Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Antman013 t1_j69phel wrote

Well, "taste" is a very subjective criteria, to start with. But, in the case of Vodka and Gin, two spirits which you can bottle as fast as you can make it (no aging requirements), what affects the quality of the spirit are the ingredients used to create it.

Specifically, what grain are you using when you distill it into alcohol, or what botanicals you use to infuse a flavour in creating your Gin. Both of these things can and will, impact the "taste".

In the case of whisky, there are aging requirements in most jurisdictions. Most of these also involve specifying the type of container used to age the spirit (wood). Aging in a wooden barrel allows for the lignen within the wood to be broken down by the volatility of the alcohol. In turn, the wood absorbs some of the harsher characteristics of that spirit, mellowing the taste. The longer the aging (to a degree) the more this impacts taste. Further, if you are aging the spirit in a barrel previously used for something else (like say wine), that too, will have an effect on taste.

45

extacy1375 t1_j69v26p wrote

Would multiple distills make a better tasting vodka? Example would be Tito's (6x) compared to Kettle One (3x).

IMO, Tito's is way better.

I understand one is by corn the other is by wheat. Dont know if that makes a difference.

10

sweetnumb t1_j6b3cwn wrote

I know this doesn't really answer your question. But if you filter cheap vodka through like a Brita water filter a few times it'll begin to taste a lot more like expensive vodka.

12

jayhawk618 t1_j6bkqjf wrote

We did this in college. I don't know how much of it is placebo, but we did it for a year or so and thought it worked.

Heads up to anyone contemplating this - it makes your filter taste like booze. If you're going to do this, set one filter aside just for vodka and don't use it for water.

14

DrDarkeCNY t1_j6cxi02 wrote

MYTHBUSTERS did this to test the theory - they claimed it was "Busted" because filtration doesn't make bottom-shelf vodka taste as good as top-shelf, but filtering it five times through a Brita/Pur type filter does make it taste better to both a vodka "expert" and to Jamie Hyneman. (Kari Byron picked the unfiltered bottom-shelf "control" as second-best and top-shelf as worst, to everyone's amusement!)

Sorry for the crappy copy, but since Discovery Channel now owns WB they're charging for copies of MYTHBUSTERS....

10

extacy1375 t1_j6denxy wrote

That was a great video to watch.

They made a great point. It cheaper to buy the top shelf vodka than to run it thru the britta filters. Those filters can be expensive. Especially when using it only once 6x.

2

tranding t1_j6bgdba wrote

Yes this is the point I came here to make as well. Smirnoff to grey goose 'taste' after Brita filtering.

5

extacy1375 t1_j6b6ecg wrote

I always read about it....never tried.

I dont like any alcohol... especially non clear ones. Unless in a mixed drink. Tito's I can drink straight....without making that face....lol

2

Antman013 t1_j69zljp wrote

Grain makes a difference. Number of distillations is a marketing tool, just as Tito's "made in Texas" nonsense is a marketing tool. They truck it in from Indiana (iirc), run it through their own still once, and this is what allows them to claim it's "Texas made".

​

The reason I say that "number of distillations" is just marketing is in the way a column still works. There are plates all the way to the top of a column still which catch the condensate. Technically, each one of these plates can be considered a separate "distillation". So, a column still with 30 plates could legally claim to be "30X distilled)". Not that I have heard of any of them doing that. But no, running it through your column still more than once is not going to significantly improve the spirit. If you didn't get it right the first time, it's not going to get much better afterwards

4

hikeonpast t1_j6a62z2 wrote

Disagree on both claims.

  1. Number of distillations absolutely makes a difference when it comes to high quality vodka. While you are absolutely correct that high reflux columns with lots of plates increases ABV (thus purity) of the resulting distillate, multiple distillation runs result in fewer cogeners in the final product, thus less discernible odor/flavor.

  2. Grain makes no difference in vodka if properly (multiply) distilled. You can make vodka from grain, potatos, rice, seaweed, grape juice - anything that can be fermented to produce ethanol. Vodka by definition has no discernible taste or smell. It is very very close to just ethanol and water.

11

Antman013 t1_j6a7429 wrote

Don't argue with me . . . my opinion is informed by conversations with a PhD who happens to be the Master Blender for J.P. Wiser's in Windsor. Take it up with him.

−15

Mayor__Defacto t1_j6aemkw wrote

I think this guy is confusing a column/continuous still with a pot still. That’s all I can think of. There’s no point to recycling through a column still, while with a pot still you have to distill it multiple times purely to achieve the proper concentration.

3

Scottzilla90 t1_j6bfnev wrote

Yes, more distillation tends to make vodka taste purer as does charcoal filtration (the Brita method).

2

FreeJazzForUkraine t1_j6d5biu wrote

Legally, the cheapest stuff and titos should taste the same because of Vodka regulations. Probably doesn't but it should.

1

TheMace808 t1_j6e0ogr wrote

Vodka’s definition in a lot of places is just a certain alcohol percentage, doesn’t matter where it comes from as if you concentrate the alcohol that much it most of the aromatics and flavor gets pulled out

1

Mayor__Defacto t1_j6aedva wrote

Number of distillations is a stylistic choice on the part of the manufacturer; many of the top rated spirits are made on continuous stills rather than pot stills and thus are “only distilled once”.

0

-domi- t1_j69qq2v wrote

Taste may be subjective, but not so subjective as for there to be a sizeable portion of people thinking that the cheapest vodka tastes better than a good vodka. xD

4

huhIguess t1_j69s8or wrote

Is this true?

How often can people truly distinguish between a mid-shelf and top-shelf vodka? Or even a well?

Most surveys I remember - no one can tell the difference.

6

Antman013 t1_j69u9nb wrote

I spent several years exploring an reviewing spirits. Vodka is meant to be "odorless, colorless and tasteless" by its very definition. So yeah, if you think the "average Joe" can tell them apart, you're kidding yourself.

​

Where taste REALLY comes into play is for things like Whisky and Rum, where aging IS a factor.

8

sweetnumb t1_j6b3mmj wrote

I wouldn't say this is true at all. Granted, if you gave me five top-shelf vodkas I doubt I would be able to point out which one is Chopin vs Grey Goose vs Belvedere or whatever... but if you put Belvedere against Popov I don't know of a single person who wouldn't be able to understand that Popov is total shit and Belvedere is way better than total shit.

6

jrhooo t1_j6ap6p2 wrote

while this is true, I tend to feel like some of the French offerings tend to be that truly clinical, tasteless nothing, while some of the Dutch, Russian, or Polish brands have a bit of "character" to them.

3

Antman013 t1_j6b868t wrote

My two favourites are Van Gogh Triple Wheat (Dutch), and Chopin Wheat. There is a craft distillery a couple hours away from me that uses Red Fife Wheat for their Vodka and Gin that I like VERY much, particularly as the first two are not stocked at my local LCBO.

2

jrhooo t1_j6b8h32 wrote

Im going to have to try the Van Gogh. If you ever get around to it, you might appreciate effen as well. They do a few flavon infused, but their straight vodka is smooth and clean

1

Antman013 t1_j6bauo5 wrote

I've had it. I have tried most of the non-flavoured Vodka carried in the LCBO here in Ontario, Canada, up to about 6 years ago. Probably about 100 different brands overall, including some stuff brought back from the States.

Then I got into whiskies.

1

Detson101 t1_j6br8gi wrote

That’s maybe true at the mid-high end of vodka (although even there viscosity can be different), but the bad stuff definitely has a distinctive taste for the reasons all low quality spirits have a distinctive taste.

1

Antman013 t1_j6cyda4 wrote

Believe what you like . . . I've done taste tests with Prince Igor and Grey Goose, and people would consistently pick Igor as often as Goose.

​

The average person just doesn't have a developed enough palate to be that discerning. Hell, I only took it seriously for about 7 years, and I know I would still slip up. There are a couple of my "regular" brands that I can pick out, but that's it. If you poured two shots of random brands, 1 premium, 1 well stock, I would not be surprised to guess wrong between them.

1

extacy1375 t1_j6bj43x wrote

Drinking vodka straight, I feel I can 100% tell the difference. For me its that smooth, no taste & no burn feel. I dont make "that face" after doing a shot of good vodka.

Mixed drink you can basically throw in anything and it gets covered up...for the most part.

8

-domi- t1_j69sexh wrote

I'm not talking about mid-shelf. I'm talking the absolute cheapest shit on the market.

7

huhIguess t1_j69szz5 wrote

Here's a survey that says people are split nearly 50/50 between top shelf and bottom shelf:

https://nypost.com/2013/05/26/post-taste-test-reveals-drinkers-cant-tell-good-from-cheap-vodka/

While I realize surveys are utter trash - I still think it's pretty common that the "average-person" will not be able to tell the difference.

Same with high quality bottled water vs low quality bottled water...

6

sweetnumb t1_j6b3wz1 wrote

I do not at all believe that someone can't tell the difference between Popov and Belvedere 100% of the time. That article was talking about mixed drinks at bars though. Sure if you have 80% soda and 20% vodka it's going to be significantly harder to tell the difference... and in that case most people probably assume the shittier vodka just means the bartender poured a stronger drink so they'd like it better.

5

-domi- t1_j69thip wrote

Fair enough. Now i wanna see what this upstate Syracuse thing tastes like. Cheap vodka I've had tasted like acidic rubbing alcohol.

2

Antman013 t1_j69uk5l wrote

And Grey Goose is an overly hyped bottle of crap. I can provide you a number of ~$40.00 bottles that are FAR superior. I live in Ontario, Canada.

If you have access to Beattie's Farm crafted potato vodka, give it a shot.

2

sweetnumb t1_j6b429t wrote

Grey Goose has been overhyped by rappers, sure. But it's really pretty good. Granted, I'd take Belvedere all day every day over Grey Goose, but if someone is offering Grey Goose I'm definitely not complaining.

2

Antman013 t1_j6b7hbg wrote

Grey Goose is literally about marketing. The guy behind it spent thousands on slanted "surveys" where Grey Goose was compared against "well stock" brands, so naturally it would be the favourite. That led to the marketing campaign where the surveys were used as "proof" that it was the "best Vodka in the world". You can look up the history of it all. It;s a dang case study in marketing strategy.

