Cigar body description

[micha]

Hello dear FOH members,

first of all let me tell you how much this forum has helped me in the past few weeks with improving my knowledge of cigars. It's just great being around here. I have written a few reviews up to now which has been a great exercise for me to recognize and describe a cigar's flavour profile. Still being kind of a newbie to this there is one question for me left unanswered. I haven't found anything through the search but I assume that something has been written about it before. So please excuse if I ask a question which has been answered before.

So here it goes: Somehow I always struggle to nail the body of a cigar I'm smoking. I can tell if it is mild or strong for my own frame of reference but I just haven't got a clue how I could describe it to others. Seeing the video reviews I have the impression that Rob/Ken/Smithy seem to almost always agree on the body when they talk about their cigars. Surely there must be some kind of "official" reference points that describe mild/medium/full which I just don't know.

I would be grateful if some of you could enlighten me about this remaining mystery of mine or point me to the right forum topic.

Alright, hope it isn't a too dumb question and also put in the right category.

Cheers and a great day...

Michael

[cigcars]

***As is said, "The only dumb question is the one not asked." In speaking for my own layperson's definition: A heavy, full bodied cigar is the one that you don't smoke on an empty stomach. Basically, it's the kind of strength level whereby it can "set you down," or "knock you down." Examples are the Bolivars, Ramon Allones and the Padrons, particularly the expensive 45th Anniversaria...THAT one made the room spin, my head whoozy, and my eyes heavy! THAT'S strong, or "full bodied." Your milder cigars are Macanudos, Fonsecas, and everyone's favorite whipping boy, the Monte Cristo Opens. I LIKED those cigars, the Montes, that is. The flavor is light, clean, and mild in flavor. Those are the "mowin' the yard" or "playing golf" smokes. And then you have your in-betweens- the medium bodied smokes. Not too strong, not too weak. Hope this helps some!

[Colt45]

Surely there must be some kind of "official" reference points that describe mild/medium/full which I just don't know.

Not really that I know of - this is one of those things that can be fairly subjective. I think that the more cigars you smoke, the easier it becomes

to define such elements.

Personally, I don't necessarily equate body with strength. For me, I guess the easiest way to describe body is the sense of density - the mouth-feel

of the smoke. You get that sense that the flavor - mild, medium, full - comes from the center all the way out to the wrapper of the cigar, versus a

cigar with just a single or thin layer. Perhaps more succinctly, the weight of the smoke on the palate.

I don't know if you drink wine, but if so, it might be like comparing a big, dense cabernet to something thinner and more acidic. They can both be

flavorful, but they have a different mouthfeel.

[semery74]

"It is always on the tip of our tongue" I think all of us are challenged to define those flavors that are so familiar to us. Rob described Diplomaticos No.2 as having an underlying core of capsicum a few years back. All I can think about now every time I have one is the flavor of smoked paprika. It is definitely there, why could I not conclude that before. It didn't click until the suggestion was made and I was anticipating that flavor. Just thought I would share one of the appreciated aspects of this forum. And how it has helped me develop my appreciation for the finer things.

I've always defined body as the power of flavor. How strong does the flavor exist in a cigar? Is it mild, medium, or full bodied? I don't think it has anything to do with Nicotine. Nicotine is not an enjoyable substance in high quantities and distracts from the enjoyment.

Mouth feel I've always equated one of the five basic taste senses called Umami. Taste is important because the best cigars IMHO are those that exhibit a proper balance of all of basic taste senses, Bitter, Salty, Sour, Sweet, and Umami

Checkout my signature for links on the best flavor wheel I've seen relative to cigars and a discussion about profiles.

[El Presidente]

Body of a cigar to me is a mixture of "weight" and "strength/power" on the palate.

* A full bodied cigar does not mean it is complex in flavour. There are plenty of mild and medium bodied cigars that are immensely complex in terms of flavour.

* You can have medium bodied cigars which are spicy (white or black pepper) through the nose and on the palate but are of medium weight and strength.

[Ginseng]

Here is a post I wrote a few years ago (I think) on the topic of flavor, body, and strength. Allow me to self-plagiarize. As I look back at what I wrote, I question the validity of splitting apart these three characteristics but they really can vary independently and so I think it's okay.

With regard to how the industry and hobbyist smokers describe things differently, I believe it comes down to the purpose to which they apply the language of cigar descriptors. For the former, this is primarily the production and quality control of cigars. For the latter, it is for the illumination and communication of the individual cigar smoking experience. On the one hand, the making of the cigar. On the other, the enjoying of the cigar. Since both parties are earnest in their endeavors, sometimes the communication divide can lead to either hilarity or consternation. An example of hilarity would be US cigar retailers' attempts to use "review" language in their marketing and sales materials (a la Holt's catalog) and coming across as a bit excessive, disingenuous. Consternation ensues when hobbyist smokers wonder at how producers may use little more than "sweet," "bitter," and "salt" and yet produce cigars of such complexity and depth. Mars and Venus, of a sort I guess.

"Over the last few years, there have been numerous discussions on the subject of strength versus body. Smokers have wondered whether a cigar need be strong in order to be rich in flavor. Can a mild cigar be as satisfying as a strong smoke? What exactly do these terms mean?

What exactly is the relationship between body and strength?

As far as I can tell, the non-Cuban cigar industry uses the term "body" to denote a blended property combining nicotine kick, mouthfeel, and flavor with a bias toward the nic-kick component. American cigar smokers tend to use "body" more commonly in reference to the mouthfeel component and reserve the term "strength" to refer to the nic-kick. We also tend to break out "flavor" into its own category. So to restate:

A. The industry (including manufacturers and retailers, e.g., Lew Rothman) commonly collapses flavor, body, and strength into one term, "body" and the primary connotation is in regards to "strength" followed closely by "flavor." Some retailers/manufacturers use strength (Holts) and others use body (JR Cigars).

