Are Micro-Distilleries Abusing the Title of Master Distiller?

[grehorst]

Are Micro-Distilleries Abusing the Title of Master Distiller?

by Charles K. Cowdery, http://www.bourbonstraight.com

First published in The Bourbon Country Reader, Volume 11, Number 1, February, 2008.

We don't know where it started, probably Scotland, this use of the title master distiller.

What does it mean?

In the crafts guild tradition of Europe, the modifier "master" before the name of a craft, like "master builder," meant a person who had passed through all of the developmental stages, had become established and known in the field, and was operating at the highest possible level. It meant the person was fully proficient at the craft.

Every guild had its own rules but, in general, one became a master by being acknowledged as one by those who already bore the title. It primarily was an emblem of peer recognition.

The dictionary says a master is, "a worker qualified to teach apprentices and carry on the craft independently."

But master can also mean employer, any person who has control over others. So the idea that a master distiller is a distillery manager is not out of left field, but a plain reading of the whole term has to include the traditional crafts guild meaning too. A master is a person who is qualified to teach in a field and to practice in that field, unsupervised, independently, and at the highest level.

In the contemporary whiskey-making business, master distiller has generally come to mean "boss distiller," both a supervisor and trainer of other distillers, and a supervisor of all persons involved in distillery operations. It also has come to mean, in very recent usage, a whiskey producer's chief quality control officer. That role makes sense too.

Most master distillers today also have a marketing role. The master distiller is more than a brand ambassador. The master distiller is the brand's personification.

Today, most master distillers at the major producers oversee distillery operations. A few are primarily tasters and barrel-pickers. We have co-master distillers. It means something a little different at each company.

But isn't there some expectation that regardless of what else the term connotes, it will continue to have the traditional crafts guild meaning of a person who, after long training as an apprentice and long practice as a journeyman, has earned the right to be called master by mastering every detail of the craft? Isn't there also, in that crafts guild tradition, an expectation that master designation requires recognition from your ostensible peers, the people who already are acknowledged as masters?

Which brings us to the people who call themselves master distiller because they bought a still and have started a business they call a distillery, the proprietors of the new micro-distilleries that are popping up all over. Who made them master distillers? What are their credentials? Who taught them? Where have they worked? What have they made?

What have they done other than write a check and read an instruction manual?

No names will be named here. There is a case to be made that if you operate a distillery you are, ergo, a master distiller. But if we accept that, don't we lose something important? Also, there is nothing wrong with the title "distiller," without the modifier.

Many of these new master distillers are experienced brewers or winemakers, so they have some relevant skills.

This publication has expressed reservations before about the often juvenile behavior of this young movement, in which people who say they want to be taken seriously as professionals act more like hobbyists, or like little kids pretending to be cowboys or astronauts.

The really sad thing is, we would love to get excited about micro-distillery projects and products, but when we look, to quote Gertrude Stein, there is just no there there. People who read this publication would love to support a good, honest, well-made micro-distilled American whiskey. We just haven't found one yet.

So, our question is this:

If you're a master distiller, how come we've never heard of you?

[Andrew]

This article provides the historic basis of a term, describes how over time the meaning evolved, then tries to apply the original definition to a subpopulation. I'm not even a simple country lawyer, and that flow of argument just doesn't make sense to me.

The term "master" has become a diluted term broadly used in technical and engineering work to mean "head of" or "in control of" something. My use of this web page is being made possible by one or more webmasters and a hostmaster or two. They almost certainly didn't learn their trade in a formal medieval guild system, yet I'm using the result of their work happily.

The term "master distiller" immediately communicates good information about someone's corporate role to a uninformed layman. That's kind of the point of titles these days. The labeling of bourbon should be strictly defined. The labeling of the bourbon maker? I'm unswayed.

[Jonathan Forester]

Who is this? How come I never heard of him?

(Sorry to be a bit tongue in cheek here, but I haven't.)

[Guest tom]

Who is this? How come I never heard of him?

(Sorry to be a bit tongue in cheek here, but I haven't.) Chuck is a good guy, he has some valid points, he just worked for the big distillers for too long.

[Guest tom]

let me try this again. Chuck is a good guy. He has some valid points, he just worked for the big boys in Kentucky too long.

