Nex to tobacco variety's

[monbla256]

McClelland's are BETTER

Would you like some fries with that ?

:face:

I think the ketchup already comes included with every purchase..... :lol!:

I throw the ketchup away. I like salt and ranch dressing with mine so I get the Gawith stuff :bounce:

 

[Rusty]

Your question has two answers. And they are mutually contradictory.

On one hand, there IS a Gold Standard, just as there are (legitimate) five-star restaurants. That Gold Standard would be G. L. Pease.

On the other hand, an awful lot of people like Big Macs.

You catch my drift.

:face:

Everything Yak wrote is correct EXCEPT this line should read" .. That Gold Standard would be McClelland".

Now can you see how there is NO answer to your question? To pare it all down, Buy an ounce or two of maybe 5 types of tobacco, and unless it just really strikes you as NOT for you, smoke ALL of what you bought of each blend in as many different pipes as available to you, keep some notes any way you want, and just go from there . It's a LIFELONG habit for most of us so this non- structured method works really well. The main thing is to relax and enjoy it all.

LOL!
Everything Yak and the old gent wrote are both true without exception. However, I suspect the old gent has yet to discover GL Pease tobaccos. He'd better hurry up; blends wait for no man. I would add C&D to those two as well. The three of them stand in line behind nobody.

I'm astonished at the volumes of European continental tobaccos sold when those three are so active and productive. This is not to say that you shouldn't try a lot of tobaccos.

I've tried MANY of Mr. Pease's blends and they are all good, just my OPINION, which ALL of this is from ALL of us, is that McClelland's are BETTER . Since it is ALL based on personal perceptions of a very subjective subject, taste, there can really be no "Gold Standard" that is not based on subjective criteria

I can sorta understand saying that with Virginias. But for mixtures? Y'know with Latakia....

What is wrong with you? :no:

 

[monbla256]

As far as Latakia blends, My preference is for several of the McC blends as well as the folks up in Bostons blends over much of what was produced in Britain years ago. It's ALL a matter of each persons SUBJECTIVE opinions about all of this. There is and really never has been a "hard and fast" objective definer. "One man's ceiling is another's floor" type thing. Doesn't mean the other guys stuff is not good, just one person prefers one over the other, so I will still say that one CANNOT set a "Gold Standard" . You can list all the various blends that folks might consider worth listing, but thats all it would be, a list of a WHOLE BUNCH of blends,

 

[Anonymous]

Repeating myself : they DO sell a lot of Big Macs, so McDucks must be doing something that pleases people. Not argued.

As far as McC & Virginias go, there is a line of thinking that goes something like this : if (since) good Virginia tobacco has a high sugar content, if we soak even more sugar into it, it will be even better !

On this end, that's not unlike the first few experiences with beer. Three make you feel so good there's a tendency to figure twelve will . . . Well, you know.

Proportion and balance are the name of the game in the upper reaches of the craft. Which is probably why outfits like Bell, Cope, & Fox were renowned for single blends. And, great as they were, Sobranie House for three. Getting it that right even once is damned tough. And that's spotting them what . . . 50 years to tinker with them ?

:face:

 

[Anonymous]

Rather than give you the impression that I'm being hostile, I'm pretty plebean as far as food goes. As far as food you get "out" somewhere goes, Popeye's fried chicken smoke's 'em all.

Still, if you're a foodie, dropping 200 bills for a dinner at Chez Wechamacallit, you're expecting a lot more than you are at Meg's Diner. And rightly.

I think the problem is that the economics of the tobacco market don't allow GLP to charge prices that reflect the quality of what he makes. If he could, this would straighten itself out spontaneously. People would argue, but their doing so would give onlookers a fix on where they were at, which would reinforce the conclusion.

:face:

 

[monbla256]

NOW it's all beginning to make sense ! PRICE is the arbiter of QUALITY!! I would hope that Mr. Pease has been making some profit as I don't think he's just doing all he does out of some altruistic sense I would imagine he is, maybe not as MUCH as he could, but I hope so. With price being the arbiter of quality, then it's obviuos that the unavailable "scented/flavored" offerings from across the pond at their higher costs would be the BEST! Since I can't afford new Dunhills or custom made freehands and am tired of waiting for the "un-available" best in blends, I guess I'll just have to stop smoking. Thanks for the insite

 

[Rusty]

... so I will still say that one CANNOT set a "Gold Standard" . You can list all the various blends that folks might consider worth listing, but thats all it would be, a list of a WHOLE BUNCH of blends,

Yep and you're proving that point. McClelland is a great tobacco maker but they are renown for Virginia's more than mixtures. Unlike the other two they debuted in the late 70's when British tobacco was still a force in the world. Plus they moved in on British turf so they went head to head with them and grew. Not bad.

