Peter Stokkebye Champagne (No.35)
(1.84)
Classic techniques and modern technology have produced the finest expression of Danish Tobacco Craftsmanship. Developed from fine Virginia tobaccos blended with Mexican Burley and topped with 2 cuts of sweet Black Cavendish, a unique masterpiece. Tobacco cut: Medium loose cut. Tobacco Flavor/Aroma: A subtle hint of French berries captures the essence of this elegantly mild mixture.
Details
| Brand | Peter Stokkebye |
| Blended By | |
| Manufactured By | |
| Blend Type | Aromatic |
| Contents | Black Cavendish, Burley, Virginia |
| Flavoring | Other / Misc |
| Cut | Ribbon |
| Packaging | Bulk |
| Country | Denmark |
| Production | Currently available |
Profile
Strength
Mild
Extremely Mild -> Overwhelming
Flavoring
Mild
None Detected -> Extra Strong
Room Note
Pleasant
Unnoticeable -> Overwhelming
Taste
Mild
Extremely Mild (Flat) -> Overwhelming
Average Rating
|
1.84 / 4
|
Reviews
Please login to post a review.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 Reviews
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2004 | Extremely Mild | Very Mild | Extremely Mild (Flat) | Very Pleasant |
Pulled some out of my celler recently. Loaded up and lit 'er up. I think I lit 'er up. Yep, I lit 'er up - I saw smoke. Whatever I tasted was light. I don't think it was tobacco. I unloaded quickly. I swabbed out my pipe quickly. I begged my pipe for forgiveness quickly. I headed back to my tobacco cellar quickly.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14, 2015 | Very Mild | Medium | Very Mild | Pleasant |
The champagne topping is mild. I got some nuttiness, molasses and earth from the burleys, a little grass from the Virginia, and a mild vanilla from the black cavendish. The tobacco flavors were more obvious in the last quarter of the bowl; not so much at the start. The fruit/berry topping had a little syrupy chemical taste that is distracting. Has almost no nicotine. Burns all right, doesn't bite, and leaves a little moisture at the finish. Needs an average number of relights. The after taste had too much chemical feeling to enjoy; very cloying. An all day smoke.
-JimInks
-JimInks
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 2017 | Mild | Mild to Medium | Mild to Medium | Tolerable to Strong |
Peter Stokkebye - Champagne (No.35).
The lesser of the three tobaccos is the black Cavendish, with the majority of the blend being medium brown. The smell from the pouch isn't pleasant: it smells a little stale/sour. The moisture's good.
The first few puffs taste quite bitter and stale, like the pouch-note. But after five minutes, I begin to note the berries, and a vanilla flavour; the vanilla being much lighter than the berries. After a while the berry flavour becomes slightly stronger, but is always subordinate to the champagne's sourness; it's a shame it's been included, at all, it just ruins what could be an ok blend. The burn from it's decent enough, and I get no bite.
Nicotine: mild. Room-note: not nice.
Not good. One star:
Not recommended.
The lesser of the three tobaccos is the black Cavendish, with the majority of the blend being medium brown. The smell from the pouch isn't pleasant: it smells a little stale/sour. The moisture's good.
The first few puffs taste quite bitter and stale, like the pouch-note. But after five minutes, I begin to note the berries, and a vanilla flavour; the vanilla being much lighter than the berries. After a while the berry flavour becomes slightly stronger, but is always subordinate to the champagne's sourness; it's a shame it's been included, at all, it just ruins what could be an ok blend. The burn from it's decent enough, and I get no bite.
Nicotine: mild. Room-note: not nice.
Not good. One star:
Not recommended.
Pipe Used:
Cob
PurchasedFrom:
Smokingpipes.com
Age When Smoked:
New
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2016 | Mild | Extremely Mild | Extremely Mild (Flat) | Unnoticeable |
An aromatic should have some aroma. Both the taste and aroma are inconsistent at best. I cannot recommend this blend. The taste is clumpy and not evenly dispersed.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| May 02, 2014 | Mild | Medium | Mild | Pleasant |
I bought this Stokkebye blend for 2 reasons: it was on sale and I was looking for a non-whiskey aromatic. Upon opening the pouch I knew things would go bad. What an artificial topping! But then I said, what the hell, let's give it a try. So I lit my pipe and confirmed my suspicions, the blend had a horrible flavouring (which was not of champagne or nothing like that). This was the first tobacco i ever threw to the bin.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 06, 2018 | Extremely Mild | Medium | Mild | Pleasant |
Summary: a pleasant vanilla/cherry aromatic with low Nicotine and smooth burning characteristics.
