u/gatodelinferno21

Balcones Rye Port Finish – Spec’s Single Barrel

Intro: As I’ve noted in my previous reviews, Texas whiskey is very divisive, and Balcones is very divisive among Texas whiskey, and the Balcones rye might be the most divisive whiskey of their lineup. This is understandable, since there’s very little in the way of traditional rye spice notes and a lot more in the way of dank earthy notes, dark chocolate, and old coffee grounds, framed by some pretty intense woodiness. While I personally love it, and it’s probably my favorite rye, I can easily see why the reviews tend to swing between “this is so unique, I love it” and “this is the worst thing I’ve ever tasted.” So if you fall into the latter category, this review will probably not change your mind. However, for those in the former category, the single barrels and especially the finished barrels can be something truly special. While from my limited experience with finished American whiskies I’m not a very big fan of bourbons being put into wine casks (different oak types like French or Mizunara are a different story), ryes can do quite well with a bit of time in a good sherry or port cask. This particular single barrel for Spec’s in Texas has been on quite a journey: in just under five years, it’s gone from its initial virgin oak cask to a used Port wine cask, and finally a mellowing period in a used bourbon cask. These are a few years old, so there aren’t many left on the shelves, but they’re not totally gone yet, and the few that are left are on sale for under $60.

USA/Texas – Rye
Price: $58 (on sale, regular price $72)
Age Statement: 4 years 11 months
Strength: 64.8% ABV
Mash Bill: 100% rye
Cask Makeup: Aged in new American oak, then transferred to a used Port cask, then transferred to a used Kentucky Bourbon cask for a total of 59 months (4 years 11 months)
Details: Non-chill filtered, no color added; Cask strength (?)

Nose: I should note ahead of time that this pour is a monster that I had to tame with a good bit of water. I find that Balcones’s ABV sweet spot is generally mid to high 50’s, and while I didn’t try to calculate what I actually proofed it down to, I started with at least three full squirts from my dropper into a healthy 2 oz pour. The notes from here on out will be for the proofed down version, since that was about the only way I drank it. Perhaps some braver souls than I could take it neat, but I found that very hot and closed off. Anyway, the nose on here is pretty wild. Very strong notes of deep chocolate and black coffee, with charred oak in abundance. Some earthiness and a touch of the typical Balcones clove spiciness. Some black tea and herbal elements as well. Imagine the bottled in bond Balcones rye cranked up to 11. But on top of that, there’s a rich raspberry note that pairs very nicely with the chocolate and coffee. Unlike anything else I’ve had.

Palate: Again, “intense” is an understatement, this pour is a wild ride. A lot of different elements going on, but the finish feels like it makes a cohesive end product instead of being slapped on top of the rest. Like an indulgently rich dark chocolate coffee cake with sweet/tart raspberry icing piped through it. Even proofed down quite a bit, still very intense and with a thick oily mouthfeel, but much more manageable ABV burn than neat. After a bit of time in the mouth the woodiness comes through, and can border on astringent, but manages to avoid veering into unpleasant territory. The herbal/black tea notes peek through as well. A remarkable interplay between the sweetness, the bitterness, and the richness, with a touch of tanginess from the Port as well.

Finish: Chocolate coffee raspberry blast, with lingering dry oak. Remarkable length.  

Notes: It’s difficult for me to think of anything else I’ve tasted that can match this level of depth and intensity for under $60, even just looking within the rest of the Balcones lineup. It’s certainly not going to be everybody’s cup of tea, and I definitely wouldn’t call it an everyday pour, but for anyone who’s had the standard rye and enjoyed it, I would highly recommend looking for a single barrel version, whether finished or not. The unfinished ones are great as well, but something about the added fruitiness from a wine cask finish (this one’s Port, but I’ve seen some others finished in Pinot Noir on the shelves as well) just harmonizes very well with the base profile. Love it or hate it, there’s nothing quite like this out there to compare it to.

