Is Whiskey Age Nothing But A Number?

By Kurt Maitland

As I have learned more about whiskeys (or “whiskies”), especially how they are made and how each manufacturer can turn what is a simple set of basic ingredients into a staggering array of complex tastes, I have found myself evaluating the individual qualities and factors that each one brings to the table. Over time, my standards and tastes have changed with that growing base of knowledge. My “go-to” drink has drifted from Jameson’s to Maker’s Mark, Oban to Macallan,  Pappy’s to Evan Williams Single Barrel and Elmer T. Lee, as I have sought out and explored new experiences.  As I learn more about whiskey, “go-to”  has just become “today’s selection”.

When I am making that informed choice,  age is not the determining factor. What is always first and foremost in my mind is the taste. When I say that, I am not so ill-informed as to think that age doesn’t matter.  It matters in so much as the aging process affects the end product and reflects the intent of the master distiller.

Yet if you are a fan of Jack Daniels or Old Overholt,  would an extra year or two of aging matter to you? Probably not.  Those are selections you are making based on taste.  Perhaps you like how Old Overholt is the rye of choice for many authentic cocktail recipes, or are simply a fan of the taste of Jack and Coke.  When I seek out Pappy Van Winkle (a long and painful hunt twice a year if you live in NYC) ,  it’s the taste I am after, not a prestigious aging statement. If Pappy could produce the exact same quality of bourbon with no comprises in half the time,  I doubt there would any complaints from the thirsty masses.

This is where I take issue with those whom have started a tempest in a teapot over Macallan’s 1824 series. Some have made this out to be a assault on aging (and the higher prices that an older vintage can bring).  It is nothing of the sort if you respect and appreciate what drives consumption: taste. That’s why I give King’s County’s Bourbon (only aged for a year) the same chance to impress my taste buds and earn a place on my liquor shelf as I do the finest 30 year old from the world’s most famous distillers.

If the aging process makes a particular bourbon or whiskey better then that should be borne out in the taste.  The mere fact that one brand’s release has been aged longer than another does not automatically guarantee a better product. Ultimately, that critique will come from the consumer.  They will decide after tasting the whiskey if the price that Macallan or any other whiskey, aging statement or no, wants to charge for is worthy of a repeat purchase. And that is how it should be.