While I used the Coca-Cola example myself at FV, it is only fair to note that every can of Coke has all the ingredients listed. An ingredient list is not the same as a recipe.

There are no "secret ingredients" in Coke.

Depends on what you mean by "secret," doesn't it?
Click to view attachment
How revealing is "Natural Flavors" to you?

Tell that to those guys who are in jail for trying to sell that info to Pepsi.

If Pepsi (or any other major soda manufacturer) wanted to know what is in Coca-Cola, they would analize it ten ways from Sunday with GC, etc.

Eventually they Could make an identical product without the 'secret' recipe.

It is not so much the ingredients that are a secret, as the ratio of the ingredients. The proposed sale was not for the 'secret Ingredient', it was for the 'Recipe'.

It is the Recipe that is the Secret!

Same applies to Absinthe. With very few exceptions the ingredients are pretty straightforward. The exact proportions and the process (specific still and the operation, coloration process) are what make the absinthe unique.

Wouldn't some of those tests also be able to discern some form of ratio?

Certainly.

Which is why, in my opinion, the Coca-Cola 'Secret' is just a marketing ploy. Pepsi Co does not want to make a Coca-Cola clone. They want to compete with Coca-Cola with their own recipe and convince the world that it is better.

As far as Absinthe goes, look at how difficult a time Ted has had reproducting BE Absinthe. No discredit to him for his effort as he has made some fine products. However, even with GC analysis and all his experience he has not nailed the nuances of of PF products from near 100 years ago.

This is where GC analysis is not enough. Coca-Cola is a mixture of flavoring ingredients, no more.

Absinthe is a distilled product. Distillation filters some natural components while passing others and further modifying still others (chemical changes take place during distillation).

Recipes with the exact ratio of constituants are kept secret for good reason, however unlike making Soda, in making Absinthe the recipe is not sufficient to make a clone. So even there I'm not too sure that it is really necessary to guard the recipe.

Of course, there is always the possibility someone could take your recipe and do you one better.

Interesting reading.

I also ran into this some time ago:

Click to view attachment

The chartreuse recipe is only known by 3 monks sworn to secrecy!


The example of Ted trying to clone Pernod fils is a good one. Even if he had the proprietary recipe, it would take years to come close because the exact herbs and their sources are not abvailable and there are lost techniques. Every maker has his style and Ted's absinthe can be identified in blind tasting against any and all others -- same for other makers.

This may be a poor example, but years ago I worked on a chocolate chip cookie recipe that won blue ribbons year after year. My friends occasionally asked me for the recipe which I gladly shared. Theirs never tasted like mine. It wasn't until I told my best friend exactly what kind of flour, sugar, etc that I used and how I baked them did they come out the same (and that was really weird). I can't even imagine how many variables there are in making absinthe, but I can guess it is a HELLUVA lot more difficult than making chocolate chip cookies!

I guess my point is, anyone can figure out the basics in a recipe, but the one who develops it has the option of divulging the tiny details...or not. And it is THEIR option.

Secret absinthe recipe...let me see, There is wormwood...

No, but if you let Ted's stuff age for 100 years in the bottle, it might be pretty damn close. Aging is all about developing nuance.



It's just a marketing ploy



Again, the vintage that we taste today is around 100 years old (sometimes younger, but I digress). When it was fresh outta the bottle after distillation, it may or may not have been just like what we drink now. There is no way to know unless you can find someone who was there and tried it fresh back in the day.
In regard to technique, you might be right, but it's not rocket science to macerate some herbs in a base and make a wash, and then distill it in an alembic. But I get what you're saying.

Edit: On rereading my post, it sounds like I am saying distilling is really easy. I'm not saying that at all. Like winemaking (which I know quite well), the basics are simple, but fine tuning them is difficult, and the more you magnify everything, the more complex it gets. What I meant was that the science has advanced some in the past 100 years and Ted is a good chemist and if anybody can replicate stuff, it's probably him.

Some samples taste as if they had been distilled two years ago. The "very green" Pernod Fils 1914 bottles do, to give just one example.

Not to digress, but is there any way to check the actual age of the "very green" 1914? Perhaps, unbeknown to anyone, those particular bottles were indeed filled two years ago?

If so, that would be fraud wouldn't it?

Oxy has more integrity than that and I don't think anyone alive can produce absinthe that good -- yet. If so, there would be no competition possible. Maybe in a couple of years . . .

Some might seem like they were just distilled -- but they weren't. 100 years is a good bit o' aging. I'd say that there has to be a considerable amount of polymerization, oxidation, etc. that happens during that time.

Saw this @ LdF (not scientific, but still):

"Does absinthe age?

Yes, the best, distilled absinthes age very well...we have tasted several that are almost 100 years old and are outstanding. We are still researching what exactly happens to the plant distillates as they age in the alcohol solution. The aging process, though important for high-proof spirits directly after distillation, is not something normally taken into consideration once they have been bottled. It is commonly believed that almost all spirits stop aging once they are placed into glass bottles, but this is not the case with distilled absinthe and a close cousin, Chartreuse.

Will aging change the quality or the flavor?

The changes will be rather subtle over a short period of a few months - this time typically improves absinthe by mellowing the alcohol bite, eliminating the 'still-shock' which can hamper the aromas and flavours and allows the herbal components to integrate even more. The color will usually become a lighter green, in some cases, more yellow-green and very old absinthes can take on an amber tint with green reflections. Clear absinthes will not change color, however, there may be some white sediment found at the bottom of the bottle."

No, I wasn't implying anything about Oxy, I meant before his discovery of the bottles.

