Yep, store it. It may taste like a campfire today, but a few weeks from now it may smell like old books, Corinthian leather, and blood red wine.
Aromatic Vs. Non-Aromatic Tobacco
- Thread starter fuel52
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
Smell:
Aromatic - Does what it says on the tin.
Non-aromatic - Nuances and things to talk about.
Taste:
Aromatic - Tastes strange.
Non-aromatic - Tastes like tobacco. Everyone tastes something different. Something to talk about.
Aromatic - Does what it says on the tin.
Non-aromatic - Nuances and things to talk about.
Taste:
Aromatic - Tastes strange.
Non-aromatic - Tastes like tobacco. Everyone tastes something different. Something to talk about.
People love aromatics. It is just that there are SO MANY of them, that you are a lot more likely to see a bad review of one because not all aro ideas were good ones. Also, an aro depends most often on the chemical flavoring that has been added and the tobacco just mainly holds that flavor. In fact, the less obtrusive character the tobacco has on its own, the better the chances usually that the intended flavoring will come through as desired.
Non-aro types depend wholly on the tobacco itself to produce its intended rich flavor, so you are much more dependent on the tobacco itself being of a higher developed quality. But you will never have as many options just from the tobaccos growing out there as you will from all the flavorings possible today.
When people start smoking pipes, the aro is usually the easy choice because you know "apple," you know "butterscotch," you know "mint," but these flavors are mainly 2-dimensional in character and do not change much from bowl to bowl, tin to tin.
Over time, a lot of people tire of that, they want more; their tastes develop more sensitivity and perceptivity, and non-aros offer greater character, complexity and depth because they are totally dependent on nature itself, and nature cannot be controlled. It is a huge variable, so you have both the depth of the individual leaves of each type which constantly vary in a random way along with the natural variation in blending, aging, and storing, so a non-aro always offers much more of a complexly changing smoke both between bowls, batches and tins.
That offers the long-term smoker a lot more palette to keep his interest piqued over time and in return, there is a lot more he can say about the non-aro than he can most aros. So despite being far-outnumbered in quantity by aros, by the time it reaches the social market level of write-ups and reviews, there is usually more interest in exploring the complexities of non-aros. Does that make sense?
Non-aro types depend wholly on the tobacco itself to produce its intended rich flavor, so you are much more dependent on the tobacco itself being of a higher developed quality. But you will never have as many options just from the tobaccos growing out there as you will from all the flavorings possible today.
When people start smoking pipes, the aro is usually the easy choice because you know "apple," you know "butterscotch," you know "mint," but these flavors are mainly 2-dimensional in character and do not change much from bowl to bowl, tin to tin.
Over time, a lot of people tire of that, they want more; their tastes develop more sensitivity and perceptivity, and non-aros offer greater character, complexity and depth because they are totally dependent on nature itself, and nature cannot be controlled. It is a huge variable, so you have both the depth of the individual leaves of each type which constantly vary in a random way along with the natural variation in blending, aging, and storing, so a non-aro always offers much more of a complexly changing smoke both between bowls, batches and tins.
That offers the long-term smoker a lot more palette to keep his interest piqued over time and in return, there is a lot more he can say about the non-aro than he can most aros. So despite being far-outnumbered in quantity by aros, by the time it reaches the social market level of write-ups and reviews, there is usually more interest in exploring the complexities of non-aros. Does that make sense?
Here's how I see it. And I'm that guy that can enjoy a good balkan blend, and then enjoy a good aromatic back to back. I would say there are two (maybe three) types of aromatic (ok I'm going to say three... and a half). There are the kind that are a heavily cased goopy mess that normally erase all natural tobacco flavors attempting to make the blend taste and smell like chocolate cake. These usually smell like like Grandma is in the kitchen baking a chocolate cake but don't taste like anything but hot waxes and ash. Although some of these (hence three and a half) may indeed taste and smell like the aroma intended. Molto Dulce, for example you could probably eat with a fork. If smoked slowly, as you should all pipe tobacco, you can really detect the flavor. Then there are the blends that are a bit more in the middle, meaning an aromatic that you still get hints of the natural tobacco flavor mingling with hints of whatever aromatic properties the blend might have. And then there are the kind that are definitely more tobacco forward, and the aromatic properties are in the back ground where you might get a hint of Grandma's chocolate cake, or even a good sweet blast of flavor only to return to good natural tobacco flavors or even not taste the aromatic properties at all, although leaving a decent room note so Grandma isn't kicking you out of the kitchen.
That being said, you should smoke what you like, when you like, regardless of anyone else's opinion. If you smoke only non aromatics because someone else says it's all trash, you might be missing out on some good blends you might indeed enjoy. Read reviews here on aromatics or read the reviews on tobaccoreviews.com where it's easy to search by blend name or brand name, or blend type.
Most importantly, relax and enjoy yourself. That's what pipe smoking is all about anyway.
That being said, you should smoke what you like, when you like, regardless of anyone else's opinion. If you smoke only non aromatics because someone else says it's all trash, you might be missing out on some good blends you might indeed enjoy. Read reviews here on aromatics or read the reviews on tobaccoreviews.com where it's easy to search by blend name or brand name, or blend type.
Most importantly, relax and enjoy yourself. That's what pipe smoking is all about anyway.
Personally, I much prefer 'English' mixtures - as long as there are Orientals and Latakia, I am a happy camper!
But I don't think it is fair to tar aromatics down the backy pecking order just because it isn't to my particular taste. I was browsing the excellent Dan Pipe catalogue recently (they can't send to the UK sadly but that is another story) and probably 80-90% of the blends they sell are aromatic to one degree or another. Fact is that most continental Europeans seem to prefer aromatics, and some of them are very high class blends indeed. As Denmark, Germany, etc are still countries (among the few) with a pretty solid pipe smoking tradition, I don't think it is wise to disparage their evidently aromatic choices in tobacco.
... of course, they don't know yet about St Bruno :mrgreen:
But I don't think it is fair to tar aromatics down the backy pecking order just because it isn't to my particular taste. I was browsing the excellent Dan Pipe catalogue recently (they can't send to the UK sadly but that is another story) and probably 80-90% of the blends they sell are aromatic to one degree or another. Fact is that most continental Europeans seem to prefer aromatics, and some of them are very high class blends indeed. As Denmark, Germany, etc are still countries (among the few) with a pretty solid pipe smoking tradition, I don't think it is wise to disparage their evidently aromatic choices in tobacco.
... of course, they don't know yet about St Bruno :mrgreen:
I think that everyone in this thread accepts that world-wide, aromatics are more popular. The weird thing is that aromatics are hardly ever discussed. Aromatic reviews on here go pretty much un-commented on, and at pipe clubs, aro smokers never want to do reviews. So, on the forums and everywhere, it is non-aros that get discussed. And, we were offering reasons as to why.
Besides, no one in this thread has said anything derogatory about aromatics... you'll have to PM me for that. :
:
:
The question may be...of all pipe smokers past the beginner stage (6 months to a year?) what is the ratio/percentage of Aros to Non-Aeros?
Is it more like 60/40 non-aeros after that beginner stage? I think this would speak more to why people don't discuss the aeros because non-beginners are more likely to post on this site and the more you get past the beginning phase of pipe smoking, the more they tend to favor non-aros. Just a thought.
If you like, you could go to the aromatic reviews that have had very little responses, and say all that you want. The bigger question is what would you say? Whereas a latakia review can cause guys to dispute, argue, or make further suggestions. They generate more talk.
I do know that despite what guys will say, the biggest reason anyone would come here is to learn, whether they are just starting or whether they've piddled for years and want to take it up a level. Very few guys come here strictly to teach. That's almost funny to think of. We are all here to learn more, and it's almost creepy why someone wouldn't be here to learn.
But, I cannot say what the ratio is of aro to non-aro smokers, but I don't think you'll ever get a clear division anyway. It's not one-way or the other. We all tend to switch around what we smoke for variety, always in flux, except for a few old codgers who only smoke Prince Albert 100% of the time.
So, it's almost funny to think of us as divided into aro and non-aro camps.
Even the most anti-aro grumbling old man at our pipe club, spouting off anti-aro rants... check his pipe bag, and I'll bet good money you will find a bag of peach or vanilla tobacco somewhere in there. Closet aro smokers. Aro curious?
I do know that despite what guys will say, the biggest reason anyone would come here is to learn, whether they are just starting or whether they've piddled for years and want to take it up a level. Very few guys come here strictly to teach. That's almost funny to think of. We are all here to learn more, and it's almost creepy why someone wouldn't be here to learn.
But, I cannot say what the ratio is of aro to non-aro smokers, but I don't think you'll ever get a clear division anyway. It's not one-way or the other. We all tend to switch around what we smoke for variety, always in flux, except for a few old codgers who only smoke Prince Albert 100% of the time.
So, it's almost funny to think of us as divided into aro and non-aro camps.
Even the most anti-aro grumbling old man at our pipe club, spouting off anti-aro rants... check his pipe bag, and I'll bet good money you will find a bag of peach or vanilla tobacco somewhere in there. Closet aro smokers. Aro curious?
Often there's an inverse relationship between how good the pouch aroma and the smoke smells to a third party and how the tobacco tastes to the smoker.
All this talk makes me want to try a good aro now!
All this talk makes me want to try a good aro now!
It's true, non-aromatics seem to get more attention, but there is plenty in Forums about aromatics, long threads on Mixture 79 with licorice, a considerable discussion of Capt. Blacks grape blend, much made of Black Frigate with rum, a review and other discussion of Iwan Ries classic aro Three Star Blue, and so on. So to say Forums is mute on aromatics ... uh, I don't think so. I've plowed out quite a bit of copy on aromatics myself in posts.
Non aros get more discussion because there is much more differences of perception, nuance and POV. Cherry tastes like cherry and all you can really say about it is which kind of cherry and whether you like it or not.
But I don't think you can divide pipe smokers into categories too well. Most people smoke both kinds and even the hardcore English smokers usually admit to smoking a few aros and the hardcore aro smokers usually break down and eventually at least start liking some non-aromatic types.
But I don't think you can divide pipe smokers into categories too well. Most people smoke both kinds and even the hardcore English smokers usually admit to smoking a few aros and the hardcore aro smokers usually break down and eventually at least start liking some non-aromatic types.
MSO, I stand corrected. Some aros do get attention, EGR, Virginia Cream, Royal Yacht, etc... but, are usually not what we think of when this comes up. Typically, if someone posts a review of Peach or Apple, we tend not to get any discussion. Even my reviews of blackberry blends or Autumn Evening really only got responses to my tongue-n-cheekiness, rather than some of the heated debates we get over flavor as in Virginia #1. This is where I think Toob is correct. What do we discuss concerning most of the goopy goopies?
I guess I will throw my hat into the ring. Like a lot of our brotherhood, I started by smoking aromatic pipe tobacco because it just seemed like it was what pipe tobacco smelled like (as has been stated above). I continued to smoke aromatic tobacco because it is what I knew, and for eight or nine years I enjoyed it tremendously.
However, mid 2016 I decided to try something outside of the box for me and ordered some PSLBF, PSLNV, and some Escudo. It did not take me long to realize that I was smoking my beloved RLP-6 less often, and that I was looking forward to each bowl of these new blends more than the tried and true aromatics because I kept discovering something new and different about the way they tasted, smoked, that they could be prepped in different ways, etc. Here it is some eight months later and I am still discovering new things about each of these blends. I also have not taken any time off from pipe smoking.
Nothing wrong with aromatics, I enjoy them from time to time; however, at least for me, non-aromatics just seem to excite my pipe passion more.
