Rabbit Hole Cavehill Kentucky Straight Bourbon

RABBIT HOLE SHOWDOWN Rabbit Hole Heigold Kentucky Straight Bourbon Rabbit Hole Cavehill Kentucky Straight Bourbon Rabbit Hole Dareringer Straight Bourbon Finished In Px Sherry Casks Rabbit Hole Starlino I encountered Rabbit Hole at a tasting a few years back with the founder. I had noticed their unique bottles on shelves but hadn't purchased any, often finding that distinct packaging prioritizes marketing over the spirit within. This is not the situation with Rabbit Hole. I'm genuinely impressed by the distillery's commitment to quality, meticulousness, and open communication regarding their products. Rabbit Hole Heigold It has a bright orange amber hue. The aroma offers chocolate-covered cherries, a hint of peanut brittle, buttery pancakes, apple cider, balsam, and a touch of spearmint. The mouthfeel is pleasantly thick, with notes of orange oil and clove emerging, followed by a mild warmth on the finish. It concludes with more chocolate-covered cherries and some woody vanilla, reminiscent of a creamy orange popsicle (in a good way), leading to a lasting spice. This bourbon boasts great flavor depth, sweetness, and exceptional smoothness. Rabbit Hole Heigold is available for under $65. Would I purchase it again? Yes. It scored 4.25. I hope Rabbit Hole maintains reasonable pricing as they introduce aged releases. 95 proof. No age statement. Non-chill filtered. Mashbill: 70% Corn, 25% Malted Rye, 5% Malted Barley Rabbit Hole Cavehill It presents a nearly identical orange amber color to the Heigold. The aroma carries notes of caramel apples, Honey Nut Cheerios, balsam, and a bit of ethanol. There's a faint dusty scent that I often associate with Wild Turkey. It has a similar light viscosity to the Heigold. I detect some peanut flavor on the palate. The finish brings oakiness, cinnamon red hots, vanilla, and again, chocolate-covered cherries. The warmth is more pronounced than one might expect for a 95 proof spirit. Rabbit Hole Cavehill is very good, and smoother than the Heigold which has more rye, but it lacks the Heigold's complexity. It's quite enjoyable and can be found for $55-60. Would I buy it again? Yes. It received a 4.0 rating, an improvement from my previous 3.75. 95 proof. No age statement. Non-chill filtered. Mashbill: 70% corn, 10% malted wheat, 10% honey malted barley, 10% malted barley. Rabbit Hole Dareringer This one is a dark amber with a subtle rust tint. It offers chocolatey notes of fudge, cocoa powder, Cocoa Puffs cereal, raisins, and honey, with a hint of spearmint. It's almost like a mudslide slushy drink. The palate has both width and depth, with more intensity than the nose. The ethanol, which was subtle on the nose, becomes apparent on the finish. While Angel's Envy was an early adopter of finishing bourbon in sherry casks, mimicking a Scotch whisky tradition, Dareringer executes this much better. Rabbit Hole Dareringer is available for about $80. Would I buy it again? Yes. It's exceptionally good. It scored 4.5. 93 Proof. No age statement. Non-chill filtered. Mashbill: 65% corn, 25% wheat, 10% malted barley. Rabbit Hole Starlino This bottling is a shade lighter amber than the Heigold and Cavehill. It's unmistakably rye. The aroma presents sweet red grapes, rosemary, sage, rye, baking chocolate, freshly cut grass, and a cooling menthol sensation. Chocolate and herbal notes dominate the palate; a pleasant rye spice emerges at the end. The higher alcohol content is well-managed (despite this being the strongest of the four), leading to a sweet, medium-length finish. Rabbit Hole Starlino is aged in Hotel Starlino Rosso vermouth. I received this bottle as a gift at the aforementioned Rabbit Hole tasting a couple of years ago. Only 2112 375ml bottles were produced and it was exclusively available at the distillery. It doesn't appear to be sold online, and I have no information on its original price. Would I buy it again? Yes, provided the cost was reasonable. It's very good. It scored 4.0. 105.6 proof. No age statement. Bottle #446 of 2112. These four Rabbit Hole releases are distinct whiskies. Heigold is a "high rye" expression; Cavehill is a four-grain bourbon; Dareringer is a sherry-finished bourbon; and Starlino is a Kentucky rye finished in vermouth casks. I favor the Heigold over the Cavehill due to its sweetness and complexity. The Dareringer is a different profile altogether and arguably more complex than the Heigold, offering significant flavor depth. The Starlino, being a rye, is also in its own category. These comparisons aren't competitions but rather exercises to highlight the varied aromas and flavors detected when comparing spirits, aiming to provide a clearer understanding of their relative characteristics than a single-spirit tasting might offer. When Rabbit Hole was established in 2012, they obtained whiskey from New Riff distillery. However, they have been producing their own spirits since 2018 (I believe Starlino was the initial release entirely from their own production). The company promotes its products as "super premium" on its website, and I concur. They are very well-made, and I anticipate that Rabbit Hole bourbons and ryes will continue to improve as their inventory ages. Note: All spirits were tasted neat in a Glencairn glass.

