Community Tasting Note

• numen wrote: 68 points

  September 4, 2013 - from a purchased sample
  
  Nose: Toffee and brown sugar flambe crust, a touch light, along with some gentle quince and plum jam. Cinnamon, spice, stewing orange in brown sugar syrup. Fairly well balanced with general orange and light-brown tones, and some oak influence. Diluted, yet otherwise fine here. Whiff of some artificial sweetness in the trail. Decent and otherwise pleasant, just shows all the usual elements of an over-light and over-watered blend.
  
  Palate: Spice and odd funky wood. Off-sweet, off-bitter, just... strangely funky. There are some of the usual fruit notes - orange (burned skin), cherry, quince, and some strange artificial sweet taste along with sugar-sweet water. Ah, the common mark of the common cognac.
  
  Finish: Some wood, providing balance, sappy watery sweetness, and some indistinct grape and plum. The funky note, sweetness, and watery quality make this a rather disappointing tipple. The 1840 showed promise, but I'm not sure what happened here. Bad sample?

  4,275 views

4 Comments

• jsjoe commented:

  4/10/16, 6:48 AM - Very unusually low rating. Might have been a typo or an emotional rating rather than a genuine dispassionate rating. Probably should be deleted.

• numen commented:

  4/30/16, 5:33 PM - jsjoe, it's not an emotional rating. If you look through many of my reviews, you'll see that I gave low scores to spirits that were watery, sugary-watery (giving a sense of artificial sweetener), and odd-wood/minimal fruit. All three were present here.
  
  Maybe it was a poor sample (Master of Malt), but I doubt it.

• jsjoe commented:

  12/4/21, 8:20 PM - Numen, I didn’t even notice your comment. Your scoring system is, well, misguided. “68” is absurd and is begging to be noticed for something, but it’s not about scoring the spirit and not in the spirit of community scoring. I shall not comment any further.

• numen commented:

  12/30/21, 1:51 PM - @jsjoe, your tasting profile may well be very different to mine. I think that my scoring is hardly "misguided." It reflects my sense of what makes for a good or bad spirit. In this case a purchased sample had markings of a poorly or cheaply made spirit that I find very off-putting. Your sense of taste may be very different and either you didn't notice it, it doesn't bother you as it does me, or, perhaps, we've had different batches that vary greatly.
  
  I do not know what you mean to say that my score and comments are not "in the spirit of community scoring." You have stated that my score and notes were a mistake and should be deleted. I hadn't realized that you were the ultimate arbiter of acceptability and tasting and that all people's experience must needs be bound within a range that you deem acceptable. If I taste a spirit that I think is very poorly made and off-putting to me, I will provide a score that reflects that.
  
  I'm glad that you enjoy the cognac tremendously and find it "angelic." I'd be curious to get your thoughts on other spirits that I've consumed and for which I have posted notes.

Add a Comment