Jump to content

Are Micro-Distilleries Abusing the Title of Master Distiller?


grehorst

Recommended Posts

I am sorry but most have missed the point.

The title Master Distiller traditionally can not be conferred by oneself. It is a professional standing awarded by the governing guild or association. The term Master Brewer in the USA is strictly controlled by the MBAA, claiming appointment without passing the exams is a no-no.

In the UK, Europe, Asia and Australia you need to qualify as a Master Distiller, not pluck it our of a Corn Flakes packet (I assume its Corn Flakes in the US??, Rice Crispies works just as well).

My question to any Master Distiller would be 'who awarded you that professional title?' Ahhh... was it Kellogg's ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a distiller (yet) - just a cidermaker. And craft/artisan/micro- cideries are at least as poorly developed in the States as small distilleries. There are a similar number of them, but they aren't getting as much press.

Cideries also lack a national guild that could accredit Master tradesmen - or speciallized academic programs to award doctorates. And I do think that beverage production is a trade. At least as much as brewing, breadmaking, cheesemaking or gardening - all of which have master crafters.

The accredited rank of the distilling boss is certainly a marketing aid. It can lend a bit of prestige. But I think it's most useful (in the marketing sense) for any individual business when there's no other story to tell. When the reputation of the distiller is more important than that of the distillery or its products. And general use of the term dilutes that power.

I can see where the new group of microdistilleries jumbles the scene up a bit. Most compress all the roles in the business into one (or very few) person. They haven't been around long enough to go through ownership succession. Or management changes, or loss of key talent and/or knowledge. They traffic in their personal story and the merits of their products. So of course they see things differently from more established businesses.

There is another, very practical issue, where using the term 'master' crops up. Nearly every day I'm open, a touring customer asks if I'm the 'wine master'. The short answer is 'yes'. The same goes for journalists who call, looking for interviews. A lot of folks (also known as consumers) seem to use 'master' in the 'boss' sense. And it's easier to go with it than to correct them. I'd rather spend the time that would take telling them the story of my business and products. My business cards say 'President'. Except the few mixed in that say 'Bottle Washer'. (I'm in that group of small newbies who compress lots of jobs into one person.)

I'll have to think about that habit. Maybe I'll put on my best Yoda voice and tell them 'Master not. Just a learner, I am.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but how many consumers really understand how their spirits are made?

And since most spirits sold are from Big Liquor, consumers must be saying they're the real master distillers? Ditto for Big Beer, they're the real master brewers, right?

How many consumers know to care about how their spirits are made?

Big Liquor and Big Beer sell a lot of booze. Thanks to marketing. They tell the consumer what is important and many times it works. Craft distillers don't have this luxury.

But either way, that does mean that the Big Boys don't have people who have every right to call themselves master distillers. These people are present in big distillers and small ones.

I am sorry but most have missed the point.

The title Master Distiller traditionally can not be conferred by oneself. It is a professional standing awarded by the governing guild or association. The term Master Brewer in the USA is strictly controlled by the MBAA, claiming appointment without passing the exams is a no-no.

In the UK, Europe, Asia and Australia you need to qualify as a Master Distiller, not pluck it our of a Corn Flakes packet (I assume its Corn Flakes in the US??, Rice Crispies works just as well).

My question to any Master Distiller would be 'who awarded you that professional title?' Ahhh... was it Kellogg's ?

This is part of my point also - These established programs tell potential employers (the distilleries) that this candidate has a certain level of proficiency and makes it easier to pick them out of piles of resumes. If this distilling movement gets off the ground here in the US a similar program will be very important to have.

And I understand that if you have gone through these programs how you would feel that those who haven't shouldn't have a the right to use the title. I see where you can feel a sense of entitlement.

But honestly, Take 2 people - Person 1 went through the established program in the UK, worked under a master distiller for a number of years, learned the ropes from experts in their field and then awarded the title Master Distiller. Person 2 doesn't have access to this program, buys the equipment, learns how everything works, creates recipes from scratch through trial and error. Learns what works and what doesn't and then begins producing products that are innovative and well received by the consuming public. Grows a business to a point that these products have to produced at a certain level of efficiently to keep up with demand.

