If the cheap stuff is good enough for you then honestly count yourself lucky. I feel far better when I find a $30 bottle of whiskey I like versus when I find another expensive one I like. If anyone shames you for it then they are the problem not you.
This is the most real comment here. I always grab a $30 bottle of whisky when I am grabbing one of my usuals, and believe it or not I have absolutely found some hidden gems.
I agree with OP, for what it is JW Red isn’t bad. Not great, not going to be excited to buy a bottle, but it’s consistent if anything.
I'm exagerating (it's 20.5%) but it's Seattle. I think there's also another tax by volume ($3.77/L). So final cost for me is $63.07, which is actually lower than I've seen it lately.
Highest liquor taxes in the country, I think.
The WA State liquor tax is higher than the tax in Sweden, which used to have the highest hooch tax in the world. Difference is the tax is based on alcohol ABV in Sweden and not cost.
WA taxes were a trade off / cost for setting up a system that favored big box stores. Our legislature accepted many contributions (bribes) from Costco and the like to make this happen.
Suggestion: buy your malt whisky from Europe. It’s usually cheaper, including the shipping, to buy from shops overseas. Screw the bribe taking politicians. The same jokers who continue to keep it illegal to grow cannabis for home use.
It's $60 in Kentucky. [https://www.totalwine.com/spirits/scotch/single-malt/laphroaig-10-yr/p/3697750?s=2102&igrules=true](https://www.totalwine.com/spirits/scotch/single-malt/laphroaig-10-yr/p/3697750?s=2102&igrules=true)
What the fuck? I haven't seen Laphroaig 10 for $30 since like, either 2017 or 2018 I think. From a sample size of three states it always seems to be in the $50-55 range these days.
I'll take it. Maybe the heavily peated stuff doesn't move too much in the Arizona market, so they discount it?? No idea. Lagavulin 16 is currently at $79.99 and if you buy two, you get $20 off (so functionally the price is down to $69.99).
JW Red is the most popular whisky in the world, followed by Jim Beam and Jack Daniels. None of those are truly awful, or they wouldn't be as popular. Most of the people in this sub (myself included) drink scotch neat, and JW is really better for mixing. If you enjoy it neat, that's great. I like Jim Beam neat once in a while. I'd be more upset if you said you used Craigellachie or An Oa as a mixer.
Seriously what kind of crackhead uses $50 or $100 bottles in a mixed drink.
But in any event, I don't really drink whisky any way other than neat, it's probably the least suitable alcohol for mixing if you ask me.
>Seriously what kind of crackhead uses $50 or $100 bottles in a mixed drink.
Sooo many people who aren't whisky drinkers get gifted nice bottles and it goes straight in a glass with coke.
There are some cocktails that really do work with better whisky, someone a while back did a series called « will it penicillin » that was fun to read, about making Penicillins with various 50-100€ Scotch.
Oh hell yeah, Old Fashioneds and Manhattans deserve a good whiskey. I make my Manhattans differently than the traditional recipe though, because I think that one has way too much sweet vermouth.
Mine have a similar ratio to how I make martinis, with a tiny splash of sweet vermouth in the bottom of the glass, swirled around, but then I toss it in with the whiskey instead of discarding it. It's probably about 1/8 fl oz sweet vermouth to 3 fl oz whiskey. Delicious, and definitely calls for a good whiskey because it's *almost* like drinking it neat except for the tiny amount of sweet vermouth, bitters, and of course the little cherry garnish.
Shit, now I want one.
K, it's settled. Manhattan time.
I mix whatever I want with whatever I want. Whisky snobs are the worst. 100 dollar used in a cocktail makes it taste great. I'm not gonna use some garbage jw red lol.
They're not truly awful, but the reason they're the most popular is marketing, not taste. I participated in a bourbon tasting session where the room tasted four bourbons: Four Roses, Makers Mark, and a couple others I don't remember. The point is, at the end, the taster asked for a show of hands, and Makers Mark was #4. He pointed out that Makers spends more on marketing than the other three combined. So popularity is just a popularity contest. What matters is your own taste buds, and your wallet!
Honesty if you like JWR you might might the costco blended sotch which is about 1/2 the cost, great mixer sotch, and is drinkable with a few cubes of ice.
I really wish that more people would focus on the value scotch lines, when you drop 400usd for a bottle named bottle , honestly it's not shocking that it's good and drinkable, it's at the other end of the line where you have surprises that are nice.
I don't know what the prices are where you're shopping, but I've been able to find Red Label pretty consistently for $20-$25 per 1.75L. If Costco has a $12 handle I'll check it out, but I would be surprised!
Costco has a 3yr old blended Scotch handle for $20 and is actually drinkable neat or mixed. It's pretty decently decent. Better than Red label for sure
Diageo made some decent, consistent liquid. The issue is: Diageo makes it, its mass produced to reach every corner of the world, and lacks any real distinct character compared many single malts.
But we’re in a group of scotch enthusiasts…if this were a hamburger enthusiast group, Johnnie Red is like a McDonalds single cheese burger. You can get it everywhere, it’ll be mostly the same, but it’s really not a definitive version of what a hamburger can or should be.
