Terroir in Whisky: Does Place Matter?

“Toasted almond notes, and a malty, biscuity, oily finish” from Athy; something “lighter and floral, with a flavour of fresh fruitiness” from Bunclody. These are Teagasc’s descriptions of spirits made from barley grown at two Irish sites. The grain’s origins left a detectable mark before the spirit ever reached a cask.[4]

Controlled studies of barley and corn support that central idea: where grain grows can affect flavour. The strongest evidence concerns new make, the unmatured spirit collected after distillation. Whether those differences survive maturation remains open; the Waterford study did not test it.[1][6]

What terroir in whisky means

Terroir begins with the whole growing environment, not just the soil. The Waterford researchers define it as “the set of all environmental factors that affect a crop’s phenotype”. Phenotype means the characteristics a crop develops through the interaction of its genetics and growing conditions. Their definition embraces environmental context, farming practices and the crop’s growing habitat.[1]

This separates three questions that often get bundled together. Does barley variety affect flavour? Does growing environment affect flavour? Does a particular variety respond differently in different environments? Waterford examined all three. Its central finding was that environment, and the interaction between variety and environment, had a greater sensory impact than variety alone.[1]

Two features of whisky production make those influences difficult to untangle. Producers commonly pool barley from different varieties and places. Meanwhile, flavour formed during production, including maturation, is thought to overwhelm the raw material’s contribution. To isolate the grain’s influence, the experiment has to begin with its origin.[1]

Inside the Waterford experiment

Published in Foods in February 2021, the study followed two commercial barley varieties, Olympus and Laureate, grown at two Irish sites over two seasons, 2017 and 2018. Inland Athy, in County Kildare, had limestone associated soils. More coastal Bunclody, in County Wexford, had siliceous stones in its soils.[1]

Weather sharpened the contrast. Athy had more consistent, higher temperatures and lower rainfall; Bunclody experienced more variable conditions. Across the experiment, 2017 was cooler and wetter, while 2018 was warmer and drier. The design let researchers examine growing season alongside location, rather than treating each place as a fixed set of conditions.[1]

The researchers micro-malted 16 kg barley samples and mashed about 10 kg of malt per sample. Each fermentation used the same dried distilling yeast for 72 hours at 32.5 °C. Laboratory distillation then collected spirit at no more than 76% ABV. These conditions describe the experiment, rather than a proposed standard for whisky production.[1]

Teagasc reports that the work produced 32 distillate samples for analysis. Researchers combined gas chromatography olfactometry, which separates compounds for assessment by smell, with descriptive sensory analysis. Six trained panellists rated 15 sensory attributes on a scale from 0 to 5.[1][4]

What changed in the spirit?

The two sites produced distinct sensory patterns. Athy spirit scored higher for pungent, feinty or earthy, malty or biscuity attributes, and an oily finish. Bunclody spirit scored higher for floral, fresh fruit and dried fruit attributes in both seasons. Those findings describe the study’s samples, rather than every whisky made with barley from either area.[1]

Teagasc’s toasted almond, biscuity and fresh fruit descriptions bring that contrast into familiar tasting language. They come from its reporting of the research, rather than a tasting conducted for this article.[4]

The chemistry offered another view of the differences. Researchers detected 42 odour active compounds, identifying 32 fully or tentatively. Eight were judged particularly influential, including ethyl hexanoate, β-damascenone and methional. The study therefore examined both what the panellists perceived and the odour active compounds behind the samples.[1]

Variety alone changed only two sensory attributes in 2017 and four in 2018. Season also affected the spirit. The result points to an interaction between crop and environment, rather than a simple ranking in which one barley variety carries a fixed flavour wherever it grows.[1]

How the evidence compares

Experiments with Oregon barley and Texas corn broaden the picture. They also show why the product being assessed matters: beer, new make bourbon and laboratory new make spirit answer related, but different, questions about grain and flavour.[1][5][6]

In the Oregon beer study, Golden Promise was associated with higher fruity, floral and grassy scores. Full Pint scored higher for malty, toffee and toasted notes. The authors restricted their findings to the genetic material, environments and malting and brewing protocols tested. The study supports grain’s influence on flavour, with beer as the measured product.[5]

The Texas researchers also examined alcohol yield. Terroir accounted for about 32% of variation in ethanol yield per gram of corn, and variety about 24%. The measured outcome is crucial here: those percentages concern variation in yield within the experiment, not the proportion of a whiskey’s flavour supplied by terroir.[6]

When a research finding becomes a headline, keep its measurement attached. Sensory differences, alcohol yield and the number of detected aroma compounds tell different stories, even when they come from the same experiment. A percentage without its outcome can obscure the most interesting part of the result.[1][6]

