Joseph Magnus Cigar Blend Bourbon

We're revisiting blend 264, a bottle now retailing for $230, though it's out there if you look. I guess that's something. We were unimpressed with batch 110 of this cigar blend previously, but a friend mentioned she had a strategy using younger bourbon stock to restore its former glory. Let's see if it succeeded. Be warned - this comparison will be extensive. Batch 264 - Upon first smell, there's a substantial presence of leather and oak, aged in those armagnac casks. Delicate notes of winter greens emerge from a robust high-rye spice. There's a subtle alcohol and metallic scent, almost like slightly fermented fruit, but it's not unpleasant here, just distinct. The rich wood and leather notes are truly nice, complemented by pleasant vanilla. Hints of red berries and a touch of orange citrus appear. My initial impression is that it's a wonderful aroma, though not as rich or old-world as I recall from superior batches. Taste - It's challenging to isolate a single flavor note initially. The sheer presence of this spirit is undeniable. It delivers a massive flavor impact that coats the palate. It's truly a showstopper. It begins light and fruity with strong vanilla notes, reminiscent of older bourbons. It shifts to citrus and slightly tart fruits in the mid-palate, concluding with a long-lasting finish of tobacco and smoked oak. The overall sensation is rich wood, almost like dark rum with vanilla creamer over oak, finishing with tobacco. I suspect the youngest bourbons in this batch are around 9 years old, possibly younger than those in batch 110. Regardless, it presents as more aged and offers more finishing character. Perhaps wetter casks or a slightly extended finishing period contributed to its richness? While I don't believe it matches the legendary quality of the past, it is undeniably outstanding. Based on my scoring system, where 4.0 is the maximum and an additional point is reserved for exceptional whiskies that challenge conventions, I'm awarding this an excellent 3.75 and contemplating a 4.0. The cigar blend has returned, though perhaps not to legendary status. Now, for a comparison: batches 28, 42, and 110. From the initial nosing, it's clear these belong to the same family. Batch 110 immediately feels the thinnest, with more upfront sweetness and less oak and spice on the finish. It strongly evokes young MGP notes on the finish, contrasting with the richer, more complex spirit upfront. Batch 42 is perhaps the most aromatic, delivering a powerful, rich wave of sweetness upfront, followed by heavy oak and leather on the finish. Batch 28 is distinguished by very rich oak and a substantial cigar backbone. It practically *is* the cigar! Comparatively, it also offers subtle walnut notes. Moving to the 264, my perception of increased finishing in this batch is confirmed by the experience, as the finished notes are particularly prominent. The vanilla also stands out significantly. In this comparison, it's almost dessert-like. Taste - I had truly hoped that time in the bottle had improved batch 110, but alas, it has not. It's slightly sharp upfront and lacks refinement. It's not bad, but the finish is also wanting; not due to lack of length, but rather quality. Batch 42, much like its aroma, explodes from the glass. It's exceptionally good, and the finish is a flavor explosion. Yet, its approach is smoother and more silky than batch 110. It's refined, aged, mature, and still a sleeping giant as the alcohol content sneaks up on the finish. This is how I prefer my whiskey! Now for batch 28; it's stately and mature like batch 42 upfront, with less sweetness and a more drying sensation. This carries through to the finish with notes of dried figs and leaves. It evokes an autumn day and a worn bomber jacket in a barn filled with tobacco. It brings back memories of my friend's farm growing up. Is batch 28 superior to 42? Possibly. But batch 28 is my current happy place. The most challenging aspect of this comparison is the extended finish of batches 42 and 28; you might forget the last pour by the time they conclude. Returning to batch 264: Oh man... I apologize, but the youthful notes and that rye character are pulling me away from my zone of enjoyment. It's ironic, as I believe this is a decent age statement for 36% rye MGP, but it simply feels young next to those two. The finishing also falters here. Refined upfront with a great mouthfeel, but it's a significant step back. Going back to batch 110, it's almost like drinking pure alcohol. Conclusion - The cigar blend has not returned to its former self, not by a long shot. That said, I believe we've made considerable progress. The added finishing notes provide a pleasant sweetness, and there appears to be a slight increase in age, contributing to a more refined upfront experience. I don't think you'll dwell on how much better the older bottles were with this one, unless you deliberately compare them as I have. Unlike batch 110, where the flaws are glaring. I feel confident assigning scores of 4.0-4.25 to batches 28 and 42, and the new batch is closer to a 3.75, though I might consider a 3.5. In any case, I'm very pleased with the direction of the Cigar Blend. Hopefully, with time, more mature bourbons will be incorporated to achieve the desired result. In the meantime, whatever secret technique the distiller is employing has this whiskey closely aligned with the older batches. It's just not built with the same quality components, which holds it back somewhat. I also note that batches 110 and 264 have lower proofs than the older batches. I'm unsure of the reason, but I felt it worth mentioning. Age could certainly be a factor. Ah, value... $220-240 seems to be the retail price I've seen, excluding secondary market markups. It's fair to slightly below fair value in my opinion. I would purchase it again at this price, but I'm not enthusiastic about it.