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that what Diageo makes doesn’t have real character because they actually own the majority of scotch distilleries which produce the most popular single malts out there. Sure, you can cite IBs but the IBs still get their liquid from Diageo.
I’m citing diageo making and lacking character as two separate reasons..and being part of a large corp doesn’t automatically make me dislike a producer, most distilleries are owned by large corporations. However, OP asked why Johnnie is seen as less than, and I’m giving a reason why: In a world of seemingly endless labels, why would a group of scotch enthusiasts think highly of the most commonly found liquid made by the largest producer? If that was the best thing, what would be the point of the group and being an enthusiast?
McDonald's single cheeseburger? I'd say it's at least like a Sourdough Jack from Jack in the Box. It's nothing special, but there are also some BAD bottles of whisky out there that I wouldn't want again.
I think you can clarify that with r/hamburgers if you want. Its doesn’t matter what the comparison product is, the general idea is the same. It’s a consistent, available product, which means the enthusiasts of unique quality products will not find it interesting.
That being said, I echo what many people say here: if you like it, you should drink it.
It’s less about the quality of the cheeseburger itself and more about distribution and consistency around the world.
You can order a McDonald’s cheeseburger in 118 countries and get basically the thing you’re expecting.
Jack in the Box is only in the US and even then only like half the states. It’s not the same.
More like Big Mac. A Big Mac in the US is Big Mac in the UK is Big Mac in Asia is Big Maharaja in India (accounting for dietary differences).
Indeed it's the consistency and familiarity that makes it what it is. Doesn't mean it's the best however.
That's what's I meant by dietary differences in my comment. But McD is about as consistent as it gets across the globe. Maybe Starbucks Pikes Place brew.
I was at a scotch event for an Islay distillery and at one point, the distillery manager said he wanted to answer a question someone had asked him.
“Is it okay to drink scotch on the rocks?”
Someone in the back booed really hard. It was a small room and extremely tasteless.
The distillery manager went on to say that several of the people who work for him prefer scotch on the rocks and he occasionally did as well.
Whisky snobs are going to be whisky snobs. The people who love whisky are going to love whisky.
There are cheap whiskies out there that are made to get you drunk. Johnnie Walker at least puts the effort in to get you a decent quality product at a reasonable price. And the brilliant minds at a place like Springbank and Lagavulin probably respect them for it.
I personally don’t like the flavor profile (thin, chemically, very grain whisky heavy, ethanol and paint thinner).
I don’t mind if it was benign like Jack Daniels. I don’t think it’s benign, I find it harsh for 40% ABV and $30.
JW double black is pretty good, but for the price, there’s a bunch of independent bottler Islay blends I’d prefer too
Edit: looks like it’s closer to $20-25 in some places. Doesn’t change my mind, but it’s more forgivable I guess
Black is the value pick of the JW line for me, it's my go-to mixing scotch. Has a real good amount of flavour, it's just let down by its nonexistent finish when sipped neat.
It used to be my go to for Rusty Nails before Ardbeg released Wee Beastie. It's only five bucks more than Black and I prefer the more aggressive peat, especially when I'm mixing it with Drambuie.
I love Ardbeg 5 too and that's my value peated malt, but It's about £10 more than JW Black here. I'll float it in a Penicillin but the Wee Beastie's main role for me is guarding yer Laphroiag 10 cask strength and other bottles. May have to try it in a Rusty Nail this weekend though...
Damn, Black is frequently on sale for £22 here in Scotland and Ardbeg 5 is usually around £35. I guess you can understand why that price point makes JW Black a no brainer.
Yeah makes sense. That puts Black on par with the solid entry level bourbons here. The Elijah Craigs and Woodford Reserves and Buffalo Traces all go for about thirty USD.
Honestly there's little enough difference between black and red to me that I feel like I might as well just get the red for half the price. Like, yes, I can taste that black is a little better, but once you're into that price range there are other things I'd rather buy for not much more money.
I bought a bottle of Blue Label just because I felt like I had to try it once, and it was honestly kind of underwhelming. I actually thought it had more of that harsh alcohol kick than red label, even if it was better in a lot of other ways.
I like peat so the Black was my go to back in college before I got deep into Islays and shit as an adult.
I had the same experience with Blue. I bought a bottle back in college when I got my first paid internship and was making like twenty bucks an hour for the first time in my life and it was underwhelming as fuck. I remember thinking how much more I enjoyed the Black.
Not an asshole, just likely haven’t found the scotch in the blend that sticks out to you as being the great one. The blend breakdown is out there, look it up and buy some of the individual bottles. You’ll probably find what it is that you like in blue for much much less.
Blue is a blend of the oldest whiskies. You may get stuff like 30 year olds in there. And you are not going to get 30 year old single malt whiskies for less than what you pay for JW Blue.
If you think that Diageo is putting a quantifiable amount of expensive 30 year old scotch into a lesser bottle and selling it at a loss you are mistaken.
Benrinnes and Cardhu in Speyside, Caol Ila and Port Ellen in Islay, and grain whisky from Cameronbridge are the main whisky’s included in JW Blue. Obtaining one of those bottles (maybe a few years younger) comes in much less and will help the drinker determine what notes it is that they like within the JW Blue, because after all it is just a blend.
Don’t get me wrong, I like JW Blue, but it is a name more than anything else.
Actually, yes. Diageo has warehouses of that old stuff. It’s not as rare as you think. It’s mainly expensive because Diageo controls the supply of old whisky. Why do you think Port Ellen hasn’t run out of supply even after all these years?
I’ve had 30 year old whiskies before, and I don’t think it’s much better than JW Blue to be honest. But I guess that’s what very old whiskies taste like.
And also, even single malts are blends of different casks at the particular distillery. You won’t get the same casks that go into JW Blue as they have probably already been allocated for the blend. What you are buying for single malts are the expressions of a blend at a single distillery.
Falls into the same category for me as something like a jack daniels old no. 7 - if you think that is bad whiskey, then I’m not sure if you have ever had truly bad whiskey. Those types of bottles may. It be special, and you may not even think they are worth drinking! But outright bad? No, that descriptor should be saved for bottles that genuinely should not have ever been released
Jack Daniels is not bad as far as bourbon goes, I just don't like bourbon very much. But believe me, I have had some bottles that were borderline unfit for human consumption.
I’ve only been able to stomach Red Label by keeping the bottle in the freezer and drinking it straight and ice cold. Warm or cut with something unlocks these artificial or chemical flavors that make me think it’s lighter fluid.
If it gets you to where you wanna go…
More power to you.
I’ve spent thousands on a bottle of Macallan.
Doesn’t always matter unless you want it to, even then…
Not at all.
In fact when one gets used to peat, non peated stuff just starts to taste like candy. To the point I find some whisky are just way too sweet.
Also about the harsh alcohol taste: the more you drink the harsh “boozy” kicking ones, more your palate will get used to it and theyll start to taste sweeter than usual as well.
The bourbon case is not only how its distilled but its also aged in virgin oak so that does amplify its harsh taste. There are nice and smooth tasting bourbon tho, albeit rarer than smooth tasting scotch.
After my MIL died, my wife bought bottles of Bushmill’s and Jameson to honor her. Never tried either. Bushmills wasn’t to my taste but I discovered that I really liked Jameson and I’m glad that I now have a cheap alternative when I want to enjoy something.
Bottom line: you do you.
It’s consistent. It’s not superlative in any way. It doesn’t have much in the way of faults, save maybe a lack of depth and complexity. It’s subtle. It’s fine, and nobody should apologize for enjoying it. It’s far above the worst that’s out there, and that includes some lauded labels. As popular as Scotch has gotten in recent years, it’s safe to assume that a not-insignificant number of the self-proclaimed aficionados have dead ass tastebuds and blind palates, and would give Listerine a 9/10 if you put it in the right bottle.
If you like it, that's what matters. So no, you're not.
I drink a lot of Chivas Regal 12 on occasion. Usually when I don't feel like wanting something complex or I want to do a lot of chugging. A lot of people in here don't like that stuff, makes no difference to me.
Personally I can't stand JW Black. Tons of people in here like it a lot. I find it tastes like cardboard ash and chemicals but yet I drink huge quantities of Ardbeg Corry/Oogie and Kilchoman.
Everyone's taste preferences are different and that's what makes things interesting. If we all only liked the same things, this place would get boring quite rapidly.
I'm the opposite of you somewhat. I usually drink high abv and cask strength bottles these days with no water whereas I find most of anything under 46% to be thin and somewhat bland, but that's me.
I think Red is actually delicious in a highball. I’m not saying it’s complex, I’m just saying if you’re trying to drink a long drink, you’re not getting much more out of a better scotch than JW Red.
Like I know a Porsche GT3 RS is a better car than a Toyota Corolla. Doesn’t mean it’s any more fun to drive if all I’m doing is picking up my kid at the school down the road.
Nah, it's a score for you. When you find something that's cheap and widely available it's a great find. I don't like Red Label, but I do like Powers Gold (Irish) and Wild Turkey 101 (bourbon). Unfortunately, I've had a hard time finding the scotch equivalent to those. Loch Lomond 12 might be the closest, but it's not available in my area.
Have you had Jameson's Stout Edition? It's great. When I first found it it only cost $23 for a bottle. It's up in the 30s now though. Still a good bang for your buck.
Nothing wrong with what you like. Personally I won't even drink with JW Red as it has a flavor that comes through that I can't stand, but each to their own.
Of course not an asshole, but if you want to get the most out of your whisky journey (assuming you care about such a thing), drinking JW Red regularly isn’t going to advance it
It's not bad. It's perfectly fine. As a mixer, it's even downright good at what it's trying to accomplish. It's just that there are much better whiskys out there for just sipping on.
No. It's not to my taste, but it's obvious that it's this world's 'DAE' circlejerk to many people.
I work in one of the nest whisky bars in the world. Drink what works for you and your budget.
No, of course you’re not.
Because it’s genuinely not that bad.
Is it the best whisky I have ever had? Fuck no, but if I’m making a hot toddy or need a good all purpose mixer then JW Red would be my choice.
The amount of hatred towards cheaper whiskies really grinds my gears. If you don’t like blends, chill filtered and coloured whisky or anything below 46% then don’t fucking drink the ones that are.
There’s an audience for everything and frankly I think it’s important that there is an entry point for people who want to try whisky and I’m getting really sick of the snobbery about it.
It’s simple. Drink what you like and what you can afford, whatever that might be.
As others have said, if you enjoy drinking it, then that's all that matters. While it isn't really my cup of tea, I don't make a huge deal about it when it's offered to me. For my personal taste, I find that I need to add a fair bit of water to it.
One thing I generally like about the whisky community where I am (at least with the vast majority of folk I've come into contact with at tastings, festivals, in the pub etc.) is there isn't such a snobby attitude towards it, in comparison with the wine scene. This is just from my own personal experience though. I've met people from other parts of the world who tell me who tell me that there is a snobby attitude towards the drams people will drink e.g. social status types who don't know much about whisky other than drinking brands that supposedly show off their wealth and are generally unpleasant folk all round.
Then I suppose there are the uber-geeks who are almost as bad as the snobs, minus the looking down on peoples social status etc. They seem to go out of their way to be over analytical to find flaws with every whisky they drink rather than just enjoy drinking the stuff with good company.
If you like it, it’s good. There’s nothing wrong with JW Red and plenty of people love it
I’m not a fan at all, but that’s more due to a long night in Mexico with a bottle of Red, than anything else
It was good enough for Winston Churchill.
"His Scotch of choice was [Johnnie Walker](https://scotchwhisky.com/whiskypedia/2424/johnnie-walker/#/) and he was apparently a fan of Black Label, as well as Red. " ([Reference link](https://scotchwhisky.com/magazine/famous-whisky-drinkers/9866/sir-winston-churchill/))
No. You’re actually the normal whisky drinker then. It’s only the whisky snobs that have the opinion that it sucks. It’s the biggest selling whisky in the world because people drink it. All the bottom shelters are better than people make them out to be.
Just because something sells a lot doesn't make it a good product though.
There are some really good low price blended scotches available to all budgets, but I wouldn't put this in that category.
Red is good for mixing. Personally, I would pay a little more to sip black.
And I would agree red is better than the similarly priced bourbons, gins, vodkas, tequilas, etc.
If the cheap stuff is good enough for you then honestly count yourself lucky. I feel far better when I find a $30 bottle of whiskey I like versus when I find another expensive one I like. If anyone shames you for it then they are the problem not you.
This is the most real comment here. I always grab a $30 bottle of whisky when I am grabbing one of my usuals, and believe it or not I have absolutely found some hidden gems. I agree with OP, for what it is JW Red isn’t bad. Not great, not going to be excited to buy a bottle, but it’s consistent if anything.
Laphroaig 10 is $30 and it's fucking superb.
Where in the world is Laphroaig 10 $30?
https://www.totalwine.com/spirits/scotch/single-malt/laphroaig-10-yr/p/3697750?s=1010&igrules=true
$50 before tax from total wine up here. So I think almost $80 after.
Where do you live that the sales tax rate is 60%?
I'm exagerating (it's 20.5%) but it's Seattle. I think there's also another tax by volume ($3.77/L). So final cost for me is $63.07, which is actually lower than I've seen it lately. Highest liquor taxes in the country, I think.
The WA State liquor tax is higher than the tax in Sweden, which used to have the highest hooch tax in the world. Difference is the tax is based on alcohol ABV in Sweden and not cost. WA taxes were a trade off / cost for setting up a system that favored big box stores. Our legislature accepted many contributions (bribes) from Costco and the like to make this happen. Suggestion: buy your malt whisky from Europe. It’s usually cheaper, including the shipping, to buy from shops overseas. Screw the bribe taking politicians. The same jokers who continue to keep it illegal to grow cannabis for home use.
WA liquor tax is such an obscene grift. Enough to make one view the government with a dash of cynicism
That is wild, I've never heard of that before!
I don't care for it. A bunch of the stores up here love to price gouge, too. One was trying to sell Fernet for $59 before tax. Fernet.
It's $60 in Kentucky. [https://www.totalwine.com/spirits/scotch/single-malt/laphroaig-10-yr/p/3697750?s=2102&igrules=true](https://www.totalwine.com/spirits/scotch/single-malt/laphroaig-10-yr/p/3697750?s=2102&igrules=true)
$59.99 at total wine in WI 🤷♂️
€33 in Metro https://www.metro.de/marktplatz/product/a96f5310-2fad-4bf5-9359-78b185f0f575
One of my favorites
What the fuck? I haven't seen Laphroaig 10 for $30 since like, either 2017 or 2018 I think. From a sample size of three states it always seems to be in the $50-55 range these days.
