Colouring - How It Began?

[Mark C]

I just read this in this book:

Forty years ago most whisky was appreciably darker than nowadays and when the Government ordered that bottled whisky should be reduced in strength to 70° proof to conserve barley it became paler. It is said that the London clubs complained because it looked as if the whisky had been diluted by barmen so caramel began to be added and this has continued ever since although whisky over 70° can now be sold.

[WhiskyNotes]

The books is talking about the 1920's, right?

At a later point very light whisky became popular (1970's?). It would be interesting to find out why, and how this happened because it didn't seem to have a technical / juridical reason.

[Mark C]

Yes, the '20s.

The book continues:

Since the demand for whisky has become so great many sherry casks are used several times and even new casks. Here it may be mentioned that casks have now become very expensive. Advantage has been taken of this by enterprising firms to extol the virtues of pale whisky which is simply whisky which has not been artificially coloured. It becomes rather a curiosity of sufficient value to make it worth while to put on the market such good malts as 'Smith's Glenlivet' and 'Glen Grant' which is colourless.

If they could do it then they could surely do it now. Glen Grant doesn't seem to have had any problems.

[peaty001]

There are a number of factors that may have influenced the move to 'lighter' whisky.
It would seem that there were simply not enough sherry casks to meet demand, though whisky was not matured exclusively in sherry casks.
Post 1945 whisky was exported from Scotland with considerable government encouragement to create a source of currency. The effects of this can still be seen with some brands that are very popular across the world but still pretty unknown in UK. The primary market was USA where an assumed popularity for lighter colour whiskies was the target market e.g. Cutty Sark and J&B

[portwood]

Resurecting an old thread ...

It is my understanding that, by law, American bourbon/whisk(e)y CANNOT be artificially coloured, AND must be aged in new wood.

I have yet to see a light coloured bourbon/whisk(e)y - even the very young basic expressions (Maker's Mark, Jack Daniels, Beam, etc). As a matter of fact, most American whiskies are darker than SMS's.

If they cannot use artificial colour (e150a) the colour we see in the whisky must be comming from the new wood (i.e. American white oak).

The widespread use of e150a suggests Scotch producers believe consumers prefer darker to lighter whiskies. Soooooo ..... why don't Scotch distileries use more new wood to achieve the darker colour "naturally"?

Secondly, would Spanish (new) oak also impart the same dark colour?

[olikli]

The widespread use of e150a suggests Scotch producers believe consumers prefer darker to lighter whiskies. Soooooo ..... why don't Scotch distileries use more new wood to achieve the darker colour "naturally"?

New wood has a huge impact on the flavour so using it would change the character of the whisky more than most people would be happy with.

[portwood]

New wood has a huge impact on the flavour so using it would change the character of the whisky more than most people would be happy with.

I get that.

But, given that SMS drinkers generally prefer more/different flavours - otherwise they wouldn't be drinking single malts - a change in character can't be the sole reason for used casks (ex-bourbon/ex-sherry/ex-wine).

So, why not use (some) new wood? Is it cost? Is it "tradition"?

[olikli]

New wood has a huge impact on the flavour so using it would change the character of the whisky more than most people would be happy with.

I get that.

But, given that SMS drinkers generally prefer more/different flavours - otherwise they wouldn't be drinking single malts - a change in character can't be the sole reason for used casks (ex-bourbon/ex-sherry/ex-wine).

So, why not use (some) new wood? Is it cost? Is it "tradition"?

Imagine you like Glen XY 12 yo as it is now even though it's coloured. Colouring this whisky with a "new wood" finish instead of caramel would turn it into a different whisky, so the familiar Glen XY 12 yo would be lost. I don't think many people would approve of such a practice. And trying to re-create the original taste of that whisky with new wood is next to impossible because you would get very different aromas from the new wood.

Of course it is good to have more or different flavours. But if they do as you propose, then for every new flavour an old one will be lost.

[Mr Tattie Heid]

Cost for new barrels would be a huge factor. And as Oliver suggests, people are loathe to mess with what seems to be a successful formula, both in terms of flavor profile and in the recycling of bourbon barrels, which benefits both Scottish and American distilleries. There have been some Scotch whiskies made with new oak--one I know of off the top of my head is the Benromach Organic.

My understanding is that European oak gives much more color than American oak, and much of the color that is often attributed to sherry is in fact from the wood itself.

[Willie JJ]

Oliver is correct to emphasise the flavour differences created by new wood. It really does make for a very different product which is not to everyone's taste.

[ColSanders]

I believe case and point in this would be Glenmorangie Astar... that's only a finish and look at what it does to the whisky as far as taste and not in color...

[LeoDLion]

Resurecting an old thread ...

It is my understanding that, by law, American bourbon/whisk(e)y CANNOT be artificially coloured, AND must be aged in new wood.

I have yet to see a light coloured bourbon/whisk(e)y - even the very young basic expressions (Maker's Mark, Jack Daniels, Beam, etc). As a matter of fact, most American whiskies are darker than SMS's.

If they cannot use artificial colour (e150a) the colour we see in the whisky must be comming from the new wood (i.e. American white oak).

The widespread use of e150a suggests Scotch producers believe consumers prefer darker to lighter whiskies. Soooooo ..... why don't Scotch distileries use more new wood to achieve the darker colour "naturally"?

Secondly, would Spanish (new) oak also impart the same dark colour?

My understanding is that the new charred american oak barrels will impart color much faster than the used ones imported to Scotland. Hence bourbon whiskies are darker. Yes bourbon can not be colored and must be aged at least 2 years. Then the oak barrel is sold overseas.

Why only new oak? I read somewhere that way back they wanted to stimulate the lumber industry. So they pass a law requiring only new oak to be used. Hence...

Even as much as 6 months, there is a noticeable change in color in whiskies that I aged at home. These are in 5 liter newly charred oak barrels. However at around 9 months, the oaky taste starts to overpower the whisky and I need to bottle it.

[Iain M]

Resurecting an old thread ...

The widespread use of e150a suggests Scotch producers believe consumers prefer darker to lighter whiskies. Soooooo ..... why don't Scotch distileries use more new wood to achieve the darker colour "naturally"?

Secondly, would Spanish (new) oak also impart the same dark colour?

By law American 'Straight' whisky CANNOT be coloured, which is probably around 99% of the market but producers can make blends which can have colouring added.

The widespread use of E150 (a) is not just relating to the customer preferring darker whiskies, partly to dow with consistency - in reality this might not always be the case.

In reality new wood is also not as widely available in Scotland as other 'used' wood is - historically anyway. As others have mentioned new wood does not always part desirable characteristics in whisky, often overpowering distilleries character. Remembering the majority of Scottish whisky is distilled differently to most Northern American distilleries, so the spirit going into the cask is different and results are different.

[Nick Brown]

Just in case anyone is curious, the difference in flavour that you get from new oak is a very intense, sweet vanilla flavour and it can go from sweet to bitter quite quickly. A number of distilleries have experimented with new oak - Glenfiddich, Balvenie, Benromach, Bunnahabhainn and Glenmorangie come to mind.

[peaty001]

A number of distilleries have experimented with new oak - Glenfiddich, Balvenie, Benromach, Bunnahabhainn and Glenmorangie come to mind.

As I remember the fresh Scottish Oak Glengoyne was very astringent. The effect of a stick wrapped in a lemon
(cheeks sucked in) seemed to add a robust edge to the usual mellow dram.

[Gordon_H]

Just been reading through this thread.....

I believe case and point in this would be Glenmorangie Astar... that's only a finish and look at what it does to the whisky as far as taste and not in color...

This is one of my favourite Glenmo's , From Glenmorangie themselves "Glenmorangie new spirit aged wholly in Glenmoranige’s bespoke Designer (Artisan) casks from the Ozark mountains, Missouri"

[ColSanders]

That does bring up a point... how is a cask "artisan" or what have you verses normal? Or is it more marketing BS?

[Nick Brown]

That does bring up a point... how is a cask "artisan" or what have you verses normal? Or is it more marketing BS?

Of course it's marketing BS. The word "artisan" is used in many spheres because it is so easily confused in people's minds with artistry. The real issue is that whisky drinkers want to believe that their whisky is lovingly hand-crafted when the reality is that it is made in factories.

[Johnny Murgatroyd]

I posted somewhere else on this site a list of blended whisky recipes from about 1910, I think, which includes spirit caramel as an ingredient.

[Adrian]

Just to bring this along a bit more even though it is an old thread.

My understanding of the difference between the use of New Wood in the States and Bourbon Barrels over here is as follows.

New barrels for Bourbon are in general heavily charred. Basically a very heavy burn where the sugars & Phenols in the wood are crystallised. Between the actual wood char and the crystallisation of the new wood it creates for a heavy colour and a rich sweet taste where the vanilla profiles etc are exaggerated. However this is a style that has developed and become the favoured taste profile in this part of the world.

