New Smoker, What am I supposed to taste?

[Kyle Weiss]

But you want it for after-soap aroma ?

:face:

Burnt bacon? No. I want the soap aroma of Latakia in a leather tobacco pouch. Are you going senile? :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Not any faster than usual, last time I checked.

If you don't want Latakia smell in your apartment, using Latakia-scented soap would leave you smelling like Latakia. And since the aroma of it would spread from you through your apartment . . .

Not copping to any more senility than necessary :no:

:face:

 

[Kyle Weiss]

What is this odd preoccupation with me liking the scent of Latakia in leather tobacco pouches and whether or not I smoke in my apartment? :lol: You do realize the whole time I was referring to Latakia in a leather tobacco pouch, which can be safely assumed wasn't also under combustion, ergo, no smoke, nor the smell of Latakia smoldering.

 

[Anonymous]

Maybe you could get Yankee to make you some Latakia-&-Leather-scented candles ? Or whatever those aroma thingies on a stand are that you have a little candle under to melt.

:face:

 

[Kyle Weiss]

That'd be cool. I know, as in soap making, the essences used for candle making is much the same. Hell, I might find a way to infuse some paraffin wax with some "leather" scent and get some Latakia steeping in the wax and see what I can come up with.

Most candle scents are abysmal.

Just waiting for Rob or some other joker to suggest BCAQ or Lakeland as an alternative. :lol:

8)

 

[Smoker99]

Too bad most tobaccos don't taste like they smell. Get away from aros, and try a straight Va or a burley from C&D.

 

[KevinM]

You might be adviced out by now . . .

But if you're interested in aromatics, you might visit Pipeworks and Wilke Pipe Shop which does a nice job with hand blended aros as well as English, Virginia and Burley blends. They offer a "sampler" package which might interest you. Wilkes' descriptions of some of their aros may give you the munchies :rabbit: If you're looking to try some good, low cost aros, Lane's RLP-6 (which some swear is Cap'n Black White) and 1Q are both available in bulk. The Wilke aros absolutely do not trade wretched taste in the latter part of the smoke for a nice smell at the beginning of it, which is the bane of some aromatics. I'd say the same about RLP-6 and 1Q.

 

[J Soshae]

Lol. First thing that comes to mind is "beating a dead horse with a stick". You should have seen the thread that disappeared a week ago.

I am sure Kyle and Yak are dying to try the 1Q. Would you like me to mix the BCA or the RLP-6 in with your orders? :lol!:

 

[Kyle Weiss]

I am sure Kyle and Yak are dying to try the 1Q. Would you like me to mix the BCA or the RLP-6 in with your orders? :lol!:

I've had my propylene glycol fix recently thanks to Rob. There's plenty of it out there for the rest of you. :lol:

 

[KevinM]

Ooops, missed something, didn't I? I'm guessing it had to do with my favorable comment re: RLP-6 and 1Q, two friendly young ladies from the wrong side of the tracks looking for a little love among the brothers. My firmly held POV is that if a piper expresses his like / non-like of Blend X, I'm bound to respect his report of the sensations received by his own nerve endings. But I'm not bound to regard individual reports as universals. In this case, there are other data available to newbies. Go over to tobaccoreviews, click on Lane and notice that a universe of 165 puffers awarded 1Q an average rating of three stars (out of four). Pretty robust, eh, haters? RLP-6 had 60 review with an average of three stars. Smaller response, mebbe, but it's a good trick to hang onto that third star as the responses come in, I'd say. Besides, they're a value choice, always a consideration for new applicants

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Two ever-present constants here in pipeland:

* People like what they like.

* People comment on what they like, and what they don't.

Conclusion:

Grains of salt, just not in your 'bacca.

8)

 

[KevinM]

I am happy to support both your points.

I'd suggest that new pipers -- as well as not-so-newcomers -- might benefit by monitoring the reasons that the pipe appeals to them. For instance, some describe their goal as a lifelong quest for the perfect pipe and their own personal Arcadia. That's fine, but others -- such as yr 'umble servant -- like variety. Our quest is the assembly of an ample, seviceable collection of pipes and the identification of, oh, let's say a dozen tobaccos, any one of which we might happily take along while walking the dog.

Those in the former group should not be surprised that their quest is necessarily judgmental, resting on the construction of a personal hierarchy of like / don't like, better than / worse than.

Those of us in the latter group, though we may appear to be too easily pleased at times, believe that this isn't an altogether bad trait and find nirvana in extended solitary moments practicing rhythmic breathing with our proven, familiar (and non-talkative) friends.

Sometimes a meatloaf sandwich with spicy mustard and a cold cheap beer really hit the spot. No need to rank 'em.

 

[J Soshae]

From watching posts, Kyle is pretty adventurous with trying new tobaccos. He just doesn't like meatloaf!

Ironically my most treasured tobacco in my cellar is now 1/2 oz of 1Q that i found in my old workbench. I bought the tobacco around 12 years ago along with my first pipe. I never finished that first little ziploc. I tried some when I found it and found it did not smoke goopy like a fresh batch. It also is smoother and does not bite. I cannot bring myself to smoke the remainder due to nostalgia. It is saved it for a special day.

Maybe Kyle you have to age it for 12 years for the glycol to evaporate off. *wink* (where is a darn wink emoticon when you need it?)

 

[KevinM]

Kyle does seem willing to give new stuff a go, and he has a nice touch with reviews. Both are helpful to those starting out as well as those who've been on the trail awhile.

And I'll bet he could even do a great review of a meatloaf sammich.

 

[Anonymous]

Well, people come here to talk, and I guess this is something to talk about on a slow news day. But the substance of it does not, IMHO, warrant the level of analysis it's being subjected to.*

GLP covered this years ago.

Q: What kind of tobaccos do you recommend for the beginner?

A: I think many well-meaning tobacconists do a disservice to the novice by suggesting a "mild" tobacco, especially an aromatic tobacco, to start with. Until the smoker is used to the mechanics of smoking a pipe, and has cultivated a sense for the flavors and aromas s/he will be experiencing, their sensory response is not dramatic. If they start with a mild tobacco, they will likely puff like a locomotive to attempt to get something out of it that resembles flavor, not to mention the difficulty they may have in keeping a pipe lit. If the tobacco is a goopy aromatic, the problem is magnified.

I generally recommend a full flavored, but not strong tobacco to the beginner. They'll be much more likely to get some flavor from their early experiences, and it will be much easier, then, for them to apprehend the idea of "slowing down," which is crucial to a great smoke. Once they've learned some of the mechanics of pipe smoking, and their senses have become accustomed to some of the myriad flavors tobaccos can present, they are better armed to move into more subtle, or "mild" blends. For the beginner, "mild" tobaccos are generally far from mild!

http://www.glpease.com/FAQ.html

That was the answer then and it remains the answer now.

:face:
.............
*(and analysis of the analysis) (and analysis of the analysis of the analysis -- ever notice how easily Americans slip into this ? They call it "critical thinking." It's not. A lot of times, it's the equivalent of a dog chasing its tail).

 

[Kyle Weiss]

*shrug*

Except to thank those with a vote of confidence to my willingness to try (and my fortitude toward my thoughts on what I try), can't explain it better than the prior three posts. <--- (super secret wink emoticon... heheh)

I'm terribly hungry for meatloaf now... :scratch: (not so subliminal)

Keep it simple, guys--be honest with yourself, too. 8)

 

[Anonymous]

Analysing "aromatics for beginners" as if it were a complex problem leads to many words and the appearence of ambiguity. But "Start with the easy stuff"
makes sense.

IMHO

YMMV

:face:

 

[KevinM]

You seem to be saying that Bentbulldog has been overserved. Must be the heat. Has everyone cooped up inside.

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Who's rap-tap-tappin' on my bridge? :lol:

I'm a newer pipe smoker compared to a lot of these guys.

I can't smoke aromatics--reason one, they bite my tongue (a common beginner "problem"). Reason two, I don't like sweet things.

No one really suggested, until I came here, that maybe I try something else. "Really? But Aromatics are for beginners!"

The problem is, they aren't for beginners, they're for people who like aromatics. This does a disservice to the aromatic tobacco and the beginner.

GL Pease's Union Square was one of the first non-aromatic tobaccos I tried. It solved the tongue bite.

In good, experiential consciousness, I should now jump back onto the train that supports the notion that aromatics are for beginners? :scratch:

Just trying to support Yak/Pease's notions here. It's more an open-minded, objective approach. Problems are often solved in the simplest of ways. I'm a newbie turned intermediate pipe smoker steered from the status-quo, and I'm okay with that. I'm also okay with suggesting it to others.

8)

 

[KevinM]

Sorry, I was actually responding to Yak's admirable plea for simplicity. Let the thread record show that I began with my stndrd rec to beginners -- get a sampler of the basic food groups -- English, Va, Burley and a respectable aro. The plus of this approach is that it does answer the Q that opened the thread --"Wot am I sposed to taste?" and it adds some variety to the search. I include aro mostly because an awful lot of it is sold, so might as well make the acquaintance early, while getting acquainted with other tastes. There seems to be a lot of preoccupation with tongue bite among the brothers, which is admittedly unpleasant. The sampler approach will quickly let you know if tongue bite is going to be a problem for you at all or only a problem with certain tobacco groups. It will also quickly lead to an appropriate remedy, if you're in the group where a tongue bite remedy is needed.