[grehorst]

He paints with a very broad brush. Many distillers started as hobbyists in brewing and wine making, and I know for a fact many craft distillers have been distilling for years- albeit on the wrong side of the law-which of course would likely be a reason Charles has never heard of them. I also know a lot of craft distillers if not currently functioning in breweries or wineries come from that background. He also refers to one product and one product only- whiskey. It's quite possible he hasn't had a craft whiskey he likes (has he tried them all?) but I think it's a matter of time before he will. Perhaps he isn't aware there are other products craft distillers are producing including vodka, brandy, gin, eau de vie, etc... many of which have received excellent ratings and accolades from the industry at large- and often rated higher than products produced by traditional "Master Distillers".

Charles previously wrote an article taking small distilleries to task for use of the terms craft or artisan. I get the impression he cannot believe that craft distillers with less experience can ever produce products of superior quality. Not too long ago I'm sure the craft brewing movement had it's detractors who were so enamored of the status quo brewing industry that they couldn't imagine a world full of craft brewers either.

[Charles@AEppelTreow]

Putting 'Master' in front of 'Distiller' on one's title may be a bit of hyperbole - but it looks SO much better when some reporter uses it in an article about one's little distillery than 'Chief Distilling Officer'.

Is there an established guild that would credential American distillers?

Charles McGonegal

<just plain> Cidermaker

[Jonathan Forester]

These are just some of my thoughts: I wish there was an apprentice system for artisanal distilleries in the US, but sadly there isn't. As a matter of fact it is really hard to learn the ropes here. You either have to learn from a 'shiner and practice on 'the other side of the law', take a few wishy-washy workshops, read books, take courses in Scotland, pay another distiller to teach you the basics, or somehow get a job in a small distillery. By the time you get an artisanal distillery up and running and producing quality product YOU ARE A MASTER DISTILLER. You've been through every and any thing that can happen, you have been apprentice, journeyman, and distiller, by the time you're getting good press, won an award or two, you have most definitely done what it takes to use the term and be called Master Distiller.

[Jay Erisman]

Thanks, Chuck, for this thought provoking post. I've had the pleasure of meeting Chuck Cowdery numerous times in various Bourbon-related contexts, and he is a first-rate fellow and, though he's not involved with whiskey production, deserves the title of Bourbon Master. Visit the forums at straightbourbon.com for a taste of Chuck's well-balanced and thoughtful digressions.

I agree with Chuck on the need for a title of "master" to carry some weight. A master of anything ought really and truly to be a master. And I do think a microdistiller who, for example, buys bulk grain alcohol, runs it through a column, and filters the hell out of it, does not deserve the title of "master distiller" in the sense that, to name just one example, Elmer T. Lee of Buffalo Trace Distillery deserves his title of "Master Distiller Emeritus" for running one of the world's best distilleries since the late 1940s.

That said, the title of "master distiller" that is now bandied about by the Bourbon industry (and they do it in Scotland too) is as much an invented term for marketing purposes as it is an actual honorific. Charles McGonegal asks if there is "an established guild that would credential American distillers." There is not--but neither is such a guild active in the Bourbon industry. A master distiller of Bourbon is whoever the marketing gurus need to push their whiskey. As Jim Rutledge of Four Roses--a whiskey master if there ever was one--once put it to me, "I'll be a master distiller whenever they tell me what that means." I assure you that back in the day, Elmer T. Lee was a "just plain" distiller (thanks, Charles M.!) of Ancient Age and other world classic whiskeys. If you asked for Colonel Blanton's business card after the end of Prohibition, it did not say "master distiller". And Master Distiller Jim McEwan of Bruichladdich Distillery in Scotland--easily one of that country's very best whisky makers--plans to be buried with only "Cooper," his original job at Bowmore Distillery, inscribed on his headstone.

