Single-Malt Scotch Whisky: The Fine Chocolate of the Beverage World

Since I have been scarcely old enough to consume alcoholic beverages, I have had an interest in Scotch Whisky. At the age of 21 as I tried to figure out what in the "spirits" category appealed to me, I kept feeling drawn, again and again, to Scotch. At first I just ordered whatever was affordable, but gradually I became more interested in pricier blends, and upon arriving in Columbia, MO to finish my B.A., I was introduced to the multifaceted world of single malts. I've never looked back. Now I have enough familiarity with the whisky-making process, various distilleries, and their geographical locations and styles, that I don't feel completely lost, but at the same time, I realize that there is a great deal left for me to learn, and so I persevere--let me tell you, it's a tough life. ;-)

At any rate, perhaps because I still have so much to learn, it only recently began to occur to me that fine chocolate and single-malt Scotch whisky have so many qualities that they share. True, this is not the first time that I have said that chocolate is analogous to Scotch in its complexity of flavor, but I have also said the same about chocolate and wine, beer, or even cheese. So let me take the opportunity to clarify that the similarity that I have now come to see between chocolate and Scotch is much more than just noting a certain level of shared complexity. In truth, I sometimes feel as though I'm tasting a distilled single-origin chocolate when enjoying a dram of a favorite single-malt.

Here are just a few reasons why this might be:

1) Texture and Body: Scotch has body and texture supported by various compounds, some of which, if they were encountered in wine, would be referred to as "tannins." Among other compounds, these tannins often give Scotch a particularly pleasant body and mouthfeel. Whisky writers may describe various characteristics as thick, creamy, viscous, light, medium or full, syrupy, firm, rounded, smooth, silky, oily, and even chewy. Length is also relevant when speaking of Scotch and can be impacted by such compounds. In all cases, I am reminded of fine chocolate.

Texture is one of the things that, as a chocolate maker, concerns me most. I am not generally partial to thin, fatty, or waxy chocolates, nor those that are overly refined with a sticky mouthfeel or coarsely refined and rough to the tongue. Rather, I prefer a fine texture, with a full, almost thick, mouthfeel, which I believe adds to length of the tasting experience, and impacts flavor in a positive way. I would certainly use creamy, viscous and even chewy as descriptors. Of course, some of these characteristics of chocolate are, in part, due to cocoa butter content, presence or absence of emulsifiers, and refinement/conching of the chocolate, but as with whisky, tannic polyphenols in chocolate also play a substantial role in this mouthfeel, and the length of the chocolate-tasting experience.

2) Aroma: Scotch often has, amongst other aromatic compounds, plentiful fruity esters due to initial fermentation, skillful distillation, and common cask aging in Sherry or other wine/spirit barrels, that may lend a bright, sweet, floral, honeyed and fruity mouthwatering quality to the beverage just as careful fermentation adds such qualities to a fine cacao-based chocolate. There are other aromatic profiles that may be shared by Scotch whisky and chocolate as well, including herbal, spicy, nutty, buttery, coffee-like, caramel and vanilla notes amongst others, but interestingly and more to the point, Scotch can even be found to have a clear chocolate note present in its flavor. A brief scan through the late Michael Jackson's (no not that one) Complete Guide to Single Malt Scotch shows more than a handful of references to chocolate, including descriptors such as: chocolate, black chocolate, chocolaty, spicy chocolate, chocolate cream, chocolate powder, bitter chocolate, light chocolate orange, and chocolate digestives amongst others. One difference, however, is that some Scotch whiskies, also contain simple compounds, called phenols without the "poly-" prefix, that are aromatic, smokey and medicinal in nature. These compounds are due to the smoke from peat fires, that are used to dry/flavor the malted barley in the kiln. In any case, when it comes to chocolate, smoke flavor, caused by simple phenols, has historically been seen as a defect. Still, despite any differences, Scotch and chocolate have a lot to share when it comes to aroma.