I'll take it. Maybe the heavily peated stuff doesn't move too much in the Arizona market, so they discount it?? No idea. Lagavulin 16 is currently at $79.99 and if you buy two, you get $20 off (so functionally the price is down to $69.99).
JW Red is the most popular whisky in the world, followed by Jim Beam and Jack Daniels. None of those are truly awful, or they wouldn't be as popular. Most of the people in this sub (myself included) drink scotch neat, and JW is really better for mixing. If you enjoy it neat, that's great. I like Jim Beam neat once in a while. I'd be more upset if you said you used Craigellachie or An Oa as a mixer.
Seriously what kind of crackhead uses $50 or $100 bottles in a mixed drink. But in any event, I don't really drink whisky any way other than neat, it's probably the least suitable alcohol for mixing if you ask me.
>Seriously what kind of crackhead uses $50 or $100 bottles in a mixed drink. Sooo many people who aren't whisky drinkers get gifted nice bottles and it goes straight in a glass with coke.
Try a Scotch Highball on a hot day, doesn’t matter how expensive.
There are some cocktails that really do work with better whisky, someone a while back did a series called « will it penicillin » that was fun to read, about making Penicillins with various 50-100€ Scotch.
Take a look at r/tiki or r/rum you’ll find there’s a place for $500 bottles in a mixed drink lol
[удалено]
Oh hell yeah, Old Fashioneds and Manhattans deserve a good whiskey. I make my Manhattans differently than the traditional recipe though, because I think that one has way too much sweet vermouth. Mine have a similar ratio to how I make martinis, with a tiny splash of sweet vermouth in the bottom of the glass, swirled around, but then I toss it in with the whiskey instead of discarding it. It's probably about 1/8 fl oz sweet vermouth to 3 fl oz whiskey. Delicious, and definitely calls for a good whiskey because it's *almost* like drinking it neat except for the tiny amount of sweet vermouth, bitters, and of course the little cherry garnish. Shit, now I want one. K, it's settled. Manhattan time.
Ardbeg Wee Beastie and Coke is amazing and worth every bit of the price difference between that and JW Red. But I’d still rather drink it neat.
I mix whatever I want with whatever I want. Whisky snobs are the worst. 100 dollar used in a cocktail makes it taste great. I'm not gonna use some garbage jw red lol.
Richard Nixon. His drink of choice was something I can’t fully remember but it involved JW Blue and ginger.
Scotch 1:2 Ginger ale plus pieces of fresh ginger and lemon. At least, that's what I drink on a hot summer's day.
They're not truly awful, but the reason they're the most popular is marketing, not taste. I participated in a bourbon tasting session where the room tasted four bourbons: Four Roses, Makers Mark, and a couple others I don't remember. The point is, at the end, the taster asked for a show of hands, and Makers Mark was #4. He pointed out that Makers spends more on marketing than the other three combined. So popularity is just a popularity contest. What matters is your own taste buds, and your wallet!
Sort of off topic for this sub but Jim Beam white label tastes like water to me lol.
Honesty if you like JWR you might might the costco blended sotch which is about 1/2 the cost, great mixer sotch, and is drinkable with a few cubes of ice. I really wish that more people would focus on the value scotch lines, when you drop 400usd for a bottle named bottle , honestly it's not shocking that it's good and drinkable, it's at the other end of the line where you have surprises that are nice.
I don't know what the prices are where you're shopping, but I've been able to find Red Label pretty consistently for $20-$25 per 1.75L. If Costco has a $12 handle I'll check it out, but I would be surprised!
Costco has a 3yr old blended Scotch handle for $20 and is actually drinkable neat or mixed. It's pretty decently decent. Better than Red label for sure
I wish Costco was allowed to sell their line of liquors in my state :( I've heard nothing but good things about them.
Rum not scotch but this was Don q for me. You’re telling me this $10 rum is excellent? Became a staple quick
Diageo made some decent, consistent liquid. The issue is: Diageo makes it, its mass produced to reach every corner of the world, and lacks any real distinct character compared many single malts. But we’re in a group of scotch enthusiasts…if this were a hamburger enthusiast group, Johnnie Red is like a McDonalds single cheese burger. You can get it everywhere, it’ll be mostly the same, but it’s really not a definitive version of what a hamburger can or should be.
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that what Diageo makes doesn’t have real character because they actually own the majority of scotch distilleries which produce the most popular single malts out there. Sure, you can cite IBs but the IBs still get their liquid from Diageo.
I’m citing diageo making and lacking character as two separate reasons..and being part of a large corp doesn’t automatically make me dislike a producer, most distilleries are owned by large corporations. However, OP asked why Johnnie is seen as less than, and I’m giving a reason why: In a world of seemingly endless labels, why would a group of scotch enthusiasts think highly of the most commonly found liquid made by the largest producer? If that was the best thing, what would be the point of the group and being an enthusiast?
McDonald's single cheeseburger? I'd say it's at least like a Sourdough Jack from Jack in the Box. It's nothing special, but there are also some BAD bottles of whisky out there that I wouldn't want again.
I think you can clarify that with r/hamburgers if you want. Its doesn’t matter what the comparison product is, the general idea is the same. It’s a consistent, available product, which means the enthusiasts of unique quality products will not find it interesting. That being said, I echo what many people say here: if you like it, you should drink it.
It’s less about the quality of the cheeseburger itself and more about distribution and consistency around the world. You can order a McDonald’s cheeseburger in 118 countries and get basically the thing you’re expecting. Jack in the Box is only in the US and even then only like half the states. It’s not the same.
More like Big Mac. A Big Mac in the US is Big Mac in the UK is Big Mac in Asia is Big Maharaja in India (accounting for dietary differences). Indeed it's the consistency and familiarity that makes it what it is. Doesn't mean it's the best however.
Maybe not the best example as the Indian burger uses chicken, as eating beef is illegal in most states.
That's what's I meant by dietary differences in my comment. But McD is about as consistent as it gets across the globe. Maybe Starbucks Pikes Place brew.
I like Big Macs. I would eat a Big Mac. I’d rather just not drink than drink Johnny red. That’s where the analogy breaks down for me.
Drink what you enjoy drinking. Not what others enjoy drinking, unless you also enjoy it.
If I’m going to buy a cheap blend, to mix with ginger ale, I go with Grouse, Grants or Teachers which are just as good and significantly cheaper.
Teachers is a personal favorite for me as well. Not sure I’ve ever had Grants but Famous Grouse was unobjectionable but also unremarkable.
I like Prohibition Cutty Sark, sometimes you just find a cheap bottle you like. Nothing wrong with that.
If you like it, you like it. No assholery involved on your part. Those giving you shit about it, on the other hand...
I was at a scotch event for an Islay distillery and at one point, the distillery manager said he wanted to answer a question someone had asked him. “Is it okay to drink scotch on the rocks?” Someone in the back booed really hard. It was a small room and extremely tasteless. The distillery manager went on to say that several of the people who work for him prefer scotch on the rocks and he occasionally did as well. Whisky snobs are going to be whisky snobs. The people who love whisky are going to love whisky. There are cheap whiskies out there that are made to get you drunk. Johnnie Walker at least puts the effort in to get you a decent quality product at a reasonable price. And the brilliant minds at a place like Springbank and Lagavulin probably respect them for it.
I personally don’t like the flavor profile (thin, chemically, very grain whisky heavy, ethanol and paint thinner). I don’t mind if it was benign like Jack Daniels. I don’t think it’s benign, I find it harsh for 40% ABV and $30. JW double black is pretty good, but for the price, there’s a bunch of independent bottler Islay blends I’d prefer too Edit: looks like it’s closer to $20-25 in some places. Doesn’t change my mind, but it’s more forgivable I guess
I mean for the price I think it’s fine. I’d prefer Black or Green though if I’m drinking JW. Blue is the JW that is a total ripoff.
Green is by far their best option IMO
Black is the value pick of the JW line for me, it's my go-to mixing scotch. Has a real good amount of flavour, it's just let down by its nonexistent finish when sipped neat.
It used to be my go to for Rusty Nails before Ardbeg released Wee Beastie. It's only five bucks more than Black and I prefer the more aggressive peat, especially when I'm mixing it with Drambuie.
I love Ardbeg 5 too and that's my value peated malt, but It's about £10 more than JW Black here. I'll float it in a Penicillin but the Wee Beastie's main role for me is guarding yer Laphroiag 10 cask strength and other bottles. May have to try it in a Rusty Nail this weekend though...
The difference is 40 for Black Label and 45 for Wee Beastie here. Sometimes I can get Wee Beastie for 42ish.
Damn, Black is frequently on sale for £22 here in Scotland and Ardbeg 5 is usually around £35. I guess you can understand why that price point makes JW Black a no brainer.
Yeah makes sense. That puts Black on par with the solid entry level bourbons here. The Elijah Craigs and Woodford Reserves and Buffalo Traces all go for about thirty USD.
Yeah, that's more in line with what I pay... JWB is 25 and the Wee beastie is 40ish. Weird world where these are the same price hahahah
Honestly there's little enough difference between black and red to me that I feel like I might as well just get the red for half the price. Like, yes, I can taste that black is a little better, but once you're into that price range there are other things I'd rather buy for not much more money. I bought a bottle of Blue Label just because I felt like I had to try it once, and it was honestly kind of underwhelming. I actually thought it had more of that harsh alcohol kick than red label, even if it was better in a lot of other ways.
I like peat so the Black was my go to back in college before I got deep into Islays and shit as an adult. I had the same experience with Blue. I bought a bottle back in college when I got my first paid internship and was making like twenty bucks an hour for the first time in my life and it was underwhelming as fuck. I remember thinking how much more I enjoyed the Black.
am i a complete asshole for thinking that blue label is not THAT bad, i honestly think its the best whisky i ever drank
Not an asshole, just likely haven’t found the scotch in the blend that sticks out to you as being the great one. The blend breakdown is out there, look it up and buy some of the individual bottles. You’ll probably find what it is that you like in blue for much much less.