Score: 8

T8KE Score scale:

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

 

 

Caballito Cerrero Azul and Chato Blanco “Destilado de Agave”

Intro:  Caballito Cerrero is something of a cult favorite for agave enthusiasts. In an age of increasing commercialization and homogenization, even as that’s offset by a larger market niche for enthusiasts, the nonconformist and old-school attitude of this small producer is refreshing. They’ve even chosen to not receive certification from the CRT, which means that their products can’t legally be marketed as tequila, but rather simply as “agave spirits.” Labels are just that, after all, and their underground popularity would suggest that they don’t need any official stamps on their spirits to convince people of their quality. For their core expressions, Caballito Cerrero offers two different lines, Azul and Chato. The Azul is distilled from the same Blue Weber agave that tequilas use, while the Chato uses the Angustifolia strand. For this review I’ll be comparing the unaged blanco expressions of each type, which are readily available in my area (more limited releases like the Unicorns or Puntas are much harder to come by). Reviews were written after I had gotten past the bottle shoulder, as I found that the first few pours were noticeably closed off compared to later pours.

Price: $65-75 for Azul, $75-85 for Chato
NOM: N/A
Agave Type: Blue Weber for Azul, Angustifolia for Chato
Extraction: Roller Mill
Fermentation: Stainless Steel Tanks
Water Source: Natural Spring Water
Age Statement: N/A
Strength: 46% ABV

Nose:

Azul: Very interesting. Unsurprisingly since this is made from Blue Weber agave, this shares a lot of similarities with tequilas that are more on the earthy/herbal end of the spectrum. In addition to that, however, there’s a definite lactic funkiness to it, though not anywhere near as prominent as the Raicilla I previously reviewed. Plus, where that funk was more of a sour cream/yogurt funk, this is a fairly distinct parmesan cheese type of funk. It’s not in the driver’s seat, but it’s definitely present. Besides that there’s some nice sweetness going on, both an agave sweetness and a bit of tangy white fruit. Quite intriguing.

Chato: Ok, this one is really leaning into the cheesy and herbal aspects while keeping the connection to a familiar tequila profile more on the tenuous side. Heavier parmesan cheese funk, I like it a lot. A touch of sweetness as well, but overall noticeably drier than the Azul. The earthy and herbal notes are dialed up as well, plus maybe a hint of smokiness, but only ever so slight if it’s there at all.

Palate:

Azul: Again, this is both familiar and unfamiliar to a tequila drinker. While not a one-note agave bomb, that Blue Weber sweet agave comes through strongly, which gives the whole thing a nice framework. The fruitiness is also very nice; I don’t find it particularly citrusy, it’s more tangy fruit like green papaya or white strawberries. It’s not all sweetness though, as there’s also a lot of earthy and herbal notes going on. Bright green vegetal notes, if that makes sense. Maybe some fresh pine in there. There’s also the light parmesan cheese funk with gives it a great depth while not overpowering the other elements. Great mouthfeel at 46%, extra oomph compared to 40% bottlings but without getting into burning territory.

Chato: Like the nose, this one is further out from familiar territory than the Azul. The parmesan cheese note is more dominant here, and the earthiness is more pronounced while the sweet and fruity notes are much more in the background. Not to say that there’s no sweetness at all; there’s some agave sweetness plus some recognizable tangy white fruit, but that’s not the dominant note. With the herbal aspect comes a more noticeable spicy side, maybe some cinnamon and fresh mint. Maybe something you might describe as mineral-y, but not in the typical “wet sidewalk” kind of mineral notes you’d get in a tequila. Also a touch of milk chocolate, which I sometimes get in agave spirits as the bottle oxidizes. You can tell this is an agave spirit, but it’s not like any tequila I’ve had. I really like it, though. Creamy, cheesy, earthy, and herbal, but not so austere as to be unapproachable. Mouthfeel is likewise great like the Azul.

Finish:

Azul: Sweet agave and fruitiness rounded off with tang and a touch of cheesy funk, with lingering vegetal notes. Good length.

Chato: I have to say, the finish on this one really impressed me. It’s uncommon for me to find the finish noticeably increase in intensity compared to the palate, but here it’s like all the notes come together in an intense burst. Super earthy and herbal but freshly herbal, if that makes sense, with loads of cheesiness and a touch of sweet to round it out. Really quite nice. 

