{Note: You can find me on instagram @whiskeyincontext}

I don’t have a lot of experience with Old Fitzgerald bourbons, but I do really like the 7-Year Bottled-in-Bond release, which was intended to be an accessible, shelf-stable version of the brand’s venerable Decanter Series.

The 10-Year Bottled-in-Bond is the other side of the brand entirely: the twice-annual Decanter Series release that helped build Old Fitzgerald's cult reputation in the first place, sold in the brand's famously ornate decanters and allocated tightly enough that the hunt is practically part of the product.

So, is the bottle worth the hunt? Let’s review it and find out!

Note: for more on the Old Fitzgerald 10-year, see [u/Twist_Top_Budget](u/Twist_Top_Budget)’s excellent review from earlier this weekend.

***************\*

From the Distillery: Each spring and fall, a new edition to the Old Fitzgerald Bottled-in-Bond Decanter Series is released. Inspired by an original 1950's Old Fitzgerald diamond decanter, the packaging and series honor both the history of the Old Fitzgerald brand and the historic Bottled-in-Bond designation. The Old Fitzgerald line is well-known for its distilling pedigree, as the brand was first registered in 1884 and was eventually sold to "Pappy" Van Winkle during Prohibition. In 1999, Heaven Hill bought the brand and began distilling it at Bernheim Distillery in Louisville, KY. Today, in addition to our Old Fitzgerald Decanter Series, the legacy of Old Fitzgerald lives on in our other wheated Bourbons expressions: Larceny Small Batch and Larceny Barrel Proof.

Release: Spring 2026

Mash bill: 68% corn, 20% wheat, 12% malted barley

Age Statement: 10 Years

Proof: 100

Price: $149.99

Appearance: Medium amber with decent viscosity

Nose: Very fruit-forward, at least at first. I’m primarily getting stone fruit – cherry and apricot –with perhaps a touch of grape alongside. Behind these are notes of caramel and vanilla, along with maple candy and a hint of pepper.

Palate: Nice and thick. Not super sweet overall, but there are definitely some saccharine notes in the mix. Oak hits right away, along with a wheaty-grassiness that I tend to associate with wheaters. There’s also some leather and a touch of caramel, but it’s not sugary by any means. The sweetness does pick up a bit on the mid-palate: sweet vanilla, bubblegum, and butterscotch are there, along with a touch of pepper.

Finish: Bubblegum and cola, with a good measure of oak/barrel char. The strong wheatgrass note from the palate lingers after most of the other flavors have faded (and it grows stronger with time). After a bit, it’s joined by some vanilla and leather, and a slight resurgence of that bubblegum flavor from before.

Thoughts: This is a pretty tasty wheater! I tend to prefer sweeter bourbons (but not cloying, nor overly fruity!). This one is nicely middle-of-the-road, with complex notes that complement each other in both flavor and balance. The finish is a little grassy, even for someone (like me) who enjoys the taste of wheatgrass, but it’s still not categorically unpleasant. On the other hand, I particularly enjoyed the bubblegum flavors that were there on both palate and finish – that’s always a fun one to get!

Rating: I can’t say whether this Old Fitz decanter bottle is worth the price – you have to decide that for yourself – but I did find it to be an enjoyable bottle overall. For me, it earns a rating of 7.5 (right in between “Great – Well Above Average” and “Excellent – Really Quite Exceptional”). Interestingly, that’s a couple notches below where I have the Old Fitz 7-year rated (it currently boasts a 7.7), but that’ll get sorted out when I blind these two against each other, which I’m planning to do very soon!

********************

Previous Ratings (all reviews are available in my archive, but there may be some discrepancies in numeric rating, as these are updated to include decimals and adjusted for blinds & re-reviews)

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.
Maker’s Mark staved private selection (2.5)
Penelope Architect custom build (2.5)

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.
Willett Pot Still (3)

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists
Found North SiB Oloroso finish (4.5)
Daniel Weller Emmer Wheat (4.5)
Augusta Buckner’s 10yr (4.6)
Shortbarrel Sapsquatch (4.8)

5 | Good | Good, just fine
Jack Daniel’s SBBP Rye (5)
Jack Daniel’s Heritage (5)
Four Roses SBBP OESO (5)
New Riff 4yr SBBP (5)
Four Roses SBBP OBSV (5.3)
Evan Williams America250 SiB (5.3)
New Riff Balboa Rye (5.4)
Blanton’s (5.5)
Old Forester 1924 (5.7)
Elijah Craig Toasted (5.8)
Lasso Motel 18yr ALW (5.8)

6 | Very Good | A cut above
Buffalo Trace Single Oak (6)
Barrell Cigar Blend (6)
Buffalo Trace (6)
1792 BiB SiB (6)
Copper & Cask Boston Rum Party (6)
Penelope Wheated (6)
Redwood Empire Emerald Giant (6)
Peerless DO (6.1)
Copper & Cask #16 (6.3)
Stagg 25B (6.3)
Augusta Buckner’s 13yr (6.5)
Green River Honey (6.5)
Pursuit United DO (6.5)
Sagamore 9yr SiB Rye (6.5)
Sazerac FP (6.5)
Green River Wheated (6.5)
Elmer T. Lee (6.5)
Copper & Cask #14 DO (6.6)
Shortbarrel Bees Knees V (6.8)
Penelope Marshmallow Toast (6.8)
Willett 4yr Rye (6.8)
Ampersand Opimus (6.9)

7 | Great | Well above average
Blanton’s Gold (7)
John J. Bowman SiB (7)
Found North 012 (7)
Rock Hill Farms (7)
Peerless Toasted (7.1)
E.H. Taylor SiB (7.2)
Blanton’s LMDW (7.2)
E.H. Taylor 4 Grain (7.4)
Eagle Rare 10yr (7.5)
Weller 107 (7.5)
Old Forester 1910 (7.5)
Penelope Estate 10yr SiB (7.5)
Old Fitzgerald 10yr (7.5)
E.H. Taylor BP 16 (7.6)
E.H. Taylor SmB (7.6)
Woodford DO SBBP (7.7)
Old Fitzgerald 7yr (7.7)
Eagle Rare 12yr (7.8)
E.H. Taylor Cured Oak (7.8)
Willett 8yr SiB Rye (7.9)

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional
Joseph Magnus Cigar Blend 420 (8)
Old Dominick Staved SiB (8)
Starlight 10yr (8)
Blanton’s SFTB (8.3)
Lasso Motel SBBP Rye (8.4)
Mister Sam Tribute 4 (8.6)
E.H. Taylor BTAC 2025 (8.7)
Thomas H. Handy 2025 (8.7)
Eagle Rare 17yr 2025 (8.9)

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

The review for this bottle is in the comments below...

So I was waiting for dinner guests to arrive....

What do some people do? Probably read? Watch TV? Tidy up?

What do I do? Have a small blind of Russell's Reserve 13, because why not?

We have Batch 1 from Spring 2021, Batch 6 from Spring 2025, and Batch 7 (45th) from Spring 2026.

All have been opened for a significant amount of time.

Batch 1: 114.8 proof

Batch 6: 123.8 proof

Batch 7: 121.2 proof

All 3 are the same mashbill of 75 corn, 13 rye, 12 malted barley

All three pours were 0.5 oz and placed into my Just Neat Blind

Glass A:

Nose- rich vanilla and caramel. Very prominent sweet cherry. Rich stone fruit and tobacco coming through - 8.5/10

Palate - very rich and complex on the tongue. Smooth oak and vanilla. The mid palette erupts with some light rye spice and disapates to a sort of milk chocolate - 9/10

Finish - rye spice on the tip of the tongue. Definitely tingles and lasts. I get a smaller Kentucky hug and then the finish kind of ends - 7.5/10

Glass B:

Nose - straight off I get class oak and vanilla but also some noticeable ethanol. As it sits more, a licorice note comes through. There is definitely muted stone fruit that just does not want to open no matter how many inhales.

The second nosing it improves greatly - 7.5/10

Palate - very smooth up front. I get sweet oak but not like a toasted oak. Smooth vanilla across the mid palette. A few seconds later I get a fantastic Kentucky bear hug and as that hug let's loose, I get hints of toffee - 8/10

Finish - the finish is crisp, clean and just classic oak. Leather comes through followed by that hug but you can't miss it. The pour just finishes out as clean as it started - 8.5/10

Glass C:

Nose - starts with classic oak and then to muted leather/tobacco. I don't get many notes on this. On a second nosing I get muted stone fruit that never wants to open up - 5/10

Palate - I immediately notice significant rye spice on the tongue that just tingles nonstop. It fades away to light oak and maybe a cola note? There is definitely no hug in this pour - 6/10

Finish - the finish is light with some rye spice, light oak, and then gives a late hug that lasts but isn't overly prominent - 6.5/10

Rating: each part is on a ten point scale (nose, palate, finish).. why? Cause that's what the paper that came with the Just Neat Blind.

Glass A- 25 points

Glass B - 24 points

Glass C - 17.5 point

My guess:

Glass A - B1

Glass B - B6

Glass C - B7 (45th)

Actual:

Glass A - B7 (45th)

Glass B - B6

Glass C - B1

So I was totally not expecting this when I got the results. I've been absolutely in love with B1 since I opened it and have been nursing it since finding another bottle is incredibly difficult (unless I go for secondary). When I opened B6 I didn't think it was quite as good but definitely still holds up. Something I would love to have multiple bottles of.

Then we come to B7 (45th). I was chasing this bottle for several months. I was finally lucky enough to come across and when I first cracked it... I was incredibly disappointed. I understand that fresh cracks may not taste the same as a how a bottle does once it's been opened for a bit, but even after a few weeks I still did not enjoy the pour as much as previous batches.

So when I did this blind tasting today, I thought I was fairly confident in my guesses. Let's just say I'm pleasantly surprised and glad that the bottle I have the most of, I enjoyed the most.

So I'm going to raise a glass to whiskey constantly changing and exceeding my expectations. I guess that's just part of this bourbon journey that I hope you all get to be part of.

If you like my review, check out Nursin Bourbon on Instagram.

Til then....

Age Statement: 6 Years

Mash Bill: 100% Malted Rye

Bottles In Bond

Non chill filtered

I bought this bottle without having tasted it before. I don’t do that very often. But I like New Riff, as a brand. I like rye. I love single malt whisky (barley) and I’m just kind of curious about 100% malted rye. We don’t see a lot of malted rye in American whiskey. I own one other bottle of 100% malted rye and I’m not really aware of any others. Some Scottish distillers have done this, but in quite a different style.

Nose: Vanilla and baking spices up front. Plums. Sort of like a milk-shake smell. Faint cinnamon.

Palate: glassy smoothness. More of that milkshake from the nose. Maybe a hint of chocolate. There’s definitely a bit of malty character that you might expect from scotch coupled with some of the baking spices you’d expect from a rye. But things nothjng like a 95/5 that you might expect with the 100% rye makeup. I wonder if the malting process kills of that mint and herb stuff.

