Liquor

[kphoger]

nice chunks of dried up bog

muck about

I see what you did there.   

[hbelkins]

Actually, I'm unaware of any distilleries located in Bourbon County. Bourbon County is more known for horses than for whiskey.

There are several distilleries, however, in nearby Franklin, Anderson, and Woodford counties. A tour of the Woodford Reserve distillery was actually part of a tax administrators' conference Kentucky hosted in 1999. I was there as a photographer.

The Kentucky Bourbon Trail is indeed being marketed as a tourist activity.

For six years, I worked in an office in Frankfort that was an old warehouse leased from Buffalo Trace. There's a decent concentration of distilleries in the Nelson County/Bardstown area.

Side note: Anyone who has traveled I-65 in southern Bullitt County, Ky., has probably noticed black spotting on many of the signs. This is due to the emissions from the nearby Jim Beam distillery at Clermont (where my uncle worked for years before his retirement). On humid, foggy days in Frankfort, the odor from the Buffalo Trace distillery can be detected for miles. On a couple of recent trips to Frankfort, I've noticed the black residue popping up on road signs as far away as the US 60/421/460 intersection and at the top of the hill going north on US 127.

[JayhawkCO]

Understood, but just as a lot of breweries Burtonize their water, some others also add and remove things to make it more like the water of Plzen (home of Pilsner).  Both are great styles of beer. Bourbon County has water sources that are unique as does Colorado.  Both can make great Bourbons.

Yes, and just as Burton and Plzen water both make great beer, they don't make the same beer. Likewise Bourbon County and Colorado water both make great whiskey, they don't make the same whiskey without a lot of effort to turn Colorado into artificial-Kentucky (the kind of stuff you talk about to make Scotch in Kentucky).

I'm not saying anything bad at all about Colorado Whiskey. I'm just saying it's a misbranding to call it Bourbon unless they muck about with the water and all that.

But the difference in this case is that the Colorado distiller is (likely) not actively trying to make a hugely different style of whiskey than the Kentucky distiller, whereas Bass and Pilsner Urquell are massively different intentionally.  I only brought up the different waters to show that there isn't just one exact profile of an ingredient that is required to make a certain beverage.  Both Plzen water and Burton-on-Trent water make beer.  But then when using those waters traditionally, those brewers are using other different ingredients to make their signature product.  Bass obviously is an ale, so it requires top fermenting yeast and different roasts of the malt.  Pilsner Urquell needs bottom fermenting yeast and has to ferment at a lower temperature, yadda, yadda, yadda.  They're both beer but massively different products because of more than just their water source.  With American whiskeys, there isn't as much variety because of the legal specifications of what constitutes Bourbon, Straight Bourbon, Bottled In Bond Bourbon, etc. 

The Scotch whisky example is a little bit different.  If they make "Scotch" in Kentucky, in reality the only way to do it would be to import peated malt from Scotland, as those nice chunks of dried up bog aren't readily available in Louisville.  So they're making it in a different place with most of the same ingredients exactly. It would be fairly easy to create a decent Scotch if you're basically moving Iverness to Lexington.  It's not possible to get those same funky iodiny flavors without a lot of imports, whereas that's not the case with Bourbon.

Scotch (like Burton beer) isn't a specific style, but covers a wider range. A lot of Scotch isn't peated, though some styles are.

And obviously by bringing up peat, I was ignoring Highlands and Lowlands whiskies that largely don't use peated malt, but I was trying to make a point.  If you use only local ingredients in Kentucky, you're never going to make anything that tastes remotely like Dalwhinnie or Laphroaig.  But if you imported a lot of ingredients from Scotland, you could create a reasonable facsimile thereof. 

Ireland has similar geology, water, peat, etc as parts of Scotland. It can't make Scotch, despite doing a similar recipe, but makes fine whiskeys that are it's own. All the more so for Kentucky and Colorado, which don't have anywhere near the same similarities in locally-available flavourings.

They're actually not similar recipes though.  They're actually closer to my beer example above.  Scotch uses only malted barley.  Irish whisky uses mostly unmalted barley. Scotch is typically double distilled while Irish is triple distilled, making Irish whisky generally smoother and lighter.  Scotch uses a whole bunch of different styles of copper stills whereas Irish whisky is normally distilled in one particular kind (which is why there is less variety in Irish whisky than Scotch).  The differences between Ireland and Scotland and their whisky traditions are MUCH larger than the differences between Colorado and Kentucky.

