Submitted by Chase_The_Dream t3_10nn24o in explainlikeimfive
Comments
RememberThatDream t1_j6aa44n wrote
To add one more point, (specifically about tequila) cheap tequila like José Quervo or Sauza are a mix of agavé (minimum 51% in order to be sold as tequila) and grain alcohol. It’s the grain alcohol component that gives it that cheap taste, whereas tequila made with 100% agavé has a smoother more consistent flavour. If you want good tequila make sure it says “made with 100% agavé” on the bottle
contactdeparture t1_j6ahwnj wrote
I'm going to get downvoted for this, fine whatever. Holy crap Boston did not do tequila well. I know a few places do now, but for decades that place was a backwater. I remember someone once said, "this is good, it's GOLD." With no sarcasm. Idiots.
Wasn't until I moved to California that I realized - one should never do burritos or tequila in Boston.
sweetnumb t1_j6b3082 wrote
I can't actually say since I've never been to Boston... but isn't that place just like every other place in the US where you can simply buy whichever one you want? Or are you just talking about tequila that was made in Boston?
[deleted] t1_j6b7z5m wrote
[deleted]
muliardo t1_j6bauzq wrote
I don’t think you’ve been to California, if you think Boston has more variety of food
WACK-A-n00b t1_j6bqmi3 wrote
Uhhh... Say you don't know shit about California without saying you don't know shit about California.
I'm standing by for when you say you are from California or something. My reply will be "so it's incompetence, not ignorance."
chapstick__ t1_j6b8307 wrote
It's not possible to make tequila in Boston because that would be mezcal. Tequila has to come from tequila Mexico to be tequila.like how bourbon has to come from bourbon Kentucky. Boston probably just doesn't have very good tequila at bars.
fiendo13 t1_j6bdymg wrote
Bourbon just has to be made in America, be over 50% corn, and aged in a new charred oak barrel. There is actually only one distillery in bourbon county, KY.
wowsuchdrum t1_j6baosh wrote
This is like.... So wrong
Scottzilla90 t1_j6bf8og wrote
Close, it has to come from the USA to be Bourbon (amongst other conditions) but can only be Kentucky Bourbon if it’s from Kentucky.
7h3_70m1n470r t1_j6bkqir wrote
Tell that to Tennessee bourbon
Rumhead1 t1_j6cr413 wrote
Tequila and mescal are different drinks and it has nothing to do with where it is made.
beorn12 t1_j6dd529 wrote
Mezcal is the overall term for distilled agave spirits. As such, there are many types of mezcales, made in different regions in Mexico, using various cultivars or even different species of agave. Tequila is a specific type of mezcal made from blue agave. It also has denomination of origin, so additionally for it to be legally called tequila, it must be made in the state of Jalisco or the bordering municipalities (counties) of Michoacan, Guanajuato, and Tamaulipas.
In practice, people separate tequila from the rest of mezcales, much like people set apart champagne from "wine", despite how champagne is literally a specific type of sparkling wine, made in the French region of Champagne.
sweetnumb t1_j6b881z wrote
Oh wow, you're right. Somehow I completely forgot about that.
ettmyers t1_j6cvo39 wrote
Mezcal actually has stricter guidelines than tequila, also must be made in certain Mexican regions.
contactdeparture t1_j6bamun wrote
Can't buy it there and most bars serve Cuervo as their mid range and worse as well. It's awful.
Shouldacouldawoulda7 t1_j6cux3d wrote
Not sure how long it's been since you left... it is not hard to find good tequila in Boston. At least, it's no harder than any other place I've been to in the US.
sweetnumb t1_j6bbhw2 wrote
That's so strange to me. I don't think I've ever actually had Jose Cuervo either, is it really that much worse than other brands? I assume there's also a difference between their 100% de agave offerings and the 51% or whatever ones.
ringobob t1_j6cxk3z wrote
>I assume there's also a difference between their 100% de agave offerings and the 51% or whatever ones.
There's a difference, but 1800 (their 100% product) isn't great, either.
Sci-FantasyIsMyJam t1_j6d8jbz wrote
I haven't had the 1800, but I like Jose Cuervo Tradicional Anejo, which is 100% agave. It's pretty good, especially for the price.
ringobob t1_j6d9gm0 wrote
Tried it, was not a fan, though I know others like it. Good price, tastes better than 1800, OK in a marg. May even compete well in the price range, but I'd rather spend more on something I really enjoy.
SassySybil71 t1_j6bgboe wrote
Cali Girl here. Charlotte NC does not do tequila well either. Finding decent (not 51%) tequila there is definitely a needle in a hay stack adventure. Let's not even talk about their Mexican food....
Stick with BBQ & vodka in Charlotte.
no_usernames_avail t1_j6bnv5u wrote
I don't liquor shop in many parts of the country besides home... do you not have didn't liquor superstores that have everything and anything?
Snatch_Pastry t1_j6bs76v wrote
A lot of people don't have bottles at home, they just have some drinks when they go out.
Ratnix t1_j6cctqu wrote
And they don't ask for top shelf when they order drinks, so they get whatever cheap shit that particular establishment pours by default.
Some places, at least around here, will have the good stuff. But they don't pour it by default. You have to specifically ask for it, and they're going to charge you more for it.
Basically, it's like in the movies when someone walks up to a bar and says, "Give me a beer." Except they are just asking for a shot of tequila without specifying they want something other than the cheap shit.
Broomstick73 t1_j6d8dlg wrote
Should try this in real life - go to a bar and say “gimmie a beer” and when they say “what kind” just keep pushing back on “just gimmie a beer”. lol
SassySybil71 t1_j6bwthj wrote
California has great liquor stores - superstore or corner market. The ABC store in Charlotte was nothing like BevMo!. I took two good bottles in my checked luggage thankfully and the recipient of the bottle I gifted was very appreciative. (I spent four weeks working in Charlotte.)
[deleted] t1_j6dn2vh wrote
[removed]
im_the_real_dad t1_j6drctu wrote
I think your reply ended up under the wrong comment. I saw one further down where it would make much more sense. ;-)
Maidenbaby88 t1_j6c4r6o wrote
That’s exactly what I was thinking! NY has like so many different types at the store so do other parts not have it this way?
WinterSon t1_j6bv4af wrote
> Cali girl
At first glance this looks like "call girl" lol
DarthGuber t1_j6cjlnl wrote
Gotta go up to Raleigh for good Mexican food in NC.
Clewin t1_j6etac0 wrote
100% BLUE Agave. I make that distinction because there are tequila mixes with green Agave (Mezcal) that are 51% Blue as well. Tequila's main requirement is it being manufactured in Jalisco with Blue Agavé as the main ingredient. They use the piña, or the fruit of the plant, not the leaves, but the leaves are strong fibers and have other uses (like rope).
My ex ran a tourism company and I've been on so many tequila tours...
blkhatwhtdog t1_j6ao3yj wrote
I thought near all distilled spirits, in the US anyway. Are run through a column where precise cuts are made at very specific temperatures. The flavor of bourbon is mostly from the barrel and how various weather conditions effect it.
Snatch_Pastry t1_j6bsnb4 wrote
I've toured a couple smaller distilleries that do this. They make grain alcohol. They cut it with water to make vodka. They cut it with water and age it in barrels to make whiskey. They cut it with water and throw it in a tub with a Christmas tree and lawn trimmings to make gin.
klipseracer t1_j6c296k wrote
Lmaooo. How someone can enjoy gin and tonic is really beyond me. I can't unsee that when I see someone who likes it.
larrydukes t1_j6cbata wrote
My favorite on a hot summer day. It's got to be good gin (I like Tanqueray), generous amounts of ice and lime with any decent tonic(Canada Dry or Schweppes). So crisp and refreshing.
