Black Maple Hill 18 Year Old Rye. . . .

Joined Sep 2003
9K Posts | 0+
Puerto Rico/NYC
I have tried this label's 14 and 16 year old bourbon. I flat out did not like the 16 year old and only liked the 14 year old marginally, although I will say it was good. I recently passed up an opportunity to purchase the 21 year old bourbon. It appears that this obscure line of whiskies specializes in the weird tasting and overpriced.

As for their 18 year old, 95 proof rye I can definitely say it was good. It was good enough to alter my Top Ten Rye List, although not good enough to crack the elite top four, although it did compete in my mind to a degree with the fourth spot.

What was good about this rye that I purchased for the "walk-out price" of $68.19 was that it has a tasty and complex flavor profile, but the flavors are somewhat muddled and the body is dull, lacking boldness. It appears that 18 years in the oak has smoothed it out so much it blew right past it's peak, if it ever had one.

This rye tastes like a mouthful of slightly spicy oak to start off rushing immediately into a muted blackberry taste, with perhaps a touch of maple syrup. The blackberry unfortunately doesn't come through bold and clear and is muddled by the taste of earthy notes, which are somewhat disappointing, although interesting. What's disappointing about the earth notes is the quick transcendence from the blackberry to the earth, without allowing the blackberry to clarify itself.

Would I buy it again? At that price maybe not, because I'd like to spend my time trying new ryes, which are rare enough without spending bucks like that on something that's really not great. As for my top three ryes, I'd spend the bucks any day, and the fourth is really special too, but I'll pass every now and then. The rest of the rye list is good, but dependent on the price. The best bang for the buck rye on my Top Ten is probably the No. 2, but a big IF you can find it. Nos. 6, 7, 8 are wonderful for the price, not outstanding or complex, top shelf style ryes, but tasty and a good bang for the buck.


Top 10 Rye List​
1. The Classic Cask Single Batch 22 year old
2. Van Winkle Family Reserve 13 year old
3. The Classic Cask Single Batch 21 year old
4. Sazerac 18 year old
5. Black Maple Hill 18 year old
6. Old Overholt
7. Jim Beam Rye
8. Wild Turkey Rye
9. Hirsch Reserve 13 year old
10. Pikesville
 
Not sure about the Ryes, but I believe the BMH Bourbons (at least the older stuff) was also bottled by Julian and quite likely... yet another branch of the old S-W whiskey we've been discussing with regards to Old Commonwealth / Van Winkle etc.

:idea:
 
Well, in that case I guess he gave the subpar stuff to Hirsch where the rye is concerned, and the bourbon that REALLY sucked went to Black Maple Hill. That's some weird tasting stuff, even this rye. Tastes like someone backed a dump truck full of potting soil up to the bottling area and ran it down a conveyer like a cement mixer into the whiskey.
 
Weird tasting as in good or bad? I'm not so sure the 14 -16 year old whiskies had anything at all to do with Julian. Perhaps... perhaps not. The 21 bourbon (which I hear is really good - but don't know personally) I am pretty sure this was bottled by Julian.

The wax seal was typical.
 
Wax seal as in on the neck? The 14 and 16 don't have that. And when I said weird, I meant like a dump truck with potting soil weird. Not even whiskey weird. Like the 16 maybe tastes like a flat port wine, and the 14? Hmmmmmmmm, it's good but, it wouldn't make my Top 35-40 if there was one. Wellll, maybe Top 40.

As for the 21, I passed up a chance to get it from Binny's for a "walk-out price" of $83-85. Not worth that much for R&D unless it is really that good. I guess I'll have to wait to find out. But if Mr. JVW really was involved with that one, maybe I'll reconsider next time I see it. Oh right, Mission has it for $10 more than Binny's and higher shipping costs.

Oh well. :dunno:
 
Bloofington said:
Wax seal as in on the neck? The 14 and 16 don't have that.
Are you sure? I'm pretty sure every example I've seen had the wax seal or maybe it's rubber - what eva.

Perhaps the seal design changed since, (like Hirsch 16 did) exact same bottle btw, aren't they? JVW also bottled those originally as well (from what a lil birddie had to say on the matter).
 
Well, it's been a couple years I think. I know someone who may still have the bottles. Unless she steamed the labels and wax seal off for her homemade holiday kahlua, they'll be there. She wouldn't steam off a wax seal though. I'll ask her.
 
Here is a picture of the BMH 21. You can see this seal (I think).

BTW I touched the top of a sealed BMH14 yesterday to make sure I'm not crazy and it is a wax or rubber seal. I haven't made the acquaintance of the 18 Rye but I assumed it had a similar seal based on photos - No?
 

Attachments

  • BMH21.jpg
    BMH21.jpg
    3.3 KB · Views: 915
Bloofington:

It's not the kind of wax seal like the one on the Elmer T. Lee bottles dripping all over the place (which I understand there is discussion about changing so that it no longer requires hooking un-opened bottles up to a tow truck to pull the strip)!
:?
 
