Question About Sillem’s Mayor 1814 Flake – Is It Lightly Flavored or Pure Virginia?

[Hope]

Hi everyone,

I’ve got a question about **Sillem’s Mayor 1814 Flake (50g)**.

On Smokingpipes.com, this blend is listed as:

Components: Virginia
Family: Virginia
Cut: Flake

However, in the *Smokingpipes* tasting notes, the reviewer mentions that this blend is *“matured Virginia topped with honey and orange,”* and that the sweetness and citrusy top notes are noticeable throughout the smoke — though *“not anywhere near Aromatic levels.”*

This makes me wonder:
Does this blend actually contain added flavoring (like honey or orange essence), or is it still considered a straight Virginia with only a light natural casing?**
And more generally, in your view, when a blend has a *slight* topping or flavoring (like honey or citrus), would you still classify it as a “Virginia,” or would you consider it “Aromatic” — even if the flavoring is very subtle?**

I’d love to hear how you all interpret this distinction.
Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts!

 

[Peter Turbo]

Its a straight VA (as in theres no other leaf besides VA) with a light topping yeah. Its very good.
The only time I call something an aromatic is if the blend is created for the room note. This is not that.

 

[lukasstrifeson]

Hi everyone,

I’ve got a question about **Sillem’s Mayor 1814 Flake (50g)**.

On Smokingpipes.com, this blend is listed as:

Components: Virginia
Family: Virginia
Cut: Flake

However, in the *Smokingpipes* tasting notes, the reviewer mentions that this blend is *“matured Virginia topped with honey and orange,”* and that the sweetness and citrusy top notes are noticeable throughout the smoke — though *“not anywhere near Aromatic levels.”*

This makes me wonder:
Does this blend actually contain added flavoring (like honey or orange essence), or is it still considered a straight Virginia with only a light natural casing?**
And more generally, in your view, when a blend has a *slight* topping or flavoring (like honey or citrus), would you still classify it as a “Virginia,” or would you consider it “Aromatic” — even if the flavoring is very subtle?**

I’d love to hear how you all interpret this distinction.
Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts!

Most blends are cased/topped with some kind of flavoring.

The idea of Aromatics is really more a continuum than a binary yes/no categorization.

 

[Hope]

Its a straight VA (as in theres no other leaf besides VA) with a light topping yeah. Its very good.
The only time I call something an aromatic is if the blend is created for the room note. This is not that.

Thank you for your reply, but I still have some doubts. Some flavorings have been added to enhance the orange note. If that’s the case, and the blend contains only Virginia tobacco, we would still classify it as a pure Virginia blend. So, does that mean the concept of “Aromatic” refers to the intensity rather than the presence of added flavoring?

 

[Hope]

Most blends are cased/topped with some kind of flavoring.

The idea of Aromatics is really more a continuum than a binary yes/no categorization.

Thank you for your reply, but I’m not quite sure what you mean by “continuum.”

 

[GardenStateoftheArtBriar]

If the leaf has been flavored, and the flavor is significantly present, so much so that it out centers the actual natural tobacco it’s an aromatic. If there’s minor flavor in there the pipe jargon doesn’t typically render aromatic - is a Lakeland an aromatic? Is St. Bruno aromatic ?

 

[ThermionicScott]

So, does that mean the concept of “Aromatic” refers to the intensity rather than the presence of added flavoring?

I'd say that's a good summary. To drive the point home, Samuel Gawith offers Grousemoor and Fire Dance Flake. Both contain only Virginia leaf, but are so strongly flavored that SG themselves call the blends "aromatic."

 

[khiddy]

I'd say that's a good summary. To drive the point home, Samuel Gawith offers Grousemoor and Fire Dance Flake. Both contain only Virginia leaf, but are so strongly flavored that SG themselves call the blends "aromatic."

And Grousemoor can additionally be described as "delicious."

 

[ThermionicScott]

And Grousemoor can additionally be described as "delicious."

Indeed! I’m curious to try the plug version next time it’s available.

 

[anotherbob]

all these terms are marketing. They're telling us what the maker thinks we're looking for in that blend. They don't have to list the type of leafs used and sometimes they don't. It's like listing the genre of a record or band. There isn't any regulation on these things. The thing that's nice is if you put all burly and latakia in a blend and called it a va it would most likely kill it's sales momentum. So it's in their interest to be generally honest and sorta of consistent across the whole market.

 

[Hope]

Thank you for your reply — it has clarified many of my questions.
Thank you.

 

[Lumbridge]

I think there's a bit of confusion here.

Casing is different from topping. Nearly all tobacco blends are cased (with sugar), but this is not done to add flavoring. Toppings are added flavoring. There are many non-aromatic blends with no toppings which are sugar cased.

There seems to be no agreed upon standard definition for "aromatic" as related to pipe tobacco.
Some smokers do not consider a tobacco to be an "aromatic" unless the topping/flavoring is present and significant enough to be the focal point of the flavor, or at least a big component of it.
Others (like myself) consider a tobacco with added flavorings of any kind or amount to be an aromatic.

A blend can be a straight Virginia AND have an added topping. Straight VAs often do, but not always, have a very subtle top note applied. It sounds like you are looking for a straight VA with zero added flavoring - a true non-aromatic - correct? Keep in mind that these are still likely to be lightly sugar cased.

 

[HeadMisfit]

I think there's a bit of confusion here.

Casing is different from topping. Nearly all tobacco blends are cased (with sugar), but this is not done to add flavoring. Toppings are added flavoring. There are many non-aromatic blends with no toppings which are sugar cased.

There seems to be no agreed upon standard definition for "aromatic" as related to pipe tobacco.
Some smokers do not consider a tobacco to be an "aromatic" unless the topping/flavoring is present and significant enough to be the focal point of the flavor, or at least a big component of it.
Others (like myself) consider a tobacco with added flavorings of any kind or amount to be an aromatic.

A blend can be a straight Virginia AND have an added topping. Straight VAs often do, but not always, have a very subtle top note applied. It sounds like you are looking for a straight VA with zero added flavoring - a true non-aromatic - correct? Keep in mind that these are still likely to be lightly sugar cased.

Almost all tobacco is cased as a means to control each blends acid levels when smoked. Cocoa and molasses sometimes licorice on burley. Normally something citrus on Virginia's.


Mac baren helped pioneer the case into topping with original choice in the 60s. Since then many people mistake anything in way of acid control, flavor, humectanct to be flavoring.

Topping is the actual deliberate flavoring say with a vanilla flavor. It's easy for companies to use the same liquid for both case and topping.

 

[Lumbridge]

Almost all tobacco is cased as a means to control each blends acid levels when smoked. Cocoa and molasses sometimes licorice on burley. Normally something citrus on Virginia's.


Mac baren helped pioneer the case into topping with original choice in the 60s. Since then many people mistake anything in way of acid control, flavor, humectanct to be flavoring.

Topping is the actual deliberate flavoring say with a vanilla flavor. It's easy for companies to use the same liquid for both case and topping.

It's a debate over definitions, and there is no consensus on what constitutes an aromatic or non-aromatic.

Sugar casing being fairly neutral, it is frequently used on "non-aromatics" for the improvements it makes to the smoking characteristics.
Any added flavor beyond that, in my humblest of opinions, would make the blend an aromatic, regardless of how subtly it is applied. Yes, I recognize that it's entirely arbitrary.

 

[HeadMisfit]

It's a debate over definitions, and there is no consensus on what constitutes an aromatic or non-aromatic.

Sugar casing being fairly neutral, it is frequently used on "non-aromatics" for the improvements it makes to the smoking characteristics.
Any added flavor beyond that, in my humblest of opinions, would make the blend an aromatic, regardless of how subtly or it is applied. Yes, I recognize that it's entirely arbitrary.

Then you have the blend called sugar barrel and the nod from hearth and home called sugar cask.

Both blends have the irony of being burley blends that were given a topping of actual sugar.

Sugar barrel if found can have a sugar crust on the tobacco

 

[Lumbridge]

Then you have the blend called sugar barrel and the nod from hearth and home called sugar cask.

Both blends have the irony of being burley blends that were given a topping of actual sugar.

Sugar barrel if found can have a sugar crust on the tobacco

Then you have a blend that has had enough sugar added that it becomes perceptibly sweet. Whether or not that constitutes an aromatic or not is up to the individual smoker.

I guess some people don't care, and it's really not all that important. I just like to dedicate some of my pipes to what I consider to be "non-aromatics" because I don't want the taste of the pipes to be influenced by toppings. IMO, light sugar casing, imperceptible in the taste does not qualify as an aromatic topping, but a citrus note, like that on Sillem's Mayor, does. Just how I like to divide things up for my own purposes.

 

[HeadMisfit]

Then you have a blend that has had enough sugar added that it becomes perceptibly sweet. Whether or not that constitutes an aromatic or not is up to the individual smoker.

I guess some people don't care, and it's really not all that important. I just like to dedicate some of my pipes to what I consider to be "non-aromatics" because I don't want the taste of the pipes to be influenced by toppings. IMO, light sugar casing, imperceptible in the taste does not qualify as an aromatic topping, but a citrus note, like that on Sillem's Mayor, does. Just how I like to divide things up for my own purposes.

Remember, Ennerdale is not considered an aromatic

 

[Lumbridge]

Remember, Ennerdale is not considered an aromatic

To me it is, regardless of whether GH call it one.

 

[HeadMisfit]

To me it is, regardless of whether GH call it one.

At least it has some flavor...

 

[Brendan]

Says so right on the tin.