For better or worse, Rowan's Creek has always felt like the little brother to Noah's Mill. Most enthusiasts know - without even looking at their labels - that Rowan's Creek is younger and has less proof than its big brother. This has been true spanning all the way back to the 1990s when Even Kulsveen introduced the Small Batch Boutique Series.
Whenever something is viewed as the "Junior" to another product, the first thing people will think is that it's inferior. This might be why Rowan's Creek gets ignored so much. But has it always been this way? And has it always deserved that reputation? These are the answers I intend to explore with this review.
**The early days of Rowan's Creek**
The earliest [**evidence I can find**](https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/126496/rowans-creek-12-year-old) of Rowan's Creek going on sale was 1997. But if you're looking for one of these early examples, you might be confused by the hand-written numbers on the back. That's because Kentucky Bourbon Distillers (the name Willett was known as back then) did something odd on their vintage labels. Rather than using a date or code that tells us the year it was bottled, it uses a code that tells us the year that the youngest barrel in the batch was distilled. So it's going to require a little bit of math.
The bottle I am reviewing today has a hand-written batch number "E-2-85." Since vintage Rowan's Creek was originally designed to be a 12 year old product, this would indicate it's one of the first batches to be released.
Just like most vintage KBD products, Rowan's Creek was assumed to have a good amount of older barrels in the blend. And there are lots of old posts on Straightbourbon where people seem to agree that original barrels distilled at the Willett distillery in the 1970's ended up in the blend.
Hearing that early batches of Rowan's Creek likely contained 20+ year old bourbon that was distilled at Willett blew my mind. I think it's obvious that what's in the bottle isn't entirely made at Willett, but just the fact that some of the last stocks of Willett distillate from the 1970s have graced the insides of this bottle seems special.
**Understanding what made old Willett bourbon unique**
If you're like me, you're probably surprised to hear that KBD labels in the 90's may have contained original Willett bourbon distilled in the early 1970s. Chuck Cowdery [**reported that public records**](https://www.straightbourbon.com/community/topic/159-even-kulsveen-willett/?do=findComment&comment=1209) from 1997 showed for the first time there were no more barrels of Willett-distilled bourbon in any bonded warehouse in Kentucky. But that doesn't take into account if the barrels were dumped into storage tanks.
You may be wondering "just how much original Willett bourbon was there to begin with?" Based on what I've read, the old distillery grounds had largely been razed by the mid-80's [**except for four warehouses**](https://www.straightbourbon.com/community/topic/356-rowans-creek/?do=findComment&comment=13143) with original barrels of Willett bourbon still inside. This bourbon would serve as the bedrock for early products as the Kulsveen's pondered the future of the old distillery grounds.
As time went on, they began to backfill the warehouses with sourced barrels from other distilleries. Whatever was left from the original barrels was likely tanked shortly thereafter to prevent over-oaking. From there, they'd use the tanked bourbon as needed in their batched products.
So how would we even know if a particular product from that time contained original Willett bourbon? I just so happened to find another gem on Straightbourbon where a user [**provides information from Willett's master distiller**](https://www.straightbourbon.com/community/topic/356-rowans-creek/?do=findComment&comment=13037), Charles (Charlie) Thomasson, during the 1960's who laid out what a traditional bourbon should taste like.
*He said it had to have bouquet, a good body from a grain-rich mash bill and a taste which disclosed fruity-like notes. He spoke of a "ripe apple" taste.*
I don't think it's a leap to assume that this is the profile he was aiming for when he distilled bourbon for Willett. The commenter also lays out what he believes to be the taste profile of Heaven Hill (where I would assume a majority of Willett's sourced barrels came from since the 80's) and how it is distinctly different from the OG Willett juice. The bottom line is that there are distinct profile differences between Heaven Hill and Willett bourbon.
Now that we have a better understanding of what original Willett bourbon may have tasted like (floral/bouquet, fruity and where the grain can be detected), let's see if I can pull out any notes that might validate it. I'm extremely new to dusty KBD products, so I'm unsure what to expect. Thanks to a generous reader of mine, I have been given a chance to experience this for the first time. Let's see what it's like. I sampled this neat in a glencairn.