Chris

[JayhawkCO]

Actually, I'm unaware of any distilleries located in Bourbon County. Bourbon County is more known for horses than for whiskey.

If I'm not mistaken, since it's a dry county, they can't make whiskey there.

Chris

[SP Cook]

The county where they make Jack Daniels is also dry.

Bourbon County used to be a lot bigger, it got subdivided lots of times.  The parts that gave their names to the drink are now in other counties.

Anyway, some guys opened a "craft"  distiller in Paris about 4 years ago.  Use a small still and 6 gallon barrels.   I have not had the product.

[hbelkins]

Actually, I'm unaware of any distilleries located in Bourbon County. Bourbon County is more known for horses than for whiskey.

If I'm not mistaken, since it's a dry county, they can't make whiskey there.

Chris

Actually, Bourbon County is wet -- the county seat of Paris certainly has been for years. There was an old saying, "Bourbon County is dry but Christian County is wet," but that's not true and hasn't been for years. You have been able to legally buy alcohol within the boundaries of Bourbon County for as long as I can remember.

[JayhawkCO]

Actually, I'm unaware of any distilleries located in Bourbon County. Bourbon County is more known for horses than for whiskey.

If I'm not mistaken, since it's a dry county, they can't make whiskey there.

Chris

Actually, Bourbon County is wet -- the county seat of Paris certainly has been for years. There was an old saying, "Bourbon County is dry but Christian County is wet," but that's not true and hasn't been for years. You have been able to legally buy alcohol within the boundaries of Bourbon County for as long as I can remember.

Gotcha.  That's why I prefaced with "If I'm not mistaken".  I know I had heard that it was before, but apparently never took the time to verify.  Good to know, thanks.

Chris

[english si]

But the difference in this case is that the Colorado distiller is (likely) not actively trying to make a hugely different style of whiskey than the Kentucky distiller, whereas Bass and Pilsner Urquell are massively different intentionally.

My point is that the brewers elsewhere are trying to make specific styles of beer and so copy the water of where that style was first made as its a key part of the recipe. It's not just "get good water" with Burton and Plzen waters both being good water for making beer and thus interchangeable - the waters make radically different beer, because they are radically different - as different as the different yeasts in the two different styles.

The difference in the other ingredients owes a lot to the difference in the water - arguably its in the ingredient that shapes the beer style the most. The soft water of Bohemia lends itself to lagering, the hard water of central/southern England lends itself to making darker ales (and that's just dealing with one factor of the water). Colorado water is significantly harder than the softer waters of Kentucky and Tennessee (the area where almost all Bourbon is made, though Tennessee doesn't like using that name to describe its similar whiskey) - that's going to give its own distinct features. They might not actively be trying to make a different style of whiskey, but are they actively trying to make that same style? Does the Colorado distillery make its water more Appalachian the way that brewers make their waters more like Burton/Plzen?

But if you imported a lot of ingredients from Scotland, you could create a reasonable facsimile thereof.

So you can't make Scotch in Kentucky, but you can make "a reasonable facsimile" if you import a lot of ingredients. By this line of reasoning, you can make "a reasonable facsimile" of Bourbon in Colorado if you transport ingredients from further east. Lets suggest the adjusting of ingredients to match the original locale as being the same as importing.* But if its just going with the bare minimum legal definition (designed for defining the product for export to certain countries who use the term 'Bourbon' to mean 'American whiskey' while trying not to sully the term too much domestically), and using unaltered local ingredients, it's not even making "a reasonable facsimile" of what people actually mean by Bourbon. That's fine, but it is its own thing, not Bourbon.

*Even with beer - which is much easier to fake certain conditions than whiskey as you don't store it for years relatively exposed to outside conditions - there's been issues with certain beers (eg Guinness, Doom Bar) that didn't have the capacity to meet demand in the original brewery so they used breweries a couple of hundred miles away to meet certain markets. Obviously they mucked about with the water, used the same suppliers for the other products, but people could tell the difference and viewed the original as superior, leading to, eventually (not sure its happened yet with Doom Bar) all be made in much larger facilities near the original site.

The differences between Ireland and Scotland and their whisky traditions are MUCH larger than the differences between Colorado and Kentucky.

But the available ingredients are MUCH closer in Ireland to Scotland than the Rockies to the Appalachians. Ditto storing conditions and other such things that effect the product. I'm talking about if someone wanted to make Scotch in Ireland, using a similar recipe, not saying that they do actually use a similar recipe.

