Cigar Review Question -

[RGD]

I've been trying to get past my simple rating system of: Sucks - Doesn't Suck and try as I can – just don’t get the term “complex”. Reading reviews I make note of the taste others mention and then try to pick them out – as instructed was the best way to learn. But I see these reviews that go: “started out with a woodsy taste that changed over to earthy leathers. Then just as the 7 year old Madagascar Vanilla crept in it went complex - mind-boggling complexity!”

Is this like code for “we’re so confused we don’t know what the hell we’re tasting” ??

Little help here –

Thanks,

Ron

I'm kind of in the same boat as you and have, in the past, interpreted that to mean that "this baby gets pretty strong." Since that would fall outside of my preferred taste profile, I ususally pass on those sticks.

You've probably seen that there are a million different ways to review and some guys just have a more refined palate than others. Some say it comes with the experience of trying more smokes, I think sometimes they just have a better sense of taste than I do.

For me, if someone gets me in the ballpark of earthy, spicy, hints of cedar, creamy, whatever that's about all I can actually relate to.

[donp]

RGD:
For me, I am able to note the complexity of a cigar by paying attention to it as I smoke it. If it starts out smooth and mild and then changes to spicey and sweet, I look at the smoke and note how far along on the stick this change ocurred. To apply descriptors to it is entirely up to me and how the tastes impress me. Hell, I'm with you, if I never had a madagascar vanilla shake I would have no friggin reference point.
So, even if you stick with your simplified scale, it would seem to me that at some point you would be able to say why it sucked or didn't suck so as to avoid or buy more of that particular smoke; it's really up to you.

[adamh_25_]

Originally Posted by donp

RGD:
For me, I am able to note the complexity of a cigar by paying attention to it as I smoke it. If it starts out smooth and mild and then changes to spicey and sweet, I look at the smoke and note how far along on the stick this change ocurred. To apply descriptors to it is entirely up to me and how the tastes impress me. Hell, I'm with you, if I never had a madagascar vanilla shake I would have no friggin reference point.
So, even if you stick with your simplified scale, it would seem to me that at some point you would be able to say why it sucked or didn't suck so as to avoid or buy more of that particular smoke; it's really up to you.

To me complexity is if the cigar changes flavour. Not sure if this is completely correct, but thats what I call it.
Adam

[TechMetalMan]

Yeah I agree.

I always interpreted it as meaning that more flavours in a stick means more complexity.

Like I had a Padron Maduro 3000. Too much of the same flavour in my opinion. No flavour changes thus less complex.

[Texan_To_The_End]

Originally Posted by TechMetalMan

Yeah I agree.

I always interpreted it as meaning that more flavours in a stick means more complexity.

Like I had a Padron Maduro 3000. Too much of the same flavour in my opinion. No flavour changes thus less complex.

It's exactly like that but slightly different.

In colours, if you mix a bunch of paint together on a canvas you'll usually end up with a shade of dark brown. But if you take those same colors and place them exactly where you want them, it'll be... Well, in my case not a Van Gogh, but at least it'll look as good as a kindergarten finger-paint session.

I've had cigars before where the separate flavors are quite distinct and I get a taste of one or the other at different times. Other cigars the flavors are melded together throughout, which if it's a taste profile I like, is good, but tasting all the parts separately is better. At least IMHO.

[donp]

It seems to me that all of you have it right to one extent or another. For me, complexity (for example) is when a smoke changes in spiciness or, creaminess or sweetness or leathery notes at varying points in the smoke. I learned that one dimensional smokes are in the eye of the beholder;there are some cigars that are simply not much of anything, like the Alec Bradley Medalist. I was very disappointed in that smoke; it was just nothing much throughout the entire smoke; and the K.Hansotia East India Ltd. as well; it seemed to lack anything pronounced at all. Those kinds of cigars are easy to review because they lack so much of what I look for in a cigar. So in writing a review on them, I simply begin with what I was looking for, and didn't find.

[homeless_texan]

Originally Posted by Texan_To_The_End

It's exactly like that but slightly different.


I've had cigars before where the separate flavors are quite distinct and I get a taste of one or the other at different times. Other cigars the flavors are melded together throughout, which if it's a taste profile I like, is good, but tasting all the parts separately is better. At least IMHO.

