Not a member? - Register and login now.
All registered users can read our entire magazine archive.

Anyone else for more caramel?

All your whisky related questions answered here.

Anyone else for more caramel?

Postby Ian_Hamilton » Mon Jan 13, 2003 6:42 pm

Just thought I'd let you know of more caramel findings.
Isle of Jura
Dalmore
Tamnavulin
All are adjusted with caramel, I just got these.
Ian (Denmark)
Ian_Hamilton
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Dumbarton

Postby Deactivated Member » Mon Jan 13, 2003 8:27 pm

I never realy understoot the meanig of destroying a good dram, just because of the nice brown color???

Erik
Deactivated Member
 

Postby Ian_Hamilton » Mon Jan 13, 2003 8:38 pm

Yeh, but lets hope the latest trend of advertising "no colouring or chill filtering" will continue and stop this nonsense, I mean does anybody really look at the colour of a whisky before deciding to buy it????
Ian_Hamilton
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Dumbarton

Postby Aidan » Mon Jan 13, 2003 8:51 pm

I would like to taste to of the same vintage, one with caramel and the other without. "They" say it doesn't make a differnece, but I believe you if you have other experience. I've tasted a few with caramel that I really liked, although maybe they'd be better if it wasn't added.
Aidan
Cask Strength Gold Member
 
Posts: 3252
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Dublin

Postby Deactivated Member » Mon Jan 13, 2003 9:45 pm

Aidan,

Caramel, is something you really shouldn't taste at all in the whisky. The fact you taste some caramel, might come from the cask. Infact they use very little of caramel, wich is not worth to mention. If you a very large dosis of Caramel to the whisky, then not only you have this nice brown color, but also a different taste. People say that they can taste the caramel, because they taste something similar, but then again never forget the wood who is responsible for such flavors. If you taste an unchill filtered and un colored whisky(perhaps a sherry butt), you might find some caramel too, and perhaps some chocolate, and other related flavors(butterscotch, vanille etc). And all given to you by the wood. However, the caramel what gives you that nice warm and romantic dark color, wich we all are waiting for(hahaha just kidding) shouldn't add that much influence. No don't worry to much about smelling and tasting the caramel, unless they have some whiskies wich they fucked up, or something like that....

That's what I have to say about this, but caramel is all a matter on uniform colors...

Slainte,

Erik

[This message has been edited by Huurman (edited 13 January 2003).]
Deactivated Member
 

Postby Nikwik » Mon Jan 13, 2003 10:09 pm

Why all this focus on caramel? There are other ways to tamper with the colour. Instead of adding something in the whisky (which you must state in some countries) you can use treated casks. I.e you fill a cask with sherry such as pedro ximenez (Earlier they used a potion called paxarette: sherry, colourings and esters) and pressurise it. After a few hours the sherry has gone inte the wood and you can depressurise the cask, empty it, fill it with whisky and say that "No, we don´t add any artificial colouring..."...

I strongly recommend "Appreciation Whisky" by Philip Hills where the method was described (p 90).

However I assume that the natural trend will continue and those who don´t use caramel or other methods will state it even more clear. If you look at the website of Bruichladdich you´ll find:

"We do not caramelise our whisky in any way, shape or form.. Nor do we fiddle about with the casks themselves adding colouring, Paxarette etc. to achieve artificial darker colours so called ‘naturally’."
Nikwik
New member
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Sweden

Postby Ian_Hamilton » Mon Jan 13, 2003 10:39 pm

Yeh I salute Bruichladdich for this, One of the finest whiskies EVER. Long live NON COLOURING and NON CHILL FILTERING!
We are not making a big issue of colouring (well okay maybe on the McCallan topic) we just want UNTAMPERED WITH whisky, a natural product. I wont buy a dark whisky just because of its colour!
Ian_Hamilton
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Dumbarton

Postby Oliver » Mon Jan 13, 2003 10:50 pm

Ian:

I agree absolutely with your points. If enough single malt drinkers vocally support this position we may see more non-chill filtered and uncolored malt on store shelves.

Oliver

PS: whomever mentionned Hill's excellent book forgot to point out that Springbank 21 was described in it as being a malt whose casks were tampered with to darken it's colour.
Oliver
Silver Member
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2002 1:01 am
Location: No Longer New Orleans, USA

Postby Aidan » Tue Jan 14, 2003 12:40 am

Huurman

Thanks. I have never tasted what might be artificial caramel in whiskey. I would like to see if there is some difference by tasting the same whisky with and without the additive. I certainly have tasted many fine whiskies that have had caramel added, so it's not a huge issue with me. That said, they could taste better without - I don't knwo.

Aidan
Aidan
Cask Strength Gold Member
 
Posts: 3252
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Dublin

Postby hpulley » Tue Jan 14, 2003 5:09 pm

I don't bother noting colour much any more, knowing how much they can mess around with it. I guess the general public wants whisky to be rich and brown so that's what they give them. In the small run single malt market I can definitely see them going to unchillfiltered uncoloured whiskies but in the mainstream stuff (singles and blends) they'll continue to do it.

Funny thing is, many without colouring are too embarassed to show it! They use dark coloured glass or a wide, squat bottle to make it look darker than a clear, tall, narrow one.

Like most other things, marketing matters more than customers would like but from the business side, marketing is very important and it is more difficult to market an inconsistent product. Almost everything is coloured these days to make it look more appealing and the number of people who want it unaltered is a very small group.

Harry
hpulley
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2503
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Postby Deactivated Member » Tue Jan 14, 2003 5:25 pm

You're right Nikwik, paxarette is also an option, perhaps a more natural one...