I have tried the Wild Turkey, VW 13 yr., and a couple of Old Potrero ryes. I found the Wild Turkey to be pretty good but not as distinctive as the VW. I enjoyed the older version of Old Potrero, but it doesn't come close to being worth its price tag. The younger version tastes closer to moonshine than whiskey.

FWIW, if your VW 13 yr. rye has a lot number beginning with 'F' it is a different whiskey from those that preceded it. I have a bottle of lot 'C'. I don't know what the difference is, just that Julian was running out of rye and had to discover a new batch.
 
The WT Rye was not my cup of tea. The VW 13 Rye is very very good.

tnbp - I'm not so sure the whiskey is different at all. Perhaps the lot change represents different storage locations or the move to BUffalo Trace.

Julian has claimed that over the last 6-7 years the whiskey has been exactly the same only that he has drawn off of it each year while the remaining barrels were left to age further (each year). He says it was finally arrested. There is an age difference between the two you are talking about - but it's supposed to all be the same whiskey (including the Old Time Rye 12 which no longer exists) - the differnce over the years is what you would buy now (eventhough it still says it's 13 years old on the label) in reality it is said to now be at least 19 years old - and if so - A BARGAIN!

I believe that site you pasted other info from had something about this conversation or else I read similar info directly from JVW himself about not wanting to change the label re-registering per state each year etc. so they left the 13 year label on there all this time.

BTW it's also my understanding that the Rye whiskey was bought and aged - but not distilled by - J. Van Winkle.
 
Hollow Point said:
tnbp - I'm not so sure the whiskey is different at all. Perhaps the lot change represents different storage locations or the move to BUffalo Trace.

Julian has claimed that over the last 6-7 years the whiskey has been exactly the same only that he has drawn off of it each year while the remaining barrels were left to age further (each year). He says it was finally arrested. There is an age difference between the two you are talking about - but it's supposed to all be the same whiskey (including the Old Time Rye 12 which no longer exists) - the differnce over the years is what you would buy now (eventhough it still says it's 13 years old on the label) in reality it is said to now be at least 19 years old - and if so - A BARGAIN!
I was browsing and found this.....

The original 12 & 13 year ryes were the same whiskey. They were never a marriage of 2 different whiskeys. We kept bottling the 13 year rye over the last 2 years, but stopped bottling the rye about 2 years ago.
The rye we are selling now was tanked in March of this year to stop it from aging. It is the 2 whiskey-marriage rye. We started selling this rye this last spring. --J. Van Winkle
http://www.bourbonenthusiast.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=228&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
 
Wow!!! I love it. You guys really make my day. The addition of tnbackpacker to these discussions has really kicked them up to "notches previously unknown." Leaving for the city soon, an unusual Friday for me in that I'm usually at home on the computer all day. I'll read this again a couple times and in more depth when I get back tonight, and also join in. Thanks again.
 
jvanwinkle said:
We originally bottled the 12-year 90 Proof Old Rip Van Winkle and the 13-year 95.6 Proof, Van Winkle Family Reserve rye about 6 years ago. They were originally the same age whiskley, just different Proof. However, Jim Murray swore that they were different whiskeys. It's amazing what adding a little water will do to to the flavor of the same aged whiskey.
Our 12-year is all gone now. Our 13-year VWFR Rye is now about 19 years old, so it is quite different from the original. It is actually a marriage of two diferent distillations.
The 100 Proof unchillfiltered was the same whiskey as the original but not filtered. it was about the best rye we put out.
julian

Here's another quote, same site, same topic. My understanding is that there were two distillations, the 12 and 13 year old original rye was exactly the same but differing water amounts. The unfiltered 100 proof was also of the original batch (VERY GOOD IMHO) - but I was also under the impression that with the marriage of distillations, the whisky was exactly the same from two different runs. Perhaps you are right and Julian is saying that the whiskies are not of the EXACT same source / composition. :?:

Also aside from the F bottles I currently have, I believe my last bottle to predate that was an E lot (unless I'm confusing this with ORVW 15 bottles). But if not, was there a difference between your C bottle and my E bottle? It seems like Julian is saying that the whiskey had not changed until last March which not long after that is when it seemed that the F became prevelant on the markets around here. This was what led me to the conclusion that the letters don't neccessarily correspond to different whiskies, but perhaps that is wrong all together and they do represent varying whiskies. I dunno.

What I do hear is there is only X amount of whiskey left and there's got to be a good 9 or 10 years left until the replacement made by Julian through Buffalo Trace can be implemented. Therefore only (X) amount of bottles are currently being released yearly to to keep a small supply on the market annually until the newly created version has matured and is bottled.
 
Needless to say, while tnbackpacker and Hollow Point continue to provide thought provoking, fascinating and in-depth background to this conversation, as well as pretty much everything they post about, my head has begun to spin. The Blond(e) Factor has pretty much taken over. Forget about whether or not it's "chicken or fish," but whether or not the Van Winkle Family Reserve 13 year old rye is one whiskey, two, or whether or not it was ever one whiskey or two, or whether or not it is now, or whether or not . . .

