Balancing Acts

22nd January, 2010: Posted by glpease in Editorial

Developing a new blend can be an interesting confluence of delight and frustration. When I conceived the notion of the Old London Series, I had some things in mind. The tobaccos would be produced in the style of the old London tobacco houses. Rather than blending cut ribbon, the leaf would be blended as strips - more or less whole leaf with the midrib removed - pressed into cakes to comingle for a few days, then cut and tumbled into ribbon form. The goal was threefold; the pressing would integrate the flavours of the different components a little sooner, and a little more fully, a slight fermentation could take place, increasing the complexity of the mixture, and finally, the cut of the blend would be more consistent.

Chelsea Morning was the first blend in the series, and I was instantly thrilled with the results. Because of this method of manufacture, it’s a very different tobacco than it would be were it made using today’s more conventional methods, and it does remind me in some ways of some of the long lost blends of yesterday. This all lands squarely on the delight side of the equation.

But, now, there’s the rest of the series to consider. I’d originally had it in mind to create blends that seemed appropriate for different times of day. Chelsea Morning, for enjoyment with the morning coffee, Afternoon Tea for later in the day, Cocktail Hour for a nice interlude before dining, and Quiet Nights for the relaxation of the evening, the final puffs before retiring. Sounds good. But, it’s turning out not to be so easy.

The first problem is that I’ve become quite smitten with Chelsea. She’s great company in the morning, and certainly a delight with that first cup of rich black coffee, made in the French press, and enjoyed in the special mug I had made in her honour. But, her charms don’t wear off quickly. After lunch, she’s still alluring. Before dinner? A fine aperitif. After dinner? Why not? It’s not really until late in the evening, when the sun has been put to bed, and a good thick book is a welcome companion that I long for something darker, heavier, richer.

So, Quiet Nights, the recipe for which I’d actually developed some time ago, serves well during its time. When this one was prototyped, long before the Old London Series was even a glimmer of a thought, I’d code-named it Nocturne. The prototype wasn’t made in this new/old way, but, instead, was done as a broken flake. So, there’s the second problem. Should I release it as a broken flake, or produce it in the same form as the other blends in the series? Okay, it’s not a very big problem, but one of those things that nags at me in my sleep. This is one of the frustration parts.

Then, there are the other two blends. I’ve been exploring several ideas, blends with different levels of Latakia, orientals, virginias; blends with different layers of natural sweetness, smokiness, complexity. It’s still fun, even after a decade of building blends, to see how much difference a small change in one ingredient can make. Just a few percentage points, and Latakia can go from being a supporting spice to the dominant player, to a boisterous and brash scene stealer. And, yes, it’s possible to have too much of a good thing. Balance is crucial.

And, there’s that whole thing about the series, about their names.

In a sense, I feel like I’ve painted myself into the corner with the original strategy of this new series. It’s arguably forgivable that Chelsea Morning works so well, at least for me, throughout the day. There’s nothing wrong with waffles for lunch or bacon and eggs for dinner, after all, and I drink breakfast tea in the evening. So, what’s the big deal? But, the names of these other blends seem to make some sort of promise. What if Afternoon Tea is really better after dinner? What if Cocktail Hour was perfect before lunch? Would I face a pitchfork and torch brigade at the next pipe show telling me that I’d misled them?

Okay, so maybe it’s like wearing white after Labor Day. It’s not considered proper, but no one will shoot you over it. They’ll just snicker behind your back. I’m sure I’m just worrying over nothing. People will smoke these whenever they feel like it, and not be compelled by the suggestions in their names. Still, I want the blends to be evocative, at least, of the time of day during which they’re meant to be smoked. Is that crazy? (Rhetorical question. It is. I know it is. Don’t answer it.)