The triumph of this mixture is that it burns smoothly: the sugars have been kept limited enough that it will gently smolder and produce the flavorful, low-heat smoke that pipe smokers desire. Its downside is that it is an aromatic, of the vanilla plus cherry nature, and therefore has little tobacco flavor shining through, although a guess is that this is the usual mixture of white Burley and brown Virginia that most commercial half/half blends use. It lights easily, unlike many aromatics, and burns smoothly, with most of the flavor coming from the flavorings, sort of like soda pop. Very little Nicotine or natural leaf is detectable but it leaves a nice room note, which really explains why 90% of pipe smokers puff aromatics: people leave them alone because the smoke has an air freshener built in. Not terrible, but I am going to have to add a lot of dark Burley to make this a smoke I notice.
The triumph of this mixture is that it burns smoothly: the sugars have been kept limited enough that it will gently smolder and produce the flavorful, low-heat smoke that pipe smokers desire. Its downside is that it is an aromatic, of the vanilla plus cherry nature, and therefore has little tobacco flavor shining through, although a guess is that this is the usual mixture of white Burley and brown Virginia that most commercial half/half blends use. It lights easily, unlike many aromatics, and burns smoothly, with most of the flavor coming from the flavorings, sort of like soda pop. Very little Nicotine or natural leaf is detectable but it leaves a nice room note, which really explains why 90% of pipe smokers puff aromatics: people leave them alone because the smoke has an air freshener built in. Not terrible, but I am going to have to add a lot of dark Burley to make this a smoke I notice.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Jan 17, 2017 | Extremely Mild | Extremely Mild | Extremely Mild (Flat) | Very Pleasant |
Nope. Smells nothing like champagne in the pouch or in the room. Tastes nothing like champagne--doesn't really have taste at all--except for VERY rarely, I'd get a green apple/Granny Smith apple taste, which might be similar to some notes in champagne. Burns ok, no bite. Overall, it's just very underwhelming.
Pipe Used:
Peterson system, Viking 301, Calabash meerschaum
PurchasedFrom:
P&C
Age When Smoked:
Fresh
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Dec 13, 2010 | Mild | Mild | Mild to Medium | Unnoticeable |
It'sa soft and moist tobacco, looks appetising with a nice ginger and black colour. Doesn't smell unpleasant, either.
I suppose it could even BE a Champagne scent...
There the pluses founder.
It tastes vile.
Like some horrible cough mixture a sadistic doctor might have given William Brown.
It has very little room note other than a vague odour of 'something medicinal'.
Some tobaccos improve after drying out/keeping for a while, but somehow I don't think this one will.
I think it's destined for the bin.
I suppose it could even BE a Champagne scent...
There the pluses founder.
It tastes vile.
Like some horrible cough mixture a sadistic doctor might have given William Brown.
It has very little room note other than a vague odour of 'something medicinal'.
Some tobaccos improve after drying out/keeping for a while, but somehow I don't think this one will.
I think it's destined for the bin.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Apr 29, 2004 | Very Mild | Very Mild | Very Mild | Pleasant |
This is a typical Peter Stokkebye tobacco. That is to say, well-blended, even burning, and some quality to the leaf. It offers good value for the money spent. And in the PS tradition, it looks good!
The topping and overall taste weren't at all what I expected from the description. There was a definite tendency toward biting. Don't let it get too hot.
A mild fruity/berry taste, and now and then, a tobacco flavor from the Black Cavendish. Other than that, it was just boring.
This was probably the most disappointing Stokkebye experince I have had. Sorry Peter.
The topping and overall taste weren't at all what I expected from the description. There was a definite tendency toward biting. Don't let it get too hot.
A mild fruity/berry taste, and now and then, a tobacco flavor from the Black Cavendish. Other than that, it was just boring.
This was probably the most disappointing Stokkebye experince I have had. Sorry Peter.
target="_blank"