If someone asked me for an example of what bourbon tastes like and wanted me to select something readily available, this would be it. I purchased this on a whim for a bourbon gathering, wanting to share something new. Knowing nothing about it beyond the label, I paid over $55 plus tax and left the store. The aroma is typical of a standard bourbon, nothing extraordinary, and reminds me of 1792 Small Batch, Chestnut Farms, or essentially any Barton product. Upon tasting, nothing particularly stands out, neither good nor bad. It's not memorable, yet it's not easily forgotten after trying. I appreciate that neutrality. It goes down easily, and even easier with an ice cube. I genuinely like its straightforward character in a world of spirits striving for distinctiveness. Here's my issue. For almost $65 after tax, I'm getting a bottle that reminds me of a $30-35 one. The bottle itself is attractive and certainly gives the impression of a more expensive spirit, so credit to the marketing team. However, at this price point, I wouldn't repurchase it given the abundance of other options in a similar price range. But if you're curious and want to try something different, or if you're bringing an impressive bottle to a party with many bourbon novices, this would be an excellent selection. It's a pleasant sipper that would appeal to those new to the spirit. September 19, 2023

Overall: Please note, this bottle has been open for over a year with about a quarter remaining, so oxidation might have softened or changed the flavors. It's possible this improved it. For those seeking a fruitier profile at 95 proof, this is a good choice. It's vibrant, reminiscent of a creamsicle. The flavors remain well-balanced throughout the sip as more conventional notes emerge. This leads me to believe oxidation brought out those bright fruity notes... my experience differs from others, and the bright orange flavors are what make it potentially worthwhile for the cost. However, I don't think it justifies the $60 price tag. A different brand offers a similar profile for half the price and 5 proof points less. Smell: Orange fruit salad, cream Taste: Vibrant! Orange... a creamsicle. Subsequent sips reveal woody spice and darker notes, but they never dominate. Finish: Brief, but pleasant.

Acquired this bottle as a complimentary item from Flaviar. Nose: Sugary, with notes of cinnamon and grains. Palate: Sweet corn; a previous description of the taste as "distinctive" resonates with me. A subtle presence of oak and spice is noticeable. The finish brings to mind "peanut brittle". Pleasant. Unsure of its age due to the lack of an Age Statement, but it seems somewhat youthful, comparable to some 2-year-old spirits I've sampled. Finish: Agreeably brief, with lingering tastes and minimal heat. I've just opened this bottle and need to explore it further to discern more specific flavors. My initial assessment is 3.75, but I could easily raise it to a solid 4.0.

After some time, walnut becomes noticeable on the nose, along with some vanilla and honey. It's very sweet. I only wish the taste matched the aroma. Heavy mint. It provides the expected mouthfeel. It's somewhat herbal. Some nuttiness is present, but not significantly. Dark caramel is there. There's a decent amount of burn for 95 proof, but nothing unpleasant. The finish is adequate. In my opinion, this is a slightly above-average bottle. Nothing is truly bad about it. There's a bit too much mint for my liking, but it's acceptable. Nothing truly stands out. I've detected more vanilla on the palate after a few additional sips, but it didn't sway my overall impression. It's very easy to drink. I'll grant it that. However, the flavor profile lacks that 'wow' factor.

A pleasant discovery, though first, a clarification. The bottle states it's 4-grain, but it actually contains four distinct grain varieties. This could be considered misleading to someone more attuned to grain specifics. However, the whiskey itself is outstanding. I enjoyed it with my morning meal at my in-laws', and they've once again acquired a fine bottle. I perceive a spicier finish than the initial taste, with typical mild bourbon notes: vanillins, tannins, and so on. For 95 proof, it's remarkably smooth. A well-rounded bourbon that isn't dull.