Maybe.
I'm not kidding, and by the way this thread would never have existed had not the Artic Wolf, in a spasm of patriotism, insisted that his dear Canadian Whisky, also labeled Canadian Rye Whisky or Rye Whisky is a "world class" spirit merely awaiting recognition by the rest of the world.
And accused me of being "woefully ignorant", et al. Bad move.
Actually Canadian Whisky is a mutt of a drink. A tasty mish-mosh of a mongrel mixture, a wild dog of a spirit with obvious cross-species attraction to any reviewer named after a wolf. Let's consider the Canadian regulations:
Let's decode that, shall we?B.02.020. [S]. (1) Canadian Whisky, Canadian Rye Whisky or Rye Whisky
(a) shall:
(i) be a potable alcoholic distillate, or a mixture of potable alcoholic distillates, obtained from a mash of cereal grain or cereal grain products saccharified by the diastase of malt or by other enzymes and fermented by the action of yeast or a mixture of yeast and other micro-organisms,
(ii) be aged in small wood for not less than three years,
(iii) possess the aroma, taste and character generally attributed to Canadian whisky,
(iv) be manufactured in accordance with the requirements of the Excise Act and the regulations made thereunder,
(v) be mashed, distilled and aged in Canada, and
(vi) contain not less than 40 per cent alcohol by volume; and
(b) may contain caramel and flavouring.
(2) Subject to subsection (3), no person shall make any claim with respect to the age of Canadian whisky, other than for the period during which the whisky has been held in small wood.
(3) Where Canadian whisky has been aged in small wood for a period of at least three years, any period not exceeding six months during which that whisky was held in other containers may be claimed as age.
SOR/93-145, s. 10; SOR/2000-51, s. 1.
First of all, Canadian Whiskey may also be labeled Canadian Rye Whisky or just plain Rye Whiskey. This is because the early CW's were mostly made from rye, then smuggled into the United States. But even while bearing the label "Rye Whiskey", it really doesn't have to contain any rye.
You read that right.
Canadian Whisky has no firm identity. It may or may not be composed of distilled rye, corn, wheat, malted or unmalted barley. Any or all. A substantial portion of these "whiskys" is what they call "neutral spirit". Neutral spirit, as you may know, is simply distilled to very high proofs and contains very little flavor. It is very light, often continuously distilled, and most importantly, very inexpensive to produce.
Thus the bulk of many CW's is really pretty tasteless. So how do these clever Canadians manipulate this base into something tasty? Simple - just add stuff. Add some flavorful bourbon. Maybe some rye whiskey, Or whisky made from corn, or wheat, or malted barley or even unmalted barley. Oh and let's not forget the good stuff...
Caramel and what the Canookies call "flavourings". Lots of them!
Their regs allow relatively huge amounts of almost anything considered a flavor. Sherry wine, any other spirits (domestic or imported), and good old abusive caramel (in addition to color, caramel serves as a blender or binder of unlike components, of which Canadian Whisky has many). Any other spirits means, well, any other spirits (which themselves may contain sugar and flavorings). No problem, it's all peachy, eh?
Bottom line:
Canadian Whisky, aka Canadian Rye Whisky, aka Rye Whisky:
1. is bottled at no less than 40% alcohol,
2. is aged in typical barrels for at least three years,
3. contains neutral spirit, and
4. up to 9.09% of any other "flavouring" (spirits of any kind), including wine or sherry, and which themselves may contain sugar, et al.
If the "Canadian Whiskey" happens to contain sugar (as indirectly introduced via the "flavourings"), that's just fine. To make matters worse for us (but better for the distillers), the distillers managed to lobby for and obtain a law that - chuckle, chuckle - that actually codifies omerta, wherein the distillers are not permitted to call their spirits "dry", even if they contain no sugar! Got that?
Sugar may be present - fine - but the distillers are under the force of law to shut up about it. Unlike here and rum, where sugar is disallowed and must be admitted.
But there's a good side to all this. In the wacky world of Canadian Whisky anything - legally - goes and does. Although the regs state that the ending mixture must "...possess the aroma, taste and character generally attributed to Canadian whisky", no one (a) really knows what that character is, or (b) disagrees about it. Like rum.
Ergo, anything goes. Legally. Unlike rum.
Now if you think that a spirit labeled "Canadian Rye Whiskey" (that may or may not contain rye, but which probably contains a bunch of neutral spirit and varying amounts of various other whiskies, coloring, fruit juice, sherry wine and only the Mounties know what) - is a "world class" spirit, then I've got some prime moose-hunting land to sell you.
My sincere apologies to the Artic Wolf and his propensity to ignore simple fact and world opinion which altogether pay little mind to Canadian Whisky in its many incarnations. Now if the Wolf and his hairy pack want to convince me that Canadian Whisky can be surprisingly tasty and enjoyable, why that's just fine. I'm all ears. Tail, er talk to me...
*******
Special Note: I love Canada, especially Toronto and particularly Montreal (which is in Canada too). I actually tried to immigrate to Canada once. My dentist is Canadian, and I once had wild sex with a luscious Canadian girl in her father's sailboat. My best childhood friends were Canadian - we taught them how to shoot hoops and they taught us how to play hockey (I had full gear and played defense). My favorite sports star was Maurice "Rocket" Richard of the Montreal Canadiens.
I do love Canada, honest.
But - as moose-shootin Sara Palin is my witness (God was on break) - Canadian Whisky, however "tasty", is anything but pure, predictable or profileable. Unlike single malts, not yet my or the world's idea of "world class".
I have spoken.
