Comments

1
What if'n you don' like vodka at all??
2
I woove you Mary.
3
империя самая лучшая водка! К черту с водкой французской и другими самозванцами!
4
I might not be edumacated but I am indeed a molecular connoisseur. . . good to know!
5
Keekee, there's nothing to not like about vodka. It's bland and tasteless. That's like saying you don't like water.

There are, however, about a dozen things I'd rather drink.
6
Wait. Let me get this straight. Are you saying that if you have a taste for specific kinds of Vodka, it's because you like the taste of one over others? Truly my mind is blown.
7
http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/11/t…

I'd be surprised if vodka was so much different.
8
A vodka that has any taste at all means it's not really vodka (or that it's vodka-plus-flavoring). In theory, all vodka is supposed to taste exactly the same... like nothing but alcoholic water.
9
Taste preference for one vodka over another tends to disappear when tasted blind. What most "vodka connoisseurs" have a taste for is money. Generally speaking, deliciousness in liquor is colored brown (exceptions for gin, some tequila, and some rums).
10
Sadly, Fnarf is right.

All you're tasting is money, kind of like how most people prefer expensive wines and enjoy them more, but not so much when it's a blind taste test.

The best vodka, in a blind taste test, is almost always the second cheapest one.
11
And hilariously the "study" was funded by one of the vodkas studied, and involved no tasting of any kind. Which means it wasn't a study at all, but marketing.
12
A big difference with expensive vodkas(and alot of liquors) compared to cheap ones is in the filtration process. Britta filters are expensive, so imagine how expensive various charcoal filters, etc. are for these companies. One of the first things to go in budget liquors is the amount of filtration that takes place. This means that alot of the impurities from the distillation process are still there, resulting in the burning-ness of cheap liquors. Try running a cheap bargain bin vodka through a britta filter 4-5 times and compare it to an expensive vodka. Not a huge difference at that point.
13
convince yerself. there's difference's.
Kettle One has a smokiness - good with foods like oysters. Grey Goose is better for your foo-foo martinis.
Sky is smooth & yummy straight up.
I love the cheap stuff when mixing with club sodie. However, blindfolded or not - I'd know if my dirty martini was made with Skoal and not Belvedere. If you can't taste it then you must not be tasting those molecules.
14
Right, there are differences. That's why I said "Not a huge difference at that point.". I mean, you can taste the difference, but if you like Grey Goose, it's unlikely you would turn your nose up at Skye or something. You would probably turn your nose up at the cheap shit, but that's mainly cause it's not filtered as well. Take care of that and they are pretty similar.
15
Does that work as well when you're vomiting it up in some alley behind the bar?

That's the real test.
16
Well, the premium vodkas do make the chunks glisten differently, @15.
17
Hmmm... I'm not a chemist—no really I'm not!—but do different filtering processes change the molecular structure of vodka? Given that many brands, top shelf brands included, all purchase their base vodka from the same distilleries then try and distinguish themselves through post-production (probably not the word for it) processes and marketing. Mostly marketing.
18
Vodka sucks. I'll take Lagavulin 16 neat please.
19
@15: Right, cause noone ever gets sick on Grey Goose, that's the good shit.
20
I started buying midgrade vodka and putting it through the Brita filter after I read this:

http://www.ohmygoditburns.com/

For the record, post-filtration, I can only taste a difference in Grey Goose (there's something mineral-y in there, probably added by their filtration method) and the flavored vodkas. Even the bottom-shelf SHIT tastes innocuous if you filter it enough.
21
"Because of molecules we are connected to the outside world from our bodies. Like when you smell things, because when you smell a smell it's not really a smell, it's a part of the object that has come off of it, molecules. So when you smell something bad, it's like in a way you're eating it. This is why you should not really smell things, in the same way that you don't eat everything in the world around you because as a smell, it gets inside of you. So the next time you go into the bathroom after someone else has been there, remember what kinds of molecules you are in fact eating."
22
Doug @ 18,

Right there with you. And, since it is nearly five, I'm off to pour myself some. Cheers.
23
Just a few people's opinions, and probably some misguided (but understandable) bias, but it's an interesting read:
http://sanfrancisco.grubstreet.com/2010/…

24
THIS IS RELEVANT TO MY INTERESTS.
25
Fnarf is spot-on. Funded by one of the brands tested, not blind, hasn't been replicated by independent researchers. this is marketing, not science.
On a slightly related note Joan Crawford always had contract riders that stipulated 100 proof, Smirnoff Silver, so she obviously had a taste for those pure "ethanol clusters".

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.