Now these are the articles I wished I read in Academia!
Whilst still in academia, I surely wasn't interested in diluting my whiskey.
Well, except with coke or orange juice.
Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
51–60 of 70 posts
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, that's very high. I'm curious about whether the angels' share noticeably alters the ABV, from the time the distillate is put into the cask, to when it's bottled (as I'm assuming different evaporation rates for water & ethanol). Edit: https://www.bruichladdich.com/article/the-angels-share Is quite interesting: "Casks stored in humid conditions lose a greater proportion of alcohol than those stored at lower humidi…
So, in the case of the aforementioned Stagg, the distillate went into the barrels at 125 proof, and came out at 144. Clearly, the angel's share preferred to take water over distillate. That said, the yield was horrible -- 10-15 gallons of spirit per barrel out of an initial barrel capacity of 55 gallons. That said, I question whether humidity has as much to do with it as atmospheric pressure does. The benefits of bar…
Cheers those figures are very interesting.
Wow that's a massive loss though, I hadn't realised it could be that much lost.
That's also interesting regarding a potential for accelerated ageing.
I'm also wondering how oxygen uptake is effected by differing levels of spirit in the cask, I'm assuming that might effect the taste somewhat.
Edit: The thesis 'Aging of whiskey spirits in barrels of non-traditional volume' has lots of interesting information.
"As evaporation occurs and the fill level decreases, oak not in contact with liquid spirit dries, contracts, and becomes more porous to the entry of outside air (28). Oxygen present in the barrel fuels oxidation reactions that are essential in the production of mature spirits"
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#53Takeaway/tl;dr: "Overall, there is a fine balance between diluting the whisky to taste and diluting the whisky to waste"
I tend to drink it cask-strength, neat. I like the burn.
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whisky is diluted as part of the manufacturing process to the optimum(ish) level: 80 proof / 40% ABV. You are correct to not dilute it further. Ref: Whisky is distilled to around 70% alcohol by volume (vol-%) then diluted to about 40 vol-%, and often drunk after further slight dilution to enhance its taste.
Yup. I wouldn't want to ruin a good thing. I don't even want ice in it. On the other hand, I've tried stuff like Everclear. That needs dilution. It's absolutely horrible, by itself. Good whiskey needs no adulteration.
> Good whiskey needs no adulteration.
Most whiskey is not sold at cask strength so evidently most distillers disagree. On the other hand, the higher quality whiskies are usually the ones that have lower cask strength and higher bottle strength, i.e. less diluted.
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup. I wouldn't want to ruin a good thing. I don't even want ice in it. On the other hand, I've tried stuff like Everclear. That needs dilution. It's absolutely horrible, by itself. Good whiskey needs no adulteration.
> Good whiskey needs no adulteration. Most whiskey is not sold at cask strength so evidently most distillers disagree. On the other hand, the higher quality whiskies are usually the ones that have lower cask strength and higher bottle strength, i.e. less diluted.
Correct. Good whiskey is perfect when you get it. The folks who made it know how to make good whiskey.
I never buy cask strength.
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give a brief explanation of the justification? I googled for the paper, and had difficulty finding the original or citations.
Not sure who is right, but there is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitri_Mendeleev#Vodka_myth
From the wikipedia page you're citing:
However, Mendeleev's dissertation was about alcohol concentrations over 70% and he never wrote anything about vodka.
This is clearly not true. Page 81 (Chapter 4) of Mendeleev's dissertation [1] starts as follows:
На основаніи этого, желая съ возможною точностію опредѣлить составъ той смѣси спирта и воды, которой при разныхъ температурахъ соотвѣтствуетъ наибольшее сжатіе, я изслѣдовалъ смѣси, содержащія отъ 40 до 50 процентовъ безводнаго спирта. Это изслѣдованіе состоитъ изъ двухъ главныхъ частей: приготовленія смѣсей и опредѣленія ихъ удѣльнаго вѣса. Опишу первое, второе изложено во второй главѣ.
[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/%D0%9C%D...
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#57It's disappointing they did not reference the seminal work by the father of the Periodic Table on ethanol/water solutions [1]. This work is often cited as justification for why Russian vodkas are 80 proof. 1. Mendeleev, D.I., O soedinenii spirta s vodoi, sochineniya (Total Collection of Transactions: On the Combinations of Alcohol with Water), Leningrad: ONTI-Khimteoret, 1937, vol. 4. UPDATE on Mendeleev's work with…
Can you give a brief explanation of the justification? I googled for the paper, and had difficulty finding the original or citations.
Here's the original:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/%D0%9C%D...
He actually determined that the highest compression of the mixture takes place at roughly 46% alcohol. (p. 93).
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#58Intriguing. I always assumed it had to do with greater alcohol strengths anesthetizing the taste buds.
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is truly the tabs-versus-spaces pointless debate of drinking culture.
The Martini is the tabs-versus-spaces debate of drinking culture. (But there is only one right way for that as well)
I thought the Martini was the toilet-paper-roll-orientation debate of drinking culture.
Re: Dilution of whisky – the molecular perspective
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Good whiskey needs no adulteration. Most whiskey is not sold at cask strength so evidently most distillers disagree. On the other hand, the higher quality whiskies are usually the ones that have lower cask strength and higher bottle strength, i.e. less diluted.
Correct. Good whiskey is perfect when you get it. The folks who made it know how to make good whiskey. I never buy cask strength.
That's a shame. There are some Lagavulin and Laphroaig bottlings that are amazing at cask strength, without any additional dilution.