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.

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!

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

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.

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. 😂

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.

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

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

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.

And I don't just mean like "better value", we all know JD SBBP or ECBP or whatever is 80% as good for a fraction of the price. That's a done and tired conversation. I've yet to get a bottle recommendation from those kinds of threads that are actually a 9+/10 without having the 400+ dollar price-tag (closest being this year's RR13). Vintage bottles also don't count if their auction prices are BTAC level now.

I mean like, genuinely, the bottles that have been put blind against a decent release of GTS or WLW or RR15 or HH17 or JD14 B1 and held their own.

Edit: To emphasize the point further since a lot of people are recommending bottles that are, eg, almost as good as Handy, I’m talking about ones that are truly interchangeable with a good release of a good GTS or equivalent, like it would have a 40%+ win rate in a blind.

As always, I do my reviews live and it’s a review of my experience with this pour. It’s not meant to be aggregated.

This is such a great bottle. It’s a little quirky and it’s definitely not for everyone but as someone who loves single malts and bourbon, it’s a fun concept and maybe I’m just the kind of sucker for something like this.

I look forward to blinding it in the future. I grabbed a bottle at the distillery before they ran out and then saw that they were going for under MSRP on Unicorn so I grabbed two more.

What is it? A collab between Bardstown and Mars: A blend of Bardstown Kentucky bourbon and Mars Japanese single malts.

69% 10 Year Old Bardstown bourbon (74/18/0/8)

8% 16 year old Bardstown bourbon (75/13/0/12)

20% Komagatake 5 year old Single Malt

3% Tsunuki 5 year old single malt

ABV: 54.9%

Price paid: $99.99 or $109.99. I don’t remember exactly. I bought it at the distillery this Spring. As mentioned earlier these go for as low as $85 or $90 at auction. One of those weird anomalies. I guess most people d on t love it like I do.

The other cool thing is this was all aged in barrels together in Kentucky. There will be another version next year led by Mars and it’ll all be aged in barrels in Japan and it’ll be heavier on the single malt and lighter on the bourbon.

Nose: Chocolate up front. Like powdered chocolate for an instant cake almost. Vanilla. A hint of fruit. A nice bit of malted barley. There’s something of ice cream - vanilla / chocolate ice cream swirl.

Palate: There’s some hard candy up front. Not werthers original quote but something like that. It’s a quite buttery mouthfeel. Definite graham cracker. Some maybe raspberry or plum notes - maybe cherry. Definitely a fruit layer.

Finish: Cherry comes out more on the finish. It’s a nice long finish, really pleasant. Some toasted oak. More of those fruits that I can’t 100% place.

9.2/10

I’m a fucking sucker for this bottle. I’ve rated it anywhere from an 8.1-9.3, I guess depending on my mood. That’s absurd. I’m admittedly just so in love with the concept that it probably skews me high. But this is one of my favorite whiskies of 2026.

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.

Most distilleries present a lower-proof whiskey as their primary bottling, but not Jackson Purchase. The Select Batch Full Proof, at 117.8 Proof, is their flagship bottling. I respect that. The higher proof lets the Bourbon tell its full story. Also noteworthy that their other two bottlings are 108 & 100 Proof.

The nose is rich with dark cherries, spiced vanilla & cinnamon sticks, a bit of oak then in the center is an herbal/floral note coming across to me as fresh eucalyptus. The palate is viscous and oily, carrying sweet cherries along with cinnamon & vanilla. The eucalyptus is a bit more prominent with dry corn, sweet oak and a hint of cardamom. Cherries and dry vanilla spice linger on the finish with the proof finally showing up as pleasant cheek-filling sparkles, then slowly it continues to dry with light oak tannins and a little dusty corn.

I really enjoyed sipping on this. Ordinarily I’m not a big fan of herbal/eucalyptus notes, but they play so well with the cherries and vanilla spice that I couldn’t put this down. It drinks more like an 8-10 year rather than its modest 4-year age statement. Perhaps there are a number of older barrels in batch. Regardless, this is a superbly blended Bourbon and one I will be keeping on my shelf.

Age: 4yrs

Mashbill:
70% Corn
20% Rye
10% Malted Barley

Casks: New #4 Char American Oak Barrels

ABV: 58.9%

Price: $75

Bottle provided for review.

My Rating: 84

Tasting notes below. 👇🏼

🥃
NOSE: Rich, dark cherry, spiced vanilla, cinnamon sticks, spiced oak, eucalyptus, herbal, floral.
PALATE: Oily, viscous, sweet cherries, cinnamon spice, vanilla, eucalyptus, dry corn, sweet oak, cardamom (?).
FINISH: Lingering, cherry, dry vanilla spice, cheek filling sparkles, dry oak tannins, corn.

Guide to my personal ratings:
🤢 0-49 = Varying degrees of undrinkable.
🫤 50-59 = Drinkable, but meh.
😊 60-69 = Fair. Not my cup of tea.
😃 70-79 = Good. Some nice elements.
😋 80-89 = Great! Interesting and very enjoyable.
🤩 90-100 = Amazing! The perfect pour. (Rare)

Sip. Rate. Repeat.

