Aromatics not so flavorful?

[Jbird45]

So when I first started this hobby I was finding tobaccos that smelled amazing and when I went to smoke them I always wound up disappointed. I never quite got the flavor I wanted. The smells of the burning smoke were similar to the smell in the package, but no matter how hard I try I couldn't get true flavors of cherry or others. There was one time when I had packed a pipe the day before and didn't get a chance to smoke it, and when I lit it up outside and it was 15 degrees out I got a lot of great flavor.

I was chalking this up to inexperience, but I have been trying fast smokes, smoking as slow as I can, I bought a new butane lighter to try and avoid the chemical taste some people claim my zippo would have given, I've tried smoking wetter and drier tobacco, and I just can't get the results I want.

Recently though I cracked a tin of escudo, Peterson early morning pipe, and some other non aromatics, and I get way better flavor than the aromatics I have tried. I even went back to Carter hall and got hints of cocoa and something nutty.

Is it just the nature of the beast with aromatics that they always do t taste as good as they smell? I'm starting to think that's why most tried and true pipers shy away from them.

Curious to hear everyone's opinions. Thanks!

 

[Jbird45]

I have also heard that pipe shape and bowl size can affect results. Any truth to that?

 

[Ponycarman]

Your right. Thats pretty much the nature of aros. There have been very few aromatic blends I've tried that tasted the way they smelled. Most of them smell great but are very very light. Sometimes quick to bite too with the heavy toppings and casings. Non aros give way more flavors usually. Just how it goes. Sadly most new pipe smokers draw to the aros right off because of the smells and I fear they turn more away from a pipe before they get to try some of the more flavorful offerings.

 

[Ponycarman]

I have also heard that pipe shape and bowl size can affect results. Any truth to that?

This can be true yes. If I remember correctly most think Virginia blends are better in narrower deeper bowls and latakia blends in wider bowls. I've never really put much effort into testing this myself. I just smoke what I want in the pipe I want haha.

I have noticed that aros seem to be a bit more flavorful when packed lighter. I've had good luck light packing and using a tall bowl with aros in the past.

 

[Jbird45]

Your right. Thats pretty much the nature of aros. There have been very few aromatic blends I've tried that tasted the way they smelled. Most of them smell great but are very very light. Sometimes quick to bite too with the heavy toppings and casings. Non aros give way more flavors usually. Just how it goes. Sadly most new pipe smokers draw to the aros right off because of the smells and I fear they turn more away from a pipe before they get to try some of the more flavorful offerings.

I'm glad to know I'm not going insane then!

I cracked a tin of early morning pipe by Peterson and was scared because it smells like a campfire with the Latakia I believe, but it tastes amazing. Just goes to show the contrast.

 

[Columbo]

I have also heard that pipe shape and bowl size can affect results. Any truth to that?

Yes, yes, and yes.

Many aromatics rely on their toppings for most of whatever makes them special … or not so special. And that separates the good ones from the not so good ones, IMO.

All smoking blends exude mainly three things (excluding for this conversation intensity and vitamin N): tin note, room note, and flavor.

Tin note is a transitory, but opening impression. Most aromatics smell good enough to eat, but of course you’re not going to do that.

With most aromatics, you are burning the toppings for whatever room note and flavor is going to emerge. Because so much of taste requires the nose, the smoker’s olfactory sense is too busy working the flavor to enjoy the room note. Which is why I say the room note is for others, and the flavor is for you.

That’s why bystanders tend to love aromatics, but not always the smoker. You alone are stuck with the flavor.

And when it comes to flavor, the base leaf is as important as the topping. Many cheaper aromatics are heavy on the toppings, use cheap ingredients, and are weak on the leaf. Cheap toppings on lower quality tobacco tends towards an unexciting smoke.

I’ve found the best aromatics to be those where you can still taste the tobacco (meaning a light or delicate topping), and where good underlying tobacco was used.

There are some exceptions, though. If a blender uses a particularly high quality topping with good tobacco, it can be a win-win-win on all counts. There are a handful of Boswell blends that hit this rare trifecta with me (and I shy away from most aromatics).

