Barterhouse 20 Year Bourbon

Blind bourbon tasting. Nose: Woody and quite toasty with significant dry wood character and tannins, but hardly any creosote. Doesn't seem particularly herbal. Some orange peel, a bit floral. Sweetness emerges from the toastiness, not brown sugar, caramel, or vanilla. Eventually, faint floral vanilla appears with the orange peel, then a little caramel. A bit of woody spice, but not many specific spices beyond that. Overall profile suggests George Dickel Bottled In Bond and an older bourbon, perhaps 12-15 years old. Nice balance and enjoyment, but only average complexity. After a very long time, a touch of brown sugar on the nose. Palate: Toasty with tannins leading to wood, then orange sweetness returns to connect everything. Some vanilla follows the orange. Less rich than expected; toastiness manifested mostly as wood. Detecting some of that Dickel vitamin flavor. Quite a lot of tannic wood, possibly over-oaked. Still enjoyable, but perhaps should have been barreled less or moved to a new barrel for more youthful flavors. Finish: Becomes woodier and more tannic. Cinnamon lingers with the dry, tannic wood, not really present on the palate. Conclusion: Side-by-side, George Dickel Bottled In Bond (rated 16/23) is richer and less tannic, with substantial similarity. This is more bitter, like a weaker Dickel. Given the similarity, this is likely a Dickel product. Comparing with a 15-year single barrel Dickel: the 15 is richer with more distinct flavors. This has more minerality, slightly more sweetness, but is flatter. Differences are minor; considering the 15 was a neck pour, they could be from the same barrel. Comparing with Resilient 15 (rated 18/23), another single barrel Dickel: Resilient has more sweetness and complexity due to less wood influence. Resilient selects good barrels, while Dickel's own bottlings are decent but slightly over-oaked. Comparing with Elijah Craig Small Batch (rated 15/23), usually seen as mature and tannic: Elijah Craig is sweet and young, with a jarring, messy sweetness akin to poorly made, short-aged bourbons. This is a very mature spirit. Final assessment: A 15. Enjoyable but flawed. Could be a low 16 or down to a 12, but enjoyment warrants a 15. Many thanks to a friend for sharing this; it's the oldest bourbon tried so far, offering great perspective for future tastings.

Nose: Rich caramel, brown sugar, anise, clove, dill, cedar, cardamom, cherry, herbal notes, dark chocolate, raisin toast, tangerine, tobacco, leather, polished oak, with a moderate ethanol burn. Taste: Tannic oak, black tea, black pepper, rich caramel, brown sugar, burnt toast, clove, spearmint, anise, cherry, bitter chocolate, herbal notes, toasted walnut, leather, tobacco, with a moderate alcohol bite. The medium-length finish features burnt sugar, tannic oak, and bitter baking spice flavors. This is the fifth of nine blind tastings. It begins with a deep, rich aroma of dark caramel, rye spice, and raisin toast. Its subtle sweetness is well-balanced by pronounced herbal and oaky, leathery scents. Unfortunately, the palate is a letdown. Overpowering tannic oak, burnt toast, and black tea flavors dominate, obscuring any subtler complexities that might be present. I should have learned from yesterday's experience about guessing a whiskey's age, but I'm taking a chance and asserting that this is a very old bourbon. It tastes as though it has spent far too much time in a barrel. Given such a magnificent nose, it's disappointing that the palate doesn't match the same quality. So, what are we drinking tonight? Barterhouse 20 Year. I was correct! This is indeed very old whiskey. In fact, I believe it's the oldest bourbon I've ever sampled. Major congratulations to the provider of this experience! It might be a long time before I taste another American whiskey this aged.

Oak on the nose, but not overpowering. This is the first time trying this bottle. With a little time to breathe, it transitions to notes of dusty peanut shells with some floral and vanilla elements emerging. The initial sip is smooth and oak-forward, perhaps even less so than some 12-year bourbons (like Knob Creek 12, which is considerably cheaper and widely available). It has a medium body on the palate with flavors of mild oak and cedar, tobacco, floral notes, and still a hint of peanut butter on the medium finish. As someone who really appreciates bold, high-proof bourbons, especially Knob Creek single barrel selections, I found myself wondering if a higher proof would improve my enjoyment. Don't get me wrong, it's a solid drink. For its stated age, you can find more pronounced oak flavor in younger spirits. I found this to be balanced, and perhaps with more time, it will develop further, ideally becoming better rather than worse. We'll see.

Aroma (3.75): Very mellow with not much happening. Perhaps some caramel and maple syrup. Not a bad aroma but it just kind of exists. Taste (4.25): Maple syrup, pancakes, and butter. I enjoyed it. Definitely a sweeter spirit, but it tastes like a hearty breakfast. It's not intricate but it is welcoming. Much better than the aroma. Finish (4.0): Ends with a puff of smoke, but not a natural smokiness. It's almost like liquid smoke. It's oaky and lingers, but the "liquid smoke" aspect was a bit off-putting. It's not bad, just not my top pick, but I could see you enjoying it if you want hotcakes and syrup in a glass. The 20 years might have been too much time in the barrel as this is a bit subdued for me. This would greatly improve with a higher proof. The flavors are simply not present for me.

This is genuinely the first time I've encountered Orphan Barrels. It appears Diageo has some special, distinct "orphan" Barrels holding various whiskies from unrevealed distilleries. It's actually a compelling narrative, as they claim these are all very limited releases, and once they're gone, well... they won't return. Bottled at 45.1% ABV. Ok. The story is one thing. The tasting and nosing notes are another. Caramel on the nose. Metallic coins, crème brûlée. A bit of toffee. Vanilla. Some refined aroma notes. On the palate, quite herbal with butterscotch. Apricots. Aftertaste is medium to long, very pleasant. It's a decent bourbon. But it's not Pappy. Not a John E. Fitzgerald 20yo. Compared to those two, this one is acceptable. 85 out of 100.

Considering the cost, I expected more, but it's very drinkable and perfectly balanced. It has many typical bourbon notes... some wood, vanilla, a bit of caramel, but not overwhelmingly so. I like it, but the price is unbelievable. I'd dock points for that, but since a friend provided it, I didn't make the purchase 🤷‍♂️.