My theory is that it does not qualify as a straight rye whiskey because they are aging in USED barrels even in the first round of aging. The website and every press release says, "SirDavis goes through two rounds of aging. First, in American oak barrels, followed by a second maturation in Pedro Ximénez sherry casks." Conspicuously missing is the normal phrase "New charred-oak barrels". My theory is that they are aging in USED rye MGP barrels (esp since I believe these are cheap compared to new barrels or used bourbon barrels). I think this also explains the "whisky" spelling, because they are aging in all used barrels more like Scotch and Japanese whisky vs bourbon and rye traditions.
It is possible to use a new charred barrel without saying so. If the label says it's a straight rye, by definition it aged in a new charred barrel even if the label doesn't say so, because the law requires it.
The whiskey / whisky spelling is always interesting. Makers drops the E and so does old forester. Plus compare a black cap Early times BIB with a blue cap…. Saz put the E back.
I was at Total Wine last week and watched a couple of young women buy TWO CASES (12 bottles!!!) of SirDavis. I admit it is a good looking bottle, but I could get 2 bottles of superior rye for the same cost of one SirDavis. You do you, boo.
great video. one thing you did leave out is the mash bill is 51 rye 49 malt which I have never tried before. don't think ill be trying this one but thought id throw that out to everyone
Fair & balanced review. I speculate there might be another reason to register under category 142 instead of 102... additives are permitted under 142. Given the young age, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some additives and coloring agents (eg E150a which is commonly used in Scotch).
I think you could be right. The whiskey does taste like they used sherry casks to mask youth. I wouldn't doubt the whiskey has coloring. It's got a nice color in the bottle. I really wish no coloring was allowed in any spirit. It's false advertising if you ask me.
I did some more digging and their website states: Does SirDavis contain any additives? SirDavis is crafted using no additives or coloring including E15OA. The only explanation is the age theory (that I can think of).
Great sleuthing! You have mentioned in the past that your palate is sensitive to sulfur notes of the sort I would expect to accompany PX sherry cask finishing. When you assess such a whiskey, how do you adjust for that factor?
Thanks for this video. The majority of what I enjoyed was the educational info that you shared that explained the legality of this industry. I certainly don’t plan on buying this or almost any celebrity whiskey. They tend to be under-proofed and overpriced.
Yes, but they explain that when they were launching they wanted the public to know their whiskey was a good as scotch. No explanation for an American whiskey made by a person who was born in raised in the USA is suspect.
Sounds like B put some new lyrics in a song..."If you wanted me to like it shoulda put some age on it." Imma steer well clear of this one but as always, appreciate the in depth review...always learn something here!
I say drink what you like. Was at a raffle the other night. Guaranteed a bottle as there were more bottles than people. The third guy drawn passed up all kinds of stuff, including Russell's 15 and EHT SiB rye, for an EHT small batch because it's his favorite bottle and hard to find. People like what they like.
@@iowabassman4701not only that, but some people can’t afford to drop $250 on a single bottle (Russel’s 15), even if they do win the opportunity to purchase it.
I asked Lindsey to record with me last night, but she was too busy. I explained that we didn't release a review last week and we couldn't miss two weeks, so I was going to do it myself. I was up stairs for a couple of hours and I went down to get her ipad (for the teleprompter) and she was like, what were you doing up there for all this time if you were not recording? I said "writing the greatest podcast script I have every created" 🤣. I was pretty excited about what I found!
@@BourbonRealTalk I love it. A history nerd and I love all the research and details. Still setting to wrap my head around the age statement stuff and your theory
Im under the impression that a rye or bourbon does not have to have any age statement. But when you add the "Straight" moniker is when it must be at least 4years old unless you state that it is younger. But may be no lower than 2 years regardless of the age statement. Thought?
You are correct. 0-2 Bourbon 2-4 Straight Bourbon with age statement 4+ Straight Bourbon no age statement required Same with all the other mash bill whiskey's including rye.
The website says: Does SirDavis contain any additives? SirDavis is crafted using no additives or coloring including E15OA. I think given the darkness of PX sherry finishing you wouldn't need coloring.
