I've had this discussion before, and just recently with Todd (Revsmoke) and wanted to see what you guys thought.
What we're considering here is an nc cigar, a cigar that would be considered a 4 on a scale of five, with a five being those few that you've experienced that were just off the charts phenomenal.
"I expect a good cigar to present a number of flavors throughout the experience, and somewhere near the end of the smoke, I expect those flavors to culminate into a whole that's greater than any of the parts. Complexity finishing with a pleasant brilliance."
I don't care it it looks like a turd, has sticks and twigs in it, goes out occasionally, runs or tunnels, so long as those defects don't negatively effect the flavors or enjoyment of the cigar. I don't mind if a cigar is finished after two thirds, so long as it's shown me those aspects I mentioned earlier. I could care less if the ash stays on or does special stunts. I don't care if it makes voluminous plumes of smoke.
To further consider the italics, I don't have to necessarily care for those flavors. I once smoked a cigar that changed from grass to hay to green spray paint, with hints of astroturf, then came together in a way that was incredibly interesting. Others really liked this cigar, I did not. (It was an Original Release Padilla something that Ted Rogers loved. He'd have to remember the name for me.) Thing is, I considered it good because it did those things italicized, and I could appreciate the talent that went into the blending. It just wasn't to my taste at all.

Don't get me wrong, if a cigar looks great, feels great in my hand, and does all the other things I don't necessarily care about, that's great. It's a bonus. If it falls apart and is just plain junk, it's junk. If it's unsmokable, it sure can't meet the italicized criteria I look for.

What I really, really, really dislike in a cigar is soulless singularity. So many of the boutique blends today taste great. After ten minutes they taste great. An hour in, they're the same great taste. Two hours in, they've never faltered and not changed one iota from when I sparked up, they still taste great, and maybe if I'm lucky, they got a bit stronger. To me, that's mediocrity, whether it's 2 bucks or 30 bucks. I don't mean that in a disparaging way, I mean it's a nice cigar for when I can't give a good cigar the attention it deserves. It can certainly be enjoyed, and that's wonderful. It certainly has it's place.

I'm finding it harder and harder to find any real talent in nc's so far as the art of blending goes. Not so long ago it seemed that everyone was intent on producing a gem. Something that wowed, something that showed off a man's lifetime of experience. A man like Don Pepin can make tobacco dance if he cares to, and his work can truly captivate, so much like the men who work their entire lives in Cuba to produce cigars that pronounce the spirit of their artwork against such incredible odds.

On the other hand, maybe I'm not finding what I'm looking for because I've had really poor luck, and my desire to search has waned after the umpteenth failure, so I've stopped experimenting and stick with the many tried and trues.

So, if you're still reading, there's a part two there. You've got "what makes a good cigar a good cigar?" and "where have you recently found the kind of thing I've been going on about among nc boutique blends?"
I want to hear what you guys think, not affirmation or argument on what I think, unless that's how you want to go. :-)
[Reply]

If the flavor suits me, or even better, beguiles me, I don't care if a cigar is monochromatic.
[Reply]

Yes, exactly. Multiple flavors, culminating in a complex experience, is one way to skin a cat (and one I particularly enjoy), but I can put a cigar in this category for a number of reasons.
[Reply]

Hi Scott,

1.) What makes a good cigar a great one is the company and environment you enjoy while smoking the cigar. Sounds dumb and meta but it's the truth.

2.) Brand wise, I would recommend Falto and Curivari cigars.

Hope this helps brother!
[Reply]

I can't argue with what you said Scott.

I think what makes a cigar a good cigar is 1st off taste and as you stated if the taste/flavor stays to the end of the stick. Personally I don't like when the stick has to be re-lit, but I guess that part of it, but the main thing is the taste and flavor all the way through.

Best experience for me was at a local B&M with my 1st Kristoff and a Romeo y Julieta given to me by my brother in law. The sticks were well constructed and the flavor last till the end.
[Reply]

This, Padron core line is a great example. Pretty one note, but it's a damned fine note! :-)
[Reply]

Scott, This is an excellent post for all to read, as it gives a point that many need to consider.

What really tweeks my interest is the following:

What I really, really, really dislike in a cigar is soulless singularity. So many of the boutique blends today taste great. After ten minutes they taste great. An hour in, they're the same great taste. Two hours in, they've never faltered and not changed one iota from when I sparked up, they still taste great

See, I'm just the opposite. I actually prefer a cigar, that once I'm enjoying the taste, doesn't change in the middle! That's a "comfort zone" kinda stick for me, especially when I really want to just relax, and do absolutely nothing!