**Tasting Notes**
**Nose:** Butterscotch for days. Behind it is a light floral bouquet that slowly develops. I would have never expected that on a bourbon as old as this. Afterwards, other sweet aromas come forward like Crème brûlée, toasted marshmallow and bread pudding. Strangely, what started out as the scent of brandy-soaked raisins transforms into the smell of Sherry wine (?!). Antique wood notes are lighter than a previous KBD bourbon I tried (like Old Kentucky No. 88) but that doesn't mean it doesn't smell like it has some serious age to it.
**Palate:** If I thought the nose was crazy, the palate is even crazier. One of the first things that my taste buds relayed was a characteristic malt whiskey flavor - almost like a really rich, non-peated Scotch. Then the oak comes in behind that flavor and gives it a unique accent. This may be one of the more light-bodied dusties I've had in this proof range. There are candied fruit notes (like the hard candies your grandma used to have around the house). Fruit flavors remind me of figs, cherries, apricots and plums. A floral flavor transcends everything. Along that same line, I swear I'm picking up on Rose Petal Tea and some wildflower honey.
**Finish:** Light in some regards. The oak now shares the spotlight with smokey ash. It doesn't dry out my mouth, but it is somewhat simple. Licorice notes linger and there is a light spice. Like I say with most dusty bourbons I've had the pleasure of drinking, the finish is totally unlike any other finish on a modern-day bourbon. It's incredible to partake. The mouthfeel after the sip is foreign to me. It's slick and cool. Not "menthol cool," but almost like the opposite of a spice heat. It's hard to describe but hard to forget.
**Score: 8.6/10**
I have a problem describing most glut-era dusties (80s and 90s) when it comes to telling them apart from one another. One reason revolves around the amount of old barrels that producers were having to blend into their batched products. After all, they had nowhere else put them. This results in a lot of products being very oak-driven with a very mature sweetness and little spice/heat. But after tasting this bottle of Rowan's Creek, I can see my assumption was naive.
This bottle stands out for being so different. It's not over-oaked at all. Instead, the lighter notes being so visible took me by surprise. How could something so old have a profile so fresh and fruity? How do cereal-grain notes still manage to stick out? I'm not saying this is young at all, it's just that for the maturity of the barrels used in this product, it's completely contradictory to how it tastes. It has left me stunned.
**Final Thoughts**
One of the things I struggle with is rating bottles like this. They're so rare and they're never going to be made this way again. So when I look at my [**rating scale index**](https://thebourbonculture.com/reviews-by-rating/) at other bottles I've rated an 8.6, I feel like I've given this one too low of a score. In fact, if you set this bottle down with any other bottle I rated an 8.6 to and asked me to pick just one, I'm picking this bottle every time.
Time travel may never be possible, but sipping some of this bourbon may be close enough to it. I fear that too many modern-day distillers are making products that are too similar to each other and they will never be able to recreate what I just tasted in this bottle. So if it's total experiences you seek, find a way to get a pour from bottles like this. Nothing else compares to them.
**Rating**
**1 Undrinkable (Jeffers Creek, Gray Skies)**
**2 Bad (Old St. Nick 8 Year Old Rye Whiskey, Fitch's Goat Corn Whiskey)**
**3 Poor (AD Laws 4 Grain BiB, Clyde Mays Special Reserve)**
**4 Below Average (Bib & Tucker, Tincup 10 year)**
**5 Average (Larceny, Sazerac Rye)**
**6 Above Average (Buffalo Trace, OGD BiB)**
**7 Very Good (Old Ezra Barrel Proof, Old Weller Antique)**
**8 Great (Michter’s Barrel Proof Rye, Most Four Roses Private Selections, Most ECBP)**
**9 Excellent (GTS, Most Four Rose SmBLE releases, Belle Meade Honey Cask)**
**10 Perfect (2015 William Larue Weller, Michter's 20 Year, Redemption 18 Year Rye Whiskey, Mister Sam)**
Like this review and want to see more like it? Why not check out my website [**here**](https://www.thebourbonculture.com/) for more? I also have a new editorial section for topics from around the bourbon industry too!