Is person 1 entitled to the title over person 2? I think "street cred" has to be considered. Especially somewhere where these established programs don't exist. Even where they do, it seems a little snobby to say that someone who didn't pay tuition for their credentials shouldn't get the same respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My comments on the consumer's opinion was a response to someone saying that because the consumer liked their products, that must count for something. By that reasoning, with Jack Daniels selling 7 million cases a year (according to this USA Today article from 2004), they're master distillers. I'm sure some of you might disagree with that.

So I'm agreeing with you, that you can't use sales numbers or customer taste to lay claim to being a "master distiller". Since no one is around who can confer that title on you, perhaps we should use some other means to differentiate ourselves from the big manufacturers.

We have to know what is better about micro-distillery products and be able to effectively communicate that to customers as well as potential customers. And while using easy terms like "artisanal", "craft distillery" sounds great in a newspaper article but what does it really mean?

I'm not being antagonistic here, just asking questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've got to move beyond the 'big is bad, small is good' mentality! If there is something to be said for just being small then what is it? And if there's something wrong with Jack Daniels (I myself am not a bourbon fan - too much oak for my tastes in general) than let's talk about that. But I see no reason that just due to size, quality must suffer. We need to be talking about quality factors and show that the big brands are lacking and the the micro-brands are superior to justify many of the postings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following press release may have some relevance to this discussion.

JIMMY BEDFORD TO RETIRE AS MASTER DISTILLER OF JACK DANIEL’S

LYNCHBURG (pop. 361), Tenn. (February 25, 2008) – Jimmy Bedford, only the sixth Master Distiller in the history of the Jack Daniel Distillery, announced today that he is retiring effective March 31, 2008.

“This year marks my 40th with the Jack Daniel Distillery and my 20th year as the master distiller,” said Bedford. “And it seemed like a good time to make the decision I’ve been thinking about for some time. It’s time I step aside and let the next generation continue the Jack Daniel’s tradition.”

The 68-year old Bedford began working at the distillery in 1968 and has served as its Master Distiller since 1988. As the Master Distiller, Bedford oversees the entire whiskey-making process of milling, yeasting, fermentation, distillation, charcoal mellowing, and maturation. As the Jack Daniel’s ads have long proclaimed, Jack Daniel’s isn’t ready to be bottled for consumers’ enjoyment until Jimmy Bedford says it is.

In addition to his role in overseeing a team of dedicated craftsmen who carry out the whiskey-making process, Bedford also has traveled across the United States and to many parts of the globe to share the Jack Daniel’s story with the brand’s many friends, consumers, distributors and retailers.

“We’re going to miss Jimmy here in the Hollow and around the world,” said Tommy Beam, senior vice president general manager of the Jack Daniel Distillery, Lem Motlow Prop. “During Jimmy’s watch the brand has grown to become the number one selling whiskey in the world. We thank him and wish him the best.”

Beam added that the seventh Master Distiller will be announced soon.

“Following Jimmy Bedford won’t be easy, but we’ve been preparing for this day for several years,” said Beam. “We’re confident that Jimmy’s successor will do a fine job and live up to Mr. Jack’s guiding words that ‘Every day we make it, we’ll make it the best we can.’”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

At our distillery, we do not claim any titles but Owners, Production Manager & Distillerymen, oh yeah and our conformance manager title "Queen of Compliance".

In the climbing world, guides do not apply the title "Guide" upon themselves. It is up, as said earlier, to a governing body accepted nationally, or some recognized educational program/institution (in climbing it's the American Mountain Guides Assn.) to license qualified guides after years of experience and substantial training, then a testing program. Same goes for "certified" climbing gyms.

Street cred does not speak to a person's technical ability. Anyone with minimum ability and the equipment can put out a product and it may or may not be good or popular in the marketplace. The person is not then a "master" of anything except perhaps marketing. The term "master" as I understand it, traditionally includes formal training, education, apprenticeship and a Journeyman period of work before the person is accepted by the general trade/craft community. It includes complete knowledge of the science, physics, biology, mechanics and finer detail points of spirits production. An electrician gets licensed, so does a plumber; ask the insurance underwriters the distinction betweek a hack electrician and a licensed master electrician. It's the piece of paper indicating a certifiable level of knowledge, experience and skill. The definition of "certified" calls for some process and the blessing of a recognized governing body.