Can you see my head spinning? Outside of the fact that I'll keep reading this thread for interest's sake, don't expect me to be doing anything but looking and sounding like the Aflac Duck. That basically leaves me looking a lot like this:

:dunno: :duh:

It also leads back to wisdom dispensed by Hollow Point some time ago. And that is since we are dealing with farm products here, not only will things like flavor sometimes vary from bottle to bottle and year to year, but in time even greater discrepancies in "known flavor profiles" may crop up in certain products. Witness my own (and many others') experience with the decline in quality (meaning reduced flavor and strength) of the Hemingway cigar line around 2000, which now appears to be returning to the more familiar territory of it's flavor and strength circa 1997.

With the passing of certain eras in an industry or within companies, the "known flavor profile" of certain products may change significantly. This is certainly true in my own observations of my No. 2 bourbon, the Pappy Van Winkle Family Reserve 20 year old. The latest release bears little resemblance to the stuff I tasted three years ago, although I'd have to admit it's just as good, and thereby still occupies the No. 2 spot on my Top 25 list.

Such is the wisdom of Hollow Point, that even with my own Top 25 bourbon list as it pertains only to ME, there is still the fact that through a period of years it serves as a guideline, but not a concept that need necessarily be "carved in stone." This is because today's bourbon of a certain label may not be the way it tasted ten years ago or will taste ten years from now.

Oh sure, in the five or so years that I've been drinking bourbon, Knob Creek has always pretty much tasted the same, and so have many others, but with labels like Van Winkle in such a state of flux, the watchword is don't go conning yourself if you honestly find that something changes and therefore a certain vaunted "special list" has to change.

And with that statement/admission, I'm still . . .

The Great Dumboni.

Let's just say that through the years the many bottles of Van Winkle Family Reserve 13 year old rye that I personally have tasted have been similar enough and good enough to place it in the No. 2 spot on my Top Ten rye list. I have had "D" bottles, "B" bottles, and other letters as well. I will defer to the superior inside knowledge and scrutiny of Hollow Point and tnbackpacker, but since a blond(e) needs guidelines, for the time being, my lists still stand.

:dunno: :duh:
 
This thread has made think about my top 25 again. I built a pretty large bourbon collection several years ago, and I really don't drink that much (I just like quality when I do take a drink), so most of my bottles are fairly old. My bottles of Weller and Old Fitzgerald are Stitzel-Weller stock (DSP-KY 16). After United Distillers sold off most of their bourbon holdings, Heaven Hill got Old Fitz, and Buffalo Trace got Old Charter and Weller.

I know Buffalo Trace is now making a wheated whiskey, though I don't think it's old enough to be on the market yet. I'm not sure about Heaven Hill is producing a wheater or just procuring old stock. The crux is, I don't know if new bottles taste the same.
 
Tnbp - That puts me and you sort of in the same boat. To be honest I've only been on the bourbon trail so many years (seriously that is). I don't drink daily either. If I'm lucky one or two drinks a week and I don't only enjoy bourbon so... In other words I have a few old bottles too - like a bottle of Sazerac Rye 2001 I've nursed over the years which has prevented me from trying the 2003 & 2004 bottles I own. Sometime in the next year I suppose I'll finish off that bottle.

From what limited drinking experience I do have, I can tell you that the profiles and tastes have changed for many of the finer bourbons in particular... which several years back Bloofington and I got to know each other a bit by thoroughly discussing how consistent bourbon remained over the long haul.

I'm not sure if the causes were more single barrel & small batch introductions, distillery shake-ups and mergers, or just a loss of the old timers who had higher quality and craftsmanship standards. Maybe like everything else (chicken today for example), the grain doesn't taste or harvest as well as it use to?

I've tasted my share of Stitzel Weller bourbon as well. I can assure you that Van Winkle 10 if you can find a newer bottle has a different profile from bottles that were on the market 3-5 years ago. I'm sure it's possilbe in certain locations to procure bottles that have sat on a shelf somewhere and still contain Stitzel Weller whiskey. Weller, the whole line no longer tastes of Stitzel Weller whiskey if you ask me - at least not what I can get here.

I believe Heaven Hill is in fact making wheat bourbon (I doubt if it's ready) but there is speculation that they might be making a Straight Wheat as opposed to traditional "Wheat formula". Like straight Rye but instead - Wheat as the strongest grain. Meaning 51+% Wheat _ 49-% Corn. We'll see in the years to come.

Anyway before I drifted off... what I was getting at is I always dismissed ratings and use to wonder why say Pappy Van Winkle 20 would win the Spirits Competition one year and then the next year rank #3 or not at all. My position use to be that it was purely political jockeying etc. But ironically the same goes on with EVERY spirit - I don't discount that there is a lot of politics & $$$ involved in who gets the top nods etc. but I've also learned that the spirits do take on different characters and tastes as the years progress, and I guess in some ways the wacky and rapidly differing ratings can be justified... to some degree.

Probably the very reason I can never come up with a numbered list such as a "Top 25".
 
Master Whiskey, 13th Dan, Most Admired Spirits Sensei, The Whiskey Dogg Detective, has spoken. Keep talking, both of you, and anyone else jump in. I'm listening intently in the first row.