February, 2019. I’m in London at the Whisky Show: Old and Rare. On offer? Truly vintage spirits like non-peaty Laphroaig from the 1930s and 1950s ryes from long-shuttered Maryland and Pennsylvania distilleries. Festivals like these are windows into the past — and, in some cases, may be our only chance to get a glimpse into what spirits from decades ago really tasted like. It is scary how good five-year-old 1950s bourbons tasted. They had flavors that you don’t find in 10-year-old bourbons of today. To be honest, after tasting some of those releases, it is hard not to come away thinking something has been lost.
Why do these whiskeys taste so good? What changed? In short: everything. Every aspect of how those whiskeys were made is different: The wood choices, the grains, how they heated their stills. Almost nothing is the same but the distillery address.
Today, there are some distilleries that want to go back to these old ways because they, too, feel it makes for more flavorful whiskeys. To better understand what these distillers want to do and why, let’s take a brief look at how distilling has changed over time.
From Cottage Industry to Beverage Industry
In both Europe and the Americas, distilleries tended to follow a similar growth pattern. Distilling began as an on-farm enterprise, with farmers turning their excess grain into something longer lasting, safe from vermin, and easily tradeable. As laws changed and distilleries grew, the industry shifted — part-time distilling was no longer as profitable or necessary. It was far easier to sell your grain to someone else who was distilling full-time and not tie up your funds or time in owning the necessary equipment, buying barrels, and getting whiskeys to market. From there the industry shifted again to large-scale factories of whiskey making, with blends, widespread distribution, and corporate ownership.
Each of these shifts has changed the product we know as whiskey in many small ways. These changes have combined to make many of today’s whiskeys far different from what they were in the past.
Farmer distillers wanted a good-tasting product that could maximize the value of their trade and be enjoyed in the months they didn’t produce spirit. These distillers did not make whiskey year-round; post-harvest was whiskey season. Time and blending couldn’t fix mistakes. They didn’t aim to produce a certain amount of distillate. They cooked the grain they could spare, and if neighbors had extra grain but no still, they cooked for them as well. They knew that, depending on the harvest, production would rise and fall each season.
That isn’t how large modern distilleries work. Today, production is king, and other considerations are secondary to that maxim. It doesn’t mean that modern whiskeys don’t taste great. It’s just that maximizing flavor is not the primary goal of many producers — it is one of several, and it often takes a back seat to other priorities, like controlling costs and meeting production quotas. There are contracts to fulfill and shareholders to keep happy. Spending more money on less productive grains is not how to make the corporate math work. Early distillers were not trying to spend more money either, but they also weren’t looking for ways to cut costs and create new efficiencies. They used the excess from the grains that they grew primarily for food.
What Changed? What Was Lost?
Some of the key changes that have occurred over the last 60 years in U.S. and U.K. distilleries include:
- There has been a shift away from certain barley, corn, and rye strains toward higher-yielding strains. Some examples of this are the move away from Golden Promise or Maris Otter barley, Rosen rye, and Hickory King corn to other styles that increase the amount of distillate and reduce costs.
- Increase in barrel size and entry proof, both of which reduce the need for labor, barrels, and storage space
- Switch from spent brewer’s yeast to distiller’s yeast or a blend of the two. Distiller’s yeast produces a high-ABV fermentation as quickly as possible. Brewer’s and baker’s yeasts are more flavorful but work more slowly.
- Shorter fermentation times. This means more batches can be fermented and distilled per week, leading to higher yield — at the loss of richer flavors that come from longer fermentation.
- Less use of worm tubs. This change saved distilleries space and money, which allowed for additional stills and greater production at the loss of the richer, more viscous spirit that comes from using a worm tub.
- The switch to column stills versus pot stills or chamber stills. Column stills are easier to operate and produce more distillate than the other options but may strip away more flavor in the process.
- Use of more “active” woods for barrels, with the flavors of the wood being used to supplement and replace some of the flavor that was lost via other changes in production.
- A shift away from floor maltings. Industrial malting processes provide a more consistent product in much larger quantities but with some loss of flavor.
- A move away from direct-fired stills. Indirect heating creates more consistent heat when compared to direct-firing. Direct-firing tends to provide a range of different temperatures over the pot’s surface, and this inconsistency can generate different flavors in the distillate.
You may notice a theme in these changes. Almost all of them allow for greater production and control, and decreased costs for the distiller. In some cases, there are legitimate reasons for the switch. Some of the grains being used now are hardier and more resistant to disease. Direct fire shaves years from the life of a still. Distiller’s yeast makes for a more consistent fermentation process. But the net result of all of these changes is that certain flavors that were common in whiskeys can now only be found in old dusties — a diminishing resource.
Chasing That Old-Fashioned Flavor
This takes us back to where we began. If we’re craving those flavors from long ago, how do we scratch that itch? To find out, I talked with two people who share my love for old styles of whiskey and are trying to bring back that flavor in new ways.
