Initial Reviews: Sutliff Edgeworth Match,Amphora,Aperatif,SG Chocolate Flake

Sutliff Edgeworth Ready Rubbed Match:

I smoked my way through a 14oz can (the only way it's currently sold in the US) of Lane Ltd Ready Rubbed which is said to be the exact recipe of the Edgeworth original, and I found it okay but didn't want to buy that much again. So I decided to give the Sutliff match another go, as it's available in bulk starting with 1oz. I like it better. The cut is coarse, closer to the Edgeworth original than the semi-ribbon cut of Lane's, and smokes slower and cooler. Sutliff's also has a more noticeable chocolate taste which I prefer to Lane's, in which the (I believe) molasses takes front row. Sutliff's does seem lighter on the nic than Lane's, which is on the minus side for me, but the more pleasing to me taste wins out. If you're looking for a chocolate flavored tobacco that doesn't taste like a sickly aro, this might be a good one to try. A good blend for a newbie also, as it is flavorful, not nic-heavy, forgiving of packing and cadence "errors", and rather inexpensive. If nobody told me it was a match for a codger blend I wouldn't suspect it.
Amphora Brown (Original):

Perhaps it was just my taste buds at the moment, but I had to dump this one after a few puffs. There seemed to be an odd taste, like burning plastic. I have smoked Amphora Red "Full Aroma" before and found it pleasant albeit not outstanding, and expected this one to be the same but more subtle and natural. The Red is said to be the more popular of the two, and at this point I can't even see why Brown still exists, but I'm going to have to try again when I haven't eaten, drank or smoked anything else for a few hours. Not pulling the plug on it just yet.
Dunhill "The Aperatif":

I smoked this back in the 70s and remember only that I liked it, but not precisely how it tasted. I know it's in a similar vein with MM965, one of my all-time favorites, and was expecting it to be a lighter version of that. What I got instead was a flatter, bitter version of MM965. 965 has a richly-fragrant, tangy flavor but Aperatif doesn't. Perhaps being lighter on the Latakia shifts the taste more toward the uncased cavendish, or else the current version of Aperatif is much different from the one of yore. I also found the moisture level a bit high, something I have never had happen with a Dunhill before. I could pinch a clump of it and it stuck together in a ball. I'm going to give it a little dry-time and see if that changes it for the better. Otherwise I'm sticking with MM965, a heavenly blend.
Samuel Gawith Kendall Mayor's Chocolate Flake:

I was not expecting this to be a chocolate aro, and in that way was not disappointed. I was expecting it to be far too wet to stay lit, and again, was not disappointed. I was expecting it not to have Lakeland essence, and in that I was horribly, nauseatingly disappointed. Admittedly there was very little, in fact it may just be that being processed in the same plant with Lakelands is enough to taint everything in sight, but it was there in every puff. Surprisingly I was able to get through an entire bowl, and perhaps with a little airing it may eventually dissipate. I'm hopeful, because in all other respects this is a very tasty smoke. Burns slow (well, to be expected given the wetness), but also somewhat hot (again, wetness). I've read that it tastes completely different when dried, which frankly would be a shame because it tastes quite good aside from the faint soapiness. Obviously the tobacco is excellent quality, and the smoke is rich and flavorful. Definitely a sipping blend, for me perfect for after a meal.

I smoked the SG Chocolate flake around 5PM, and the Amphora around 7, and as I dumped it rather quickly, I followed it not too long after by the Aperatif. So I'm wondering if the Lakeland essence I noted in the SG might have ghosted my mouth and nose enough to skew how the others tasted. I'm going to try again smoking the latter two given a wide berth of time between smoking or eating.
I'm also going to take your advice about drying the Amphora, Jim, as I now recall that's what I did with the Red before the first smoke. Not that it felt wet to me, but I wanted to evaporate as much of the PG as I could without overdrying. And I recall leaving it out on a paper plate for 3 hours to notice a significant drop in moisture feel, so my guess is Amphora really ladles the PG on liberally.
I also think perhaps the wetness of the Aperatif might be a factor. This is truly the first tin of a Dunhill blend I found that wasn't spot-on the moisture. I hope it's just a random lapse in QC, not that they've started cutting corners.
And going back and reading far down the list of reviews of Kendall Chocolate Flake on tobaccoreviews, I noted a few that mentioned the presence of Lakeland essence, so it may or may not be a crosscontamination issue. Compared to Hyde Park, the only other Lakeland I've sampled, the amount in Chocolate Flake is infinitessimal, it's just that Lakeland essence is so odious to me that even a tiny bit affronts my taste. I'm hoping it's a topping that will evaporate with a bit of drying, I just don't want to dry it so much the blend changes flavor. I've seen it said that drying obliterates the chocolate in favor of Latakia, and I didn't buy this just to have another Lat blend.

UPDATE

I gave Amphora Brown and Dunhill Aperatif another try yesterday. None of the unpleasant taste I originally tasted was present, leading me to conclude that what I had experienced the day before was due to having smoked the SG Chocolate flake a few hours prior, and the Lakeland essence had temporarily ruined my sense of taste. I truly never knew the Lakeland essence was that evil, but for me apparently it is. If I smoke the SG again, I will do so as the last pipe of the day.
So hereweith are revised opinions:
Amphora Brown:

The taste and room-note of this is almost identical with Amphora Red, except whereas the room-notes are of equal intensity, the flavor of Brown is far less. I'll finish off the pouch, perhaps mix it with some BRM for a change of pace. But I'll go back to Amphora Red. I see now exactly why Red is far more popular world-wide than Brown.
Dunhill The Aperatif:

The flatness and bitterness I tasted originally was apparently the result of having smoked a Lakeland a few hours before. Taking a fresh stab at Aperatif revealed its true character, which is that it is basically MM965 with far less Latakia, causing the other components to come forward. Aperatif is too floral for my taste, unlike 965 where the floral notes are subtle and tame the acridness of the Latakia. The whole time I was smoking Aperatif I kept saying to myself how it would be a perfect blend if only it had a bit more Latakia. Mixing in a bit of Nightcap confirmed that opinion. Basically, Aperatif+Nightcap=MM965. So I'll use this mixture to finish off the tin, then go back to MM965. But if anyone likes the florals in 965 but feels it's a bit too Lat-heavy, Aperatif might be just what you're looking for.

The Gawith chocolate flakes sound quite interesting--I may buy both and compare. I'm assuming the GH Bob's Chocolate flake would have even more of a Lakeland whiff.

Click to expand...

From what I've read, yes, Bob's CF has a strong Lakeland presence, thus I have no interest in trying it. I can certainly detect the Lakeland essence in Kendall Mayor's CF but it's not unpleasant even for someone like myself who abhors Lakelands. I don't find that it ghosts a pipe either. At least not the one I've been smoking it in, which is a smallish Amboseli meer prince. What I have found is that it ghosts my sensory apparati for a short while, imparting a rather bitter and unpleasant taste (not a Lakeland floral) to anything I smoke within a few hours of it. As long as I smoke the CF as my last pipe of the day I find it one of the tastiest and most satisfying blends I've ever tried, and by the next day my palate is clear for other blends. In fact for me CF is a far better nightcap than Nightcap :D