Blue is a blend of the oldest whiskies. You may get stuff like 30 year olds in there. And you are not going to get 30 year old single malt whiskies for less than what you pay for JW Blue.
If you think that Diageo is putting a quantifiable amount of expensive 30 year old scotch into a lesser bottle and selling it at a loss you are mistaken. Benrinnes and Cardhu in Speyside, Caol Ila and Port Ellen in Islay, and grain whisky from Cameronbridge are the main whisky’s included in JW Blue. Obtaining one of those bottles (maybe a few years younger) comes in much less and will help the drinker determine what notes it is that they like within the JW Blue, because after all it is just a blend. Don’t get me wrong, I like JW Blue, but it is a name more than anything else.
Actually, yes. Diageo has warehouses of that old stuff. It’s not as rare as you think. It’s mainly expensive because Diageo controls the supply of old whisky. Why do you think Port Ellen hasn’t run out of supply even after all these years? I’ve had 30 year old whiskies before, and I don’t think it’s much better than JW Blue to be honest. But I guess that’s what very old whiskies taste like. And also, even single malts are blends of different casks at the particular distillery. You won’t get the same casks that go into JW Blue as they have probably already been allocated for the blend. What you are buying for single malts are the expressions of a blend at a single distillery.
If you like it, drink it. Nothing wrong with that.
Falls into the same category for me as something like a jack daniels old no. 7 - if you think that is bad whiskey, then I’m not sure if you have ever had truly bad whiskey. Those types of bottles may. It be special, and you may not even think they are worth drinking! But outright bad? No, that descriptor should be saved for bottles that genuinely should not have ever been released
Jack Daniels is not bad as far as bourbon goes, I just don't like bourbon very much. But believe me, I have had some bottles that were borderline unfit for human consumption.
Not an asshole. You like it you like it
I like it with some club soda, nothing wrong with the stuff.
Why would you be an asshole? You like what you like! Fuck everyone else!
I’ve only been able to stomach Red Label by keeping the bottle in the freezer and drinking it straight and ice cold. Warm or cut with something unlocks these artificial or chemical flavors that make me think it’s lighter fluid.
If it gets you to where you wanna go… More power to you. I’ve spent thousands on a bottle of Macallan. Doesn’t always matter unless you want it to, even then… 
You do you, thats the concept of living a fulfilling and meaningful life!
Not at all. In fact when one gets used to peat, non peated stuff just starts to taste like candy. To the point I find some whisky are just way too sweet. Also about the harsh alcohol taste: the more you drink the harsh “boozy” kicking ones, more your palate will get used to it and theyll start to taste sweeter than usual as well. The bourbon case is not only how its distilled but its also aged in virgin oak so that does amplify its harsh taste. There are nice and smooth tasting bourbon tho, albeit rarer than smooth tasting scotch.
Yes, you are. Now, in all seriousness, tastes differ, and you like what you like as much as you like it. Nothing wrong with that.
If you like it then that's great for you. Personally, I can't drink the stuff
I drink it. Blended scotch hides it's faults well. It's drinkable despite the shit I get for doing so.
After my MIL died, my wife bought bottles of Bushmill’s and Jameson to honor her. Never tried either. Bushmills wasn’t to my taste but I discovered that I really liked Jameson and I’m glad that I now have a cheap alternative when I want to enjoy something. Bottom line: you do you.
Yes. It’s horrible.
well, to each their own I have a few weird neighbors, as in, "I only drink..." like one specific cocktail got one that does JW red and coke
It’s consistent. It’s not superlative in any way. It doesn’t have much in the way of faults, save maybe a lack of depth and complexity. It’s subtle. It’s fine, and nobody should apologize for enjoying it. It’s far above the worst that’s out there, and that includes some lauded labels. As popular as Scotch has gotten in recent years, it’s safe to assume that a not-insignificant number of the self-proclaimed aficionados have dead ass tastebuds and blind palates, and would give Listerine a 9/10 if you put it in the right bottle.
If you like it, that's what matters. So no, you're not. I drink a lot of Chivas Regal 12 on occasion. Usually when I don't feel like wanting something complex or I want to do a lot of chugging. A lot of people in here don't like that stuff, makes no difference to me. Personally I can't stand JW Black. Tons of people in here like it a lot. I find it tastes like cardboard ash and chemicals but yet I drink huge quantities of Ardbeg Corry/Oogie and Kilchoman. Everyone's taste preferences are different and that's what makes things interesting. If we all only liked the same things, this place would get boring quite rapidly. I'm the opposite of you somewhat. I usually drink high abv and cask strength bottles these days with no water whereas I find most of anything under 46% to be thin and somewhat bland, but that's me.
I think Red is actually delicious in a highball. I’m not saying it’s complex, I’m just saying if you’re trying to drink a long drink, you’re not getting much more out of a better scotch than JW Red. Like I know a Porsche GT3 RS is a better car than a Toyota Corolla. Doesn’t mean it’s any more fun to drive if all I’m doing is picking up my kid at the school down the road.
