Shaken, not stirred improves the taste of a cocktail.
Oh, I’m not saying that it’s untrue, I’m just saying that it’s an effect of dilution, not some sort of semi-magical thing that happens because a little water is added, which is how most of the whisky world perceives it.
It’s not one of those chemistry class tricks where a drop of something is put into a huge beaker of something else, and the whole thing changes color or solidifies or whatever. It’s merely diluting it, and the amount matters.
Depends on the cocktail.
Most that are spirit-heavy aren’t best shaken- they get too much aeration and too many tiny ice shards, as well as overdiluted. But the gin isn’t bruised- that’s nonsense.
But most other drinks, especially with juices and/or syrups, are definitely better shaken for the same reasons.
I’m not a connoisseur either, but I do drink a fair amount of bourbon, including cask strength bourbon. For me, bourbon (or whiskey or what-have-you) that’s too high in alcohol isn’t fun to drink because the alcohol overpowers everything else. That’s why most bourbon is diluted down before bottling – it’s much more pleasant to drink something at 80 proof where you can actually taste things than at 105 proof where you just taste alcohol.
Tasters at a distillery have picked a nice balance for the general population with most of their products, whether that’s 80 proof or 90 or 95. They’re basically pre-diluting it to get it to a point where most people will be OK with it. But for the snobs, they want to fine tune that, and so higher-end products that are meant to be sipped are sold undiluted at “cask strength” with the expectation that the drinker will dilute it to their preferred taste. And I’ve never measured, but I’m guessing I usually dilute things down to about 80 proof anyway, because I like an easy drink. But my drinking buddy usually just drinks it however it’s poured from the bottle. To each their own, there’s no wrong way. I can drink the hard stuff but it just fries my tongue for the rest of the night.
So that’s my 2 cents. I don’t think the added water “releases” anything, I think it just cuts the alcohol down to a non-intrusive level so you can taste what’s already there.
Thank you. That was an interesting read.
To defend my friend he said it sarcastically and with a smile probably in reply to something I said about how I wasn’t sure if it was any good.
Thanks for this!
Before reading the thread, I actually was guessing that the entire “much longer” bit was sarcasm, and he was making fun of the fact that you took 25 seconds to stir it before handing him his drink.
I wonder if it’s an issue of aeration. With finer wines the taste is improved by decanting it and exposing it to oxygen for a while before drinking. Stirring would increase the surface area of the drink and allow faster aeration. I have no idea if that is actually a thing with whisky, though.
It’s not magic, it’s chemistry. There really is something that happens when drops are added to the glass, and it’s not the same as diluting the whiskey at bottling.
This is a little simplified, but the higher the alcohol percentage, the more it retains certain aromatics. A 90 proof spirit holds more than 80 proof, which holds more than 40 proof, etc. If you dilute a 90 proof to 80 at bottling, it releases some of those aromatics, and they are long gone by the time you pour it in your glass. But if you dilute it in your glass, they are released where your nose can smell them.
Putting a few drops in might not lower the total concentration by much, but there is significant localized dilution right at the surface where the drops land. That’s why it still changes the character of the whiskey even though it doesn’t seem like much water.
Try pouring two shots of a high quality whiskey. Add a few drops of water to one. Let them both sit for a few hours, then add a few drops to the other and stick your nose in both glasses. Assuming your nose is sensitive, you should be able to detect a subtle difference.
Are you saying Bond, James Bond, is wrong about this?
Absolutely.
I mean, you can do it, but it’s generally not the preferred way. Kind of like ordering a well-done steak.
Agent 007 isn’t saying “shaken, not stirred” because he’s advocating it’s better–it’s like demanding no “no brown m&m’s”. He’s indicating that’s he has exacting needs and capabilities and he knows if you’re trying to pull a trick over him. It’s a brag.
This was my immediate reaction as well. 25 seconds feels like a long time to stir an Old Fashioned, especially in front of a thirsty guest.