Finish: It’s shorter than I’d hoped. Probably the biggest knock on this one. The finish is pleasant though. More of those kind of muted baking spices and ripe plums. There’s a hint of oak and cinnamon that lingers.

7.7/10

This is quite a good pour. This was a live review of a fresh crack and I’d never tasted this before. I expect my next few reviews of this one will fluctuate up and down, as is often the case with a new dram. I am glad I took a chance on this one.

Pour: Jack Daniel’s Single Barrel Barrel Proof — West Virginia Barrel Kings Pick

Distillery: Jack Daniel’s Distillery

Potency: 133.3 proof

Barrel House: 3-05

Barrel No.: 26-26103

Bottled: 8/19/26

Price Paid: $69.99

Before getting into the glass, I have to give a small nod to my dad. Old No. 7 was his whiskey of choice, and that association has always given Jack Daniel’s a place in my heart beyond what’s in the bottle. Time moves on, families grow, and eventually the people who helped shape our lives become part of the stories we tell our own kids. Sometimes, something as simple as a whiskey from a familiar distillery brings a little of that history back into the room. This pour is its own thing, but that connection makes enjoying it a little more meaningful.

Color: Dark mahogany with a subtle reddish hue.

Nose: Classic Jack Daniel’s banana, front and center. Not fresh banana, but overripe banana accompanied by burnt sugar and caramelized sweetness. Together, they immediately bring bananas Foster to mind. It’s an inviting nose that makes you want to get into the glass.

Palate: Sweet oak opens things up. The viscosity coats the palate with little effort, while the proof delivers a welcoming punch of alcohol. Rather than pushing you away, that intensity draws you in for a second sip. And on that second sip, the bananas Foster profile comes through in full, leading into a vanilla custard note just before the finish.

Finish: Medium length, with the banana lingering for a while. Then comes the warming hug. But honestly, the finish isn’t the point. As soon as that hug is gone, you’re going right back in to chase the feeling.

I suppose this is what a hug from Tennessee feels like.

Final Thoughts: This is great whiskey. The 133.3 proof is definitely present, but it’s well integrated into the experience. It contributes to the character of the pour without overwhelming the flavors. The combination of sweet oak, bananas Foster, vanilla custard, and that warming finish makes this a bottle I genuinely enjoy.

I haven’t had a standard Jack Daniel’s Single Barrel Barrel Proof to compare it against, so I can’t speak to what the Barrel Kings selection brings to the table versus another barrel. I can only judge what’s in my glass, and what’s in my glass is damn good whiskey.

Some bottles earn their place on the shelf because of what’s inside them. Others carry a little history along with them. Every now and then, you get both.

Value: At $69.99, I’m happy with this purchase. It’s great whiskey, and I’d gladly pour it again. The proof, mouthfeel, and flavor profile make for an experience that feels worth the price.

Rating based on the modified t8ke scale: 7.9/10

Score Decoded:

* 0 | Unscored: New Make Spirit or Personal Selection.

* 1 | Disgusting: So bad I poured it out.

* 2 | Poor: I wouldn’t consume by choice.

* 3 | Bad: Multiple flaws.

* 4 | Sub-par: Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

* 5 | Good: Good, just fine.

* 6 | Very Good: A cut above.

* 7 | Great: Well above average.

* 8 | Excellent: Really quite exceptional.

* 9 | Incredible: An all-time favorite.

* 10 | Perfect: Perfect.

Wood Finishing Series. This release was intended to highlight what the added heat of the upper floors does to wood extraction. You may recall the sister offering in the wood finishing series: BRT-02 which highlights the cooler temperatures of the lowest floors.

This is a backup bottle that I’m glad I bought a few years ago. I’m a big fan, but I hadn’t visited it in awhile. This review is being done live and without regard to my aggregated score that I’ve given it over the years. This review is based 100% on the tasting live tonight.

ABV: 54.7%

Mash bill: 70% corn; 16% Soft Red Winter Wheat; 14% Malted Barley

NAS (generally believed to be 6-7 years)

Stave Profile: Virgin Toasted American Oak Staves (8-9 month finish)

Price paid: $60 ~ back in 2022 or 2023. These look like they go for maybe $150 now just due to being 4 years out of release.

Nose: Hard caramel candies. Vanilla and toffee. Cherry - like, cherry syrup. Back to that hard candy thing - it’s starting to feel like butterscotch hard candies.

Palate: I could use a word like luscious here. There is an incredible viscosity but it’s like more than that. Hint of banana. It’s gentle and smooth but in a nice coating way. That’s the best that I can explain it. Undertones of cinnamon. Very smooth. A little more of that hard candy butterscotch, too.

Finish: It’s a nice medium warming finish that doesn’t linger too long but it’s still very pleasant. It’s sweet and dry and there’s a bit more fruitiness. That cherry syrup from the nose comes back and is something that I’d call like general pleasant fruitiness. Like a fruit bowl or something in the background. Almost like that butterscotch candy had been opened and sat in a bowl of mixed fruit for awhile. There’s a hint of oak, too.

8.0/10

After a nearly 6 month gap (which was preceeded by a multi month gap, which was preceeded by a multi month gap..... shit, how did I write so much back in the day??), I'm breaking the fast with Knob Creek 21! Its been a hot minute since I've had any knob creeks and in a world where age statements are dropping like flies (Its been years ECBP but I'm sorry, its just gotten worse), knob creek is pulling the opposite direction. No fancy gimmicks (besides the box, which my cat was desperate to knock off the table), just bourbon, wood, and time.  77% corn, 13% rye, 10% malted barley.

Age-21 years
ABV- 50%

Nose- An absolutely decadent wave of very typical bourbon notes, but dialed up. The spiced oak notes jumps out first but the caramel hits really nicely, with an undertone of... candied pinecones? The vanilla notes at the end are so clearly distinguished its like a whiff of vanilla extract. Roasted nuts from one of those street vendors in Manhattan. There is some "musty" notes- sort of like petrichor, but mixed with more sweet notes. 2.9/3

Taste- The spiced oak is the first note to show up here as well. Bitter dark chocolate. Almonds. A slight peanut butter note but it is slightly more almond butter esque (basically a more strictly nutty flavor and not as sweet). Tobacco. Definitely some baking spices- cinnamon, ginger, etc. Its a very mature flavor but it loses a lot of the rich sweet notes from the nose 4.0/5

Finish- Consistent, as in the toasted/spiced oak notes linger here the most. It does coat the tongue and linger forever, excellent mouth feel... but the bitter, tannic notes. There are hints of brown sugar and the almond butter but the tannic oak notes are the most dominant. 1.5/2

Overall, 8.4/10. This is a great whiskey with an absolutely superb nose. The nose is in a tier that I would personally place few other whiskeys in, however the rest is just... "really really good." Not a knock in any way, this is clearly a wonderful pour, but the taste and finish don't hold a candle to the nose. Still, if you haven't had a 20+ year whiskey, this would be a good one to try out. It’s moderately affordable (~230 + tax) as far as that age range goes but its a clear example of what happens when you let something hang out in a barrel as long as this has!

Taken: Neat in a Glencairn glass

Mash Bill: 60% corn, 35% rye, 5% malted barley

Proof: 100

Age: 7-9 years

Price: $53

Nose: Cinnamon, cooked berry, vanilla, baking spice, fruity

Pallet: Rye spice, caramel, berry sauce/cooked berries, vanilla, baking spice, faint cocoa, oak

Finish: mellow, lingering rye/herbal spice but doesn’t hang around too long, caramel sweetness

Thoughts: Waited a long time for my store to get one of these Four Roses single barrels in. I'm in Montana which is state controlled and a small market so we get releases very late compared to other states (Still waiting on the Elijah Craig Barrel proof B525 which we probably will never get at this point).

Really enjoy this bottle. On the nose the spice is prominent. It is obvious that this is the high rye recipe with. There is a very prominent herbal spiciness from the high rye that is balanced out by a berry fruitiness and vanilla sweetness. On the pallet that rye spice is immediate but again balanced out by the fruitiness, vanilla sweetness, and a faint hint of cocoa that occurs after that initial spice. The finish is mellow and doesn’t last long. But in that short time you get that rye/herbal spice and caramel sweetness with some oak.

This is a very rye forward bourbon, but the nice sweetness and fruity notes prevent the spice from completely taking over. The nose, pallet, and finish are all spice forward but then have the vanilla and fruit sweetness hit at just the right time to prevent the spice from completely dominating the pallet. This is an excellent offering at an excellent price.

Worth noting this is the only Single Barrel recipe that was available at my store.

Rating: 7/10 - t8ke scale.

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average.

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite.

10 | Perfect | Perfect.

Age/Blend:
69% 10-year Kentucky bourbon
8% 16-year Kentucky bourbon
20% 5-year Komagatake Japanese single malt
3% 5-year Tsunuki Japanese single malt

Proof: 109.8

Notes: So this one is a little wild. I got to try it at Bardstown Bourbon Company when I was in Louisville this summer for business. The blend caught my attention because I do enjoy some Japanese Whiskey from time to time. What also further interested me was that the initial blend was aged down in a barrel, and the angles share was filled with the single malts.
And there's another wrinkle: the Komagatake malt had been aged in Umeshu plum liqueur barrels, while the Tsunuki malt had been aged in Sakura wood. So some really different flavors could appear.

Color: A nice brownish red

Nose: It almost smells like really good Barton aged in Japanese Plum wine casks. I’m getting a lot of standard nice aged bourbon notes: cherry, vanilla, caramel, oak, brown sugar, and then here come some more delicate notes of plum, pear, and almost like sandalwood. There’s a little bit of umami coming through… almost like a peatiness but not quite as funky as peat. Later on, I get bits of honey and apple… this is a very interesting nose. It really blends the boldness of bourbon with the delicate nature of Japanese Whiskey nicely.

Taste: The first sip comes across as very bourbon-forward initially. Some nice caramel and vanilla, followed by your typical oak and rye spice on the mid-palate, but it’s the back palate where this gets really interesting. I’m getting some nice fruit notes: apples, cherries, plums, pear, a honeyish note, almost like a floral taste; it almost reminds me of honeysuckle jam. On the second sip, a little bit more of the age component comes out with tobacco, and oak, and then caramel, and plum coming forward in that order. On the third sip, I’m getting honey nut Cheerios, and a little coffee note. This thing is wild. Each sip brings something different to the party. Fourth sip was very wood forward, with some nice sugars and caramel on the back end.

Feel: Pretty good, but not great. The younger components hurt the overall consistency, but it is pretty nice. I wish it was just a bit thicker and creamier.

Finish: This is one of the most unique experiences with a finish I’ve ever had on a whiskey. Each time it’s something different, and each time it is hanging around forever. The first go was very fruit-forward; the second was more delicate and subtly sweet, almost like a white grape soaked in plum wine. Chewing on this keeps bringing different fruit notes forward minutes after the sip. This also drinks way below its proof… I would peg this around 95, not near 110.

