Three Chord 12 Year Twelve Bar Reserve Barrel Proof

Reviewing Batch 0001 of this spirit. A smooth, velvety bourbon with a potent kick of heat. Since my last review, the bourbon market has evolved considerably. On paper, it's hard to find better value: $66 for a 12-year-old, barrel-proof, small-batch bourbon. The website indicates batches are around 600 bottles, suggesting roughly four-barrel batches, hence truly small. However, theoretical value doesn't always translate to superior taste. Firstly, while barrel-proof, it's a low proof at 107. Secondly, this spirit is sourced from Tennessee and Kentucky, then blended and potentially finished (using sound waves???) in Michigan. Setting aside the sonic gimmick, some Dickel character persists, which might be a dealbreaker for some. Lastly, the flavor profile lacks the complexity one might anticipate for its age and proof. It's an easy drinker but rather one-dimensional throughout, lacking depth. I detect a significant amount of dry peanut, with subtle notes of caramel and vanilla, finishing with a pleasant spice (which I also associate with Dickel products). My previous review mentioned a caramel-heavy profile, but that's not apparent now. Its most prominent characteristic for me is smoothness upfront with a peppery finish in the back. Ultimately, I believe it justifies its price and is certainly worth trying if the opportunity arises – particularly if you appreciate Dickel and prefer a brighter, less intense, less oaky, smooth spirit. It could benefit from deeper, richer notes, but it remains a fine, smooth sipper. On a side note, the low "barrel proof" raises questions about undisclosed processes. The website states, "We do not use water in the blending of Twelve Bar Reserve. In and out of the cask, Twelve Bar Reserve is the same 107 proof." Given the unlikelihood of consistent proof in and out of casks without a brief period, and the ambiguous allusions to secondary wood treatments involving charring and sonic integration, could the sourced whiskey be diluted and then briefly re-barreled? Would this permit them to legally claim barrel proof concerning the second barrel?

Conducted a 12-Year comparative tasting featuring Elijah Craig 12, 1792 Twelve Year, Three Chord Twelve Bar, and Weller 12. From first to last, my ranking was: 1. EC12 (7.5/10) 2. 1792 12 year (6.5/10) 3. Three Chord Twelve Bar (6.5/10) 4. Weller 12 (6/10) EC12: Clearly my preferred pour of the group. Not necessarily the most complex, but likely the one that best embodied "this just works." Everything harmonized beautifully, making for an enjoyable and easy-drinking experience. Sweet cream with a subtle fruitiness, notes of butterscotch, and a noticeable grassy spice. The lingering finish offered mostly dry peanut and a faint hint of raw sugar candy. Unfortunately, acquiring more of this is quite challenging. 1792: It was a close call between this and the Three Chord, requiring an additional tasting of each to decide. Oily, earthy, with hints of tobacco, something almost bitter, a significant amount of charred oak, and dusty leather. The finish included dry peanut powder (more like PB2 than actual peanut) and a slightly sour note. There was an almost savory quality, reminiscent of barbecue. Twelve Chord: Possessing the highest proof, it offered the most peanut flavor, dry medicinal herbal notes, some caramel, vanilla, and brown sugar. Despite being considerably higher in proof, it didn't taste noticeably hotter than the others. Perhaps it was the least complex, or most one-dimensional. I wished for greater depth and complexity. W12: The least favorable by a noticeable, though not vast, margin. It was the smoothest of the group, meaning it had the least bite and spice – which aligns with its lower proof and lack of rye in the mash bill. However, within the flavors I could discern, there were unpleasant notes amplified by the comparative tasting – cheap bubble gum being the most prominent. The entire profile seemed to be in conflict: a thin mouthfeel (due to low proof), excessive char (from aging), clove, and an off-putting bubble gum/strawberry banana combination (often a result of wheat in the mash bill, but more pronounced here). The finish also had a lingering artificial strawberry Nesquik taste. I needed to rinse with water and return to it, after which it improved slightly, revealing a hint of maple sugar.

Decided to try this to support distillers from my home state. At least the bottle has an appealing look. The aroma is very sweet, much like freshly baked pecan sticky buns. The initial taste features prominent brown sugar and vanilla with a subtle rye character. It's surprisingly smooth given the high proof. The price is a bit steep, as it doesn't quite measure up to ECBP, but it's a nice offering from a relatively new distillery.

Allowing it to breathe after an initial pour and assessing after about three weeks and a third of the bottle consumed. The initial aroma is of leather and oak with a hint of caramel. Tasting it provides a warm yet slightly nutty flavor, with a subtle caramel note in the mid-palate. The finish is slightly leathery and carameled, with added warmth. It's a respectable sipper, either neat or on ice, but better options exist within this price bracket.

The aroma presents a balanced and pleasant mix of maple, caramel, vanilla, with hints of salt, grapefruit, and oak. The taste begins with salted caramel layered over maple and vanilla, offering a very rich mouthfeel, along with developing notes of oak and pepper. The finish is long and peppery, with fading notes of oak and caramel. Absolutely delicious.

Remarkably good. A thick, rich caramel profile that is likely worth $60-$65. As someone who prefers less spice in bourbon, I enjoy this more than ECBP. While I haven't tried the standard Three Chord, this is an excellent barrel-proof offering, perfect at its 107 proof.