Recent Tobacco Review Observation

Log in Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Not open for further replies.


Might Stick Around
Dec 7, 2012
I agree with the objection to the "I don't smoke xxx tobaccos, but..." reviews. But another objectionable habit is the lognwinded gaffer who starts off with "I sat down in my favourite leather armchair with my priceless Dunhill Rootbriar from 1955, wearing a smoking jacket I inherited from my grand-uncle Lord Quartermain, while my trophy wife and beloved pure-bred golden retriever hunkered on the polar-bear skin rug at my feet.....".
Too dang much information, non-germaine to boot.
I'm currently smoking a pipe.

It's got tobacco in it.

Good stuff.



Dec 12, 2012
Fortunately, we have Luxury Tobacco Reviews to counter the lunacy.
I know that this site shares ownership with, so I apologize, but to me it is more of an "also ran."
It is still very much in its infancy: Five reviews for a blend like Penzance. Zero reviews for many other popular blends. Not a single review for any Brebbia tobacco; only two reviews for the entire Wessex line.
And the quality of the reviews that are there doesn't seem any different from TR. Reviews like "This is CRAP!" for a blend that is universally hailed as a great stoved Virginia. And here's the entire -- and only -- review of Dunhill's London Mixture:
Being relatively new to the "gentle art of (pipe) smoking" and not being blessed with tastebuds that'll ever get me on Wine Spectator's editorial board, I have and still do gravitate to the finer things in life. Mind you the more time passes, the less I can afford but, for a few pennies more than a ten spot, I can rely on a fine and comfortable smoke.
Many are the blends I've tried and much has been written by, and for said blenders. Yet, London Mixture remains near the top of my list. I've no glimpse into the past to know the true 1928 blend, nor can I compare todays to DLM's Irish era. The Orlik version with all it's detractors (mostly in the form of some prominent blending houses) consistenly hits a mellow chord. There are certainly blends that are better suited for certain hours of the day and where I did, not long ago, start the day with it, I now find myself smitten with Early Morning Pipe. Orlik again!
What it all seems to boil down to with this novice is the dynamic of Virginia to Oriental to Perique to Latakia (Cyprian vs. Syrian) and the countless variations - blends - claims. I can tell you I prefer British Woods for instance far more than Westminster, but not necessarily why. I can tell you that HH Vintage has alot more character than Three oaks Syrian in many ways but Three oak won't leave my tongue feeling like it's had a date with a palm sander and the HHVS will. But I'm getting off the subject and DLM is the "subject" and just happens to be the "object" of this pipe smokers affection.
Despite all the words, the reviewer never bothers to say what London Mixture tastes like! While you'll run into that on TR, certainly, the sheer volume of reviews virtually guarantees that somebody is going to say something useful about a blend.
Just my .02.



Sep 23, 2011
I smoke, drink, and eat a wide variety of products and when I do write about them I stick with how they taste, (sweet, sour, bitter...) and the flavor I get, (caramel, figs, smoke...) and try to test them in many styles and ways before I write about them. A good tester/writer should be able to convey the product in an objective way and try not to throw in the subjective, "I don't ... but" point of view.
I am on several whisky forums and just hate when someone says, "I only drink single malts but here goes anyway about this Bourbon". Same goes with and especially tobacco. Don't tell me what YOU like, tell me what the tobacco was about, not your private individual tastes.
Let the tobacco write the review through your eyes. That way when someone else reads it, they can glean something they may like, like smokey figs, which YOU may not enjoy. In the summery you can then tell us you didn't like something because of the tastes you got from the tobacco, but at least tell us what you did taste and not generalize about a genera of tobacco.
Just my 2p. :puffy:



Part of the Furniture Now
Oct 11, 2012
I love the same Brussel Sprouts that make my better half want to throw up. Which one of us is right?
As long as you declare upfront where your usual preferences lie, you'd give enough context to the reader so he can judge your opinion for what it is: personal.
Yet, I have to agree on one thing: statements without context are worthless. "This is crap" has no information content whatsoever as a tobacco review. However, if that same person would have stated "I sincerely dislike this blend because the flue cured red virginia severely disagrees with my mouth chemistry and thus gives me hellish burns", others with a similar history of red-virginia intolerance may be sufficiently warned before trying the blend.



Jan 8, 2012
I find it useful to read some reviews of tobacco I know i like (or hate) and see if there's someone who I agree with, then check out their other reviews. It's a way to navigate the data.



Starting to Get Obsessed
Feb 11, 2012
I took a hint from a thread I once saw here. It was a recurrent "what-are-you-smoking" theme. Within the multiple pages of responses, were nearly no matches. Such wide variance of taste preferences supported my theory that reviews are (to me) perhaps good reading, other times entertaining for the intended or unintended humor. Seldom did they actually help in my search for new favorites. Every time I had relied on overwhelming huzzahs at TR on a famous blend, I found it either lackluster, or simply not for me. I resorted to now taking my chances on something new by the single tin after reading the label. The trouble with reviews are not in their well-intended generation. It is in the reader's level of expectation from them. What I did learn from this forum is that there is an extremely broad spectrum of opinions concerning both tobacco and pipes. Realistically, how could we expect to agree on anything?

Not open for further replies.