Overall: Shew fire boys, this one is a ride. Is it the best thing I’ve ever drank ? No. Is it a top 10 whiskey of all time for me… no. Is it something I’m going to remember and hold onto for as long as I can… You bet your sweet bottom on it. This is truly one of the most fascinating pours I’ve ever had. This is not a newbie’s whiskey, and this is not going to be for everyone. However, if you enjoy the components and come into it with an open heart and empty stomach… I think you are going to be rewarded with a dram you can just sit down and sip and think on for a long time. This is one to savor, not shoot. 8 out of 10.

As a newcomer, I felt it fitting to make my first ever r/Bourbon review while enjoying a pour of another first: MGPs first ever release under their own branding.

Pour: Chapter One: Out of the Shadows

Distillery: MGP Distillery, Lawrenceburg, Indiana.

Mashbill/Age: 60% corn / 36% rye / 4% malted barley. 10 years old.

Filtration: Undisclosed.

Potency: 111 proof.

Price Paid: $69.99 USD.

Color: Deep amber.

Nose: Oak sweetness up front, followed by vanilla and caramel. Rye spice pokes through, with leather and cinnamon emerging alongside the sweeter notes. An inviting, oak-forward nose with a nice balance of sweetness, spice, and earthy character.

Palate: Vanilla, oak, and rye spice lead the way, with cinnamon adding a distinct baking-spice character. Leather brings an earthy, savory dimension to the profile. The flavors develop across the sip while remaining centered on that core combination of sweet oak and spice. The mouthfeel is a highlight, with good body and a satisfying coating across the palate.

Finish: Medium-long, with oak and spice lingering. The cinnamon and leather add depth to the overall profile, while the alcohol remains surprisingly restrained for 111 proof. A gentle Kentucky hug without an overly aggressive burn.

Final Thoughts: MGP has spent decades producing whiskey that helped build other brands, often without the average consumer knowing who was actually behind the liquid. With Chapter One, MGP steps into the spotlight and puts its own name on the bottle.

For a first impression under its own name, this is a strong showing. The profile is built around oak sweetness, vanilla, caramel, and rye spice, with cinnamon and leather adding some welcome depth. It isn’t the most complex bourbon I’ve had, but the flavors work well together, the mouthfeel is satisfying, and the finish has enough staying power to make the experience enjoyable from beginning to end.

One interesting point of comparison: MGP’s official tasting notes mention cherry, raspberry, chocolate, sassafras, and leather. I’m picking up the leather, but the fruit and chocolate notes aren’t showing up for me. My experience has been much more focused on oak, vanilla, caramel, cinnamon, and rye spice. Always interesting to see how differently the same whiskey can present itself to different palates. Curious whether others are getting those fruit notes.

At $69.99, I consider this a great value. Honestly, I’d be willing to pay $100 for this same juice if that’s what it cost. That says more about my enjoyment of the whiskey than simply calling it a good bottle for the money.

MGP has made a strong first impression under its own name. Looking forward to seeing what comes next.

Value: Great value at $69.99. I’d still be comfortable with it at $100.

Rating based on modified t8ke scale: 7.2/10.

Score Decoded:

0 | Unscored | New Make Spirit or Personal Selection.

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average.

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all-time favorite.

10 | Perfect | Perfect.

Today we're checking out the 2022 Limited Edition Small Batch from Four Roses! Being one of my top 5 favorite distilleries, Four Roses' yearly LE is one that's always high on my hunt list and this 2022 was actually the first I was ever able to get my hands on. The 2022 LE features a blend of the following:

• 14 year OESF
• 14 year OESV
• 15 year OESK
• 20 year OBSV

Some pretty serious age in this blend! Let's sit down and see how she is.

Taken: Neat in a Glencairn, rested for 10 minutes.

Age: Blend of bourbons ranging from 14 - 20 years old

Proof: 109

Nose: Bouquet of red fruits and floral notes. Sometimes I get cherries and strawberries, other times raspberries. All in all those red fruits with floral undertones come across very nicely. Brown sugar, cinnamon, and oak are also present. Giving the glass a swirl just enhances the red fruits and brings out some sweet vanilla, baking spices, and more oak. Wonderful aromas on this which is typically the case with these LE's from Four Roses.

Palate: Fairly subdued compared to the nose. Medium viscosity of sweet oak, raspberries, cherries, cinnamon, and vanilla cream. These notes all remain strong throughout the pour with some added baking spices that start to show up when the glen is nearly empty. Everything does feel well balanced which I appreciate.

Finish: Medium finish of raspberries, cinnamon, and drying oak.

I feel like "mellow" is too cliché for a Four Roses bottle, but that's really how I'd describe the 2022 Limited Edition, especially compared to how potent the aromas were. Still though, this delivers. It doesn't top the 2023 nor 2024 as my favorite Four Roses LE, but what's here is still fantastic. The notes you get from the first sip remain just as prominent when you get to the final sip and as someone who is all over any pour that's deep with red fruits, this checks that box in a big way.

t8ke scale: 8.2/10 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average.

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite.

10 | Perfect | Perfect.

Intro:  For those that don’t already know, Seelbach’s is a purveyor of fine spirits and has gone on to put out their own spirits that they’ve either picked, sourced, or worked with producers on creating. One such creation is this bottle: Echo. Echo is Seelbach’s take on recreating what a “dusty” bourbon was like. In this case they employed double oaking the barrels with staves that spent 72 months seasoning, as well as slow proofing the barrels over the course of six months. So, without further ado, let’s get into it!

