Barton 1792 Distillery Archives - First Pour Cocktails

1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits Single Barrel Select

Posted on September 10, 2023 by Nick

The last 1792 Full Proof store pick I had I received from a friend, and it was nothing short of delicious. As with most brands, when I find something I like, I think it’s worth exploring further. So on a trip last winter, I knew that the 1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits pick was definitely something I’d have to try. So how does it compare, and did I make the right decision in getting another bottle by a different selector?

1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits

Sight: Deep tawny, hedging on auburn

Smell: The nose here is decidedly more oaky than the last single barrel I encountered. There’s a perfumed vanilla that lingers behind a heavy oak and cigar component. The woody character gives off impressions of roasted walnuts and pecans with a deep dark chocolate and slight berry character. Like the other Full Proof, the nose has a tinge of alcohol that’s obvious enough that you shouldn’t go face first into the glass. Those berry notes add a brightness to the edges here, but make no mistake, this is a heavy nose that doesn’t convey sweetness.

Sip: The start is not at heavy as it might imply, but does quickly pull in some baking spice and toasted marshmallow. The oak notes definitely show up though, giving off a toasted char to compliment the spice. Some nuttiness and cocoa powder shows up. Vanilla works it’s way back in with a hint of brown sugar, but it doesn’t quite run sweet. There’s a tobacco and astringent black tea component moving here as well.

Savor: The finish pulls in some of those baking spices, black tea, and slight perfumed oak note. It lingers with a moderate weight without getting too aggressive, and goes more into a charred oak sort of linger. It pops with a little heat toward the end.

1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits is more of a dry take on things than the last bottle I had. This doesn’t mean it’s bad, but it’s more of a contemplative sipper that isn’t quite as unique or complex. It has some good deep notes in it, but it isn’t going to make anyone run out for another bottle to sip.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan, 1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits is unsurprisingly very full bodied and rich. The sweetness actually opens up though, giving an interestingly vanilla brown sugar character that lingers under a toasted barrel / marshmallow riff. The astringency is complimented by the sweetness of the fruity vermouth, and somehow the bitters kind of bind it. While it is strong in presence here, it also sort of mellows. Better in a cocktail than neat.

In Review – 1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits

1792 Full Proof – All Star Wine & Spirits is good, and at a price under $50 it really delivers well on full proof without high price. While it isn’t the home run the previous full proof is, it still shows these picks are worth picking up and enjoying at the $50 price point. Generally speaking, it seems like if you happen to like 1792 (Barton’s) normal full proof, you’re going to enjoy other bottles. Thanks to reasonable price point, these are worth getting when you see them at retail.

1792 Bottled In Bond

Posted on January 18, 2023January 8, 2023 by Nick

We’re continuing on in our exploration of 1792’s bourbon with 1792 Bottled In Bond. Distilled in one season, this bourbon is bottled at 50% A.B.V. and has spent a minimum of four years in a government bonded warehouse. Age aside, the biggest step up from their Small Batch is the additional 6ish proof points. So is it worth hunting down for that slight extra?

1792 Bottled In Bond

Sight: Deep Copper

Smell: Caramel notes come through at the start but lean more into jammy raspberries and candied orange with plenty of spice. There’s a heat that gives way to spicy charred oak, cigar box, tobacco, and a slightly earthy green walnut note. Other touches of powder sugar remain but the nose is tight.

Sip: The bottled in bond starts of bready, with a bit of a yeasty character, and then goes full on into an unexpected melange of fruit. Everything from peaches to plums to candy apple runs through, and a honeyed sort of note kicks in for good measure. Oak and spice complement here, giving a nice background to the almost candied like character of the fruit.

Savor: The finish pulls back from the candied fruit tart character, and delivers a more balanced cigar box and char ending with just a bit of brown sugar.

1792 Bottled In Bond is completely unlike it’s nose and all of the place in the flavor profile. The bready start to the flavor profile giving way into fruit is particularly unexpected given that it doesn’t seem to have any sort of indication on the nose that it’s going to head in that direction. The flavors are on point, layered, and don’t suffer from the increase in proof. Overall, it’s an interesting expansion over the Small Batch.

Compared to 1792 Small Batch

Despite the significant increase in proof, the nose is almost tight, refusing to give up much. What it does show are slightly more leans into fruit, and a more earthy character than it’s sibling. Small Batch better captures some of the sweet and spice notes, but doesn’t deliver anywhere near the layering of fruit flavor or complexity. There’s a lot to like here in the increase that actually adds some value.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan 1792 Bottled In Bond pulls in more of that crazy fruit forward character with a little yeasty bread characteristics. There’s a bit of appearance of banana, but then tons of plums, peaches, and honeyed orange come forward combining with the berried and vanilla notes of the vermouth. The oak and vanilla come out to play as things carry on, and the finish has a slight tropical fruit character laced with a good tinge of oak notes. As Manhattan’s go, it’s very solid, but a little muddled due to the sheer number of fruit notes.

In Review – 1792 Bottled In Bond

1792 Bottled In Bond is a bit inconsistent, but generally quite good. As a straight sipper goes, it’s got some depth, but gets a bit confused on the palate. The nose is incredibly inviting, and in a cocktail it makes a nice mix of yeasty and fruity notes to invite one in. The challenge with 1792 is that you have to go out of your way to find it. While it does a lot of great things, the challenge to find a bottle might not be worth the squeeze. The end result is a bottle that you should try if you can find it at MSRP on the shelf, but not one you need to hunt. Instead, you can purchase a bottle of Four Roses Single Barrel and get amazing depth without the hunt.