If an Irish distiller wanted to make Scotch with the peating, the malting, the only distilling twice, etc but didn't import (or muck about with to make closer) the ingredients, it wouldn't be Scotch, merely a similar product. We're talking about a step further away than what you call "a reasonable facsimile" here. But still closer than Bourbon made in Colorado as the difference in the ingredients and conditions is less.

Let Colorado be proud of what it makes, rather than trying to pretend its something else. That's what Tennessee does, despite having much more similar conditions to Kentucky than Colorado!

Going back to Pilsner, Miller Lite is not a Pilsner despite its branding in the US as such. For a start, it uses corn syrup to supplement the malt's sugars - a big no no for beer in Central Europe. It uses Galena hops in addition to the variety that define Pilsner. It's a Pilsner-based recipe, but it isn't a Pilsner. It adds stuff - as would using harder water in your Bourbon recipe. Doesn't mean its a bad beer, just means its mislabelled. I'm not particularly fussed if a Pilsner is made in Czechia or Canada, but there's defining elements of the style that require fairly precise ingredients (one of which is water). Same with Bourbon.

[JayhawkCO]

First things first, before I respond, a good article for anyone interested in MGP (the Indiana distillery that produces a lot of whiskey for places that basically claim they make it themselves).

And apologies for the length of the post, but you put a lot of thought into yours, and I wanted to be able to respond as thoroughly.

My point is that the brewers elsewhere are trying to make specific styles of beer and so copy the water of where that style was first made as its a key part of the recipe. It's not just "get good water" with Burton and Plzen waters both being good water for making beer and thus interchangeable - the waters make radically different beer, because they are radically different - as different as the different yeasts in the two different styles.

The difference in the other ingredients owes a lot to the difference in the water - arguably its in the ingredient that shapes the beer style the most. The soft water of Bohemia lends itself to lagering, the hard water of central/southern England lends itself to making darker ales (and that's just dealing with one factor of the water). Colorado water is significantly harder than the softer waters of Kentucky and Tennessee (the area where almost all Bourbon is made, though Tennessee doesn't like using that name to describe its similar whiskey) - that's going to give its own distinct features. They might not actively be trying to make a different style of whiskey, but are they actively trying to make that same style? Does the Colorado distillery make its water more Appalachian the way that brewers make their waters more like Burton/Plzen?

I largely don't disagree with you, but as you mentioned in your reply, water is the most important ingredient in beer.  It comprises 90-95% of the product, so of course it has a reasonably large impact on the flavor profile of different styles of beer.  But obviously at a higher proof, there's less water in whiskey comparatively, so in turn it's less important in the overall composition.  I'm not saying that it isn't important, but I would argue that it's less important than the grain, the barrels and other things that import flavor that comes across more easily than sedimentary materials in the water itself.  I just texted a distiller friend of mine who says that everyone modifies pH and removes chlorine (everywhere), but he isn't familiar with any distilleries filtering through limestone.  He also said that a lot of distilleries out here dilute with Eldorado Springs water to market it as Coloradoan.

So you can't make Scotch in Kentucky, but you can make "a reasonable facsimile" if you import a lot of ingredients. By this line of reasoning, you can make "a reasonable facsimile" of Bourbon in Colorado if you transport ingredients from further east. Lets suggest the adjusting of ingredients to match the original locale as being the same as importing.* But if its just going with the bare minimum legal definition (designed for defining the product for export to certain countries who use the term 'Bourbon' to mean 'American whiskey' while trying not to sully the term too much domestically), and using unaltered local ingredients, it's not even making "a reasonable facsimile" of what people actually mean by Bourbon. That's fine, but it is its own thing, not Bourbon.

Well, to start with, in my opinion the most important flavor component in whiskey is the barrel.  By definition, for bourbon, the barrels have to be new, charred, American white oak.  So that limits the amount of differentiation to start with.  Whereas Scotch might utilize used bourbon or used sherry barrels for their aging, that's not allowed when you call it bourbon.  In addition, almost every distiller gets their barrels from Independent Stave, a company based in Missouri.  So if everyone is using the same barrels for their whiskey, again, there isn't really going to be a differentiation between different regions if the same component is used in all places.  Then the other barrel component is the amount of char, which even within Kentucky/Tennessee varies distiller to distiller, so there's not a Kentucky type char and a Colorado type char.  It's all allowed to be called bourbon as long as there is some char.