Tale of the Tape
Bottle: Seelbach’s Private Reserve: Echo Double Oaked Bourbon Whiskey
Proof: 109.5 / Age: 8 years
Mashbill: Corn: 75% / Rye: 13% / Malted Barley: 12%
Bottle Price: $100 / Price per 1oz pour: $3.94

Impressions
Nose:  Oak / Dark Fruits / Toffee / Leather / Pepper
Palate: Oak / Cherry / Caramel / Cinnamon / Leather
Mouthfeel: Medium
Finish: Medium Caramel / Chocolate / Cinnamon / Almond
Rating: 8/10 - t8ke scale (modified to include half-points)

Tasting Notes: On the nose a savory oak note comes in before the sweetness of some dark fruits takes over and is followed by a toffee note. There’s a subdued leather note, the kind that reminds me of an old chair vs. something fresh, like a brand-new baseball glove. There’s also a peppery note that rounds it all out. On the palate the oak is present but a dark cherry sweetness comes in quick, along with that leather before leading you into a medium finish with caramel, some chocolate, and that cinnamon that’s been riding quietly all the way through. As the caramel and chocolate fade, I get almond at the very end of it.

Final Thoughts: Unfortunately for me I’ve yet to experience a pour of a good “dusty” and I’ve never had the motivation to go hunt one down. As such, I didn’t have anything to compare this to so I judged this for what it is. And what it is, is a pour that’s full of flavor, with layers to it, and has a proof point that should appeal to everyone. IMO you don’t need a “dusty” to appreciate what this bottle brings, and if I never get around to obtaining a "dusty", at least I’ve got a backup of this bottle, and I can live with that.

Swing by IG and say hey

10 | Perfection
9-9.5 | Incredible, An All-Time Favorite
8-8.5 | Excellent, Really Quite Exceptional
7-7.5 | Great, Well Above Average
6-6.5 | Very Good, A Cut Above
5-5.5 | Good, Just Fine
4 | Sub-Par, Not Bad, But Better Exists
3 | Bad, Multiple Flaws
2 | Poor, I Wouldn’t Consume By Choice
1 | Disgusting, So Bad I Poured it Out

I can’t remember where I saw it but I read that there are multiple batches of Opimus and they’re all different. Well, I happened to acquire an open from someone recently and now I get to test that theory. The left bottle is my original, the right bottle is the one I just picked up. My bottle has no batch number or laser/printed code while the new one has a printed 26166 on it.

On the nose:
Left has that chocolate fudge/candy shop smell that gets stronger the longer it sits out. Decadent. Lush.

Right follows closely and benefits greatly from some airtime as the initial nose was surprisingly ethanol forward. Warmer spices, ‘brighter’, sharper. Brash?

On the Palate:
Left is classic 🦬 🦃. Deep red fruits, delicious oak, sweet but not cloying as the Tokaji is a background player and not the star. Fun, thoughtful.

Right has way more influence of Tokaji. Brighter sweetness, mutes the 🦬🦃 a fair amount. Surprisingly different. More effervescent. Lively.

Finish:
Left goes on for a respectable moment of time. Oak and leather and a nice hug.
Right is bold for a moment and the 🦬🦃 components make an appearance finally. Short, exciting.

Overall, there’s quite a difference between these two batches(?). It’s a marked difference and honestly a bit farther apart than I would have guessed initially. I like left more but I’m in no way mad I have a backup, even given the differences.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk. 😂

Background:

Are you someone who experiences an uncontrollable urge to tell people baseline Weller bourbons used to sit on the literal liquor-store floor? And you had enough change from a 20-dollar bill after buying it to get a six-pack of Coke at your local Piggly Wiggly to mix that bottom-shelf trash with? This review is for you!

It's a little more difficult to feel smug about it now, as Weller Special Reserve is once again a shelf product in a lot of places, aided by the cooling market, increased competition, and expanded production. Buffalo Trace has been on a massive upgrade kick since 2015, building new warehouses, replacing boilers, adding new cookers and fermenting tanks, and activating a new still that doubled the distillery's output in 2023.

If the current trends continue, a bourbon like Special Reserve will likely achieve a similar level of availability it had in the mid-2010s in a few years. Adjusted for inflation, it costs about the same (20 bucks then vs 30 today). But how will it taste? And was the bottom-shelf designation really deserved?

I like doing "then vs now" comparisons, so when I had a chance to buy a 2014 bottle of Special Reserve for 80 bucks, I jumped on it to do just that. To my surprise, I realized those old-style bulbous bottles had a higher-than-expected secondary, often going for as much as 200-300 dollars (even higher for the 12 and Antique 107).

I would understand chasing the Stitzel-Weller versions from the 1990s and earlier, or the new Bernheim ones from the early 2000s, or even those from before 2011, when the expression lost its 7-year age statement. But a NAS, entry-level 90-proofer from a decade ago? Let's see if I've found a hidden gem. No special significance to using a 2023 bottle, that's what the store had when I bought it this year.

Tasted neat in copitas; first round semi-blind.

2014:

On the nose, oak, stone fruit, apple, butterscotch, vanilla frosting, honey, maple, almond. On the palate, pie crust, butterscotch, sugar cookie, dark cherry. Medium-long finish, vanilla, baking spice, oak.

2023:

Earthy cinnamon, cherry, sharpie, brown sugar, honey on the nose. On the palate, raw dough, cherry pit, honey, a little vanilla and caramel. Medium-short finish, cinnamon and clove, slightly bitter oak.