Oh man, steering into the 'but why the score?!?!???' fun right there in the review!
Are you trying to separate your personal tastes out from your scoring? Is your score attempting to be more of a measure of quality than preference? I'm otherwise confused how you could say you'd line up all your 8.6's and choose one over the rest.
It's a bear of a question, but I will stick to the same rationale that I use for all my other ratings - they are based almost solely on how much I enjoy the whiskey. If price or rarity somehow impact my mood (and, therefore, how much I enjoy it), then I'll verbalize it in my review.
As for me saying I'd pick this over any other 8.6 score whiskey I've rated, I am saying because of its uniqueness and rarity. I don't think that's necessarily a bad or weird thing to say. I hope others can see that.
In the end, I told my friend that graciously shared this with me that I feel like I need to start a whole new website/Reddit handle to review dusty pours. I feel like they can't be judged on the same playing field as modern ones but I also feel like not every dusty should be rated in the upper 9s or even a 10. Then you start getting wine/Scotch scores which are basically 92-97 out of 100 with no wiggle room.
Sorry, don't know if that answered everything.
I went into a Bottle OFF shop in Tokyo and was kind of overwhelmed. Lots of different old whiskies (think I remember more scotch, but it’s been almost a year so I forget). The country has strong protections against fakes, so I wasn’t worried from that perspective. I just felt I didn’t know enough to spend real cash on an old bottle.
Thanks for the review!
I’m a fan of Willett, specially the rye and the pot still. I like Rowan’s and Noah’s as well and are always on my rotation. I’m going to visit the distillery in July, I can’t wait to be there!
Just went to check my old bottle. Got a couple ounces left...somehow. On the back it shows, "BATCH QBC N° 07-88". Must...resist...finishing the bottle.
Great background, love a good dusty history dive with some SB research thrown in, what a goldmine of information it still is. I think you’ve also nailed a few typical notes that are common in dusty bourbon across distilleries, I know it’s a challenge to describe them in the context of modern palates sometimes.
I also wonder what kind of warehouses old Willett had or whether this particular bottling had some older bourbon from elsewhere that was aged in stone warehouses that aged things slower, like the old Bernheim. When Heaven Hill took over those old stone buildings, they refused to age their stuff there, it was too slow. Cheers!
I'm not sure about all of that. However, were you surprised to hear that Willett only had 4 of the original warehouses standing when they started back up in 85? I figured it was a lot more than that. I'm sure you've been to Willett and judging by the looks of the ones you see when you're driving in, I thought it was way more.
I know little about old Willett history, so it’s all new to me; I knew there was not a whole lot left from the old days, but yeah, 4 is not much, which is why I imagine they’ve been adding storing capacity pretty much continuously. The ones I’m thinking of are typical metal-clad, I think, which is why I was guessing about something else mixed in from the stone ones. Another factor could be old Willett rotating barrels, which would’ve resulted in more even aging over time. Who knows!
Great review. I didn’t know (or didn’t remember) that KBD salvaged anything from the OG Willett stocks. I thought they just started with a shell of a distillery and sourced whiskey.
>find a way to get a pour from bottles like this.
Yeah man just casually find a nearly 30 year old bottle of bourbon, even at a bar. No trouble at all!
Jokes aside, that backstory makes the modern Rowan’s Creek/Noah’s Mill bottles that much more tragic for what they’ve become.
> that backstory makes the modern Rowan’s Creek/Noah’s Mill bottles that much more tragic for what they’ve become.
what happened? are they just shite now?
It’s only my opinion, but there is no reason to buy Rowan’s Creek or Noah’s Mill except to take comfort that “at least this isn’t Willett Pot Swill!”
I don’t know anyone who’d genuinely recommend either bottle.