BladeDoc t1_j6d8vwq wrote
Have you tried Tanqueray Rangpur? It makes any gin drink that you’re going to make with lime taste even better.
dubbzy104 t1_j6cak8k wrote
Some people derive pleasure from pain and suffering
Selfless- t1_j6czc7c wrote
Tonic is not soda water. It’s quinine juice. Quinine is a bitter, obsolete medical extract that has horrible side effects. If you don’t like a gin and tonic it’s probably not the gin you object to.
klipseracer t1_j6gd3uy wrote
Yeah I'm aware there is a difference. Having had shots of gin, I can say with confidence there is nothing about a gin and tonic or gin by itself that I think is appealing, hence my astonishment when someone enjoys it or calls it their drink or choice.
SapperBomb t1_j6d3yvn wrote
I've found that substituting premium vodka for gin in most traditional gin drinks works really well
klipseracer t1_j6gcg1b wrote
I can see that. But gin... Phewwwie
larrydukes t1_j6cbt3w wrote
That's how all distilleries do it. That's literally how you make booze. Except for the lawn trimmings. Juniper berries give gin it's distinctive flavor.
aotus_trivirgatus t1_j6h6orq wrote
>They cut it with water and throw it in a tub with a Christmas tree and lawn trimmings to make gin.
Them's fightin' words, pardner.
G0_pack_go t1_j6arw42 wrote
The mash bill has a lot to do with it too. As well as the filtration process.
cunninglinguist32557 t1_j6bhz5s wrote
This is also why you have to be careful with moonshine. If you don't know what you're doing you could get too much methanol in there and cause serious issues.
hikeonpast t1_j6brq79 wrote
Fun fact - methanol is really only a concern 1) if you are fermenting fruit or 2) if the federal government denatures (poisons) your moonshine with it like they did during prohibition.
Other fun fact - the antidote for methanol poisoning is….ethanol.
Chart69r t1_j6cjkyl wrote
Learned this watching house
dave200204 t1_j6d0dl9 wrote
Methanol appears at the very start of the run. Almost every moonshiner knows this. So they dunno out the first cup of so.
GoodGoodGoody t1_j6bpqze wrote
Acetone. I had no idea.
Justeserm t1_j6atwqp wrote
Has anyone tried marketing a pure 100% ethanol drink?
I personally drink Everclear, and it's 190 proof, or 95% ABV. From what I can tell alcohol with water forms an azeotrope and has a lower boiling point than alcohol without. I would suspect that when alcohol is distilled some flavors may come with the water that evaporates with it.
I was thinking about trying to distill my own "dry" alcohol. If you add certain dried salts that form hydrates I think you can "soak up" the extra water and be left with basically pure ethanol, except for some of those other things you mentioned.
jrp55262 t1_j6b17xm wrote
Are you drinking Everclear straight? Got your liver transplant lined up already?
The thing about the azeotrope mixture at 95% ABV is that at that point alcohol and water have exactly the same vapor point. You could distill that stuff 100 times and not get any higher alcohol concentration. There are various tricks that are used to push past this barrier, but they either require exotic equipment (vacuum swing distillation) or can leave undesired residues (benzene addition)
Justeserm t1_j6bgeat wrote
God, no. I like drinking it because it has like no taste and I only have to use a little.
From what I read, acetone can be dried by baking Epsom salt (magnesium sulfate?) to dry it and then adding acetone. I think then it's supposed to be frozen and the acetone can be poured off the top. I was thinking of trying it with ethanol, but using a natural salt that forms a hydrate and (hopefully) isn't a laxative, not that it should dissolve.
Scottzilla90 t1_j6bfgru wrote
Ethanol above 70% actually damages proteins and cell membranes.. use with caution
cunninglinguist32557 t1_j6bhu3p wrote
An ex of mine chugged everclear from the bottle because he thought it was vodka, and I don't think I've ever seen anyone that fucked up.
