Blind Tasting Whisky: Tasting Without the Label

How to Taste Whisky

Matching whisky samples arranged for a blind tasting

In 1983, eight men from a surgical unit tasted whisky blindfolded, trying to tell malt from blend. They could not separate the two reliably, and regular whisky drinkers showed no advantage over inexperienced drinkers.[2] It is a useful starting point for blind tasting: the most revealing question is often not “What is this?” but “What do I actually notice?”

Blind tasting means assessing whisky without knowing which bottle is in the glass. With the label hidden, you can separate your impressions from your expectations before a name supplies the answer.

Give the tasting a question before hiding the bottles. Which sample do you prefer? Which aromas distinguish two glasses? Do you describe the same whisky consistently when it appears twice? These are different tasks from identifying a brand, and a useful session need not attempt them all.

In a 2017 study, Barry C. Smith and colleagues asked 92 experts and novices in London, New York and Paris to sort whiskies by sensory similarity. The selection included four single malts, four blends and one single grain. A second glass of Johnnie Walker Black Label brought the total to ten glasses per participant.[1]

Neither group reliably separated blends from single malts, whether nosing or tasting. Experts did, however, group the two glasses of the repeated whisky together more reliably than novices.[1] Recognising a resemblance and identifying a production category are different achievements.

For a first session, concentrate on observation. Follow the complete tasting guide for the underlying method, then remove the bottle information rather than changing everything about how you taste.

Start with a clear question and a hidden identity key. This editorial framework draws on the random three-digit sample codes and reduction of visual and audible clues described in Sally MacGarry's 2023 whisky research; it is not a standardised research protocol.[7]

Choose one question. Decide whether you are comparing preferences, describing differences or looking for a repeated sample. Write the question down before anyone sees the selection.
Separate preparation from assessment. Ask someone to code the samples and keep the identity key out of sight. Use random three-digit numbers, not names suggesting an age, category or expected flavour. Keep bottles and packaging away from the tasting surface.[7]
Keep presentation consistent. Use matching clear whisky tasting glasses, equal amounts and the same serving temperature. The 2017 study served samples at ambient temperature, each containing 30 ml whisky and 10 ml mineral water. That was its research preparation, not a universal dilution ratio.[1]
Record aroma before discussion. Work quietly and write your observations before hearing anyone else's. If words are elusive, consult the whisky flavour wheel. Choose descriptors that fit what you notice, rather than trying to fill every category.
Keep water additions deliberate. Record added water in millilitres and use the same approach for samples you intend to compare directly. Two preparations are no longer identical if one has been diluted further.
Record a judgement before the reveal. Note your preference, reasons and confidence before checking the key. Leave your original notes intact. If knowing the identity changes your interpretation, add a separate comment afterwards.

If tasting rather than nosing only, nobody needs to finish a glass. For arrangements beyond the assessment itself, see running a whisky tasting at home. The central discipline is simple: keep identities hidden until observations are recorded.

Keep recognition, preference and description separate

A confident guess can swallow the rest of a tasting. Give each sample separate spaces on your note sheet for aroma, palate, finish, preference and possible identity. Add a confidence rating in your own words.

Keep “I prefer this” apart from “I think this is a single malt”. One records a preference under these conditions; the other makes an identification claim. Neither replaces a description of what you smelled and tasted.

A repeated sample asks a particularly useful question: did you describe it similarly both times? In the 2017 study, the duplicate revealed an expert advantage that the malt versus blend task did not.[1] At home, use a repeat to reflect on your observations, not to set a pass or fail examination.

Perhaps your two favourite codes turn out to be the same whisky. Perhaps your descriptions of it differ substantially. Both are useful discoveries. Preserve them rather than editing your notes into agreement after the reveal.

What the malt versus blend studies found

The blindfolded surgical volunteers provide an earlier counterpart to the 2017 findings. Stephen J D Chadwick and Hugh A F Dudley published their experiment in 1983, involving eight male volunteers from their surgical unit: four regular whisky drinkers and four inexperienced drinkers.[2]

Their selection contained three malts and three blends, each tasted six times. Participants received a sherry copita with spring water added. They classified each sample as malt, blend or “don't know”, attempted identification and scored liking.[2]

Story box: London surgeons in blindfolds

Verdict: Documented. The study found no reliable separation of malt from blend and no reliable distillery identification. Among regular drinkers, 36 of 72 malt classifications and 48 of 72 blend classifications were correct. The authors found no improvement in discrimination from experience.[2]

The result applies to the whiskies and volunteers tested, not every possible tasting.[2] Taken together, the studies ask whether their selections separated into malt and blend through sensory assessment, not whether every malt resembles every blend. The practical lesson is straightforward: neither “single malt” nor “blend” is an aroma you should automatically expect to recognise.[1][2]

