Too much negative feedback. I took a chance a few years ago and love it.Why I was neglecting this so long,
Wait, you are going to forgo many trusted names in tobacco reviews to side with one of maybe six people I have ever heard of that likes this crap? Ha ha, come on, Chasingembers smokes 1Q mixed with Penzance and says he can taste every aromatic he has smoked... Haha!Thanks for the heads up Chasing, now I'm confident I must get me a pouch of this ,the sooner the better, Why I was neglecting this so long,,
says he can taste every aromatic he has smoked.
The only reason to smoke "affordable" burley is for the topping! The more "modest" varieties of burley are the IPA of tobacco: bitter, bitter, bitter! I just stop when I get to the bottom 1/2 to 1/3rd of the bowl when the bitter starts overwhelming the taste of the toppings and dump it out. Besides the old version of Mixture 79, I'm thinking of the dearly departed House of Windsor Field & Stream. Oh, how I miss thee!I didn't hate it, but I do like licorice toppings and casings. My biggest put off was the tobacco tastes that did come through the heavy aromatic toppings. The burley just wasn't within the range of flavors that I prefer... to put it nicely.
I find codger blends to be more expensive than bulk blends. But, they are more accessible. Personally, I can always find something I would rather smoke instead. But, if someone likes it, then smoke what you like.The only reason to smoke "affordable" burley is for the topping! Besides the old version of Mixture 79, I'm thinking of the House of Windsor Field & Stream. Oh, how I miss thee! I just stop when I get to the bitter 1/2 to 1/3rd of the bowl and dump it out.
That's a good point. Relatedly, I think, codger blends also offer simplicity of choice. It's pretty overwhelming trying to figure out which bulk Sutliff, PS or C&D to try; it seems like there's a blend for every constellation in the sky. Just go for the tried and maybe true.I find codger blends to be more expensive than bulk blends. But, they are more accessible. Personally, I can always find something I would rather smoke instead. But, if someone likes it, then smoke what you like.
so do I need to understand that this is now licorice /Anisette forward tobacco something like Half&half?I'm really bummed that they've changed the topping. It's now licorice dominant rather than floral. The floral is still there but there's much less of it.
Not quite like H&H. There is another element to it, almost lakeland-ish.so do I need to understand that this is now licorice /Anisette forward tobacco something like Half&half?
Oh Yeah, That'll be quite a 'taste combo' ,licorice/anisette with a faint floral note ,applied to burely tobacco,,,Not quite like H&H. There is another element to it, almost lakeland-ish.
Ha ha, I wince when I read that it contains burley. It's like an awful thing to do to burley, lump it into the category as that... stuff. pufapplied to burely tobacco,,,
I still have some old 79, but it's been a long time since I've had the HOW F&S, so take this with a grain of salt. F&S was mostly cubed burley, 79 was and is ribbon. F&S was floral but a different kind of floral than 79. Also not as strong topping wise than 79. They're different enough that one's not a substitute for the other. If I knew HOW was going away, I would have tried to stock up.How close is 79 compared to the old Field&Stream tase wise?
Advanced warning: faint is relative, as it's still quite noticeably floral, just not so much as beforeOh Yeah, That'll be quite a 'taste combo' ,licorice/anisette with a faint floral note ,applied to burely tobacco,,,