Notes: I get it now, this brand deserves all the praise it gets here. Nothing about this screams mass production or is interchangeable with really anything else I’ve come across, and the quality is really top notch. Take my notes with a grain of salt, because it was so different that I had a hard time putting the tastes into words. Given how much I like lactic funkiness, I went into this expecting the Chato to be the clear winner, but I was surprised by how much I also liked the Azul. Both are excellent in their own different ways, with the Azul leaning more into the delicious crisp fruit and the Chato going full-on into herbal and funky territory. They scratch different itches, but as far as quality goes I’d say they’re about on par. There’s about a $10 cost difference between them, though, so that should be considered. However, neither of these are outlandishly expensive, as both are about comparable with what you see in higher proof blanco releases from bigger producers (one place locally has the Azul for $65, which is an absolute steal). I can’t help but wonder, is Caballito Cerrero a tequila drinker’s mezcal, a mezcal drinker’s tequila, or both, or even neither? Do mezcal drinkers love it too, or is it too close to tequila to interest them? In any case, I don’t need to worry about that since they’re both delicious, and I look forward to trying some of their other offerings.

Score: 8.5 for both

T8KE Score scale:

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

 

 

Tequila Ocho Plata Puntas – 2023 Release

Intro:  For whatever reason, Tequila Ocho is one of the last well-respected brands that doesn’t have a regular high proof blanco release. So far, the only option to get their juice at a higher proof point has been an annual limited release. However, as is often the case with special releases, these can be very difficult to find, and if you’re lucky enough to find it, it’s either on a points system or jacked way up past MSRP. Also, the last Puntas release was in 2024; nothing came in 2025, and there hasn’t been any word about a release this year, so we’ll see if the series continues. Maybe they’re building up stocks to make it a regular shelfer, which would be the ideal outcome in my mind. The 2024 release was one of the first reviews I posted on here, and while I quite enjoyed it, the general consensus seemed to be that previous releases were a bit better. I’m lucky enough that I was able to get both the 2024 and the 2023 release, so I saved the 2023 for after the 2024. It’s unlikely that at the time of this review anyone will be able to find this in the wild, but it may be useful either to anyone looking at a trade, or if Ocho puts out a shelfer high proof release in the future.

Price: $70
NOM: 1474
Extraction: Roller Mill
Fermentation: Wood Tanks/Pipones
Water Source: Deep Well Water
Age Statement: N/A
Strength: 53% ABV

Nose: Strong agave and a touch of ethanol, but not bad for 53%. This one strikes me as very citrus and mint forward, I didn’t see a whole lot of other reviews mention it but I got a pretty distinct sweet lime note. A touch of minerals but not as much as the 2024 release. Some more herbal and vegetal notes, but overall on the sweeter rather than earthy side. A touch of creaminess as well. Very nice.

Palate: The agave and lime citrus profile carries through from the nose onto the palate. This is really tasty, a big agave bomb with sweetness coming both from agave and citrus fruit, with plenty of mintiness and a dash of wet sidewalk to balance it out. Eventually more herbal and vegetal green pepper notes come through, but sweet agave and lime stays front and center. A nice creaminess as well, though not to the level of “creamy jalapeno ranch dip” that the 2024 release reminded me. Not so vegetal as that one either, much brighter and more citrus dominant. Somewhat reminiscent of what seems to me to be the typical 1414 profile. Great mouthfeel with a hint of heat, but very manageable given the proof point.

Finish: More sweet agave and citrus, lingering mint freshness and earthy herbal notes. Not really a burn to speak of and good length.

Notes: I think the general consensus on here is largely correct: both 2023 and 2024 releases are excellent pours, but the 2023 is just a touch better. There are some similarities between them, but (to my palate anyway) they offer different profiles, with the 2023 being more citrus forward and the 2024 being more vegetal forward, and my preferences lean more toward the 2023 profile. Not a huge difference in quality, but enough to give the 2023 an extra half point. However, as I noted in the 2024’s review, a special release system for “just” a high proof blanco doesn’t really make sense in the current market. I’d say this is about on par with some of the higher end HP blancos like Volans or Don Vicente, and it has the advantage of being about $10 cheaper. However, as also noted above, actual availability and pricing is a much more variable matter, whereas these aren’t an issue at all with the other shelfers. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to drum up hype for limited releases when other comparable options are readily available, and it seems that the market for LE bottles has shifted more towards aged expressions with unusual cask types. Maybe that’s why Ocho seems to have discontinued the series, at least for now. Hopefully something like this from them becomes more accessible, because it really is a quality product, but it’s not worth hunting high and low or paying $100 for.