This is, first and foremost, a marketing job. If I see it at a bar, I'll probably try it out of curiosity. I would expect it to be exactly as described in this video. It comes from a good source, and I'm sure it is made well for what it is trying to be, which is a casual-friendly, cocktail-friendly whisky. There is a decent chance that I would buy it if the price was reasonable, as this sort of whisky can be a good warm-up pour before moving on to the firewater. Unfortunately, celebrity branding and a fancy bottle naturally result in a price that is way too high. Somewhere, I heard that this is a high malt mash bill, so it might not be quite the same as the usual MGP rye. I've recently found a few high malt ryes that aren't costly. Johnnie Walker High Rye is a high malt rye that works fine as a simple warm-up pour or cocktail mixer. It is 45% ABV, which is surprising since inexpensive blended Scotch is almost always 40%. It's nothing fancy, and the bottle isn't as eye catching as the SirDavis, but the price is right for what it delivers. Save your money and buy this instead. And if you want some stronger Sherry flavor, just buy a bottle of Pedro Ximenez Sherry and mix a little of it into the whisky.
@@eafarrar I'll keep an eye out for that. I'm finding that I like a nearly half-and-half rye and barley mix. They should bottle a cask strength version of SirDavis. I'm sure they would charge too much for it, but it would be a tasty pour.
Regarding the regulations on age statements ... If a rye were to be aged 3 years in the first barrel and then finished for 1 year in a sherry barrel, are they allowed to put the age statement "4 Years" on the label?
Yes, they are allowed. The TTB now allows you to add secondary aging time to your total age statement (they didn't allow it in the past). In this case, rather than disclosing I believe they used the total 4 year age statement to avoid on all together.
This is a very interesting breakdown of the behind the scenes. I love it Randy, thanks for the insight on everything that has been talked about in the whiskEy community
Yes, and they tell you why. MM and Dickel both say it is because their whiskey is as good as scotch, and they wanted consumers to know it. The Brown family was from Scotland. It is odd that a person raised in Houston Tx would leave off the "e" with no explanation unless it was a decision from branding people who are used to dealing with scotch brands.
The whiskey isn't bad. It's definitely not a $90-$100. It's definitely not any better than the other MGP rye's out there. It tastes like they tried to finish a whiskey to cover up youth. Don't take my word for it. Try a shot...like I did. It'll save you a lot of money.
@@Mykkus I think you're right. Unfortunately, I think the whiskey in this bottle has been colored as well. Classifying it under 142 allows for coloring. I bet the real color of it looks a lot like dirty water.
The fundamental difference between a straight rye and a rye is the ability to blend in additives. When bourbon was made a distinct spirit of the United States you could no longer add flavors or non alcohol blenders to any bourbon, straight or other wise. That is not the case for rye. A rye without the straight designation can have 1.99% added flavors created in a laboratory and no more than 2.5% non alcohol blenders. So it’s most likely older than 4 years old but has flavors and caramel coloring added.
From the website: Does SirDavis contain any additives? SirDavis is crafted using no additives or coloring including E15OA. It is legal nuance, but they could not call it a straight and leave the age statement off unless it was 4 years when they dumped to go into the finishing barrel, but if they hit 4 in the finishing barrel they can drop the age but also have to drop the straight.
I actually didn't know the mash bill when I wrote the script, but I was aware of the two standard MGP rye mash bills and knew it could have been either or both.
@@BourbonRealTalk didn’t know that was a standard? Interesting!!That’s the only thing that made it quasi interesting to me. If I get a chance to try a pour I may. But buying a bottle heck no 😂 Thanks for another great vid!
10:32 Is it a legal requirement that the label say that a straight whisky is a straight whisky? If so, then the scenario you hypothesize is the only thing that makes sense to me. But if you don't have to put "straight" on the label even when a whisky qualifies for the designation, then it's possible - though it seems to me unlikely - that they just chose to omit it. Whether that's possible depends on whether the law requires the "straight" designation on the label. As to the spelling, I much prefer the Scottish version - whisky. But then I have Scottish ancestors. And I've heard that the Irish started putting the E into the word back in the 19th century in order to differentiate their stuff from Scotch. 🙂
There is a requirement that you have to put the information that most accurately describes the whiskey in the bottle, but if the whiskey was 3 years old when dumped to put in the PX sherry barrels, and it aged for 1 year in the second barrel, then they would have the option of calling it a straight with an age statement, or calling it just a rye without an age statement. I think it was the later.
Not sure why you started talking about bourbon in the middle of the video. Also, I thought straight whiskey only had to be 2 years old, but if it was under four it must be age stated. I guess I was wrong on that.
