JimInks
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2012
- Messages
- 37,217
- Reaction score
- 49,675
The woody, earthy red Virginia adds much of what sweetness there is: tangy and dried dark fruit. It's a bit subdued by the dark fired Kentucky, but that's not a complaint, just an observation. I consider the RV to be more of a condimental addition. The woody, lightly floral, nutty, vegetative Kentucky is a little deeper flavored with a touch more earth and a little spice. The bright Virginia offers tart and tangy citrus with a touch of grass and floralness as a condiment. The sugary black cavendish is a condiment. The molasses topping is mildly applied, and there's a touch of licorice as well. They sublimate the tobaccos to a moderate extent. The nic-hit is in the center of mild to medium. The strength and taste levels are medium. Burns cool, clean and a little slow with a very consistent sweet taste. Requires few relights, and leaves a little moisture in the bowl. Has a pleasantly lingering after taste. The room note is a tad stronger. Not an all day smoke.
Is it the very same tobacco as the Orlik Dark Kentucky? No, it isn't. Orlik Dark Kentucky was a slightly sweeter and easier on the tongue when I compared the two blends some years back. PH DSF seems just slightly harsher, and has a little more molasses than the licorice in the Orlik version. The red Virginia was a little more prominent in ODSK with more dark fruit flavor. You could see it a little more, too.
UPDATE 12-24-2014: I'm smoking a freshly opened tin, and the tobacco has changed from when I smoked it a couple of years ago. The Virginia is brighter with much less red, and doesn't have the level of dark fruit that it once had, and is a little sweeter. It still has the same molasses and licorice flavor, though I notice the licorice a little more than before. It has a little more grass and citrus that it didn't have before because the bright Virginia content is greater now, though the level of earthiness seems to be the same. It's also a tad spicier than it used to be. The sugary black cavendish is still a condiment. The strength and taste levels are the same, barely. The nicotine level lightly less potent. The burn rate and after taste are the same. Four stars for the older version, three for the new one.
UPDATE 6-23-2022: This blend has been radically changed. The label no longer mentions dark fired Kentucky or red Virginia. The amount of tart and tangy, grassy, bready, sour lemon, vegetative, mildly floral, sugary, acidic bright Virginia has been increased. Many flakes are predominantly bright Va. with a little black cavendish bookending the slices or are partly on one side. There are flakes and broken flakes that are pure black cavendish, but the proportions don’t average out the way they used to when dark fired Kentucky was used in this blend. Judging the 2016 production and this one side by side, the bright Virginia appears to have been increased by approximately twelve to fifteen percent. The very sweet and spicy black cavendish is the major component, and is described as having “its typical roasted aroma”. To my tastebuds, it appears that Kentucky was subjected to the black cavendish process as it certainly has a nutty presence that I associate with burley. The label states that a fruity plum topping was added. It mildly tones down the tobacco, although I still taste a little licorice despite the written omission of its presence on the label.
The strength and nic-hit are still medium, but the taste is now a step past that mark. It’s more floral, citrusy, sour, mildly spicier (due to the increase in the brights), and less sweet with distracting acidity. The black cavendish certainly has a little less strength than the dark fired Kentucky formerly used, and depending how you prepare your smoke, isn’t always the lead component unless you stack the bowl in its favor. However, that would leave you with a lot of bowls where the bright Va. is the major factor. There’s no chance of a consistent flavor unless you spend bit time manipulating the flakes to suit that purpose. Essentially, this is now the type blend where you can experiment with the proportions of the varietals for your own amusement. Moderately moist, it still burns a tad slow, and requires some relights. Leaves little dampness in the bowl and has a more acrid room note. It’s not an all day smoke. One and a half stars rounded down to one for this production largely due to the acidity and uneven distribution of the varietals. My rating at TR reflects this version.
Is it the very same tobacco as the Orlik Dark Kentucky? No, it isn't. Orlik Dark Kentucky was a slightly sweeter and easier on the tongue when I compared the two blends some years back. PH DSF seems just slightly harsher, and has a little more molasses than the licorice in the Orlik version. The red Virginia was a little more prominent in ODSK with more dark fruit flavor. You could see it a little more, too.
UPDATE 12-24-2014: I'm smoking a freshly opened tin, and the tobacco has changed from when I smoked it a couple of years ago. The Virginia is brighter with much less red, and doesn't have the level of dark fruit that it once had, and is a little sweeter. It still has the same molasses and licorice flavor, though I notice the licorice a little more than before. It has a little more grass and citrus that it didn't have before because the bright Virginia content is greater now, though the level of earthiness seems to be the same. It's also a tad spicier than it used to be. The sugary black cavendish is still a condiment. The strength and taste levels are the same, barely. The nicotine level lightly less potent. The burn rate and after taste are the same. Four stars for the older version, three for the new one.
UPDATE 6-23-2022: This blend has been radically changed. The label no longer mentions dark fired Kentucky or red Virginia. The amount of tart and tangy, grassy, bready, sour lemon, vegetative, mildly floral, sugary, acidic bright Virginia has been increased. Many flakes are predominantly bright Va. with a little black cavendish bookending the slices or are partly on one side. There are flakes and broken flakes that are pure black cavendish, but the proportions don’t average out the way they used to when dark fired Kentucky was used in this blend. Judging the 2016 production and this one side by side, the bright Virginia appears to have been increased by approximately twelve to fifteen percent. The very sweet and spicy black cavendish is the major component, and is described as having “its typical roasted aroma”. To my tastebuds, it appears that Kentucky was subjected to the black cavendish process as it certainly has a nutty presence that I associate with burley. The label states that a fruity plum topping was added. It mildly tones down the tobacco, although I still taste a little licorice despite the written omission of its presence on the label.
The strength and nic-hit are still medium, but the taste is now a step past that mark. It’s more floral, citrusy, sour, mildly spicier (due to the increase in the brights), and less sweet with distracting acidity. The black cavendish certainly has a little less strength than the dark fired Kentucky formerly used, and depending how you prepare your smoke, isn’t always the lead component unless you stack the bowl in its favor. However, that would leave you with a lot of bowls where the bright Va. is the major factor. There’s no chance of a consistent flavor unless you spend bit time manipulating the flakes to suit that purpose. Essentially, this is now the type blend where you can experiment with the proportions of the varietals for your own amusement. Moderately moist, it still burns a tad slow, and requires some relights. Leaves little dampness in the bowl and has a more acrid room note. It’s not an all day smoke. One and a half stars rounded down to one for this production largely due to the acidity and uneven distribution of the varietals. My rating at TR reflects this version.