tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post3094998579209676495..comments2024-03-29T07:54:08.898-07:00Comments on Shut up about Barclay Perkins: Bischofsgrün (part two)Ron Pattinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03095189986589865751noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-26982682832278819382010-07-16T04:11:56.421-07:002010-07-16T04:11:56.421-07:00Ron, whisky malt is regular barley malt that has b...Ron, whisky malt is regular barley malt that has been subjected to some degree of peating when kilned, i.e., some peat is added to the fuel to kiln the malt. This imparts a smoky taste. The analogy with Bamberg, or other smoked, malt is very close. Depending on the degree of peating and amount of whisky malt used in the mash, the smoky taste may be more or less strong. But it is simply a smoked beer, and as many historical styles were smoked, including wheat beers, its use seems logical although as always the taste of each product may or may not recommend.<br /><br />To the degree you were referring to beers stored in a cask that had held whisky, that is different since there the effect is to impart some actual (finished) whisky flavour to the beer. I have liked some of these, not all.<br /><br />One thing that puzzles me is beers that have a smoky taste but don't use any form of smoked malt. Although I don't find it in current samples, Caledonian's beer called St. Andrew's for many years had a smoky or cured-like taste. Yet I understand peated or smoked malt was never used to make this beer. The malts must have been cured in a particular manner to achieve this.<br /><br />GaryGary Gillmannoreply@blogger.com