Seems to me, in every undertaking there are those who want to represent themselves as "Master" of their craft, for whatever reasons; for some it's ego, for others it's a sales ploy. So be it. Who the hell cares. The hacks will fall by the wayside. The true masters will work on, mainly unheralded. It's simply not enough to be good at it. And the only way distilling in the US will have a method for sorting out or recognizing the true "Masters" is to define the term and accept a governing body with the criteria established and a method of reviewing the "candidates".

R

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following is written from a position of ignorance, not challenge. Rum that isn't made from straight pressed sugar cane juice is made from molasses boosted by white sugar. Brown sugar is (almost always) white sugar that's had molasses added back in. It seems apples to apples for me. What's wrong with the term "rum" for this fellow's procedure?

Look at the Fed's STANDARDS OF IDENTITY, the definition of Rum.

Comment on credentials: The definition of "Master" anything is simply not a self-appointment. And I think our cousins in the UK would disagree strongly with the assertion that there is no real qualified program or curriculum that is the distilling equal of Master Electrician. Just because it doesn't exist in the US, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. In the EU the main difference is that the Governments often establish criteria and require a license from the governing body before recognizing the "Master" designation. We have no such criteria or program here, yet. The establishment of such programs takes an organized and deliberate effort among the players, all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did look at the BAM when the criticism was posted; "Spirits distilled from the fermented juice of sugar cane, sugar cane syrup, sugar cane molasses or other sugar cane by-products." Cane sugar + molasses passes that. And, assumably, they got formula approval for it. While not the way I'd approach it, this seems to be a reasonable and creative approach.

That said, while I'm still missing the reason for criticism, my question is tangential to the point of this thread and should probably be ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting the rum distraction aside, this conversation did completely change my opinion on the use of "Master Distiller." (I started out thinking the statement of title abuse was an unnecessary distraction and eye-rolling silliness. I now disagree with that Andrew of six months ago.)

But the issue also worries me. I see the small distillers' greatest asset as the ability to innovate, differentiate and be flexible. How much tradition; how many social mores and production expectations do we adopt from the culture of larger-scale producers and self-impose as a community before these adopted expectations start ostacising people in small ways and for silly reasons?

Perhaps the rum example above isn't irrelevent. It's exactly this that bugged me about the snide comment about brown sugar. Not traditional, but it passes legal muster (or so I think). If their product is good (I haven't tried it) and is attracting consumers, shouldn't that be what we as a community look at first?

"Master Distiller" is an issue of respect and truth in labelling, and setting standards and expectations internally is quite important for the group to be cohesive and responsible. I just want to wave the rather obvious flag that adopting too many expectations from an industry that operates at a different scale, with different pressures and with somewhat calcified traditions, might be unhealthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramblings from the cheap seats down here in Florida.

I haven't chimed in on these issues yet mostly because I've had my head in my pot still. Yes my POT STILL. That has a COLUMN on it. In which I make a very irreverent vodka distilled from Florida honey. Honey? Yes honey. It has been 4 years since I decided to learn the craft. From scratch. And I wanted to make something that spoke of the of the land from which it came. Where I was born and raised. In Florida. I think I make a very nice vodka. So did the judges in San Fran in 2006 when I came out. A joke? I can tell you I laugh every time I see that list of gold medal winners in my category for that year from France, Russia, Estonia (fill in some other European country here) and the handful of micros from virginia, oregon, california and florida on the same list.

I may be tooting my own horn a bit, but it is to make a point. And my point is this. We micros are a very upstart (perhaps irreverent) bunch. I can understand why the establishment (sorry chuck I don't know you but, you're not a micro, so you're the establishment) may take umbrage to some of our practices and products. We don't follow the rules. If we followed the rules we would all still be stock jockeys or accountants or whatever we did before we lost our minds and opened a distillery.

I recently heard Lance Winters (that's Lance Winters at St. George) speak at Tales of the Cocktail and I think he said something very profound. I don't know if he meant it as a defining point, and I am periphrasing here because they served 4 cocktails during the session, but it was:

If you want to experience an artisan distilled product seek out thosed distilleries who are using the local ingredients because they really are an expression of that region. The artisan distiller (we) makes products for his own reasons and they may not necessarily have a market to begin with, but he creates the product for its own sake.

Or something along those lines. It sounded better when he said it.