Score: 8.5

T8KE Score scale:

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

 

 

Balcones Single Malt – Spec’s Single Barrel

Intro: Like a lot of Texas distilleries, Balcones tends to get a very polarized reception, with responses either in the love-it or hate-it camp. While for those of us in the love-it camp, their core range is quite solid across the board in quality, pricing, and availability, we generally hold that the single barrels are really where it’s at. I tend to think that the distillery exclusives are the cream of that crop, and I’m lucky enough to be near enough to Waco that I can occasionally stop by and grab one, but store picks are a more feasible option for the majority of people. I’ve generally had good luck with Spec’s picks, so this one caught my eye. It’s basically their flagship single malt release aged in virgin American oak for a few years, but with an extra finish in ex-bourbon casks for a total of 56 months of age (which is a pretty good length of time in the Waco heat). With an age statement and proof point above the base release, we’ll see if this can justify the accompanying jump in price tag ($50 to $85, not exactly a small increase).

USA/Texas – Single Malt
Price: $85 ($80 cash)
Age Statement: 4 years, 8 months
Strength: 56.7% ABV
Cask Makeup: First-fill virgin American oak, then ex-bourbon barrel
Details: Non-chill filtered, no color added

Nose: Unmistakably Balcones, whether you think that’s good or bad. As I’ve said before, their signature profile reminds me very much of spiced cider: it’s very stone fruit forward, but with a clove/nutmeg spiciness to it as well. Also a strong wood presence, unsurprising given the time spent in virgin oak, but not enough to distract from the spicy fruitiness. Promising so far.

Palate: Again, very on profile, take the single malt core release and dial it up a few notches. Like a buffet of juicy nectarines, plums, and peaches. Prominent but not overpowering clove spiciness and a bit of an herbal aspect. This might be the controversial “Texas funk” that many find off-putting, but I’m a fan of this sort of thing. It’s not your usual cinnamon-dominant type of “spicey” that most bourbon drinkers would think of when they hear that term, though there is a touch of cinnamon in there as well. The wood is also quite noticeable, more so in an oak-forward way than in a sweet vanilla/butterscotch/caramel way. The intense Texas heat seems to impart a strong oakiness much quicker than it does with the softer, sweeter aspects of the wood (see also Garrison Brothers). In this particular instance it’s on the dry side, but not to the point that I find it an unpleasant astringency. As it is, the wood adds a robust heft that supports the other flavors quite nicely without overpowering the base malt. I’d still call it primarily fruit-forward with spice and wood supporting. ABV and mouthfeel are very nice, I find a few drops of water bring out some of the fruitiness even more without diluting it.

Finish: A blast of juicy ripe stone fruit, with lingering spice and oak. Good length, no burn.

Notes: This is what I love about single barrels; while there’s some variation, oftentimes you can get the base flavors from the core release in a more intense and more cohesive form. This is a notable step up from the base bottling in these respects, and for someone who’s already a fan it’s right up my alley. That being said, I’m not sure “the same profile, but more so” will convince someone who falls outside the love-it camp. Plus, the price tag is more than justified to someone like me, but definitely should give pause to someone new to the brand. If you’re a fanboy like me, or if you’ve enjoyed their single malts and wondered what they might be like with a little more age and proof, then picks like this are a solid choice and well worth the premium. If you’re just curious or were unconvinced by your initial forays into the Balcones range, then these probably aren’t for you. Proceed with that in mind. As far as scoring goes, I think this is great but not quite at the level of excellence in special releases like the Cataleja or distillery exclusive barrels, but most aren’t fortunate enough to have access to those.

