Whisky in the Name of Science
I'd been talking about wanting to do blind taste tests of liquor for a while, so I can be sure it's the flavour of the liqour I like, not just preconceptions or marketing or whatever, so this past summer my wife bought me four decanters for my birthday. I'd already done a couple of smaller comparisons (one Bourbon (Basil Hayden beat Woodford Reseve), one Scotch (Macallan beat Cragganmore)), but I hadn't recorded any of them.
I did encounter significant problems setting up the experiments, though -- you have to choose liquors that you're either unfamiliar with or that are very similar in character, or you end up being able to tell immediately which is which. The Macallan is much darker and has a much rounder flavour than Cragganmore, so it wasn't a real blind experiment. I probably should have compared the Macallan (which is aged in Sherry casks) to the Glenmorangie Sherry Cask.
I have only recently begun drinking peaty Islay malts, and I still haven't tried many of them, so I figured it's a perfect opportunity to do a full comparison of four whiskies I barely know. I remember John Willis mentioning that he'd liked Caol Ila (although I can't find evidence of this online), and I happened to be able to get some in Duty Free in Melbourne, so I had the first of my test whiskies. It was relatively easy to pick the rest of the lot; they're all listed below.
Here's the setup:
I've got four Scotch whiskies:
- Laphroaig 10yr
- Caol Ila 12yr
- Lagavulin 16yr
- Ardbeg 10yr
In addition, I've got four temporary containers (in this case, two Nalgene bottles and two pitchers), four decanters, and four pieces of paper. I actually got a bottle of Caol Ila 18yr, also, while I was in Melbourne (and both Caol Ila bottles are liter bottles, as all Duty Free bottles seem to be), but I didn't want to have two such similar whiskies in the test.
At least two participants are required to make it double blind (double blind means neither the researchers nor the subjects know which is which, and we're assuming all researchers will also be subjects). My wife puts a piece of paper in front of each temporary container, pours one bottle of whiskey in each, and labels the papers appropriately (she apparently didn't quite successfully take a picture of this stage). She then flips the paper over so I don't know what liquor is in what container and leaves the room.
I come in and pour from the temporary containers into the decanters, and label the pieces of paper with the decanter. This makes each piece of paper a key that matches the whisky name to the decanter it's in, without either of us knowing what's where. Here's the final result:
The bottles and decanters are arranged randomly, and both my wife and I were careful to rearrange the bottles on the table during each phase, so that, for instance, a single liquor doesn't stay on the far left the whole time. The box in the picture contains our keys.
Given that this is more than three liters of Scotch, and I don't drink it all that quickly, this is going to be a heckuva long experiment, but I expect I'll be able to deputize some friends as subjects.
Sat, 01 Mar 2008 | Tags: whisky, science
When and where and I'll be there. I think this would make a great podcast. Whiskey and Puppet. Of course all in the name of science.
John
Tags
