I love doing reviews, and I was a featured reviewer for SMOKE magazine (I know, cigars) for a 3 issues in 1999. But, I really like the method that they use to review stuff. So, I have adapted that method for reviewing cigars, and applied it to reviewing pipe tobacco. So, I thought I'd post up a couple of my reviews of tobaccos here. Maybe, if so invited, I'll even post up a few of my cigar reviews.
Rattray’s Hal ‘O the Wynd (purchased 4/2012)
0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality
2.1 - 2.9 = fair
3.0 - 3.5 = good
3.5 - 4.5 = excellent
4.6 - 5.0 = superior
Rattray’s says of this tobacco, "A pure Virginian tobacco of a most unusual share of strength". This is a strong, sharp aged red Virginia blend that will perk you up quickly. And yes, the homepage Kohlhase & Kopp says "Kentucky- Virginia-Perique". Flake rubbed by hand.
The question remains, is there Perique in this blend or not? Some say yes, some say no.
1) Aesthetics: Ribbon cut with predominantly cinnamon browns, and a few darker strands. It looks like a tobacco should.
Score for Aesthetics: 4.5
2) Pre-light Construction: I did put a bit out to dry, not that it was overly moist, but I prefer my tobacco a bit dry. As I nose this, I am really curious if there is any Perique in it, if there is, there is not much, for I do not detect it pre-light. I do like the rich sweetness that I get pre-light.
Score for Pre-light construction: 4.5
3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Took to flame easily and burned cool and even, producing a nice grey ash. One lit, I smoked pretty much to the bottom of the bowl without a relight.
Score for post-light construction: 4.7
4) Flavor and strength: Touch of caramel comes in lightly, but predominantly just a rich sweetness. This does not exhibit any high notes like I expected to perk me up. I am not normally a big fan of burley tobacco, so the Kentucky in the blend was a calculated risk on my part, it produces a slight nuttiness, and adds some strength, but it doesn’t make overwhelm. I am still waiting for the prune-ish or spicy hints of Perique, as they never appeared to my estimation. I do like that this is a very smooth blend. It does have some nuances that fade in and out, but it is simply a very comfortable blend, and nowhere as strong as it is supposedly billed.
Score for flavor and strength: 4.5
5) Aftertaste/Finish: HOW has a finish that fades quickly, being neither pungent or strong. It was slightly sweet, but I’m not even sure it was that.
Score for aftertaste: 4.1
6) Aroma: I found the sweetness again to be present here and that nuttiness was noticeable as well.
Score for aroma: 4.3
7) General Comments: I enjoy HOW, I think I’d like a bit more Perique in it though (if there is any at all), Perique would definitely bring an element to this blend that would add complexity. I like this, it is a nice consistent, smooth, smoke.
Overall score for the tobacco: 4.3
8) Recommendation: Recommended.
Rattray’s Hal ‘O the Wynd (purchased 4/2012)
0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality
2.1 - 2.9 = fair
3.0 - 3.5 = good
3.5 - 4.5 = excellent
4.6 - 5.0 = superior
Rattray’s says of this tobacco, "A pure Virginian tobacco of a most unusual share of strength". This is a strong, sharp aged red Virginia blend that will perk you up quickly. And yes, the homepage Kohlhase & Kopp says "Kentucky- Virginia-Perique". Flake rubbed by hand.
The question remains, is there Perique in this blend or not? Some say yes, some say no.
1) Aesthetics: Ribbon cut with predominantly cinnamon browns, and a few darker strands. It looks like a tobacco should.
Score for Aesthetics: 4.5
2) Pre-light Construction: I did put a bit out to dry, not that it was overly moist, but I prefer my tobacco a bit dry. As I nose this, I am really curious if there is any Perique in it, if there is, there is not much, for I do not detect it pre-light. I do like the rich sweetness that I get pre-light.
Score for Pre-light construction: 4.5
3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Took to flame easily and burned cool and even, producing a nice grey ash. One lit, I smoked pretty much to the bottom of the bowl without a relight.
Score for post-light construction: 4.7
4) Flavor and strength: Touch of caramel comes in lightly, but predominantly just a rich sweetness. This does not exhibit any high notes like I expected to perk me up. I am not normally a big fan of burley tobacco, so the Kentucky in the blend was a calculated risk on my part, it produces a slight nuttiness, and adds some strength, but it doesn’t make overwhelm. I am still waiting for the prune-ish or spicy hints of Perique, as they never appeared to my estimation. I do like that this is a very smooth blend. It does have some nuances that fade in and out, but it is simply a very comfortable blend, and nowhere as strong as it is supposedly billed.
Score for flavor and strength: 4.5
5) Aftertaste/Finish: HOW has a finish that fades quickly, being neither pungent or strong. It was slightly sweet, but I’m not even sure it was that.
Score for aftertaste: 4.1
6) Aroma: I found the sweetness again to be present here and that nuttiness was noticeable as well.
Score for aroma: 4.3
7) General Comments: I enjoy HOW, I think I’d like a bit more Perique in it though (if there is any at all), Perique would definitely bring an element to this blend that would add complexity. I like this, it is a nice consistent, smooth, smoke.
Overall score for the tobacco: 4.3
8) Recommendation: Recommended.
