• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Cigar oils and the processes of maturations

Dave

Padilla Lanceros, yum yum!!
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
1,398
Location
Brooklyn, NY
First some reading.

Dan and I have been discussing this matter at length, however neither of us are chemists, or bio-chem majors, or even biology majors, so we weren't able to come up with a conclusive answer that satisfied the question.

This all started when we were talking about aged cigars. In both of our experiences, as a cigar ages, it reaches it's peak flavor at some point, and then steadily declines, not too dissimilar to wines. I've smoked a few 7 year old cigars, and a few 6 year old cigars, I must say the latter had more flavor. I haven't smoked them too often, so my research is limited. The bible states that a lot of the aged cigars require a fine palatte, and probably because there is no varying flavorful food in Britain, and Hong Kong being a British colony, the adoption of this methodology was easily accepted. There is an article on a vendor's site, which I will not disclose, that talks about aged cigars, and even mentions that the Spanish Market, and Cuba, even Zino Davidoff never understood aging cigars for a long term. They agreed that the flavors peak within 3 to 5 years and start to lose their flavors after 5 to 7 years. This was off the article, I **** you not.

Maybe there is a reason why the Bible usually mentions that cigar XXX should be aged 3/5 years minimum. Very coincidental with the proposed question, why do aged cigars lose their flavor?

My theory - The leaves once cured and prepared for rolling, have x amount of oils. That's it, it doesn't produce any more oils, what's there is there. There is the idea of water content, how the porous leaf allows for osmosis of humidity and oils thus contributing to the debatable idea of marrying which I will not get into because I don't believe in it. There are certain temperatures that oil and water can mix, however I don't think it is anywhere near 70F. That being said, I think as a cigar ages, it absorbs water content from it's humid environment, and the water slowly pushes out the oils inside the leaf. Over time, the oils would have gathered enough on the surface of the wrapper, and if lucky, will crystalize and plume happens, yet another debatable topic that I don't want to get into. Just bear with me.

In this theory though, as the cigar ages, over the long period of time, almost all of the oil will be pushed out of the leaves, and even out of the cigar totally, since as we all know oil and water don't mix. Oil floats on top, so when that outside wrapper leaf is saturated in water through the natural process of maturation and proper storage, the oils have no more contact with the leaf itself, and thus any other form of contact with another surface will immediately attach itself, I don't want to use the word bond, not chemistry, mechanics. As we know, the fat is where the flavor is, and with the profuse excretion of oils, the cigar loses it's flavor.

Just a side note touching on plume, I will refer to the pork chop or a nice steak. For me, the tastiest steaks are usually the ones with that nice trim of fat around the edges. I believe cigars are the same way, the wrapper is the direct point of contact with your lips, so the flavor is saturated there, even when smoking the wrapper is the dash of spice on top that makes everything great, and I believe my theory partially explains this phenoma, unless someone else came up with this theory prior, I didn't search but that damn post should be stickied (if it exists) so I wouldn't have lost so many brain cells trying to think up a plausible explanation of why cigars taste bland after x amount of years.

Other things that might come up in discussion. As per the above link that refers to storage and humidification, I think the range is more like 55rh to 75rh. Another site where a few more experienced international club members were discussing the storage of certain cigars from a certain Island, have stated for long term aging, 55% is good. I don't believe the oils dry at that low humidity, maybe in the lower than 50% is where the oils are lost, and maybe higher than 75% is where the organic compositions of the oils are broken down. Again, I am not an expert, nor even knowledgeable in the are of mechanics and chemistry, just some more questions and ideas that could use some responses. The lower humidity would slow the process of the tobacco oils being pushed out projected by my theory, and thus allow for a nice long slow maturation. But in the end, I don't know.

Ok, I'm tired, and I know if any of you guys even managed to read all this, must be feeling what I am feeling. I completely understand, and would have rather smoked a cigar instead. Time for a young tannic Fonseca.
 
Ummmm, ok. I'm going to have to read this again.

One comment I think worth making is that an exclusive emphasis on "oils" in cigar tobacco is bound to be misleading. In the best case, "oil" becomes a proxy for the entire amalgam of flavor producing components in fermented tobacco. In the worst case, it unidimensionalizes and mischaracterizes the fairly complex phenomenon of age-related changes in the chemical profile. There are many other compounds that contribute to the sensory characteristics of combustible tobacco. The cigarette design research is perhaps the most significant body of empirical work investigating the effect of naturally occurring and introduced chemical compounds on smoking quality.