Score: 7.5

T8KE Score scale:

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

 

 

Wild Common Blanco Still Strength and Anejo

Intro:  Again with the unaged/aged comparisons from a single NOM/brand, this review will examine the other big hitter from NOM 1123. This NOM is primarily known for its Cascahuin brand, but Wild Common is starting to get its name thrown around a lot as well, especially after their release of a core range anejo at the uncommonly high proof of 47% ABV. Their signature profile is heavy on the “wet sidewalk” mineral note (similar to other heavy hitter 1579 of G4/Volans fame) and citrus notes, especially in the highly regarded Cascahuin Tahona Blanco release. I was initially drawn to Wild Common because I noticed that their Still Strength is also (partially, at least) tahona milled, but at a much more robust 50% ABV than the Cascahuin’s 42%. Proof isn’t everything, and the Cascahuin can more than hold its own, but I couldn’t help but wonder what a few more proof points would do. Likewise, I’m curious how the “Cascahuin profile” takes to the barrel. NOM 1414 in particular to me seems to harmonize very well with aging because of its creamy, bright mint/herbal forward profile, whereas the mineral forward 1123 profile is a lot more austere and seems to me like it might be more ideal in a blanco. In any case, we’ll see how the 1123 juice can fare on its own and with a bit of time in the cask.

Price: $80 for Blanco, $95-100 for Anejo
NOM: 1123
Extraction: Tahona/Roller Mill
Fermentation: Stainless Steel Tanks
Water Source: Deep Well Water
Age Statement: N/A for Blanco, 12 Months ex-Bourbon Cask Aged for Anejo
Strength: 50% ABV for Blanco, 47% ABV for Anejo

Nose:

• Blanco: Very reminiscent of Cascahuin, cooked agave and strong mineral-y wet sidewalk notes without being too overpowering. A good amount of citrus, mostly orange, and some herbal/vegetal notes as well. Not much in the way of creaminess, and seems more on the dry side than sweet. Really reminds me of the Cascahuin Tahona but with a bit more oomph, which is exactly what I was hoping for. Strong start.
• Anejo: Remarkably similar to the blanco, the agave and mineral notes are still front and center, but a little more restrained. There’s still plenty of citrus, plus some barrel flavors like cinnamon and vanilla caramel, but this really doesn’t scream “barrel aged” like the Alma del Jaguar repo did. I wouldn’t have pegged this for an anejo if I got it blind. Nose is nice, but I prefer the undiluted heft of the blanco.

Palate:

• Blanco: Yeah, “Cascahuin Tahona dialed up a notch” is a great way to describe this. It’s got that same somewhat-on-the-dry-side profile of agave and minerality backed by orange citrus, with some more herbal notes (mint, green peppers, vegetal) and a dash of earthiness in the background, but at 50% the mouthfeel is noticeably thicker and the flavors noticeably more intense without any burn from the ethanol. This is just killer stuff.
• Anejo: Again, the blanco’s profile of dry agave and minerality takes the lead here, but dialed back a bit in intensity and with some mild barrel flavors alongside it. I’m honestly a little conflicted about this one. On the one hand, I generally prefer a milder barrel influence like is on display here, one that harmonizes with the base agave distillate rather than covering over it. However, I’m not really sure that I would call this a harmony, since the 1123 profile doesn’t really seem to lend itself to barrel flavors the way others do. Their blancos are more on the dry and austere side, and the aging seems almost like a distraction from it than an addition. 1414 has a deliciously sweet and creamy profile that goes just swimmingly with wood notes like vanilla and butterscotch, but these seem more tacked on than truly integrated here. Don’t get me wrong, this is an impeccably made pour that I’m sure many people will love, and I really like that they released it at 47% ABV, but to my particular preferences it doesn’t seem like a fully cohesive end product. Technical perfection, but it doesn’t grab me.

Finish:

• Blanco: Intense agave and mineral with lingering citrus and minty freshness. Great length.
• Anejo: A somewhat more muted agave/mineral swell with vanilla, cinnamon, and a touch of citrus. Also good length.

