Jump to content

Barrel Size


WI Distiller

Recommended Posts

Be aware that the article is talking about comparing a 1.5 gallon barrel to a 48 gallon barrel (6 liters vs 180 liters), both uncharred oak.

Ahh yes, I can see how that could make a noticable difference! :lol:

Does anyone know of any credible research done on, say, 15 gal. vs. 53 gal. charred? Gosh... the whole topic of barrel aging seems to have so many myths associated with it... like heat and/or humidity having a particular effect, etc. On that subject Bill Owens' Craft Of Whiskey Distilling states that low humidity aging makes for better vanillin extraction, and that higher temperatures accelerate oxidation which contributes to increase of acids and esters. But I've also spoken with people who say this is all a myth too.

Sorry, I don't mean to hijack the thread with that stuff. But I do want to know if anyone has any reasonably concrete data on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm sure there a number of BIG DISTILLERIES in KY that know quite a bit about this, but they're not talking to us.

It's an area where we (the micros) are at a disadvantage compared to them (the majors). imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, great to see some more discussion.

I'm sorry to hear your account got deleted, Liberty Bar, and I hope it was not as a result of your opinion on this topic. Your certainly not the only person to feel this way.

I will say that one major reason the big boys use the barrel size that they use is cost. It takes about the same amount of time and labor to produce a 5 gallon barrel as it does a 53 gallon one, so even though the materials cost is less, the cost of producing the barrels is relatively close. Or put another way, ten 5 gallon barrels cost WAY more than one 53 gallon barrel, even if you have your own cooperage. If you have the ability to wait 4-6 years to put your product out, it is more cost effective to use these bigger barrels.

If you think of how 53 gallons became the standard size, think of it as an evolutionary process. Things like the labor it takes to produce a barrel, the amount of aging time needed, the ease of filling and emptying the barrel, the ease of moving the barrels around a warehouse, and other considerations would all have been taken into account, and on balance, large distilleries settled on 53 gallons. Flavor would not have been the only consideration. For a newer distillery, these considerations might cause a distiller to come to a different conclusion.

I'm not sure if you can get the Tuthilltown stuff in Seattle, but I think they are a good example of great whiskey coming from a small barrel. I would never argue that it is accelerated aging; statements like "1 year in a 15 gallon barrel is like 3 years in a 53 gallon barrel" seem crazy to me, because you aren't going to get the exact same product, you'll get something that I believe is different but, I believe, can be equally high quality if done correctly.

As has been pointed out, that study has a ton of flaws, not least of which is a very short time period in the barrels and the use of wine-style toasted rather than charred barrels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Liberty Bar - Seattle

My guess - and this is only a guess, based upon talking to a lot of master distillers over the years - is that it takes a certain amount of time and the environmental relationship of the whisk(e)y going in and out of the wood of the barrel to achieve the quality affect which we have grown accustomed to tasting. There's no doubt that if you throw a charred piece of oak into a jar with a white dog, the whisk(e)y will look and taste differently in a short period of time, right? But the difference between the seasonal effects (heat/cold) on the barrel and the whisk(e)y, sucking the whisk(e)y into the wood & pushing it out year after year, and a good oak barrel seems to be a very difficult affect to approximate this effect in a smaller barrel.

Meaning: just more surface area on a smaller amount of actual oak does not seem to have the same, positive, desired effect.

And, while it IS interesting to see what would happen in stainless with charred staves/blocks/balls, sounds like it's the time going in and out of the wood that; as I understand it, seems to be the difference, not just a 'quick' leeching of color and some sugars...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Independent Stave Company (ISC) supplies barrels for every American distiller except Brown-Forman (Jack Daniel's), as well as for some of the 'cooperages' that micros may be dealing with who are really just resellers for ISC, specializing in small volume accounts. ISC has sponsored many symposiums on the subjects of spirits aging and wine aging, and published the research study results in three hard cover volumes. I got a set just for asking.