D0ugF0rcett t1_j6bzq6u wrote
>An ex of mine chugged everclear from the bottle
Oh boy
>because he thought it was vodka,
Oh boy
Scottzilla90 t1_j6bl9ap wrote
Ouch
Gabzop t1_j6cfc4n wrote
Me and my buddies used to put warheads or skittles in a bottle and drink it because we were fucking stupid.
jashxn t1_j6cfcn0 wrote
Whenever I get a package of plain M&Ms, I make it my duty to continue the strength and robustness of the candy as a species. To this end, I hold M&M duels. Taking two candies between my thumb and forefinger, I apply pressure, squeezing them together until one of them cracks and splinters. That is the “loser,” and I eat the inferior one immediately. The winner gets to go another round. I have found that, in general, the brown and red M&Ms are tougher, and the newer blue ones are genetically inferior. I have hypothesized that the blue M&Ms as a race cannot survive long in the intense theater of competition that is the modern candy and snack-food world. Occasionally I will get a mutation, a candy that is misshapen, or pointier, or flatter than the rest. Almost invariably this proves to be a weakness, but on very rare occasions it gives the candy extra strength. In this way, the species continues to adapt to its environment. When I reach the end of the pack, I am left with one M&M, the strongest of the herd. Since it would make no sense to eat this one as well, I pack it neatly in an envelope and send it to M&M Mars, A Division of Mars, Inc., Hackettstown, NJ 17840-1503 U.S.A., along with a 3×5 card reading, “Please use this M&M for breeding purposes.” This week they wrote back to thank me, and sent me a coupon for a free 1/2 pound bag of plain M&Ms. I consider this “grant money.” I have set aside the weekend for a grand tournament. From a field of hundreds, we will discover the True Champion. There can be only one.
Tyraels_Might t1_j6d58q9 wrote
Yooooo. It's been years! Finding this again feels like meeting an old friend.
SapperBomb t1_j6d4m97 wrote
Uh sir, this is a Wendy's
TheRealSnorkel t1_j6e1no9 wrote
This might be my favorite copypasta
Shimmer_Games t1_j6bq50h wrote
I love your name
Justeserm t1_j6bghxz wrote
I have it with a mixer.
CoolGuy175 t1_j6cv5jl wrote
This guy knows how to give head, and tails too.
purple_hamster66 t1_j6e0zw8 wrote
Are there filters that could be designed to get exactly the compounds you want, without all that guesswork?
Albs610 t1_j6a1ge8 wrote
Good explanation. Is this true with like beer beer to? Like why budwiser and bush are basicallu identical but one clearly is better tasting(usually) and cheaper?
I've always heard the better case of bush would taste better than a worse case of budwiser but never understood why.
hikeonpast t1_j6a6ihr wrote
Beer has much more to do with ingredient quality and process steps. I can’t speak to Bud vs. Busch, since they are both lagers and have a similar flavor profile (to me). Compare the flavor of, say, Anchor Porter to Budweiser. Worlds apart.
Ralfarius t1_j6am1h4 wrote
All macro brews are pretty much interchangeable, imo. Not bad, necessarily, but the difference between a domestic 'premium' and 'value' brand is not significant enough to warrant the price difference. Craft beers, however, run the gamut from eye opening to terrible mistakes.
jrhooo t1_j6aopu2 wrote
add to that, a significant number of medium-macro brews may have their own recipe, but pay some bigger macro to brew their stuff.
Example, Baltimore's "Natty Boh" being owned by PBR and Brewed on contract in Coors facilities
blkhatwhtdog t1_j6app96 wrote
Well you can tell Michelob from bud n Busch and they all come from the same vats.