In fact, the Bourbon industry is quite capable of some subtle abuse of the term. Consider Wild Turkey, where Jimmy Russell is one of the grand old men of the Bourbon industry. If you've ever met Mr. Russell, or heard him speak, you will not forget it. Master distillers do not come any better than Jimmy Russell. Yet today, some Bourbon connoisseurs consider that decisions at Wild Turkey today get made by marketing executives. Their Russell's Reserve line of whiskeys bear Jimmy's surname, yet are bottled at 90 proof--while Mr. Russell has championed 101 proof his entire career. A whiskey bottled at 90 proof, with that man's name on it, is something of a non sequitur. As whiskey expert Jim Murray puts it in his Whiskey Bible (3rd edition) regarding the 90 proof RR, "Someone has goofed here." Now, don't get me wrong--the Russell's Reserve whiskeys are very good stuff, perfectly delicious Bourbon and Rye. But do they reflect the wishes of the man whose signature they bear? Or has Wild Turkey appropriated in a sense the name of their "master distiller"? In fact, RR has turned into another product line for Austin Nichols Co.--the label never even mentions Wild Turkey.

I do take exception with Chuck's assertion that there aren't any good micro/craft distilled whiskeys in America. Certainly this fledgling industry is dominated by white spirits. And some of the brown microspirits out there fall into the category of "hmm, that's...interesting," as opposed to "wow, that's a world-class whiskey!" But I think the several Old Potrero Rye whiskeys from Anchor Distiller hold their own against anything from Kentucky. What is not "honest" about an innovative, 100% rye malt whiskey, made from scratch in a little pot still? St. George Single Malt is another good example, made from several malts, aged in French, American, and port wood barrels and delivering an almost ribald fruitiness that is a long way from Bourbon and awfully good on its own terms. I think that's more honest than cashing in Jimmy Russell's name recognition for a new label of weaker (that is to say, cheaper) whiskey.

Which raises another point: there are some microdistillers who have acceded to the level of "master". Such as Hubert Germain-Robin, making probably America's best brandy since 1982 in Ukiah, California. Georg Rupf at St. George Spirits is another example, as much a master of fruit eau de vie as the Europeans Chuck refers to in his post. Mr. Rupf's assistant Lance Winters probably deserves the title as well. Old World guilds typically required a craftsman to pass a test to earn the title of master. Arguably, Mr. Winter's spirits like Hangar One vodkas and his superb Qi tea liqueurs (I haven't had his absinthe yet, but I'm sure it will slay me) mean he has passed the test. How about Steve McCarthy at Clear Creek in Oregon? Duncan Holaday in Vermont probably hasn't been in business long enough to earn "master" status--but what else can you say about someone who takes two signature products of his home state--maple sap and milk--and from scratch turns them into ripe, rich vodka? What is not "good, honest, [and] well-made" about that? Please everybody, suggest some other names, but some prerequisites might include years of experience, facility with all the processes of distilling (so bonus points are awarded for those who ferment a mash), and of course making some really excellent hooch, even if it doesn't fit in a traditional category like Bourbon.

Thanks again, Chuck, and I look forward to our next dram together,

Jay Erisman

The Party Source

Bellevue, Kentucky

[cowdery]

Who am I?

Fair question.

A few of you know me. For the rest, there is plenty of information out there about me and I won't bother to repeat it here. It's easy to find. If you're interested, my web site is a good place to start.

But the short answer, for purposes of this discussion, is this: I'm your customer, potentially your best customer.

I am an American whiskey enthusiast and so are my readers. We prefer American whiskey to all other alcoholic beverages. We can't get enough of it and are always interested in something new and different, but we're not chumps. We don't like to be zoomed. We're not children and we don't need to be told that our whiskey was made by elves in a hollow tree.

And although we aren't, for the most part, distillers, we know that a pot still is that thing pictured at the top of this page, and not a Holstein or anything else with a rectification column on it. Therefore, pot still vodka is a joke.

So if you don't care what your customers think or want, or you don't care how American whiskey enthusiasts generally approach and consider American whiskey, then ignore or disdain me. Otherwise, let's take each other seriously and have a dialogue.

Was that piece meant to be provocative? Of course. As Bill Owens said when he asked me if he could republish it, "let's see if anybody is awake out there."

[delaware_phoenix]

I'm not a whiskey person, but I have to agree with Mr. Cowdery and Mr. Erisman. It's too easy for new distillery folk to get equipment, put up a web site and call themselves "Master Distillers" for the marketing cachet it carries with the public.

Presenting this fledgling industry in terms of fancy web sites with Flash animation, slick marketing concepts, and the like sells short what we're trying do. And to me that's making authentic spirits without shortcuts, using the best ingredients (local if possible), without selling out. Being able to walk into a store and shake the hand of the person buying your spirits. And produce the best possible spirit that you can, that makes you proud. And if someone else does it better, well that's called motivation.

