Changing hands = Changing blends

[Thomas Porculo]

Hey guys,

Every so often you read something someone wrote about X blend being completely changed and not being what it used to be. While I have never written about this topic, I've been having some thoughts for the last week or so that I wanted to share and see what others think

As you know, many blends have recently, relatively speaking, changed ownership. While I never noticed huge changes in the past with other blends, there are 3 blends that left me "confused" and disappointed in the last month, namely Erinmore Flake, Dunhill 965, and Dunhill Nightcap. Let me be more specific:

Erinmore flake was a blend that had a strong aromatic flavor that came in force during the smoke. It used to "tingle" my nose and it used to draw strong reactions from people. I had not had it in a while, so I got a tin. I open the tin and get a blast of that smell I loved and loaded my pipe, and what do I find? Barely any aromatic flavor. While in its current incarnation, EF is still good, it lost all that made it unique; it was just another flake. I remember how Erinmore Flake would ghost the pipe and leave it "possessed" for a while, not anymore.

Dunhill 965: Current incarnation is still good, but mediocre. Used to have a certain amount of complexity and the Cavendish came thru, now it's just generic.

Nightcap: The perique made it peppery, and it was a full bodied blend. Current incarnation is enjoyable, but again, another generic blend.

To add insult to injury with the new Dunhill blends, they are 52 bucks a pound.

So, I'm starting to think that when brands change ownership the new owner basically blends a match (and not always a very close match) and calls it the same.

If you have a product that has, for a long time, been very well regarded, why would you change it? For a while I thought the Dunhill blends came back to the market after an absence in the U.S., but did they really come back? Let me use a popular blend as an example: Let's say I acquire the MacBaren brand and take it off the market for a year. Then I take a popular blend like Scottish Mixture, take ALL of the Virginia's out, replace them with Burley cased with other flavors because it's cheaper. Then I pack that blend into tins that look exactly the same and bring them back to the market. Are you then really smoking Scottish or a random blend I created?

 

[Anonymous]

Rape by cost accountants

:twisted: 

:face: 

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Takes all kinds. Woe are those that had the once-was, and are faced with the now-is.

I tried older versions of Erinmore Flake, and found it to be different than the newest incarnation, but none of them said "aromatically-sweet" to me. I rather like the new version.

Nightcap's Perique is minimal, much like EMP's Latakia. I'm not one for Perique, and I also rather enjoy Nightcap.

Tried somewhat older 965, tried newer stuff--it's never gotten along with me.

Cost? Well, that's something worth noticing. With, oh, gosh near everything. :mrgreen:

Yes, when new blenders take over an old recipe, they're likely using different crops, locales, and (hopefully) trying their best. Orlik's done good by me, I like their current stuff a lot. I am not, however, a knew-how-it-was. So, I have that on my side, thankfully.

As always, like what ya smoke, smoke what ya like.

8)

 

[Thomas Porculo]

Rape by cost accountants

:twisted: 

:face: 

Hmmm... that might explain why I'm pooping coins...


Now, Kyle: I never meant to suggest there's anything wrong with liking the new incarnations, and I apologize if my post came across that way.

 

[monbla256]

Hey guys,

Every so often you read something someone wrote about X blend being completely changed and not being what it used to be.  While I have never written about this topic, I've been having some thoughts for the last week or so that I wanted to share and see what others think

As you know, many blends have recently, relatively speaking, changed ownership. While I never noticed huge changes in the past with other blends, there are 3 blends that left me "confused" and disappointed in the last month, namely Erinmore Flake, Dunhill 965, and Dunhill Nightcap. Let me be more specific:

Erinmore flake was a blend that had a strong aromatic flavor that came in force during the smoke. It used to "tingle" my nose and it used to draw strong reactions from people. I had not had it in a while, so I got a tin. I open the tin and get a blast of that smell I loved and loaded my pipe, and what do I find? Barely any aromatic flavor. While in its current incarnation, EF is still good, it lost all that made it unique; it was just another flake. I remember how Erinmore Flake would ghost the pipe and leave it "possessed" for a while, not anymore.

Dunhill 965: Current incarnation is still good, but mediocre. Used to have a certain amount of complexity and the Cavendish came thru, now it's just generic.

