Unicos and Monte #2 Are the Same Cigar

[Ken Gargett]

And I think it's human nature to deny the existence of something that one is unable to perceive.

it is an interesting thought but, and i do not really want to take this to places where i shall cop an early reprimand, how then does one explain religion? it seems to me that the exact opposite applies.

but i will now wimp out and abandon this thread rather than risk royal censure.

[Fugu]

it is an interesting thought but, and i do not really want to take this to places where i shall cop an early reprimand, how then does one explain religion? it seems to me that the exact opposite applies.

but i will now wimp out and abandon this thread rather than risk royal censure.

Yes, perhaps with the (only?) exception of religion, Ken. But otherwise... look at the history of science.

[Ken Gargett]

Yes, perhaps with the (only?) exception of religion, Ken. But otherwise... look at the history of science.

granted. science has been one long battle against the forces of denial and so much more.

but religion is one bigarsed exception.

[shlomo]

Religion is not an exception. Religious folk perceive the existence of God in everyday, mundane things.

Non religious folk deny the existence of God because they do not perceive a prescence in the world.

[headstand]

granted. science has been one long battle against the forces of denial and so much more.

but religion is one bigarsed exception.

bigarsed indeed!

Having read through the thread, it seems that Cuban cigar brand profiling can appear as mystifying as human nature. Fair enough. I will take both Cuban cigars and humanity, keeping those I love most close at hand, and loving the rest as best I can.

Cheers and goodwill.

[CigSid]

Religious folk perceive the existence of God in everyday, mundane things.

This is ridiculous

[Fugu]

This is ridiculous

Let’s rather not expand on this too much, for the sake of forum rules. Remarkable, how quickly we got from Unicos to religion…

There have been many documented (and who knows how many undocumented) cases of wine producers adulterating their wines outside of regs - I imagine to simply make money.

What he sais.

True - I'm one who prefers less "tinkering". But, how many wine drinkers would really go for minimal intervention, allowing terroir to really show? Natural yeasts, no temp control, so sulfer, no sugar, cement tanks, etc?

Still a slight bit off-topic, as we are drifting into winemaking, but in order to bring it back to brand character just a little wise-arsing (simply skip….)

Basically agree with Colt, less is certainly more in winemaking. But all of that mentioned I would not necessarily count under “tinkering”, if done restrictedly, respectfully and with a proper consideration of the particular harvest. At least I wouldn’t call it severe manipulation that would inevitably mask ‘terroir’ or say simply ‘character’. Those means are in use since centuries and are not necessarily bad or negative at all. Flipside of the coin if done without:

Wild inst. of cultured yeast – Can certainly be a good thing and help to contour ‘terroir’, but can on the other hand produce difficult/unpleasant artificially tasting flavours from various esters and other unwanted fermentation byproducts (in partic. if done without temp-control). Can ruin wine, but can gain magnificent, exciting wines if done skillfully (comes with economic risk). There are intermediate ways, e.g. when cellars use their own selected yeasts from their natural grape material in order to gain more control of the process over spontaneous fermentation.

No temp. control – see above, risk of unwanted notes, uncontrolled fermentation, uncontrolled extraction. Risk of losing the harvest or parts thereof (high economic risk)

No sulfurization – really difficult not to use, if you don’t want to only go for bone-dry wines (and even there…). Antioxidant and antimicrobial, enzyme inactivation and also capturing acetaldehyde (taste and toxicity). Wine unstable after bottling and even unwated fermentation could be going on. No Sauternes, no Beerenauslese and no Candian Icewine without considerable amounts. There is essentially no SO2-free wine, even if not declared.

No sugar addition – the item that could most easily be forgone. If sugar is necessary to increase must weight, then the grapes simply haven’t reached ripeness, period. Less important today with climate change, where high must weights (sugar content) are obtained often well before physiological ripeness sets in (taste). High sugar levels turn out to be a problem instead today in many regions.

Cement or steel vats only – depending on wine and wine style can be a win and help to better bring out terroir. But wooden pièces, large casks or barriques have their right of existence (no Bordeaux, no Burgundy today imaginable without…)

What really is manipulation today is all the other recent tech. hocus-pocus, such as reverse osmosis, ultrafiltration, (kryo-) concentrator use, dealcoholization and fractionation, wood-chip and shavings use, use of natural flavoring and so on... Compared to that, the above mentioned older means (including acidification/de-acidification, filtration and fining) are really rather innocent, I’d say.