[Copperstill]

Who am I?

Fair question.

A few of you know me. For the rest, there is plenty of information out there about me and I won't bother to repeat it here. It's easy to find. If you're interested, my web site is a good place to start.

But the short answer, for purposes of this discussion, is this: I'm your customer, potentially your best customer.

I am an American whiskey enthusiast and so are my readers. We prefer American whiskey to all other alcoholic beverages. We can't get enough of it and are always interested in something new and different, but we're not chumps. We don't like to be zoomed. We're not children and we don't need to be told that our whiskey was made by elves in a hollow tree.

And although we aren't, for the most part, distillers, we know that a pot still is that thing pictured at the top of this page, and not a Holstein or anything else with a rectification column on it. Therefore, pot still vodka is a joke.

So if you don't care what your customers think or want, or you don't care how American whiskey enthusiasts generally approach and consider American whiskey, then ignore or disdain me. Otherwise, let's take each other seriously and have a dialogue.

Was that piece meant to be provocative? Of course. As Bill Owens said when he asked me if he could republish it, "let's see if anybody is awake out there."

I see where your going with this Chuck and I do appreciate it. I personally don't care to much about what a spirit maker calls him/herself although I do find it a little pretentious to title your self its much like giving yourself your own nickname (ace,killer,). Its what you can do and make that is more important proof is in the product. I've met people that take on the title of Master Distiller and make crap, so what in 5 years they will be gone. People that can 1. make good product and run a business and 2. get positive reviews for their hard work will still be there. As for the consumer's view of this all most of them don't no squat about spirit anyway. They may know what they like but the don't really know why they like it or have the ability to put it into context of other products. That were you and others like you come in Review, Critique let the best rise to the top through their merits.

[Beauport Bob]

Just to add my thoughts, I have too much respect for those who went before to attach that title to myself. Never considered it. At 53 years there probably isn't enough time anyway. So my partner, Dave Wood and I will just chug along the path ahead and be proud of what we have chosen as a career.

We'll be pleased to see you all at Louisville ADI conference.

Bob Ryan

Ryan & Wood

Gloucester, MA

[grehorst]

It occurred to me that Charles could have written this about me! Maybe not, but I fit into a lot of his comments and I'd like to respond to a few points...

1. I've used the term "Master Distiller" for a very simple reason (just googled my own website and found one use of it on my vodka page, may have used it in our newsletter and other marketing as well) it's an easy term for the typical spirits consumer to understand.

As Charles stated in his essay a "master" can mean "an employer, any person who has control over others" well, I include in this someone who has control over the whole process as well, in fact I think if you ask the typical consumer of alcohol what the term "master distiller" means, they will assume it is the person who oversees the production of the product they are drinking. Bingo. They figured it out without a lot of explanation. If you simply tell them you are a distiller they have no indication that you have done anything more than collected magic fluid from the output of a still. The fact is we choose our grain, we develop a mash, we develop the best distillation procedure we can, we developed the filtering (in the case of vodka), we developed the packaging, we DO the packaging, we sell the product, etc... and there is a lot of detail to master in all of that.

Now, I could use the term distillery manager but that conjures up an image (at least to the uninformed consumer) of a tie wearing desk jockey and doesn't really paint an image of what we really do (see above). We have enough trouble communicating to people how small we are- they picture a big smoking factory with corporate offices full of cubicles -we've asked many and that is really the image the typical consumer has of distilleries especially if they haven't visited our website or been to our distillery.

I also think we have great products, this isn't to say we can't learn more and do even better and it may not fit Charles personal definition of mastery but our customers (and many critics) really like our products and in the end thats all that counts to me.

2. I'm also guilty of telling people that our product was made by elves- I'm pretty certain they didn't really believe that, but I thought it was a humorous way of explaining how we operate- we (there are 3 of us at GLD) typically spend our days producing product, paying the bills, developing new products, packaging product, etc... and our nights selling our product. People see our product in a lot of places in our market and they can't believe that three people can really produce that much product and be in so many locations and at so many tastings. The other day we started our day at 9am at the distillery and finished our last tasting of the night at 1 am the next morning - it must be elves! We use a lot of humor in every aspect of our business, we don't take ourselves too seriously, we have fun- the only thing we don't joke about is the product itself.

