A comparative tasting of four barrels.
Tl;dr: Hypothesis correct, you can’t make a consistent tasting single barrel product, some bottles of Blanton’s are far better than others.
“The Original Single Barrel Bourbon”, Blanton’s is a well-esteemed and highly sought after bottle, made even more covetable by its collectible horse toppers.
The card affixed to the bottle explains that each barrel is unique, and selected only when the master distiller believes it deserves the Blanton’s label. Barrels, as we know, can differ greatly, so I decided to plunge into the reserves and see how four individual barrels of Blanton’s compare, and assess whether the horse-bourbon sought after by ‘taters and tastemakers alike holds up under objective (ish) scrutiny.
All bottles were 375ml, opened at the same time.
Sample 1: Barrel 878, rick 32, dumped 6/5/24
Sample 2: Barrel 1084, rick 48, dumped 12/4/23
Sample 3: Barrel 81, rick 65, dumped 9/29/23
Sample 4: Barrel 1301, rick 44, dumped 1/1/24 (no days off at the distillery, it seems).
I found a definite, if subtle, difference in color of the whiskey from sample to sample. Sensible, given the unique nature of barrels and the fact that color correcting isn’t allowed in bourbon.
The aroma of the four was consistent in smelling like pretty solid bourbon. A little more heat off the nose than I would usually expect from 93 proof whiskey on samples 2 and 4, but reasonable on the others.
I found 1 to have more fruity, ester-y stuff going on, a little bit of cola in 2, and more red fruit and vanilla on 3 and 4, but all 4 were fairly consistent in presenting the typical notes of bourbon; cola, vanilla, maybe some apple and pear, and obvious oak influence.
On tasting, the assumption I started with was proven; these were all VERY different whiskies. In fact, out of the samples, only number 3 would I jump for another sip.
I decided to put it to panel by including this tasting in my Office Hours series at Neat Bird. I had 5 people come through the tasting, and we universally agreed that 3 was the favorite, with sample 4 being a close second. After opening up a bit, all of the whiskeys showed a little more character, with sample 2 turning into a pretty unbearable butterscotch bomb. This was universally the least favorite. Samples 1 and 4 evolved a fair bit, and ultimately tasted like perfectly fine bourbon. Delicious, but not better than my general litmus test of Russell’s Reserve. Number 3 was fantastic, however, with rich notes of red fruit and cola, balanced heat, and delicious cocoa on the finish.
Now, obviously such variance in taste is to be expected. Whiskey is, after all, an agricultural product, and there are near infinite factors that impact the final flavor and aroma. Sazerac is notoriously cagey about how much production information they share, so it’s left to speculation to guess whether the proof the whiskey enters the barrel is always the same, or what the average barrel proof coming out of aging winds up being. What we can confirm though is that each barrel is a bit of a dice roll.
More research to be done here… for now, what are your thoughts on a product with intentional inconsistency? Is it a risk you’re willing to take?
Let us know! Next up, we’ll put 3 barrels of Wild Turkey Kentucky Spirit to the same test. I’m biased towards that distillery, so it’ll be interesting to see how they stack up, especially since the bottle at barrel strength instead of toning down to 93 as Blanton’s does.