This for Scotch & Irish whiskey is not the style that is sought however and subtler influences of the wood are favoured. So why use bourbon barrels? Well because the barrels have already been used, alot of the immediate new wood characteristics has been removed. The barrels are then reconditioned (Charr removed) and they are toasted (as opposed charred). Toasting is much lighter to charring even though there will be many levels of each with in each industry.

The toasting has a similar effect as charing but to a lesser degree and hence less colour.


In relation to colouring E150(a) I think this has more to do with the sherry cask colouring of whisky and then the change over to Bourbon because of costs. So colouring was added to bring up to an acceptable visual appearance that a whisky drinker had come to expect.

[C57]

In relation to colouring E150(a) I think this has more to do with the sherry cask colouring of whisky and then the change over to Bourbon because of costs. So colouring was added to bring up to an acceptable visual appearance that a whisky drinker had come to expect.

That makes a lot of sense Adrian (btw, good to see you back!)

[Adrian]

(btw, good to see you back!)

Cheers Nick, I pop in and out as often as I can butd there are a shed load of threads here to catch up on So finding it hard to get around currently but I'll get there

[orange_barnet]

Once upon a time, in my local hair salon whilst chatting to my stylist....

In relation to colouring E150(a) I think this has more to do with the sherry cask colouring of whisky and then the change over to Bourbon because of costs. So colouring was added to bring up to an acceptable visual appearance that a whisky drinker had come to expect.

That makes a lot of sense Adrian (btw, good to see you back!)

Seriously, is there an "acceptable visual appearance" amongst whisky drinkers?? Part of the rich tapestry of variation in whisky is the colour as well as all of the other characteristics that are reviewed and discussed... nose, palate, finish etc. For me the tasting experience starts with the colour.

[Adrian]

The point was meant as a historical one about where the custom of colouring stemmed from. Obviously whisky aficionados like ourselves appreciate that there will be variations of colour depending on cask type, age etc so I totally agree with you on that but the Single Malt Whisky market was and still is only a small part of the Industry's business and it is something we over look easily and the influence that the Blended Whisky business has on all of the industry.

So what one must remember is within the whole whisky drinking sector we are a very small community and that 90% of Scotch sold is blended and the vast majority of that is in the mass produced category. Further not many of your average blend drinkers are going to be too worried if their bottle of "Glen Tartan" is coloured or not. However if it was suddenly uncoloured and bottled in it's natural straw yellow state I think you may find that people may opt for the golden brown "McALISTER's Pish" beside it. As the majority of Scotch blends by Volume are non age stated you can be sure they are all being coloured. And because this has been an industry standard for decades it is ingrained in people that whisky should have an "acceptable" colour. This of course had been rife in the Single Malt market too but it is slowly but surely changing.

Colouring as a marketing strategy is basically the norm ...

Just to show you prime examples ... the top selling scotch blend is Johnnie Walker with 2011 retail sales value of $5.24 billion. Compared to the top selling Single Malts of Glenfiddich at $435 million & The Glenlivet at $330 million which is 8% & 6% of JW total sales respectively or 15% combined. Of which I think both of their entry level products (highest Volume sales wise) are coloured also ?!?!?!? And if you take the entire drinks market JW is the number 2 spirit brand in the world where Glenfiddich comes in at 61 & Glenlivet 90

And here is a list of of the top 25 whisk(e)y brands in 2010 where you will only notice that the above 2 malts are the only entries and the list is dominated by scotch blends. Strip out all bar scotch and you find 14 of the 16 scotch brands are blends.

1 JOHNNIE WALKER
2 JACK DANIEL’S
3 CHIVAS REGAL
4 BALLANTINE’S
5 JIM BEAM
6 DEWARS
7 J & B
8 CROWN ROYAL
9 JAMESON
10 GRANTS
11 FAMOUS GROUSE
12 BELL’S
13 CANADIAN CLUB
14 SEAGRAM’S 7 CROWN
15 GLENFIDDICH
16 TEACHER’S
17 MAKER’S MARK
18 BLACK VELVET
19 100 PIPERS
20 CANADIAN MIST
21 CLAN CAMPBELL
22 WILLIAM LAWSON’S
23 CUTTY SARK
24 CLAN MACGREGOR
25 THE GLENLIVET

[dramtastic]

Just a little aside on the use of caramel into some Japanese whisky. In 1919 Masataka Taketuru the founder of Nikka and Master distiller of Japans first commercial release whisky under Suntory(wasn't the brand name back then), learnt to add caramel for colour consistancy from Longmorn, the first distillery to offer him a(all but brief) apprenticeship. Hence no doubt why Nikka(at least at Yoichi), is the most traditional(Scottish methods), of all the Japanese distilleries(still use direct coal fired stills for instance) and caramel!.