What are Single Malt, Blended, Vatted, and other Scotch terms?

Scotch terminology can be a bit confusing at first.  Even the name itself, Scotch whisky, is confusing?  Where did the "e" go?  Well, I'm not going to get into that one right now, but I am going to explain some terminology that describes different types of Scotches, and what those terms actually mean to the Scotch drinker (if anything).

The easiest way to understand it is that there are two major ways of classifying Scotches.  First is by where and when they are made, and second is by what they are made from.  The term "single malt" actually addresses both of these questions.

Where and when a Scotch is made.  In addition to the regions (which I won't get into here), this is a question of how many distilleries and how many seasons the Scotch is made in.  A single Scotch was distilled at a single distillery, in a single season.  Blended Scotch, vatted Scotch, or scotch that doesn't specify, is usually a mix of Scotch from different distilleries, and/or year.

What Scotch is made from is also, obviously, important.  A malt whisky is a whisky made exclusively from malted barley, often and traditionally kilned over a peat-fueled fire.  Grain whisky is still made primarily from malt, but also contains other grains (unmalted barley, rye, wheat, or corn typically).

So there are essentially four categories here:

Single Malt Scotches are Scotches made only of malted barley, at one distillery, in one distilling season.

Single Grain whiskys, contrary to their name, are made from multiple grains, but are distilled at one distillery, in one distilling season.

Vatted whisky is a "blended" whisky made entirely of single malt Scotch.  That is, it is all malted barley, but can be a mixture of different years and different distilleries.

Blended whisky is a blend of whiskys mad from different grains, in different years, and/or at different distilleries.

So what's the best?  Single Malt, right?
Well, this is where people have a lot of misconceptions.  Everyone thinks single malt Scotch is inherently better than the rest.  They certainly can be the most expensive.  My challenge to these people would be to taste Johnny Walker Blue or Double Black Label against Glenlivet 12.

The reality is that no one category is inherently "better" than any other.

Single malts tend to be the most expensive, for a very good reason that has nothing to do with quality.  When they're gone, they're gone.  Since the law requires single malts to be distilled at a single distillery, in a single season, each year, for example, there is only so much Glenlivet which has been in cask for 12 years.  If they sell all of it, there is no way to produce more "on the fly."  Distilleries often distill, age, blend, and bottle more than one brand of whisky, so there are definitely ways to adjust, for instance, using more or less in blends vs. single malts, etc.  But those decisions have to be made before blending and bottling, and often before barrel aging, requiring a prediction on what demand will be like for certain whiskys 8, 10, 12, or even 25 years in advance.

The reality, however, is that there is an easy argument to make that vatted or blended whiskys are actually a better quality product.  At the very least, they are more consistent.  If a barrelmaster does not like a Scotch he tastes out of the barrel, or does not think it is consistent with the brand's profile, he has two options if that barrel was intended for a single malt.  1) bottle it anyway, especially if the variation is slight but it is still a high quality whisky; 2) give up on making it a single malt and either blend it or throw it away.

On the other hand, when a barrelmaster tastes a cask intended for a blended whisky, he can make infinite adjustments.  If it is too dry, he can add some whisky which was finished in sherry casks.  If it is not smokey or peaty enough, he can add more peaty whisky.  The goal in making a blended or vatted whisky is to create a whisky each bottling which not only tastes great, but is consistent to the previous year.

And, the reality is, there are only a handful of companies in the Scotch game.  Most of them own several distilleries and several brands.  They make a lot of whisky, and each year, they taste tons of casks.  Those which are most similar to their "big name" single malts get bottled as single malts.  Those that aren't, or those that are in excess of the quota they've set for their single malts, get blended.

So you are often drinking the exact same whisky, prepared by the exact same people, when you sip on a single malt and a blended whisky, even if the label is different.  

So in short, don't worry about price point or about what type of Scotch you're drinking.  Find one you like.  The single malts will vary slightly from year to year, but should stay in a very similar flavor profile.  If you find a blend you like, it should stay consistent year to year!  Cheers!

What's With the Sediment in My Beer?

This is a follow up post to my post on sediment in wine,  A lot of the same questions apply to beer, and some of the answers are very different.  What is the sediment in my beer?  Is it good?  Is it bad?  Should I drink it?

First, what is the sediment?  Like wine, there are a couple of answers to this.  The most common answer is that it is the yeast remaining in the beer.  This happens for two reasons.  One is because a beer was bottled unfiltered.  The other is that a beer went through bottle conditioning.  There are some situations in which a sediment or haze could be a sign of bad handling of the beer some time between brewing and consumption.  Mostly, though, this is a deliberate choice by the brewer, whether traditional or untraditional to the particular style of beer.  Unfiltered beers have dead yeast cells (lees) deliberately left in the beer in order to contribute to the flavor, color, and body of the beer.

