I just tried...to write a tobacco review.

[George Kaplan]

I didn't get very far. I blame Kyle and BH and all you guys who set the bar so dang high. :evil: I'll try again this weekend. There's this other problem of mine that keeps popping up, making me reticent to discuss tobacco in detail. Sometimes I doubt that I really know what I'm smoking. I try a lot of blends, and know what I like and don't like. It's just that I have trouble isolating specific elements. Monbla brought something up on a recent thread, and I think he's mentioned it before as well. (not that he repeats himself ) With our modern-day access to such a variety of blends, we don't often take the time to "get to know" any one blend in particular. When I started 20 years ago this wasn't the case; I got to know Paladin and Captain Black pretty well. :lol: In the 2 or 3 years I've been back, though, I must admit I've become quite a baccy slut. I think it's time for me to go back to basics, so I've ordered some "pure" blending tobaccos. I'll make it my summer project to actually learn what makes a blend good or bad to my tastes. This is how I learned to cook. Not follow recipes, mind you, but actually create a dish; by learning the individual ingredients and how they work together.
First, though, I've got to hammer out this review of the Royal Yacht that A.J. sent me...

 

[George Kaplan]

p.s. I think I'll start saying "20 years ago" until Kyle lumps me in with Monbla.

__________________________________________________________________

Onward through through the frog

 

[monbla256]

I didn't get very far. I blame Kyle and BH and all you guys who set the bar so dang high. :evil: I'll try again this weekend. There's this other problem of mine that keeps popping up, making me reticent to discuss tobacco in detail. Sometimes I doubt that I really know what I'm smoking. I try a lot of blends, and know what I like and don't like. It's just that I have trouble isolating specific elements. Monbla brought something up on a recent thread, and I think he's mentioned it before as well. (not that he repeats himself ) With our modern-day access to such a variety of blends, we don't often take the time to "get to know" any one blend in particular. When I started 20 years ago this wasn't the case; I got to know Paladin and Captain Black pretty well. :lol: In the 2 or 3 years I've been back, though, I must admit I've become quite a baccy slut. I think it's time for me to go back to basics, so I've ordered some "pure" blending tobaccos. I'll make it my summer project to actually learn what makes a blend good or bad to my tastes. This is how I learned to cook. Not follow recipes, mind you, but actually create a dish; by learning the individual ingredients and how they work together.
First, though, I've got to hammer out this review of the Royal Yacht that A.J. sent me...

George,
You've brought up what to me, are some very pertinant points concerning all the 'bac sampling that is done around here. Without some "time" ie, calendar wise AND quantitywise, one really can't "know" a blend/mixture IMHO I congratulate you on your decision and will look forward to hearing of any results that you come up with

 

[Fishfuzz]

Frankly, I would rather just know how you personally felt about any blend. Then when I try it, I can base my experience against yours and then balance the results (reading the rest of your reviews with an appropriate filter, if necessary).

So, what did you think?

 

[Anonymous]

Nobody alleges there's no validity in your point.

But you don't have to marry a woman and live with her for 30 years to know you don't like her.

:face:

 

[Kyle Weiss]

I'm usually full of crap when I write.

Then again, it doesn't seem that way when I write it, especially after trying something.

Getting to "know" a blend or a mixture includes (for me) writing extensively about it. Some of it goes here, some of it doesn't. Tobacco and the pipes chosen are definitely like a relationship. You have to get to know them while realizing the pretense they aren't interested in getting to know you. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't--even from day to day.
For now, it's just enjoying the moment, or deciding it isn't worth your time. I know couples that re-met and even married years after they decided they didn't like each other, and (to my knowledge) happily ever after.

All of it is details, GK, might as well write 'em down, even if it's total crap, and regardless if you share them. Even if it's just a few sentences. Though tobacco won't mind so much if you keep daily diaries about your interaction with them, which would likely scare the bejesus out of a potential human partner. :lol:

Good luck on your "basics" research, I'll be curious with your progress!

8)

 

[George Kaplan]

Thanks for the encouragement, gentlemen. This bit of silliness exposes a personality flaw of mine that's plagued me since childhood. I'll often set out to do something that seems like a lot of fun at the time, only to have it bog down in the planning stage. The dang plan just keeps getting bigger. Obstructive Perfectionism, a shrink once called it. (He also told me clowns weren't always plotting to eat me, so he was probably full of crap.) my desire to "get it right" makes me get bogged down in details. The more important a task seems, the less likely I am to ever finish it. Seems pretty silly doesn't it? It is, but if I gotta have some kinda complex, better this than bed wetting.
Case in point: ajn27511(A.J.) just sent me a generous goody bag which included some Dunhill Royal Yacht, which intrigued me. I want to do right by him, so I can't just write a half@$$ed review. I wouldn't judge it on a single bowl. I'd need to try it in different pipes, with different moisture levels, different packs, under different conditions. If I add only 3 variables to each of these brackets, I'd need to smoke 81 bowls for a full data set. He didn't send me that much. Even if he had, that's still a lot of smoking. Maybe Haggerty can smoke 45 bowls a day, but I top out at 4, maybe 5 at the most.
This is ridiculous, but I just wanted to get that off my chest. I'd like to start writing reviews here. I will soon enough. Just need to break out of this mind-set first.