Two now. One must have gotten fired. An interesting point as well: their claim is "Green Chartreuse is the only liqueur in the world with a completely natural green colour." And yet it's colorfast in clear bottles at relatively low proof. (remember, absinthe is not a liqueur )
Eh. It ain't rocket science. I don't mean to start the whole science/art debate, because both are obviously involved, but it's closer to cooking than is often implied.

Well, that means they absolutely have to be lying. Because it's utterly impossible to do that naturally.

I don't know... they have some pretty high connections.

That knocked the wind out of me!

It's variable. If it's green and there isn't a trace of amber, you can bet it hasn't seen too much UV light -- yes, you-know-who apparently wasn't involved in production just yet . And the taste is a pretty good guide, as it's easy to tell the effects of ageing from samples that have aged differently indeed.




Serge Helfrich and I mused over this. If it were true, we'd love to know who can make us some more .

The bottles unmistakenly contain Pernod Fils, from comparison with absinthes from other caches (some in the Cannes cache also had a trace of green and were somewhere in between the amber and green PF1914 samples) and from the typical PF wormwood profile, very different from the more fruity high quality wormwood often used these days (in good products).



It would have been quite a feat to have bottles on the top taste exactly like most other amber and aged PF, and to then craft other bottles that would've been fake but still with the characteristic PF taste.

re: Colorfast Chartreuse

Having traveled to a great many liquor stores, I can tell you that there is some variability in Chartreuse's color.

The Yellow, especially, is prone to very noticeably fading, if it has been sitting on a shelf for too long.

I've also seen claims of things like, "Chartreuse is the only distilled spirit which continues to age and evolve in the bottle."

Short answer, to me, is, any distilled spirit which contains organic materials will change, over time, in the bottle.

The degree to which they change must be something like a continuum from the basically pure ethyl alcohol of vodka, on one end, to freeze distilled cider on the other.

It could be mistaken for Helfrich, in a blind taste test.

I don't know about that. It would be impossible to achieve a stable green color by coloring with chlorophyll, but I've seen recipes that suggest using saffron and some manner of blue vegetable dye to achieve a green color. It's possible that the monks are using some technique along those lines.

I was being sarcastic. Reference to a thread at FV.

Yeah!
As you could mistaken Edouard Pernod with Montmartre.

Not once you've had them side by side, of course.

You really need to open your bottle, by the way...

Congratulations Hiram!! That will be the next bottle I buy... it may be 10 years from now, but I swear I'm going to buy it!!

No, no, no. You won't have to wait 10 years for it. I'll make sure you get it before then. No worries.

Oh I was exaggerating I'm sure I can manage it sooner than that.... maybe 5 years hee hee

I've not had Helfrich.

Nor his absinthe.

Does opening the bottle improve the taste, or is WBT better off licking the label 77 times?

I wasn't referring to a bottle of Helfrich.

But will licking the bottle of 1914 77 times make it taste any different?

What bottle, then?

Is he trapped?



Edit: The question was for Xixser.

Different for the next guy who licks it.

After finally sitting down and reading this topic, I'd very much suggest reading the testimony of Louis Pillet, Baglin v. Cusenier Co, 221 U.S. 580.

I tried what is being heralded as the first legal absinthe in the U.S. this past weekend.

Care to offer a cursory review? Good, bad or ugly.

wow, that's cool that you quote that and it may be relevant to something, but maybe you should actually tell people what is the testimony and/or where it is they can read it?

I know this is kind of late, but congrats, Hiram! I'm looking forward to this becoming available.

Well, I got to admit it. PV got it correct. Grim, don't be so obtuse. And you can call me on that.

I will.

No offense taken… I just didn't have the time to link up a pdf or somethin'… so forgive me.

Check your e-mail.

True. The board is for communicating, not playing "I know something you don't know". Is there any particular part of the case that you found relevant to (this particular tangent of) the thread?

For the record, I had an absinthe two years ago that has the same status as the one at St. George Spirits: legally produced by a professional distiller at a licensed distilled spirits plant, not very good, and not yet released. I certainly wish St. George the best with their efforts, but apparently they have some tweaking to do.

Given their rep for quality, I don't doubt they'll get it down, but it's not the first legally produced absinthe. It looks like it has a good shot at being the first legally produced one sold here.

Don't mistake it for that.

Learning is half the fun, and to my own fault I assume that most worthwhile persons would be insulted if I spoon-fed them information.

You yourself have questioned me in the same way in the past and we ended up discussing the details of thujone testing before it became common knowledge on the boards, or have you forgotten?

Then, as now, wheresoever I can help you… you need only ask.


The discussion of ingredients, formula and proprietary information. For Dr. Verte, the replication of Pernod and the validity of popular treatises… all as treated by Mr. Pillet.

In the U.S.…?

what about worthwhileless persons ?

I've never met a person that fits that category. Everyone is worthwhile. Maybe that's different where you are.

How 'bout we substitute "worthwhile" for "inquiring"... like Chris523, who I also had the supreme pleasure of meeting recently. He introduced me to crack-dip n' crackers, antique tobacco pipes and oodles of hooch. I got schooled and pampered.

That's all I'm after; not spoon-feeding, just tell me what I'm going to be eating. I think you'll agree these boards have a history of people tossing out innuendos with no intent of follow-up. Not that I'm saying you're a tosser. Yes. Also, there was a buzz last year about Tuthilltown Gristmill doing an absinthe in this historically interesting thread. I don't know if they ever got around to making a batch. It's remarkable how much can change in a year.

If I read that correctly, Doubs is entitled to use that name on an Absinthe.

However that is a US court judgement and has little or no sway in France. It does mean that Doubs could be sold out of England and shipped to the US if it did not violate other laws and was approved by the TTB.

Or am I off on a tangent?