Pete's Wicked Ale...I believe the first craft beer or maybe that's Anchor Steam...was hired out to a small mass market brewer...as was Boston Lager
im_the_real_dad t1_j6dstow wrote
A few years ago I toured the Anchor brewery in San Francisco. At that time they made Anchor beer in SF.
henchman171 t1_j6bmms0 wrote
Busch had corn and Budweiser has rice
blkhatwhtdog t1_j6ap8en wrote
American beer is mostly barley flavor rice sake. Literally the cheapest beers have the most rice. That's why people are surprised by their first taste of a European beer.
In the old days before I could drink, breweries usually only had one product and the flavor varies with the price of commodity barley, hops etc...and the marketing price they were aiming for. I read about the implosion of Schlitz when the brewers decided to go cheaper but the marketing department decided to go upscale, and nobody knew what the others were doing. In the 50s n 60s you had to plan 6 months ahead. Your advertising was locked in 3 months in advance (my dad used to tell me about shooting summer fashion in the winter)
lewisj75 t1_j6asvwp wrote
This is not true.
blkhatwhtdog t1_j6ba72i wrote
Easy just look at the ingredients on the nutritional label. Case closed, thanks for playing.
nutsotic t1_j6bey8e wrote
Lol beer doesn't have nutritional labels
G0_pack_go t1_j6arp3y wrote
FWIW Miller Lite has zero rice.
TremulousHand t1_j6buhqh wrote
I almost never drink the American macrobrews, but I was curious about looking into this. While rice is common, corn is actually more common (especially in the form of corn syrup). Hilariously, many companies pass both ingredients off as variations of "fine cereal grains" without actually specifying what they mean exactly.
Of the 13 most popular beers in the US (rankings based on what I found in a USA Today article), three have rice, nine have corn (usually syrup), and there's only one with no rice or corn.
Rice: Bud Light, Budweiser, Michelob Ultra
Corn: Coors Light, Miller Lite, Corona Extra, Modelo Especial, Natural Light, Busch Light, Busch, Keystone Light, Miller High Life
No rice or corn: Heineken
I do think calling them barley flavor rice sake is a bit unfair to sake, which has a much more complicated fermenting process than beer. In any event, I had no idea how much corn syrup goes into cheap American beers.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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....
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.
tranding t1_j6bgdba wrote
Yes this is the point I came here to make as well. Smirnoff to grey goose 'taste' after Brita filtering.
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
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
hikeonpast t1_j6a62z2 wrote
Disagree on both claims.
-
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.
-
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.
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.
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.
Scottzilla90 t1_j6bfnev wrote
Yes, more distillation tends to make vodka taste purer as does charcoal filtration (the Brita method).
FreeJazzForUkraine t1_j6d5biu wrote
Legally, the cheapest stuff and titos should taste the same because of Vodka regulations. Probably doesn't but it should.
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
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”.
-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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Grammarguy21 t1_j6acq7h wrote
Antman013 t1_j6adhn8 wrote
LOL . . . ya caught me.
total_looser t1_j6c9gxh wrote
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.
-domi- t1_j69sexh wrote
I'm not talking about mid-shelf. I'm talking the absolute cheapest shit on the market.
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...
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.
-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.
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.
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.
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.
sweetnumb t1_j6b8b4o wrote
Yes... I agree with you. Overhyped by rappers.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
HereComesCunty t1_j6amk74 wrote
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.
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).
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?
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!).
Antman013 t1_j6cxn6x wrote
Coffee, tea leaves, tobacco leaves, beer . . . other spirits.
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...?"
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.
grat_is_not_nice t1_j69wasa wrote
First, pure alcohol (ethanol) is tasteless. However, the process of making and distilling alcohol includes congeners - other chemicals that are the result of the fermentation process and then selected (and in some cases modified) during distillation.
The congeners depend on the raw material (cane sugar, beet syrup, barley, malted barley, grain, corn, or potato) and the yeast strain that feeds on the sugars to produce alcohol.
Distillation then extracts the alcohol from the water in the ferment. Along with the alcohol comes the methanol (the heads and tails, which are discarded), some water, and some of the congeners. The heat of distillation also chemically modifies the congeners.
