Complex- Means to me multiple rich flavours coating my palate!!!
[Reply]

I agree with Clayton - I want multiple flavors that are balanced, where the flavors complement or otherwise benefit each other.

For example, almonds, toffee, and vanilla can create a great balance (ie Fuente Magnum) where seaweed and pepper do not work well with mocha and cream (ie RP Edge Maduro).
[Reply]

:-)
:-):-)
[Reply]

Very interesting on some of the replies. Personally, if a cigar has a nice set of flavors that are balanced, I describe the cigar as balanced not complex. But that is what it means to ME. I do like T.G.'s response of dynamic vs complex and maybe that is more in line to how I should describe it.

To me balance seems more of the multiple flavors that combine and i can't pick out some, but it's still all in "balance" to me.

Where as complex, I can describe or pick out each flavor.

LOL, but that's backwards it seems to most of the replies so far. I really enjoy the replies. Sometimes words are used and they can have certain meanings based on a person's understanding of it. And that may not translate well to someone who smokes that same cigar and finds it "different" for lack of a better term.
[Reply]

Can a terrible cigar be called complex? For example if it has a layering of multiple flavors; cat piss, old cardboard, gas fumes and paint... is it complex?
[Reply]

IMO, Yes, a dog-rocket can still be complex. Taste is subjective.
[Reply]

Interesting, I have only heard "complex" used to describe what were reported to be "good" cigars...

I like to use words to describe cigars that cannot be contextualized; twangy, oomph, rich, chewy and of course complex... If these words are subject to individual interpretation, as discussed with complex, what is the purpose of using them...? It would seem they present no consumable value to the target audience...
[Reply]

That is exactly what came to my mind (except it may not have been put into words as well as Kelly, but he is old. He should be a better 'splainer :-)). With most things in life, faced with the exact same thing, some may find it complex, some may not, depending on so many factors like experience, for example. With cigars, it is no different, I believe.
[Reply]

I think some people, epecially through shared experience (like smoking the same cigars, or Puff-Puff-Passes), may have shared interpretations of words like "complex", "chewy" and "rich", among others. Subjective, yes, but exclusionary? I don't think so.

Twang? I don't like that one. :-)
[Reply]

Good point about shared experiences... I do get a chuckle when I hear some descriptions tho... "I was blessed with a rich and chewey smoke that finished with a complex twang."

Oh and about a cigar tasting twangy, prolly better than tasting wangy...
[Reply]

True dat. :-)
[Reply]

And Jeremy knows wangy... :-)
[Reply]

Lol...

I guess I left myself open for that one...
[Reply]

Reading through this whole thread and I agree with the complex is a variety of different flavors coming throughout the duration of the cigar, sometimes multiple flavors at once.
That said, yes, bad cigars can have complexity. Complexity isn't always enjoyable. Just like chics.... complex can be good.... or crazy bad.

I had a Sig II the other evening that was either too young or sick and it was complex, but shitty. Almonds, Tannin, Wet Hay, and Citrus throughout I could pick em all out, but bitter Almond and tannin killed it.
[Reply]

I agree with Tim - while I think complex is generally used to describe a positive aspect of a cigar, it needs explanation - just like Tim's explanation of the Sig II.

Dog rockets can be complex - don't believe me? Feed your dog a buffet and wait...
[Reply]