This has been quite elusive for me. I saw it available a few years back, hesitated because of the cost, and haven't seen it since... until now. The price is still a hurdle. Batch 113, 57.8% ABV. Amber color, likely partly due to triple cask finishing. I had assumed this was entirely MGP, but apparently, it includes some Kentucky bourbon. The aroma supports the KY component – reminiscent of Four Roses, with cherry and floral notes, some light caramel, and slightly dusty oak. It does evolve, however, and MGP characteristics emerge later with hints of dill, eucalyptus, cacao, and tobacco. The question arises: what flavors come from the base bourbons themselves versus the casks? There's a slight mustiness I attribute to the armagnac, the cacao and buttery sweetness from cognac, and the brighter fruit notes might be from the sherry (perhaps a PX?). Some of these influences are also present on the palate. Regarding taste, it follows the nose with a pleasant warmth but little sharpness. The body is lighter but still coats the mouth and reaches every part. Nothing stands out excessively; it's just wonderfully balanced. Let's revisit the price. The standard bottling of this brand at $100 has notes of leather and, for me, is almost unpleasant with a strong sulfur component. Consequently, the standard bottling drinks like a bourbon aged over 20 years – which most people probably wouldn't prefer, despite the hype around age statements. At double the price, this cigar blend is what I wished the standard bottling would be. Much sweeter, dare I say more bourbon-like, complex, and interesting. The finish of the cigar blend is enduring and evolving – and perhaps where the price tag is justified. It drinks like a 12-16 year old bourbon, and the cask finishes enhance rather than overpower the final product. Now, about its scarcity. It's frustrating. And the secondary market prices are unreasonable. I would suggest that the best alternatives are also blends – specifically, some from the Bardstown Discovery series. At $120, they are almost a bargain. This rivals their initial Laubade finish, and if I weren't low on funds, I might purchase their second edition. Honestly, Rare Breed isn't far behind (and should still be under $60 unless you're being overcharged). In short – a fantastic finished bourbon where the cask finishing complements rather than dominates, complex and interesting, accessible, and not drastically superior to products costing half as much. Worth a splurge for a special occasion pour, but not something to obsess over.

Batch 242, 108.2 proof. The aroma presents cashew, date, fig, tobacco, aged wood, leather, sage, honeydew, caramel apple, and a whisper of smoke. A slight ethanol presence, but overall complex and enjoyable. Wow. The palate delivers more nutty notes (now macadamia and hazelnut) alongside wine, dried fruits (raisin/fig), pipe tobacco, black cherry, and toffee. It certainly tastes like it contains some very old whiskey. The flavors are rich, robust, and so well-integrated that discerning individual notes is difficult. Just know it's delicious. The finish is medium with plum, sherry wine, dark chocolate, citrus zest, and a hint of nutmeg. There are also wood tannins, but it's hard to describe as just 'oak'; it's more like layers of different woods. Tobacco and leather notes persist. No heat whatsoever. The mouthfeel is full and exceptionally smooth. I realize I've used leather, tobacco, fig, and nut multiple times, but attribute this to the profile's coherence, as these elements are present throughout the entire experience. Phenomenal. 6 out of 5. For $199, I have no regrets and would buy it again. It's that good and that distinctive. The ultimate finished whiskey.

I enjoy smoking cigars occasionally and have been searching for the ideal whiskey to complement my preference for medium to full-bodied tobacco. My quest has concluded! Previously, I found most bourbons to overwhelm the cigar and cognacs to be excessively sweet. This particular bottling offers an excellent fusion of the best characteristics from both. I must admit, when I first acquired the bottle, my eagerness led me to try it neat on its own, and I wasn't particularly impressed, especially given the strong reviews. I attribute some of that to my palate being accustomed to more premium whiskies. However, when I paired it with my favorite cigar, that's when the magic happened. I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the batch number, especially when enjoying a good smoke. As I understand it, hundreds of batches are released annually. My bottle is batch 400, for what it's worth. Just relax and savor life's pleasures!

I discovered this drink at the hotel I was staying in while in Virginia. I had never tried anything from Mr Magnus before. The name also caught my attention. "Cigar Blend". I have to say, it was truly excellent. The nose offered notes of brown sugar, baking spices, and warm vanilla. The tasting experience was delightful. Initially, I detected distinct notes of oak, dark fruit, and corn. After a few more savored sips, the palate settled, revealing leather and tobacco. These were more prominent on the finish. I enjoyed it so much, I nearly ordered another. Fortunately, I stopped myself because I later found out it cost me $35 for the serving! Now, I'm not an expert on cigars by any means, but I can only imagine it would pair exceptionally well with this. Especially since it was more than satisfying on its own.

Batch 121. This might be the most intricate and flawless whiskey I've ever had. I received this bottle as a Christmas gift from my wife, and we've enjoyed a significant portion of it. We keep intending to save the remainder for special occasions but find ourselves returning to it due to its exceptional quality. While this is a finished bourbon, the master blender has effectively allowed the base whiskeys to remain prominent. The finishing casks enhance, rather than overshadow, the bourbon's character. This whiskey coats the palate beautifully and its presence lingers until the morning. I dislike contemplating its eventual absence, but I'm confident subsequent batches are equally remarkable. If you encounter one of these at your local store, treat yourself.