3. We have a Holstein, with rectification column! We also have the ability to bypass the rectification column- it's a nice flexible piece of equipment and we can do a variety of products on it. A pot still is a device for producing a product in a batch- which is what we do -even vodka.

[Rich Morgan]

Are Micro-Distilleries Abusing the Title of Master Distiller?

In a word, YES. Some thoughts...

Master Distiller is a title given as an attainment of professional experience, not that you are the Head Distiller, they are not the same. Many large Distilleries will have a number of Master Distillers and one Head or Chief Distiller.

I have been a professional distiller for over 22 years, mainly on the UK. The term 'Master Distiller' is a hand down from the UK industry. If you attained a number of professional and academic qualifications you were awarded the right to call your self a Master Distiller, during my time with Seagram's this included;

• A formal degree in Science, specific to Distillation or Brewing
  
• Professional standing with the Guild (now the IBD)
  
• 5 years supervising and directing distillation operations
  
• Nomination and support by your professional peers
  

The general opinion in Europe and the UK appears to be if you are professionally qualified, and have +5 years experience you can claim the title of Master Distiller.

[cowdery]

Jess Graber asked me to post this on his behalf.

Charles Cowdery,

As “Manager” of Stranahan’s Colorado Whiskey, I enjoyed your observations in American Distiller #104 and agree that the term “Master Distiller” has been extended loosely, especially by self proclamation. I have even heard the term used in conjunction with a vodka producer, which confused me greatly.

My instincts tell me that a master distiller knows pretty much everything there is to know about making and selling whiskey and has been doing it long enough, with humility, that everyone else in the business will smile and shake his hand when they see him. That type of respect is earned through tradition, experience, and love of work.

It will be interesting to see if the micro distilling industry, especially whiskey makers, will reconsider and honor the traditions of previous pioneers.

You also stated you were looking for a good, honest, well-made micro-distilled American Whiskey. I’m sorry we do not fit that description exactly. The Code of Federal Regulations states we must call ourselves a good, honest, well-made, micro-distilled American Straight Whiskey.

I know your preference is Bourbon but perhaps a little sample of “Stranny’s” might alert your taste buds that there’s some new flavor on the horizon.

Sincerely, Jess Graber

Manager

Stranahan’s Colorado Whiskey

[bourbonv]

Chuck is very good at creating debate on subjects worthy of debate. This is one of them. The term "Master Distiller', in my opinion, is in danger of being cheapened by use not only by the micro-distillers but by the industry as a whole. I would rather see a time span associated with the term stating that only after a certain amount of time working in the distillery can the term "Master" be added to the job "distiller". I would like to think that a true "Master" has earned the experience to deserve the title and that may be a decade or more working in the distillery. I don't want to see the term become just another marketing tool bestowed upon someone because they can sell whiskey better than they can make it and that consumers start to ridicule the term.

Mike Veach

[grehorst]

Jess Graber asked me to post this on his behalf.

Charles Cowdery,

As "Manager" of Stranahan's Colorado Whiskey, I enjoyed your observations in American Distiller #104 and agree that the term "Master Distiller" has been extended loosely, especially by self proclamation. I have even heard the term used in conjunction with a vodka producer, which confused me greatly.

My instincts tell me that a master distiller knows pretty much everything there is to know about making and selling whiskey and has been doing it long enough, with humility, that everyone else in the business will smile and shake his hand when they see him. That type of respect is earned through tradition, experience, and love of work.

It will be interesting to see if the micro distilling industry, especially whiskey makers, will reconsider and honor the traditions of previous pioneers.

You also stated you were looking for a good, honest, well-made micro-distilled American Whiskey. I'm sorry we do not fit that description exactly. The Code of Federal Regulations states we must call ourselves a good, honest, well-made, micro-distilled American Straight Whiskey.

I know your preference is Bourbon but perhaps a little sample of "Stranny's" might alert your taste buds that there's some new flavor on the horizon.

Sincerely, Jess Graber

Manager

Stranahan's Colorado Whiskey

You continue to invoke third parties who have not themselves posted or likely even read and considered others opinions stated on this website.