Where the evidence stops

Maturation is the biggest unanswered question. The Waterford authors state that it was “not explored in this study”. Their findings came from two growing sites, two seasons, two varieties with similar genetic heritage, and laboratory scale production. Wider consistency across farms, varieties and commercial production systems remains to be established.[1]

Teagasc announced further work involving Waterford’s commercial spirit and matured whisky. That next stage would need to establish whether the measured differences remain distinguishable after maturation.[1][4] The Whisky Professor likewise reports that new make evidence is challenging the belief that barley variety has little flavour impact, while its effect after maturation remains open.[11]

The research’s funding and affiliations are part of the record. It was funded through the Enterprise Ireland Commercialization Fund in collaboration with Waterford Distillery. Two authors worked for Waterford and one for Boortmalt; the team also included researchers from Teagasc and Oregon State University.[1][2]

Firestone & Robertson, the Texas distillery, funded the corn study. Producer involvement belongs alongside the findings, while the experimental design, measurements and stated limits provide the basis for assessing them. Enthusiasm for terroir is a reason to investigate the question, not a substitute for the experiment.[6]

What producers’ accounts can tell us

Bruichladdich says it traces barley parcel by parcel, distinguishing varieties, farms and even fields. Terroir is central to its approach. Its account describes comparisons involving barley from Aberdeen, the Black Isle and the Lothians, concluding that the barley is not identical.[7]

Traceability and sensory experimentation do different jobs. The first documents where barley comes from; the second tests whether that origin produces a detectable difference. Bruichladdich’s description is a producer’s account rather than a published controlled sensory experiment. For more on the compounds involved, see whisky flavour chemistry.[1][7]

A farm name can make a precise origin claim while leaving the flavour question open. The useful questions are practical: were varieties kept separate? Were production conditions comparable? What was measured? Was the sample matured? These details turn an appealing account of place into a comparison that readers can assess, and make the published studies informative.[1][5][6]

Common mistakes when reading terroir claims

Treating terroir as another word for barley variety. Variety is the genetic component; terroir concerns the growing environment. Both begin with the grain, which makes them easy to conflate. Waterford’s findings separate them: environment and the interaction between variety and environment had a greater sensory impact than variety alone.[1]

Reducing terroir to soil. Limestone and shale make memorable contrasts, but weather and growing seasons were also part of the experiment. Its design supports an environmental effect. It does not isolate soil as the sole cause or assign individual aromas to particular minerals.[1][4]

Turning new make findings into proof about matured whisky. Start with the sample, not the headline. The Irish and Texas experiments assessed new make; the Oregon study assessed beer. Calling all of this “whisky research” can conceal a substantial difference between the tested product and the finished bottle.[1][5][6]

Reading a site association as a permanent flavour signature. Athy and Bunclody differed in the experiment, but season mattered too. Place influenced the spirit under the tested conditions. That is a more revealing finding than an unchanging flavour formula attached to a farm name.[1]

Where to go next

• The Chemistry of Whisky Flavour: explore the compounds behind sensory descriptions.
• Rapid Ageing and Accelerated Maturation: What the Science Says: separate the measured result from the headline.
• What Happens When You Add Water to Whisky?: follow the science from production into the glass.

Sources

[1] Kyraleou, M., Herb, D., O’Reilly, G., Conway, N., Bryan, T. and Kilcawley, K. N. The Impact of Terroir on the Flavour of Single Malt Whisk(e)y New Make Spirit. Foods, 10(2), 443, 18 February 2021.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7922972/

[2] EurekAlert, Oregon State University news release. Like wine, environmental conditions impact flavor of whiskey, study finds. 23 February 2021.
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/769936

[4] Teagasc. Decades of terroir debate: weather and soil crucial to making great whisky. 18 February 2021.
https://teagasc.ie/news--events/news/decades-of-terroir-debate/

[5] Herb, D. and others. Effects of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) variety and growing environment on beer flavor. Journal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists, 75(4), 345 to 353, 2017; abstract and bibliographic record in the University of East Anglia repository.
https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/64482/

[6] Arnold, R. J., Ochoa, A., Kerth, C. R., Miller, R. K. and Murray, S. C. Assessing the impact of corn variety and Texas terroir on flavor and alcohol yield in new-make bourbon whiskey. PLoS One, 14(8), e0220787, 8 August 2019.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6687180/

[7] Bruichladdich. Terroir. Producer’s philosophy page, undated.

[11] The Whisky Professor, ScotchWhisky.com. Is barley variety important in whisky? 30 July 2019.

This desk-researched article draws on the supplied verified fact sheet, distinguishing published experimental findings from institutional summaries and producer statements.

Last checked: November 2026