Bottle conditioned beers undergo a secondary fermentation, usually with the intention of adding carbonation naturally, in their bottle.  The dead (or, in some fresh, bottle conditioned beer, even living) yeast obviously remains in the bottle.

In terms of if the sediment is good or bad, with the exception of beers which are not intentionally hazy, the haze and sediment is usually a good thing.

Should you drink it?

Well, that's really quite a subjective question.  The lees add flavor, body, and texture to a beer.  They are also, apparently, quite nutritious, offering protein and lots of vitamins.  That being said, I'm a big texture person, so too much can leave a chalky or gritty mouth feel.  This is why, at a great beer bar, the server will ask you, before serving you a beer which throws sediment, if you like the sediment.

My personal preference varies on the size of the bottle the beer comes in.  That sounds strange, right?

Well, if a beer comes in individual serving bottles, and has been poured properly, and is agitated ever so slightly before service, the sediment is spread out throughout the beer and quite manageable.  If, however, the beer is served in a large format bottle (like a 750ml bottle), and has been sitting upright, ALL of the sediment is likely to be present in the last glass served.  That's a bit much for my personal taste.  Similarly, draft weiss beers and belgians often throw a lot of sediment, even enough to turn them from pale gold to hazy gray in color, toward the bottom of the keg, particularly if they are served upright.  Those last few glasses are a bit too much sediment for me.

At the end of the day, if you are drinking a Belgian beer, a wheat beer, or even some British styles, chances are the sediment in your beer is harmless at worst, and tasty at best.  It's really your choice whether to indulge or stick to just the liquid!

What's with the sediment in my wine?

A lot of people probably have questions about the sediment at the bottom of a bottle of wine.  What is it exactly?  Is it good?  Is it bad?  Should I drink it?

Well, these questions are all complicated.  In short, sediment in wine comes from many sources.

Sediment can consist of debris from the winemaking process, lees (dead yeast cells), and tartrate crystals, or, usually, some combination of the above.

Wine is naturally a hazy substance.  The yeast which has created the alcohol is suspended in the wine, as are tiny particles of grape skin, pips, seeds, etc.  Many wines are filtered or fined to remove sediment, although, unfiltered and unfined wines are becoming more popular for several reasons (biodynmic and vegan winemaking, health concerns, and a healthy respect for more natural wines among them).  Moreover, the process of filtering out or, especially, fining out "undesireable" sediment can also remove things which positively affect the way the wine develops with age.  This is why white wines, and red wines meant to be drunk young, are more often filtered or fined.

Moreover, as wine ages, tartrates crystalize in the wine, particularly if the wine is stored in or transported in, cool temperatures.  These are perfectly harmless, but not temperature stable, substances found in all wines.  As the wines chill, they crystalize and fall to the bottom of the wine.  Barrel aging wine allows many tartrates to crystallize before the wine is bottled, but wines which are bottled young have more tartrates to crystalize.  Many winemakers "cold stabilize" their wines, chilling them and removing tartrate crystals before bottling the wine.  Like filtering and fining, the problem is that you can also filter out many things that contribute to desireable changes during bottle aging.  So, again, this is much more common in wines meant to be consumed in their early years.

As far as if sediment is good or bad, the answer is really neither, but leans toward good, particularly n older wines.  Sediment is perfectly harmless, and the compounds in the sediment, particularly grape remnants and lees, can contribute great flavors to wine as they age.  As far as if you should drink sediment, the general feeling seems to be no.  This is the main reason to decant wine (as opposed to aerating it, which also involves putting it in a decanter).  By carefully pouring the wine into the decanter, and by again, carefully pouring from the decanter to the glass, you can avoid most, if not all, of the sediment.  If a little sneaks into the glass, though, it's not the end of the world.  I think for the most part, the aversion to sediment is more of a personal taste, and based primarily on texture, especially since sediment settles at the bottom of the bottle and glass, so the last sip of the last glass poured would have quite an interesting texture to it.

Why are Belgian Beers So Strong

So I read something interesting the other day that I thought I would share.  Ever wondered why Belgian beers, many of which were originally, or still are, brewed by priests, monks, and nuns, are so strong?  Seems counter intuitive, doesn't t?  Especially since most monastic breweries also produce a "patersbier" or "fathers' beer" which is very low alcohol, and which is what the actual monks drink.

Well, this is an interesting example of laws changing the history of the drinking world forever, and not always in the way intended.