1792 Single Barrel

Posted on January 11, 2023January 3, 2023 by Nick

I happened to find that 1792 Small Batch was one of my favorite bourbons last year, and the next progression of this was to try their single barrel. While with some brands, you won’t be able to find anything beyond the basic offering at opening (Weller Special Reserve, Buffalo Trace, etc), other brands are thankfully quite findable well after opening and sometimes for days afterward. Barton’s 1792 Single Barrel falls into this category (at least outside of Ohio) and is frequently a store pick. Our particular bottle is actually a non-store pick, so is it worth your time to pick one up if you see one?

1792 Single Barrel

Sight: Chestnut Oloroso Sherry

Smell: Caramel, butterscotch, and powder sugar combine with cooked cherries. Hints of heat and orange marmalade interject with a bit of dark chocolate. Spices and oak run through the background, but the heat seems pervasive.

Sip: Slight fruit leads off (almost raspberry like), a little bit of caramel starts to creep in, and the mouthfeel is thin comparatively. There’s a bit of heat that kicks up before oak and spice notes jump in. The evolution leads more into the oak and spice side of things toward the back of the palate.

Savor: The finish pulls in more charred oak with a hint of clove and spice. The finish lingers with a slightly tannic nature.

1792 Single Barrel is much more barrel orientated than it’s Small Batch cousin, and brings complex flavors of oak and spice. The mouthfeel belies it though, giving a thin character as it dances across the palate. The oak comes on heavy throughout, and lingers on the ending with considerable strength. While there’s a bit to unpack here, complexity isn’t it’s strong suit.

1792 Single Barrel Compared with 1792 Small Batch

While the nose is indeed fuller, the ethanol is equally punchy to the increase in aroma. This makes it a touch sniff comparatively, where the small batch almost more willing reveals it’s secrets and depth. 1792 Small Batch is a bit more balanced toward fruit and away from oak in the palate as well. A slightly sweet nature of the fresh fruit notes is a bit contrast with the heavy caramel and oak of the single barrel.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan, 1792 Single Barrel delivers more of the same. The initial punch is actually nicely balanced caramel and red fruit (most likely helped by the vermouth), but moving into charred barrel territory with lots of spice. The ending maintains a similar tannic note with more spice. Overall, it makes a very serviceable Manhattan.

In Review – 1792 Single Barrel

1792 Single Barrel is a nice, solid bourbon. Where it struggles is that it doesn’t quite bring anything revolutionary to the party, and in some ways, doesn’t live up to it’s little brother Small Batch. The result is a bottle that’s not only harder to find, but also more expensive. The hype generated by Full Proof likely has a good deal to do with explaining this. With that said, we can’t recommend you add 1792 Single Barrel to your collection, but it’s worth a try if you find that you like other Barton products.

1792 Small Batch Bourbon

Posted on December 17, 2021December 1, 2021 by Nick

A few years back, Jim Murray named 1792 Full Proof the whiskey of the year. Like many products that receive notoriety, 1792 went the way of Weller and Pappy Van Winkle and got incredibly hard to find in all guises, including Sweet Wheat, Port Finish, and 12 Year. In the state of Ohio, this included their entry level offering of 1792 Small Batch Bourbon. Unlike many of their other limited releases, Small Batch is findable with a little luck and no need to tater, but how is it?

1792 Small Batch Bourbon

A.B.V.: 46.85% (93.7 Proof)
Age: No Age Statement (NAS)

Sight: Slightly past deep copper, heading toward burnished.

Smell: Opens with candied cherries, bananas, brown sugar, and baking spices. Candied nuts and rock candy hang out in the background with some toasty oak. The cherries move toward preserved as it opens up and a touch of cocoa powder slips in.

Sip: The palate opens up with a combination of rye, spices, and oak. It’s dry, giving off various nuts, hints of stone fruit, and cherries. A vanilla and brown sugar mix begins to emerge, and creates a standoff between the sweet and spice. The mouthfeel throughout has a nice weight, and it does occasionally give off a little heat.

Savor: A barrage of spices come out ranging from vanilla extract to cinnamon to clove to nutmeg, along with touches of cigar box and toasted oak. A slight tannic note lingers with some red fruits.

1792 Small Batch Bourbon is a fairly spice forward bourbon that allows it’s rye notes to bring the spice. The spicy nature is part of the charm here, giving it a bit of character and zip. It’s not a bad sipper, and it has enough complexity to keep your attention. That said, it wouldn’t be what anyone would deems smooth.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan 1792 Small Batch Bourbon explodes with caramel, baked brown sugar and cinnamon, and vanilla. Cherries and stone fruit join in with plenty of rye and spices, and just the smallest touch of banana and orange marmalade. The mouthfeel is silky and easy going, almost creamy because of vanilla the notes. The ending is inviting with a slight ending of sweetness.

In Review – 1792 Small Batch Bourbon

1792 Small Batch Bourbon a slam dunk in a cocktail, opening up an amazing flavor profile that works well with other elements. The price point of around $30 makes it more than competitive with Elijah Craig, and a good alternative to Wild Turkey 101. The only real issue with 1792 is in some locations it’s allocated. However, if you have it available, we thoroughly recommend it as a bottle to use as your go to bourbon.