Peter Stokkebye 1882 Mixture
(2.00)
One of the most complicated and oldest blends. Two kinds of ribbon Virginias mixed with Black Cavendish and then accented with hand-spun Curly Cuts Very mild very smooth blend filled with unique tobacco flavors then enhanced with French cognac
Details
| Brand | Peter Stokkebye |
| Blended By | |
| Manufactured By | |
| Blend Type | Aromatic |
| Contents | Black Cavendish, Virginia |
| Flavoring | Cognac |
| Cut | Ribbon |
| Packaging | Bulk |
| Country | Denmark |
| Production |
Profile
Strength
Mild
Extremely Mild -> Overwhelming
Flavoring
Strong
None Detected -> Extra Strong
Room Note
Pleasant to Tolerable
Unnoticeable -> Overwhelming
Taste
Mild to Medium
Extremely Mild (Flat) -> Overwhelming
Average Rating
|
2.00 / 4
|
Reviews
Please login to post a review.
Displaying 11 - 12 of 12 Reviews
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Sep 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.
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 | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Sep 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.
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.
target="_blank"
