Peter Stokkebye Highland Whiskey (No.38)

Aromatics are rarely spot on replicating true flavor, but since whiskey is more of a taste than scent kinda thing (for an amateur like me at least), the dull cardboard - faint sweet/sour odors coming off, were as good as the real thing I suppose. I would be more convinced I had a bag of expired cherry tobacco if blindfolded however.

I was surprised by the first few puffs, they did remind me of some brown firewater, but the rest of the bowl had more bite than I would of liked, detracting from the taste. I would venture to guess this one relies more on the power of topping than quality of leaves, as little tobacco goodness shone through.

While not expecting to get drunk off of whiskey tobacco, I was expecting more smokey richness. I mean after all, no one says "smooth" roughly after a shot of the real thing because it isn't a punch to the buds.

This is one of six new blends I picked up yesterday for testing purposes. First off, why is it called Highland 'Whiskey'? In my experience every scotch I have bought was a 'whisky' (without the 'e'), so why the American spelling then?

Anyway, back to the baccy. Upon opening the G&H labelled pouch I spied a rich mixture of black & dark tan flakes with a scattering of pale yellow. On the nose the most dominating aroma was of paint, yes paint! Of the sort I used to paint my Airfix models as a kid. Not overwhelming but enough to have me wondering I had made a mistake in buying this blend. As for whisky/whiskey I detected none, Highland or otherwise.

Packing was easy enough though as per usual, this needs an hour or so airing time due to being slightly over moist. Fired up it took a few lights to get a decent burn but I was away. Again, no taste of scotch at all and thankfully no 'paint' taste either, just mild tobacco flavours with the black cavendish being the most dominant. It does burn hot however but that could have been due to me having to keep lighting the stuff.

Last night afore bed I filled another pipe and let it rest overnight. I am now smoking that bowl and am rather disappointed. It is still a pig to keep alight and worst of all what little flavour I tasted yesterday has totally gone! This trick has worked for me with other blends but not with this one.

Overall a very bland smoke that demands much input but gives little in return for that effort.

Not one for me.

I first enjoyed this early on, but as the sampled aged it became something else entirely. The taste and flavoring changed ad not for the better. Was recommended, not so much anymore. Okay early on, but becomes foul tasting with age.

This just tasted like an average whiskey blend. It seems to burn kinda hot even though I was using a corn cob. I think I'm going to let it age and try smoking it through my EA CAREY pipe which allow little more air into it.

Bit the hell out of me...But, then again a lot of Aro's will do that if your not careful...Yes, Boys and Girls, this is an Aro and not a Scottish blend...However, that does not make this a bad blend, you just have to be careful while smoking...Don't puff like the proverbial steam engine...For those of you like me who tend to forget and puff too quickly, after you finish wrapping your tongue in bandages for the rest of the day you might try this: mix one part Highland Whisky to three parts Lane Limited 1-Q...You won't be disappointed...The 1-Q takes the edge off the Highland Whisky and the Highland Whisky wakes up the monochromatic 1-Q.

I love P.S. tobaccos, almost the only brand I smoke but this one smokes a bit hot if you're not careful. Puffed slowly, it's not too bad, but the whisky flavor ain't what I'd pour over the rocks. Burns clean. I packed this a little more loosely than normal, as it was a bit moist. Once this two ounce pouch is gone, I don't think I'll be buying any more. My B&M has a lot of the P.S. offerings, and I've been trying them out, with a few that are definitely keepers. But for me this one could use something in the blend that's just not there for me...

PS always comes through with good tobacco and this is no different. I can taste virginia from start to finish with a hint of whisky to keep it interesting. Room note is soft and not and not real smokey( I like smokey though) Nice change of pace, but won't be in the rotation.

The sweet black cavendish takes over right from the start, to me it seemed just like Nougat ( PS-24 ).

After the topping burns off the flavor is a mild tasty virginia with the chocó cavendish in the forefront. It is a nice blend but does not remind me of whiskey at all, and I prefer Nougat for my chocó sweet fix.