One is Matt Strickland of Iron City Distilling in Creighton, Pennsylvania, who is working on a Monongahela rye project inspired by historic styles. Monongahela was a style of rye whiskey produced around the Monongahela River watershed from the 1800s up until Prohibition. It is dearly missed because of its big, bold flavors. Strickland is currently working on a product inspired by that historic style, and I was curious as to how he went about it. There are so many possible variables, from grain source to still shape. I asked Strickland about the choices he made for this project.
“A lot of folks can pick one or two techniques and just see how they work and affect their final product,” he explains. “There are certain things that you can implement in your distillery that take a page from historic distilling practices and that can positively affect your product.”
Strickland started doing research. He and his team reached out to local historians and asked “What did this whiskey really taste like? How was it actually made?” They made the acquaintance of Laura Fields from the SeedSpark Project, an initiative to revive lost cereal grains and bring them back into full-scale production. From Fields, they learned that Rosen rye was a white rye that was very closely related to the ryes that were grown in the region back then and known to be quite flavorful.
Strickland and Fields began looking at possible mash bills. While Strickland wanted to try a 100% Rosen release, Fields pointed out that the typical mash bill in the region was something around 80% rye and 20% malted barley. “I’ve looked at all these old mash bills, and they’re all kind of loosely around that,” says Strickland. “I would have loved to do 100%, but I do want this whole historic angle to be in effect.”
For this project, Strickland also installed the first operational three-chamber still in Pennsylvania in over 65 years. Because the cooperages back then were not as consistent with their chars, Strickland opted for a barrel program with mostly char #4 barrels with smaller amounts of char #1 and #2 barrels in the mix. He and his team decided that they would go into the barrel at 101 proof. Their research showed them that the old Pennsylvania warehouses were brick and steam-heated. The one thing he wishes that he could do over is that he opted for a shell and tube condenser on the three-chamber still versus the worm tubs they probably would have used.
At Kythe Distillery in Perthshire, Scotland, Angus MacRaild and his team are in the process of building a distillery with the goal of reviving “old style” Scottish single malt whisky. “Our aim is to recreate an extinct style of Scottish single malt whisky — one not produced since the 1960s,” says MacRaild.
Every decision they have made has been to further that dream. They aren’t spending any money on visitor centers or merchandise. All of their capital is going toward the creation of a distillery that can produce the old-school flavors that they love.
The project draws on MacRaild’s deep connections and extensive time in the Scotch industry. He writes about Scotch whisky as the “Whisky Sponge” and contributes reviews on Whisky Fun with the icon that is Serge Valentin, plus he has his own line of independent bottlings via Decadent Drinks. MacRaild and his team have had years of access to the styles of whiskies they want to recreate. They know the flavors they want, but have had to reverse-engineer how to get there with their distillery build.
“I think the whole ‘old-style whiskey’ thing can mean something quite different in America. It’s a totally different world,” says MacRaild. “Whenever I’m going around asking about bottlings of American whiskey, I’m speaking to producers, and one of the first things I’m asking is ‘What’s your cask-filling strength?’ Because I just want some of those old-school, fruity bourbon flavors, but they are hard to find.”
MacRaild wants those old-school flavors to be available in new products, not just dusties. For him, there’s no good reason why flavors like these aren’t available on a shelf today. “We know how to make it. It’s just that it’s become so expensive if you make it deliberately now, versus it just being how the industry was decades ago.”
That vision might require a different business model with lower production and a higher price point, with the goal of growing demand and establishing value through quality rather than quantity. “It is a bit scary, but I’ve no interest in doing any other kind of distillery. If I’m going to make whiskey, this is the whiskey we want to make. So why not give it a try?” says MacRaild.
So how did MacRaild and the team at Kythe look to approach these challenges in their distillery build? They used a combination of primary research via old distiller data, production sheets, and production logs as well as interviews with older distillery workers about how they did their jobs. They also did a lot of tasting. From there, they gained a good idea about the specific characteristics they wanted: “Waxiness, tropical fruit, these kinds of flavors that we love,” explains MacRaild.
From the beginning, MacRaild and his team knew that slow, clear wort mashing, long fermentation using ex-brewer’s yeast, direct firing, and worm tubs would be the foundation of their approach to old-style production. “We knew what we wanted, and there was nothing that we came up against that persuaded us otherwise,” says MacRaild.
For MacRaild and his team, the real test will come in figuring out how long it’s going to take them to determine if they’re on the right track. “With distillate, so much about it is locked up and kind of embryonic. It needs that time in cask to come out of its shell,” says MacRaild.
I look forward to a day when we can taste the product of Strickland’s and MacRaild’s hard work. I’m quite willing to “go back” to make a new future for the whiskeys that I love.