I like it
Nah, it's a score for you. When you find something that's cheap and widely available it's a great find. I don't like Red Label, but I do like Powers Gold (Irish) and Wild Turkey 101 (bourbon). Unfortunately, I've had a hard time finding the scotch equivalent to those. Loch Lomond 12 might be the closest, but it's not available in my area.
Not a question to ask. This is a tough crowd.
I can't stomach it, but I feel the way you do about JW Red about Jameson's
Have you had Jameson's Stout Edition? It's great. When I first found it it only cost $23 for a bottle. It's up in the 30s now though. Still a good bang for your buck.
Nothing wrong with what you like. Personally I won't even drink with JW Red as it has a flavor that comes through that I can't stand, but each to their own.
Red for my day to day, black for when I have company, blue for when my son was born.
I drink it on a plane, does the business!
It's not terrible for $30, everyone has his favorite bottom-shelf, mine is Glenfiddich.
JW Black but not red. price to quality ratio makes it Black all the way. Availability, drinkability and consistency.
I'm not gonna lie I prefer the cheap Total Wine & More brand scotch to Macallan and I feel like a heathen for it but it just tastes better
JW Red is my favorite in scotch & soda. Straight up, no, but I enjoy the bit of heat it brings to the mix.
Of course not an asshole, but if you want to get the most out of your whisky journey (assuming you care about such a thing), drinking JW Red regularly isn’t going to advance it
I love it as a mixer.
I love JW Red with coke. I use to fly a lot to Asian and that was offered on the flight
Be thankful you have found at inexpensive daily sipper that can be found everywhere. My cheap daily sipper is Grouse Smoky Black
It's not bad. It's perfectly fine. As a mixer, it's even downright good at what it's trying to accomplish. It's just that there are much better whiskys out there for just sipping on.
No. It's not to my taste, but it's obvious that it's this world's 'DAE' circlejerk to many people. I work in one of the nest whisky bars in the world. Drink what works for you and your budget.
No, of course you’re not. Because it’s genuinely not that bad. Is it the best whisky I have ever had? Fuck no, but if I’m making a hot toddy or need a good all purpose mixer then JW Red would be my choice. The amount of hatred towards cheaper whiskies really grinds my gears. If you don’t like blends, chill filtered and coloured whisky or anything below 46% then don’t fucking drink the ones that are. There’s an audience for everything and frankly I think it’s important that there is an entry point for people who want to try whisky and I’m getting really sick of the snobbery about it. It’s simple. Drink what you like and what you can afford, whatever that might be.
JW red is meant to be drank with coke IMO
Who cares. Enjoy what you enjoy and don't worry about it.
Personally speaking, and personal thoughts aside…. What you enjoy, you enjoy…. If you enjoy it, consume it…. Your choice….
As others have said, if you enjoy drinking it, then that's all that matters. While it isn't really my cup of tea, I don't make a huge deal about it when it's offered to me. For my personal taste, I find that I need to add a fair bit of water to it. One thing I generally like about the whisky community where I am (at least with the vast majority of folk I've come into contact with at tastings, festivals, in the pub etc.) is there isn't such a snobby attitude towards it, in comparison with the wine scene. This is just from my own personal experience though. I've met people from other parts of the world who tell me who tell me that there is a snobby attitude towards the drams people will drink e.g. social status types who don't know much about whisky other than drinking brands that supposedly show off their wealth and are generally unpleasant folk all round. Then I suppose there are the uber-geeks who are almost as bad as the snobs, minus the looking down on peoples social status etc. They seem to go out of their way to be over analytical to find flaws with every whisky they drink rather than just enjoy drinking the stuff with good company.
If you like it, it’s good. There’s nothing wrong with JW Red and plenty of people love it I’m not a fan at all, but that’s more due to a long night in Mexico with a bottle of Red, than anything else
I like red label for mixing and I feel like that’s what it’s made for.
Honestly I think it’s a great bottom shelf blend
It was good enough for Winston Churchill. "His Scotch of choice was [Johnnie Walker](https://scotchwhisky.com/whiskypedia/2424/johnnie-walker/#/) and he was apparently a fan of Black Label, as well as Red. " ([Reference link](https://scotchwhisky.com/magazine/famous-whisky-drinkers/9866/sir-winston-churchill/))
JW red and black of that era is quite different though than what you get now in a good way
No. You’re actually the normal whisky drinker then. It’s only the whisky snobs that have the opinion that it sucks. It’s the biggest selling whisky in the world because people drink it. All the bottom shelters are better than people make them out to be.
Just because something sells a lot doesn't make it a good product though. There are some really good low price blended scotches available to all budgets, but I wouldn't put this in that category.
It's garbage. But if you enjoy it, who cares bro.
Red is good for mixing. Personally, I would pay a little more to sip black. And I would agree red is better than the similarly priced bourbons, gins, vodkas, tequilas, etc.
Haven’t had red label in more than a decade, and even then I only used it to make a scotch and coke.
I had the same reaction with Dewars 12, it's actually not bad at all...