As for these other flavor components, some are lipophilic and some are hydrophilic. That is, some are water soluble and others are soluble in non-hydrogen bonding solvents, such as oils, fats, and the like. Also worthwhile to keep in mind is that these characteristics are not like on-off switches. Even oils have some affinity for water, albeit small.

Wilkey
 
Good stuff!

The point is...which cigars will reach a peak and which will carry on blending and therefore taste better? Your 5 to 7 years seems to be a blanket on all cigars but is this the case?
I have numerous 7,8,10 year old sticks that taste damn good to me. Not being an expert on aging, quite honestly, I'm confused.

I have smoked several 20 + year old cigars and recently I acquired, through my good friend (not sure if he wants me to mention his name, he can reply if he does), a box of 35 year
old Monte Tubes...35 years old!!! They taste damn good to me. However, would these taste better at 7, 8, 10, 15 years old? If someone can tell me which cigars or brand of cigars
reach peak and at what age, I will be eternally grateful. In the same token, there are probably certain smokes that reach peak at 2,3,4 years.

I'm not sure there's a definitive answer, if there is, please lets hear it.

Brian
 
Ummmm, ok. I'm going to have to read this again.

One comment I think worth making is that an exclusive emphasis on "oils" in cigar tobacco is bound to be misleading. In the best case, "oil" becomes a proxy for the entire amalgam of flavor producing components in fermented tobacco. In the worst case, it unidimensionalizes and mischaracterizes the fairly complex phenomenon of age-related changes in the chemical profile. There are many other compounds that contribute to the sensory characteristics of combustible tobacco. The cigarette design research is perhaps the most significant body of empirical work investigating the effect of naturally occurring and introduced chemical compounds on smoking quality.

As for these other flavor components, some are lipophilic and some are hydrophilic. That is, some are water soluble and others are soluble in non-hydrogen bonding solvents, such as oils, fats, and the like. Also worthwhile to keep in mind is that these characteristics are not like on-off switches. Even oils have some affinity for water, albeit small.

Wilkey


Ummmm, ok. I'm going to have to read this again.
:D
 
I should be able earn at least 4 Units of credit towards a Tobacconist Certificate for just reading this thread. Lots of good info.
 
If a person eats a steak for the first time, and that steak is a well prepared filet mignon, the person will not be able to appreciate that the filet mignon is generally regarded as an excellent steak. If a person begins smoking cigars and immediately begins smoking aged and vintage cigars, I do not think their cigar palate is adequately prepared to discern the favorable qualities that are hopefully present in those cigars. However, with the exception of cigars in their "sick period" (which I believe in), I don't think any cigar is ever better or worse at any time in its life span. It is simply different. Whether one appreciates that difference depends on the ability of their palate to discern flavor nuances and, quite simply, what kinda smoking mood they are in for that particular time and place.

All materials degrade into nothing over time. Their components break up until the material is no longer recognizable. That could take one year or a billion years, but it happens. It is my understanding that cigar leaf has a "tight" molecular structure in its early years. That molecular chain breaks apart in later years to reveal a different taste as time goes on. It is a "looser" molecular structure that, in cigar leaf, may provide a "smoother" smoking experience and also reveal previously hidden tastes as the stronger flavors fade away. The combustion is also made easier by virtue of the "looser" molecular structure (think of one of those DNA chains) being weaker and easier to burn. That greater combustion may also play a part in the varying flavors of aged cigars - flavors that may not have previously completely revealed themselves due to incomplete combustion. This is where the white ash vs dark ash debate comes into play a bit.

But are aged cigars any better? Not one bit. Not unless you've smoked countless "young" cigars as a benchmark and have decided that you prefer the nuances of an aged cigar. Otherwise, they just taste different. It's up to the individual as to when in a cigar's "life" that they generally prefer its taste profile.

Just like as in wine, I think the joy is in the search.
 
Wilkey, why are you so damn intelligent? Interesting, now that it's not "oils" but chemical properties in tobacco that produce the flavor when combined and oxidized (at least that's what I think you said. I just lost 4000 brain cells writing the first post), I fear there are more questions and answers that might come up. Is there any form of research soley devoted to cigars and the characteristics of the cigar tobacco's flavor producing components?

Brian,

Would you still have thought those vintage cigars tasted great if you didn't know they were what they were? Taste is very subjective, and there have been many examples, one such example happened earlier this year in Las Vegas... which I won't go into further details with.

On a side note, a fresh box of late 07' Fonseca Delicias my friend acquired tasted pretty tannic when first recieved, and Dan asked him if this wasn't an ISOM, would he have thought it was a good cigar? BTW, my friend just nubbed one a few minutes ago, and he said they taste pretty good as an early morning smoke.