You infer that Bill O. wouldn't believe a Holstein is a pot still- I have not heard him say this or read anything by him to believe this. Now you're quoting Jess Graber commenting on your essay as read elsewhere- has he considered other responses to this as posted here? You're an attorney, lets just deal with facts.

1. There is no governing body in this country to establish what a Master Distiller is.

2. Because of this the term can have many meanings unlike Master Plumber or Master Electrician which are well defined within their trades.

3. The meaning I take from the title is that the master distiller is in charge of all aspects of the production of a distilled product. You may not agree, but that is my opinion and i believe an accurate description of a master distillers duties. If you ask the typical consumer what a master distiller is they will likely understand this to be the case without any further explanation or question of experience. They will not assume the same godlike qualities you seem to place on them.

A definition from the Evan Williams Website; "What does the Master Distiller do? The Master Distiller oversees the entire whiskey-making process of milling, yeasting, fermentation, distillation, and aging which includes production scheduling and taste testing to ensure quality".

Sounds like what a lot of craft distillers do.

4. A vodka distillery with a Master Distiller? Why not. Are we saying only Bourbon and Scotch distilleries have master distillers? What snobery. I've seen the term associated with Rum distillery's, Tequilla distillery's, Gin distilleries, etc... Are you prepared to tell those people they cannot use the term? I don't believe Whiskey makers have a lock on the term. Google the terms 'master distiller vodka' 'master distiller rum' 'master distiller tequila' etc... and you will see what I mean. You are heavily into the bourbon world, evidently so far so that you have no idea there are other standards of identity and these standards often have the term master distiller associated with them. You seem to have taken offense that a term you wrongly believe is only associated with whiskey production has been picked up by others.

5. I have the greatest respect for people of experience no matter what their title. A title is just that a title- it is used to communicate to other people what they do. My own business card simply says Founder & Distiller. I use the term master in some marketing of our product so that people understand someone has put his heart and soul into a product from grain (or fruit) to packaged product- it's effective two little words and they understand. Doug does most of the distilling work in our place and I often refer to him as master distiller out of respect for his abilities and the awards we've won under his watchful eye and skilled hands and well developed sense of taste- he is a master at what he does and I don't think there's anything wrong with recognizing that with a term frequently used in the distilling industry- throughout the distilling industry.

If our craft distilling community as a whole should vote to establish some sort of definition or establish guidlines of a Master Distiller I would gladly abide by it but until then I will communicate to my customers in the easiest to understand fashion possible. Your opinions are just that YOUR opinions and they are not binding on myself or anyone else.

[grehorst]

Jess Graber asked me to post this on his behalf.

Charles Cowdery,

As "Manager" of Stranahan's Colorado Whiskey, I enjoyed your observations in American Distiller #104 and agree that the term "Master Distiller" has been extended loosely, especially by self proclamation.

Now, I'm guessing Jess didn't call himself master distiller, it was probably bestowed by the reporter but I think him being called Master Distiller in this article http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20060614/NEWS/106140029 demonstrates my point- in the world of distilling, people will assume if you run the distillery you are the master distiller.

[Osocalis]

Bravo Charles!

I do get a sense in this industry the there is a bit of the “Emperor has new clothes” syndrome at play. In the case of brown spirits where it takes 5-8 yrs to bring a product to even a 'young' maturity, would not one like to have the experience of even a few trials and errors (who knows 10 years experience?) before claiming to be a ‘Master’? In the case of spirits that need to start life as neutral, it is arguable how much art is in the artisan. There are however ways to screw up anything I guess.

While this is indeed hard to quantify, much of the present use of the term ‘Master Distiller’ doesn’t pass the ‘ho ho test’.

[cowdery]

Jess saw the original essay in the ADI newsletter but was having some technical trouble accessing the forum, so he sent his comments to me. I offered to post them on his behalf and he accepted. That's all there is to that. I can't imagine why his comments, made in reaction to the original essay only, would be considered invalid. I'm sure there are other posters here who hadn't read every single other reply before posting their reactions. So what?

If you have a disagreement with something Jess wrote, take it up with him. I don't speak for him, no more than grehorst speaks for me, even though he posted my essay to begin this thread.

When I have quoted Bill Owens it has been from conversations we have had. I never stated or inferred that Bill doesn't think a Holstein is a pot still. If I had to guess, I would say Bill does consider a Holstein to be a pot still, but he can speak for himself.