Hmm sounds kinda like art for art's sake huh?

So why don't we have your respect? Maybe its just we had the audacity not to ask for it. Or that we don't want it or need it. I am not trying to be antagonistic and as I read that last sentence it sure sounds that way. But there is no other way to say it. I don't want to pretend to speak for others here but garnering respect of large established distillers was not high on my list when I decided to do this. That's what I was rebelling against. In fact I pretty much counted on hearing some of the things you expressed Chuck. You are right about one thing though. My payback comes when someone tastes my products, enjoys them and feels compelled to share that joy with me. That's respect. That's why we do it. It is ultimately the consumer who will weigh in here and rightly so. So if you are a consumer as you say step out of the lines a bit and try Stranahans or St. Georges whiskey or if you're feeling really off your rocker maybe a vodka made by a micro. And if you truly enjoy it please share it with the maker.

As others have said, I have tremendous respect for those who came before me for what they endeavored to create, for their courage and for what they have achieved.

But I also see those same qualities in my contemporaries...

BTW I go by the title my folks gave me

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When all of the rule-breaking takes the form of short cuts, that's nothing to brag about.

And the fact that spirit made from cane sugar is legally rum, and also just about the easiest distilled spirit to make, the moonshiner's hallmark, that also is nothing to brag about.

Why not?

Because where's the craft? It's like getting an Easy Bake oven and calling yourself an artisan baker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When all of the rule-breaking takes the form of short cuts, that's nothing to brag about.

And the fact that spirit made from cane sugar is legally rum, and also just about the easiest distilled spirit to make, the moonshiner's hallmark, that also is nothing to brag about.

Why not?

Because where's the craft? It's like getting an Easy Bake oven and calling yourself an artisan baker.

Hence my clarification in my trying to quote Lance Winters (lamely) in describing the art in artisan. We as a group are trying to define the term ourselves as has been posted here in these forums. Your point is taken. If I buy dixie crystals and disolve them in water and add baker's yeast you'll get a wash you can distill but does it have character? Does it explore new ground? Does it say something different? I think that is part of the test Chuck. And there are folks out there who are trying to do this and maybe don't quite understand where they're going and why. The market will take care of them. A craft distiller might decide to make a distilled spirit from I don't know let's say a Yuca plant. It might not have a market today and may never have a mass market but it is something that has never been done before and that is art. You may not like Andy Warhols Campbells soup can but you got to admit it's different.

I think we agree more than disagree on this. Are people abusing the genre. Probably. I am just trying to say that innovation comes from taking risks. As a master distiller at a big whiskey house with a well deserved title you are the master of the craft but how much leeway do you get to experiment and take risks?

At one time somebody in that organization did take the risks and that's might point.

Thanks for prompting the discussion.

Respectfully,

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Important to remember, what you are making (vodka, whiskey, absinthe, eau de vie, whatever) is not the defining characteristic of "craft".

Some comments earlier posts suggest that vodka is not a crafted product and there was some question if it can be made in a pot still. These are not the criteria for "craft". But to address the comments directly, we consider our vodka to be "crafted". It is produced in a pot, one batch at a time and we replumb our still to send the vapor from the pot through two columns in order to get the required alcohol content so it can be called "vodka".

It is true that a simple pot still can not make vodka. Any claims of distillers they are making crafted vodka in a simple pot contradict the laws of physics. However, the pot is still a pot even when you reroute vapor to columns, and a batch is still a batch. The approach, the mindset, the care and attention to detail and flavor, the care taken with the fruit substrate we use, all of it goes to the "crafting" of our vodka. And the fact it is barely vodka, in the sense that we are following the letter of the legal definition and perhaps pushing the subjective determination of what constitutes "without distinctive character, aroma, taste, or color" since our vodka has the faint aroma and flavor of the apples from which it is made; these faint characteristics are not removed with charcoal or any other process. But the point is that the spirit is within the definition and it is therefore vodka.

It never fails, whenever someone decides to operate on the fringe, there are those who are not satisfied. This is exactly what definitions and limits and agreed terms are for, to prescibe the outer limits of the defined thing. It may be barely whiskey, or just inside the definition of vodka; but so long as it's inside the box, it's acceptable and no dishonor or cheating in the decision to be on the fringe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...