One suggestion for dry tobacco is to breath gently into the bowl 5 or 6 times before lighting, the moisture in your breath will rehydrate it. I have not tried it, but it sounded good.

First of all, there is no "e" in the word "whisky" when speaking of Scottish whisky or "Highland whisky". The "e" only appears on the left side of the Atlantic, in the "whiskeys" of North America: Bourbon, Rye, Tennessee, Canadian, etc. That having been said, I don't who is guilty of this spelling error. Does Peter Stokkebye actually advertise this blend as "Highland Whiskey" with an "e"? Or is this grievous error one that only appears here on this page?

Anyway, I have a basic problem with tobaccos that claim to be "flavored" with whisk(e)y, either with or without the "e". Either a blend is flavored with something else that really isn't whisk(e)y, or it really IS flavored with whisk(e)y. If it IS flavored with whisk(e)y then its a waste, because whisk(e)y is about 99 percent alcohol and water which, by themselves, are both tasteless, and most of it will evaporate long before you smoke whatever tobacco you've put it on.

That leaves something less than 1 percent of the whisk(e)y which comprise the natural impurities transferred from the mash during the distilling process as well as the actual oak essence from the inside of the charred barrel in which the whisk(e)y was aged. It's these impurities that give whisk(e)y its caramel color and characteristic flavor. And this is what might flavor any tobacco.

We can argue about the finer points of where whisk(e)y gets its flavors, but the real point is that its a damn poor waste of any whisk(e)y to go pouring it on pipe tobacco thinking that will improve the flavor of either. It won't. Keep the whisk(e)y in your glass and put the tobacco in your pipe.

Of course, the other possibility is that it is actually flavored by something else that the manufacturer imagines tastes something like whisk(e)y. I shudder to think.

Not surprisingly, this blend has only received six reviews prior to mine over a two- year period. Of those six reviews, only two give it a 3-star rating, three reviewers give it a 2-star rating, and one gives it a 1-star. I've tried it and will give it two- stars, but only because the tobacco is from Peter Stokkebye. I would have probably given it a good solid 3-star rating if it didn't have the "flavoring."

COMMENTS: Whiskey flavor is mild but enjoyable. Allow to dry for many hours prior to smoking it. Once dry it is a fine smoke, although not one I'd write home about. (Instead, I'm writing you about it.) If I were given more I would not throw it out. I might mix it with a little more VA to increase its strength slightly.

CONS: Exceedingly wet. Difficult to light, impossible to keep lit until dried out more. Lacks nicotine kick.

PROS: Mild, with virtually no bite whatsoever. Room note is pretty good. For those who enjoy light aromatics this is probably a 3-star blend due to decent taste (when smoked slowly and dried out) and nice room note.

I was at Rupp Arena and passed a Straus tobacconist store before entering. I knew I was going to stop in after the game and did so. Suprised to find three Peter Stokkebye blends in bulk jars. Bought two ounces. Out of the bag the aroma was strong and the tobacco was moist. I had no idea it would smoke so well. With 2 matches I smoked it 2/3 through the bowl. Suprising because it was so moist. The flavor gives way half way through to more tobacco taste. Upon smoking it tasted like it might have the complexity of three tobaccos. Was glad to note above that indeed it did contain some Virginia, from Zimbabwe of all places. The price, ease of staying lit, and the happiness of an unexpected "find" rate the blend high with me. I've smoked it in two other pipes and it was consistant in all. With time, and the mellowing of the flavoring, could this tobacco get even better toward the bottom of the bag? I think I did well for my first Stokkebye bulk blend. Initally it was a 4 star blend, but to compare it with my other ratings, it's recommended, but not a highly my other 4 star picks. This tobacco had been a 3 and 4 star performer for me, but to be fair to the other tobaccos I've tried and smoked, it drops to 2 stars.

A good friend gave me a sample of this fine blend from a tobacconist in Carbondale, Illinois ("Yesteryear"). I always find the range of aromas available in the pipe-game amazing; this tobak smells sweet and toasty, as most Cavendish's do, but with a warm breath of whiskey barrel at the bottom. At first light, there is nothing too special, and throughout the bowl(s)I only got wiffs from the dram that comes through the smoke like mellow drops of whiskey on your tongue. It comes and goes. The tobacco seems top notch, and smokes clean to the bottom. What astounds me is the price; between $1-$2 a bulk-ounce makes this a sweet deal. A mild aromatic for those who don't do..."aromatic".