B. Smokers are more likely to separate the characteristics of flavor (intensity of taste or aroma), body (heaviness or lightness of mouthfeel), and strength (nicotine kick) although not all users use these terms in the same sense contributing to the confusion so often encountered.

What do you guys think? Are your conceptions different? How do you break up the sensory experience of cigar smoking?"

Wilkey

[dicko]

It's been described much more elegantly above. I think of body as the 'weight' on the palate, how heavy or light the mouthfeel is. I think of smoke volume, nicotine strength and flavour as slightly different things. Of course, it's all academic!

[micha]

Thanks gentlemen, that is helping a lot. Now I've got a fairly good picture of it, I guess the rest will come with much practice. The different mouthfeel and weight of the smoke on the palate is often quite noticeable, I just didn't know how to put it in reference to your body descriptions. Now I do.

I don't know if you drink wine, but if so, it might be like comparing a big, dense cabernet to something thinner and more acidic. They can both be

flavorful, but they have a different mouthfeel.

Yes I do, and that analogy actually makes a lot of sense to me. It explains too why you wouldn't need a frame of reference to define the body. I've been drinking wine for a loooong time now and I know that I have a very dense or thin one when I taste it. There is no need for putting it up on a scale and compare it with others. If I have had as many cigars it probably wouldn't be much different.

Checkout my signature for links on the best flavor wheel I've seen relative to cigars and a discussion about profiles.

That flavour wheel really is great. Do you have a link for one with a better, printable size and resolution? Would be great.

[Colt45]

That flavour wheel really is great. Do you have a link for one with a better, printable size and resolution? Would be great.

I don't know where Dmitri's wheel comes from (perhaps he'll be able to provide you with that info), but here's a link to one that can be

found here at FOH:

Link

Click on the top of the image to view it at full size, then save that one out.

[PigFish]

Not really that I know of - this is one of those things that can be fairly subjective. I think that the more cigars you smoke, the easier it becomes

to define such elements.

Personally, I don't necessarily equate body with strength. For me, I guess the easiest way to describe body is the sense of density - the mouth-feel

of the smoke. You get that sense that the flavor - mild, medium, full - comes from the center all the way out to the wrapper of the cigar, versus a

cigar with just a single or thin layer. Perhaps more succinctly, the weight of the smoke on the palate.

I don't know if you drink wine, but if so, it might be like comparing a big, dense cabernet to something thinner and more acidic. They can both be

flavorful, but they have a different mouthfeel.

As Ross has noted I think the more cigars you get under your belt, the more you will have to draw from.

While I taste many things in cigars I think that each of us has a different method. Some rate by tastes, some rate by experiences, sensations and feel. Unless you categorize them they seem to homogenize and get a little ambiguous. I use a tasting sheet typically. I check off the flavors, the strength of the flavors and when they appear. I reconcile those at the end and write a narrative. I separate taste from sensation. Perhaps sensations and taste combine to form a term. Those terms appear to be defined by the individual.

For example: nicotine is a sensation, not a taste, as is unctuous. Oiliness or an unctuous feel may help me develop the terms, body, aftertaste, character, constitution and finish! Each word in the narrative is used to help the reader experience the cigar and that is largely my goal to reviewing a cigar.

I would say that you train you palate like you train your ear. For example: I like the Yes song, Heart of the Sunrise, and think Squire is arguable rocks finest bassists. I separate the bass line and concentrate on it, follow it and try to catch every note. Occasionally I get lost and go back to listening the combined music, the song itself. The song is the overall taste of the cigar. The notes of the bass are just one component. That component is rated by itself but combines to rate the tone or timber of the song, the quality of the song, the strength of the song. I may do the same thing in picking the bassoon out of an orchestra, or the ginger out of a meal.

I am gonna' catch some flack for this comment I am sure, but a lot of todays mainstream cigars seem to taste similar to me. If that is what you are experiencing you may not be the problem! If this is the case you may want to vary the size, ring gauge of cigar that you are commonly smoking and mix it up a bit. Pick up a few Monte Especials, or a QdO or LGC's to scramble up your palate a bit. I am only guessing at your cigar selection of course, but sometimes the questions hide the information necessary to provide complete answers.

Best of luck, and happy smoking regardless. -Piggy

[micha]

I am gonna' catch some flack for this comment I am sure, but a lot of todays mainstream cigars seem to taste similar to me. If that is what you are experiencing you may not be the problem! If this is the case you may want to vary the size, ring gauge of cigar that you are commonly smoking and mix it up a bit. Pick up a few Monte Especials, or a QdO or LGC's to scramble up your palate a bit. I am only guessing at your cigar selection of course, but sometimes the questions hide the information necessary to provide complete answers.

Best of luck, and happy smoking regardless. -Piggy

Hey Piggy,

thank you for that valuable comment, it really made me thinking. First of all it's great to read how you approach the tasting of a cigar and in the same way the perception of a song or a meal. I would love to see a few of your tasting sheets. I think it is a gift being able to pick up and concentrate on every nuance of a given thing which in our times is more often just being consumed than really appreciated down to its core elements. I think that makes life much more enjoyable and worthwhile.

I think you are quite right with your assumption about my cigar selection. I consider myself a beginner in smoking cubans and know that there is still a lot to learn. At that stage it is almost given that I stumble across more of the mainstream cigars than any others. Being a member in this forum has widened my horizon a great deal and I'm starting to go for different, less famous brands and a variety in vitolas. So I will definitely take your advise to heart. I think I am only at the beginning of a great journey and the next stop most probably is buying a much larger humidor than my current 12 bottle wine fridge (if only I had known before).

Cheers,

Michael