The temperature, type and material of the distillation still further modifies the congeners - copper stills react with and remove sulphur-containing congeners, for example. Modern column and vacuum stills can have very selective distillation. Cycling the distillate through multiple distillation and filtering stages allows for highly selective congener selection and end-product.
However, better source sugars, distillation stills and multiple distillation stages result in more loss and wastage. This is expensive. So cheap spirits use cheaper raw materials and cheaper distillation methods, and their products have more congeners that generally result in a harsher taste. Better starting materials and distillation/filtering smooths out those congeners for a better raw spirit.
Then comes the flavouring process (for gins) or cask aging (for bourbons and whisky/whiskey), which have been discussed by others. Again - more expensive starting materials at this stage produce better results. Proper barrels vs wood chips, burnt casks vs charcoal filters, more cheap vs fewer expensive botanicals - it all adds up to better flavour in the end result.
However, as also pointed out, selection should be based on blind tasting and not on price alone - the human brain is hard-wired to appreciate more expensive tastes.
BarkBeetleJuice t1_j6c8gb1 wrote
>First, pure alcohol (ethanol) is tasteless.
That's not really true, it burns like a motherfucker.
FreeJazzForUkraine t1_j6d5l0m wrote
The burn is your cells undergoing osmosis. Its not a true taste.
Alcohol does have a distinct aroma, but not taste.
TheMace808 t1_j6e131h wrote
Idk about osmosis, but dying perhaps?
FreeJazzForUkraine t1_j6eje98 wrote
It's osmosis. The alcohol is absorbed into your cells via a concentration gradient and dries them out.
Another part if the burn is that alcohol activates heat receptors that usually only activate above 107°(VR1). But as for the pain if you leave a drop of high proof alcohol under your tongue- thats a result of osmosis.
Chaotic_Lemming t1_j69q8yk wrote
What kind of alcohol are you talking about?
In alcohol such as wine blind taste tests have shown that there is little difference between the mid-level and expensive brands. A lot comes down to people's expectations instead of whats actually in the bottle. Although some of the truly cheap wines are god awful. Thats down to the quality of the grapes and processing.
For distilled spirits it depends on the type of spirit. Some require filtering to remove certain chemicals that can effect the taste. The extra filtration steps add cost to the production process and increase price. Aged whiskeys are more expensive because of the aging process. Its a heavy investment with a lot of risk to produce a product that you have to store for a decade or more before the first bottle hits the shelf. Higher quality spirits will usually have some extra level of processing/production that adds to the cost.
Beer tends to come down to the quality and variety of ingredients, as well as volume of production. A beer that is produced in gigantic vats a hundred thousand gallons at a time with basic cheap ingredients is gonna cost less than one brewed in a 500 gallon vat with a selection of premium ingredients. And the taste is purely a matter of personal preference. I know people that prefer miller lite to high quality micro-brews. They just have a taste preference.
SeniorRum t1_j6bap3d wrote
Another reason is taxes. Taxes on ethanol are quite high. However taxes on flavorings are a lot lower or not existent. Many flavorings only dissolve in ethanol so they use an ethanol carrier. (I was once told that Red Bull is .35% alcohol from the flavorings)
So when you’re making a really cheap alcohol you’ll add a lot of “flavorless” flavorings that use ethanol carriers. The total alc % doesn’t change, it’s still 35 or 40% or whatever, but a portion is from non taxable flavor. The more you add, the less taxes and the cheaper that plastic bottle of Vlad The Impailer Vodka direct from St Petersburg (Florida) can be. Those flavors even though they aren’t meant to, change flavor and also massively increase hangovers.
ERRORMONSTER t1_j6bzjw4 wrote
Answer: in addition to what others have said, even if everything else were the same, alcohol that tastes bad will generally have a lower demand than alcohol that tastes good, inducing good tasting alcohol to be more expensive, all else equal.
