Smoking a pipe comes with a steep learning curve. We often field questions from new, or relatively new, pipe smokers about technique - packing, lighting, cadence, and so on. Figuring out these various factors, and learning how to put them together in a manner conducive to a good smoking experience, takes plenty of trial and error. At some point, those factors come together well enough that the smoker is now a competent and functional pipe smoker. At that point in time, I think a lot of us more or less cease conscious effort at further refining our technique once we reach the point of competency. After all, if you can keep the pipe burning well enough to have an enjoyable smoke, what else is there to improve? I have come to believe that such a view is very misguided, and that it is a severe mistake to cease such effort.
Experience has led me to believe that smoking technique is the primary determining factor in whether the pipe smoker can taste nuanced details in a blend, much like the various blends are described by those smokers with refined palates such as @jiminks , or whether the smoker just gets a much more generalized experience of a blend's flavor. Not to say that great technique will turn us all into sommeliers, but it will certainly enhance any smoker's experience and ability to distinguish the nuances in a blend. In my case, when I first took up the pipe about seven years ago, if I were asked to describe a Virginia blend, I would just say that it basically tasted like a cigarette, but better. At that time, I was packing my pipes too tight, puffing them too hard, lighting them too vigorously, and smoking them too hot. I'm sure if I smoked a bowl of a fine Virginia in such a manner today, it would taste much the same - a little harsh, plain, and maybe a hint of some type of grass or hay. Of course this is an extreme example of how technique affects the quality of smoke, but experience tells me that the principle can be extended past the point of mere competency; excellent technique, namely figuring out how to keep the pipe consistently burning at the lowest possible temperature and figuring out the ideal moisture level for any given blend (both as to burning characteristics and flavor) will deliver a much better smoking experience than mere competent technique.
Switching gears for a minute, JRR Tolkien, in his Middle Earth works, wrote that Hobbits spoke of pipe smoking as "an art." I recall reading some of those passages at some point in time before taking up with pipe, and I thought Tolkien just meant blowing smoke rings and the like. However, knowing that Tolkien was well-known regular pipe smoker, based on my experience with the pipe, I can only imagine now that when he called pipe smoking "an art", he was actually referring to the ability to smoke the pipe in such a manner so as to get out of a tobacco all that it has to offer. It takes some effort to get maybe 60 or 70 percent of the way there, at which time the smoker is a competent pipe smoker, but the real magic is in the latter part of that learning curve.
That all being said, I have renewed my efforts at further improving my technique after stumbling upon numerous experiences of a great smoke, and I think it would make sense for anyone else who might believe they are not getting everything out of the pipe that it has to offer to make efforts towards this end as well, so that we might all become great pipe-smoking artists like Tolkien's Hobbits.
Experience has led me to believe that smoking technique is the primary determining factor in whether the pipe smoker can taste nuanced details in a blend, much like the various blends are described by those smokers with refined palates such as @jiminks , or whether the smoker just gets a much more generalized experience of a blend's flavor. Not to say that great technique will turn us all into sommeliers, but it will certainly enhance any smoker's experience and ability to distinguish the nuances in a blend. In my case, when I first took up the pipe about seven years ago, if I were asked to describe a Virginia blend, I would just say that it basically tasted like a cigarette, but better. At that time, I was packing my pipes too tight, puffing them too hard, lighting them too vigorously, and smoking them too hot. I'm sure if I smoked a bowl of a fine Virginia in such a manner today, it would taste much the same - a little harsh, plain, and maybe a hint of some type of grass or hay. Of course this is an extreme example of how technique affects the quality of smoke, but experience tells me that the principle can be extended past the point of mere competency; excellent technique, namely figuring out how to keep the pipe consistently burning at the lowest possible temperature and figuring out the ideal moisture level for any given blend (both as to burning characteristics and flavor) will deliver a much better smoking experience than mere competent technique.
Switching gears for a minute, JRR Tolkien, in his Middle Earth works, wrote that Hobbits spoke of pipe smoking as "an art." I recall reading some of those passages at some point in time before taking up with pipe, and I thought Tolkien just meant blowing smoke rings and the like. However, knowing that Tolkien was well-known regular pipe smoker, based on my experience with the pipe, I can only imagine now that when he called pipe smoking "an art", he was actually referring to the ability to smoke the pipe in such a manner so as to get out of a tobacco all that it has to offer. It takes some effort to get maybe 60 or 70 percent of the way there, at which time the smoker is a competent pipe smoker, but the real magic is in the latter part of that learning curve.
That all being said, I have renewed my efforts at further improving my technique after stumbling upon numerous experiences of a great smoke, and I think it would make sense for anyone else who might believe they are not getting everything out of the pipe that it has to offer to make efforts towards this end as well, so that we might all become great pipe-smoking artists like Tolkien's Hobbits.