But to finally bring it back to tobacco and resuming on the remarks of Cigarbigboy – I still do see a lot of parallels and quite a few of those basic measures influencing the product wine, in the field and in the 'cellar', as being in action here in tobacco, too – at least potentially:

Field: Terroir/soil (more than 50 soil types identified in Vuelta Abajo I’ve read), >1000 single farms, microclimate, selection of sorts and clones, planting/plant density, preparation of soil, fertilizing, irrigation regime, tabaco tapado/de sol (filler, binder, wrapper), precise timing of the gradual harvesting i.e. picking of leaves from bottom to top depending on ripening (climate and season) over certain periods

'Cellar': curing/drying, fermentation of leaves: exact temperature/moisture-control and process-cycling (interrupting and re-piling in burros, second fermentation in tercios), raw tobacco aging, sorting/selecting and finally the blending.

So, the means are certainly there to precisely carve out particular characteristics of certain tobacco and thus the final cigar. How much use of this is then actually being made appears to vastly remain a secret of the Cubans.

[LGC]

Although science is a requirement in the production of fermented tobacco, it's impossible to treat the selection of cigars as a science. There's simply too many uncontrolled variables that goes into the final product. Does anyone remember the VR/LGC RE swap?

An experiment I would like to see...

-Gather up a panel of super tasters

-Obtain 3 different boxes of 3 vitolas from 3 different brands (from 3 different years throughout a decade).

-See if the panel can successfully identify each marca amongst the mixed trials.

I think many of us like to associate specific flavor profiles with certain marcas, vintages, etc. Sure...there are certain marcas or vitolas that have more prominent and recognizable flavors; but how many of us can truly pick them out without bands and boxes?? I now only see bands and boxes as something that helps to increase my odds of selecting an enjoyable cigar (but not always a guarantee that a certain cigar will always deliver a certain profile described on paper).

[shlomo]

This is ridiculous

Will be glad to discuss via pm so we dont offend people's highly offendable sensitivities.

[Colt45]

Still a slight bit off-topic, as we are drifting into winemaking

But all of that mentioned I would not necessarily count under “tinkering”, if done restrictedly, respectfully and with a proper consideration of the particular harvest.

How much use of this is then actually being made appears to vastly remain a secret of the Cubans.

I agree wholeheartedly re wine production. I guess my main supposition is that the more human intervention, the greater the possibility there might be to lose the characteristics of terroir (the flip side is that there are those who feel that what happens in the winery is part of terroir). And also that I'm not sure how many people would embrace wines made as naturally as possible, with the least amount of intervention.

As for the tobacco, sometimes during these discussions I start to get the impression that perhaps the main issue is that there is a monopoly on the production of Cuban cigars - one company producing all these "brands", with all the associated issues.

Were there independent producers with equal access to tobacco, might we have less of a problem accepting the premise of brand? Perhaps producer X might blend each size within their marque to certain qualities of finesse, body, strength, etc, and we'd be more apt to accept the unavoidable seasonal variations?

What I know to be fact about Cuban cigars would fit on the head of a pin - with room to spare.

[Jah]

It isn't uncommon for NC cigar makers to slap different bands on the same cigar, so I wouldn't doubt it if Cuba did the same thing in certain scenarios.

[cigarbigboy]

Although science is a requirement in the production of fermented tobacco, it's impossible to treat the selection of cigars as a science. There's simply too many uncontrolled variables that goes into the final product. Does anyone remember the VR/LGC RE swap?

An experiment I would like to see...

-Gather up a panel of super tasters

-Obtain 3 different boxes of 3 vitolas from 3 different brands (from 3 different years throughout a decade).

-See if the panel can successfully identify each marca amongst the mixed trials.

I think many of us like to associate specific flavor profiles with certain marcas, vintages, etc. Sure...there are certain marcas or vitolas that have more prominent and recognizable flavors; but how many of us can truly pick them out without bands and boxes?? I now only see bands and boxes as something that helps to increase my odds of selecting an enjoyable cigar (but not always a guarantee that a certain cigar will always deliver a certain profile described on paper).

I agree completely. Tobacco from different farms are processed together, then shipped to the factory, graded by color and quality, and put into the recipe for the march/vitola.... each subjectively, with other factories making the same marca doing the same thing. They are amazingly successful, but the marca just increases your chances of getting what you want, not guarantees it. Of course the Prez's observations also dramatically increase your odds.

