Page 1 of 2
Last time I checked, it still said “Cigar Aficionado” on the cover, even though the word “Cigar” has been softened somewhat over the years. I don’t subscribe anymore, but I do admit to picking it up now and then when I am traveling.
You may remember an article a few months ago called “Things I can’t taste” which went over all the unique things the editors can taste in their highly educated palates. As I went through the magazine this time, I realized how really little there is about cigars. Really, can they even call this Cigar Aficionado anymore? How about “Rich Guys Who Think They're Hot Stuff Aficionado”, or maybe “Watches, Travel, Sports Cars, and Ads Aficionado”, anything without the word “cigar” in it would work great.
I digress, as it isn’t fair to give a hard time to this beautifully produced 146 page magazine. (146 pages including the inside front and back cover.) What do you really get for your 146 pages? It is about cigars right…at least that is what you would think.
In reality, this issue has 70 pages of ads. That’s not a misprint; almost one half of this magazine is advertising. Starts making me feel they should pay me to look at it. If 48% of what I just paid for is ads, imagine what this thing would cost if they weren’t in there! That leaves us 76 pages reserved for cigars…right?
Not so fast, as there are 52 pages of non-cigar content. Don’t get me wrong, this can be some good stuff…this must be where they but the “aficionado” in Cigar Aficionado. Strike it rich hear cigar lovers…we have 4 pages on Poker (I like Poker), 4 pages on golf (I love golf), 4 pages of other people smoking cigars (who really cares), 1 page on cigar accessories (go figure, uber expensive lighter), and of course the main article on the HBO hit Entourage. A great show that has…well really nothing to do with cigars.
Comments
What is more important to them any more?? It sure doesn't seem like it is informing the little man who likes to enjoy a good cigar the in's and out's of the cigar world, like it was said they seem to try and out wit each other with their cute sayings of how well their palate can tell what special ingredient was used to make a great cigar taste so well. Most normal people could not tell one way or the other if they were telling us the truth or not and most probably don't even care to be honest with you.
As long as their cigar has the taste they appreciate, then I really don't think most care if they know that walnut was used and not hazelnut in their cigar. I can say for sure that my palate is not that refined to be able to tell what was used to make my cigar taste as good as it does but I would be interested in knowing how they come to that conclusion and most others would too and that is what they should be putting in their mag and not all that advertising. I think a lot of us would appreciate being told how they put the nut or cedar or what ever other ingredient that these so called experts tell us are in our cigar rather than just telling us that they are in their.
I know I have been smoking cigars off and on for a long time and for the past five or so years every day and I can say with all honesty that I couldn't tell if there is a ceder, leathery flavor or if there was a nutty chocolate flavor to my cigars.
I know that if a cigar taste good enough then I will buy it and enjoy it and most normal cigar smokers are the same as me. Most of us would really enjoy knowing how to tell what is put into our cigars to make them taste the way they do and I think that is what their mag should be focusing on to share with all of us and not use the mag to sell us everything under the sun but cigars.
At least I hope that I am not the only one who thinks this way. LOL8)
HAPPY SMOKING Y'ALL
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
I read this article and formed a opion about it then I was told who the writer was and I was a little disappointed.
I agree that CA is at best the Robb Report with a bigger cigar section. All magazines rely on ads but CA has taken it to an art.
However I was disappointed that another publication would point it out. Seems a little like mud slinging. Then I noticed it was Paul - whom I have respected and always thought was "top shelf" and a class act. To see you slinging arrows has me head scratching.
Paul with all the years of cigar knowledge I would expect articles of a higher caliber. You have been in the cigar world and probably met and smoked with some great people. I would rather here stories of that or what you learned or the cigars you smoked then telling me CA is a forum for ads and dubious reviews.
Heres to looking forward to your next article.