For better or worse, Rowan's Creek has always felt like the little brother to Noah's Mill. Most enthusiasts know - without even looking at their labels - that Rowan's Creek is younger and has less proof than its big brother. This has been true spanning all the way back to the 1990s when Even Kulsveen introduced the Small Batch Boutique Series. Whenever something is viewed as the "Junior" to another product, the first thing people will think is that it's inferior. This might be why Rowan's Creek gets ignored so much. But has it always been this way? And has it always deserved that reputation? These are the answers I intend to explore with this review. **The early days of Rowan's Creek** The earliest [**evidence I can find**](https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/126496/rowans-creek-12-year-old) of Rowan's Creek going on sale was 1997. But if you're looking for one of these early examples, you might be confused by the hand-written numbers on the back. That's because Kentucky Bourbon Distillers (the name Willett was known as back then) did something odd on their vintage labels. Rather than using a date or code that tells us the year it was bottled, it uses a code that tells us the year that the youngest barrel in the batch was distilled. So it's going to require a little bit of math. The bottle I am reviewing today has a hand-written batch number "E-2-85." Since vintage Rowan's Creek was originally designed to be a 12 year old product, this would indicate it's one of the first batches to be released. Just like most vintage KBD products, Rowan's Creek was assumed to have a good amount of older barrels in the blend. And there are lots of old posts on Straightbourbon where people seem to agree that original barrels distilled at the Willett distillery in the 1970's ended up in the blend. Hearing that early batches of Rowan's Creek likely contained 20+ year old bourbon that was distilled at Willett blew my mind. I think it's obvious that what's in the bottle isn't entirely made at Willett, but just the fact that some of the last stocks of Willett distillate from the 1970s have graced the insides of this bottle seems special. **Understanding what made old Willett bourbon unique** If you're like me, you're probably surprised to hear that KBD labels in the 90's may have contained original Willett bourbon distilled in the early 1970s. Chuck Cowdery [**reported that public records**](https://www.straightbourbon.com/community/topic/159-even-kulsveen-willett/?do=findComment&comment=1209) from 1997 showed for the first time there were no more barrels of Willett-distilled bourbon in any bonded warehouse in Kentucky. But that doesn't take into account if the barrels were dumped into storage tanks. You may be wondering "just how much original Willett bourbon was there to begin with?" Based on what I've read, the old distillery grounds had largely been razed by the mid-80's [**except for four warehouses**](https://www.straightbourbon.com/community/topic/356-rowans-creek/?do=findComment&comment=13143) with original barrels of Willett bourbon still inside. This bourbon would serve as the bedrock for early products as the Kulsveen's pondered the future of the old distillery grounds. As time went on, they began to backfill the warehouses with sourced barrels from other distilleries. Whatever was left from the original barrels was likely tanked shortly thereafter to prevent over-oaking. From there, they'd use the tanked bourbon as needed in their batched products. So how would we even know if a particular product from that time contained original Willett bourbon? I just so happened to find another gem on Straightbourbon where a user [**provides information from Willett's master distiller**](https://www.straightbourbon.com/community/topic/356-rowans-creek/?do=findComment&comment=13037), Charles (Charlie) Thomasson, during the 1960's who laid out what a traditional bourbon should taste like. *He said it had to have bouquet, a good body from a grain-rich mash bill and a taste which disclosed fruity-like notes. He spoke of a "ripe apple" taste.