They have academics who conduct research and present their results at these symposiums. ISC also develops its own experiments in partnership with distillers. Those also are reported and published.

The reason I say acceleration schemes don't work is because they only deal with one aspect of aging and that's extraction. The changes that result from evaporation and oxidation simply take time.

Whether it's heat cycling or chips or small barrels, it's all been tried. It's one thing to sell a product and tell, very specifically, what that product does, but to just say it "accelerates aging" to me is a red flag of a scam. Accelerated aging is like the flip side of the Fountain of Youth, equally illusory. But, hey, anyone who wants to chase unicorns can be my guest.

As for all the 'secrets' the majors are supposedly sitting on, one of my mantras is: "Just because you don't know something, that doesn't mean it's a secret."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The spirits industry is slowly, but surely catching up to the wine industry in product innovation/technology

There have been many blind taste tests where wine aged with oak alternatives including our product- the oak infusion spiral- won best of show, double gold etc. over wines aged for one-two years in new French oak cooperage

so 6 weeks with French infusion spiral ($55)beat out wine aged in new F/O barrels ($1000)for 1-2 years

In fact- the majority of wineries now use oak alternatives to some extent- you just wont get the winemakers to talk about their technique

Over the past 10 years the idea is becoming less taboo, and now you can read many articles in wine business monthly, and wines and vines on this topic

Small barrels are not used commercially in the wine business, or in 99% of the spirits industry- this is due to economies of scale and competition

I can go to the liquor store and buy a $25 1.75 liter bottle of bourbon from the big boys

We have sold many 15 gallon and 30 gallon charred barrels to MAJOR distilleries in KY- I wont say which ones because I would like to continue working with them

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I say acceleration schemes don't work is because they only deal with one aspect of aging and that's extraction. The changes that result from evaporation and oxidation simply take time.

Respectfully, oxidation is more rapid in smaller barrels, for obvious reasons. Assuming, of course, you know how to get compounds in your distillate that will oxidize into positive congeners.

I wouldn't say that the small barrels age whiskey faster. I'd say that they age whiskey differently. And this can be a good thing or a bad thing.

The biggies aren't sitting on very much these days----recall that they're all owned by a handful of corporations, and you're talking about shared knowledge these days. There's all kinds of conferences these days (they publish the papers the Worldwide Distiller's Conference in a hardbound volume)....you just have to put in some work. Google won't give you all the lit. that's out there, folks. Look to Japan. Part of being a professional distiller is keeping up with your reading, IMHO, just like any other professional trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's all kinds of conferences these days (they publish the papers the Worldwide Distiller's Conference in a hardbound volume)....you just have to put in some work. Google won't give you all the lit. that's out there, folks. Look to Japan. Part of being a professional distiller is keeping up with your reading, IMHO, just like any other professional trade.

Those books you mentioned are an invaluable reference. I constantly refer to them when I have my own doubts about production/QC/etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experiences in a small winery have taught me that making a product in small, hands-on quantities limits applicability of certain standard approaches, but it also opens up unique possibilities not available to those making product on a large scale. Making a few hundred or a few thousand cases a year allows for a level of attention and precision that simply can't be replicated when you're starting from a million-gallon mash. That midnight oil we're all burning isn't for nothing! :)

It also seems to me that, for artisan-scale producers of any product, a more fundamental question than "can we [blank] just like them, only faster" is..."why do we want to [blank] just like them?" In my experience, much of what is done in any industry is as related to "that's how we've always done it" as it is to technically-derived understanding and conscious choice.

I'm struck by the fact that there are exemplary aged spirits out there using decades-old barrels for aging that clearly cannot transfer the same level of wood-based compounds as new oak - yet few would argue that (for example) a well made, aged Calvados is a miraculously wonderfully complex drink. It seems clear this particular cat can be skun in more than one way.

All IMO, etc.

D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see some strong opinions on both sides, and glad to see some suggestions for further research!