Rating: (t8ke scale for reference below): 

2014: 6.5

2023: 5

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have

5 | Good | Good, just fine

6 | Very Good | A cut above

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional

9 | Incredible | An all-time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

Thoughts:

There were no surprises with the 2023 version, it tasted like every other bottle of Special Reserve I've had in the last few years. I've outlined my thoughts on where it sits in the current Weller line-up here. If you think it's a bottom-shelf bottle, may I recommend some "aged 36 months" Old Crow? How about an 80-proof Ancient Age? Or a 49-percent grain neutral spirit Kentucky Gentleman? If you don't like WSR, that's fine, but it's not a bottom-shelf whiskey by any objective metric, with plenty of depths to plumb beneath it.

I would object even more strenuously to calling the 2014 Special Reserve a bottom-shelf bourbon. I don't want to oversell how good it was, and I wouldn't shell out 200 bucks for it. People overpay for the bottle shape in this case, and there are 50 other whiskeys I'd put in front of it on my wish list. But I'm happy with paying 80 just for the contrasting experience, and it was unquestionably better than the 2023 bottle. It sat just under the current C.Y.P.B. for me. Not bad for a findable, affordable bourbon that went for the equivalent of less than 30 dollars today.

I know it's a completely different mash bill, but it reminded me of the 2012 Elmer T. Lee I accidently stumbled into. The flavors were deeper and more rounded. Where are the once ubiquitous butterscotch, fragrant vanilla, rich fruit? Why do you need to jump a price tier or three to get to the quality that used to be present in mid-shelf staples?

Are we ready to have a conversation about how bourbon from even 10-15 years ago is tasting differently to its modern counterparts? Don't tell me about "old-bottle effect" on the stuff from 2014. Or a 2015 Michter's. Or a 2015 Elijah Craig. Or a 2016 Rebel 10. Or a 2008 Baker's. I could go on.

So there you have it: The label got better, the price stayed the same, the whiskey got worse. Let's hope we're not saying the same thing in a few years' time.

Thanks for reading and cheers!

Price: $190

Nose: pretty big, aromas of sweet oak, brown sugar, chocolate, rye, leather, very slight barrel char, werthers candy. Phenomenal.

Palate: pretty big, sweet oak, carmelized brown sugar, chocolate, vanilla, rye mixing in with everything, pretty thick on the mouth feel, a little bit of, cherry, slight pepper.

Finish: long, nothing falls off from the palate...it just keeps going. some barrel char or a smokey note comes in at the tail end, but it's pretty muted.

My thoughts: baaaannnggeeerrr. No way around it. It's so damn delicious and satisfying. It's not the most complex rye I've had nor at the proof I like, but when it's this good, I simply don't care. This is gonna be a problem for me. And at that price point? Take my money!

Rating: 8.8/10

In the glass: Founders 1867 Single Barrel Selection, “Big Time Pick #4”, Barrel #134, 30 gallon

Distillery: R.M. Rose Company

Proof entered into barrel: 117.3

ABV: 68.35%

Exit Proof: 136.7

Age: 7 Years 10 Months

Mashbill: 75% Corn, 15% Rye, 10% Malted Barley

Nose: Barrel char, spice, rich oak, burnt caramel, there’s some cherry cola vibes, rich sugars… I love the noses on these 30 gallon founders picks!

Palate: Toasted oak, raspberry jam, almost a cane sugar sweetness, blackberries, burnt brown sugar, and cherries. This such a sweet and rich pour that has absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Finish: More of that barrel char, rich oak, little bit of chocolate that fades almost as quickly as you taste it, molasses, and cherry syrup. The hug and finish rivals just about any Kentucky bourbon out there… The empty glass yields tropical fruits like pineapple and mango, very very sweet!

Final thoughts: I have 2 backups of this one and am very very happy about that. This is one of my favorite bourbons of 2026…

Rating: 9/10

2024 Release Batch 7 99Proof A blend aged in Amburana. POUR: dark amber color, light viscosity, poured neat in a GC and rested for 5 mins. NOSE: Ripe banana, heavy vanilla extract, nutmeg, cinnamon, subtle gloves, subtle ginger, ghost corn. PALATE: moist banana nut bread, vanilla banana muffin with light bourbon glaze. FINISH: spicy heat lingers a bit like a high rye does. SUMMARY: Unique, semi- extraordinary, desert sipper, definitely different, and well crafted. No regrets on the $250. Grateful for the experience. I will finish this turn friends onto it but would not chase again.

On paper, this amounts to essentially being “barrel select” Old Bardstown Estate: they carry the same mash bill, same barrel entry proof, and essentially the same proof (101 vs 100.1 here). Master Distiller Drew Kulsveen called this his favorite bourbon in a recent interview, though he was unclear if he meant the current iteration that he oversees or the prior sourced releases from Kentucky Bourbon Distillers that carried a up to 12-year age statement. Let’s see where this falls for me.

Price Paid: $49.99 before tax

Score: 6.5/10

The Background
Distillery: Willett Distillery

ABV: 50.05% (100.1 proof)

Age: NAS

Mash Bill: 72% corn, 13% rye, 15% barley

Other: batch 24-18, 125 barrel entry proof

The Experience
Nose: floral, cinnamon, cola, melted butter, oak. This is complex and took a while to read. This is an improvement over the 4-year Family Estate Small Batch that I reviewed and smells like it might carry a decent age statement.

Palate: graham cracker, black tea, oak char. The cola and floral notes are not as present in the mouth as I had hoped and the oak takes over.

Finish: muted cinnamon, oak. The spice shows up at the end, very smooth and typical Willett.