Anyway. Back on track. After dozens of experiments, one of the prototype blends has reached that point where everything plays well together, and the flavours evolve nicely from first light to last puff. The room note is classically English. There is a delightful sweetness from the Virginias, and the orientals offer some fullness and depth. The Latakia is just right, being noticeably heavier than it is in Chelsea Morning, but not fatiguing on the palate. The previous one had been just too heavy - just about 4% too heavy, and that is enough to make a serious difference. It just wasn’t balanced. I smoked a dozen bowls, and with each, before the bottom was reached, my palate was overwhelmed.

I’m smoking the new one now. It’s still very young, and may require some fine tuning as I explore it over the next few weeks, but the early results are really promising, and I have that feeling that the next blend in the Old London Series is very close to being ready for release.  It’s great with a cup of P.G. Tips. I think I know which one this will be.

-glp

9 Responses

  1. Moe Says:
    January 22nd, 2010 at 17:45

    Is is absolute torture!

  2. The Nocturne Liberation Front Says:
    January 26th, 2010 at 14:16

    25 months we’ve waited! That’s how long Nocturne has tantalized and taunted. It’s still probably not as vivid in the mind as it would be in the bowl. That’s usually a given, at least so we hope. And we’d like to participate in these discussions (like the questions above). BUT we can’t until you release it! Or at least put a date on release.

    On the sequencing…. Draw a broad line through the day! We have the morning so give us the evening. Why not release the endpoints first?

    And maybe the processing choice (new/old way & broken flake) is actually two interesting blends that are different enough to be viable as a pair? Offering flake and rubbed out was a tradition too and they were never exactly the same.

    Nocturne is now Quiet Nights. Ok, no problem. We’re fine with name changes AS LONG AS YOU RELEASE IT or at least tell us when.

  3. Jon Burton Says:
    January 28th, 2010 at 12:53

    This is exciting news indeed!!

    Ever since you announced the series, I have really been looking forward to them. Then, once I had Chelsea Morning, I have been REALLY excited, and biting my nails in anticipation!!

    As to the “Nocturne” issue: I vote it becomes part of the Heirloom series as a broken flake, and also is released as “Quiet Nights” in the Old London series. There HAS to be enough of a difference to justify the double release. OR maybe a “Limited edition Double Album” release. Nocturne is released alongside “Quiet Nights” for a limited run. Maybe in a neat Yin Yang double lid Humidor! Ok, I’m getting carried away, I admit.

    As to the names…Hey, I never hesitated to smoke Nightcap right after lunch if it was what I was in the mood for! Early Morning Pipe found my bowl on many an evening. To me, this ancient/new processing, the artwork, being named after merrie ol London Towne, it all hearkens back to the great old traditions in this art form, and I say the names go perfectly along with that, because as you describe the blends, they coincide with the norms of that tradition as well, so I say they are perfect!

    Folks can smoke what they want, when they want. And hey, as you well know, you have many, MANY Union Square fanatics who would never light a match to Quiet Nights, Nocturne, or whatever she’s named at ANY time a day!

    I’m sorry that you feel the frustrations, but…I’m thankful that you have them, and find the goodness on the other side. : )

  4. glpease Says:
    January 28th, 2010 at 13:06

    Jon, thanks for that, and some interesting ideas, though I don’t think I can manage the yin/yang humidor. I think the two formulae won’t be exactly the same, though. The pressing changes things sufficiently that the two formulations will probably be deserving of some small adjustments to keep the harmony.

    The two NASPC blends for 2009, Treebeard and Gimli’s Stash, were the same blend, presented in two different forms. Personally, I think the ribbon version was the more successful of the two, though others feel the other way. I did learn a thing of two from this, and will certainly apply it to further explorations.

    Even after all these years, there are still surprises, and that’s what keeps it interesting!

    -glp

  5. Jon Burton Says:
    January 29th, 2010 at 14:29

    well…the humidor bit was a bit tongue in cheek…ok, maybe that whole paragraph was! But, it just goes to show: I’m Stoked! Pun intended!