As for the grain itself, of course there will be a little bit of differentiation in the corn and/or adjuncts based on where they're grown.  The real question is would corn grown in Kentucky taste different than the corn grown in Colorado?  To be honest, I don't know.  I know distilleries like to use their grain as a marketing technique, but it remains to be seen if anyone can actually smell/taste the difference of the "grain terroir".  But this isn't like wine where I can smell the difference between grapes grown in limestone soil vs. a clay soil, which as a trained sommelier, I can do rather easily.  I'd argue the most important contribution the grain provides to flavor is the grain bill itself, i.e. the percentages of corn, rye, barley, wheat, etc. And again, that varies just as much amongst Kentucky distillers as it does anywhere else.

My distiller friend said the following:

Commodity corn probably isn't going to taste any different, and that is what most use.  Heirloom varieties (blue corn, etc.) do taste different, but that's probably not a product of where it's grown.

But the available ingredients are MUCH closer in Ireland to Scotland than the Rockies to the Appalachians.

I already argued against this above.

Ditto storing conditions and other such things that effect the product. I'm talking about if someone wanted to make Scotch in Ireland, using a similar recipe, not saying that they do actually use a similar recipe.

If an Irish distiller wanted to make Scotch with the peating, the malting, the only distilling twice, etc but didn't import (or muck about with to make closer) the ingredients, it wouldn't be Scotch, merely a similar product. We're talking about a step further away than what you call "a reasonable facsimile" here. But still closer than Bourbon made in Colorado as the difference in the ingredients and conditions is less.

The storage conditions are going to be largely the same for bourbon however, as again, it has to be in the same kind of barrel.  Yes, there could be temperature/humidity variations depending on where you age the barrels, but I would argue that those effects are probably less than you'd think.  Look at Maker's Mark or Jim Beam.  They produce so much bourbon that they are aging their barrels in a climate controlled warehouse, not some specific cave with endemic bacteria and yeast that affect the flavor.

Let Colorado be proud of what it makes, rather than trying to pretend its something else. That's what Tennessee does, despite having much more similar conditions to Kentucky than Colorado!

We are proud that we make damn great bourbon!  And re: Tennessee, there's is just a marketing technique too.  Calling it "sour mash whiskey" is just announcing on the bottle a technique that almost all distillers use, Tennessee or not.  There is nothing different about Tennessee's whiskey.  And Colorado distillers proudly call out that it's Colorado bourbon too, but I just take it for what it's worth that we're not doing things dramatically differently than our Appalachian counterparts.  It's a lot like Tito's that became insanely popular because they labeled their vodka as gluten free.  Well no shit, Sherlock.  All spirits are gluten free unless they have additives like flavored vodka or something along those lines.

Going back to Pilsner, Miller Lite is not a Pilsner despite its branding in the US as such. For a start, it uses corn syrup to supplement the malt's sugars - a big no no for beer in Central Europe. It uses Galena hops in addition to the variety that define Pilsner. It's a Pilsner-based recipe, but it isn't a Pilsner. It adds stuff - as would using harder water in your Bourbon recipe. Doesn't mean its a bad beer, just means its mislabelled. I'm not particularly fussed if a Pilsner is made in Czechia or Canada, but there's defining elements of the style that require fairly precise ingredients (one of which is water). Same with Bourbon.

I agree that labeling matters.  There needs to be certain standards for sure.  But I think the crux of my argument (and for the record, I'm enjoying this discussion, so thanks for engaging), is I look at bourbon like I look at Burgundy.  In Burgundy, there are very specific rules.  If it's red, it's Pinot Noir -- the end.  If it's white, it's Chardonnay or, very rarely in comparison, Aligoté.  But within Burgundy, there are large differences.  Those from the Côte de Nuits (the northern part of Côte d'Or) are a lot more delicate and elegant.  Those from the Côte de Beaune (southern part of Côte d'Or) are more powerhouses.  The cheaper whites (village level and below) are rarely aged in oak, where the Premier Cru and Grand Cru start to be.  The soil is largely limestone, but there are variations within the region itself.  But, either way, the AOC decided that the wines that met the basic standard could be called Burgundy (or a more specific regionalization). 

The U.S. has decided that there are basic requirements for what constitutes bourbon.  The requirements are specific in a certain sense and also pretty liberal in others.  Since Kentucky distillers aren't consistent on a lot of those variables (grain bill, char level, ageing length, etc.), I don't see where the line is to exclude other regions from labeling their whiskeys are bourbon if there isn't an appreciable difference between the ingredients, the methodology, nor the flavor of the resulting spirit.  Yeah, the U.S. is a larger region than Burgundy, but I feel like the analogy applies.

Chris

[triplemultiplex]

The county where they make Jack Daniels is also dry.

