Is Royal Yacht a True Aromatic?.....Should I Worry?

[kane]

This is a naive question from a neophyte piper. Do you consider Dunhill's Royal Yacht to be a true aromatic blend?

It is listed as such on the P&C site.

I have never smoked aromatic tobacco, and I have no interest in trying any aromatics. I guess I am just turned off by the idea of having added flavorings in my baccy, and I am very happy with the English blends I smoke.

In my short pipe smoker's life I have enjoyed a few Dunhill blends---EMP, LM, and MM965, although of late I have reached for Vintage Syrian and Sasieni over EMP---and I am adding Nightcap and Durbar to my next order. But I have read a lot of praise for the Royal Yacht, and when I read what you folks are saying my impression is that you all are talking about an English style blend rather than an aromatic. But when I see P&C listing it as an aromatic I say no. So, what's the deal with this.......can an English blend be an aromatic without having the bad things I have read about aromatics, i.e., candied aroma but crap flavor and ghosting the pipe? I do not dedicate pipes to specific blends as I don't have enough pipes to do that and I am trying a lot of different blends, but all of my blends fall into the English/Balkan/Latakia categories, although I am keen to explore more Virginia based blends.

So, is it safe to think of Royal Yacht as an English type blend, or would I be puting my pipes into the aromatic waters?

 

[warren]

I would say so, what with the plum topping. It is marketed as an aromatic.

 

[pitchfork]

Lots of tobaccos that aren't "aromatics" have added flavorings. Royal Yacht is one of those. However, it's not flavored with chemicals the way most conventional aromatics are.

 

[nachman]

Royal Yacht is not what most people would consider an aromatic, and nor is it what Americans would consider an English blend, neither is it a Lakeland. It is composed of African Virginias, which are stronger than American Virginias. There is no Latakia, the presence of which is what many refer to as an English blend. There is a very slight plum note added, but unless you have a sensitive palate you wouldn't know it. It will not ghost your pipes nor does it have any chemicals added because it has been made by a formula compliant with the old purity laws for more years than I have been alive, and I am eighty. It has a higher nicotine content than any of the tobaccos you listed in your post, but the flavour is not as strong as some. (My favourite tobacco, I have been smoking it since Sir Alfred was in charge of Dunhill.)

 

[pipefish]

I've never tried the stuff yet, but I have a tin that's been aging for about a year now. Obviously I purchased it before reading Condorlover's assessment of it on another thread (one of the funniest descriptions of a tobacco ever):

Royal Yuck! I would sooner have my ball sacked super glued to the floor while being buggered by a gnome wearing a barbed wire condom that smoke the by product of the devils crotch fluff!

But Kane, YMMV with this blend…. ::

 

[rcstan]

RY is fairly stout. I consider it a VA blend. There's nothing aromatic about it. Compared to let's say a flat tasting all Burley "I just ripped a leaf off the stalk, dried it, chopped it and put it in the pipe" type-blend, then yes some might say it has a noticeable topping.

The "Royal Yuck" part comes into play if it's either too moist or too dry, and packed too tight. I have experienced this a few times, and therefore chalk this blend in the "finicky" category.
But it is in no way a cousin of Borkum Riff, Captain Black, or the Cherry Vanilla stuff they sell out of big jars at any B&M....

 

[michiganlover]

There really is no agreed upon definition as to what is and is not an aromatic. If you avoid any tobacco with flavoring added, I feel you will lock yourself out of some truly great blends.
To me an aromatic is a tobacco in which the added flavoring almost totally masks any tobacco flavor. So things like Carter Hall, Prince Albert, and Sir Walter Raleigh are not aros. While their may be flavoring added it is mild, and the dominant flavor is still that of tobacco.
I've smoked Royal Yacht, mostly I tasted Virginia. I would never define it as an aro.

 

[pitchfork]

Most of the great blends had/have flavorings added. Capstan has tonquin bean. The old Balkan Sobranie had an elaborate "sauce" that gave it its characteristic flavor. so did Three Nuns. Peterson Irish Flake has anise (and other flavors, too, probably).

 

[easterntraveler]

Royal Yacht an Aromatic? Absolutely not. Oh and it is the best tobacco you can buy. Yep I said it. Out of 30 somthing blends in my Cellar this is my favorite.

 

[phil67]

I strongly dislike aromatics but will on rare occasion smoke a bowl of Bagpiper's Dream as it's about the only one I can tolerate and get a modicum of satisfaction from. As for RY I don't consider it to be an aromatic in the slightest and I find it an enjoyable tobacco in my rotation.

 

[jrtaster]

For a newbie, you appear to have formed some pretty firm opinions about those "horrible" aromatics, of which I am sure there are plenty. Once outside the rarified environment of places like Pipes Magazine, i.e., the rest of the pipe-smoking world, sales of aromatic tobacco seem to indicate LOTS of smokers, however, don't fear aros and in fact embrace them as part of their regular rotation.

Let me suggest that blends like Perfection considered by some as cross-overs, is basically an English in its pronounced latakia presence, but with a delicate, subtle vanilla "topping." You might try it, or others like it, before forever closing your mind, and pipes, to the notion of aromatic tobaccos.

Just thrown out to present an alternate POV!

 

[warren]

Jeez, guys! If the manufacturer describes Royal Yacht as an aromatic and peddles it as such is it not an aromatic? Whom can we trust?
I guess we are again at that place where there is no hard definition. One where if a person states that they will not smoke an are, and they smoke Royal Yacht, the blend cannot be an aromatic. I am predominantly a smoker of the so-called "English" blends. With it's fruit casing, I have to consider the blend an "aro." If fruits or other sweet essences are added to a blend to achieve a flavor, to me such a blend is an aromatic.

 

[billypm]

We sure do seem to get fixated on labels, don't we? I think what most people mean when they call a blend an "aromatic" is a combo of Virginia, burley, and black cavendish, with a heaping helping of PG added to retain moisture and doused with flavorings. They usually burn hot, wet, and don't taste as good as they smell.
There are plenty of wonderful, dry burning, delicious tobaccos that have sweetening and/or flavoring added. I'm not sure what I call them but I reserve "aromatic" for the style listed above. Royal Yacht is not an "aromatic" to me.

 

[pipefish]

Jeez, guys! If the manufacturer describes Royal Yacht as an aromatic and peddles it as such is it not an aromatic? Whom can we trust?

 

[mso489]

I smoke mostly non-aromatics including English and burley blends and Virginias and Va/Pers. I smoke aromatics

for a change of pace, and try to find those that have tobacco forward flavor. However, anyone who regularly shops

and peruses tobacco sites and catalogs, and respects the data from the market, must see that aromatics dominate

the market. It may be a narrow majority -- or maybe not -- but it is the aromatic smokers who are floating the

pipe tobacco industry. So I could happily smoke a pipe without ever smoking an aromatic, but what is sustaining

the availability and variety of blends on the non-aromatic side are smokers who smoke mostly or entirely aromatics.

And most pipe smokers begin with aromatics, rightly nor not. Not counting the plum (or whatever it is) topping/flavoring

on Royal Yacht as making it aromatic may be prejudicial thinkiing; we don't want it to be an aro, so we don't admit it is.

 

[frank13]

If Royal Yacht is considered an aromatic, it is clearly the most mild aromatic I've ever smoked. Yes, there are some slight notes, but what mostly comes through is tobacco, loud and clear, and it packs a nicotine punch rivaled by very few other tobaccos. I smoke mostly latakia/oriental/virginian blends -- either Balkan or English, and I'm really not a fan of any aromatic. I personally would not classify RY as an aromatic, but your mileage may vary. I personally find it a very enjoyable smoke, and don't find much difference between RY and Nightcap.

 

[derfargin]

The Royal Yacht is a damn fine smoke. "Aromatic" or not.

 

[frank13]

+1

 

[phil67]

Jeez, guys! If the manufacturer describes Royal Yacht as an aromatic and peddles it as such is it not an aromatic?

Well, one case in point is Peterson's University Flake (which I LOVE) and it is not touted/advertised as an aromatic, but it has a Plum flavoring. Good strong baccy taste, bit of a kick at times (depending on your metabolism at the time you smoke it), but yet a hint of sweetness with a very pleasant room note. Lighting up a bowl this evening with some blended whiskey over a game of chess. Life can indeed be good at times. :wink:

 

[zekest]

Yes, worry.
You can't be "one of us" and a "real pipe smoker" if an aro touches your pipe.