Rancio is a journey

The distillers who call us all end up asking the same question: can rancio be made to come faster? The honest answer is no. Here is why, and what is left to do once that answer has been accepted.

Rancio is the character of very old eaux-de-vie. Fresh walnut first, then wax, old leather, and that faintly rancid edge that gave the word its name. You find it in old reserves and rarely anywhere else, and those who have smelled it once recognise it without hesitation the next time.

The term comes from rancidity and long described a fault. Today it describes the opposite: the signature of spirits that have reached their peak, the ones houses keep at the back of the cellar and rarely bring out.

A word nobody has reduced to a number

The first thing that strikes you, when you try to pin rancio down, is that it resists. There is no threshold, no analysis that declares it reached. Professionals recognise it before they can explain it, and they are entirely comfortable with that order of things. People speak of fresh walnut, beeswax, deep spices, sometimes dried mushroom or old books. Each adds a word, nobody really contradicts the others.

The term travels too, and shifts slightly at every border. In Armagnac it often arrives earlier and more openly, carried by Gascon oak and by a generally continuous distillation. In Roussillon it has become a category in its own right: the vins doux naturels claim a rancio mention, and oxidative ageing is sought deliberately, in demi-muids, sometimes in glass demijohns left outdoors, the exact opposite of what one would do for a wine meant to keep. Sherry and madeira cultivate the same logic under other names, solera, estufagem. Whisky and rum lovers use the word more rarely, but describe, on very old refill casks, walnut and wax notes that clearly belong to the same family.

Vin jaune from the Jura has to be set apart. Its walnut character is famous and its origin is quite different: it comes from a veil of yeast, so from biological work, not from slow oxidation through the stave. The confusion is common. It mostly reminds us that two very different roads can lead to neighbouring aromas, and that the nose alone is not enough to trace the way back.

What chemistry cautiously suggests

That leaves the question every distiller ends up asking: where does it come from, exactly? The explanation that circulates in the Charente fits in one sentence. Distillation on the lees leaves fatty acids in the spirit that do not evaporate; over decades in cask they oxidise very slowly into ketones, to which the richness and the depth on the palate are attributed. The account is coherent, shared across the trade, and compatible with what is observed.

We should be clear about our sources, though. The Bureau national interprofessionnel du cognac publishes the appellation specification and a considerable body of technical work; we found no public note devoted specifically to rancio, nor any study fixing an analytical definition of it. What one reads comes from houses and from tasters, not from peer-reviewed publications. The explanation above is therefore widely accepted, it is not demonstrated.

On timing, accounts converge on an order of magnitude rather than a date: the first notes appear after fifteen to twenty years, the character settles between twenty and thirty, and keeps evolving well beyond. The cru matters, cellar practice matters, and chance is never absent. Two identical casks, filled the same day with the same spirit, no longer resemble each other ten years later. That is the charm of the trade and the nightmare of whoever has to blend.

Our own part is narrower and more measurable. We know what our oak does, how fast it releases, what a toasting level changes. We cannot describe the fine chemistry of rancio, nor announce the date on which it will appear in a given spirit. The parameter that escapes us most is oxygen: brought very slowly, it lets the assembly between wood and spirit evolve; brought too fast, it hardens and tires. Dosing wood is done to the gram. Measuring the oxygen actually dissolved in a real cask, far less so.

Preparing the ground is the beginning of the journey

Let us be blunt: no oak product, ours included, produces rancio. Not in three months, not in three years. The only known road runs through decades in cask, and nobody knows how to shorten it. Anyone selling you the opposite is selling you something else under that name.

What remains possible is of another nature, and the two should not be confused. You can build a base: structure, colour, an oak background chosen rather than endured. That does not manufacture the aromas of very long ageing, it gives time a decent material to work on, if time is granted.

Limousin oak is the starting point we know best, and it is also the one traditionally used for ageing cognac. It is where our liquid oak, the #410, comes from. Putting it to work looks less like an additive than like a cellar preparation, and it calls for patience.

The two application methods, the analytical characteristics and the timings are set out in the product technical sheet, which can be downloaded here. The preparation itself takes months before any blending, which says a great deal about the spirit of the thing: you prepare, you do not catch up.

For a first trial, the rule fits in three words: small volume, low dose, untreated control. It is the control that will tell you whether you have moved forward or merely changed something. A liquid oak is judged quickly, on a few centiliters and in a few minutes.

As for rancio itself, it will have to be waited for, and that wait cannot be bought. Perhaps that is what makes this journey endearing: at the end of all our measurements, there remains a glass, a table, and someone who waited twenty years to fill it.

If you have been working on rancio longer than we have, write to us. On this particular subject we have more questions than answers, and the best ones we have heard came from cellars, not laboratories.

Read next : Oak for spirits: what we know, and what we are still working on · Spirits and oak alternatives: what we see changing