Thursday, January 7, 2010
Esoterica -- Stonehaven
Brand: Esoterica
Blend: Stonehaven
Style: Virgina/Burley
Pipe Used: No-Name Volcano
Price: $28.99/8oz.
Appearance: 9
Taste: 8
Room Note: 8
Value: 7
Overall: 8
I must have been good last year as Santa left me a pound of Esoterica's Stonehaven under the Christmas tree. This Virginia and Burley flake is considered by many to be in a class of its own and the high demand means that it can be a difficult blend to procure. I'm just glad that the pipe smoking jolly old elf was looking out for me.
Upon opening the 8oz. Mylar bag my nose was immediately met with the strong aroma of fermented tobacco -- kind of a cross between dark rum and dried dates. The dark brown, almost black, tobacco was arrayed in nice rows of wide, thin flakes in a small plastic tray. The tobacco was wet to the touch so after divvying it up among a few Mason jars I selected one flake and left it out overnight to dry.
The next day I rubbed the flake out a bit and loaded up my no-name Italian rusticated volcano briar pipe. This is a short, stubby nosewarmer style pipe with a 1/4 bend and after cleaning and restoring it I decided to dedicate it to this particular blend.
I gave the tobacco a light and due to its dry condition it fired right up. Some of the longer strands of tobacco began to curl up and over the bowl but I decided to avoid tamping since it was burning along at such a nice pace.
The first few puffs delivered hints of that classic Virginia sweetness but the stout, fermented Burley quickly made its presence known by delivering that deep, rich tobacco taste that so many of us lust after.
The blend remained consistent throughout with that rich flavor being regularly complemented by that slight sweetness. The Virginias acted almost like a palate cleanser as they offered the tongue a brief respite from the heavier stoved and fermented Burley flavors.
And while the flakes smelled like dried fruit and fine liquor the only evidence of these trimmings was in the very pleasant aftertaste.
In describing Stonehaven I'm going to compare it to one of my favorite beverages, Guinness. Both are dark, heady concoctions that may at first glance seem overly stout and strong but since they're meant to be enjoyed regularly they're actually fairly mild and tame. You don't want your daily quaff to knock you on your keister any more than you want your daily smoke to do the same so don't let appearances fool you.
The tobacco gave off a lot of smoke but the room aroma was fairly mild and never took on that acrid smell one often finds with lighter Burley blends. To my nose it was reminiscent of a musty old book with a hand-tooled leather cover and coming from a bibliophile like me that's high praise indeed.
Stonehaven also remained bite free even after I caught myself puffing so hard as to make the bowl of the pipe uncomfortably hot (a real no-no to be sure). As for relights, the tobacco only required one when I neglected it for a few minutes to fuss with my iPod. Other than that it burned evenly down to a light gray ash and left very little dottle and no sticky residue in the bottom of the pipe. I had been warned that this blend often leaves behind a bit of a mess in the bowl but it seems like a thorough drying of the tobacco before smoking avoids most of those problems.
Stonehaven reminded me an awful lot of one of my favorite Virginias, McClelland's Blackwoods Flake. While the McClelland offering is a bit sweeter the two tobaccos look, taste, and behave like siblings and I can see substituting one for the other when stock runs low.
Esoterica's Stonehaven is a fine tobacco and I liked it enough to dedicate a pipe to it but I can't say that it completely blew my socks off. Perhaps I've just been spoiled by my past experiences with so many great blends but I found it to be a bit too mild for my palate.
That being said, the fact that the tobacco came to me in such damp condition leads me to believe that this batch is fairly young and I can't wait to see what a year or two of aging does to alter my perceptions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment