- Thread starter
- #21
The 2oz bag of match blend arrived today.
I should be able to try a bowl (or three) of it in the next 24-48 hours. I promise to share my impressions as soon as I have burned enough to do so.
An update on Prince Albert, et al.
- Thread starter Columbo
- Start date
The 2oz bag of match blend arrived today.
I should be able to try a bowl (or three) of it in the next 24-48 hours. I promise to share my impressions as soon as I have burned enough to do so.
Thanks. Hope it works for you. I’m going to order a tub of SWRA at your recommendation. I’m having a bowl of LLRR at the moment and enjoying it mutchly.
- Thread starter
- #23
A Comparison of Prince Albert to Sutliff PA Match (Duke Albert):
Let me start by saying I don’t write tobacco reviews. I’m doing this by request, so don’t get mad. I don’t have an account at tobaccoreviews, and don’t pay too much attention to what they say over there, as there are too many variables to most of them. Half of the reviews are a little silly if you ask me. For the exact same reasons, I’m going to tell you to consider this comparison with a grain of salt. You don’t have my palate, and I don’t have yours. You might taste something entirely different. I’m just an old piper that smokes a lot.
This is a comparison between recent Middleton-production Prince Albert (PA), and a Sutliff PA-match blend called Duke Albert.
I can describe some controls and standards that I applied:
The PA was from a 3/4 depleted tub that had been opened for 2-3 weeks, so was adequately relaxed for immediate smoking. The Match was freshly bagged in a 2 oz quantity, and had spent three days in shipment and a day resting sealed on my pipe counter. The PA had been previously cellared for about 6-8 months, and was current year production when purchased. I have no idea as to the age of the Match, as it was a bulk purchase from the vendor’s canister. However, I will note that at least in the case of PA, it is cellar-neutral, and neither improves or degrades with age.
Both were smoked in my oldest and most familiar pipe, a modest unfiltered French-made poker of unknown brand which is now in its sixth decade of smoking. The control beverage was hot coffee (McCafe bought on sale, and kindly made by Mrs. Columbo).
Tobacco was scoop and gravity-loaded (as I usually do with PA), with a very light single finger tamp and a pinch of tobacco dust on each. In deference to the Sutliff, all bowls were allowed to rest for 20 minutes after loading before lighting (something I do not normally do with PA). All lights were butane.
Because I am very familiar with PA, only one bowl of it was smoked. It ran its usual 30-35 minutes, with about 1/4 bowl or less of dry dottle remaining. The pipe was swabbed out before the changeover to the Match blend, so it was smoked in a warm, but not damp, pipe.
A 30 minute break ensued (the dog needed a run).
Three bowls of Match were then smoked, with a swab down of the pipe after bowl two, again in deference to the fresh Sutliff.
What I tasted:
Let me start by articulating my normal benchmark with PA. It is typical nutty mild Burley, with a very slight undertone of cocoa, and the slightest hint of what can be best described as a light molasses. Not really sweet, but more of walnuts with a dash of cocoa. Not bitter. Not as sweet as SWR, or as rich as LLRR. Not strong, not ashy, but just a mild nuttiness with something a little less sweet than chocolate lingering around. A gentle aftertaste that quickly fades. The quintessential comfort smoke you can smoke all day long. I can’t speak to room note, other than that it is well known already, and Mrs. Columbo finds it soothing. Same with the tub note, everybody knows what PA smells like (pleasant raisin/plum like smell).
I explain this, as it is indicative as to the pipe. If there were any unfair ghosts running about, a bowl of PA would have conjured them out to my tongue. The holy waters of the PA confirmed that the soul of this old pipe remained pure and unfouled by wicked tobacco spirits.
Now, on to the Match blend.
The first difference was as soon as you zipped open the bag. A much sweeter note. The Cavendish and whatever’s on it hits you right in the snozz. It was a step or two closer to Captain Black White in that regard. Don’t take that as an insult; there is nothing offensive about the pouch note of CBW. Not worse or better than native PA, just different.
The second opening difference was the cut and color. Much thicker, wetter, ribbon cut, and much lighter, too. Perhaps Sutliff is going to stash the flavor in its Cavendish and tossed some plain white Burley along for the ride. The Match was slightly harder to load, and was more of a pitchfork-it-in affair. Again, none of this is better or worse. Just different.
It lighted easily, and crackled a lot, and threw off a lot of smoke. This is a wetter blend for sure, and will run a little hotter if you don’t pay attention to it and over draw it. Three bowls, and my trusty poker was starting to get soggy. But no bites or other nasties from overheating, and I pushed it a bit at times to see. That may actually be an advantage to a less experienced piper, as the sassier flavor on the match won’t run away and hide like PA can if you over draw it. It’s generally a well-behaved burn (it won’t take liberties with your pipe like the randy Captain can), and should be better still once dried a bit more. It required more relights than PA (but perhaps we can attribute that to the freshness of the sample). It had slightly longer legs than PA, and I got an easy 40 minutes of of the bowls, with about 1/4 bowl of wet dottle at the end (but much less than an an aromatic would have left).
Sweeter. And creamier. That came out right off the first light. The Match is significantly sweeter than PA. SWR sweet, if not sweeter ... but in a different, fruity way. There was a hint of raisin or some other fruit going on somewhere. A very slight tartiness. Like a distant ghost of Velvet was malingering around in my cake. Maybe Sutliff’s Cavendish is VA based. Thankfully, it only smelled like CBW in the bag; there were no Campfire marshmallows burning anywhere with this. I didn’t taste any anise or licorice in the Match, either. It is not a complex blend. Did I mention that it’s sweeter?
But all of this new flavor was competing with the natural nuttiness that would normally be found in PA at the forefront. The Burley was there in the Match, but the sweet fruitiness was jumping around it, and where PA surrenders its flavor charms in subdued hues like a polite lady, and requires a gentleman’s soft draw to do so, the Match was showering me with enough sweetness to make finding the natural Burley a little harder.
Compared to the demure and polite (but beautiful) PA that needs to be tenderly coaxed before she’ll dance with you, the Match was the sassy girl that loved to dance, no matter how hard you tossed her around the dance floor (that’s your pipe for those now confused). Imagine going to a dance in 1920 vs. one in 1955, and you can visualize how these two express their joy.
Just an aside to really rock your world, it confirms those old codgers were better with the ladies then you could ever imagine.
And to steal from the Wendy’s ad, “Where’s the cocoa?” I couldn’t find it. Maybe there was some milk chocolate dancing around somewhere behind that fruity sweet chorus line. Something resembling milk chocolate showed up a little stronger after mid bowl, once the sweetness had finally danced itself out. The Burley then started to make a later appearance with a little more authority. Much better. The closest the Match got to native PA was near the end of the bowl, after all the fireworks had died down.
Similar to the smoke, the Match leaves a nice, creamy, sweet aftertaste that goes on a little longer than PA’s.
The Match is a richer smoke than PA, but in a different way. Not cloyingly sweet or aromatic strong, but sweeter, again, in a SWR or CH kind of way. It’s the Sutliff Cavendish I’m sure. It’s a mild, easy smoke. Vitamin N is no stronger than PA. I have no comments on room note, as I smoked this alone. I got no complaints about the area afterward, so consider it a wife-friendly blend.
All in all, the Match is a lovely, easy going blend, but it’s not PA. It’s a bit more flavorful, and the flavors tend to be more of the added variety, as opposed to the plain jane natural Burley flavor that PA builds its house on. Not bad, just different. And you don’t have to work hard to get them. A light and and wink, and she’s running across the dance floor at you. I thought it was a better SWR match, and that’s a good thing. At times, it’s a bit sweeter than SWR, too. SWR has a nice ability to hang on to its essential Burley taste while dashing a little sugar along the way. I think this Sutliff match struggled on that tightrope at times. Hey, you try to dance the jitterbug on a tightrope. Again, I think it’s the Cavendish. I don’t know why people think these basic OTCs have Cavendish in them. They don’t.