3) Taste (i.e. sweet, sour, salty, bitter, umami, etc.): As with most foods of more than just slight complexity, Scotch whisky can have any number of possible combinations of sweetness, acidity, bitterness, and even saltiness. Chocolate, of course, is often classified in terms of its bitterness to sweetness quotient: Bitter/unsweetened, Bittersweet, semisweet, sweet, etc., but chocolate also has an often overlooked acid component, though it can be far more obvious in some single-origin chocolates than others. Additionally, though it seems to have mostly fallen out of favor in dark chocolate, chocolate companies often used to add very small quantities of salt to help round out and balance the flavor. Still, balance is a subjective quality, and as with chocolate, where a mouthwatering tartness, overarching sweetness or rather more dry bitterness may be preferred in different amounts by the chocolate maker and chocolate connoisseur, single-malt Scotch whisky may also come across as anything from a sweet honeyed elixir to a drying, spicy, even medicinal and peppery concoction, and lets not forget the salty, seaweed-tinged single malts that exist. The beauty of both single-origin chocolate and single-malt Scotch, in this regard, is in the diversity and complexity of combinations available, to which there is essentially no end.

All of this has caused me to wonder if my preference for Scotch above all other spirits is based upon the same part of my palate that is drawn to chocolate above many other foods. Complexity, sure. But as you can see, there is more, much more that is shared in flavor and texture. Let's put this hypothesis to good use with a couple of pairings.

Here are a couple of my personal favorite single-malt Scotch whiskies that go very well with Patric Chocolate. I have made an effort to choose two bottles that are true bargains, as they are most amazing whiskies, yet come in at prices between $40 and $60. Both whiskies have been paired with Patric Chocolate's 67% Madagascar.

First a clearly complementary pairing:

Longmorn 15-year is a full-bodied whisky with clear aromas of apples and citrus that follow through to the palate. When combined with the fruity citrus qualities of the 67% the pairing really shines as the whisky helps elevate the prevalent fruits rouges of the bar, most notably the cherry, which fills the mouth and nose, and for its part, the chocolate highlights the otherwise light nuttiness and more noticeable spice of the Longmorn. This whisky and chocolate seem to meld together perfectly and effortlessly like two old friends.

Next a pairing with substantial contrast:

Talisker 10-year is a huge whisky with real island character--smoke coming through immediately in the nose and palate--brightened by only a touch of sweet fruit in the aroma, which is only slightly more noticeable on the tongue. While the Longmorn and 67% may go together like two old friends, the Talisker has a slightly more difficult relationship with the same chocolate. However, after careful attention, it becomes clear that Talikser's smokey character is supported by the subtle roasted edge and mild bitterness of the chocolate, as the chocolate's roasted quality seems to grow by the second. Furthermore, the fruit of the Talisker, which heretofore was more of a slight hint, expands in the mouth and nose, becoming far more encompassing. Best of friends, perhaps not, but the Talisker and 67% are like two sides of the same coin, each with its own important role to play as equal parts of the whole.


Eat chocolate; Enjoy Life!

Alan McClure
Chocolate Maker
Patric Chocolate

READ MORE - Single-Malt Scotch Whisky: The Fine Chocolate of the Beverage World

Chocolate: The New Fine Wine?

Those of you who have heard me speak, who follow this blog, or my tweets at http://www.twitter.com/PatricChocolate, know that I always dwell upon the many similarities between fine chocolate and other fine foods, with a specific emphasis on wine. I do this not because I want to charge more for fine chocolate, but because I truly believe that the similarities are clear when carefully considered, and that my comments will help people to think about chocolate in new and different ways. Of course, I work with chocolate each and every day, so this is something that is on my mind more than it will be for the average person, but lately the issue has been on my mind even more than usual.

I think that the main cause of this recurring thought is that I have been doing a lot of demos lately (demos are where, at stores or various events, I hand out samples of Patric Chocolate and talk about my products). Demos are interesting because I have the opportunity to interact with a lot of people who didn't stop by JUST to hear me speak, or to learn about fine chocolate, or even chocolate in general.

At a demo I am speaking with people who are at the store, for example, to do any number of things, from buying produce, to cereal, to seafood, and anything in between. There is no guarantee that the people with whom I am talking, in this fairly chocolate-neutral venue, have ever asked themselves the question "What makes good chocolate good?" All of this being the case, it should really have come as no surprise to find that when I asked people "What is your favorite chocolate?" most people would essentially say, "I've never thought about it."

Now, let me clarify that I am not speaking badly of the people who made these statements. They were clearly being honest with me, and that is exactly what I was looking for as an intro into a conversation about fine chocolate. Still, I can't help but be a bit disappointed that I didn't have more people who knew exactly what they liked and, importantly, why.

I guess that part of my disappointment rests upon the fact that people have much better selections of chocolate bars at their disposal now than they did 10-15 years ago, and that at least the _idea_ of fine chocolate no longer seems counter intuitive to most people. On top of that, people are constantly asking me about chocolate and wine pairings, so the comparison of chocolate and wine must somehow be infiltrating popular culture. Still, there are only about ten artisan bean-to-bar companies in the US, when compared with thousands of wineries, over one thousand craft breweries, and at least hundreds of artisan coffee roasters. You'd have far more luck finding someone in any American town espousing the beauty of single-bean coffee than single-origin chocolates. You'd have a much better chance finding serious beer appreciation clubs than any such chocolate clubs anywhere throughout the nation. And, you wouldn't have to look too hard to find a respectable dessert wine at many decent restaurants, despite the fact that the same restaurants would almost always be serving desserts made without an interesting chocolate.

All of this is to say that though we may be moving in the right direction, we are far from being at parity with the other items mentioned above. This being the case, and since part of this struggle, perhaps even most of it, has nothing to do with actually tasting chocolate and everything to do with learning more about chocolate, I'd like to take just a moment to highlight ten simple reasons why fine chocolate really should be seen to be in the same realm as other fine foods and beverages. I hope that you find them interesting.


1) Over 600 different aromatic constituents have been classified by food scientists while trying to understand what gives chocolate its flavor. These components make chocolate one of the most complex of any food or beverage in the world, and this doesn't even include the delicate balance of slight acidity, bitterness, and sweetness that we taste as a square of chocolate melts across the tongue.

2) Chocolate is made from fermented cacao seeds. This fermentation, as with any fermented food, adds complexity of flavor that simply doesn't exist in the raw material, just like with wine, beer, and cheese.

3) Chocolate is made from roasted cacao seeds. The roasting process, again, adds additional flavors and helps create and strengthen the quintessential and inimitable "chocolatey" note. Flavor technologists have been trying to mimic chocolate's flavor for many years and still have not come up with an acceptable substitute.

4) Combining #2 and #3 above, chocolate is one of only a handful of foods that are both fermented and roasted. This is a large part of the reason why #1 above is the case.

5) Terroir, a term used to discuss the impact that soil-type and macro- and micro-climate have on grapes, and therefore on the wine made from grapes, is also entirely relevant when it comes to cacao as any chocophile who has enjoyed single-estate chocolate from differing years could notice.

6) The definition of terroir can be expanded when it comes to cacao to include the naturally occurring yeast and bacteria populations in a certain place and the impact that they have on the fermentation of the cacao, since the fermentation of cacao is due to these naturally occurring microbes, and not added cultures. This is one reason that cacao from Madagascar's Sambirano Valley, for example, tends to have such bright citrus and berry tones to it (i.e. The specific mix of bacteria and yeast in that area help to create such flavors). Compare this to other naturally fermented fine foods such as some wines, and Belgium's tradition of naturally fermented Lambic beers.

7)Single-origin chocolates can have as many differences as similarities, just like single-bean coffees, leading to chocolates that can seem as different as night and day to the initiated. Some may be intensely fruity, while others are quite earthy, for example.

8) From freshly harvested seed to finished bar, chocolate takes longer to make than most beer. Craft chocolate makers may even age their dark chocolate for months to impact the flavor in positive ways before molding it into bars--something that used to be common practice in the early 1900's.

9)Fine chocolate is very rich, and is made for being appreciated in small quantities. Eating an entire bar of fine chocolate often takes from several days to a week, and in this way is comparable to fine wines that are intended to be appreciated in moderation instead of consumed as quickly as possible. For this reason fine chocolate is not the same as chocolate candy, and even further removed from mass-market chocolate candies, with their heavy doses of sugar.

10) Fine chocolate is best enjoyed slowly with your full attention on the melt, texture, and release of flavor of the chocolate. It shouldn't be chomped and gulped down as quickly as possible or the true complexity and character of its flavor will never be unlocked and uncovered. In this way chocolate is also analogous to artisan coffees, fine wine, and craft beers among other fine foods.


Hopefully most of you will find these facts as interesting as I do. My wish in sharing them is two fold:

1) That you keep these things in mind as you appreciate chocolate in the future, always pushing to further expand your comprehension of this amazingly delicious and complex food.

2) That you share what you have learned with those around you that might appreciate it.

Chocolate companies cannot change the public perception of chocolate alone. It really will take each and every one of you to help create the chocolate sea change that we need. Sure, such a change will help Patric Chocolate and companies like it, but more importantly, it will lead to a growing market for fine chocolate that can support more privately owned small chocolate making companies, thereby creating a substantial variety of quality fine chocolates for the marketplace. Even those who think that they don't have a preference will have to take note, and as for the rest of us...well, we will be in chocolate heaven.

Very best,

Alan

Eat Chocolate; Enjoy Life

READ MORE - Chocolate: The New Fine Wine?

Chocolate Aftertaste and Microbes in Your Mouth

Hi all,

Yes, I know it is an odd title for a blog post, but I came across an article at Science Daily that really got me thinking about the impact of our invisible little friends on the flavor of chocolate. Of course I've already talked about the impact of bacteria and yeasts on the flavor of chocolate as regards post-harvest processing of cacao such as fermentation--where I've compared the result to wine and beer--but the flavor impacts that I'm thinking about now have nothing to do with changing the chocolate itself, and everything to do with what happens after the finished chocolate is in your mouth.

The authors of the study cited in the article above have noted that certain chemical compounds that are normally tasteless, when exposed to microbes that are naturally present in the mouth and/or throat, are transformed into aromatic compounds that impact flavor in interesting and unique ways, in some cases giving off what we would consider to be the "characteristic odor" of a particular food. Specifically, the paper focuses on what we often call "aftertaste." The idea is that it takes some time--maybe 20-30 seconds--for the bacteria to carry out the transformation from the odorless compound to the aromatic compound, so it isn't until the end of a tasting experience that certain flavors become obvious.

Thinking back to all of the chocolates that I've tasted, some with magnificent, long-lasting finishes, and others that seem to spiral so quickly to an unsatisfying demise, it makes me wonder once more about the reason for the differences, and whether the microbes in my mouth had any say in the matter. There are a million implications to all of this, including whether the compounds that these bacteria might be processing are naturally present in cacao or not, and if not, how they get there--fermentation, oxidation during drying, roasting??

Lots of food for thought, so to speak, and speaking of thought, who knows, maybe they'll find out that there are microbes that change the way we think as well.


'Til next time,

Alan

READ MORE - Chocolate Aftertaste and Microbes in Your Mouth

The Chemistry of Chocolate Part 2: General Cocoa Bean Chemistry

Chocolate doesn’t just grow on trees. Well, actually it does…kind of. Chocolate is made from the fermented and dried seeds--often called cocoa beans--of a fruit, a large berry in fact, that grows on a tropical tree between approximately 20ºN and 20ºS. It was once commonly thought that two subspecies of cacao trees existed, Theobroma cacao ssp. cacao—commonly called Criollo—and Theobroma cacao ssp. sphaerocarpum—commonly called Forastero. However, more recent research suggests that the idea of two separate subspecies is incorrect, since though Criollo and Forastero populations certainly have differing phenotypes, they are sometimes far more similar than different, with some Criollo and Forastero populations being much more alike than either is similar to various hybrid populations. We will touch on this issue more in this installment of The Chemistry of Chocolate, as it is quite relevant to the chemistry-based role that genetics can play on the flavor of cacao. First, however, let it be noted that it is common in the chocolate industry, and especially in chocolate marketing within the industry, to talk about the following three categories of cacao: Criollo, Forastero, and Trinitario.

We have already seen the terms Criollo and Forastero, and the name “Trinitario” stems from the hybridized trees of Criollo and Forastero parentage in Trinidad following a “blast”—either disease-based or hurricane-based—in the first half of the 18th century. Because the name Trinitario had relevance in speaking of the first well-known hybrids of cacao, it gradually also came to be used in a generic sense by many people, for almost any hybrid, despite the fact that many hybrids have nothing to do with Trinidad as their origin. Therefore, though in Trinidad there is still said to be true Trinitario cacao, in the sense of it being closely genetically related to the original, and though some of this cacao was spread to other geographical regions, the term is generally more confusing than it is helpful. For this reason, I will not use the term Trinitario, but will use the more generic term “hybrid,” which, though leaving much to be desired, since it lacks the specificity needed to delineate the hundreds—at least—of cacao hybrids that now exist, will serve the purposes of the Chemistry of Chocolate series just fine. Finally, then, for ease of discussion, we can generally say that there are three main categories of cacao: Criollo, Forastero, and hybrids, and within each group there are certainly countless populations with divergences in phenotypes and flavor profiles of prepared samples, and this means that none of these categories can be seen as a single homogeneous "variety." However, there are also some general rules that can be stated, which are gleaned from a study of the various populations that are generally seen as fitting within the three categories listed above. Let us first discuss Criollo.

We know that Criollo cacao was historically cultivated by the Olmecs--perhaps as early as 1000 BCE-- and then the Maya in Central America and Southern Mexico, and it is likely that these Central American cacao populations had originally come from populations in western Venezuela and the surrounding areas, where such Criollo populations continue to exist, though often in slightly hybridized forms. Interestingly, Criollo matures more slowly, produces fewer fruit, and has low disease and pest resistance. With all of these seemingly negative qualities related to Criollo, one might wonder why the Olmecs and those pre-historic peoples who came before them even bothered to propogate it. The answer is likely in the flavor, in that the Criollo cacao populations are generally particularly nutty, mild, lacking bitterness and astringency, and therefore are often more subtle and pleasing as regards flavor. This being the probable case, despite the drawbacks of such cacao, it gradually came to be favored by certain indigenous peoples of Central America, finally making its way from its likely origin in Venezuela, up to Guatemala, Belize and southern Mexico. The underlying chemical reasons for the flavor of the Criollo cacao, which are related to the genetics of this type, are also quite interesting, and will give us a foundation for dealing with the chemistry of the other cacao types.

One clue that helps to unlock the mystery of the general flavor differences between categories of cacao, is that while Criollo seeds have white interiors prior to fermentation and drying, Forastero seeds have purple interiors. The missing purple chemical in Criollo is the same one that colors polyphenol-rich blueberries: a flavonoid bound to a sugar that, when taken as a whole, is called an anthocyanin glycoside. Though this compound itself is not thought to be bitter or astringent, it has been noted that where it is present in cacao, certain other flavonoids are present as well, and in higher amounts than in cacao with no purple pigment. These other flavonoids, such as catechin and epicatechin, tend to be bitter in their simpler non-complexed form, and in their complexed forms, somewhat less bitter but more astringent. Astringency is a dry/puckery feeling in the mouth caused by the higher molecular weight flavonoid polymers--often referred to as tannins--reacting with protein in the saliva and on the tongue, and though always present in cacao, in excess, the sensation can be quite unpleasant.

Interestingly, not only does the relative lack of these particular flavonoids lead to a less harsh product in the case of Criollo, which has about 2/3 of the amount that Forastero has, but the balance of flavor is shifted even further, as other flavor notes within the cacao become more noticeable in the absence of the flavonoid harshness. Therefore nutty, fruity and other positive qualities of the cacao tend to be more noticeable. However, flavonoids aren’t the only bitter chemicals that are present in Forastero. Theobromine, an alkaloid related to caffeine, is also quite bitter, and present in perceptible quantities in Forastero. We will touch upon theobromine in more depth when discussing roasting later in the series, where it will have a large role to play. Another potential difference between Forastero and Criollo cacao, though the amounts of data present to support it are still limited, is that Criollo or Criollo-heavy hybrids may generally have more free amino acids in their composition. This could well play a role regarding flavor differences between Criollo and Forastero during roasting, a possibility that we will also discuss later in this series.

As for hybrids, they can have many different combinations of the above Criollo and Forastero traits. They can seem remarkably similar to Criollo, with only slightly bitter and astringent, very light, pink cotyledons, or they can seem far more like Forastero, with purple, more bitter seeds, and sometimes hybrids can actually include many more bitter and astringent compounds than even average Forastero populations. Hybrids can, thus, not be lumped into one category for the sake of flavor description or internal seed chemical composition, especially since the degree of variation within the whole range of hybrid populations far exceeds variation within Criollo and Forastero populations. This is one reason why, though all three terms--Forastero, Criollo, and hybrid--can be tricky in terms of usage, almost always requiring a bit of supplementary definition, the aforementioned term "Trinitario" is almost useless unless very clearly defined. That said, Criollo also risks becoming a useless term as some people have tended to refer to any hybrid with some amount of noticeable Criollo parentage as Criollo, when, as a hybrid, it obviously cannot be. It is reasonable, therefore, to want to know the whole story behind someone's usage of the terms Criollo or Trinitario before taking them at face value.

Moving on--so far we have taken a brief look at what role genetics can play in terms of determining cacao chemistry and flavor, but though genetics play a large role regarding cacao flavor, due to flavonoid, theobromine, and, potentially, free amino acid levels, the environment and climate in which the cacao trees grow also substantially impact the chemistry of the cacao seeds and therefore their flavor. As with all fruit trees, the health of the tree itself is important, and so weather patterns that impact temperature, rainfall, humidity and solar radiation levels all play a role in the flavor of the seeds within the cacao fruit. In addition to these various climactic conditions, soil-type, other plant species growing in close proximity--for example shade trees or leguminous atmospheric nitrogen-fixing plants--and even mycorrhizal fungi in the soil that have a symbiotic relationship with cacao, all make substantial impacts on the health, and therefore the cellular chemistry, of the tree and its fruit. In fact, all of these conditions could arguably be combined underneath a single umbrella-term that the French call “terroir”, a word that one normally hears used in relation to grape vineyards and wine. However, it is equally applicable to other crops, and cacao among them. Terroir is responsible, to quite a degree, for the flavor of cacao that comes from different regions, origins, or even given plots of land within regions. Additionally, the various impacts that terroir can have on cacao stretch beyond the growing location and reach into post-harvest processing, as each location, or origin, has different microbial populations that impact the chemistry and flavor of the cacao in dramatic ways. The next part of the Chemistry of Chocolate series, therefore, will delve into this realm of post-harvest processing, as we cover harvest, fermentation, and drying.

READ MORE - The Chemistry of Chocolate Part 2: General Cocoa Bean Chemistry