Late last night, I cracked open a two year old tin of St. Bruno Flake made by Mac Baren.
It is my first time trying the blend and I have to say that I was expecting something very different. This is one case where many of the reviews have been extremely misleading. I think that is the trouble with legendary brands that have gone through so many incarnations - a lot of people are discussing a completely different beast...
The tobacco and its essence were much lighter than I imagined. Pleasant in all respects, but fairly mild in taste and strength. I know this isn't a new tin but I did not expect the flavouring to be so subdued. All things considered it was relatively complex and old fashioned in character so that much was accurate.
The dark spicy elements so many people referenced, however, seem to be less than advertised and I think the Kentucky component is not as prominent as people have stated. Nothing about St. Bruno is in your face - it is a well integrated Virginia burley blend according to my tastes. It may include Kentucky but it is not defined by Kentucky.
I would also firmly disagree with descriptions calling this tobacco soapy - there may be a very light floral element in the topping but I find it completely integrated in the smoke with the other flavours and not akin to outright floral soapiness found in other blends with a British heritage. I have tasted more soap in latakia blends, even.
As I had enjoyed a bottle of red wine and some Full Virginia Flake beforehand, I am not prepared to give St. Bruno a proper review as my tasting abilities might have been thrown off by these other influences but I just wanted to chime in with some of my first impressions.
Many of you will know that St. Bruno uses vinegar as a preservative. I find it makes for a pleasant flavouring agent as well because the light acidity makes for a more interesting smoke. The vinegar is actually the first thing I smell and taste but it is not overpowering; if anything, it might be even a little refreshing and responsible for making old Bruno a little more unique and enjoyable than it would otherwise be.
By the way, my tin has just begun to rust slightly where it meets the lid but I suspect one could go 4-5 years before rust poses any danger to the tobacco or the tin's integrity.
Beyond the risk of rusting, the worst part about St. Bruno Flake is its price. I find it agreeable on all fronts but the premium paid for this tobacco is unwarranted. I know that licenses must be paid and I am very glad that it was revived for the US market but there are many tobaccos that I prefer for 20-30% less in price.
Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it but this quality flake is unfortunately not worth the coin for me. I would gladly buy it on sale for a special occasion or on the fly while traveling but it is not something I would cellar very deeply...
With that said, I may end up eating crow in the next few weeks because it seems like a blend that one must learn to appreciate over time. It is not a showstopper, but probably more of an old standby. I would certainly buy it more regularly if it was affordable and widely available like in its heyday back in the UK...
Has anyone else found reviewers to be all over the place with this one?
It is my first time trying the blend and I have to say that I was expecting something very different. This is one case where many of the reviews have been extremely misleading. I think that is the trouble with legendary brands that have gone through so many incarnations - a lot of people are discussing a completely different beast...
The tobacco and its essence were much lighter than I imagined. Pleasant in all respects, but fairly mild in taste and strength. I know this isn't a new tin but I did not expect the flavouring to be so subdued. All things considered it was relatively complex and old fashioned in character so that much was accurate.
The dark spicy elements so many people referenced, however, seem to be less than advertised and I think the Kentucky component is not as prominent as people have stated. Nothing about St. Bruno is in your face - it is a well integrated Virginia burley blend according to my tastes. It may include Kentucky but it is not defined by Kentucky.
I would also firmly disagree with descriptions calling this tobacco soapy - there may be a very light floral element in the topping but I find it completely integrated in the smoke with the other flavours and not akin to outright floral soapiness found in other blends with a British heritage. I have tasted more soap in latakia blends, even.
As I had enjoyed a bottle of red wine and some Full Virginia Flake beforehand, I am not prepared to give St. Bruno a proper review as my tasting abilities might have been thrown off by these other influences but I just wanted to chime in with some of my first impressions.
Many of you will know that St. Bruno uses vinegar as a preservative. I find it makes for a pleasant flavouring agent as well because the light acidity makes for a more interesting smoke. The vinegar is actually the first thing I smell and taste but it is not overpowering; if anything, it might be even a little refreshing and responsible for making old Bruno a little more unique and enjoyable than it would otherwise be.
By the way, my tin has just begun to rust slightly where it meets the lid but I suspect one could go 4-5 years before rust poses any danger to the tobacco or the tin's integrity.
Beyond the risk of rusting, the worst part about St. Bruno Flake is its price. I find it agreeable on all fronts but the premium paid for this tobacco is unwarranted. I know that licenses must be paid and I am very glad that it was revived for the US market but there are many tobaccos that I prefer for 20-30% less in price.
Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it but this quality flake is unfortunately not worth the coin for me. I would gladly buy it on sale for a special occasion or on the fly while traveling but it is not something I would cellar very deeply...
With that said, I may end up eating crow in the next few weeks because it seems like a blend that one must learn to appreciate over time. It is not a showstopper, but probably more of an old standby. I would certainly buy it more regularly if it was affordable and widely available like in its heyday back in the UK...
Has anyone else found reviewers to be all over the place with this one?
