Rhetoric 22 Year Bourbon

Comparative tasting - Rhetoric 20 vs 22, first pour, blind. As a brief background, I did have either the 22 or 23, I believe it was the 23... I have an empty bottle somewhere from that time, so I would recognize it. Of course... where I put it? Your guess is as good as mine. OK, so I loved that whisky, so I have some expectations. Both bottles were purchased at "retail" in 2020, which put them at $174.99... yeah, inflation is a real thing. Nose - Whiskey 1 - fruity vanilla, cherries, berries, and a significant amount of oak. Whiskey 1 exhibits all those classic ultra-aged bourbon characteristics with a powerful sweet, fruity aroma upfront, gradually giving way to aged oak. Overall, it achieves a near-perfect balance for me, where sweet fruits, chocolates, and that leathery vanilla dominate, and the oak serves as a complement rather than overpowering. Whiskey 2 - While Whiskey 1 immediately grabs your attention, this one is more reserved and subdued. I detect very little sweetness, only alcohol and oak notes. I get a dusty closet aroma and some peanut or other nuttiness. I wouldn't dare assume these two bourbons have anything in common. After some time, swirling, and coating the glass, the sweetness begins to subtly emerge. Now, some chocolate notes appear, along with sweet corn, but even as the oak recedes slightly, it's primarily bread and baking notes on the finish, where I'm seeking oak and very little is present upfront. Taste - focusing on whiskey 2 first due to its notes. Whiskey 2 - Initial impressions are buttery oak, tannins, and a substantial amount of vanilla at the end. Caramel is minimal, fruits are absent, and there's a secondary vanilla note here (one is typical bourbon vanilla, the other is almost waxy vanilla creamer). A truly unusual spirit, and frankly, not one I'll revisit. Whiskey 1 - Sweeter upfront, possessing a much more characteristic aged bourbon profile. It also gives off that alcohol and dryness often found in super-aged bourbons, which can be a bit drying and impart that vanilla note. Here, we get vanilla and caramel with old leather, alcohol-infused oak chips, tannins, and subtle sweet dark notes. I'm often one of the most vocal proponents of OLD bourbon, though I fully admit that the ultra-aged expressions can become excessively oaked, those BAD ones. Here, I believe we're on the wrong side of that spectrum, but despite also being a proof enthusiast, I'm hopeful water might just improve things! Nose - Water hasn't significantly altered our first bourbon, either positively or negatively. Perhaps it has reintroduced some sweetness that had faded during tasting. It remains a wonderful bourbon aroma. Whiskey 2 appears sweeter and more integrated. It has become somewhat creamier, with vanilla, and I'm now detecting sweet caramel. I still only get a hint of dusty leather, which I'd expect from a very aged bourbon. Water opens up both whiskies, introducing a bit more sweetness and oak. Balance isn't really achieved, and the finishes on both are characterized by vanilla and oak. Whiskey 1's initial impression is very good but falls short of greatness, and then it finishes poorly, though the finish is long, oakey, and lingers well. Whiskey 2 is bitter, and while it also has a sufficiently long finish, the buttery notes persist. Okay, Whiskey 1 is the clear choice here. I've been told the 22-year is the best of the batch, but frankly, if I had to guess, 2 seems like the older spirit. Let's see. Whiskey 1 - 22 year Whiskey 2 - 20 year Well, so much for my aging predictions. The 22-year completely surpasses the 20-year. 2 stars for the 22-year and 1.5 stars for the 20-year. These are easy passes, despite the 22-year having a nose worthy of a 3.75 whisky and an upfront taste worthy of a 3.25.

A great bourbon to start off some after-work day drinking. When working the night shift, your happy hour needs to shift to 9-11am. Unfortunately, local bars don't get it, so I handle it myself. Many thanks to a friend for sharing a sample of this hard-to-find whiskey. This is the third Orphan Barrel I've had, and while they've all been good, this one is truly excellent. It aged for a mere 22 years (short by Scotch standards, haha). It has a deep copper color and a strong smell of oak and vanilla. It has an oily texture on the palate and tastes very woody. The rye is well-balanced by the barrel notes, and the long aging has smoothed it out perfectly. The flavor is not diminished; it's just heavy oak, vanilla, and rye. Typical for rye whiskey, but very smooth and delicious. The finish is long, warm, and slightly spicy. I'm not usually a big bourbon fan, especially rye, but this one feels worth the high price. If you get a bottle, don't hide it away – drink it. Fantastic stuff. 4.5 stars. Cheers, everyone.

Compared to the 21-year bottling, this was an improvement for me. Unlike the 21-year, the aroma had no flaws. The aroma also included a welcome hint of crème brûlée and faint allspice. The palate was similarly thin to the 21-year but had a pleasing mouth-coating quality. There was a nice harmony of dry wood, toasted marshmallow, anise, and a touch of apricot jam, along with a pinch of cigar wrapper. This expression, unlike the 21-year, is something I could drink continuously. It's well-balanced and includes a pleasant touch of spice and just a hint of fruit. The low alcohol content results in less burn than cough syrup but also a less pronounced finish. If it weren't over $100, you wouldn't need the finish because you could sip it all day. That's another drawback – aside from the novelty of tasting this aging bourbon, the high price makes it somewhat difficult to appreciate. In a market where 12-15 year old bourbons sell for $80-300+, the value per year of age is not unreasonable, despite the lack of a truly impressive quality.

On the nose, fresh baked goods and toast are nicely balanced with enjoyable vanilla notes. The mouthfeel is coated with vanilla and oak, supported by baking spices and pepper. The finish lingers for a medium duration with diminishing vanilla, cinnamon, and oak. A wonderfully straightforward spirit.

Yum. Smells like fruit. I thought it would have a bold oak flavor, but it didn't. It tasted a bit fruity. It was warming and smooth, though not as smooth as Sinatra Select. I had a great time drinking it. It's one of the top whiskeys I've tried.

I'd rate it 4.5. Better than anticipated based on reviews of the 20 & 21-year versions. Wonderfully balanced; the oak is prominent but works well for me. I found it for $109, which makes it amazing at that price.