 

[monbla256]

I'll often set out to do something that seems like a lot of fun at the time, only to have it bog down in the planning stage. The quote]

I think you summed it up with your reference to "...the planning stage" To me, a review of something as subjective as an "impression" of a tobacco really does not need as much "planning" as you may think it does. When I've done one, I don't really "plan" things out, mainly I write in a much more spontainious manner. Nothing wrong with that, it is your "impressions" after all

 

[tech2576]

Well put monbla, after all, everyones "impression" of a blend will be different.
Variables maybe of some interest but the basic tastes and general thoughts after a bout 40I yrs of smoking a blend will do. 8)

Nobody is looking for scientific analyses of the stuff. Just your opinion.

Go for it!

 

[KevinM]

Yeah. I find it hard to describe a taste, too. Probably because my taste buds only have three settings: good, not so good, and don't like. Lacks subtlety, don't it?

There are interesting solutions to the communication problem. The Professor's Pipe Page includes very good narrative descriptions of pipe smoking tobacco. (Even though his taste buds seem to have levels far beyond my own.) The Prof, on a relatively few blends, also includes objective scores (Granted, based on his subjective reaction) in which he rates strength, taste (in several different categories), room note and others. I kinda get the quantitaive scores better than I match up with his narrative descriptions, though I'm sure many would find the opposite to be true.

I have a book on wine tasting which includes an extensive vocab and descriptions of what each word means. Wonder if anyone has done that for tobacco tasting.

 

[zjgilbert]

Thanks for the encouragement, gentlemen. This bit of silliness exposes a personality flaw of mine that's plagued me since childhood. I'll often set out to do something that seems like a lot of fun at the time, only to have it bog down in the planning stage. The dang plan just keeps getting bigger. Obstructive Perfectionism, a shrink once called it. (He also told me clowns weren't always plotting to eat me, so he was probably full of crap.) my desire to "get it right" makes me get bogged down in details. The more important a task seems, the less likely I am to ever finish it. Seems pretty silly doesn't it? It is, but if I gotta have some kinda complex, better this than bed wetting.
Case in point: ajn27511(A.J.) just sent me a generous goody bag which included some Dunhill Royal Yacht, which intrigued me. I want to do right by him, so I can't just write a half@$$ed review. I wouldn't judge it on a single bowl. I'd need to try it in different pipes, with different moisture levels, different packs, under different conditions. If I add only 3 variables to each of these brackets, I'd need to smoke 81 bowls for a full data set. He didn't send me that much. Even if he had, that's still a lot of smoking. Maybe Haggerty can smoke 45 bowls a day, but I top out at 4, maybe 5 at the most.
This is ridiculous, but I just wanted to get that off my chest. I'd like to start writing reviews here. I will soon enough. Just need to break out of this mind-set first.

I can kinda relate. While I don't feel the need to smoke the tobacco that much to write a decent review, I do feel I need to make the outcome perfect. Basically what I remember is that I'm here to just have fun with it. This isn't a job, it's a hobby. No one here is going to be criticizing you because you weren't elaborate enough. Ultimately a review is merely your thoughts on a tobacco and is subject to change. I will typically update reviews I've made on tobaccos every few bowls to remind me and inform others of the full view of the smoke rather than just the one sitting.

 

[zjgilbert]

Yeah. I find it hard to describe a taste, too. Probably because my taste buds only have three settings: good, not so good, and don't like. Lacks subtlety, don't it?

There are interesting solutions to the communication problem. The Professor's Pipe Page includes very good narrative descriptions of pipe smoking tobacco. (Even though his taste buds seem to have levels far beyond my own.) The Prof, on a relatively few blends, also includes objective scores (Granted, based on his subjective reaction) in which he rates strength, taste (in several different categories), room note and others. I kinda get the quantitaive scores better than I match up with his narrative descriptions, though I'm sure many would find the opposite to be true.

I have a book on wine tasting which includes an extensive vocab and descriptions of what each word means. Wonder if anyone has done that for tobacco tasting.

I know some people will do this with bourbon. If you have some kind of suggestion of what flavors may pop up in the tobacco ie chocolate, raisins, dates, etc. then eat those things prior to smoking. It will help familiarize your palate. Sometimes it's difficult to pack a bowl blind, smoke it, and say you taste such and such, but if you have something suggesting that flavor it is much easier to discern.

