another slam to micro whiskey

[ammocrypta]

It's from a while back, but I thought I would post and see what folks had to say (given we have seen this sort of thing recently).

http://www.whatdoesjohnknow.com/2010/08/30/guest-blog-1-most-craft-whiskeys-suck/

[flagler spirits]

just look at their source of revenue, all articles quote the biggest of the big boys, we stand to be marginalized by these publications we have to use our local press to grow in our areas. by the way who reads these mags in the general public, or are all comped to industry and purchasing

[Paul Tomaszewski]

My argument for craft distilleries continues to be twofold: 1. In America you've had variations upon variations of the same type of whiskies made by a handful of large, industrial operations, ie bourbon or bourbon or... bourbon! (or tennessee whiskey, more or less in itself a variation on bourbon). Ten years from now you'll see dozens of types of whiskies, aged and made well (the market will help that out), that the big distilleries have no desire to tinker with. And 2. You may not like certain types of products, but if I can run a business and the market decides a product is viable, than so be it. I detest certain whiskies and many types of alcoholic beverages out there, but if someone can sell them and make a profit, more power to them. That also being said, I'd never make something that I wouldn't drink either.

[porter]

I'll have to chime in also with results not meeting expectations. I've personally bought various whiskys when in different areas of the country just to see what was out there. And there a lot of highly written about 'artisan' whiskeys which, in my personal opinion, shouldn't even be on the market. In one professional tasting class a person brought samples of their actual sale products. The class instructor asked them point blank if they ever had anyone buy a bottle the second time, it was that bad. For those problem 'artisans' maybe we'll see a weeding out soon.

The article hits on a very sore point though that needs to be addressed. The 'blenders' and 'mixers' shouldn't be considered as distillers. If your product doesn't go through a still under your guidance/control you aren't a distiller. If you don't own a still, your not a distiller. If you're just mixing products then you are a bartender, nothing more, and happen to be selling your product in a bottle instead of by the glass. I'm sure some on here will spit and fume over this, but that's a fact. Now we need to get the law to say the same thing. They need seperate licensing and label restrictions to keep them from calling themselves distillerys .

[Curtis McMillan]

I understand what he is saying, and agree. Youth can't be an excuse for quality. Early auto makers spent massive amounts on quality because it had their name on it. Your name needs to stand for something. 90% of them almost went broke but that desire helped build the auto industry. If american micro distilling is going to make a name or a dent we need to hit the big boys in quality, price, and personal customer connection.

[cowdery]

I cannot emphasize enough how important it is to read the articles before commenting on them. As is clearly stated, the author of the article is Steve Ury and not John Hansell, the publisher of Malt Advocate and owner of the blog, who wrote the first of 98 posted comments and disagreed with Ury in some of his criticism. Both Malt Advocate and WHISKY Magazine have given significant and fair coverage to micro-distilleries and their products. This complaint that writers like me are prejudiced against 'little guys' is bullshit, not to mention lame. What we are prejudiced against is bad whiskey.

[KBFreeRange]

Hey Chuck, I laughed out loud when I got to the part of your response where you called it like it is - bullshit. I've seen many a scathing review of well established whisk(e)ys in the past, and they aren't limited to big guys or little guys - only guys that are putting bad stuff in bottles. The small batch distilling "industry" is in its infancy, and like with any other youngster, enthusiasts (and others) are game to hang a finger-painted masterpiece on their fridge with pride, warranted or not. We should all be willing to call it as it is, without having to make a statement that we don't appreciate the hard work that goes into making it.

As we all should know, making it good isn't easy, and at least the habit or putting bad whisk(e)y into sherry and port barrels for a few years or more to cover up the flaws hasn't caught favor here. As for us out our here distilling small-batch on our island in the Puget Sound, we'll keep on grinding, mashing and percolating until we feel that the product is as good as it can possible be. I expect that as we go on and our standards get ever higher and we'll always be striving to reach higher.

And, oh yah, keep up the good work John and Chuck! We appreciate it!

[Guest Liberty Bar - Seattle]

I'll have to chime in also with results not meeting expectations. I've personally bought various whiskys when in different areas of the country just to see what was out there. And there a lot of highly written about 'artisan' whiskeys which, in my personal opinion, shouldn't even be on the market.

I agree. Steve Ury is correct, "This particular emperor has been wearing new clothes for too long." I love that there are so many new distilleries and products on the market, but sadly along with the growth of these distilleries and products, hero worship has grown along side of them. Sure, some of the people making these spirits are really nice folks, but I wonder if there has been somewhat of this Hans Christian Andersen'esque effect is majorly at play here. In fact, I got booted from here recently for saying such a thing. What we should really do is work together to encourage these young & learning distilleries grow, improve and become long lasting, profitable distilleries.

If you don't own a still, your not a distiller.

Actually, that's not true. I know a number of people that do not own a distillery, but DO contract to use a still and act as head distiller throughout the whole process, from sourcing ingredients to bottling & selling. So, semantics aside, one can be a distiller without ever owning a still. Point taken though.

[Marc]

Why did my post disappear?

[Gwydion Stone]

And why did Andrew get busted down to "guest" status?

I completely agree with the article, which I read in its entirety. While there are notable exceptions, most of the craft whiskeys I've tasted were sub-par. In fact, I've tasted a lot of other craft spirits that were completely unimpressive and some that never should have been bottled.

We still have supposedly well-respected "craft" distillers who are simply cutting and re-bottling GNS and then talking about old European recipes and complex flavor profiles. Distillers who've never so much as bottled a whisky offer classes on how to make it. Don't get me started on distillers who want to redefine classes of spirits to cover for the fact that they can't figure out how to make them properly. Gin comes to mind: "I meant to do that, it's a new style."

I know this all sounds harsh, but think of it as tough love. We're not doing craft distilling any favors by indulging in gratuitous back-slapping.

I agree. Steve Ury is correct, "This particular emperor has been wearing new clothes for too long." I love that there are so many new distilleries and products on the market, but sadly along with the growth of these distilleries and products, hero worship has grown along side of them. Sure, some of the people making these spirits are really nice folks, but I wonder if there has been somewhat of this Hans Christian Andersen'esque effect is majorly at play here. In fact, I got booted from here recently for saying such a thing. What we should really do is work together to encourage these young & learning distilleries grow, improve and become long lasting, profitable distilleries.