Perhaps there is a way to scientifically chart the progress of certain chemical components in the fermented tobacco to predict what kind of flavor they will produce. The bible also mentions a cigar, the H. Upmann Connoisseur #1 as mystical, bland when fresh but so flavorful after 4 years, must try to believe... or something along those lines.
 
Brian,

Would you still have thought those vintage cigars tasted great if you didn't know they were what they were?
No! I listened to their taste a lot harder because they were old and they cost an arm and a leg. So, your point, which is well taken, is that it has a lot to do with what you think. I guess blind tasting may provide some answers even to those with an experienced palate.

The 35 year old Tubo's are damn good smokes though but would they taste better or different if they were 10 years old?


Brian
 
...Is there any form of research soley devoted to cigars and the characteristics of the cigar tobacco's flavor producing components?
None that I can find. At least none in scientific or marketing peer reviewed journals. Nothing of an experimental nature...meaning something was manipulated to see if there would be an effect of some change.

From what I am led to believe, this knowledge exists codified experientially and systematically only in the heads of master blenders and others involved in the cigar blend development process.

I certainly understand why this is the case, but it sure is frustrating. :D

Tasting blind and tasting within fully revealed contexts involve the same sucking action, but in my opinion, are directed at two different ends. The former toward the purely analytical and the latter toward a much more fully holistic experience.

Raymond, nice to see you posting and so cogently.

Wilkey
 
Thank you, Wilkey. I always enjoy bumping into you in our various boards. I've recently cut back a bit on my number of boards, but I'll begin to branch out again from my home board. No board is all great and no board is all bad.
 
...Is there any form of research soley devoted to cigars and the characteristics of the cigar tobacco's flavor producing components?
None that I can find. At least none in scientific or marketing peer reviewed journals. Nothing of an experimental nature...meaning something was manipulated to see if there would be an effect of some change.

From what I am led to believe, this knowledge exists codified experientially and systematically only in the heads of master blenders and others involved in the cigar blend development process.

I certainly understand why this is the case, but it sure is frustrating. :D

Tasting blind and tasting within fully revealed contexts involve the same sucking action, but in my opinion, are directed at two different ends. The former toward the purely analytical and the latter toward a much more fully holistic experience.

Raymond, nice to see you posting and so cogently.

Wilkey

You lost me at scientific.

-Mark
 
Ok,
Let me try it this way. :D

1. There are no published systematic studies of cigar blending.

2. Such information surely exists, but only in the minds of the blenders.

3. We smoke blind to analyze the cigar without the prejudice of knowing what it is. When we smoke for pleasure, knowing who we're dancing with is part of the dance itself.

Wilkey
 
All this input is very valuable and brings us if anything just a little closer in understanding the mysteries of this wonderfull plant.

I want to pose a few direct questions that hopefully will shine a bit more light on the subject.

When smoking a cigar its level of humidity is very important as a wet cigar or a dry cigar will not produce the best smoking experience. Now given this assumption we can always get the cigar to the desired level of humidity given it was not so dry that it is crumbling in our hands or not so wet you can actually sqeeze water out of it.

But what actually happens when the storing conditions deviate from the desired ones. Are there some changes that take place that are not reversable ?

Some specifics

1) Say we hold temperature at a desired level but increase the humidity to say 85% is there anything besides the possibilit of mold that would mess with our cigars
2) Also keeping the temperature the same but lowering the humidity to say 40% what changes will occur that will make the maturation at these conditions unfavorable
3) Holding the humidity at the right level but increasing the teperature to say 85 degrees is theree anything besides the possibility of beatles hatching that interupts the perfect maturation condition
4) Also keeping the humidity at the best level but decreasing the temperature to say 40 degrees what is taking place to prevent perfect maturation from happening


I know this is asking quite a few questions but I am hoping to break this down to a level where we are more aware of both the processes that take place through unfavorable conditions as well as more attune to what could have acvtually gone wrong with the cigar that tasted great a few months ago but now seems to have lost its flavor or took on some unplesant flavors
 
But are aged cigars any better? Not one bit. Not unless you've smoked countless "young" cigars as a benchmark and have decided that you prefer the nuances of an aged cigar. Otherwise, they just taste different. It's up to the individual as to when in a cigar's "life" that they generally prefer its taste profile.

Just like as in wine, I think the joy is in the search.

Agreed, and well-stated. However I will say that I think some people can immediately discern quality. Here's an extreme example.