    The NASPC blends this year were MIGHTY tasty. I only have one Gimli, won’t open it for a while…if ever! I have one of my Tree Beards in a Mason jar, and I really do like it. It would be an all-day contender for me. And on that, it is SO COOL that you do those. I probably would say that those books are what got me into Pipes in the first place, and G.L. Pease has always had my favorite smokes since 2000, so, its a really special treat. I actually only found out about them this year! So I missed out on a lot of them. Sigh.

    I’m still waiting for the similar “custom shop” branch of GLPease. Where for a HUGE fee, you’ll privately consult with a client, and create, and fine-tune custom “hot-roded” blends for them. Name them whatever they want…design their own labels. ok…i need to settle down. ; )

    Oh Wait! how about the GLP-OTC line!! Buy a ton of lowgrade Burley, and cover it in Aunt Jemima, and Grenadine. Available at all CVS and Wallgreens! Ok, I’m stopping. Now. Promise.

  6. Don Says:
    January 31st, 2010 at 20:02

    I’ve been reading through your website for hours over the past week (I promise I have a job) and really enjoy when you talk about the blending, their components and how it effects there flovor.

    When you spoke about the two blends, one flake and one non-flake you mentioned: ” I think the two formulae won’t be exactly the same, though. The pressing changes things sufficiently that the two formulations will probably be deserving of some small adjustments to keep the harmony.”

    One day in your “free” if you believe there is enough interest I’d love to hear you talk about the differences in flake vs non-flake in reguards to Latakia.

    Thanks for the wonderful tobaccos and after reading you site I am anxiously awaiting my first try of Cumberland soon.

  7. Vito Says:
    February 9th, 2010 at 16:46

    Greg: Notwithstanding the nature of the Nocturnal/Quiet Nightal nomenclature, the bard did sayeth, “What’s in a name? A Peaseweed by any other name will taste as sweet.”

    Having had the good fortune of tasting an early prototype in broken flake form, I’m partial to that version. Although I knew I would regret not having any more to smoke until its debut, as a realist I recognized the impossibility of resisting its call as the sample dwindled to extinction. Hence, my expectations were stratospheric in January 2008, when I already suspected the involvement of sorcery. And now you say you’re making it BETTER?

    All right then. The delay in its emergence as a finished product can only mean that it will be the beneficiary of further refinement. Typical. You’re crazy, and I’m glad. Considering my own obsession with perfection, I’m hardly one to point an accusing finger. I have no requests, no “helpful suggestions”, no vote to cast…well, except “Rock on, Bro’!”…and the thought that you might consider marketing Quiet Night with a color-coordinated drool pan. I’m slavering just thinking about it.

  8. Eric Cioe Says:
    February 12th, 2010 at 22:29

    Allow me to say only that given the same taste, I much prefer the flake or broken flake form factor. You can always rub it out to a more ribbon consistency, but you can’t press a ribbon back into a flake. I am sure that the differences in taste between the same ingredient list melded in different ways is pretty large.

    When you first mentioned Nocturne, I had the hope that you were going to do a straight up, intact English flake, like Penzance but better because, well, Esoterica is good but it’s no Pease. There are many reasons I like that blend, but for me I love the little tin. I can shove that much more easily in my pipe bag to carry to work than I can the 2 oz cans you use. In fact, I’ve kept and cleaned out a few old Penzance tins that I fill with your blends for transport reasons. Something to consider, perhaps.

  9. Johnny T Dement Says:
    April 21st, 2010 at 15:09

    This is so exciting!!! I can’t wait to get my hands on these london blends. I’m smoking through “Chelsea Morning” right now, and I love it. I am in accordance with the others, I like the idea of releasing the flake as “Nocturne” in some other series (esp. because I really like that name) and the “Quiet Nights” in the London Series, although I’m not a huge fan of this name, I think you should incorporate some aspect of London into the name, you could call it “London Nights” or something… I dunno, just a thought. Either way, I can’t wait! I’ve begun a trend that I think I will continue, I’ve devoted pipes to blends of yours that I especially enjoy. I’ve devoted pipes to Stratford, Blackpoint, and now Chelsea Morning.

Share Your Thoughts

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay publication. There is no need to resubmit your comment.