Effect of Sugar: split from Sugar Updates

[The Fat Rum Pirate]

Since Pirate is the second tester to show significant sugar in the P15, this has increasing credibility. To me this is a great value of decentralized testing. This can spot aberrations, or as in this case, confirm a reading. It can also determine whether the US and Europe get different "recipes".

I happen to have a 15 and will test it. Stay tuned...

The Pussers 15 does have added sugar. I had confirmation of this when I tried a Bristol Port Mo(u)rant. Very different profile. The Bristol was sweet (it was finished in Port Pipes) but also had a slightly vegetal and earthy feel to it. Neither rum was bad and my preference towards either would depend on my mood.

It does show though why rum producers add sugar. For many it will make the rums more appealing. I've noticed the same with El Dorado and Bristol and Mezan Demerara's. Again not calling either "bad rum" per se but you don't need a sugar test to note the differences.




*******
Capn's Log: this post was "split off" from the Great Sugar Test Updates, to keep that thread on track, and to give this subject proper attention.

[Capn Jimbo]

It's important to distinguish "rum" from "sugared rum"...


The hidden and unlabelled alteration of what we expect to be "rum", but that is secretly sweetened along with other alterations (think Ron Matusalem with unlabelled prune and vanilla extract) is really not permitted or intended by the regulations (YMMV). If this occurred with a single malt or bourbon there would be riots in the street.

For all practical purposes these rums are flavored, whether legally enforced or not. To compare a pure rum with an altered rum has no real basis of comparison. Indeed, that is why the notion of "styles" is so important. It's a fooles errand for example, to compare say a cane juice style rum to a Jamaican style. Such a false comparison becomes a matter of personal preference (eg "I don't like cane juice rums"). This is also why most of us also tend to have a reference rum in mind. For example I would tend to compare a Bajan style to either MGXO or Seales 10.

Thus the notion that sugar "makes a rum taste better" is a contradiction in terms. That's as much as saying that secretly flavoring a rum with prunes and vanilla makes for a better "rum". Somehow the word "flavored" gets lost in the shuffle. Che's tests make clear that the use of sugar seems to have two goals:

1. To be able to pass off cheap young rums by making them palatable.

2. To distinguish "premium" rums by implying that an aged rum is expected to have thick legs, and a strong element of sweetness (and who knows what other adulterants). He demonstrated that it doesn't take much sugar to mask and fuzz up the profile to the point that such heavily sugared rums become ever harder to be distinguished from one another.

Think about it...

How can one say sugar (and whatever else is also added) improves a specific "rum" when in fact (a) it is masking it and (b) we do not have the unaltered distillate for comparison? Answer: we can't convincingly make that argument. Now while it may be true that a taster may like a product that has been significantly altered, it begs the question: why add all those monkey droppings if the base rum was good? Another question is this: If sugaring is so common and good, then why do most distillers work so had to hide its use, refuse to admit it and/or to misrepresent these high levels as "extractives"?

The distillers in many cases are actually selling altered rums as "rum". While legally labelled "flavored rums" must largely be reviewed on the basis of personal preference, pure "rums" must stand on their own, and only in fair comparision to like rums of the same style.

[cyril]

nice post
i ilike the Matusalem example and it may be the same for the rhums agricole La Favorite tested lately (cuvées Privilege and cavistes).

someone told that during a visit to the distillerey, the master blender said they add prunes and vanilla into the barrels...and old and secret family receipe. I dont know if its true tho, what why communicate it there and not officially ? And more important, can we call it rhum then ?

[AK9]

I would like to consider the health perspective from the sugar.
We know alcohol is an issue but we are as adults aware of this and try to manage it.

How can we manage/deal high sugar content from health perspective when we are not aware of it?

[cyril]

mesured about 10 rhums for now, agricoles, no sugar, and some others among :


Barbancourt 5* Réserve Spéciale circa 70 (43°)
20° / mesured at 41
Sugar= 8g/L

Dictador 20 (40°)
20° / 38
sugar= 8g/L

English Harbour 1981 (40°)
21° > correction at 20°
38 > correction at 37,5
sugar = 8-12g/L

[Capn Jimbo]

It's possible to interpolate...


Hi and a big, big thanks to Cyril. These tests will be added to the Great Sugar Test Master List. I would only add regarding that the English Harbor will be reported at 10g as:

37% is 12g
38% is 8g

Therefore 37.5% is 10 grams by interpolation. It is perfectly acceptable to interpolate from the conversion chart when you are confident of your alcohol percentage reading (which you are).

Again, a huge thanks. It was also notable that Cyril found that other "agricoles" were sugar free. Cyril, are you able to report those as well?

[cyril]

rhum Dillon millésime 1975 (45°)
20°/ 44,9
Sugar=0g/L

Rhum Hors d'Âge G&P Dormoy (45°)
20° / 43,5°
Sugar= 4-9g/L

Rhum Clement single cask Vanille Intense (42,8°)
20° / 42,5
Sugar= 0-4 g/L

Rhum Damoiseau 8 yo (42°)
20 / 41,6
Sugar =0 -4g/L

Rhum JM 2000 (47,2°)
20° / 47
sugar=0

Velier Liberation 2000 (45°)
20 /45,6
sugar=0

Bielle rhum vieux hors d'age 50cl. circa 80's (42°)
20 / 40,1
sugar= 4-8g

Rhum Isautier 15 yo (40°)
20° / 40,1
s=0

Rhum Reimonenq 2008 (47°)
20° / 46,2
s= 5g/L (0-5)

and non agricole

Moon Import Enmore (EHP) 94/2001, 46° sherry port
20° / 45,6
s= 0-5

Silver Seal Dennery (St Lucia) (43°)
20° / 43,6
sugar=0