Smoked in Ashton pipe.

Definite chocolate aroma from the tin. Seemed to be very moist compared to other tobaccos I've had. Despite moistness, this seemed to be no more or less difficult to light and keep lit. Once lit, actual tobacco flavor is not as strong as I would like. Aroma of the smoke is pleasant and sweet. I do not feel there is a lot of nicotine with this smoke. This tobacco is sweet, mild, and pleasant. Overall, a good tobacco.

Update: As my current tin has remained open and aged gently over several months, this aromatic gets better and better. Possibly McClelland's best aromatic. It is even less "artificial" and has more of a nougat/caramel/vanilla/milk chocolate thing going on. No gurgle, no wet remnants at bowl's end. Firmly in the rotation now, this is a great concoction as far as aromatics go. Tasty, lightly sweet, great room note, gentle on the palate, and a light, pleasant aftersmoke taste. I can't see what more you could ask from it, for what it is.

Now is that a bad thing? With their VA's and Vapers, is it wrong or deceitful to put a more aged version of a very similar if not identical product in tins and the more youthful version in bulk? Not at all. Their bulk VA's and Vapers age nicely and the bulk sales presentation package isn't as nice.

Is it wrong for aromatics, which don't age well? Again, I don't think so. But after smoking various samples of McClelland bulk aromatics, I always felt their claim that they used the best tobaccos and the blend, while sweet and soft, was of a higher quality than other blends was a bit of codswallop (the new balderdash). With Tastemaster, I think they've hit that mark.

Ok, aromatics aren't my thing, it's true. But this one is of the high quality they've claimed. It's a chocolate/vanilla (to my taste and nose) blend that is sweet and soft but also flavorful and of high quality. It tastes and smells quite good, burns well, doesn't leave a goopy heel and is as satisfying as an aromatic can be. Now I'm not in any real hurry to do so, but I believe over time I'll try their other tinned aromatics. They've proven with this one that they can blend in this style, and do it properly. If you like aromatics, try this one.

Its not the chocolate juggernaut that MacBaren Honey & Chocolate is, but its good

The tin aroma has a very prominent rum/chocolate smell. It did not seem overly moist and hence I did not need to dry it out. I smoked it in a CAO Lion's head Meer. There was no trouble getting it burning, however, it needed constant relighting - especially if I put it down for several seconds. The taste was reminiscent of chocolate cream and butterscotch - not too bad in and of itself, but it was too sweet for me which made me faintly nauseous by mid bowl. There was also a chemical taste similar to what one finds in OTC aromatics (Capt. Black, etc.) as well as a slightly burnt taste which reminded me of how briar tastes when you are developing a burn-out through the bowl. No gurgling to speak of, but no tobacco taste either. It was like smoking burning candy and burned hot.

I wouldn't dismiss the blend altogether, but it will only serve me as a "once in a while, on a whim" smoke. Most of all, I liked the coarse cut. Overall, I give it 2 stars.

UPDATE 11-11-09: After letting this one sit for the past 10 months or so, it has improved enough for me to raise my rating to 3 stars. Why? No appreciable chemical taste, number of re-lights reduced, and minimal burn-out taste (I think this taste is due to the Green River Cavendish). The hot burn was now more of a spiciness on the lips and tongue. Still, however, only an occasional smoke for me. Good for when you want something sweet with minimal (if any) tobacco taste. Overall, a better version of Captain Black White that actually tastes like something. Good in place of an after dinner cordial.

I was quite pleasantly surprised. The smoke was smooth and luxurious. The flavor is almost pure cavendish. The room note is a warm subtle dak chocolate. Much lighter and more refined than what I had expected from the tin note.

Definitely a premium Aromatic. For a less heavily cased Aromatic try McClelland's Mellow Mack.

It is a bit on the mild side with little nicotine strength. But I like that most of the time. Only rarely do I like a strong tobacco. I find the flavor to be quite unique. There is a subtle hint of chocolate flavoring mixed with a very sweet aftertaste. Towards the end of the bowl one begins to taste more tobacco and less flavoring. The room note is nice however there are other blends with a much more pleasant room note.

This is an excellent choice for someone new to pipe smoking.

This is defiantly one of the highest quality aromatics out there. It burns very cool and I was unable to get it to bit.

The tin aroma was very pleasant lacking the notorious McClelland ketchup aroma. It had a chocolateish smell on opening the tin.

This stuff lights very easily and burns clean to the bottom of the bowl.

It has very smooth and cream like smoking characteristics. I do detect a hit of chocolate but I primarily taste an almost Mocha coffee.

This is one of my favorite tobaccos to smoke when having a cup of coffee where the pipe smell might offend those near by.

I get many complements on the room note and it's an Aromatic that I actually enjoy!

-Chris

This doesn't really taste like chocolate, nor tobacco. The tobacco appears to be top quality cavendish treated burley, with a few yellow flakes of virginia thrown in for good measure.

The "room" note, since I only smoked this outside, was described by bystanders as "burnt peanut brittle."

This wouldn't have been half bad, but it contains the heaviest dose of propylene glycol I have found in a tobacco (aside from best of show), so much in fact, that by the time you near half a bowl it's pretty much gone to goop. I could not for the life of me find a way to dry this out, so I ended up throwing away the tin.

I smoked this in a king size savinelli roma lucite canadian I have dedicated to aromatics, and it took days to dry out.

McClelland makes some wonderful tobaccos, but this is one of those that would have been best left on the drawing board.