[deleted] t1_j69of1p wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6a1max wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6anrya wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6bz4kv wrote
[removed]
mikeholczer t1_j6clvzl wrote
A lot of the reason is because you expect it to. I’ve seen cases were people have done blind taste tests of both un-aged alcohol, like vodka, and aged alcohol, like wine, and people generally can’t tell the difference unless they are told one is more expensive. If they are told one is more expensive they tend to like that one whether it actually was more expensive or not.
kynthrus t1_j6cn7d7 wrote
Ingredients and distilling process. Creating a better tasting alcohol just costs more straight up. Anyone with an airtight pot and barrel can make alcohol, making it taste nice is the trick.
[deleted] t1_j6cp0c0 wrote
[removed]
Sexpistolz t1_j6dju93 wrote
Since no one else has talked about wine:
Its a common misnomer that more expensive wine tastes better. In my experience (been working with wine for about 20 years) most newer or infrequent wine drinkers prefer cheaper, fruitier and sweeter tasting wine. More expensive wines tend to be aged in various types of barrels that alter the profile of the wine. They tend to be drier, oaky, and more secondary/tertiary flavor notes (ie wood, spice, vanilla, mushroom etc). Many inexperience wine drinkers do not have a refined enough palette to be able to pick out the complexity of many more expensive wines.
[deleted] t1_j6dl1lg wrote
[removed]
hvrock13 t1_j6e4q28 wrote
I’ve never noticed a difference lol. It all burns and for liquor, it’s not gonna taste good regardless. It is a poison after all
[deleted] t1_j6fw7li wrote
[removed]
LayneLowe t1_j6b0m5r wrote
I have had $20 bourbon and $100 bourbon, I can't taste any difference. It's all just alcohol.
aspersioncast t1_j6brhlh wrote
Lucky you.
[deleted] t1_j6bfy85 wrote
[removed]
explainlikeimfive-ModTeam t1_j6bm5se wrote
Please read this entire message
Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):
- Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3).
Joke-only comments, while allowed elsewhere in the thread, may not exist at the top level.
If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using this form and we will review your submission.
goldfishpaws t1_j69q147 wrote
Drinking alcohol is usually under 40% ABV (spirits) and a lot lower for wines (11-13%ish) or beers (3-6%ish).
That leaves a lot of space for other things and flavours - and much like cheap "orange flavour drink" doesn't compare with freshly squeezed orange juice, the mixers will have a huge affect on flavour, the good stuff is more expensive.
Mayor__Defacto t1_j6af8z8 wrote
Virtually no spirits are bottled at what they’re distilled to. Vodka is typically distilled to above 90% ABV and then diluted with water at bottling.
goldfishpaws t1_j6cueah wrote
Exactly my point - they're dilute products, the alcohol doesn't taste any different, the stuff it shares a bottle with does.
hikeonpast t1_j69u0tt wrote
One of the big reasons that cheap alcohol can taste "off" has to do with the nature of the distilling process.
When you distill fermented "beer" into spirits, lots of compounds come over in distillation. Some of those compounds taste "good", and some taste "bad". At the beginning of a batch distillation run, the first compounds to come over are lighter-than-ethanol compounds like acetone. Those are called "foreshots" and are discarded or recycled. Next come the "heads", which have some ethanol, but also methanol, acetaldehyde and light esters (flavors). Next come "hearts", which are mainly ethanol and water, with a few esters in the mix. Last come "tails" which tend to include fusel oils and other foul-tasting compounds. Tails have a distinct wet dog smell and taste very bitter.
The art in distilling is knowing how much of the heads and tails to include with the hearts in the final product. More expensive spirits add just a little heads and tails to give the spirit character while still tasting good. Cheaper spirits will add back more of the heads and tails, because it increases the total amount of spirit produced, at the cost of including undesirable flavors. Barrel aging can temper some of those off-flavors a bit, but you'll still get some odd flavors/smells.
Source: I work with a distiller