Yes, but an exceptional performance is not a reasonable expectation for every tasting. A 1994 BMJ study asked four wine-club volunteers to distinguish two malt whiskies from two cognacs while blindfolded.[3]

Story box: The Ontario exception

Verdict: Documented. One participant correctly classified 50 of 51 samples and named the whisky brand in all 25 malt samples he had correctly identified. Another scored 25 of 48, consistent with guessing. The authors described the exceptional participant's whisky specific ability as “acquired not innate”.[3]

Distinguishing whisky from cognac is a different task from sorting a varied whisky selection into malts and blends, or identifying any bottle presented.[3] The exceptional result deserves recognition on those terms.

For your own tasting, leave identification as an optional final entry. A session that sharpens your descriptions or clarifies your preferences has achieved something worthwhile, whether or not you name the whisky.

Hiding the label does not hide every influence

Colour is still visible in a clear glass. MacGarry states that whisky colour is “not indicative of age or quality”, so darkness is no shortcut to either judgement.[7] Describe what the whisky smells and tastes like before attaching an explanation to its appearance.

Story box: The red dyed white

Verdict: Documented. In a 2001 wine study, researchers coloured a white Bordeaux red; 54 oenology undergraduates then described it using descriptors they had used for red wine. Separate tests found no detectable odour from the colouring under the study conditions.[5]

This was wine, not whisky, so it does not establish the size of any effect in your glass.[5] It does give a clear reason to take visual expectations seriously.

Story box: The Singleton Sensorium

Verdict: Documented. In a 2013 study, 441 participants assessed the same whisky in differently designed rooms. Grassiness was rated 5.4 in the green “Nose” room and 3.33 in the “Taste” room; sweetness was rated highest in the red, rounded “Taste” room, on a scale from 0 to 10.[4]

The rooms combined sensory features, so the study cannot isolate one influence or supply a rule about a single colour or sound.[4] For a comparison tasting, keep the setting consistent rather than creating a different atmosphere for each sample.

Water changes the comparison

Water does more than lower alcohol concentration. Karlsson and Friedman's 2017 molecular modelling examined guaiacol, a smoky phenol, in mixtures of water and ethanol. It favoured the liquid and air interface up to about 45% ethanol by volume and moved into the bulk liquid at 59%.[6]

That offers a molecular explanation for how dilution can change an aroma compound's availability at the surface. It does not predict a whisky's complete aroma or establish one ideal water addition for blind tasting.[6]

Choose your preparation before comparing samples, then record any changes. If you assess a whisky both before and after adding water, keep those observations separate. After the reveal, you should still be able to see which preparation produced each impression.

At a glance

Where to go next

Nosing Whisky: How to Smell It Properly: develop the aroma assessment that comes before identification.

Writing Tasting Notes: turn observations into a record you can revisit.

Finish, Body and Mouthfeel Explained: distinguish texture and persistence from flavour descriptions.

Sources

Smith, B. C., Sester, C., Ballester, J. and Deroy, O., Flavour, volume 6, article 5, 2017. The perceptual categorisation of blended and single malt Scotch whiskies. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13411-017-0056-x
Chadwick, S. J. D. and Dudley, H. A. F., British Medical Journal, volume 287, 24 to 31 December 1983. Can malt whisky be discriminated from blended whisky? The proof. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/instance/1550199/pdf/bmjcred00586-0012.pdf
Campbell, E. J. M., Campbell, D. M. E. and Roberts, R. S., BMJ, volume 309, pages 1686 to 1688, 1994. Ability to distinguish whisky (uisge beatha) from brandy (cognac). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2542667/pdf/bmj00471-0020.pdf
Velasco, Jones, King and Spence, Flavour, volume 2, article 23, 2013. Assessing the influence of the multisensory environment on the whisky drinking experience. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:c475d9de-2408-414f-ba95-4fc3f0d05730/files/m5a7fcf6c4c34e9b2adc94207155f3f0e
Morrot, G., Brochet, F. and Dubourdieu, D., Brain and Language, 2001. The Color of Odors. https://www.daysyn.com/morrot.pdf
Karlsson and Friedman, Scientific Reports, volume 7, article 6489, 17 August 2017. Dilution of whisky: the molecular perspective. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5561096/
MacGarry, S., Edinburgh Napier University, MRes thesis, May 2023. The Effects of Ethanol on the Flavour of Whisky. https://napier-repository.worktribe.com/OutputFile/3175294

This desk-researched article uses the site's verified fact sheet TOP-A486, distinguishing research findings from the proposed home-tasting framework.

Last checked: November 2026