But mixtures? :shock:

But Yak is assuming things about McClelland's Va's that really are attributes of Euro continental Va's. They're the ones that soak them in sugar. I think McClelland doesn't which is why they have a vinegar nose so early in their lives. That's the scent of fairly natural fermentation. It takes most Va tins years of aging to get there, if they get there at all.

 

[Anonymous]

No. It isn't. Obviously.

But where people are concerned, they take it as one, so it might as well be. That's the perspective I wrote that from.

When a new GBD or non-special Comoy was $22.50, a Dunhill was $85.00 Was the Dunhill a three-times-better pipe ? I think not. But people valued it as if it were. Simple suggestion.

IMHO, his stuff is worth it.

:face:

 

[Rusty]

IMHO, his stuff is worth it.

:face:

Yes. It's great. He pours memories into tins. I don't know how but he does. So I agree. But....

Exnay on the pricing talk ok? Rather not have to pay more. I appreciate it just fine at the current price.
Bad enough that SG's US distrib decided that he'd raise prices and profits instead of beating SG into more production.

 

[monbla256]

Yep and you're proving that point. McClelland is a great tobacco maker but they are renown for Virginia's more than mixtures. Unlike the other two they debuted in the late 70's when British tobacco was still a force in the world. Plus they moved in on British turf so they went head to head with them and grew. Not bad.

But mixtures? :shock:

But Yak is assuming things about McClelland's Va's that really are attributes of Euro continental Va's. They're the ones that soak them in sugar. I think McClelland doesn't which is why they have a vinegar nose so early in their lives. That's the scent of fairly natural fermentation. It takes most Va tins years of aging to get there, if they get there at all.

So, let me see if I get this correct as what you've just said has turned everything over that I had thought I knew about "blends" over the last 40+years. If I , a tobacco blender take three "types" of Virginia tobacco's and put them together in some sort of proportion and either add a topping or press them into a solid and maybe even slice them, I have NOT made a BLEND as it is NOT made up of DIFFERENT types of tobaccos? And to think I have been missinformed all these years

blend (blnd)
v. blend·ed or blent (blnt), blend·ing, blends
v.tr.
1. To combine or mix so that the constituent parts are indistinguishable from one another: "He has no difficulty blending his two writing careers: novels and films" (Charles E. Claffey).
2. To combine (varieties or grades) to obtain a mixture of a particular character, quality, or consistency: blend tobaccos.
v.intr.
1. To form a uniform mixture: "The smoke blended easily into the odor of the other fumes" (Norman Mailer).
2. To become merged into one; unite.
3. To create a harmonious effect or result: picked a tie that blended with the jacket. See Synonyms at mix.

 

[Anonymous]

It might be that the word we're looking for is finesse. (?)

:face:

 

[Rusty]

Yep and you're proving that point. McClelland is a great tobacco maker but they are renown for Virginia's more than mixtures. Unlike the other two they debuted in the late 70's when British tobacco was still a force in the world. Plus they moved in on British turf so they went head to head with them and grew. Not bad.

But mixtures? :shock:

But Yak is assuming things about McClelland's Va's that really are attributes of Euro continental Va's. They're the ones that soak them in sugar. I think McClelland doesn't which is why they have a vinegar nose so early in their lives. That's the scent of fairly natural fermentation. It takes most Va tins years of aging to get there, if they get there at all.

So, let me see if I get this correct as what you've just said has turned everything over that I had thought I knew about "blends" over the last 40+years. If I , a tobacco blender take three "types" of Virginia tobacco's and put them together in some sort of proportion and either add a topping or press them into a solid and maybe even slice them, I have NOT made a BLEND as it is NOT made up of DIFFERENT types of tobaccos? And to think I have been missinformed all these years

blend (blnd)
v. blend·ed or blent (blnt), blend·ing, blends
v.tr.
1. To combine or mix so that the constituent parts are indistinguishable from one another: "He has no difficulty blending his two writing careers: novels and films" (Charles E. Claffey).
2. To combine (varieties or grades) to obtain a mixture of a particular character, quality, or consistency: blend tobaccos.
v.intr.
1. To form a uniform mixture: "The smoke blended easily into the odor of the other fumes" (Norman Mailer).
2. To become merged into one; unite.
3. To create a harmonious effect or result: picked a tie that blended with the jacket. See Synonyms at mix.

What the heck did I say that confused you?

A mixture (that's a keyword), ie an English or Scottish mixture, looks just like its name indicates 'a mixture of different types & colours of tobacco'. A Virginia is principally Virginia. It doesn't matter whether it is a blend of a variety of Virginias or maybe it has a little Perique, Burley, or even a bit of Oriental. It's really a Virginia. What's so hard?

 

[monbla256]

Nothing. So It is a Virginia BLEND ? You made it sound as if it does not have more than one TYPE of tobacco in it it isn't a BLEND, rather a MIXTURE. As I said, changed everything I've thought was. And besides, our digression from the original question has proven my original statement that there can be NO "Gold Standard" about tobacco blends/mixtures as was asked. We all have gone into our personal areas of likes , opinions and scattered facts as we each knows them. I would not call all this a "Gold Standard"

 

[Rusty]

Nothing. So It is a Virginia BLEND ? You made it sound as if it does not have more than one TYPE of tobacco in it it isn't a BLEND, rather a MIXTURE. As I said, changed everything I've thought was. And besides, our digression from the original question has proven my original statement that there can be NO "Gold Standard" about tobacco blends/mixtures as was asked. We all have gone into our personal areas of likes , opinions and scattered facts as we each knows them. I would not call all this a "Gold Standard"

You're confused about the words blend and mixture. The first is more like a marketing term used quite often on tins. It doesn't really tell us very much. But the word mixture is a specific keyword with tobaccos. The McClelland Green tins that you like are all mixtures. Older pipe smoking Brits understand what we mean by mixture. They might object to the 'English' being applied to that. Virginia's have always been more popular than mixtures in England. So they sometimes mildly object to the N. American habit of calling them English mixtures.

If you can find a nice book about tobaccos esp pipe tobaccos do so. Carl Ehwa's book about pipes and tobaccos is worth the purchase price just for the tobacco section. It's pretty good. He was one of the founders of McClelland. The book predates that by about 5 years.

 

[scottbtdmb]

First off, I hope you are learning a bunch from all the informative websites that myself and others on here sent you. It is a fun and exciting time in one's pipe career when they are just starting out and you are taking in so much information. From my experience with the "brands", I can honestly say that I have had my experiences with tobaccos bought from small blending houses. I would recommend that you look into Pipeworks&Wilke at www.vtpipes.com. They have been around for over a hundred years and their current blender/owner Carole Burns does a really great job of continuing the legacy of many of their decades old blends. She uses top notch tobaccos and is still somehow able to procure high quality Orientals such as Yenidje, as well as really good Syrian Latakia that is used in blends like #400 and #524. Additionally, you will find great blends from LJ Peretti's in Boston at www.ljperetti.com. These guys have also been in business for over 100 years and also are able to obtain really high quality Orientals such as Yenidje and Izmir and some of their great English blends include Tashkent, Royal Blend, and Omega. They are also known for their Burleys, although I have only tried their "Somerset Slices", which is the closes Burley I have found that approaches the strength in the old Edgeworth Slices. Yet another great old shop is Uhle's at www.uhles.com. While I have not had any of their blends, you will hear guys on here speak very highly of their Burleys and once again, they have been blending for 70 years! Finally, out in LA, you have Kramer's Tobacco at www.kramerstobaccoshop.com. This blending house has been around for over 50 years and were known to have supplied pipe tobacco to many late, great Hollywood movie stars of the 40's and 50's. Overall, it is my opinion that these smaller ma&pa type shops churn out some of the best tobacco blends out there. They are all available in bulk, which will save you money as opposed to buying tins and you are literally smoking historical blends that have been around for ages. Just my two cents and once again have fun with your pipe smoking journey.

-Scott

 

[monbla256]

As always your right Rusty But I'll maintain it's still the old ceiling/floor thing BTW, I have a copy of Ehwa's book, signed by him and it does have great info in it. Your not the only one to have written material around for reference. BTW scotts reply above is much more along the lines we should have taken to reply

 

[Rusty]

As always your right Rusty But I'll maintain it's still the old ceiling/floor thing BTW, I have a copy of Ehwa's book, signed by him and it does have great info in it. Your not the only one to have written material around for reference. BTW scotts reply above is much more along the lines we should have taken to reply

Scott is making suggestions to try for any and all. It's all about trying stuff.
But we were talking about consensus and then terminology. I was specifically answering your question and also gently teasing you about your preferences along with Yak.

Some of those suppliers will not send Canucks tobaccos. We're fortunate anyway because we can import from those that will ship but most is not distributed in Canada any longer either. We do have SG but the price would make you wonder.

 

[monbla256]

I know about the Canadian "thing". I have a cousin up in Montreal for whom I buy three McClelland "blends" for him down here in Texas and send to him as I can get them cheaper here and he beats the high tobacco taxes in Canada this way

 

[mark]

There might be a can of worms being opened some where but I have to ask. ..

More like a DRUM of worms,,,but it's always interesting,,,it's been a great read,,,

 

[desertpiper]

And that's what I kind of wanted to do. People get passoniate about this and you get good arguments (debates). Which brings out good info.