What I suspect is going on (a WAG) is that unlike a big OTC blender that starts its recipe right with the casing of the main base leaf, Sutliff is using a more generic Burley, and is applying its recipe not so much via the casing, but through whatever toppings it is adding to the blend (and that Cavindish). I don’t fault Sutliff for this at all. The major OTCs historically process enormous amounts of their product, and can dedicate more of the processing steps to the recipe. Sutliff’s Match is necessarily a small batch blend, and they are not going to custom case an entire carload of base leaf specifically for it. Playing with toppings makes more sense, and gives the match blender more flexibility. But there are some unavoidable tradeoffs. Such as how these toppings will cellar, and how they are going to behave in a burning bowl. It’s a quasi-aromatic conundrum.
End Thoughts:
I don’t think the Match is an all-day-long smoke for me. It would get my mouth too sweet after 6-8 bowls. But it is definitely an all-afternoon one, and would make a great after dinner sojourn. For the 2-3 bowl a day smoker, this is nice stuff, and cheap, too. If you like it, buy it, smoke it, enjoy it. Tastes roughly like the OTC big-name genre. But it’s not PA. And it’s not SWR, either. Perhaps SWR+, with a dash of Velvet.
And perhaps it should just be judged on its own merits, and not by comparison. That’s why I don’t chase matches. This is a good solid blend in its own right. But I’ll just call it Sutliff’s OTC Tribute Blend.
I was originally planning to dump in what was left of the Match bag into my tub of PA. But after comparing them, I don’t think that would be fair to EITHER blend. I am going to enjoy the rest of this Tribute Blend on its own terms, on its all-fours, over the next week. For me, it’s a lovely mild dessert Burley (or rather a BurCav) that runs near the OTCs, and doesn’t stray too far from them to cause a taste shock like a bowl of Aperitif might.
And those are my thoughts.
Let me start by saying I don’t write tobacco reviews. I’m doing this by request, so don’t get mad. I don’t have an account at tobaccoreviews, and don’t pay too much attention to what they say over there, as there are too many variables to most of them. Half of the reviews are a little silly if you ask me. For the exact same reasons, I’m going to tell you to consider this comparison with a grain of salt. You don’t have my palate, and I don’t have yours. You might taste something entirely different. I’m just an old piper that smokes a lot.
This is a comparison between recent Middleton-production Prince Albert (PA), and a Sutliff PA-match blend called Duke Albert.
I can describe some controls and standards that I applied:
The PA was from a 3/4 depleted tub that had been opened for 2-3 weeks, so was adequately relaxed for immediate smoking. The Match was freshly bagged in a 2 oz quantity, and had spent three days in shipment and a day resting sealed on my pipe counter. The PA had been previously cellared for about 6-8 months, and was current year production when purchased. I have no idea as to the age of the Match, as it was a bulk purchase from the vendor’s canister. However, I will note that at least in the case of PA, it is cellar-neutral, and neither improves or degrades with age.
Both were smoked in my oldest and most familiar pipe, a modest unfiltered French-made poker of unknown brand which is now in its sixth decade of smoking. The control beverage was hot coffee (McCafe bought on sale, and kindly made by Mrs. Columbo).
Tobacco was scoop and gravity-loaded (as I usually do with PA), with a very light single finger tamp and a pinch of tobacco dust on each. In deference to the Sutliff, all bowls were allowed to rest for 20 minutes after loading before lighting (something I do not normally do with PA). All lights were butane.
Because I am very familiar with PA, only one bowl of it was smoked. It ran its usual 30-35 minutes, with about 1/4 bowl or less of dry dottle remaining. The pipe was swabbed out before the changeover to the Match blend, so it was smoked in a warm, but not damp, pipe.
A 30 minute break ensued (the dog needed a run).
Three bowls of Match were then smoked, with a swab down of the pipe after bowl two, again in deference to the fresh Sutliff.
What I tasted:
Let me start by articulating my normal benchmark with PA. It is typical nutty mild Burley, with a very slight undertone of cocoa, and the slightest hint of what can be best described as a light molasses. Not really sweet, but more of walnuts with a dash of cocoa. Not bitter. Not as sweet as SWR, or as rich as LLRR. Not strong, not ashy, but just a mild nuttiness with something a little less sweet than chocolate lingering around. A gentle aftertaste that quickly fades. The quintessential comfort smoke you can smoke all day long. I can’t speak to room note, other than that it is well known already, and Mrs. Columbo finds it soothing. Same with the tub note, everybody knows what PA smells like (pleasant raisin/plum like smell).
I explain this, as it is indicative as to the pipe. If there were any unfair ghosts running about, a bowl of PA would have conjured them out to my tongue. The holy waters of the PA confirmed that the soul of this old pipe remained pure and unfouled by wicked tobacco spirits.
Now, on to the Match blend.
The first difference was as soon as you zipped open the bag. A much sweeter note. The Cavendish and whatever’s on it hits you right in the snozz. It was a step or two closer to Captain Black White in that regard. Don’t take that as an insult; there is nothing offensive about the pouch note of CBW. Not worse or better than native PA, just different.
The second opening difference was the cut and color. Much thicker, wetter, ribbon cut, and much lighter, too. Perhaps Sutliff is going to stash the flavor in its Cavendish and tossed some plain white Burley along for the ride. The Match was slightly harder to load, and was more of a pitchfork-it-in affair. Again, none of this is better or worse. Just different.
It lighted easily, and crackled a lot, and threw off a lot of smoke. This is a wetter blend for sure, and will run a little hotter if you don’t pay attention to it and over draw it. Three bowls, and my trusty poker was starting to get soggy. But no bites or other nasties from overheating, and I pushed it a bit at times to see. That may actually be an advantage to a less experienced piper, as the sassier flavor on the match won’t run away and hide like PA can if you over draw it. It’s generally a well-behaved burn (it won’t take liberties with your pipe like the randy Captain can), and should be better still once dried a bit more. It required more relights than PA (but perhaps we can attribute that to the freshness of the sample). It had slightly longer legs than PA, and I got an easy 40 minutes of of the bowls, with about 1/4 bowl of wet dottle at the end (but much less than an an aromatic would have left).
Sweeter. And creamier. That came out right off the first light. The Match is significantly sweeter than PA. SWR sweet, if not sweeter ... but in a different, fruity way. There was a hint of raisin or some other fruit going on somewhere. A very slight tartiness. Like a distant ghost of Velvet was malingering around in my cake. Maybe Sutliff’s Cavendish is VA based. Thankfully, it only smelled like CBW in the bag; there were no Campfire marshmallows burning anywhere with this. I didn’t taste any anise or licorice in the Match, either. It is not a complex blend. Did I mention that it’s sweeter?
But all of this new flavor was competing with the natural nuttiness that would normally be found in PA at the forefront. The Burley was there in the Match, but the sweet fruitiness was jumping around it, and where PA surrenders its flavor charms in subdued hues like a polite lady, and requires a gentleman’s soft draw to do so, the Match was showering me with enough sweetness to make finding the natural Burley a little harder.
Compared to the demure and polite (but beautiful) PA that needs to be tenderly coaxed before she’ll dance with you, the Match was the sassy girl that loved to dance, no matter how hard you tossed her around the dance floor (that’s your pipe for those now confused). Imagine going to a dance in 1920 vs. one in 1955, and you can visualize how these two express their joy.
Just an aside to really rock your world, it confirms those old codgers were better with the ladies then you could ever imagine.
And to steal from the Wendy’s ad, “Where’s the cocoa?” I couldn’t find it. Maybe there was some milk chocolate dancing around somewhere behind that fruity sweet chorus line. Something resembling milk chocolate showed up a little stronger after mid bowl, once the sweetness had finally danced itself out. The Burley then started to make a later appearance with a little more authority. Much better. The closest the Match got to native PA was near the end of the bowl, after all the fireworks had died down.
Similar to the smoke, the Match leaves a nice, creamy, sweet aftertaste that goes on a little longer than PA’s.
The Match is a richer smoke than PA, but in a different way. Not cloyingly sweet or aromatic strong, but sweeter, again, in a SWR or CH kind of way. It’s the Sutliff Cavendish I’m sure. It’s a mild, easy smoke. Vitamin N is no stronger than PA. I have no comments on room note, as I smoked this alone. I got no complaints about the area afterward, so consider it a wife-friendly blend.
All in all, the Match is a lovely, easy going blend, but it’s not PA. It’s a bit more flavorful, and the flavors tend to be more of the added variety, as opposed to the plain jane natural Burley flavor that PA builds its house on. Not bad, just different. And you don’t have to work hard to get them. A light and and wink, and she’s running across the dance floor at you. I thought it was a better SWR match, and that’s a good thing. At times, it’s a bit sweeter than SWR, too. SWR has a nice ability to hang on to its essential Burley taste while dashing a little sugar along the way. I think this Sutliff match struggled on that tightrope at times. Hey, you try to dance the jitterbug on a tightrope. Again, I think it’s the Cavendish. I don’t know why people think these basic OTCs have Cavendish in them. They don’t.
What I suspect is going on (a WAG) is that unlike a big OTC blender that starts its recipe right with the casing of the main base leaf, Sutliff is using a more generic Burley, and is applying its recipe not so much via the casing, but through whatever toppings it is adding to the blend (and that Cavindish). I don’t fault Sutliff for this at all. The major OTCs historically process enormous amounts of their product, and can dedicate more of the processing steps to the recipe. Sutliff’s Match is necessarily a small batch blend, and they are not going to custom case an entire carload of base leaf specifically for it. Playing with toppings makes more sense, and gives the match blender more flexibility. But there are some unavoidable tradeoffs. Such as how these toppings will cellar, and how they are going to behave in a burning bowl. It’s a quasi-aromatic conundrum.
End Thoughts:
I don’t think the Match is an all-day-long smoke for me. It would get my mouth too sweet after 6-8 bowls. But it is definitely an all-afternoon one, and would make a great after dinner sojourn. For the 2-3 bowl a day smoker, this is nice stuff, and cheap, too. If you like it, buy it, smoke it, enjoy it. Tastes roughly like the OTC big-name genre. But it’s not PA. And it’s not SWR, either. Perhaps SWR+, with a dash of Velvet.
And perhaps it should just be judged on its own merits, and not by comparison. That’s why I don’t chase matches. This is a good solid blend in its own right. But I’ll just call it Sutliff’s OTC Tribute Blend.
I was originally planning to dump in what was left of the Match bag into my tub of PA. But after comparing them, I don’t think that would be fair to EITHER blend. I am going to enjoy the rest of this Tribute Blend on its own terms, on its all-fours, over the next week. For me, it’s a lovely mild dessert Burley (or rather a BurCav) that runs near the OTCs, and doesn’t stray too far from them to cause a taste shock like a bowl of Aperitif might.
And those are my thoughts.
Thank you for your excellent observations without the use of "review speak". I haven't had PA from a tub for nine years or so and look forward to SGT production as soon as available and will be able to make a more educated evaluation as I look forward to buying another tub. My pouches are several years old as well except for one I just received from a kind fellow piper who also included a tin of EGR as well as other goodies. I did have a bowl or two of the EGR but having had several bowls of LLRR during the day, I will have to wait for my first morning smoke to catch all of its goodness. By the way, I really like the idea of the "Codger Cabin" thread and hope it becomes frequently used as I enjoy those blends over others these days and perhaps see some others come into the fold.
Had a bowl from a new pouch;(generously donated) of new production PA this morning and it was decidedly different from the Match as well as the nine year old pouches I’ve been smoking from. I believe the difference between PA and Match PA is to the same degree as the difference between CH and CH Match. Close but no cigar I suppose.
- Thread starter
- #27
It's been a while, but I had a similar experience to the above PA match with their Edgeworth match. Close, but a little sweeter and some other things going on because of the Cavendish. Others have called their matches more "syrupy", but I won't go that far.
Sutliff is very proud of their Cavendish. And their matches are very nice smokes, whether they nail the original or not.
As I snuck into that above novella, if you like a match, smoke and enjoy it ... as its own unique blend.
And I do. Most of the Matches I enjoy are blends I never had in the original. I did smoke Edgeworth slices in the late 60’s and 70’s when made by Laurs I believe but I have no memory of the flavor now. I smoke both LLRR and Match RR and like both. Like the cut of LLRR better - easier to smoke. Now that you mentioned it, I do prefer the absence of black cavendish in PA. I do like the Dutch cavendish from time to time.
simon1
Self Ignored by Vista
I just got back from the local smoke shop and they didn't have Carter Hall or Prince Albert. Clerk said they couldn't get it from the people they buy it from and thought it had been discontinued. No one seems to know why the supply is so bad. I still have some though. The shop did have SWR, Captain Black, Velvet and other codger blends, but I have some of those also.
- Thread starter
- #30
The more I smoke of this match ... that sweet fruitiness I keep finding is more like a grape or winey flavor. Almost like an EGR Light.
I’ll be smoking up a good bit more of it this evening. It is an excellent mild dessert smoke.
I much preferred the old match blends that House of Windsor developed; the Sutliff iterations of the same blends just weren't as enjoyable for me. Trying one was like trying a recipe out of one of those "make (insert quick-service restaurant's signature dish) just like they do at (insert quick-service restaurant!) recipes - close, but no cigar if you'll pardon the pun.
Russ Ouellette has a bunch of match blends available at PipesandCigars; the ones I've tried were pretty good. I know I liked his takes on Barking Dog and Revelation.
Russ Ouellette has a bunch of match blends available at PipesandCigars; the ones I've tried were pretty good. I know I liked his takes on Barking Dog and Revelation.
I’m fine with Sutliff matches for the most part but still prefer the remaining originals,LLRR (a quasi original), SRW, H&H, CH, PA and to some degree Velvet which I need to spend more time with. One blend I have smoked a lot of is Walnut and Sutliff hit that nail on the head and took the bite out of it to boot.
Last edited:
I had a bad start to the day where nothing tasted quite right but after a bowl of a Balkan my palate got right and I spent the rest of the day and evening with PA and we got along famously. I’m beginning to understand it better now and will get a tub when available. I did finally identify the Oriental in a Balkan today. Proud of myself as I’m not good at picking a blend apart. For the life of me, I don’t get nuts from Burley. Except for citrus and cocoa, relating to food flavors escapes me completely.
Having missed out on most of the old classic codger blends, that's about where I am. Enjoying my Match blends on their own merits. In a way, I'm very lucky never to have loved and lost. In that same way, I feel for you guys as much as I feel for the Sutliff blenders trying to recreate iconic blends with what's available today, in today's heavily regulated world.
- Thread starter
- #35
It’s not so bad. Most of the major classic brands are still around, and are for the most part well-blended. The “it tasted better 60 years ago” knock is not quite as accurate as it seems.
And PA and CH will soon be back, probably better than ever under STG.
The Internet has overcome a lot of the obstacles so far. I can still get most anything I like delivered to my door: OTCs, and a whole lot more.
I’ve spent three days smoking PA (Current production and purchase). Actually went through the entire pouch. Used various cobs and briars. I’m a believer now to the point it would qualify as my “desert island” choice. I’m happy I made the effort. I’m now smoking PA from a newly opened ten year old pouch hoping this will soon be available again. Perhaps my half pound of Match PA will bridge the gap
It won't be the same, but it'll still scratch that itch PA, CH, ETC scratched. For example, neither of us has had the original Field and Stream. But we find the match a slightly delightful smoke all the same.
I just hope any updates to my beloved Carter Hall are just as tasteful.
I’m quite happy I never had or recall having the original F & S. The Match is great - probably better actually. If STG produces PA and CH I’m pretty sure they will be good. They will be the same blend since they will be bought as they currently are and not approximations. STG may even use better grades of tobacco. We will have to wait and see on that one though. STG produces quality blends.
