-
What defines bourbon whiskey?
I certainly am aware of the regs per BAM regarding bourbon. Over the Memorial Day weekend I got to thinking about the 51% requirement (and this could go for any name whiskey — rye, wheat, malt). Must the mash meet the percentage requirements or does it only matter what goes in the bottle. For example, can I ferment, distill, and store individual new make spirits then blend (to the appropriate percentage requirements) / proof immediately prior to bottling and meet the BAM definition? Furthermore what does the 51% actually mean? Grain weight pre-mashing? If so I can find no definite supporting statement. Your thoughts?
-
11 Replies
-
As I have understood it from the TTB the answer on mixing 100% corn, with 100% rye, 100% barley, etc, to a consistency of 51% corn still will not qualify it as bourbon. No idea why. I love the idea of doing it that was as you can blend to exactly what you want later. Maybe 6 year old corn with 4 year old barley and 2 year old rye is the best bourbon. TTB won’t really let us do it and call it bourbon. I believe the answer to what the % is would be dry weight pre-mashing. If you get a better, ie, you can do it, answer, please post it alone with the agent that said it was fine.
Cheers,
Jeff
-
Jeff,
What got me onto this tangent was that I was reading the website of New Riff Distilling in Newport, KY. There is an odd little blurb saying:
ABOUT OUR COLUMN STILL
At nearly 60 feet tall and 24 inches in diameter, the column still will produce about a dozen 53-gallon barrels of Kentucky whiskey per day. It’s fed by two silos—one holding corn and the other rye—and, in classic Kentucky style, the column feeds into a squat doubler still. But we also have a unique side conveyor that allows us to add any grain at will into the distilling process. While we focus on producing bourbon and rye whiskeys, you can look forward to a range of innovative Kentucky whiskeys pouring out of our column still.
– See more at: http://newriffdistilling.com/column-still/#sthash.nQO5daYC.dpuf
The part that intrigued me is But we also have a unique side conveyor that allows us to add any grain at will into the distilling process
What exactly does that mean? Are they dynamically mixing/matching mash as it’s pumped into the column? That doesn’t sound correct as they mention storage silos. Perhaps they are dynamically augering grist into mash cookers??
As for the mixing new make — you’re onto exactly what I was thinking — mix the best 100% spirit for bourbon and as long as you don’t overstate the age (e.g. age statement would be the lowest of the constituent spirits) I would think it fine. I’ll see if I can get a definitive response from TTB (I know, humorous).
Eric
-
My guess is you could call the TTB over and over again until you get the response you like, then document it. You almost never get the same response twice (assuming you talk to a different person),
-
The BAM accounts for what you’re referring to under the blended whiskey type. The BAM type description for bourbon whiskey states that it must be produced “from a fermented mash of not less than 51 percent corn”. Once it leaves your production account, you note the type (in Part III) and what raw material you used to produce it (in Part VI) on the Production Report. If you then take varying whiskies from your storage account and mix them to produce another whiskey in your processing account you must label it blended bourbon whiskey (if it’s bourbon) as described in the BAM “Blended whisky produced in the U.S. containing not less than 51% on a proof gallon basis (excluding alcohol derived from added harmless coloring, flavoring or blending materials*) straight bourbon whisky”. I read the New Riff excerpt as referring to grain entering the brewing process not finished whiskey entering the distilling process or bottling process.
-
Duly noted. Thanks Ned. Most of my BAM reading occurs during bouts of insomnia — it’s a sure cure. I appreciate the clarification. Re: New Riff — seems the marketing department substituted “distilling” for “mashing”.
Thanks.
-
I hear you man, I got a bit nappy myself looking over it this morning!
-
Duly noted. Thanks Ned. Most of my BAM reading occurs during bouts of insomnia — it’s a sure cure. I appreciate the clarification. Re: New Riff — seems the marketing department substituted “distilling” for “mashing”.
Thanks.
Yes. Yes, they did.
For my part (being something of a purist) the idea of producing whiskey from a 60′ column still strikes me as heresy.
“Whiskey should taste like more than alcohol and wood.”
-me
-
>> For my part (being something of a purist) the idea of producing whiskey from a 60′ column still strikes me as heresy.
How in the world are they pulling it off at under 160 pf?? Must be pumping in beer at around .05% ABV.
-
>> For my part (being something of a purist) the idea of producing whiskey from a 60′ column still strikes me as heresy.
How in the world are they pulling it off at under 160 pf?? Must be pumping in beer at around .05% ABV.
They’re no doubt cooling the column. I’ve seen Barton’s column work – it’s not 60′ tall (probably more like 30ish) but same general principle.
-
They’re no doubt cooling the column.
Although no expert Im generally familiar with the contributions Mr. Coffey has made. However I can’t figure what cooling the column would do. Wouldn’t that just induce more reflux in the column? Did the cool the stripping or rectification section? I dont think I’ve ever seen a continuous column with tray bypass mechanisms but it’s not beyond imagination. Suppose I should just head over to Cincy for an afternoon and check it out.
Eric
-
>> For my part (being something of a purist) the idea of producing whiskey from a 60′ column still strikes me as heresy.
How in the world are they pulling it off at under 160 pf?? Must be pumping in beer at around .05% ABV.
If there were only 4 plates in that 60 feet, then less than 160 proof would be easy
Log in to reply.
English 
Spanish 
German 
French 
Russian