Winemaking is much more controlled and scientific, with the variabilities able to be measured, quantified, and regulated.

Luckily Cuban tobacco rocks, so even with the "shortcomings" most cigars come out pretty dang good. However everyone knows the taste profile can vary dramatically, not only from factory to factory, but even within a box.

[Smallclub]

However everyone knows the taste profile can vary dramatically, … but even within a box.

Not in my experience. Again, I believe the blenders and the staff that checks the taste consistency does a pretty good job, overall…

[cigarbigboy]

Not in my experience. Again, I believe the blenders and the staff that checks the taste consistency does a pretty good job, overall…

Respectfully, not my experience. I'll try a couple sticks from the same box over a few days and find good, but disparate taste profiles in some cases. Not in all, but some. One stick might be exceptional, while the next is relegated to just being good.

[Fugu]

As for the tobacco, sometimes during these discussions I start to get the impression that perhaps the main issue is that there is a monopoly on the production of Cuban cigars - one company producing all these "brands", with all the associated issues.

Were there independent producers with equal access to tobacco, might we have less of a problem accepting the premise of brand? Perhaps producer X might blend each size within their marque to certain qualities of finesse, body, strength, etc, and we'd be more apt to accept the unavoidable seasonal variations?

Yes, that could indeed be the quintessential point. However, while there might be some grain of truth, still a rather simplistic approach:

Bright examples from the “western” world of food and beverage companies comprising an umpteen of brands under a single corporation roof:

Anheuser-Busch InBev, Nestlé, Kraft-Heinz/Mondelez, Diageo, Suntory Int. etc.

And even there, different products and brands leaving the same factory.

[Fugu]

I agree completely. Tobacco from different farms are processed together, then shipped to the factory, graded by color and quality, and put into the recipe for the march/vitola.... each subjectively, with other factories making the same marca doing the same thing.

Don’t know where such info might stem from, Bigboy, but when strictly keeping with the cigar literature, I get a different picture.

Just two citations, which I consider useful in bringing back some facts to the debate. The first one is from the older book of Le Roy and Szafran, La Grande Histoire du Cigare (1989). The second one from the more recent book of Adriano Martínez Rius, El Gran Libro del Habano (2010), a man of whom I’d say he should know what he’s talking about, at least he’s got first hand info:

1.) “The exact provenance of these tercios, which are packed into numbered bales, can be determied anytime, because each finca’s land is divided into numbered parcels, the numbers of which can be found written onto each single bale.” (translated by self correspondingly)

2) “…. Each package [he is talking about tercios and fardos],…, is identified according to variety, type of leaf, tobacco plantation of origin, harvest year, and fermentation time.”

Now, people might argue, you are really so naive to believe in what’s written in books…? Well, ok…then go, figure out locally and tell us first hand.

Cheers

Paul

[bdurkk]

Respectfully, not my experience. I'll try a couple sticks from the same box over a few days and find good, but disparate taste profiles in some cases. Not in all, but some. One stick might be exceptional, while the next is relegated to just being good.

I agree, partially with this statement on the cigar sometimes being different within the box. However, my experience is that it is not the cigars themselves, but more the occasion or mood or situation as to when the cigar is smoked.

However, to stay on topic, I don't feel the VR and Monte are the same cigars...they are completely different and VR imho is much better.

[Smallclub]

I agree, partially with this statement on the cigar sometimes being different within the box.

I guess that's everyone's experience.

But there is a huge difference between “ sometimes being different within the box ”

and

“ the taste profile can vary dramatically, … even within a box. ”

[Colt45]

Yes, that could indeed be the quintessential point. However, while there might be some grain of truth, still a rather simplistic approach:

True, but none of those companies have a monopoly on the production of their respective products in any country - they are not the only game in town. There are other brands / producers to choose from.

And yes, I'm pretty simplistic - I'm often told I have a keen grasp of the obvious

[Fugu]

True, but none of those companies have a monopoly on the production of their respective products in any country - they are not the only game in town. There are other brands / producers to choose from.

And yes, I'm pretty simplistic - I'm often told I have a keen grasp of the obvious

Was not targeted towards you, rather towards the approach...

While I have to admit you are making a valid point, in certain areas those concerns do have a near-monopoly or at least a high level of island position.

But I even can't really see the point in whether it being a monopoly or not. Perhaps you are simplistic, I am naive....haha.

[cigarbigboy]

Don’t know where such info might stem from, Bigboy, but when strictly keeping with the cigar literature, I get a different picture.

Just two citations, which I consider useful in bringing back some facts to the debate. The first one is from the older book of Le Roy and Szafran, La Grande Histoire du Cigare (1989). The second one from the more recent book of Adriano Martínez Rius, El Gran Libro del Habano (2010), a man of whom I’d say he should know what he’s talking about, at least he’s got first hand info:

1.) “The exact provenance of these tercios, which are packed into numbered bales, can be determied anytime, because each finca’s land is divided into numbered parcels, the numbers of which can be found written onto each single bale.” (translated by self correspondingly)

2) “…. Each package [he is talking about tercios and fardos],…, is identified according to variety, type of leaf, tobacco plantation of origin, harvest year, and fermentation time.”

Now, people might argue, you are really so naive to believe in what’s written in books…? Well, ok…then go, figure out locally and tell us first hand.

Cheers

Paul

I think Suckling did a pretty good job explaining some of this in his documentary on the heart of cuba...

[shlomo]

I cant think of a single time where 2 cigars out of the same box had different profiles.

Different burns, different strengths in terms or rough or harsh, but 2 completely different tastes? Never.

[cybermadhatter]

Good thread with smart posts.

I will add that while in Cuba in November I was handed an un-banded cigar from Abel Esposito, at his restaurant. My two friends got one too. A Robusto, but it looked different than the Yolanda custom robustos. No idea who rolled it or when. We smoked one the next day and when I tried it, it tasted like a 2008 Boli rc, (from the factory many seemed to like back then, I forget the code right now). I took off my bolivar band on My cigar, and put it on the cigar and my friend smoked it and said,

''now I 'taste' Bolivar but do not know how those good brc's aged in 7 years but now to me it is bolivar ''. I then put a Hoyo band on it, and my friend said, '' Damn now I taste epi 2''

We all laughed and have no idea what cigar it was, and it most likely was not regular production, but it opened up a discussion how the typicity of brands can influence or bias your palate, psychologically.

Coincidentally, at the Partagas festival dinner I smoked a recent production Unico, and it was more ON than usual. My two friends were wowed by how good it was. The three of us smoke about 3-4 cigars a day, and monte 2 did not come to my mind at all with this Unico. Nor do I prefer them when reaching for a torpedo. Beany; vanilla cocoa and coffee, but inconsistent.

The guy next to me later on, apropos of nothing, was telling me that he thinks brand recognition is waning and most vitolas, say, coronas, are now too similar. I did not totally agree, even though he was called a big-wig from another friend. And, although sometimes that seems true, it is not mostly or always true. Especially how I dislike the bbf but like the 'salty' sp belicoso, and would (almost?) never confuse the two.

[SCgarman]

Good thread with smart posts.

I will add that while in Cuba in November I was handed an un-banded cigar from Abel Esposito, at his restaurant. My two friends got one too. A Robusto, but it looked different than the Yolanda custom robustos. No idea who rolled it or when. We smoked one the next day and when I tried it, it tasted like a 2008 Boli rc, (from the factory many seemed to like back then, I forget the code right now). I took off my bolivar band and put it on the cigar and my friend smoked it and said,

''now I 'taste' Bolivar but do not know how those good brc's aged in 7 years but now to me it is bolivar ''. I then put a Hoyo band on it, and my friend said, '' Damn now I taste epi 2''

We all laughed and have no idea what cigar it was, and it most likely was not regular production, but it opened up a discussion how the typicity of brands can influence or bias your palette, psychologically.

Coincidentally, at the Partagas festival dinner I smoked a recent production Unico, and it was more ON than usual. My two friends were wowed by how good it was. The three of us smoke about 3-4 cigars a day, and monte 2 did not come to my mind at all with this Unico. Nor do I prefer them when reaching for a torpedo. Beany; vanilla cocoa and cofee, but inconsistent.

The guy next to me later on, apropos of nothing, was telling me that he thinks brand recognition is waning and most vitolas, say, coronas, are now too similar. I did not totally agree, even though he was called a big-wig from another friend. And, although sometimes that seems true, it is not mostly or always true. Especially how I dislike the bbf but like the 'salty' sp belicoso, and would (almost?) never confuse the two.

TEB 08 Awesome RASS and BRC

[cybermadhatter]

Ah, yes, thanks. TEB