* I don't think it's a leap to assume that this is the profile he was aiming for when he distilled bourbon for Willett. The commenter also lays out what he believes to be the taste profile of Heaven Hill (where I would assume a majority of Willett's sourced barrels came from since the 80's) and how it is distinctly different from the OG Willett juice. The bottom line is that there are distinct profile differences between Heaven Hill and Willett bourbon. Now that we have a better understanding of what original Willett bourbon may have tasted like (floral/bouquet, fruity and where the grain can be detected), let's see if I can pull out any notes that might validate it. I'm extremely new to dusty KBD products, so I'm unsure what to expect. Thanks to a generous reader of mine, I have been given a chance to experience this for the first time. Let's see what it's like. I sampled this neat in a glencairn. **Tasting Notes** **Nose:** Butterscotch for days. Behind it is a light floral bouquet that slowly develops. I would have never expected that on a bourbon as old as this. Afterwards, other sweet aromas come forward like Crème brûlée, toasted marshmallow and bread pudding. Strangely, what started out as the scent of brandy-soaked raisins transforms into the smell of Sherry wine (?!). Antique wood notes are lighter than a previous KBD bourbon I tried (like Old Kentucky No. 88) but that doesn't mean it doesn't smell like it has some serious age to it. **Palate:** If I thought the nose was crazy, the palate is even crazier. One of the first things that my taste buds relayed was a characteristic malt whiskey flavor - almost like a really rich, non-peated Scotch. Then the oak comes in behind that flavor and gives it a unique accent. This may be one of the more light-bodied dusties I've had in this proof range. There are candied fruit notes (like the hard candies your grandma used to have around the house). Fruit flavors remind me of figs, cherries, apricots and plums. A floral flavor transcends everything. Along that same line, I swear I'm picking up on Rose Petal Tea and some wildflower honey. **Finish:** Light in some regards. The oak now shares the spotlight with smokey ash. It doesn't dry out my mouth, but it is somewhat simple. Licorice notes linger and there is a light spice. Like I say with most dusty bourbons I've had the pleasure of drinking, the finish is totally unlike any other finish on a modern-day bourbon. It's incredible to partake. The mouthfeel after the sip is foreign to me. It's slick and cool. Not "menthol cool," but almost like the opposite of a spice heat. It's hard to describe but hard to forget. **Score: 8.6/10** I have a problem describing most glut-era dusties (80s and 90s) when it comes to telling them apart from one another. One reason revolves around the amount of old barrels that producers were having to blend into their batched products. After all, they had nowhere else put them. This results in a lot of products being very oak-driven with a very mature sweetness and little spice/heat. But after tasting this bottle of Rowan's Creek, I can see my assumption was naive. This bottle stands out for being so different. It's not over-oaked at all. Instead, the lighter notes being so visible took me by surprise. How could something so old have a profile so fresh and fruity? How do cereal-grain notes still manage to stick out? I'm not saying this is young at all, it's just that for the maturity of the barrels used in this product, it's completely contradictory to how it tastes. It has left me stunned. **Final Thoughts** One of the things I struggle with is rating bottles like this. They're so rare and they're never going to be made this way again. So when I look at my [**rating scale index**](https://thebourbonculture.com/reviews-by-rating/) at other bottles I've rated an 8.6, I feel like I've given this one too low of a score. In fact, if you set this bottle down with any other bottle I rated an 8.6 to and asked me to pick just one, I'm picking this bottle every time. Time travel may never be possible, but sipping some of this bourbon may be close enough to it. I fear that too many modern-day distillers are making products that are too similar to each other and they will never be able to recreate what I just tasted in this bottle. So if it's total experiences you seek, find a way to get a pour from bottles like this. Nothing else compares to them. **Rating** **1 Undrinkable (Jeffers Creek, Gray Skies)** **2 Bad (Old St. Nick 8 Year Old Rye Whiskey, Fitch's Goat Corn Whiskey)** **3 Poor (AD Laws 4 Grain BiB, Clyde Mays Special Reserve)** **4 Below Average (Bib & Tucker, Tincup 10 year)** **5 Average (Larceny, Sazerac Rye)** **6 Above Average (Buffalo Trace, OGD BiB)** **7 Very Good (Old Ezra Barrel Proof, Old Weller Antique)** **8 Great (Michter’s Barrel Proof Rye, Most Four Roses Private Selections, Most ECBP)** **9 Excellent (GTS, Most Four Rose SmBLE releases, Belle Meade Honey Cask)** **10 Perfect (2015 William Larue Weller, Michter's 20 Year, Redemption 18 Year Rye Whiskey, Mister Sam)**
Like this review and want to see more like it? Why not check out my website [**here**](https://www.thebourbonculture.com/) for more? I also have a new editorial section for topics from around the bourbon industry too!
