McClelland

[cosmicfolklore]

Peterson was making the blends for Dunhill before Dunhill got out of the business.

Actually, STG was making the Dunhill and Peterson blends. The Dunhill corporation merely wanted it's name off of the labels, so all that happened was a different label was used with Peterson's name instead. STG just continued doing what it was doing.

 

[pantsBoots]

Understood. I'll stop now.

Remember - the same voices spout the same opinions weekly here. This sucks and that sucks and that over there was great and will never happen again. And it's all treated as fact by these folks on account of their age, I guess. No accounting for taste.

People go around and around here about the labels being the same. To hell with the labels. The posit that McClelland will never be imitated successfully went out the window with the first Cringle Flake and I've read somewhere (here) that Ken Byron is rounding the corner on something comparable.

Fact is, everyone realizes there is a lack of quality fermented red Virginias and I can almost guarantee that we will see some options over the next 3-5 years.

 

[tzinc]

You're right, not everyone agrees. Very few in fact. The latest Dunhill to Peterson was no change at all, Peterson was making the blends for Dunhill before Dunhill got out of the business. As for those other blends, what you have today is hardly the same as the originals.

Someone in this thread just said a passed on blend was better with the new company. So it can be better. Plus I tell you what approximation is fine by me. If I can't have Balkan Sobranie I'd rather have Black House, White Night etc then nothing. If I can't get the original Bengal Slices or Presbyterian I'm okay with the approximations. I realize it won't probably be the same but similar is good enough for me as long as it's a good smoke.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Fact is, everyone realizes there is a lack of quality fermented red Virginias and I can almost guarantee that we will see some options over the next 3-5 years.

I would suggest if someone wants to try quality fermented Virginias, check out what Rattrays is doing. It's not a McClellands copy, but it is very good and creative fermentations. Hell, I hope people keep experimenting and developing different types of ferments in tobaccos. I am just not crazy about people trying to recreate things.

I realize it won't probably be the same but similar is good enough for me.

This is where you lose me. This is why I think that pipesmokers come across as a gullible niche market. Slap an old label on something, and guys line up. It's lazy marketing that seems to work for us. I get where you are coming from. It's valid. But, I just don't share your outlook.

I'd rather tobacconists keep looking ahead to new and different, explore their creativity, and give us new and unexplored flavors. I guess I am just a "look ahead" sort of chap, while some are "rearview mirror" sorts. It's all good.

 

[tzinc]

It is not either or. I am fine with new blends being developed I am one of those that tries out new blends all the time I don't stick to a few blends.

At the same time it is not just slapping a label on something. There are people who have tasted the originals and then developed the copies based on that. So it's not just a label but active and tested copying. Likewise, there are also smokers who tasted the originals and so they can tell how close a blend is to the original label has very little to do with it. For example, Balkan Sobranie is said not to be that similar to the original but carries the label meanwhile blends like White Knight which don't carry the label come closer to the original taste.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Balkan Sobranie is said not to be that similar to the original but carries the label meanwhile blends like White Knight which don't carry the label come closer to the original taste.

I was in on the tasting and testing of this one when Russ was very active on here, and he never said that WhiteKnight was a recreation of Balkan Sobranie. After it was released, "some" said that it was better than the re-released versions of BS. I don't believe anyone has said that it was a recreation. Definately, Russ never told us involved with tasting that it was an attempt at recreating the old blend. He was just doing his best to develop the best Balkan blend he could.

Some blends like the new Three Nuns was said to be close, but by the time it went to mass production it had become something entirely different than what the tobacconist had actually developed. This happens a lot, especially with some of the huge tobaccos factories. My speculation based on what I've heard is that making a small batch recipe, and then translating that into 1000's of pounds, using what the company happens to have on hand, can sometimes mess up a recipe. YMMV on that.

 

[pantsBoots]

I would suggest if someone wants to try quality fermented Virginias, check out what Rattrays is doing. It's not a McClellands copy, but it is very good and creative fermentations. Hell, I hope people keep experimenting and developing different types of ferments in tobaccos. I am just not crazy about people trying to recreate things.

This is where you lose me. This is why I think that pipesmokers come across as a gullible niche market. Slap an old label on something, and guys line up. It's lazy marketing that seems to work for us. I get where you are coming from. It's valid. But, I just don't share your outlook.

I'd rather tobacconists keep looking ahead to new and different, explore their creativity, and give us new and unexplored flavors. I guess I am just a "look ahead" sort of chap, while some are "rearview mirror" sorts. It's all good.

Rattray's is a personal favorite - possibly my top manufacturer based on weight in my cellar. I do wish they'd accompany the HOTW/OG/BC trinity with a straight Virginia, but then I wouldn't buy as much of the 3 mentioned above.

I think what twists some peoples' panties here re: this conversation (which seems to occur monthly) is the dinosaurs think everyone wants old McClelland with the old labels and for everything to be like it was in the early 2000s. Maybe some want that, but what I usually read is people asking about the reproducibility of the techniques, which the dinos always read as "exact copy of McClelland." There's a key distinction in which question is being asked that gets glanced over every time this comes up.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

which the dinos always read as "exact copy of McClelland."

What I and other "dinosaurs" ha ha, have posted is straight from Mike and Mary. And, if someone asked me about something similar to McClellands, I have no answer. But, if someone wants to try what I estimate to be an acetic bacterial ferment on a tobacco, I would point them towards Rattrays. If someone wants vinegar sprayed on their tobacco, I just beat my head on my desk, ha ha ha.

McClelland made more than just red Virginias, and I am not sure why it is their reds that are now so discussed. Red Cake was a blend with reds, and they did have a few straight reds, but really it was their interpretation of Englishes and Orientals that drove the crowds wild.

I am one, as you know, with lots of opinions and speculations, but when these types of questions come up, I stick to the McNeil's script. Doing otherwise, has people smacking opinions and speculations about on the head. If I posited a speculation, and don't hit me on the head yet... I would say that other more established tobacco manufacturers (and doing a McClelland's style would involve manufacturers and not just a blender) like Sutliff and such, have very distinct procedures that they stick to when processing their products before it gets to the blending stage. I posit that what McClellands was doing (from what I have gleaned from hearing interviews from Mike and Mary and Greg Pease, and talking to Mike at Pipe Shows) that doing what McClellands was doing in their manufacturing stages involves more hand labor on surfaces that mattered to the process... in a way that another company might not find economically viable. That is my educated guess, which could be dead on, or not. Mike has been heard to say that the tobacco business wasn't making him rich, so one might guess that another company might not want to take on such an expensive endeavor.

^That is my best answer I would give to someone, in not such a public way, in a realm where some people take offence at guesses.

 

[Inspired Idler]

As someone who has a “talent” and has made a decent living off of the IP produced with that talent, I’m dumbfounded by such a narrow, selfish, uninformed and dangerous opinion. My work, the work of the McNeils, and the work of any other creative person on this planet, is the manifestation of their labor. They are entitled to do with it as they damned well see fit.

They sure are! I'm just glad lots of other people have the opposite opinion. Take the internet for example, over 90% runs on Linux which was developed by talented and gifted people who selflessly contribute to free, open source software. They could develop the features they need and keep it to themselves, but they don't, and we all benefit.

 

[fireground_piper]

Nothing is stopping another blender from doing their own R&D and creating a blend they want. I also imagine there’s quite a few blenders who do know what mcclelland was generally doing and they just don’t do it themselves. There’s plenty of stories all across the internet of the blenders talking, trading tobaccos amongst each other, etc.

To think that no one has an understanding of what they did seems like a silly assumption. There’s likely reasons why it’s not replicated, kind of like you don’t see perique or Latakia mass copied. The time requirement is significant alone and it’s not for a lack of information. Heck you can take tours of the perique facility.

 

[hoosierpipeguy]

They sure are! I'm just glad lots of other people have the opposite opinion. Take the internet for example, over 90% runs on Linux which was developed by talented and gifted people who selflessly contribute to free, open source software. They could develop the features they need and keep it to themselves, but they don't, and we all benefit.

Isn't the guy who created/founded Linux worth $150 million now? Sounds pretty selfless to me. Perhaps you should check your facts before posting bullshit to attempt to support your story.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

kind of like you don’t see perique or Latakia mass copied.

Actually, in the tobacco homegrowing hobby, there are lots of people making perique and latakia... just not on a commercial scale. However, perique is made by several different farmers, as Russ explored in his RO perique series several years ago. It has merely been Mark (love the guy but he is a bit of a pitch man) that has been harking that it can only be made at his farm, but other farmers are making it commercially.

Just like in the homegrown world, there are hobbyist making things close to what McClelland's was doing. I have had several years crops turn an acetic bacterial fermentation, and came out with a sorta McClellandy taste. But, when I post this, it pisses people off. I am not allowed to sell or distribute homegrown, so... I keep my trap shut and just let assholes tell me I don't know what I am talking about... till we can meet up and smoke a bowl. But, honestly, I am not in a hurry to meet up and share my hobby with assholes... ha ha.

 

[karam]

It was about time this thread popped up again, will read at home with a beer

 

[Inspired Idler]

Isn't the guy who created/founded Linux worth $150 million now? Sounds pretty selfless to me. Perhaps you should check your facts before posting bullshit to attempt to support your story.

I'd suggest you do the same. Read up on GPL. Yes, there are now paid versions of linux, but there are many more open source versions that rely heavily on volunteers for support. Simple fact is, without linux and contributions from volunteers, the internet as you know it wouldn't exist.

Here's a good quote from the GPL wiki to support my "bullshit" story:

David A. Wheeler argues that the copyleft provided by the GPL was crucial to the success of Linux-based systems, giving the programmers who contributed to the kernel the assurance that their work would benefit the whole world and remain free, rather than being exploited by software companies that would not have to give anything back to the community.

For your reading pleasure: History of free and open-source software - Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_free_and_open-source_software

 

[sablebrush52]

Simple fact is, without linux and contributions from volunteers, the internet as you know it wouldn't exist.

Best argument against open sourcing there is.

 

[fireground_piper]

Actually, in the tobacco homegrowing hobby, there are lots of people making perique and latakia... just not on a commercial scale. However, perique is made by several different farmers, as Russ explored in his RO perique series several years ago. It has merely been Mark (love the guy but he is a bit of a pitch man) that has been harking that it can only be made at his farm, but other farmers are making it commercially.

Just like in the homegrown world, there are hobbyist making things close to what McClelland's was doing. I have had several years crops turn an acetic bacterial fermentation, and came out with a sorta McClellandy taste. But, when I post this, it pisses people off. I am not allowed to sell or distribute homegrown, so... I keep my trap shut and just let assholes tell me I don't know what I am talking about... till we can meet up and smoke a bowl. But, honestly, I am not in a hurry to meet up and share my hobby with assholes... ha ha.

I’m not saying there isn’t. My point was simple the information is likely known by a number of people in the industry who at least have the knowledge to accomplish similar lines of things.

Other people can make perique, but no one seems to want to take up the business of actually doing it commercially at scale either as a supplier to other or even their own blending house. There’s surely reasons for that and it’s not a lack of knowledge.

 

[pantsBoots]

Just like in the homegrown world, there are hobbyist making things close to what McClelland's was doing. I have had several years crops turn an acetic bacterial fermentation, and came out with a sorta McClellandy taste. But, when I post this, it pisses people off. I am not allowed to sell or distribute homegrown, so... I keep my trap shut and just let assholes tell me I don't know what I am talking about... till we can meet up and smoke a bowl. But, honestly, I am not in a hurry to meet up and share my hobby with assholes... ha ha.

You're obviously making that up because the McClelland went out of business. There won't be anymore ever. The show's over. Move on. What you describe is impossible.

I'm actually pretty excited to get into growing and processing tobacco. Been lurking a few grow forums and am amazed at the amount of people doing it as a hobby and their journals describing successes, failures, techniques, etc. A minute to learn and a lifetime to master.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

You want open source tobaccos, go to one of the many homegrown tobacco forums. You can grow and make whatever you want. But, this doesn't mean that anyone has to divulge recipes or commercial manufacturing trade secrets, nor do other companies have to make the things you want them to. But, you are welcome (and I would encourage you to) grow and make whatever your heart desires.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

, but no one seems to want to take up the business of actually doing it commercially at scale

As I mentioned, there are many other commercial manufacturers of perique besides LaPoche. Russ explored some of them in his RO series. Wait, didn't I just type this out a minute ago, ha ha. Not all blends that say perique came from La Poche.

But, yes... I would not want to get involved with growing or processing tobaccos at all, and I have looked at the prospect of buying a Pipe shop... it's just not going to make a return on an investment that I would be interested in, and knowing the future of pipes and tobacco... you'd have to be crazy. I have met and spoken with quite a few people in the tobacco trade, farming and processing... my neighbor in NC for one, lives in a shack. Most are completely impoverished. Even just family farms that move commercial products... it's impossible to really make a living at it. Every farmer in my district, when we meet for Co Operatives... we all have other means of making money.

And, if one stayed pipe tobacco specific... you'd almost be farming at a loss right from the get go.

We are lucky to be getting the blends that we do AT SUCH DAMN CHEAP PRICES. This is why it makes me sick when people gripe and complain at a $2 increase on tin prices. People like that shouldn't be allowed anyways.

 

[paulfg]

As someone who has a “talent” and has made a decent living off of the IP produced with that talent, I’m dumbfounded by such a narrow, selfish, uninformed and dangerous opinion. My work, the work of the McNeils, and the work of any other creative person on this planet, is the manifestation of their labor. They are entitled to do with it as they damned well see fit.

NO
just let someone else do all the work and expect to be given the results
whilst you do F'all

If you have worked/developed something you can do what you wish with it