 

Notes: This is probably just my personal preferences talking, but I’m increasingly of the opinion that some NOMs are meant for blancos and some are meant for repos/anejos. I’ll come out and say it, this ties with Volans Still Strength as what I think are the best blancos on the market that aren’t special releases or some other kind of unobtanium. I think it’s better than the Cascahuin, and it’s $5-10 cheaper too depending on where you are. The signature minerality you get from 1123 and 1579 just begs to be presented in its undiluted, unaged form, unless maybe I just haven’t had the right one yet. As I said, the anejo is a truly remarkable release (and that’s how I’m scoring it), but despite how great it is, when I drank it I was usually thinking that I would prefer the blanco. Again, this might just be me, but if you’re a fan of the Cascahuin profile and want it kicked up a notch in ABV, I’d stick with the blanco and look elsewhere for aged stuff. If I had a three-bottle permashelf, it would probably be the still strengths from Wild Common and Volans, plus a rotating reposado from 1414. I didn’t love the anejo like I did the blanco, but I’m sure there are some out there who will. Both highly recommended with the above caveat.

Score: 8.5 for Blanco, 8 for Anejo

T8KE Score scale:

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

 

 

La Venenosa Sierra Occidental Raicilla

Intro:  If mezcal feels like a strange and unfamiliar realm for many tequila drinkers, then raicilla (agave spirits made in Jalisco from agave varieties other than the standard blue for tequila) might be an even more unusual style to get into. Without generalizing too much, raicillas often exhibit more of the lactic “funky” type of notes that sometimes show up in mezcals (and less often in tequilas), while smokiness is a less common feature. I became curious after trying a few funky spirits such as the Chamucos tequila I reviewed a while back (though believe it or not, there are a number of funky Scotches out there as well), and picked up a raicilla from La Venenosa, which seems to be one of the more prominent and available brands. This one, the “black label” as it’s often called, gets recommended as a good introduction to raicilla.

Price: $75-85
Agave: Maximiliana
Distillation: Single
Strength: 40.5% ABV

Nose: Yeah, this is definitely funky in a way unlike any tequila I’ve had. The Chamucos had plenty of blue cheese funk, but that was in a very austere and briny profile. This one is very bright and fruity, and I find it much more appealing and harmonious overall. It’s a kind of crisp/tangy green fruit profile, the closest thing I can think of is green papaya, but there’s a hint of agave sweetness rounding it out as well. The funk is less of a stinky cheese funk and more of a yogurt funk, which pairs well with the bright fruitiness. The funk is prominent but not overpowering, but I should note that I say this after I got acclimated to it. The first time I smelled it I wondered what I had gotten myself into, but it quickly grew on me.

Palate: Unlike the Chamucos, the funk carries over pretty cleanly from the nose into the palate as well. Man, this is just so crisp and, dare I say, refreshing, like green papaya yogurt if that were a thing. Like the nose, I’d call this a green fruit profile that straddles the line between tangy and sweet, with noticeable cooked agave and maybe a touch of tropical fruit, held up by that yogurt-y frame. There’s maybe a touch of earthiness, and some herbal or minty moments, but they stay in the background. There’s basically zero ethanol burn, but the mouthfeel is much more substantial than just about any other tequila I’ve had at 40%.

Finish: Simply delightful, a blast of sweet tangy zest, agave, and bright green fruit. Good length, the tang lingers quite a while in your mouth.

Notes: I can see why this gets recommended as baby’s first raicilla. If you’re funk-curious, this is a highly accessible option. It’s got a restrained but still quite present level of funk, and moreover it’s a funk that harmonizes well with the overall profile rather than contrasting or distracting from it. Plus, it’s just delicious. It’s odd to describe a distilled spirit as “refreshing,” but that’s what comes to mind here. I’d want to keep one on my shelf if I weren’t wanting to dive deeper into this side of agave spirits now. I don’t really know how to rate this numerically, or if it makes sense to compare scores of tequilas to mezcals/raicillas, but I think the review speaks for itself; I’ll just say this is Excellent and call it a day. If you’ve had your fill of tequilas and want to dip your toes into the weirder side of agave spirits, this is a great entry point.

Score: 8

T8KE Score scale:

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I’d rather have.

5 | Good | Good, just fine.

6 | Very Good | A cut above.

7 | Great | Well above average

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect