and what we’re doing is sacrilege,” Lix continues. “We’ve been called the number one most hated bourbon distillery among old-school whiskey drinkers.”
Not only do these modern processes face regulatory restrictions in the market, they face backlash from the consumers themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if in a blind tasting, such pressure-aged spirits would fare favorably, but not if their brand and process was known. There is too much biased involved for me to appreciate any part of this industry and it as a hobby.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/07/the-scientific-arms-race-to-age-our-whiskey/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/07/the-scientific-arms-...
- tptacek 8y agoThe trend in Scotch is strongly towards no-age-statement (NAS) expressions. If they could reproduce aging in an Oloroso butt using pressure treatment, Diageo would already be doing it. Scotch tends to be aged for at least 10 years; the economics are such that even if they could just mix in pressure-aged distillate to cut down the aggregate ratio of aging years/liters, they'd be doing that, and still relating an "average age" over 10 years (which is roughly what they claim for NAS single-malt now). But they do not. They don't even do it for blends, where the distillates aren't even ostensibly traceable. Is it possible that some technological approach will allow for radically accelerated aging of Scotch? I sure hope so! Is your subtext --- that all Scotch is basically the same product regardless of how it's aged simply because someone has managed to extract phenylated esters from chunks of wood --- valid? No, it obviously is not.