Erik
Deactivated Member
 

Postby Jeroen Kloppenburg » Sun Jan 19, 2003 11:06 am

Anyone mind explaining quickly what Paxarette is exactly? And why would it be more natural then caramel?
Jeroen Kloppenburg
Silver Member
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Deventer, the Netherlands

Postby Deactivated Member » Tue Apr 22, 2003 9:38 pm

Is Paxarette not illegal?
Deactivated Member
 

Postby Ize » Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:03 am

I quote my own text from thread which had Macallan and colouring discussion:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana">quote:</font><HR> http://www.ddwilliamson.com/solution/downloads/caramel.doc

I extract one comment from that document:"Lightly colored, pleasant tasting caramel flavors are produced in the initial stages but as the reaction continues more high-molecular-weight color bodies are produced and the flavor characteristics become more bitter."

This becomes very obvious thing when tasting Loch Dhu ...

Anyway, E150 is not tasteless. For instance, it is widely used in breweries to make beer dark and bitter.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Burnt sugar does not necessarily taste as sugar (or bitter) especially in small quantities, but IMO when it has blend in it softens the taste. For example, in cooking a little sugar makes a lot difference to taste.

My opinions are quite neutral to caramel colouring since I don't pay that much of attention to colour and the taste in the whiskies I like are softened with caramel (Lagavulin, Highland Park to name few). So only issue left against is the artificiality of that process, I'm a lot old fashioned guy, you see. Image

Kippis,
Ize

[This message has been edited by Ize (edited 23 April 2003).]
Ize
Silver Member
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Up north, Finland

Postby r0b » Wed Apr 23, 2003 7:49 am

Regardless of one's opinion on the use/no us of caramel, the fact is that we also "drink" with our eyes. Maybe the coloring stems from the days when whisky was naturally dark and that is what most non-whisky geeks like us Image expected from whisky (Likely bourbon is much to "blame") The brighter, white wine coloured/no caramel started to appear on the market it was perhaps by many thought of as a thin, inferior, little flavoured whisky, hence the "No caramel/colouring added" seen in many ads.

A case in point, once I was told that he t Alfred Hitchcock was quite fond of practical jokes. At a dinner he was havig, he had coloured all the food BLUE! The taste was the same, but some of his guests would apparantly not eat it. Image

[This message has been edited by r0b (edited 23 April 2003).]
r0b
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Sweden

Postby hpulley » Wed Apr 23, 2003 12:55 pm

Food colouring is not tasteless! That said, you are right, we do taste with our eyes as well as our mouth and nose so appearance plays a part. To me, however, a dark, deep brown no longer implies a lot of wood influence, it implies a lot of colouring. If it comes from the cask that way, great! Otherwise, please leave it. Unchillfiltered, uncoloured is my preference.

Harry
hpulley
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2503
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Postby ceedeedoos » Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:52 pm

I don't mind the addition of caramel as long as it's not superfluent. I also prefer unchillfiltered and uncoloured, but it will not stop me from buying Laphroaig for example ...
Nevertheless, I still feel that if a distillery adds E150, they should have the decency to add it on their labels, and not only in the countries where they are forced to do so by law ...
ceedeedoos
New member
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Belgium

Postby adogranonthepitch » Wed Apr 23, 2003 7:51 pm

Talking of Colour Boys and Girls........................

What about the Port Finished Signatory Laphroiag 1990 12yo that was PINK !!

Now thats what I call colouring!

Yours

adoranonthepitch
User avatar
adogranonthepitch
Gold Member
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Lincolnshire, Angleterre

Postby Rudy » Wed Apr 23, 2003 10:35 pm

The moment you start to see pink elephants you'll know why...

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby Admiral » Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:43 am

If you are told, or if you believe, that caramel has been added to the whisky, then you will believe you can taste it.

If you are told, or believe, that caramel has not been added, then you are unlikely to believe you can taste it, unless the caramel "flavour" is a natural feature of the whisky, as mentioned by others above.

Very pschyco-somatic.
Admiral
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2722
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Australia

Postby Ian_Hamilton » Sun Apr 27, 2003 12:36 pm

Admiral:

I have not tasted it in any whiskies, I just don't like it being added to my whisky when it really should not be!
Ian_Hamilton
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Dumbarton

Postby Rudy » Sun Apr 27, 2003 7:51 pm

When discussing blends, one of the main issues is its consistancy.
In this thread, we talk about single malts.

But isn't it here about consistency as well?

Doesn't the consumer expect:
consistancy in taste
consistancy in colour
no haze in the whisky...?

If colour wasn't that important, why should the bottler then bother at all? A bottler could reduce his costs and add that to his profit!

It's all about consumer expectations. Maybe it's because the consumer only know what they know.
Most consumers do not talk about whisky as a subject, read books about it or know this forum exists.

We know that the wood does not always do the same in colour changing, since it's a natural process.

In another thread we talk about marketing, but in fact are talking only about place and promotion. How to address a possible target group of consumers? But should the consumers be educated and told about colour changes that differ from barrel to barrel? Would they be interested in it?

In another thread the decline of the MacAllan is discussed. I agree on that. But all I care of is the taste. I'm not thirtysomething years in the whisky industry. I'm just a novice and after three years seriously trying to understand whisky I notice a change at the MacAllan. As a consumer I feel offended. I know what I like, and a MacAllan 8yo is great! With or without caramel, I like that taste.

And finally, look at ourselves, what do we do as whisky enthousiasts when appreciating whisky? Look at the colour? Take all the publications where notes are written down. There ARE notes about colour, or not?
What do we expect to see in our glass, now or next year? We look at the colour too...
But why do blenders then have blue nosing glasses, when assessing the whisky for doing their job?

Personally I prefer my whisky un-chillfiltered, uncoloured and sometimes at cask strenth.
But I care most about the taste!!
If caramel is needed to do the trick, then let the magic begin!

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Return to Questions & Answers

Whisky gift and present finder