Mild, in both tobacco taste and the whisper of sweet highland malt. I personally like my smokes a bit more stout, but if you're looking for a soft, sweet smoke, this is a very good one. For me, as both a scotch and tobacco lover, this blend scratches neither itch.

I bought this bc it smelled good and was recommended by the man working the counter. I also got the pipe used to smoke it for this review.

Looks nice, mostly dark. Some ribbon and cavendish and some rubbed flake. Moisture was good when I got to it. Bag note is sweet, whiskey and slightly confectionery. This takes a bit of work to get burning and did need some relighting. I was smoking it in the car, partly on a long drive. I found it worked great with a lighter pack, as the flake bits expanded. After the initial whisky flavor explosion dies down a bit, the flavor is very consistent. Mostly whisky and confectionery taste to it. Cocoa and molasses and vanilla. Not a very sweet topping, the tobacco is pretty present. It is a well made mild aromatic blend. The man who suggested it was correct. It started to nip my tongue a bit after the 4th bowl of the day. The first few bowls burned down nearly completely. The car note was almost pleasant, and surprised me when I noticed it. It smells much sweeter than it tastes.

Overall, I like it. It’s not my favorite of the whiskey genre. It is my favorite mildly aromatic whisky blend. I think it’s worth trying, and it may be somebody’s favorite go to whisky blend out there.

The bag note is a sweet boozy raisin and nutty aromatic tobacco smell. Moist but not sticky black and tan pieces ready to smoke. Packs and lights just fine.

So after the first few puffs after lighting the tobacco settles in. It’s a rather pleasant alcohol whisky (yes without the e) flavor with the usual aromatic raisin/nutty tobacco flavors. The whisky tang stayed till the end along with the sweetness. Huzzah for that! Nothing special but not bad at’tall. Did leave some moisture in the pipe as expected. Mild tobacco after taste. Did not bite me even puffing away on a walk with the hound. A fair and above average boozy alcohol topped bulk aromatic. Would happily smoke again.

A whiskey aromatic with light whiskey flavor that's slightly sweet. A decent smoke, cool and dry. I actually prefer the regular whiskey blend to this one. Too much black Cavendish for me in this one, it tends to take away the whiskey flavor somewhat. Quality of the tobacco is very good. Something about some PS tobaccos is that they seem slightly rough or raw at times and they are always better with age. This one to me is just ok, could be better.

First and foremost, I’m not one to compare the subject blend of discussion to yet another in all rational fairness. However, this one comes somewhat as, let’s call it, a brother from another mother. Specifically, Peter Stokkebye presented us with two whiskey-infused blends that is kind of forcing me to deviate from my own standards.

Earlier this year, I crafted a critique of Stokkebye’s Whiskey #2, giving it an overall 2.5 pipes rating. Now enters Highland Whiskey #38 as a comparative offering. My conclusion is that there is significant equivalency between the two recipes in terms of the base components used. The key difference lies in the respective let-down ratios of the individual varietals and of course the featured whiskey additive. Primarily Whiskey #2 is injected with a sweeter bourbon versus the spicy malt of the subject Highlander counterpart. And I do believe Stokkebye has secretively spikes both mixtures with blackberry, vanilla, and maybe just a drop of caramel.

Expanding my position, Highland Whiskey brings considerably more Cavendish and apportioning towards the Burleys. Presenting a face enmeshed by a weave of ribbon and knotty coarse shredding, the blend’s tartan is formed by a hearty gradation of complementing hues. Namely bright tans owning to the White, chocolate brown Dark, reddish-brown of Zimbabwe Virginia, and a healthy standing of ebon Cavendish define the pattern, much more attractive than #2 by all measures. Additionally, this mix yields with optimum moisture, meaning the caber tossing fun is immediate.