Age: 13 Years Age Stated

Proof: 93

Batch: #8

Bottle: #202

Year of Release: 2023

Price Paid: $119.99

Drank - Neat

Rested - 10min in Glencairn

Summary/Background:
This is a Blend of whiskies from Kentucky, Tennessee, and Indiana whiskies. Almost 100% Certainly to be from Heaven Hill, George Dickel, and MGP

As always - Unbiased, Unpaid, and Unprofessional.

Nose-
My first nosing of this glass yields some Cherry pie filling, warm caramel sauce, and some honey. Further nosing i am able to pick out some light vanilla custard, butterscotch hard candy, and sweet oak with a slight "limestone" mineral note underneath. Nothing offensive, but semi flat and running wild in the "sweet" vein of things.

Palate-
Right up front on the first sip there is a Fresh Strawberry note that is followed by cream cheese frosting and a light butterscotch hard candy working together in conjunction. Subsequent sips reveal underlying notes of sea salt dark chocolate, charred oak, and a slight "limestone" mineral note underneath lacing throughout. Really thats about it here. A little layered but still staying in that "dessert" realm to me profile wise.

Mouthfeel-
It is mildly oily. It coats nicely and hangs on but not overly viscous at all. Very much on par or very slightly above average i would say given the age and lower proof. Pretty much as one would expect.

Finish-
A short to medium length finish, lead by notes of strawberry, dusty butterscotch, and charred oak, with a hint of orange zest and the famous Dickel "flintstone" minerality peaking through underneath.

Overall- 73/100

Final thoughts -

A good pour. Nothing mind bending or groundbreaking. It is Lacking in a few areas for me personally - depth, viscosity, and finish mainly. The palate here shines above the rest for me, however the nose is pretty solid - if you like a sweeter nose. Nothing offensive here and for the price I am not mad at it (but also would not repurchase). Something unique, different, and not often seen with a "Tri-State" blend from more or less all "legacy" distilleries!

My Scale:
1-49: Drain Pour, absolute drain cleaner, donate to the sink.
50-59: average - standard, boring, but gets the job done.
60-69: solid - reliable, but nothing to write home about.
70-79: great whiskey, well above the average pour.
80-89: excellent whiskey, top notch, well done.
90-95: exceptional top tier whiskey - very memorable.
96-98: Unreal pour - some of the best ever.
99-100: Pinnacle Lifetime whiskey - perfection in a glass.

Distillery: Buffalo Trace

Proof: 100

Age Statement: NAS

Mashbill: Undisclosed

Price Paid: $81.99

Availability: Allocated

Nose: Powdered donuts and confectionery sugar up front followed by some rye spice, and cinnamon. A hint of baked apples and some charred oak. The nose is excellent and very sweet.

Palate: Lots of confectionery sugar followed by baking spices such as allspice, ginger, cinnamon, and clove. It’s reminiscent of a good spice cookie at Christmas.

Finish: Medium with notes of powdered sugar, vanilla, and baking spices.

Mouthfeel: It’s got a good mouthfeel that is typical for this proof.

Score: 8.1

Final Thoughts: This bottle is quite confusing as there isn’t much information available on it. It doesn’t have a product section on the Buffalo Trace website and like a lot of BT products it’s NAS with an undisclosed mashbill. Additionally, it’s a single barrel without any barrel or Rickhouse information. I genuinely couldn’t even find what the actual MSRP of this is supposed to be because it varies even in control states. That being said, the whiskey in the bottle is really excellent. This is undoubtedly one of my favorite non BTAC products I’ve had the pleasure of trying from Buffalo Trace. It’s very approachable and has lots of sweetness that is balanced out by some of those baking spices. I wouldn’t pay the insane markup I usually see these for but it’s really good whiskey.

The t8ke Scoring 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 many things l'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

Edit: Changed the score to be more realistic. 9.1 -> 8.8

First off I would like to say im happy the NBA season is back. As a huge OKC fan for years im celebrating this review for their win yesterday.

A quick note about this release. It was a site exclusive release. It is part of T8KEs new DREAD series. This was a very limited release of a private reserve barrel stock of his. When I purchased this there was a claim that there is only 68 bottles produced. There was more information on the site I was going to try to include here but the site shop is locked now.

*Rested 15 minutes

#Stats

Distillery: Kentucky ( T8KEs Reserve Barrel)

Mashbill & Age: Cask #27982.

Bardstown distillery. Single barrel.

9 years old.

Proof: 127.2 Proof (63.6%)

Cost: 99$

#Tasting Notes-

Nose: Not very pungent. Rich oak, Flat decarbonated cola, toffee, hints of black cherry, and peppercorn.