But you’re right in that most seasoned pipe smokers tend to enjoy tasting the various leaf varieties more than toppings, and view the latter as at best a matter of mere seasoning.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

I like non-Cavendish aromatics. Either topped Virginia blends, or Virginia Burley blends. Examples include Condor, University Flake, Jamaican Flake, Navy Flake, and of course, Lakelands. I don't mind a little bit of Cavendish, but too much can dull the flavour of the blend.

 

[Jbird45]

Yes, yes, and yes.

Many aromatics rely on their toppings for most of whatever makes them special … or not so special. And that separates the good ones from the not so good ones, IMO.

All smoking blends exude mainly three things (excluding for this conversation intensity and vitamin N): tin note, room note, and flavor.

Tin note is a transitory, but opening impression. Most aromatics smell good enough to eat, but of course you’re not going to do that.

With most aromatics, you are burning the toppings for whatever room note and flavor is going to emerge. Because so much of taste requires the nose, the smoker’s olfactory sense is too busy working the flavor to enjoy the room note. Which is why I say the room note is for others, and the flavor is for you.

That’s why bystanders tend to love aromatics, but not always the smoker. You alone are stuck with the flavor.

And when it comes to flavor, the base leaf is as important as the topping. Many cheaper aromatics are heavy on the toppings, use cheap ingredients, and are weak on the leaf. Cheap toppings on lower quality tobacco tends towards an unexciting smoke.

I’ve found the best aromatics to be those where you can still taste the tobacco (meaning a light or delicate topping), and where good underlying tobacco was used.

There are some exceptions, though. If a blender uses a particularly high quality topping with good tobacco, it can be a win-win-win on all counts. There are a handful of Boswell blends that hit this rare trifecta with me (and I shy away from most aromatics).

But you’re right in that most seasoned pipe smokers tend to enjoy tasting the various leaf varieties more than toppings, and view the latter as at best a matter of mere seasoning.

I wonder if this is a part of my problem. The tin note is amazing, and the room note gets compliments from people, and I occasionally get hints of room note but not enough that I personally enjoy it, but I find the flavor to be lacking.

Since I normally smoke alone in my garage, flavor is the most important element to me, so maybe I will have to take a break from the aromatics and explore some other blends

 

[Kentos]

If you retrohale the smoke you should get a lot of the aroma from the tobacco. One should be aware that “flavor” is largely based on the aromas wafting through the palate as you chew. Trying eating some Indian curry with your nose pinched shut. Most of the flavors other than salty, sweet, bitter, etc. will be lost.
Smoke slowly so as to not burn off all the aromatic additives, and blow the smoke out the nose as you puff. If it’s a good aromatic you should hat a nice hit of flavor. YMMV a lot of course . For myself BRM and Molto Dolce are the strongest aro’s I have tried.

 

[Jbird45]

If you retrohale the smoke you should get a lot of the aroma from the tobacco. One should be aware that “flavor” is largely based on the aromas wafting through the palate as you chew. Trying eating some Indian curry with your nose pinched shut. Most of the flavors other than salty, sweet, bitter, etc. will be lost.
Smoke slowly so as to not burn off all the aromatic additives, and blow the smoke out the nose as you puff. If it’s a good aromatic you should hat a nice hit of flavor. YMMV a lot of course . For myself BRM and Molto Dolce are the strongest aro’s I have tried.

Thanks for the advice. I will have to give this a try.

 

[Columbo]

If you retrohale the smoke you should get a lot of the aroma from the tobacco. One should be aware that “flavor” is largely based on the aromas wafting through the palate as you chew. Trying eating some Indian curry with your nose pinched shut. Most of the flavors other than salty, sweet, bitter, etc. will be lost.
Smoke slowly so as to not burn off all the aromatic additives, and blow the smoke out the nose as you puff. If it’s a good aromatic you should hat a nice hit of flavor. YMMV a lot of course . For myself BRM and Molto Dolce are the strongest aro’s I have tried.

This is true for all tobaccos. Unless you are using your nose after the draw, you will not be getting the flavors the blender intended.