They changed it in recent years so that's a little more "damp".

Despite being home to Jack Daniel's Distillery, Moore County itself had been completely dry. However, the County now allows the sale of commemorative bottles of Jack in the White Rabbit Bottle Shop and one can take part in a sampling tour at the distillery. It is also now possible to sample wine, rum, vodka and whiskey in shops where it is distilled on premises. Beer is also available in local food establishments when served with a meal.

[SP Cook]

While the major brands of Tennessee whiskey meet the legal definition of "bourbon" , the main points of which are:

- made in the USA
- mash bill of at least 51% corn
- aged in new, charred oak barrels

Tennessee whiskey if further defined by IRS rules, USMCA, and Tennessee state law with additional requirements:

- be made in Tennessee (duh)
- go through the Lincoln County Process.

The Lincoln County Process, which Jack Daniel's describes on the bottle as "charcoal mellowed, drop by drop"  is just that.  The whiskey passes, very slowly, through charcoal (Jack Daniel's far more slowly than George Dickel) before going into the barrel.

Thus while Tennessee whiskey is bourbon, it is usually not labeled as such, and is, in fact, a different product with an additional step used in its creation.

[kphoger]

With the pandemic, my wife and I have gone long stretches without going to the gym.  In the beginning, it's because cases are on the rise and we don't feel comfortable being around a bunch of strangers breathing hard.  But then, when cases subside, we just don't go back.  Because we're lazy.  Anyway...

Every so often lately, we've been mentioning to each other how we really want to get back to the gym, how we miss exercising.  Well, today got up over 70°F here in Wichita.  So I got our bicycles out of the shed, hosed them off, aired up the tires, adjusted the saddles.  And she and I went for a ride around town.  But the wind is strong today and, by the time we got home, we were pretty tired.  And there's nothing better after some outdoor exercise than a good cocktail.

For myself, I made a Jungle Bird:
3 parts dark rum
3 parts pineapple juice
2 parts Aperol
1 part lime juice
1 part double syrup

My wife doesn't like anything bitter, nor very sour, so I usually just make up something for her.  Here's what I made for her today:
3 oz white rum
¾ oz double syrup
½ oz triple sec
the rest of the pineapple juice from the can, probably 4 oz or thereabouts
the rest of the lime juice from the juicer, probably ½ oz or so

Each one got a ride in the cocktail shaker with ice, then poured into cheap wine glasses with lime rings on the rims.  Then I invited her out to sit with me on the front porch.

We always make sure to have a snack with drinks.  I had a spicy peanut mix and some dried mango slices.  She had Chex mix.  While we were out there, our younger two sons came home from the playground.

What a nice few minutes with my wife, I must say.

[kkt]

With the pandemic, my wife and I have gone long stretches without going to the gym.  In the beginning, it's because cases are on the rise and we don't feel comfortable being around a bunch of strangers breathing hard.  But then, when cases subside, we just don't go back.  Because we're lazy.  Anyway...

Every so often lately, we've been mentioning to each other how we really want to get back to the gym, how we miss exercising.  Well, today got up over 70°F here in Wichita.  So I got our bicycles out of the shed, hosed them off, aired up the tires, adjusted the saddles.  And she and I went for a ride around town.  But the wind is strong today and, by the time we got home, we were pretty tired.  And there's nothing better after some outdoor exercise than a good cocktail.

For myself, I made a Jungle Bird:
3 parts dark rum
3 parts pineapple juice
2 parts Aperol
1 part lime juice
1 part double syrup

My wife doesn't like anything bitter, nor very sour, so I usually just make up something for her.  Here's what I made for her today:
3 oz white rum
¾ oz double syrup
½ oz triple sec
the rest of the pineapple juice from the can, probably 4 oz or thereabouts
the rest of the lime juice from the juicer, probably ½ oz or so

Each one got a ride in the cocktail shaker with ice, then poured into cheap wine glasses with lime rings on the rims.  Then I invited her out to sit with me on the front porch.

We always make sure to have a snack with drinks.  I had a spicy peanut mix and some dried mango slices.  She had Chex mix.  While we were out there, our younger two sons came home from the playground.

What a nice few minutes with my wife, I must say.

[formulanone]

On a couple of recent trips to Frankfort, I've noticed the black residue popping up on road signs as far away as the US 60/421/460 intersection and at the top of the hill going north on US 127.

I was wondering why this sign was darn near unreadable...

Across the street from the Wild Turkey distillery:

[Scott5114]

Isn't that kind of an environmental problem? If that black junk can accumulate on a sign, it could end up in your lungs...

