One of the exciting things about getting my blog up and running is having a place to post some longer-form whiskey reviews. (I’ve done some micro reviews on Twitter.) My first is my review of Baker’s! (Actually, one I’ve had stored in a spreadsheet for some time.) But the real question is, what style for the reviews? I tried a pretty long, structured version like Whiskey Wonka or Bourbon Enthusiast, but should I go for a shorter, less formal review like Sku or John Hansell? Longer, informal, more narrative reviews like Drinkhacker or Scotch & Ice Cream? What sort of reviews do you like to read?
All posts by Matthew J. Brown
Baker’s Bourbon Review
Age: 7 years
Proof: 107°
Price: $43.00
Volume:750mL
Color: Medium-dark amber
Nose: Dry sawdust and hay. A splash of water brings out some nice sweet and floral notes.
Palate: Starts with candied fruit that evolves quickly into heat and spice, burns in the nose. The 107° really shows on this one. A splash of water helps, brings out lot of caramel, but it’s almost too sweet.
Finish: Nice and long, a lot of black pepper and oak.
Overall: Baker’s is a good bourbon, less rye than a lot of the Jim Beam small batch bourbons. It turns out to be a tricky bourbon to drink, though, since the heat really comes through when you take it neat, while water makes it almost too sweet. The big problem with Baker’s is the price: you can get better bourbon’s for less. Compare this to Old Weller Antique, which is the same proof without as much heat, definitely sweeter but easier drinking and more interesting overall, and usually only runs $25 or less.
Rating: B+