An even netting of bright sugary annotations combine with some independent bitter earthy spice to define the pouched nose, a much richer presentation than the alternative. Gentle in temperament overall but powerfully attractive, nonetheless. There seems to be quite a bit going on with the measured flavorings. A remarking of fruitiness peeks through with a blackberry-like appeal, only to be jostled by the prime whiskey note’s throw of the big hammer. This spiritually sauced air spins with an intensely grained degree of right-smarting punch.

Additionally, some wafts of brown sugar/caramel and vanilla are bashfully doting within but are compressed to mere tinges by the surrounding ingredients. The native element shows its game with a parceling of lemony tart and a strong sour bump coming from the African, while a buttered nuttiness of the White pulls with even force. Finally, a recognizable bracing of earthy Cavendish zip can be denoted circulating on the bottom.

For an aromatic, I must admit that the orchestrated taste profile is well balanced between the top-coatings and the constituent native varieties. No question the coatings do in fact lead the flavor, but they do not squelch the registration of the latter disproportionately. Highland Whiskey confers an inebriating tastefulness that is more consistent in obliging savor as compared to the fleeting sweet smack of the Whiskey #2.

With the flame, the initial forward character is a pocket of condiments softly sweet and peppy in composure. Obviously, the whiskey note is the key feature expelling some gripping alcohol chariness and poignant malty spice that hits boldly at first, then beautifully tapers off the finishing tail. It is bundled, nonetheless, within a nice off-setting frame of berry-vanilla charm that softens the sharp bite found in typical Scottish spirits. . As the toppings occupy the top half of the forward profile, the hardy Burley and Virginia tobacco come together in tandem partnership providing a densely thickened baseline character. For the most part these two elements stand harmoniously on equal footing. However, the Burley postures largely to throw the leading leg, while the Virginia is content standing a step or so in the background. With the Burley an unfailing persona of toasty nuttiness is decorated by timbres of dark molasses, brown sugar/cooked caramel accenting.

Bringing a degree of maturity, the African Virginia strain counters with a pleasant citrusy weathered grass and bit of floridity that is reminiscent of a crisp juniper/evergreen embellishment. This Zimbabwe leaf is unique in that it’s tenders both creamy and a little on the spicy side. Underneath this confluent stream, the minimally cased Cavendish faithfully shadows the blended flavors with zestful, sugary nativity as it enhances the smoky emphasis within the mixture. Optimum characterization of this mix seemed to be engendered best by a hardwood Ozark cob.

A colorfully fancied room note is warm and richly aromatic in presence tending to taper off with a modest accord. The general impression is a buttery sweetness built in height by a mingling of the assorted and complimenting top-coating garnishment. A full charge of alcohol-like spice declares its influence while churning over supporting native hardwood, citrus, and rich candied nuttiness. Most definitely pleasant to the sense and easily badge as extremely fragrant in nature.

This blend generously produces prosperous clouds of dense vapor. The smoky texture whirls in beautiful columns of gray-blue plumage, as the tobaccos burns nicely dry with regulated temperature and a slower tempo. Although cool and reasonably smooth on the palate, Highland Whiskey can demonstrate a bit of sting on the forward palate if your fling gets too high stepping as the combination of the spirits and the Virginia will trip you up. Yet in sum, the blend is a mellowing enjoyable encounter.

So, what’s the end game? With some genealogical partiality on my part of course, my objective assessment is that Stokkebye’s tartan-cladded one is much more impressive and invites a darn sight more colorful experience. Surely, the Inverness laddies would fame Highland Whiskey #38 a gusty belter. Catch the spirit of the Scots and let Highland Whiskey’s tasty jig thrill the good life into your bowl. Slainte Mhath! 3.0 Pipes

3/5 smooth, dry smoke, but little in the way of robust flavor I would expect from a highland blend. Room note was pleasant, but the flavor didn’t match the smell. Cool dry smoke, and I would recommend it on that count alone. Took hardly no time at all to dry out on the serving tray before packing the pipe. Someone will love this blend, but it’s not me. Nothing wrong with it, but nothing great either.