1

sweetnumb t1_j6b8b4o wrote

Yes... I agree with you. Overhyped by rappers.

1

Diagonalizer t1_j6a466p wrote

Tito's is better than grey goose (not sure if you get Tito's in Canada but it's not as expensive as GG)

1

Antman013 t1_j6a5r6x wrote

I agree. And yes, we do get it in Canada. But we also have better options, as well. My personal favourite in terms of Vodka was a a Dutch Vodka called Van Gogh Triple Wheat.

The gimmick was that they used three different varietals, grown in three different climates (prairie, mountain, and shoreline). It was interesting in that different palates would note different qualities. I tended to focus on a tinge of brininess (sea air), while a friend of mine would note a minerality to it.

2

sweetnumb t1_j6b490x wrote

That's weird to me. I like Grey Goose significantly more than Tito's. I associate Tito's with "not terrible like Popov, but not great like Belvedere." It's definitely acceptable... but that's all I can say on it.

1

jrhooo t1_j6aqjnd wrote

Grey Goose is "fine" but IMO its just "fine". Its the burger at a sit down restaurant. You know its floor will be pretty good. its a safe choice, but its not going to give you some high end "wow" experience.

Now, I won't say any of the following list is "high end" or special, but in terms of just drinkability, and hey I kind of enjoy this, I've liked

Ketel (for mixed drinks only)

Russian Standard (excellent value for money)

Imperia (russian standard's "premium" release, not sure if they still make it)

Stoli Elit (probably overhyped and very probably overpriced, but it is nice to drink)

Chopin (wheat only for me. The potato felt I guess "thick" in texture? I didn't like it so much)

Effen - very nice, drinkable, reasonably priced

Personal opinion on what I DON'T like, anything Scandinavian. Just never really found one I liked. Reyka was not bad, but but all the absolut, level, svedka... hard pass.

Hidden gem for you California folks,

Albertson's used to run a brand called "Origine" bit sure if its still around, but basically it was their in store brand of various alcohols. No idea who their supplier was, but IIRC each liquor under their label was just a small batch distillery offering. So their Origine vodka was just some micro distillery product out of France. It was nice.

1

Antman013 t1_j6b7uqj wrote

Agree with you on Chopin Wheat. That is the one that led me to Triple Wheat by Van Gogh, which is just awesome.

1

ArenSteele t1_j69ujfu wrote

Well I can’t, but my wife once ordered a martini with a specific vodka, and if they didn’t have that specific vodka to come back and she’ll change her order.

They brought the martini and after 1 sip, she sent it back because she could taste the wrong vodka.

The bartender came over to ask how she could tell (didn’t deny, just didn’t believe anyone could tell)

3

Maltese_Vulcan t1_j69uojz wrote

Not vodka, but there was a [wine tasting in 1973] (https://www.vivino.com/wine-news/the-day-california-wine-beat-the-french-and-shocked-the-world) that proved that telling the difference between “lesser quality” California wines and the “obviously superior” French ones was a lot less cut and dried than they thought.

2

Leovaderx t1_j6cauz5 wrote

Those french wines were not priced based on whether the average person is going to like them. So it would be silly to not expect that outcome.

2

aspersioncast t1_j6br32d wrote

I’m sure there are people who can’t, but you can def develop your palate enough to tell shitty well vodka from a level or two up.

1

chrisdavidson152 t1_j69ywas wrote

It really is easy tbh. I'm a cider or vodka drinker and have been drinking both since my late teens (25 years now) and I can very easily tell a crap from good vodka even when used with a mixer. I'm sure most vodka drinkers could (that like the good stuff).

0

jrhooo t1_j6aqz5o wrote

I used to always say, you might not know the diff drinking it, but you'll know the diff when you wake up in the morning.

Granted, looking back that's still biased, because, plot twist, when you're drinking the bottom of the barrel cheapest vodka on the shelf, you're probably college/military junior enlisted age, at some bar or house party, and all that sub cheap plastic bottle vodka you're drinking is also mixed with the cheapest sugar slush you can find too.

Was it the cheap vodka making you hung over? Or the red bull and raspberry blue slushie mix?

4

DrDarkeCNY t1_j6cwce2 wrote

And once the bourbon barrels can no longer be used for alcohol, they can age coffee in it!

I'm serious - Starbucks Reserve sells a coffee with beans aged in a bourbon barrel. It's actually really good...unfortunately it's also insanely expensive (I bought a half-pound for $45 as a treat!).

1

Antman013 t1_j6cxn6x wrote

Coffee, tea leaves, tobacco leaves, beer . . . other spirits.

2

DrDarkeCNY t1_j6cy1w2 wrote

Yes! I knew there were other foods and drinks that did it, but couldn't remember which offhand.

I kept thinking to myself, "...Bourbon Barrel-aged Chocolate, maybe...?"

1

Antman013 t1_j6czgup wrote

I think they would age the cocoa beans to infuse them, rather than the actual chocolate. Bourbons requirement for new barrels every time is just so damn wasteful, imo. But it is what it is.

2