K Baz
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
I also don't agree with their ratings most of the time, let's get that out of the way now. But for us to bash them for having "highly developed palates" is just silly to me. Have you ever heard a spirit sommelier describe a shot of scotch? They will go on about your Macallan 21 y/o single malts' "bright, oakey profile with vanilla and honey on the palate and a lot of fruit on the nose". Is that what I taste? Absolutely not, haha! All I taste is an exquisitely smooth whiskey, nothing more, nothing less. Aren't we both drinking the same fermented and boiled-down grain juice? But to get on a high horse and call B.S. would be wrong.
This high horse is the exact opposite of theirs. Instead of "I'm so refined, I can taste macadamias and honey with a hint of leather and oak", this pedestal is that of the average joe. The "I'm so real and so down-to-earth, all I can taste is what it's made of, and that's tobacco", or "I'm so real and blue-collar, I can't figure out what these hoity-toity rich folk are B.S.ing each other about" pedestal. I mean no disrespect to anyone, I'm just trying to prove a point. To hate on them for their success defeats the whole purpose of why we smoke cigars in the first place, IMHO. A cigar IS the everyman's luxury. I may not be able to afford a yacht or a month-long European vacation, but I can certainly afford to blow $20-$50 on a super-premium cigar to celebrate a big paycheck or birthday, and I can taste the same cigar that the big-shots are enjoying. Imagine how dull the ratings would be if all they said was: "This cigar was good. I tasted good tobacco." And then the next rating was: "This cigar was bad. I tasted bad tobacco."
I, for one, enjoy hunting for different flavors in my smokes and trying to find the same tastes that others do. I truly believe that the editors are tasting what they say they're tasting. I might not agree with their obscenely high ratings, but I can't say that "just because I can't taste it, it must not be there". Just my $0.02.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
At the end of the day, all ratings are is opinions. Even the ratings on this site. Many times more comprehensive, for sure, with thousands of users offering up their opinions, but still just one persons perspective of something that is infinitely subjective between different people.
I think Ron brought up a good point about maybe describing which leaves, what regions, and which different shapes bring what kinds of flavors to a cigar, and I hope someone from their magazine will read these comments and perhaps integrate that into an article or a part of the rating process. Perhaps someone could offer up something on this website as an e-article, even!
Anyway, I hope I didn't ruffle too many feathers with my P.O.V., but I felt I had to stick up for those of us who like to have a little "burnt caramel and white truffles with the essence of suede and a hint of hibiscus and plumerias" in their cigars.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
Peace
Marko
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
Please don't take it to serious, and if the writing came off that way, my apologies. This article is the beginning of my swan song with Puff, and I sure don't want to leave on a sour note!
Sorry to raise a ruckus, I was just having a little fun!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
I'll probably try to find another publication that's more about the smoke, eventually. That's too bad becuase it is important to support the guys who support us but CA is really getting old for me. Too much Robb Report for my tastes.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
The bad thing is that been in Cigar Aficionado is a dream come true tu cigar makers like my self. I buy the CA every two months just to see the review of the cigars.
But i recomend you all to do the thing that i am doing insted of buying something sow expencive (in mexico is $12 usd) Every thursday i buy one diferent brand for me to smoke with friends. And we say what we think about the cigar and we do our review.
So like Paul said you smoke for the pleasure of smoking not for showing up.
So lets light up some sticks and enjoy them with friends. That is the hole reason of the cigar.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
Maybe not quite "walnuts" LOL, but "nuttiness" is a choice description for me...
Anyway, I'm rambling on. Paul, I sincerely enjoyed your writing, including the single portion that I disagreed with, and I hope I didn't offend you in any way. I didn't mean to critique it, I only wanted to vent my opinion, since the topic was brought up.
Best regards! - Mike.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
I think Puff will never be the same with you leaving.
I would like to thank you all you have done and all you have given us in the past.
Though we have never met you will always have my respect for what you did for cigars smokers and the cigar community in general.
All the best in your future endevours whatever you choose to do.
K Baz
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote