Setting The Whiskey Record Straight
Kings County really began with the premise that whiskey marketing was full of exaggerations, half-truths, and myths. We actually set our minds to finding the credibility within all the noise of the whiskey world—and there is a lot of noise. Whiskey happens to embolden the spirit, which can lead to hyperbole, rumor-mongering, and mythologizing. But in the light of day in the distillery itself, we face some interesting realities that often counter obvious myths.
Myth 1: Water Is Crucial
This might be the first one and comes from scotch where 1-ingredient whiskey is more common and water does arguably play more of a role. Still, if you wanted to purify water from disparate sources, you would turn to distilling, which by its very nature removes mineral content from water and sequesters away much of the differentiation in a variety of water sources. The water can have an effect on fermentation, where a lower ph and chemical balance can make water more favorable to yeast. And any water that you are using to dilute the whiskey just before, especially after barrel aging will have an outsized impact. But I would argue that water is less significant than grain, still configuration and distillation process, and most importantly, the person or people making all these decisions.
Myth 2: Every Barrel Is Different
If the water thing is overstated, especially for American whiskey, then the singularity of single barrels was also a myth I thought might be ripe for a takedown, and yet, this one actually holds water, so to speak.
Barrels are surprisingly different, even if filled on the same day from the same distillation run. Variations in the char level, wood grain, head space all seemingly play roles in a process that remains obtuse even with all the advances in science we’ve come up with over the years. While the whiskey is inert, it’s organically derived and rests in an organic container over changes in climate that all work on the barrels in ways that yield surprisingly disparate flavors. So this one is true for us, though we make a handful of barrels each week, so perhaps if our scale increased this might qualify more as a myth.
A cottage industry has sprung up within whiskey around single barrels as the ultimate rarity. I’ll say I generally agree with the singularity of a barrel, but at the same time, the difference of single barrels is probably overstated, so this is a yes and no at the same time (sorry to disappoint).
Ryan Ciuchta our Chief Blender inspecting barrels
Myth 3: Whiskey Stops Aging In The Bottle
While generally true, I think this is also a myth that’s not quite so simple. Yes, the infusion of oak stops when a whiskey is emptied (dumped, in industry parlance) from the barrel. But there are other changes that happen over time, that have nothing to do with the barrel that are easily overlooked. Any hobby distiller of moonshine knows that resting a whiskey designed to be consumed unaged will mellow it independent of a barrel—some of these changes are evident as the spirits will get cloudy. After even longer, the oils and esters may congeal and create what appear to be floaties. Many brands filter these “fusel oils” to use an old fashioned distilling term to refer to congeners that add texture and mouthfeel to whiskey, but can over time degrade the shelf-appeal of a product.
A lot of the mellowing of a white spirit happens right away and there are probably diminished returns from extra aging. That doesn’t stop cognac producers from decanting spirits from a barrel into demijohns and carboys after decades of barrel aging for further resting. Every producer has a philosophy, based a little bit in science, a little bit in experience, and a little bit in mysticism.
So-called “Dusty” bottles often tell us that the whiskey of the past tasted different, but there is very little way to scientifically isolate the effects of age, since age is absolute. There is a familiar, desirably characteristic common to a lot of dusty bottles but it’s hard to know if distillation practices were better, grain was richer, or if there’s something about bottle conditioning that happens over 25+ years on a shelf. Maybe all three.
It’s also true that an opened bottle shouldn't be left to linger long. The spirit will begin to evaporate with more headspace in the bottle, changing the spirit’s balance and interaction with oxygen may also play a role in diminishing the brightness of a spirit after it has been opened.
Myth 4: Whiskey Should Be Consumed Neat
One time, a distillery manager from a prominent scotch distillery came to visit and a little tour and tasting turned into a pretty deep dive session. But i was especially interested in how he tasted the whiskeys, which he doused with 2 parts water for every 1 sample I gave. It just proved to me there is no right way to taste (or drink) anything, it’s completely up to personal preference (which is often influenced by tradition). The scots like to add a little water, Americans seemingly want as little water as possible. I tend to favor neat in the winter, and with ice in the summer, and anything in between. I’m not especially picky.
five flight whiskey tasting
Myth 5: Ricked Storage Is Better Than Palletized Storage
It’s certainly prettier, more romantic and more instagrammable, but if you think there’s a flavor difference, I invite you to a blind tasting and look forward to witnessing the magic of your palate that can taste the orientation of an aging barrel. Let’s do a lineup of 10 blind samples and I’ll let you tell me which ones were stored vertically. Great, I’ll wait.
Myth 6: Copper Stills Make Better Whiskey
This one is repeated a lot on distillery tours. It only takes being on a Kentucky distillery tour and seeing the insulating jacket (not made of copper) painted with copper paint to understand how important this myth is to the public consciousness (and distillery experience managers, apparently). There are a couple of major distilleries guilty of this sleight of hand, pandering to the totally subjective notion that copper makes whiskey better.
I remember being in the Louisville office of Vendome, the still manufacturer, talking designs for our 3rd still, when our engineer brought up something from his experience: at Jim Beam most of the equipment is stainless by design, at Jack Daniel’s, they use little pins of “sacrificial copper” to maximize copper impact on the distillate. The are both titans of American whiskey and stand on opposite sides of the issue. While each distiller has their preference, it’s a completely subjective stance.
I for one think copper is an overrated material in still construction, but it plays an important, if overstated role.
Kings County Distillery Copper Stills
Myth 7: Older Is Better
I’ve saved the best myth for last. Everyone sort of knows this intrinsically, but continues to behave differently with their wallets, which creates a lot of opportunity for people who like excellent whiskey and don’t want to pay for superlative age statements.
I’ve sat in on enough tastings with experts to know that no one alive can determine a whiskey’s age by its palate, and while the relative age is sometimes apparent, it’s hardly a fixed rule. I will say that on 8 out of every 10 barrel picks (of Kings County or any other) I’ve sat in on, most people pick the oakiest barrel, assuming it will be the oldest, and perhaps, the best.
We seem to live in an era where no amount of oak character is too much for most people, and the infusion of oak is probably the single easiest aspect of the aging process to pick out in a blind set. Still, there are other factors that change as lower boiling point compounds, often the harshest, evaporate out as angel’s share and higher boiling point compounds (known as fusel oils), absorb into the charcoal layer. Alcohol also changes regardless of a barrel, as esters come out of suspension, acids degrade, and a host of other organic processes that mellow a spirit simply by resting in time. Still those processes tend to have a limit and so the infusion and volume reduction that happens each season are more contributive.
I’ve often opined that whiskey would be better if labels were banned, that people were forced to try things blind without the expectation of age and mashbill etc. or even brands or distillery names. We would all like much more differentiated, much more subjective things.
But let me interrupt my own train of thought with a contradiction by saying that part of the pleasure of whiskey is the fact of a thing over the character of a thing for many people. Sometimes there is as much pleasure in rare, superlative whiskey as there is in excellent whiskey.
