Peter Stokkebye - 1882 Mixture pipe tobacco reviews

Review

Please log in to add or edit a review. If you do not have an account yet, you can sign up for one here.

Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
Showing reviews 1 through 9 of 9 reviews of this tobacco
dualkarnain	08/23/2006	Mild to Medium	Strong	Mild to Medium	Strong
After a couple of pulls of the briar, my wife bitched about this blend from the foyer next to my closed-door study. She hates it! Failed the wife test. The gurgling moisture made itself audibly known by the first 10% of the bowl contents. Not a good sign! At this point, my tongue burned. The taste of the tobacco is passable but not remarkable. I've let this age about six months and still enjoyment of this bowl is eluding me. Images evoked while smoking include a bleached femur atop a swarming anthill.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
fatherDougal	06/19/2006	Medium to Strong	Strong	Full	Pleasant to Tolerable
Ofcourse I'll agree with much of what has been said of this "complicated" mix. But having tried it after a few weeks of airing-out in a glass jar (with a few nail holes in the top for breathing), I will say a positive thing. At times the smoke is more like Cognac than it is smoke; it is unique in its ability to create this liquid illusion on the tongue, and while not my favourite puff, I can say that it inspires patience and contemplation in anyone who opens its secrets. It is a smoke for someone who needs a distraction, rather than just a reassuring background. 1882; the year Charles Darwin died, and the year James Joyce was born.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
CaptnDan	12/31/2005	Mild	Mild to Medium	Mild to Medium	Pleasant to Tolerable
Not one of my favorite Stokkybe blends. As stated by others, the Cognac topping is over the top. Let it sit, I waited a year, and the Cognac dissipates and the tobacco flavor comes out. Smoke it carefully - it never actually bit me, but I always had the impression that it was about to.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
Spike	12/08/2005	Medium	Very Mild	Medium	Pleasant to Tolerable
I am in the process of making friends with this blend. It has good stength without whacking you over the head with flavour. It tastes like a good Virginia blend with a splash of Cognac for flavor. If you don't know what Cognac tastes like or don't like tobaccos with spirits in them, avoid this blend. I have had this pouch for a few months and revisit it from time to time. I like it better each time. I give this three stars for now and will update in a few months if my impression changes.11/15/2004 Update: As the cognac flavor dissipates, the blend gets better. If you have a pouch of this and find the flavor too bold, let it air out a bit. I agree with another reviewer, I wish they made this blend without the cognac. Two stars when fresh, three stars after a year or so of age.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
huffnpuff	12/08/2005	Medium	Mild to Medium	Mild to Medium	Pleasant
This is good blend I like the aroma when I open it. The cuts of leaf are a little moist when fresh but once stuff gets aired out it gets better and better. I find that sipping on the pipe helps cause it has a little bit of a bite , or maybe I am just a newbie still. The room note is very pleasant to my wife and I also. The cognac does make the tobacco sweet and tasty,I find myself wanting to eat the smoke rather than puff it. The discs I call them flavor blasts ,mmmmmm. very good.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
Arashi	11/29/2004	Medium	Extra Strong	Overwhelming	Pleasant to Tolerable
This is a beautiful looking tobacco. Neat discs, cubes, and ribbon cuts make it look like a complex, promising blend. But unfortunately it's soaked in flavorings that all but obscure any tobacco flavor and cause it to smoke incredibly hot. After searing my tongue on the superheated casing vapors for a few bowls I gave up on it. I wish Stokkebye had an uncased version.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
Willy	03/02/2004	Mild to Medium	Very Mild	Mild to Medium	Pleasant
I happened to find amongst my "stash" of pipeweed a silver 42g pouch of tobac that was labeled CORPS EXPO 2001, "The Odyssey Blend", Presented by Peter Stokkebye, Int. which was used in that expos "Name the Tobacco" contest. I don't recall what the winning name turned out to be, but I had to open the little pouch to see what gives. Yes, it was still very much smokeable. The pouch aroma, to me, was just good 'ol VA tobac that looked just as the above description says it does; black/brown ribbons and/or small bits with fingernail sized discs here & there. Loaded and lighted good, smoked nice, burned well. Very little moisture trouble, burned to grey ash. I thought I'd e-mail Stokkebye to see if they could tell me what this stuff is; this is not bad at all. Brian at PS just got back to me & tells me this is PS-53, 