I just tried Semois

Brothers of Briar

Help Support Brothers of Briar:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Kyle Weiss

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
11,988
Reaction score
7
Boy, this stuff caused waves with a lofty, heralded introduction by the New York Times, giving smokers and non-smokers a glimpse into a world they may never knew existed.  I certainly didn't know what "Semois" was before then, and the plot only thickens--much like the smoke it can provide.

Two fine individuals around these parts, Todd Harris and Scotties, both were kind enough to surprise me with a sample of the leaf, which is quite difficult to get, so I understand.  It just so happens I have an interest in trying tobacco, and lo, I owe a review and the daunting task of getting through a few bowls.

Most of you know I write "I just tried," reviews, which make grumble the seasoned veterans that all have their definitive amounts required to be smoked before a mixture or blend is "known."  The problem is, between tastes changing, seasonally or overall, there's sometimes a case when there's just not enough tobacco on hand to really get a solid idea.  We work with what we have, and trust our tongues and our instincts to guide us further.  Plus, it means any writ I put forth toward this leaf will be in the shadows of some of the much better articles, research, history and reviews that have very recently come before it; no sense in re-paving the road.

Semois has one striking feature that is noticeable right away--the unburnt smell.  It's a combination of a faint maduro cigar with lilies and honeysuckle flowers.   There's tobaccos you can simply smell (more for the enjoyment of it as-is than a prelude to what is to come) and there's tobaccos you nasally absorb, as it entices the mind.  This is by far the latter, and unto its own.

I'm not sure exactly how this tobacco is packaged from the makers/curers, but the dryness was something to overcome.  My sample from Todd and Scotties were quite different, from the cut (Todd's sample was small, thin "curly-Q" vs Scotties' ribbon-like strans) and it makes me wonder if they were from two different places--though the smell is quite the same.   Sadly, the sample Todd gave to me, I discovered today, went slightly moldy and had a strong tinge of ammonia.  That's the first time I've had such a problem--ever.  All I did was put the sample in a small, sealed glass jar.   It tells me how natural and as-is the stuff happens to be.   I considered putting a little moisture into Scotties' sample, but this made me think twice about that.

Five bowls in, and each in a different kind of pipe, two cobs and three reliable briars.  Packing is extremely important here, because of the cut and the dryness.  "Breathing" a little moisture via bowl helped the second time, and it burned a little better and provided some much-needed moisture for flavor transfer.  This is a "sipping" tobacco if I ever had one.  While easy, the rich smoke's flavors can get lost if it isn't treated gently.

The flavors are indeed fascinating.   Depending on the pipe, tastes and tones are quite different.  In a cob, everything from hints of honey-roasted peanuts to sage-like cigar leaf remained throughout.   In fact, this tobacco smoked, reacted and tasted more of a curious, lightweight cigar than a pipe, but from unlike past experiments thinking I could simply put cigar leaf in a pipe and enjoy it, this was actually smokeable.   Other pipes, especially briar provided more muted, but more honest flavors, ranging from delicately meaty and ham-like, to lightly waxy like a honeycomb.  The natural, perceived sweetness is impressive, even from a sugar-phobe like myself--much how nutmeg and real cinnamon are sweet to the nose, but not the tongue.   When the savory kicks in at the end (I haven't clued in on all the nuances), it's a great change of pace throughout the bowl(s).  Nicotine is oncoming much like that of a cigar.  Less cerebral and direct, more whole-body and lingering.

Due to it being extremely easy on the mouth overall, I was able to load back-to-back bowls--mostly because of the smaller bowls I usually employ, the springy tobacco smoked quickly even with more insistent packing methods (which kept the smoke cooler and more even-keeled).   This also means my sample will be dwindling just as fast!  
 
So...did I like it?   Yes and no.   While it appeals in certain areas, I had to get over the "rarity factor" quickly if I were to be honest with my time smoking.  The tobacco lacks some expected dynamics.   Having tried untreated, totally natural tobacco from Mark some time ago, which is best described as "solid foundation missing a few things," since Semois is similarly untreated and unprocessed, it's astonishingly good by comparison.  It's completely different than any other tobacco I've tried to date.  Simple with complexity to be found, it confused my preference for matured, pressed leaf.   There's zero brightness, zing or "pop" one would find in certain Virginias, and lacks the body of aged tobacco.  There's no nutty body as one would find in a good Burley.  There's no spice of an Oriental, nor any pepper of a Perique.  It's truly one of a kind.   Thinking it might be better not playing solo, I'd have a hard time pairing it with any drink in particular due to its subtlety.  Perhaps a nice cognac (which I had none on hand)...?  

Subtlety, while I appreciate and enjoy, isn't always key.  Semois lacks a solid foundation that perhaps I missed, and reminds me of a Fauvist Matisse painting...lots of colors, questionable definition.  Some tobaccos have the personality of a brick wall, which can also appeal, and this is the opposite of that.  Gentle and curious, with fascinating origins and story, I won't be selling a kidney to get the stuff, but it is an eye-opener.   The purity while smoked and smell as-is becomes the real trophy, the experience of something truly different and uncommon was the biggest pleasure of all.  

8)
 
I bought quite a substantial bit of Semois and found it very interesting as well.

The tobacco smells absolutely divine, much as Kyle described. Unfortunately for me, the smoking experience was not as great. It does taste more like a cigar to me than any pipe tobacco I've tried. However I found that it burns very quickly and reduces my tongue to a burining crisp just as quickly.

The only way I've really been able to enjoy smoking semois is in hand rolled cigarettes. The problem is that the rolling paper really taints the flavor. Natural rice paper imparts the least flavor.

At the Kansas City show I was able to show the Semois to Mike McNiell, the master blender at McClelland. If any of you have seen Mike disect a tobacco, its quite fascinating. After a short time he was able to tell me exacly what the tobacco was: a simple Burley. That explains why it bites me so badly. Mike did mention that the terroir had really affected the taste of this Burley. Burley grown anywhere else, even the same species, would not have as distinct a flavour.

I learned a lot from Semois and I am happy I have tried it, but I will not be going out of my way to get any more.

Excellent review Kyle!
 
I should also mention this stuff has a terrible room note. I gave a couple of pipefuls to my buddy James, and I caught whiffs of it as we were trying out the first few bowls. A few passers-by looked at us as if we were belching swamp gas at them. As an anti-personnel tobacco, it would do just fine. :D
 
Kyle, is your Semois from any of the three major growers? From what I read there is tobacco labelled Semois that is not the bona fide article, which I think I remember means grown in the one valley.
 
Ocelot55":ccy9f2wa said:
At the Kansas City show I was able to show the Semois to Mike McNiell, the master blender at McClelland. If any of you have seen Mike disect a tobacco, its quite fascinating. After a short time he was able to tell me exacly what the tobacco was: a simple Burley. That explains why it bites me so badly. Mike did mention that the terroir had really affected the taste of this Burley. Burley grown anywhere else, even the same species, would not have as distinct a flavour.
fascinating. someone should do some genetic testing on the plants.

this reminds me of the Sicilian grape "Primitivo". at some point someone did some genetic testing and found out that it was identical to the grape we call "Zinfandel". until then it was assumed they were different.

doody.
 
This is the real deal Semois straight from Vincent Manil. Todd, Jesse and I all have the same stuff.

Jesse--I missed Mike at the show, but am going to give him a couple of bouchons at the next GKCPC meeting to see what he thinks.
 
Kyle Weiss":uv7x7v2i said:
Most of you know I write "I just tried," reviews, which make grumble the seasoned veterans that all have their definitive amounts required to be smoked before a mixture or blend is "known."  The problem is, between tastes changing, seasonally or overall, there's sometimes a case when there's just not enough tobacco on hand to really get a solid idea.  We work with what we have, and trust our tongues and our instincts to guide us further.  Plus, it means any writ I put forth toward this leaf will be in the shadows of some of the much better articles, research, history and reviews that have very recently come before it; no sense in re-paving the road.
Here's my opinion on this. The first few bowls of any tobacco you will taste it much more acutely than when you have become accustomed to it. You will taste more depth, and may catch nuances that will escape you later. I don't know why this is, and it isn't absolute as obviously you will have great smokes with any given tobacco at any given time. The downside to all this is that sometimes you go nuts over a new tobacco and buy a couple pounds, only to find that you never repeat your experience from the first few bowls. However, I think it's completely valid to post impressions after only three or so bowls, and those with good tobacco palates can make very accurate and astute observations on that experience.
 
I agree with Kyle's review, but I am not nearly as eloquent in my description.

I found that the taste reminded me of the smell of a well maintained barn.  That is it reminded me of sweet hay and straw with a very subtle undertone of something bad (like animal dung and sweat) but not in a bad way.  Sort of in the way that a minor chord in music adds some tension and improves the piece.

Todd

(This is why I don't often write tobacco reviews :D )
 
Thanks for the candid review Kyle.

I'll sample it eventually. Someday.

Hopefully it won't be like Tambolaka.

220px-Poison_Help.svg.png




Cheers,

RR
 
Kyle,
That review was the most interesting and descriptive ever. It sounds like a tobacco that I would smoke rarely, even though I am a common sewer of Burley and good cigars. I think that you expressed the nuances of that tobacco so well that I don't even have to experience smoking semois to know what it's like. You did all the experimentation for me. Thanks for that and for one of the finest reviews I've ever read.
:D 
 
To take on something as different as Semois and have that much to say, and depth in what you said, is a fine write. Kudos!
 
Thanks for the compliments.   :) 

Scotties cleared up the origins and lineage of the Semois I smoked, so there it is.   :)

Sis, you'll have to pardon the disclaimer I threw in there--I think it helps to remind readers that might happen across my review what my approach is, because I think a lot of guys, especially the seasoned veterans and the true tasters have their own idea of what standards should be had.  In such a subjective hobby, which is almost purely taste and preference with a little foundation of science somewhere along the lines, at least I have my objectivity points covered rather than come across like so many young upstarts who think they're someone.   I'm just me, here with my pipe--if someone thinks I'm full of sh!t, well, there it is.  :)  

RR, I still have some Tambo hanging around (again, from Todd Harris...and a few others) that I owe a review on.  I've been a little apprehensive.  Fortunately, because it's so dry anyway, I'm not terribly worried about the tobacco going south on me.  :lol:

I'd encourage anyone who has access to Semois in some capacity that hasn't tried it to give it a go.  It's so curious, and unique, I probably could have written sixteen more paragraphs on the thoughts I had about it, but what I wrote was fairly all-inclusive.  That said, don't necessarily take my word for it, life is to be experienced--for us, so is tobacco.  

As a writer familiar to us (with better linguistic kung-fu than I) often finales: "...your turn."   :) 

8)
 
nice review kyle...

IMO semois = mouthful of dirt + cigar + flower pedals + fresh bread + peat/wet hay + snickerdoodle.

aka the stuff dreams are made of.
 
[quote

IMO semois =  mouthful of dirt + cigar + flower pedals + fresh bread + peat/wet hay + snickerdoodle.

aka the stuff dreams are made of.[/quote]

:lol!: :lol!: 
 
Top