Do not generalize this sample-specific result to every bourbon and rye; use it to qualify deterministic mashbill claims. Fresh audit: Corrected locator: the trained11-person panel comparing9ryes and15bourbons appears on PDF92/printed81, not PDF89–91. Failure to find a separating attribute is not proof of equivalence or a universal mashbill result.
Discussion of descriptive sensory analysis, product categories, and the limits of using production labels as flavor predictions.
In the cited trained-panel comparison of commercial products, no sensory attribute reliably distinguished the bourbon samples from the rye samples, showing that legal mashbill category alone did not guarantee a separable sensory profile in that set.
PDF sheet 92 / printed p. 81
PDF sheet 92 / printed p. 81
Chapter 2 — Flavor–Chemistry
September 28 fresh audit: passage and locator checked against the supplied 533-sheet PDF. Corrected locator: the trained11-person panel comparing9ryes and15bourbons appears on PDF92/printed81, not PDF89–91. Failure to find a separating attribute is not proof of equivalence or a universal mashbill result.
Verified evidence record from the complete review of Whisky Science: A Condensed Distillation.
Evidence
In the cited trained-panel comparison of commercial products, no sensory attribute reliably distinguished the bourbon samples from the rye samples, showing that legal mashbill category alone did not guarantee a separable sensory profile in that set.
Locator
- Section: Chapter 2 — Flavor–Chemistry
- Start: PDF sheet 92 / printed p. 81
- End: PDF sheet 92 / printed p. 81
Context
Discussion of descriptive sensory analysis, product categories, and the limits of using production labels as flavor predictions.
Annotation
Do not generalize this sample-specific result to every bourbon and rye; use it to qualify deterministic mashbill claims.
Supports
September 28 audit
Corrected locator: the trained11-person panel comparing9ryes and15bourbons appears on PDF92/printed81, not PDF89–91. Failure to find a separating attribute is not proof of equivalence or a universal mashbill result.