I agree, if I can taste the various flavors in a cigar as I smoke it I call that cigar complex, However I have smoked many cigars that are not bad but have the same flavor throughout the life of the cigar then to me it is one dimensional. Just my opinion. The important thing is, do you like it? because in the end thats all that matters.

[whiteboard]

To me complex means change, but also that there's some kind of interaction between the flavors and characteristics...like a good wine or perfume or good jazz. There are hints and suggestions of things that sometimes can't quite be defined and there is a certain balance to the different parts. The flavors can sometimes be separate and identifiable, but the experience is a whole ... gestalt.

The more a cigar engages my senses in different ways, the more it engages my mind. It doesn't mean that I find one dimensional cigars bad. If I like that particular dimension, they are great. But if I smoke them all the time, I eventually get bored.

A complex cigar is like a musical piece that keeps me coming back for more. And each time I can appreciate its familiarity but also appreciate it in a different way simply by focusing my attention on a different aspect of the experience.

[Bigwaved]

At the stage of the game I am at, complex is trying to make a choice on what to try next...

[donp]

Originally Posted by whiteboard

To me complex means change, but also that there's some kind of interaction between the flavors and characteristics...like a good wine or perfume or good jazz. There are hints and suggestions of things that sometimes can't quite be defined and there is a certain balance to the different parts. The flavors can sometimes be separate and identifiable, but the experience is a whole ... gestalt.

The more a cigar engages my senses in different ways, the more it engages my mind. It doesn't mean that I find one dimensional cigars bad. If I like that particular dimension, they are great. But if I smoke them all the time, I eventually get bored.

A complex cigar is like a musical piece that keeps me coming back for more. And each time I can appreciate its familiarity but also appreciate it in a different way simply by focusing my attention on a different aspect of the experience.

Well said

[Desert Rat]

Best way to answer your question is to try a cigar with complexity.

Smoke a couple of VSG's and you will probably be able to expand your "suck doesn't suck" rating system .

[donp]

The following is an example of a review I read recently on another board:

>Subdued, yet complex tastes of creamy vanilla; an easy draw that leaves a buttery and citrus-like residue on the back of your palate with the meatiness of a hearty grain<

Now I have no idea what is meant by "meatiness of a hearty grain", nor can I imagine what "buttery and citrus-like residue" is. But, for the guy who wrote the review is must have made sense to him. So, if I smoked the same cigar he reviewed, and tried to look for those things he described, I might never find them, and may even think the cigar sucks.
Better I find out for myself what a particular is all about, and enjoy finding what best describes what I prefer in a smoke.

[refill]

Originally Posted by RGD

I've been trying to get past my simple rating system of: Sucks - Doesn't Suck and try as I can – just don’t get the term “complex”. Reading reviews I make note of the taste others mention and then try to pick them out – as instructed was the best way to learn. But I see these reviews that go: “started out with a woodsy taste that changed over to earthy leathers. Then just as the 7 year old Madagascar Vanilla crept in it went complex - mind-boggling complexity!”

Is this like code for “we’re so confused we don’t know what the hell we’re tasting” ??

Little help here –

Thanks,

Ron

Well sometimes reviews of cigars sound more like cheesy romance novels. I would not worry about not being able to pick those hints, fades and country mountain early morning dew flavors.
You can try a trick a friend told me before smoking, not sure if really works or its a mind thing. Works for me but I have a simple mind so who knows.
Eat a saltine cracker or bland rice cake or something before lighting up, drink water or club soda while smoking and blow a bit of smoke threw your nose.

[PadronMe]

Originally Posted by RGD

I've been trying to get past my simple rating system of: Sucks - Doesn't Suck and try as I can – just don’t get the term “complex”. Reading reviews I make note of the taste others mention and then try to pick them out – as instructed was the best way to learn. But I see these reviews that go: “started out with a woodsy taste that changed over to earthy leathers. Then just as the 7 year old Madagascar Vanilla crept in it went complex - mind-boggling complexity!”

I posted a review that was lost in the crash that read like this, "I had a Montecristo Afrique today and it was good." That was the entire review.

I can't distinguish all those individual flavors either, but I do know that I either like it or I don't. Besides, some of the things people write in reviews I don't even understand. For instance, the current CA reviews has a number of cigars that are "streaky." What does that mean? Who cares, just smoke what you like and don't worry about fancy reviews.

Originally Posted by RGD

Is this like code for “we’re so confused we don’t know what the hell we’re tasting” ??

. I think so.