1882 Blend. Checked again on the website & the visual description matches but I would not have guessed there was French Cognac on this. I don't think my nose or palate is that messed up, but I thought I was smoking VA mixed with just a bit of black Cavendish. Never would have thought there was a casing if I had not seen it in print or knew it was a PS blend. Anyway, this was mild & cool smoking with just slight sweetness & VA tang, and I can only assume (should never assume) that the flavoring dissipated w/time even though the pouch was still sealed. Nuff said, this is, apparently, a nice lightly flavored aromatic, the tobac taste comes through, and unless I have something different from the other esteemed reviewers or there is some confusion somewhere, the blend has very possibly metamorphosed into 1882. Not bad though.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
BriarLaw	09/17/2003	Mild	Strong	Mild	Pleasant
While I think Stokkebye tobaccos are high quality, many are just to sweet or flavored for me. This is one of them. The tobacco itself is very unique with a mix of ribbon cut and unique disks of rolled tobacco. Good moisture content. The problem is that the Cognac casing is too flavorful. The tobacco is hidden behind the Cognac flavoring. Sort of makes it one-dimensional I think this will be a love it or hate it blend. If you like the pronounced flavor, then great. If not, there is not much else in the tobacco to make you stick around.
Reviewed By:	Date:	Strength:	Flavoring:	Taste:	Room Note:	Recommendation:
WxGuy	09/08/2003	Mild	Medium	Medium to Full	Pleasant
Well, Somebody needs to review this tobacco, which has been on the market now for ~1 year, so I take this task upon myself with pleasure. I have been a fan of PS aromatics since I first started smoking aromatics, though not so fond of PS englishes (kind of lame). I personally find that PS does a bang-up job with their aromatics (those few I have tried, anyway). You can actually taste the "aroma" but it does not typically overwhelm the tobacco flavor. An observation however: When buying bulk tobaccos, a lot of what the consumer ultimately experiences is dictated by the care given to the tobacco in its bulk form. I have had aromatics "from the bottom of the jar" that were overly dry and with very little aroma. So... your milage with 1882 may vary... My experience with all PS aromatics- with the exception of a bad sample of Champagne- is that the aroma is clearly present in the "tin" and that the nose corresponds well with the taste. 1882 was no exception, though I doubt the claim that "this is one of most complicated and oldest blends", It is a relatively strong aromatic and I am not sure they had the technology to keep aromatics this fresh back then. The topping is supposedly cognac, but seems to be more fruity than spiritous. The blend appears as would be expected, brown virginias, some brown/black cavendish ribbons with some delightful little curly cuts intermingled. The curly rolls- about the diameter of a dime- looked great, but in practice this mixture of textures makes the loading of the pipe somewhat messy. Giving up on rubbing out/rolling up the birdseyes, I have just taken to packing the little buggers whole along with the ribbon cut.Seems to burn just fine that way. The tobacco, at least my half pound sample, was at just the right humidity for ready consumption. One light and we are off to the races, with maybe a light or two towards the end to finish things off. The flavor is a wonderful interplay between the virginias and the aroma. Unlike other some other aromatics, this one (like other PS aromatics) held its aroma throughout most of the bowl.It can bite a bit, if puffed on absentmindedly, but is generally well behaved. No complex novel, this blend, but more like a nice piece of background music that is very familiar, but not to the point of monotony. This is a regular in my aromatics rotation, which I generally consume while focused on other tasks (like writing these reviews). Sometimes a little ashy at the end. but also more sweet virginia-ish throughout. I have cellared most of my original 2 oz sample in a babyfood jar for about 9 months, and it does not taste substantially different than the new batch, A little sweeter at bowl's end but also more sweet virginia-ish throughout. The room note/slip-stream odor is quite pleasant though my wife still complains "it smells like tobacco". Duh, dear! Other non-smokers have commented on the nice aroma, including one who typically finds aromatics to be cloying. If you like aromatics, give this one a whirl.Don't bother otherwise. Even some aromatic lovers may find the topping off-putting. The price and quality is very competitive, at least through mail order venues. The great thing about aromatics, indeed pipe tobaccos in general, is the huge variety available to suit almost every taste. This one does it for me.
Showing reviews 1 through 9 of 9 reviews of this tobacco