twenty years in days?

[captnKB]

Has anyone heard of or worked with these guys equipment? Id love to hear some opinions on it.

http://enewschannels.com/2015/04/02/enc44466_125127.php/twenty-years-six-days-future-aged-spirits-unveiled-american-distilling-institute-conference/

[Artisan Still Design]

Brown Forman spent millions on trying to force age whiskey, so did the Scottish Whisky Society.

if they abandoned it as a failure, there is little chance a small independent will figure it out.

its a curiosity, every time I see one of these "New ideas" pop up, I'll check it out, but I remain skeptical.

[3d0g]

Davis' talk was standing room only at the ADI conference. Will be interesting to see the results from his beta testers...

[Skaalvenn]

Another system using pressure, vacuum, temperature changes with wood chips?

I'm not saying it won't work, but it probably won't nearly as well as proper time in a barrel. Every year we read about someone "speed aging" and it's like those creators of perpetual motion devices. Many have tried, some things have been better than others but every single one is a failure.

Granted, some day speed aging to perfection will be a reality, unlike perpetual motion. I just don't think we're there yet as in barrel aging there's an awful lot of chemistry which has yet to be completely understood.

[PA_JoeDistiller]

I've been researching his process and I suggest all of you go over to lost spirts . net and check out the white pages. Instead of trying to force wood extraction or oxidization like most attempts have tried, this "reactor" from what I can gather actually forces long chain esterization, which is the predominant factor of taste in aged whisk(e)ys.

Think about it, we are in a boom of distilling + tech that has never existed before. All the big boys have been around for decades and sticking to tradition, the hundreds upon hundreds of new craft distilleries are based on innovation. It's just a matter of time till someone cracks what it is that makes ageing tick, and how to harness it.

[John McKee]

Hey all,

Ignoring Lost's technology and its future success or failure, this is the single biggest issue of arrogance that this industry has.....I.E. it can't be done, or if Brown and Foreman can't figure it out....no one can, the chemistry isn't well understood, etc, etc, etc. This is complete and utter bullshit.

Any Chemical Engineer would tell you this is bullshit. Aging in a barrel is esterification and extraction chemistry....that is all. Nothing else. If Lost's hasn't figured it out, it will be figured out within the next decade by chemical engineers from other industries realizing that its only because of tradition, market economies, lack of professional knowledge, and extraordinary leg up's on product-in-barrels that has kept this type of technology from being developed from within the industry of beverage alcohol.

Be forward thinking, fund projects to solve this, or get left behind when someone else figures it out and leaves you behind.

Cheers,

McKee

[3d0g]

Bryan's patent is readily visible: https://www.google.com/patents/WO2015013704A2

Key component appears to be heat, which makes sense as in general, a chemical reaction rate doubles for every 10 degree Celsius increase in temperature.

[MDH]

it can't be done, or if Brown and Foreman can't figure it out....no one can, the chemistry isn't well understood, etc, etc, etc. This is complete and utter bullshit.

Thank you for saying this. I completely agree that the factors involved in spirits aging are simpler than is made out by some here: Temperature, and oxygen contact (as barrels are permeable) are the main drivers. I also think that Bryan's lack of "angel's share" is not something to brag about; the share is likely a crucial factor in softening the spirit over time.

[Silk City Distillers]

It's all just chemistry, so why just stop at synthetically aging? Just quit beating around the bush and go straight to molecular additives. If the end result is a some percentage of specific long chain esters, aldehydes, ketones, cyclic aromatics, phenolics, etc - why not just add those chemicals directly? Most every chemical you would need is available already, if not it's not a problem to have it made. You can have more control over the process, with a significantly higher precision, and potentially without fault. You can essentially build a product completely from scratch, tailored for a very specific profile. With GC, you can have the recipe of any spirit you care to mimic. We can build it, we have the technology.

"Hey, Barkeep, another Rum, and this time take it easy on the Isobutyl Butyrate, ok?"

What am I missing here?

Do we think artificially aged is going to be better received by consumers than artificially flavored? Maybe, does the word artificial even have a meaning to consumers today?

And what becomes of the inevitable race to the bottom? Without scarcity there is no price floor, without either of these things, what is to stop larger producers from simply taking over the market with scale? A 1,5l handle of "15 year old artificially X'ed Bourbon" on the retail shelf at Big Box Mart for $14.99? Even worse, god help us, what if it's good? How would anyone compete against that?

…probably by touting that they do it the old fashioned way. The big boys could quash this techno-approach in a second with a single marketing campaign - just call it an insult to the intelligence of the consumer. I'm pretty sure a 30 second spot on TV or a print ad saying that would resonate with consumers immediately, guys in dirty denim jeans swinging hammers, rolling barrels in rick houses, a dusty pat on the back, pickup truck and a dog. I can even see the tag line - "Because you deserve better". There is an inherent appeal to a hand made product, especially in the states. I'm not at all saying it's an insult, don't mistake that, but it's an approach I think it would be very easy for some to take. Is the irony here that the big boys become the "craft" in the industry? Talk about role reversal.

I'm not a luddite by any means, and I appreciate the technology here. The patent is certainly interesting.

[bdkolstad]

Why does the song Red Barchetta from Rush suddenly come to mind?

[Jedd Haas]

John, will you be receiving one of the beta units?

[John McKee]

Jedd,

I don't yet.

Cheers,

McKee

[Artisan Still Design]

Do we think artificially aged is going to be better received by consumers than artificially flavored? Maybe, does the word artificial even have a meaning to consumers today?

I think thats the question ultimately. synthetic diamonds while chemically identical to to ones out of the ground, arent worth as much.

I think it will come down to how its being used. it its being used instead of time in the barrel it will have to be identical, if its juct close in effect, it could be a good thing in conjuntion with time in the barrel.

think a 2 year old whiskey that tastes like a 12. instead of new make that tastes like a fake 4 years.

I donno. as I said before, I reserve judgement. it would be nice if it worked but I'm not holding my breath just yet.

[Dsking416]

My opinion on barrel aging is basically to ask yourself why did spirit end up in a barrel anyway. The answer is it was easy to ship it around the world in FREE containers. Then people figured out that it tasted softer and or rounder essentially smoother when it traveled further. The first spirits to get barrel aged were hot firey and offensively harsh. The science of distillation and fermentation have come a long way. Do we really need to add wood flavor that was never meant to be there anyway?