I will stipulate that there is no accreditation body in the United States that regulates the term master distiller. Maybe the ADI could be such a body for micro-distilleries. Maybe the Kentucky Distillers Association should perform that function for the Kentucky industry. They have a new president. Who knows?

As my essay acknowledges, even within the established American whiskey industry there is no consensus although based on knowing that industry and those individuals as well as I admittedly do, there are some common threads, which I noted.

The title of the essay ended with a question mark. It's a question, not an assertion. Somewhere else in this forum, a poster made the statement that most customers are ignorant about spirits, what they are, how they're made. That may be true of some, but not all. There are a lot of customers who have educated themselves and continue to educate themselves, who want to know all they can. In the American whiskey space, they flock to websites such as Straight Bourbon.com and Bourbon Enthusiast.com. WHISKY Magazine has a very active forum that covers all of the world's whiskey types. Anyone who intends to make whiskey would do well to educate themselves in the same way.

I saw a TV show once that did a feature on a micro-distillery somewhere out West. The distiller was making something he called rum. Then they showed him empty a sack of brown sugar into a bucket. I said somewhere else that my purpose is not to strangle this baby in its bed. On the contrary, I'm happy to be the lightening rod, if that's what it takes, to keep this young movement from strangling itself by tolerating self-delusion.

For every Jess Graber who agrees with me, at least in part, and is willing to say so publicly I hear from several others who aren't, for whatever reason, willing to get into the fray. Mostly, I just want people to think about these things. I don't enjoy being attacked, obviously, but blaming the messenger is a pretty venerable tradition. I can take it, but less heat and more light or, as came out of the Texas primary the other day, less hat and more cattle might be better for everybody.

[Andrew]

The distiller was making something he called rum. Then they showed him empty a sack of brown sugar into a bucket.

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?

[Guest tom]

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?

this is just the spirited debate we need, just the thing for reading when running a still. I am glad chuck wrote the article, I think we should all do what we think is best, annd the cream will come to the top.

[A Craft Distiller : )]

Well - congrats to Bill for getting people fired up about something. Congrats to Mr Cowdery also since he is the one that wrote the piece.

The whole issue about Holsteins and pot stills probably belongs in another thread. It is irrelevant to the discussion of using the title Master Distiller.

I appreciate the - how would you say it - romanticism. But, it is hard to have this discussion about when someone should use the term, when the big American Whiskey distilleries are using the term as loosely as they do. Why challenge the craft distillers on it's use? Why not challenge the big boys about why they give brand ambassadors the title? And even question the use of the term when the distiller is really just being a steward of a recipe? If your job is be make sure the product tastes the same as it has for 150 years, are you a master distiller or simply a QC Manager?

I am not trying say anything about the skills of the Master Distillers at these large distilleries. I am just wondering why some of you are trying to judge us with a different set of criteria...

So, should we set some standard? It would be nice, but be honest - it is only important to the marketers. If you can't tell a different story than the next product on the shelf, talk about your "Certified" Master Distiller.

And what about the criteria?

Should it be based on quality? Who's the judge? I have had Scotch that most people would not consider good. Should that distiller lose his title? If he's been doing it for 30 years - he's a master right??

Should a brew master that has never won a beer competition be stripped of his or her title? Or do they have to wait to get a good rating from someone before getting the title? Knowing how ratings are given - that would not be good criteria either.

Look - I use the title Master Distiller. I pulled out the checkbook one day and bought a still (a Holstein for that matter), but I know the science and technical side of distilling better than most people who are getting into the business. I've produced award winning products. I have not be doing this for 25 years. Should I use the title? Should I judge someone for using the term themselves??

If the consumer likes the product, hasn't the distiller mastered something??

One last thought - Having a standard for the term is really only good on an industry level. If you are trying to hire someone, it would be nice to know that if they used the title of master distiller they have reached a certain level of proficiency. Though is still does not mean that they can make anything that tastes good.

Okay – summary thought - this is a difficult subject because distilling is not like being a plumber or electrician. Those crafts can easily define the term master, because the standard of quality for them is very objective. The plumbing is right or your basement floods. Our craft is very subjective. Some people will love your products, others will not...

[delaware_phoenix]

If the consumer likes the product, hasn't the distiller mastered something??

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?