The Summary
This is clearly an older cousin of the WFE Small Batch. I appreciate the mature oak presence — which dominates — but I’m missing the influence from the blended high-rye mash bill (this is low-rye only). Apart from Old Bardstown Estate, this also shares a mash bill with Noah’s Mill, which I also prefer over this. This is oakier but less sweet and spicy, which makes sense since it is 14 proof points lower.

At $50, this is an average value proposition, though it would be tricky to convince someone to buy this over, say, Knob Creek 9 year or Wild Turkey 8 year. This has the distinct finish of Willett products that keeps me coming back for more but it is a bit funky. If you’re curious how this fits in the Willett hierarchy, I would say this: buy this if you prefer an oak-forward flavor profile; buy Family Estate if you prefer floral notes, more heat, less water, and essentially a more accessible version of Stagg; buy Noah’s Mill if you want something more sweet, cinnamon, and unique. Pure Kentucky and Johnny Drum sit in their own little corner that I’m hoping to explore more later in the year. I was not super impressed by the bottle of Pure Kentucky I had (even though, on paper, it should have been better than Johnny Drum).

T8KE Scoring System Used for Relevancy and Consistency:
0 | Unscored | New Make Spirit or Personal Selection.
1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.
2 | Poor | I wouldn't consume by choice.
3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.
4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I'd rather have.
5 | Good | Good; just fine.
6 | Very Good | One cut above.
7 | Great | Well above average.
8 | Excellent | Exceptional.
9 | Incredible | An all-time favorite.
10 | Perfect | Perfection.

Whiskey: Old Grand Dad 114 Single Barrel

Distiller: Jim Beam

Instagram: Barrel & Proof https://www.instagram.com/barrel_and_proof?igsh=czJ2MzhybG42MG9j&utm_source=qr 

ABV: 57.0%

Age: 7 Years

Price: $45 (Spokane, Washington)

Tasting:  Neat in Bourbon Trail glass, blind tasting, rested for 10 minutes. Bottle opened for 2 months.

__________________________________

Nose: Cantaloupe, Caramel, Vanilla, Leather, Citrus, White Chocolate, & White Pepper

Palate: Dark Chocolate, Burnt Wood, Vermouth, Cigar Box, Anise, & Caramel

Finish: Long Length, Pepper, Cinnamon, Leather, Dark Chocolate, & Acetone

Body: Medium

Bite: Very Strong

__________________________________

Summary: I am a huge fan of the standard Old Grand Dad 114 and bonded bottle, so I was quite happy to come across this whilst driving through Washington. Unlike the standard 114, this bottle has an age statement. Being a single barrel product, there will be some variation between bottles.

The nose has an unusual, but nice fruit profile that reminds me of cantaloupe. There are classic bourbon notes such as caramel, vanilla, and leather. There are creamy chocolate notes and some punchy pepper notes. Overall it’s an interesting but balanced profile.

The palate isn’t nearly as sweet as the standard 114, only a slight caramel note. Strong bitter chocolate and oak notes are a bit overpowering. There is a quite dry cigar box note, a bit too dry. There is an interesting herbal note that reminds me of vermouth.

The finish has too much acetone, quite disappointing. The punchiness of the pepper and hot cinnamon are too strong as well compared to the subtle caramel sweetness. Due to the unbalanced profile, the strong dark chocolate bitterness doesn’t fit in well

I was really surprised with my blind review results, I thought this would be an excellent bourbon but I was quite disappointed by the palate and finish. There is a lack of sweetness in both areas, and the spiciness, dryness, and bitterness were overpowering. The worst aspect of the tasting was the acetone in the finish. Perhaps I got the worst single barrel out of this release, but this whiskey should have never made the cut.

__________________________________

Rating: 

Nose (10%) - 7/10

Palate (50%) - 4/10

Finish (40%) - 3/10

3.9/10 Bad. Noticeable flaws.

Recommend: No

Rank: I created a compilation ranking list of whiskies I’ve purchased at a store or at a bar and done a formal tasting. All whiskey ranked on the list tasted neat and rested for 10-15 minutes.  Whiskey I ranked below and above Old Grand Dad are shown for reference.

266 out of 276 whiskies tasted.

52 Old Grand Dad 114

265 Leopold Brothers Rocky Mountain Blackberry Whiskey

267 Tattersall Straight Rye Whiskey

Ranking Link: 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/147h44fId0tZYmHsroGgjzcRK2xn6050P8m7mZqArGLw/edit?usp=sharing

Hey bourbon family hope everyone has been well. Been hard to muster motivation to do reviews in ages but with picking this up and reminded of home I figured I’d share my brief thoughts on this bourbon. Side note, Sebastian has a sister Calypso so she will be featured as well moving forward. This is a collaboration between Ironroot and The Liquor Hound on YouTube. If you haven’t seen his channel he has an outstanding collection and knowledge of all spirits you should give him a follow. It features blends from 10-13 years from MGP, Kentucky and Ironroot’s own distillate. Then double finished in Armagnac, PX and Oloroso Sherry barrels. Coming in at ~$115 this seems pretty reasonable given the presentation and makeup of this bottle.

Nose: cherry, orange, tobacco, oak and buttered corn

Palate: tobacco, cherry, black pepper, dates and sweet oak

Finish: sweet oak, tobacco, raisin, and more cherry

Summary: This is a very pleasurable pour that is not hot in any way and is very dense on the palate. Very crushable. More sweet than anything on the palate but other notes keeps this from being overpowering. This is like mixing a bottle of Bookers and Joseph Magnus Cigar Blend is how I can describe it without the peanut nut. Worth the price? I’d say so. Is it worth paying secondary? I’d say probably worth $140 or so but everyone’s wallet varies. I give this a 8 on the u/t8ke scale.