I was out with my wife, who doesn't drink, and any time I've given her something alcoholic to drink, she tries a sip and that's generally that. I was also there with another friend of mine who normally does not drink cognac; but we were celebrating a big occasions, so I was splurging.

I ordered 3 glasses of Remy Martin Louis XIII cognac. My wife sipped it, and said "Oh, that's quite nice actually!" My friend who doesn't like cognac was instantly in love.

Some of the cognac that is in that cuvee is 100+ years old. And it's smooth, smooth, smooth good shit.

I think a similar analogy can be made for cigars.
 
That post has some misconceptions about RH and storage.

"I'll tell you what... If the humidity drops below 68%, your cigars will become dry and crack"

There is some good info for newbs in there but this statement is misleading. ;)
 
First some reading.

Dan and I have been discussing this matter at length, however neither of us are chemists, or bio-chem majors, or even biology majors, so we weren't able to come up with a conclusive answer that satisfied the question.

This all started when we were talking about aged cigars.


My head hurts but in a good way. Thanks guys! :cool:
 
A few questions:

1) If vintage cigars aren't better, why are they sought after so greatly by connoisseurs? The chase? Collection purposes?

I've had my fair share of vintage cigars and wholeheartedly admit to having preferred a Davidoff 5000, at times, over a Dunhill cabinetta. Now that statement is sacrilegious in most circles, but one night I had both and was more into the Davidoff. Perhaps that night my mood was more aligned with the flavor profile of the Davidoff.

2) Lately I've been intrigued by ash color. Some say that vintage cigars tend to have a whiter ash. That isn't my experience. It seems that mineral content within the soil is the major factor. The combination and age of the tobacco plays a role, but what I've read (and experienced on a limited basis), this is the lesser factor.
 
...However I will say that I think some people can immediately discern quality.
By this statement, you're implying that 1) there is an aspect of quality that is universal and 2) the ability to detect this universality is inherent in some people.

I disagree less with the second statement than the first but both aren't quite satisfactory. I've come to believe that quality is at least as much of a learned phenomenon as anything. Why else would people eat stuff like caviar, stinky tofu, or epoisses cheese? These three things are revered by their admirers but are otherwise regarded as gross by the vast majority of the untrained. Two of the three smell like shit and the third tastes fishy like a sea-bass's armpit.

I know you're particularly fond of the California v. Bordeaux example as an illustration of the universality of quality, but weren't all the tasters experienced (trained) in wines? If so, then the learned standards of wine quality have already been inculcated in them. All the test showed was that if one removes prejudicial signs of non-functional utility, then they can apply these learned standards.

A few questions:

1) If vintage cigars aren't better, why are they sought after so greatly by connoisseurs? The chase? Collection purposes?

I've had my fair share of vintage cigars and wholeheartedly admit to having preferred a Davidoff 5000, at times, over a Dunhill cabinetta. Now that statement is sacrilegious in most circles, but one night I had both and was more into the Davidoff. Perhaps that night my mood was more aligned with the flavor profile of the Davidoff.

2) Lately I've been intrigued by ash color. Some say that vintage cigars tend to have a whiter ash. That isn't my experience. It seems that mineral content within the soil is the major factor. The combination and age of the tobacco plays a role, but what I've read (and experienced on a limited basis), this is the lesser factor.
1) Prestige, the thrill of the hunt, acquisitive frenzy, vanity, snob appeal, and perhaps even a preference for the flavor of such cigars. In a sense, they chase it because they can and it offers all of the above inducements. But these motivations also translate downmarket vís a vís the Fuente HTF's.

2) We had a pretty intense discussion here in the last year on ash color with a chemist chiming in IIRC. I also recall a pretty good discussion on CStogie as well. The bottom line is that at present, there simply is not enough empirical information to say one way or another and as such, all theories remain in play until disproven or until a particular one gains traction. Remember, ash color is but a single outcome resulting from a whole host of factors and a long chain of cause and effect relationships. Some of these relationships are necessary while others are serendipitous.

Wilkey
 
Wilkey, would you please say that again in English :laugh:

The opinions that I'm picking up out of this thread is that Vintage cigars are not better than aged or regular, taste is subjective, it's the hunt for the HTF etc etc.

Brian
 
Wilkey, would you please say that again in English :laugh:

The opinions that I'm picking up out of this thread is that Vintage cigars are not better than aged or regular, taste is subjective, it's the hunt for the HTF etc etc.

Brian
Dammit, it takes too damn long to translate my thought-writing into plain language. :angry:

"Better/worse" is what we collectively decide, agree to, and transmit as "better/worse."

The thrill of the hunt

You're making me work too hard, Brian. :p

Wilkey
 
Top