Nightcap: The perique made it peppery, and it was a full bodied blend. Current incarnation is enjoyable, but again, another generic blend.

To add insult to injury with the new Dunhill blends, they are 52 bucks a pound.

So, I'm starting to think that when brands change ownership the new owner basically blends a match (and not always a very close match) and calls it the same.

If you have a product that has, for a long time, been very well regarded, why would you change it? For a while I thought the Dunhill blends came back to the market after an absence in the U.S., but did they really come back? Let me use a popular blend as an example: Let's say I acquire the MacBaren brand and take it off the market for a year. Then I take a popular blend like Scottish Mixture, take ALL of the Virginia's out, replace them with Burley cased with other flavors because it's cheaper. Then I pack that blend into tins that look exactly the same and bring them back to the market. Are you then really smoking Scottish or a random blend I created?

I think much of what you are experiencing may be some "change" in your tobacco palate over the years. I have smoked several of Dunhill's blends over the past 40+ years and yes they have changed somewhat, mainly due to many factors such as type of specific variety of leaf used in the blends availability and ageing etc. I started with 965 as made in London by Dunhill in the early 70's, then to the Murray blended version in the 80's,( Murray took over Dunhill blending in 1981) and will soon try some of the Orlik/STG blended version soon. Murray's was the same but slightly "different" than the earlier London blend but it was STILL 965.
As far as Nightcap goes, I've only smoked the Murray's version and recently the Orlik/STG version and to MY taste, there was VERY LITTLE difference in the two.
As far as Royal Yacht goes (my FAVORITE Dunhill blend) I've smoked all three versions over the years and the version blended by Orlik/STG is slightly different than the London blended version I smoked in the early 70's but not by much at all.
As far as EMP goes, I've only smoked the Murray's version as it was not a blend that kept my interest so I could not say how it compares to todays iteration.
As has been stated by others ( Greg Pease has written about this many times) Over the years varieties of specific tobacco's change depending on many variables, suppliers change, and processing of these varieties change over time, so it would be hard for ANY blender to make a blend be the SAME as they might have sold over several decades . My palate has changed over the years to where many blends which "were THE blend" no longer hold my interest and this may be where you are at smoking wise! JMHO :twisted: :twisted:

 

[Thomas Porculo]

Hey guys,

Every so often you read something someone wrote about X blend being completely changed and not being what it used to be.  While I have never written about this topic, I've been having some thoughts for the last week or so that I wanted to share and see what others think

As you know, many blends have recently, relatively speaking, changed ownership. While I never noticed huge changes in the past with other blends, there are 3 blends that left me "confused" and disappointed in the last month, namely Erinmore Flake, Dunhill 965, and Dunhill Nightcap. Let me be more specific:

Erinmore flake was a blend that had a strong aromatic flavor that came in force during the smoke. It used to "tingle" my nose and it used to draw strong reactions from people. I had not had it in a while, so I got a tin. I open the tin and get a blast of that smell I loved and loaded my pipe, and what do I find? Barely any aromatic flavor. While in its current incarnation, EF is still good, it lost all that made it unique; it was just another flake. I remember how Erinmore Flake would ghost the pipe and leave it "possessed" for a while, not anymore.

Dunhill 965: Current incarnation is still good, but mediocre. Used to have a certain amount of complexity and the Cavendish came thru, now it's just generic.

Nightcap: The perique made it peppery, and it was a full bodied blend. Current incarnation is enjoyable, but again, another generic blend.

To add insult to injury with the new Dunhill blends, they are 52 bucks a pound.

So, I'm starting to think that when brands change ownership the new owner basically blends a match (and not always a very close match) and calls it the same.

If you have a product that has, for a long time, been very well regarded, why would you change it? For a while I thought the Dunhill blends came back to the market after an absence in the U.S., but did they really come back? Let me use a popular blend as an example: Let's say I acquire the MacBaren brand and take it off the market for a year. Then I take a popular blend like Scottish Mixture, take ALL of the Virginia's out, replace them with Burley cased with other flavors because it's cheaper. Then I pack that blend into tins that look exactly the same and bring them back to the market. Are you then really smoking Scottish or a random blend I created?