To me these three statements can all coexist is the same reality:

Cowdery: "Whether it's heat cycling or chips or small barrels, it's all been tried. It's one thing to sell a product and tell, very specifically, what that product does, but to just say it "accelerates aging" to me is a red flag of a scam. Accelerated aging is like the flip side of the Fountain of Youth, equally illusory."

Denver Distiller: "I wouldn't say that the small barrels age whiskey faster. I'd say that they age whiskey differently. And this can be a good thing or a bad thing."

Dado: "It also seems to me that, for artisan-scale producers of any product, a more fundamental question than "can we [blank] just like them, only faster" is..."why do we want to [blank] just like them?""

I think that thinking about small barrel aging in terms of "accelerated aging" is incorrect, for many of the reasons you point out, mr Cowdery. But, as Dado says, the conversation shouldn't be about "how can we make a product that is the same as the major Kentucky distillers but put it out faster and charge more for it," but how we can make high quality, distinctive products, and I think that small barrel aging is a viable tool in the tool kit for doing so. I think there is a lot of merit in young whiskeys (and I think others would agree with me), and small barrel aging is a way to add some of the heavy char oak flavors that many people look for in whiskey into a younger product at a faster rate. Not the same product, but something that's different while being still recognizable as whiskey.

I plan to make a range of whiskeys, some small barrel aged, some large barrel aged, and one that will only be in a barrel while I fill out some paper work so that the feds will let me call it whiskey. And I think all of these approaches have merit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...the conversation shouldn't be about "how can we make a product that is the same as the major Kentucky distillers but put it out faster and charge more for it," but how we can make high quality, distinctive products...

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. Koval is using 30 gallon barrels. Dan Garrision, in Texas, is using mostly 10 gallon barrels and he is getting an incredible flavor, with a distinctive butterscotch note, with two years in wood. Is it the small barrels? Is it the Minnesota terroir of the oak? Is it the Texas Hill Country aging conditions? His water source? His distillate? His yeast? All of the above? None of the above? I don't know but it's a wonderful flavor.

I know a little more about Koval. They are also using Minnesota oak but they're making a very clean and focused distillate that has a wonderful flavor without aging and an even more wonderful flavor after a few months in wood. For one expression they use lightly charred barrels, for the other the barrels have a deeper char. This allows you to taste the same distillate three ways, naked and with two different aging schemes. Fascinating but also very good.

It seems as though maybe some people are looking for a magic bullet: small barrels! chips! heated warehouses? More char? Less char? It will never boil down to one thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest Liberty Bar - Seattle

...how we can make high quality, distinctive products, and I think that small barrel aging is a viable tool in the tool kit for doing so.

Distinctive, yes. And, depending on the definition of "high quality", I don't know. I have had pushed whiskies that I liked, but none that are even really good, much less great.

I don't know the science of wood & whisk(e)y - what causes those flavors to slowly leech out of the wood or be created by the time and combination of wood & whisk(e)y - but I would imagine that one aspect of what makes a great whisk(e)y great is this unique combination of time & effect due to the volume of whisk(e)y in a barrel of a larger size, and that size so far is not the smaller barrels, as we're discussing.

I think others would agree with me, and small barrel aging is a way to add some of the heavy char oak flavors that many people look for in whiskey into a younger product at a faster rate. Not the same product, but something that's different while being still recognizable as whiskey.

Yes, I would add though "[one aspect] of the heavy oak flavors", because I doubt that one could just add some charred blocks of Mizunara to a well-produced single malt and have that unique Japanese oak flavor. I imagine that there's a combination of time & environment that matters more in the long run than just exposure to surface area.

I do love the options that we have though.

Is it the Texas Hill Country aging conditions? His water source? His distillate? His yeast? All of the above? None of the above? I don't know but it's a wonderful flavor.

It seems as though maybe some people are looking for a magic bullet: small barrels! chips! heated warehouses? More char? Less char? It will never boil down to one thing.

Absolutely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...