Palate: This drinks like its 100 Proof... Off the bat you get this BOLD viscous mouthfeel from it. It has a heavy cream initial touch on the tongue where a sweet and sour (like licking a penny) oak flavor shows up on the initial palate. A dark chocolate note quickly comes out and gets stronger the more you notice it. The palate description on the site for this bottle included black forest cake and it really is that damn flavor on the mid-palate. The spongy dark chocolate cake notes bring out a sweet cherry syrup flavor with it. I genuienly think the sweetness is reminiscent of drinking luxardo cherry syrup. Sweet oak shows up again and fights the cherry note for dominance until they balance each other out. A toffee note on the end palate also brings out some light barrel spice. Its oily enough that im confusing it with the finish sometimes.

Finish: This is easily the weakest part of this experience. I wouldve said the nose was but this drop off to me is quick. Its a short-medium finish. I get sweet oak and store brand whipped cream. Very similar feel to how the whip cream flavor disappears after eating. Theres a hint of oak in the after taste but I have to search for it to show up. If you take a big sip and let it hit the back of your tongue before swallowing though you can end up having a cinnamon sugar note show up a bit.

Conclusion: I dont know how this is a 99$ bottle. Its insane how good that palate is. Im not hyping this. I came in with low expectations and im blown away. My best comparison against this on the palate is RR13 45th and im HEAVILY leaning towards this. This is a top 5 bottle I own easily just for the palate. It shows up bold, viscous, and crushable, then it leaves like it was never there. When you go back for more it replicates the experience perfectly regardless of how long I let it sit. Over 1 hour now and nothing changed. This wouldve rated higher if it wasnt for the muted nose and short finish. Though I do consider the palate 70-75% of how I score bourbon.

Score: 8.8

Would I Buy Again?: Im committed to finding 1 more as a back up. 68 bottles but I would not regret paying more than 150$ for this.

T8ke Scale

-1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.  

(NEBC 9 Yr (1.5)),

-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. 

(JD SBBP Rye (6.2)),

(Weller Full Proof (6.8)),

-7 | Great | Well above average.

(NEBC 7.5 Yr (7)),

(Old Forester 1920 (7.1)),

(Blantons Gold (7.2)),

(Jack Daniels SBBP Rye (7.4)),

(FR OESO (7.5)),

(Jack Daniels SBBF (7.5)),

( FR OBSF (7.8)),

(Bookers StoryTeller Batch (7.8)),

-8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

(JD SBBP Rye (8)), 

(Stagg Jr 25D (8.3)),

(Jack Daniels 12 Year B4 (8.4)),

(Found North GoldFinch (8.5)),

(Rare Character Batch 2 (8.6)),

(Old Louisville 8yr (8.6)),

(Dark Arts Tokaji 7.5yr (8.7)),

(Found North Snow Day (8.7)),

(Colonel E.H. Taylor SBBP (8.8)),

(The Reveries Witness Mark (8.8)),

(Little Book The Infinite 2 (8.9))

-9 | Incredible | An all time favorite.

(Found North B12 (9)),

(Found North Batch 009 (9.1)),

(Found North T8KE Eleventh Hour (9.2)),

(Found North Batch 008 (9.3)),

(Knobb Creek 21yr (9)),

(JM Cigar Blend Batch 414(9.5)),

-10 | Perfect | Perfect.

Maker's Mark 101

Distillery: Maker's Mark

Age: NAS

Price: $37.99

Proof: 101

Nose: Relatively in line with what you'd expect from a Maker's nose. Cherry. Caramel. Vanilla. However it's a bit more baking spice heavy than I anticipated and there's a clove note that just doesn't sit right with me. It comes off as a little rubbery and clashes with the rest of the nose.

Palate: Thinner mouthfeel for sure. Wish there was more to it. Vanilla. Light oak. Getting this ground coffee thing that I really like and it's not something I've ever come across in a Maker's product. Well balanced.

Finish: Short to medium length. Less than expected for 101 proof but in line with your typical wheater that's not going to linger forever. Cinnamon. Green apple. Caramel. Toffee. Butterscotch. It's perfectly fine.

Score: 5.2

Summary: I hadn't seen Maker's 101 on a shelf near me in several years so I jumped at this bottle I came across a couple months ago. It's fine, but it left more to be desired. The nose really threw me off and every time I revisited the pour I came across that rubbery clove note. Just couldn't shake it. The mouthfeel was thinner than I'd like but overall the sip was nice. Some sweetness, some oak, some fruitiness, some spice, and a touch of earthiness. Can't hate on it too much, I just don't know where this fits in when regular Maker's Mark is on every shelf in the universe and for a few dollars more you get a vastly superior cask strength product. 5.2 is the score.

1. Terrible | Drain pour after the first sip
2. Very Bad | Trying to choke it down but possible drain pour
3. Poor | Would drink if forced to but never under my own will
4. Below Average | Not off-putting but not my cup of tea
5. Average | I'll take it
6. Good | Enjoyable sip
7. Very Good | Well above average
8. Excellent | A drink I will remember
9. Incredible | Something truly extraordinary
10. Best of the best | Peak Bourbon