I will add in closing, my wife liked it better when I smoked mostly RLP-6 and 1-Q because for those first eight or nine years because I was only spending about $100 on pipe tobacco a year, now I spend that in less than eight weeks, and I had a great six or so pipe rotation which now has grown to a bit larger thirty pipe rotation. Sorry honey.
However, mid 2016 I decided to try something outside of the box for me and ordered some PSLBF, PSLNV, and some Escudo. It did not take me long to realize that I was smoking my beloved RLP-6 less often, and that I was looking forward to each bowl of these new blends more than the tried and true aromatics because I kept discovering something new and different about the way they tasted, smoked, that they could be prepped in different ways, etc. Here it is some eight months later and I am still discovering new things about each of these blends. I also have not taken any time off from pipe smoking.
Nothing wrong with aromatics, I enjoy them from time to time; however, at least for me, non-aromatics just seem to excite my pipe passion more.
I will add in closing, my wife liked it better when I smoked mostly RLP-6 and 1-Q because for those first eight or nine years because I was only spending about $100 on pipe tobacco a year, now I spend that in less than eight weeks, and I had a great six or so pipe rotation which now has grown to a bit larger thirty pipe rotation. Sorry honey.
The thing about most aromatics, is that for the new smoker, they come at you head on and yell: CHERRY! or MAPLE! You usually know right away what you are smoking, they have the attraction of rich food--- mixed berry pie! Chocolate fudge vanilla creme cake! but just as a good cook's tastes become more sensitive and discriminating over time, I think most smoker's palettes get a fatigue eventually from such things.
Oddly enough, I really like the room note of many non-aros or "low-aros!" Sometimes it seems better to me than the rich high-aros that are supposed to rule in this area.
The nice thing about non-aros is that they "back-off" and let you come to them like a blind man feeling a face. They offer the opportunity to explore--- They draw you in. Challenge you.
With few exceptions, I find most high-aros are better added to non- or low-aro blends simply as an adjunct to their complexity. I will add some aro to a blend sometimes to give it hints of a "cherryness" here and there or something for a little change of pace and added depth. Likewise, I might take a non-aro that did not go over with me and add some of it to some aro I have to tone it down a bit. Both ways, I end up with a more flavorful, complex blend.
That's why I don't rush out to buy every obscure blend. A lot of these exotic, hard to find blends I would bet don't end up too far from some of the things you find just experimenting on your own.
Oddly enough, I really like the room note of many non-aros or "low-aros!" Sometimes it seems better to me than the rich high-aros that are supposed to rule in this area.
The nice thing about non-aros is that they "back-off" and let you come to them like a blind man feeling a face. They offer the opportunity to explore--- They draw you in. Challenge you.
With few exceptions, I find most high-aros are better added to non- or low-aro blends simply as an adjunct to their complexity. I will add some aro to a blend sometimes to give it hints of a "cherryness" here and there or something for a little change of pace and added depth. Likewise, I might take a non-aro that did not go over with me and add some of it to some aro I have to tone it down a bit. Both ways, I end up with a more flavorful, complex blend.
That's why I don't rush out to buy every obscure blend. A lot of these exotic, hard to find blends I would bet don't end up too far from some of the things you find just experimenting on your own.
I think the answer to the OP has been answered by several on here. There's just a lot more to talk about when it comes to non-aromatics.
But, I wouldn't assume people are one or the other.
I started in aros but quickly moved on for the most part.
But after several years I have now found myself enjoying them in the summer time heat, and in public settings around others all year. Enjoying Latakia heavy blends during the cold winter months. Medium to light English blends during spring and fall, and Va/Per all year long.
But, I wouldn't assume people are one or the other.
I started in aros but quickly moved on for the most part.
But after several years I have now found myself enjoying them in the summer time heat, and in public settings around others all year. Enjoying Latakia heavy blends during the cold winter months. Medium to light English blends during spring and fall, and Va/Per all year long.
And sometimes you just have to turn down the lights, put on some Barry White, and fire up some Molto Dolce. Bow chicka wow wow. ::
:- Status