![]() For examples, see my reviews of Lost Spirits Ouroboros and the Abominations. If it tastes better and is priced lower than equivalent traditionally-aged whiskies, I am willing to participate. Just like my stance on NAS, my stance on “technology aging” is that the proof is in the pudding. Personally, I have now tasted two of these “technology-aged” products, and have attempted to maintain an open mind on the subject. “Balderdash!” they might say (or maybe something more colorful). So imagine the reaction that such a person would have to the idea that you could replicate some of that aging effect via the use of various rapid technological processes, including the use of intense light, pressure, or ultrasonic vibration, and that the effect of oak aging could be induced over the course of hours, days, or weeks rather than years or decades. Just look at the NAS debate to discover how much barrel-aging means to the majority of whisky appreciators. Most people agree that oak has pronounced positive effects on grain-based spirits, and that those effects tend to become more positive the more years are spent in the barrel. ![]() The usual stance of haughty affront is somewhat understandable when you consider that much of whisky’s appeal comes from its romantic associations with the little-understood magic of oak barrel aging. If you want to start a slap-fight amongst self-styled whisky aficionados, all you have to do is bring up the recent phenomenon of “rapid aged” whiskies, otherwise known as “technology aged” whiskies.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |