Jim Beam Double Oak

Its hard to approach any Jim Beam product anymore without a suspicious glare as you approach, but in my earlier days of grocery store-sourced whiskey consumption, this was a safe bet that sdidnt break the wallet and made me feel better than buying something generic or bland or merely single oaked (insert snobby scoffing laughter here.) Now Jim Beam is just another foreign-conglomerate owned has-been of its glorious past intent on churning out the most generic content possible and though sometimes they make a mistake and release something fantastic, for the most part they are soulless and joyless offerings. Double Oaked is leaning towards becoming the latter. In a side by side with other Jim Beam offerings, the oak is slightly noticeably more. Certainly not Doubled. If not Double oaked, most definitely not double aged. Im guessing an additional 6 months in a non-first-fill barrel at most. Its not bad, its just not memorable. And maybe thats what $30 gets you these days. I dont know. If the idiots that run this world dont get run out of office soon I expect $30 will get you nothing soon, so I guess I should be grateful. We're supposed to "own nothing and be happy" so maybe, like Jim Beams former commitment to value, Im just not meant for this mediocre world. So on that note, um, I guess Ill awkwardly dismount.

The aroma is of oak and peanuts covered in caramel with a hint of apple, stone fruit, and smoke. The taste is full of oak from the moment the flavor hits to the last remaining past of the finish. Unlike the oak, most other aspects change a lot over time. Early on, there’s more cherry and dark fruits with nutty notes, but it develops into a peach and corn forward grain midpalate, with a finish of sweet caramel corn and smoke. It feels much thicker than many young bourbons, but less than a pot still whiskey. This is infinitely better than Jim Beam White Label, but I do think I can find better bourbons for the money.

Nose: not much, ethanol, maybe a bit of fruit and woody leather Palate: lots of oak, some brown sugar and smoke, almost a grassy easiness Finish: very easy, about what I expected from the nose, finishes sweet and nice Thought I was maybe getting an awesome deal with something comparable to the Woodford double oaked, but really just an easy, smooth bourbon with not a whole lot of richness and flavor. Actually quite nice by itself, but not something that is going to impress a seasoned taster

Jim Beam Double Oak Blind Test Nose: oak, light vanilla, nothing bad, but no strong aromas. Taste: Similar to the nose. Nothing all that remarkable, light oak, vanilla, pepper. Doesn’t really evolve over the course of the drink. Doesn’t seem to be high proof. Finish: pepper, cinnamon, fades quickly Overall: 2.75/5 Nothing bad here, just nothing interesting. The primary flavor is of course the oak, which make sense. Works as a supper, but probably better as a mixer.

Ethanol on the nose is strong for the proof. I don't get "notes" from this whiskey, it just smells like corn, oak, and rye. Despite the "Double Oak," the taste is no more oaky than your typical bourbon. It's certainly smooth, but a touch too thin . The oak is substantial on the finish, but ice will kill it. The unmistakable Jim Beam peanut lingers for 5 to 10 seconds. This is a good whiskey, but you can find much better value out there.

One of the darker colored bourbons Ive seen, maybe because of the double oak process . Nose is licorice, leather ash and floral front, with hint of herbs. On the mouth , there's more herbs and spice than other bourbons, not unlike ryes, but with wood notes joining the choir. A bit harsh for just 43 proof, but complexity makes up for the roughness.