I think much of what you are experiencing may be some "change" in your tobacco palate over the years. I have smoked several of Dunhill's blends over the past 40+ years and yes they have changed somewhat, mainly due to many factors such as type of specific variety of leaf used in the blends availability and ageing etc. I started with 965 as made in London by Dunhill in the early 70's, then to the Murray blended version in the 80's,( Murray took over Dunhill blending in 1981) and will soon try some of the Orlik/STG blended version soon. Murray's was the same but slightly "different" than the earlier London blend but it was STILL 965.
As far as Nightcap goes, I've only smoked the Murray's version and recently the Orlik/STG version and to MY taste, there was VERY LITTLE difference in the two.
As far as Royal Yacht goes (my FAVORITE Dunhill blend) I've smoked all three versions over the years and the version blended by Orlik/STG is slightly different than the London blended version I smoked in the early 70's but not by much at all.
As far as EMP goes, I've only smoked the Murray's version as it was not a blend that kept my interest so I could not say how it compares to todays iteration.
As has been stated by others ( Greg Pease has written about this many times) Over the years varieties of specific tobacco's change depending on many variables, suppliers change, and processing of these varieties change over time, so it would be hard for ANY blender to make a blend be the SAME as they might have sold over several decades . My palate has changed over the years to where many blends which "were THE blend" no longer hold my interest and this may be where you are at smoking wise! JMHO :twisted: :twisted:

I'm inclined to agree with most of what you said, with a certain degree of disagreement.

See, I understand that it is hard for any blender to keep the blend consistent because of the changes in tobacco. I also fully agree with the palate changes. When the Dunhill blends were unavailable for a while my tobacconist told me if I was on the look out for a new favorite I should check out the GL Pease blends. Well, I'm glad he did, and I think I got spoiled. I understand it this is only a matter of subjective opinion, and in my humble and very subjective opinion, the tobacco used in GLP blends is far superior than past or present Dunhill incarnations (again, just a thought) and far from being an expert, my hat off to Mr. Pease.

However, IMHO, new Erinmore and old Erinmore are night and day, and while a change is expected regardless of manufacturer, such a drastic change raises an eyebrow. Still, I can't rule out a change in palate, but I will go out on a limb here and suggest an experiment.

If anyone here has an unopened tin of the old Erinmore Flake, and are willing to open it, let me know. I will send you a little bit of the new erinmore flake and have you smoke it, then post your impressions here. I would offer to be a guinea pig, but I don't see anyone offering me some old EF.

So, who's up for a little experimentation in the name of science?

 

[monbla256]

So, who's up for a little experimentation in the name of science?

Unfortunately there is NO SCIENCE in Pipe smoking, just subjective OPINIONS and comparing memories of blends from even a decade ago with current iterations would have no scientific basis  :twisted: :twisted:

 

[Briar Spirit]

I hear ya Bro', sad thing is that change is a part of life, some life changes hurt so bad ya wonder if you'll ever get through, some tobacco blend changes are so radical they make ya head spin, what is best in all of that chaos is being able to see through the misty waters so you can then focus on some good stuff, heart aches fade, bad changes in blends blur into memory but the good stuff we've been able to focus on, that's right here in the 'now' and man is some of it AWESOME, get yerself a tin of something truly exceptional and remind yerself there's a heap of fantastic smokes out there, let those jaded blends go, enjoy some great NEW blends instead. :cheers: :sunny: 

 

[Anonymous]

********.

Never in the last 50 years has the right to manufacture & market a tobacco been sold by a blender to a cartel, or a manufacturer of it been supplanted by another manufacturer and the result of it has been that the change resulted in an improvement in that product.

Enough about tobaccos that have become unobtanium. That's a factor in some cases. But SG & GH survived the demise of Rhodesian Virginia pretty well, and GLP's kept his offerings level in the water even more skillfully.

That's why the real deals in the business deserve the title "blenders."

And why many who pass for them don't. :twisted: 

:face:

 

[riff raff]

I had some bulk EMP that was always just a touch too light. Recently I opened a tin of Nightcap and was reminded of how stout that blend is. I decided to blend a 50% mix of each and found it to be wonderful. I usually smoke 965 and don't mind the Cavendish, but the EMP/Nightcap mix might just be the ticket.

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Improvement or...possible sideways move leading to merely different? I dunno. Maybe?

Or just OTS... Old Tongue Syndrome. :lol!:

8)

 

[Briar Spirit]

********.

Ah come on Yak, don't hide your real feelings chap, tell us what you really think. :lol:  :heart: 

 

[monbla256]

********.

Ah come on Yak, don't hide your real feelings chap, tell us what you really think. :lol:  :heart: 

Yak has SPOKEN, it is FACT :twisted: :twisted: Besides it's ALL Burley anyway  

 

[Briar Spirit]

********.

Ah come on Yak, don't hide your real feelings chap, tell us what you really think. :lol:  :heart: 

Yak has SPOKEN, it is FACT :twisted: :twisted: Besides it's ALL Burley anyway  

You really put a BIG smile on me ugly pug right there, nice one. :cheers: 

 

[Thomas Porculo]

********.

Never in the last 50 years has the right to manufacture & market a tobacco been sold by a blender to a cartel, or a manufacturer of it been supplanted by another manufacturer and the result of it has been that the change resulted in an improvement in that product.

Enough about tobaccos that have become unobtanium. That's a factor in some cases. But SG & GH survived the demise of Rhodesian Virginia pretty well, and GLP's kept his offerings level in the water even more skillfully.

That's why the real deals in the business deserve the title "blenders."

And why many who pass for them don't. :twisted: 

:face:

OK, let me see if I understand you correctly. What you call real blenders are the ones who are able to keep their offerings somewhat consistent thru changes in supply?

If I understand you correctly, then we go to my original point. You might have the same proportion of, roughly speaking, the same tobacco varieties but the blend is only a "match" with the same name.

To clarify: I don't get hung up and heart broken when I blend I like does a 180 flip, and I don't have issues moving on, experimenting with new blends is a great way to find other favorites. However, it does annoy me when I am told I am buying Erinmore Flake and end up smoking something else...

 

[Anonymous]

Keeping blends consistent over the years while each year's crop is varying is what blenders DO.

Vinterers have been doing it for the last 200 years.  

:face: 

 

[sisyphus]

these products are going to vary from year to year just like wines and whiskeys do. It's exactly the reason blended whiskeys originated in Scotland, to try to make a consistent flavor that you could return to again and again.

I think with tobaccos that undergo a process to become what they are, like FVF, BBF, the various ropes and Germain Brown Flake etc, it's easier to hit that target because the process itself is responsible for a lot of that flavor. Take a tobacco like MVF, Opening Night or F&T Blackjack, and I think astute palates would detect differences from batches made using different crops. I certainly can tell a difference between Blackjack tins of different vintage in my cellar.

So of course this difference is going to be even more dramatic when labels change manufacturers. The new Capstan is not the old Capstan, or Balkan Sobranie, or the Dunhill blends. Some of these aren't as good as they used to be, some of them are just as good on their own merits.

 

[Richard Burley]

I don't worry about change; it's homogenization that concerns me, with everything tasting alike. It has almost destroyed uniqueness in aromatics, which seem to be nothing but vanilla bombs. I have never felt wedded to any particular brand. I'll stick with Pease, C & D, and McC for quality and quantity. The imports are curiosities more than anything else. If new owners want to bitch up a traditional product by erasing what is unique about it, it's their call. I am a strong believer in letting everyone go to hell their own way.

Having said that, I am a bit ticked off by what I've been reading on other posts about Escudo. Ah, well...  :|

 

[Kyle Weiss]

I don't worry about change; it's homogenization that concerns me, with everything tasting alike. It has almost destroyed uniqueness in aromatics, which seem to be nothing but vanilla bombs. I have never felt wedded to any particular brand. I'll stick with Pease, C & D, and McC for quality and quantity. The imports are curiosities more than anything else. If new owners want to bitch up a traditional product by erasing what is unique about it, it's their call. I am a strong believer in letting everyone go to hell their own way.

Great point.

8)

 

[alfredo_buscatti]

I certainly bitched about the STG topping of Escudo, but to tell you the truth, after smoking more of it, it tastes a lot more like the untopped version than it tastes differently. Though it's not hard to identify the topping in the tin note or the smoke, it's also not hard to stop thinking about it and getting annoyed.

I wonder how expectation figures in in this matter. For me what I believe comes true most of the time in general and certainly in the realm of tobacco taste. I've smoked many tins of Escudo and this memory is always in my palate.