No, you're right. Straight whisky must be at least two years old, and if it's younger than four years it must have an age statement. And of course it has to follow all the other rules for that kind of whiskey - rye, bourbon, corn whisky, whatever. 🙂
All the rules are the same for mash bill whiskey like bourbon, rye, wheat whiskey, except that rye that isn't straight is allowed to have 2.5% adulteration (although they clearly state they do not use additives or coloring). 0-2 Bourbon 2-4 Straight Bourbon with age statement 4+ Straight Bourbon no age statement required I may have mistakenly switched to talking about bourbon, but given the above all the information applies.
You mean all these videos I’ve seen of influencers from other, non bourbon fanatic channels were nothing more than targeted marketing though social media?
Prideful Goat is the only Celebrity whiskey I’ll ever buy! 🥃
I appreciate it, but for the record I do not identify as a celebrity 🤣
My theory is that it does not qualify as a straight rye whiskey because they are aging in USED barrels even in the first round of aging. The website and every press release says, "SirDavis goes through two rounds of aging. First, in American oak barrels, followed by a second maturation in Pedro Ximénez sherry casks." Conspicuously missing is the normal phrase "New charred-oak barrels". My theory is that they are aging in USED rye MGP barrels (esp since I believe these are cheap compared to new barrels or used bourbon barrels). I think this also explains the "whisky" spelling, because they are aging in all used barrels more like Scotch and Japanese whisky vs bourbon and rye traditions.
It is possible to use a new charred barrel without saying so. If the label says it's a straight rye, by definition it aged in a new charred barrel even if the label doesn't say so, because the law requires it.
Class 142 requires new charred oak containers just like class 102, so this theory can not be right.
The whiskey / whisky spelling is always interesting. Makers drops the E and so does old forester. Plus compare a black cap Early times BIB with a blue cap…. Saz put the E back.
So interesting when it comes to filing paperwork and alcohol in the US. I feel like I learned a lot in this episode.
Glad it was informative!
I was at Total Wine last week and watched a couple of young women buy TWO CASES (12 bottles!!!) of SirDavis. I admit it is a good looking bottle, but I could get 2 bottles of superior rye for the same cost of one SirDavis. You do you, boo.
great video. one thing you did leave out is the mash bill is 51 rye 49 malt which I have never tried before. don't think ill be trying this one but thought id throw that out to everyone
I was aware that MGP had that mash bill, but I didn't know that was the one that was used.
Fair & balanced review. I speculate there might be another reason to register under category 142 instead of 102... additives are permitted under 142. Given the young age, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some additives and coloring agents (eg E150a which is commonly used in Scotch).
I had not considered the 2.5% additive carve out for 142 rye. I suspect they use PX finish to give the young rye some color when proofed down.
I think you could be right. The whiskey does taste like they used sherry casks to mask youth. I wouldn't doubt the whiskey has coloring. It's got a nice color in the bottle. I really wish no coloring was allowed in any spirit. It's false advertising if you ask me.
I did some more digging and their website states:
Does SirDavis contain any additives?
SirDavis is crafted using no additives or coloring including E15OA.
The only explanation is the age theory (that I can think of).
The crowd buying Sir Davis is the same crowd that chased Taylor Port after it was "marketed" on TikTok. SMH
Randy, so well done...appreciate you being so open about brands, and the geeky information is awesome
Glad you enjoyed it!
If I were on LVMH’s list, I would hope for an Ardbeg or Glenmorangie before sir Davis
The bottle is nice as a decanter for better whiskys.
I've had a couple of other celebrity whiskeys and I found them underwhelming for it's price. It's just not taylored to us.
Beyoncé drinks whiskey as much as I drink wine coolers. Never
Great sleuthing!
You have mentioned in the past that your palate is sensitive to sulfur notes of the sort I would expect to accompany PX sherry cask finishing. When you assess such a whiskey, how do you adjust for that factor?
I do, but I didn't get it on this whiskey.
WOW! BRT Intelligence Agency on the case! Sagamore PX Sherry and Prideful Goat are two of my favorites! PASS for me. Great video!!
Great review as always! Really appreciate your honesty and indepth reviews.
I’m always leery of celebrity whiskey..
Thanks for this video. The majority of what I enjoyed was the educational info that you shared that explained the legality of this industry. I certainly don’t plan on buying this or almost any celebrity whiskey. They tend to be under-proofed and overpriced.
Love when you do these deep dive videos Randy, thank you!
I like the breakdown on all aspects of Sir Davis. Keep up the great videos. 👍
Maker’s Mark also left the ‘E’ off whiskey too. Weirdos lol
Yes, but they explain that when they were launching they wanted the public to know their whiskey was a good as scotch. No explanation for an American whiskey made by a person who was born in raised in the USA is suspect.