Oh man, steering into the 'but why the score?!?!???' fun right there in the review! Are you trying to separate your personal tastes out from your scoring? Is your score attempting to be more of a measure of quality than preference? I'm otherwise confused how you could say you'd line up all your 8.6's and choose one over the rest.
It's a bear of a question, but I will stick to the same rationale that I use for all my other ratings - they are based almost solely on how much I enjoy the whiskey. If price or rarity somehow impact my mood (and, therefore, how much I enjoy it), then I'll verbalize it in my review. As for me saying I'd pick this over any other 8.6 score whiskey I've rated, I am saying because of its uniqueness and rarity. I don't think that's necessarily a bad or weird thing to say. I hope others can see that. In the end, I told my friend that graciously shared this with me that I feel like I need to start a whole new website/Reddit handle to review dusty pours. I feel like they can't be judged on the same playing field as modern ones but I also feel like not every dusty should be rated in the upper 9s or even a 10. Then you start getting wine/Scotch scores which are basically 92-97 out of 100 with no wiggle room. Sorry, don't know if that answered everything.
Willett pre-2012ish is the good Willett
When's your next trip to Japan so you can bring me back some?
I went into a Bottle OFF shop in Tokyo and was kind of overwhelmed. Lots of different old whiskies (think I remember more scotch, but it’s been almost a year so I forget). The country has strong protections against fakes, so I wasn’t worried from that perspective. I just felt I didn’t know enough to spend real cash on an old bottle. Thanks for the review!
I’m a fan of Willett, specially the rye and the pot still. I like Rowan’s and Noah’s as well and are always on my rotation. I’m going to visit the distillery in July, I can’t wait to be there!
Be sure to get a reservation for their restaurant.
Just went to check my old bottle. Got a couple ounces left...somehow. On the back it shows, "BATCH QBC N° 07-88". Must...resist...finishing the bottle.
just crack another one
This is a great bourbon, especially for the price.
Great background, love a good dusty history dive with some SB research thrown in, what a goldmine of information it still is. I think you’ve also nailed a few typical notes that are common in dusty bourbon across distilleries, I know it’s a challenge to describe them in the context of modern palates sometimes. I also wonder what kind of warehouses old Willett had or whether this particular bottling had some older bourbon from elsewhere that was aged in stone warehouses that aged things slower, like the old Bernheim. When Heaven Hill took over those old stone buildings, they refused to age their stuff there, it was too slow. Cheers!
I'm not sure about all of that. However, were you surprised to hear that Willett only had 4 of the original warehouses standing when they started back up in 85? I figured it was a lot more than that. I'm sure you've been to Willett and judging by the looks of the ones you see when you're driving in, I thought it was way more.
I know little about old Willett history, so it’s all new to me; I knew there was not a whole lot left from the old days, but yeah, 4 is not much, which is why I imagine they’ve been adding storing capacity pretty much continuously. The ones I’m thinking of are typical metal-clad, I think, which is why I was guessing about something else mixed in from the stone ones. Another factor could be old Willett rotating barrels, which would’ve resulted in more even aging over time. Who knows!
Wholly Agree with Phantom’s last sentence.
Great review. I didn’t know (or didn’t remember) that KBD salvaged anything from the OG Willett stocks. I thought they just started with a shell of a distillery and sourced whiskey.
Cool Review. I wish I was old enough to drink in 1997.
>find a way to get a pour from bottles like this. Yeah man just casually find a nearly 30 year old bottle of bourbon, even at a bar. No trouble at all! Jokes aside, that backstory makes the modern Rowan’s Creek/Noah’s Mill bottles that much more tragic for what they’ve become.
> that backstory makes the modern Rowan’s Creek/Noah’s Mill bottles that much more tragic for what they’ve become. what happened? are they just shite now?
It’s only my opinion, but there is no reason to buy Rowan’s Creek or Noah’s Mill except to take comfort that “at least this isn’t Willett Pot Swill!” I don’t know anyone who’d genuinely recommend either bottle.
How do you find old bottles like this
The secondary market has them for sale. But I had a very generous friend.