 

[Rob_In_MO]

No one here is going to be criticizing you because you weren't elaborate enough.

Cool. Let's see here...


1-Q - Ok
RLP-6 - Good
BCAQ - Better
RLP-6/BCA - Best!





:lol!:

 

[zjgilbert]

No one here is going to be criticizing you because you weren't elaborate enough.

Cool. Let's see here...


1-Q - Ok
RLP-6 - Good
BCAQ - Better
RLP-6/BCA - Best


:lol!:

^Notes, not a review :tongue:

 

[Kyle Weiss]

I roasted coffee for about six months here in Reno--good coffee too, small-batch, medium-roast west coast style. One thing I did a lot to familiarize myself with flavors was to simply "cup" (taste) the batches after a good two-day rest (the beans need to "de-gas" and mellow a little). It really helped me tune in what I needed to do on future batches to roast, and often, what not to do. Having a clean palate was pretty essential, so foods eaten just before tasting could often chemically alter experiences. Usually this was fixed with sparkling water (seltzer bottles to make your own club soda was the ticket--nothing fancy).

Being a cook, scotch and beer nut, learning to find subtle flavors wasn't a big deal to me, but tobacco require a unique sensory approach, since it is not exactly "ingested," and takes some practice (trial-and-error, more like) to get just right. I feel I've only just begun the basics in that realm.

That in mind, if you do taste "triggers" that are akin to certain flavors, and want to familiarize yourself with direct foods that that you may get from the smoke, be sure to cleanse your palate. Mouth chemistry is important, and there's been plenty of foods that have ruined an otherwise good smoke--lots of tomato sauce with fennel, for example, was a poor choice just before a smoke, I learned. Bleh! :lol:

8)

 

[Rob_In_MO]

Mouth chemistry is important, and there's been plenty of foods that have ruined an otherwise good smoke--lots of tomato sauce with fennel, for example, was a poor choice just before a smoke, I learned. Bleh! :lol:

8)

Yes, absolutely correct. Don't drink Orange Juice right after brushing your teeth either. ale:

 

[monbla256]

Kyle, your reference to a tomatoe sauce with lots of fennel was interesting. That is one of my favorite types of tomatoe sauces and I have enjoyed a nice full Oriental/Balkan smoke about 1/2 hour after having some pasta with just such a sauce. I usually add a nice strong coffee (w/cream) as my drink along with my smoke which seems to add to the whole experience. JMHO 8)

 

[Rob_In_MO]

Kyle, your reference to a tomatoe sauce with lots of fennel was interesting. That is one of my favorite types of tomatoe sauces and I have enjoyed a nice full Oriental/Balkan smoke about 1/2 hour after having some pasta with just such a sauce.

Maybe that's why you like the Ketchup blends so much.




Something Harlock turned me on to - Earl Grey goes great with Latakia. Not sure exactly how this combo works, but I know that it works well. The Earl Grey really brings out the flavor of the Latakia. Whenever I smoke a good English blend, I now fix a cup of Earl Grey to go with the smoke.

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Kyle, your reference to a tomatoe sauce with lots of fennel was interesting. That is one of my favorite types of tomatoe sauces and I have enjoyed a nice full Oriental/Balkan smoke about 1/2 hour after having some pasta with just such a sauce. I usually add a nice strong coffee (w/cream) as my drink along with my smoke which seems to add to the whole experience. JMHO 8)

True, but Balkans (I've recently learned) can pretty much overtake any situation. :lol: This is why I've come to really enjoy them! Sextant is another I find is a fantastic after-dinner for all occasions. A good cup of coffee/espresso is a good choice--if it's quality coffee, normally it is more neutral in the acidity realm and probably eases the transition even more.

It was Virginia (and often Red Virginia) that I've noticed being a problem with me, personally. Lesson learned.

Truthfully the seltzer water has been a great companion for during the smoke, if I'm not up for drinking adult or caffeinated beverages. I recently managed to buy a cheap, nice old 1950's Kidde Soda King system that only needed new seals, so I have a good supply of water'n'bubbles on hand!

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Maybe that's why you like the Ketchup blends so much.




Something Harlock turned me on to - Earl Grey goes great with Latakia. Not sure exactly how this combo works, but I know that it works well. The Earl Grey really brings out the flavor of the Latakia. Whenever I smoke a good English blend, I now fix a cup of Earl Grey to go with the smoke.

Hey hey, no messin' wit da Ketchup, sir. :lol:

Earl Gray has never gotten along with me. Not sure why. As Puff Daddy will attest, some direct-from-China Oolong or Pu'erh tea, the nice fermented stuff, is bliss with a good tabac. 8) Tea is wonderful stuff.