[kphoger]

Has anyone tried flavored tonic in their G&T?

I really like this one with a squeeze of lime and a dash of Peychaud's bitters:

[JayhawkCO]

Has anyone tried flavored tonic in their G&T?

I really like this one with a squeeze of lime and a dash of Peychaud's bitters:

I really like their elderflower tonic. Works well when you have a less than premium gin in covering up some of the harshness.  You don't even need much lime.

[hbelkins]

On a couple of recent trips to Frankfort, I've noticed the black residue popping up on road signs as far away as the US 60/421/460 intersection and at the top of the hill going north on US 127.

I was wondering why this sign was darn near unreadable...

Across the street from the Wild Turkey distillery:

This is a problem in the vicinity of a number of distilleries in Kentucky. It's especially noticeable on the signs along I-65 near the KY 245 (Clermont/Bardstown) exit, which is close to the Jim Beam distillery. It's also becoming an issue in Frankfort along US 127 and US 421. I worked next door to the Buffalo Trace distillery for six years and on humid mornings, the smell of the mash was overpowering. Since I only go there infrequently now, it's even more noticeable to me, as you tend to get used to it if you're around it every day.

I only notice the black buildup on road signs. Not on buildings or other structures.

[kphoger]

Does anyone on here make a batch of syrup and then store it in the fridge for use in cocktails?  I've been considering this, rather than making a tiny bit on the stovetop each time.

[kphoger]

I've tried several different gins:
  Gordon's London Dry
  Tanqueray Rangpur Lime
  Beefeater London Dry
  Bombay Sapphire London Dry
  Bluecoat American Dry

Of those, the ones that mix the best into my cocktails are Beefeater and Bombay Sapphire.  Those two don't impart any "off" flavors to the drink.  The Bombay Sapphire adds some interesting other flavors, so I think that's going to be my go-to gin from now on.  (Beefeater is basically all juniper, which is fine too.)  I find it interesting that Bombay Sapphire is also the brand I grew up seeing in the house for my dad's occasional martini.  It's also the brand my sister and her husband buy.

Bombay Sapphire has definitely become my go-to gin.  However, this time, I decided to buy a bottle of Tanqueray Nº 10 instead.  It's quite similar, in my opinion.  For someone who likes plenty of juniper and citrus (like me), it's pretty good.  Well, I haven't tried it in a cocktail yet, but it was pretty good neat.

[triplemultiplex]

Does anyone on here make a batch of syrup and then store it in the fridge for use in cocktails?  I've been considering this, rather than making a tiny bit on the stovetop each time.

I usually have some real maple syrup on hands for exactly this purpose.  I primarily use it to whip up an old fashioned every now and then, but for pretty much any cocktail that calls for simple syrup, you can swap in maple syrup with positive results.
(The unofficial state cocktail; Brandy Old Fashioned, sweet.)
We're one of the largest producers of maple syrup in the country up here and I personally know people who tap their own, so I always have some on hand.  So much so that when you ask about making a "batch of syrup"; my head went straight to this process of tapping sugar maples and boiling down the sap into syrup.  I like using it in cocktails that call for brown liquor.

Plus you know, pancakes and waffles.

[kphoger]

I'm having a hard time imagining that a Tom Collins would be better with maple syrup than with simple syrup...

[JayhawkCO]

Does anyone on here make a batch of syrup and then store it in the fridge for use in cocktails?  I've been considering this, rather than making a tiny bit on the stovetop each time.

Sorry I missed this yesterday (been in a ton of work training).  Yep. Shelf life of a month. I use my tea kettle and boil water and dump it into a mason jar 1:1.

[JayhawkCO]

I'm having a hard time imagining that a Tom Collins would be better with maple syrup than with simple syrup...

I like Demerara syrup with it. Same in my Old Fashioneds. Simple works well for light and fruity vodka drinks in general, and I tend to use Dem (as it's called in the biz) with almost everything else. Maple I'll leave pretty much for only whisk(e)y cocktails. Agave syrup instead of any straight up sucrose syrup for anything tequila/mezcal based.

[kphoger]

Does anyone on here make a batch of syrup and then store it in the fridge for use in cocktails?  I've been considering this, rather than making a tiny bit on the stovetop each time.

Sorry I missed this yesterday (been in a ton of work training).  Yep. Shelf life of a month. I use my tea kettle and boil water and dump it into a mason jar 1:1.

I've been considering doing double syrup (2:1) instead, because I've read it has a much longer shelf life.