Sounds like B put some new lyrics in a song..."If you wanted me to like it shoulda put some age on it." Imma steer well clear of this one but as always, appreciate the in depth review...always learn something here!
A friend of mine bought a bottle and he likes it. He’s a Basil Hayden fan too:)
I say drink what you like. Was at a raffle the other night. Guaranteed a bottle as there were more bottles than people. The third guy drawn passed up all kinds of stuff, including Russell's 15 and EHT SiB rye, for an EHT small batch because it's his favorite bottle and hard to find. People like what they like.
@@iowabassman4701not only that, but some people can’t afford to drop $250 on a single bottle (Russel’s 15), even if they do win the opportunity to purchase it.
I’m continuing to be blown away by your knowledge and research that you do to make these videos great
I asked Lindsey to record with me last night, but she was too busy. I explained that we didn't release a review last week and we couldn't miss two weeks, so I was going to do it myself. I was up stairs for a couple of hours and I went down to get her ipad (for the teleprompter) and she was like, what were you doing up there for all this time if you were not recording? I said "writing the greatest podcast script I have every created" 🤣. I was pretty excited about what I found!
@@BourbonRealTalk I love it. A history nerd and I love all the research and details. Still setting to wrap my head around the age statement stuff and your theory
Im under the impression that a rye or bourbon does not have to have any age statement. But when you add the "Straight" moniker is when it must be at least 4years old unless you state that it is younger. But may be no lower than 2 years regardless of the age statement. Thought?
That's correct.
You are correct.
0-2 Bourbon
2-4 Straight Bourbon with age statement
4+ Straight Bourbon no age statement required
Same with all the other mash bill whiskey's including rye.
Excellent "knowledge-share!" Thank you!
This could be like Templeton Rye. Not a straight rye because they added sugar or other flavorings
For what its worth, the website does claim there are no additives or coloring.
The website says:
Does SirDavis contain any additives?
SirDavis is crafted using no additives or coloring including E15OA.
I think given the darkness of PX sherry finishing you wouldn't need coloring.
Makers Mark calls itself Whisky in honor of their scottish/Irish heritage.
Yes, and I accept that as normal because they explain that.
I really appreciate all the work you put into your videos to get the best facts that you can find.
This is, first and foremost, a marketing job. If I see it at a bar, I'll probably try it out of curiosity. I would expect it to be exactly as described in this video. It comes from a good source, and I'm sure it is made well for what it is trying to be, which is a casual-friendly, cocktail-friendly whisky. There is a decent chance that I would buy it if the price was reasonable, as this sort of whisky can be a good warm-up pour before moving on to the firewater. Unfortunately, celebrity branding and a fancy bottle naturally result in a price that is way too high.
Somewhere, I heard that this is a high malt mash bill, so it might not be quite the same as the usual MGP rye. I've recently found a few high malt ryes that aren't costly. Johnnie Walker High Rye is a high malt rye that works fine as a simple warm-up pour or cocktail mixer. It is 45% ABV, which is surprising since inexpensive blended Scotch is almost always 40%. It's nothing fancy, and the bottle isn't as eye catching as the SirDavis, but the price is right for what it delivers. Save your money and buy this instead. And if you want some stronger Sherry flavor, just buy a bottle of Pedro Ximenez Sherry and mix a little of it into the whisky.
Smoke Wagon bottles the same 51/49 rye at cask strength and older for less money.
@@eafarrar I'll keep an eye out for that. I'm finding that I like a nearly half-and-half rye and barley mix. They should bottle a cask strength version of SirDavis. I'm sure they would charge too much for it, but it would be a tasty pour.
@@heatherharrison264 I think they label it "Straight Rye Malted Barley" with the green medallion.
This is a huge PASS for me!
Marketing cringe and sub par whiskEy at a premium....no thanks. It definitely tasted super young.
Regarding the regulations on age statements ...
If a rye were to be aged 3 years in the first barrel and then finished for 1 year in a sherry barrel, are they allowed to put the age statement "4 Years" on the label?
I think that why he brought up the 102 class and 142 class
Yes, they are allowed. The TTB now allows you to add secondary aging time to your total age statement (they didn't allow it in the past). In this case, rather than disclosing I believe they used the total 4 year age statement to avoid on all together.
This is a very interesting breakdown of the behind the scenes. I love it Randy, thanks for the insight on everything that has been talked about in the whiskEy community
Glad you enjoyed it!