In 1919, a socialist lawmaker named Emile Vandervelde encouraged the passing of a law (named after him), which sought to reduce the negative affects of alcohol on the working class.  The Vandervelde law outlawed restaurants and bars from serving distilled spirits, and limited retailers to selling a minimum of two liters of distilled spirits to a customer, making it a more expensive investment than buying smaller quantities.

The law did not apply to beer, and thus, brewers started brewing stronger beers, adding candi sugar, more malt, wheat, oats, and other ingredients to raise the gravity (sweetness) of their mash, thus also increasing the alcohol content of the finished product.

The craziest part of this story?  The Vandervelde Law wasn't repealed until 1984!

What Exactly is Malolactic Fermentation???

Wine geeks and professionals often use terms that can be difficult for the casual consumer to understand.  Usually, though, at least the major point of the words, can be broken down pretty simply.  One example of that is malolactic fermentation, which I'm going to try to break down pretty simply and then at least at an introductory scientific level.

The easiest way to understand malolactic fermentation is to actually look at the words themselves.  Fermentation is the action of yeast converting sugar into alcohol and carbon dioxide, at least at the most basic level that most of us drinkers need to/want to know about.  The reality of it is, much like our own digestive process, or any other chemical reaction, there's a lot more going on.  In the case of malolactic fermentation, one of the results is the conversion of malic acid into lactic acid.  Hence the name malolactic fermentation.  Malic acid is the tart acid which tastes a lot like a green apple or tart pear.  Lactic acid is the acid found in milk, butter, and other dairy.

So, on its most basic level, malolactic fermentation is fermentation which turns tart, apple-like acids into creamy, buttery, acids.  Chardonnay is the varietal where this simple breakdown is most evident, and most easy to understand.  On the other hand, malolactic fermentation is either desired, or not desired, in many other varietals, which neither start out with such a sharp green apple taste, or end up quite as buttery as many chardonnays do.

The Science Behind It
Malolactic fermentation usually uses one or more of three different types of bacteria, Oenococcus oeni, Lactobacillus, and Pediococcus.  Each of these bacterias eats up tart malic acid and spits out lactic acid and diacetyl.  Lactic acid provides a smooth, creamy, round flavor and mouth feel, and diacetyl, which is often considered a fault in both beer and wine, provides a buttery flavor and aroma (think movie theater popcorn).

Again, Chardonnay is the most extreme example, but most red wines, and many whites, undergo some malolactic fermentation.  The original flavor profile of the wine, the environment in which malolactic fermentation occurs, and many other factors affect how obvious the flavor effects are on a wine.  On the other hand, many crisp, tart, fruity, and floral whites are produced in such a way as to almost eliminate the possibility of malolactic fermentation, in order to preserve the sharp acidic notes in the wine.

Malolactic fermentation can occur either as part of the primary fermentation, or after the wine has been fermented.  It can and does occur naturally, or the bacteria can be deliberately introduced.  It is almost always done either during fermentation or aging, and almost never in the bottle.  One increasingly rare exception is certain Vinho Verdes from Portugal, which underwent malolactic fermentation in the bottle, since slight effervescence is expected in the wine.  This is less popular now, as wines which undergo fermentation in bottle also throw a sediment and pour less clear.

Hopefully this post helps a few people understand a little more exactly what malolactic fermentation means, and more importantly, why they should care about it when buying or drinking wine!

Tasting Notes: 2013 Nobilo Sauvignon Blanc, Marlborough

Appearance: Very light yellow, almost white, translucent.  No legs whatsoever.

Aroma:  It's all citrus to me.  A hint of lemon and lime, but primarily grapefruit.

Mouthfeel:  Light, rolls right off the tongue.  A little bit of acidity leaves your mouth watering.

Flavors:  Refreshingly acidic and citrusy.  Lemons, limes, a hint of fresh cut grass, and a decent amount of grapefruit, though the grapefruit is not as prominent as it is on the nose.  Just a hint of melon to cut through the acidity here.

Overall:  Not my personal favorite, because I have an aversion to grapefruit.  But the grapefruit is not nearly as overwhelming as the nose left me to expect.  A pretty well balanced Sauv Blanc with citrus, a little tropical fruit, and just a touch of grass, so something for almost every Sauv Blanc drinker.  Not one I would buy for myself, but definitely one I would take to a party or suggest to someone who likes Sauv Blanc and doesn't mind that grapefruit.

Liqueurs, brandies, cordials, and "other spirits"

Basically, spirits are organized into 8 "families," or types of spirits.  Those are, in no particular order: vodka, gin, rum, tequila, whiskey, brandy, liqueurs, and "other spirits."

When someone mentions one of the first five, a pretty good idea probably comes to mind as to exactly what they mean, but the last three get confusing for most people.  Add to that the fact that you often see things sold as "cordials" and it can get really weird.  This post is an attempt to demystify some of these classifications.

Brandy is the easiest and narrowest to define of these categories.  It is a spirit distilled from a wine, which in turn is an alcoholic beverage fermented from fruit.  This is what separates it from the other categories.  Within brandy, there are three basic types: grape brandy (often called just brandy), fruit brandy, and pomace brandy.

Grape brandy is brandy made from grapes.  In other words, it is basically distilled table wine.  It is usually barrel aged (more on this later).  This is what Cognac and Armagnac are known for.  If a bottle is labeled just "brandy" it is most likely made from grapes.  Although this is changing, especially with U.S. craft distillers, I misled a little bit when I called it distilled table wine.  The base wine is usually, although, not always, made from different grapes than the wine we are used to drinking.  The ideal wine is high in acid, moderate in sugar, and low in alcohol, which, while making it rather unpleasant to drink on its own, allows it to hold up to both distillation and extensive aging.  In fact, brandy is the one drink which it is believed does not hit a "peak" of ideal age, after which it starts to decline.  Some fine brandy is aged many decades, and it is believed that the best brandies in the world only continue to get better in the barrel.

Pomace brandy is also made from grapes, but not from the juice or wine.  This brandy is made from the pips, skins, stems, etc. left over after wine grapes are pressed.  It is usually served unaged.  Pomace brandy, marc, and grappa are all examples of this category.

Fruit brandy is brandy made from fruit other than grapes.  Apple brandy is a common one, followed by pear, cherry, and peach.  Many Eastern European countries also drink plum brandy.  This can be served aged, or unaged.  Unaged brandy, whether from grapes or other fruit, are known as eaux-de-vie (water of life), and are clear.  Aged brandies are darker in color.  Calvados and applejack are common apple brandies.  Kriek, poire, and framboise are common ways to label cherry, pear, and raspberry brandies, respectively.  A brandy made from fruit other than grapes will almost always be labeled including the fruit.  That is, it will be labeled as a "Raspberry Brandy," rather than "Brandy."

Liqueurs are often confused with brandies, especially fruit liqueurs and fruit brandies.  The key distinction here is that fruit brandies are distilled from that fruit.  Liqueurs, on the other hand, can have any base spirit, but are flavored, and have a sugar content between 2.5% and 30%.  Examples are triple sec, Drambuie, Benedictine, curacao, Grand Marnier, schnapps, crème de menthe, crème de cacao, etc.
Proprietary liqueurs are liqueurs which refer to a specific brand name, i.e. Grand Marnier, Bailey's, Kahlua, while generic liqueurs are generally accepted flavors of liqueur which may be available in multiple brands, i.e. curacao, crème de menthe, crème de banana, etc.
An interesting liqueur to consider is Grand Marnier.  Many people think Grand Marnier is an orange brandy, rather than an orange liqueur.  This is where it is tricky.  Grand Marnier has a brandy base. The orange flavor and sugar, however, are added into the brandy (which has a grape base).  This makes Grand Marnier a brandy based orange liqueur.  In order to be an orange brandy, Grand Marnier would need to be distilled from oranges.

Cordials are a category with different meanings in different parts of the world.  In the U.S., they are synonymous with liqueurs.  The EU, however, recently changed their definition to mean a non-alcoholic ingredient.  So beware, if shopping in Europe, your cordials will not have alcohol!

Other Spirits are not really one of the major families of spirits, and that's kind of the point.  They were fairly unimportant until recently.  With the resurgence of spirit forward cocktails and bitter cocktails, and with the re-legalization of absinthe, they are gaining in popularity.  There are basically three major categories (in my objective opinion) to consider here: bitters, absinthe, and unsweetened liqueurs.

Bitters include two groups of spirits.  One I call mixing bitters and one I call drinking bitters, although in reality, both are primarily used as ingredients in cocktails.  Mixing bitters are usually sold as bitters and come in small bottles to be used by the drop or dash in cocktails.  They include Angostura, Peychauds, orange bitters, etc.  People often forget that these are spirits, as they are alcoholic (usually very high alcohol content, in fact).  Drinking bitters usually come in full sized bottles, and, although it is not very popular, can be consumed on their own, or used as the base in a cocktail.  These include Campari, Lillet, Fernet, etc.  These are on the rise in current cocktail culture.

Absinthe I discuss in more detail here.

Unsweetened liqueurs are essentially flavored spirits which either are not sweetened at all, or are not sweetened enough to be considered a liqueur.  Although frequently sold with, and considered liqueurs, they are not technically a liqueur.  These are also gaining in popularity, as craft distilleries become more popular, and overly sweet cocktail go out of fashion in favor of more spirit forward drinks.

Questions?  Have a favorite brandy or liqueur?  Let me know in the comments!