Love the video, but look… Makers Mark, Old Forester, and George Dickel all leave the E out of whisky… idk if that point is relevant.
Yes, and they tell you why. MM and Dickel both say it is because their whiskey is as good as scotch, and they wanted consumers to know it. The Brown family was from Scotland. It is odd that a person raised in Houston Tx would leave off the "e" with no explanation unless it was a decision from branding people who are used to dealing with scotch brands.
The whiskey isn't bad. It's definitely not a $90-$100. It's definitely not any better than the other MGP rye's out there. It tastes like they tried to finish a whiskey to cover up youth. Don't take my word for it. Try a shot...like I did. It'll save you a lot of money.
I think a lot of brands are finishing to cover the youth.
@@Mykkus I think you're right. Unfortunately, I think the whiskey in this bottle has been colored as well. Classifying it under 142 allows for coloring. I bet the real color of it looks a lot like dirty water.
The fundamental difference between a straight rye and a rye is the ability to blend in additives. When bourbon was made a distinct spirit of the United States you could no longer add flavors or non alcohol blenders to any bourbon, straight or other wise. That is not the case for rye. A rye without the straight designation can have 1.99% added flavors created in a laboratory and no more than 2.5% non alcohol blenders. So it’s most likely older than 4 years old but has flavors and caramel coloring added.
From the website:
Does SirDavis contain any additives?
SirDavis is crafted using no additives or coloring including E15OA.
It is legal nuance, but they could not call it a straight and leave the age statement off unless it was 4 years when they dumped to go into the finishing barrel, but if they hit 4 in the finishing barrel they can drop the age but also have to drop the straight.
I do not give two shits about celebrity brands or endorsements.
Agreed!
Great video
You are awesome. I am here for all of the nerdy whiskey talk and all of your investigations that you’ve done thank you thank you so much fun.
Thanks for being here!
Will her friend Diddy be releasing a prison wine made from of toilet water?
Different mashbill though… 49% malt. It’s not the standard 95/5
I actually didn't know the mash bill when I wrote the script, but I was aware of the two standard MGP rye mash bills and knew it could have been either or both.
@@BourbonRealTalk didn’t know that was a standard? Interesting!!That’s the only thing that made it quasi interesting to me. If I get a chance to try a pour I may. But buying a bottle heck no 😂
Thanks for another great vid!
10:32 Is it a legal requirement that the label say that a straight whisky is a straight whisky? If so, then the scenario you hypothesize is the only thing that makes sense to me. But if you don't have to put "straight" on the label even when a whisky qualifies for the designation, then it's possible - though it seems to me unlikely - that they just chose to omit it. Whether that's possible depends on whether the law requires the "straight" designation on the label.
As to the spelling, I much prefer the Scottish version - whisky. But then I have Scottish ancestors. And I've heard that the Irish started putting the E into the word back in the 19th century in order to differentiate their stuff from Scotch. 🙂
There is a requirement that you have to put the information that most accurately describes the whiskey in the bottle, but if the whiskey was 3 years old when dumped to put in the PX sherry barrels, and it aged for 1 year in the second barrel, then they would have the option of calling it a straight with an age statement, or calling it just a rye without an age statement. I think it was the later.
Not sure why you started talking about bourbon in the middle of the video. Also, I thought straight whiskey only had to be 2 years old, but if it was under four it must be age stated. I guess I was wrong on that.
No, you're right. Straight whisky must be at least two years old, and if it's younger than four years it must have an age statement. And of course it has to follow all the other rules for that kind of whiskey - rye, bourbon, corn whisky, whatever. 🙂
All the rules are the same for mash bill whiskey like bourbon, rye, wheat whiskey, except that rye that isn't straight is allowed to have 2.5% adulteration (although they clearly state they do not use additives or coloring).
0-2 Bourbon
2-4 Straight Bourbon with age statement
4+ Straight Bourbon no age statement required
I may have mistakenly switched to talking about bourbon, but given the above all the information applies.
He’s never tried anything like this before because it’s horrible 😂
If Beyonce involved, skip it
You mean all these videos I’ve seen of influencers from other, non bourbon fanatic channels were nothing more than targeted marketing though social media?
I don't watch the other channels. Are the other channels saying it is a good buy?
I want nothing to do with Beyonce or T Swift. The 👹 will come calling for them soon
❤
🤣😂🤣
13👍
beyonce is going to jail for far worse then wiskey