This doesn't mean I have no place for sticks that change! Otherwise, I would not own multiple boxes of CCs! However, I more regularly find myself wanting a stick that will be the same throughout.

This just re-emphasizes what most of us here already know, that we all have different tastes, and that somewhere out there, there are usually one or more sticks that will really get us excited for a specific cigar!

For some reason, one part of your post made me flash back to the first Cremosa I smoked:-) Something in there about wrapper, sticks.....:-)

Thanks for the post and the understanding:-):-)
[Reply]

Yes, as someone said, the best cigars are not the cigar themselves, but the company we keep when smoking it. A medicore cigar (at best), can be a stellar performer with the right friends gathered around. OK, we agree here, we don't need to discuss further.

I have to concur with what is highlighted in. I love monochromatic, when I'm sitting on the mower for three hours and don't really want to think about it. When I look for a new cigar, I want something that's going to develop as it smokes, the same flavors may even be present, but they have somehow morphed and changed as the cigar progresses.

I saw Padrons mentioned earlier as a single flavor, and while they indeed may have a predominant flavor, they do not smoke the same from light to nub, there is complexity and morphing (seems like a good way to describe it) going on.

I had a Cain F Lancero the other night, it had a wonderfully intriguing flavor that I loved, but after about 40 minutes I was bored - it was puff, after puff, after puff, after puff of the same flavor. I ended up giving the last almost 1/2 of it to CoreyD because it had numbed and bored me. If there would have been some other subtle nuances that appeared and then faded, that would have been something, but there wasn't anything. The first puff was the same as the last puff I'd had. I really wanted to enjoy it, for that flavor (still not sure what to call it) was very tantalizing. If it had been a petite corona I'd have finished it, but this dragged on.

For those of you that like that sort of thing, cool, get a few of the Cain F Lanceros, they have a great flavor, nice draw, are a good looking stick, last quite a while for a Lancero, but it was sorely lacking in complexity in any way whatsoever.

Of course, YMMV.

I'm with you Scott, I'm looking for the newer boutique (or any) cigar that will deliver what your hoping to find. And, personally, it doesn't necessarily have to be a powerhouse to be that cigar, just have some personality of it it's own and some complexity to it.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

I had probably the BEST cigar I've ever smoked last night. It was an 05 PLPC. Such strong flavors of caramel, chocolate, slight spice, little coffee. All the flavors were apparent throughout the cigar. The flavors just took turns being a dominant flavor. no other flavors crept in (that I could tell). No harshness or strong earth into the final third. Just amazing. I don't like the flavors to completely change.

Weird thing was, I had left it in my 5 count herfador in the back of the GF's blazer for 4 days where temps most likely reached 90 degrees at some point each day.
[Reply]

There is a time for the comfortable smoke (taste doesn't change much) and a time to have that complexity sink in.

Hey Scott, I have a question, maybe our problem is the reverse? Maybe the true art is getting a cigar that remains fairly consistent from beginning to end? Maybe anybody can just blend tobacco that produces a constant change of flavor from beginning to end, but never really settles into anything.

I guess, I really should clarify, I don't want drastic change - I just want some complexity, same flavors even with some different nuances making and appearance would be great. I notice that lots of reviews look at cigars in 1/3s, and how cigars change. I think my real problem is with cigars with no change whatsoever, the first puff is the same as every puff inbetween.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

But change they did, didn't they? That's what I'd call complexity. They mixed it up a bit as it went along - one, then the other, then another, came to the fore.
[Reply]

When I think "change," I think of entirely new flavors. Huh. Learn something new everyday. :-)
[Reply]

Of course, that's simply my definition. Shilala might disagree completely. :-)

And again, I must restate what is in my tag line. You smoke what your palate likes, and enjoy it. I'll smoke what I like. It may make for interesting conversation, but I am not going to smoke to please your palate, nor should you smoke to please mine.

Peace of the Lord be with you.
[Reply]

There is a time for the comfortab smoke (taste doesn't change much) and a time to have that complexity sink in.
I tend to turn to machine made cc's or other little stuff at those times. That way I can smoke three or four cigars and not get bored. I admit I'm just as likely to smoke an Anejo, though. I think I've found so many cigars that I define as good that those are my comfort smokes. I used to smoke a truckload of Sancho Panza Double Maduros, though. They were pretty singular, but there was enough complexity to keep me satisfied.

Hey Scott, I have a question, maybe our problem is the reverse? Maybe the true art is getting a cigar that remains fairly consistent from beginning to end? Maybe anybody can just blend tobacco that produces a constant change of flavor from beginning to end, but never really settles into anything.
Ya know what? I don't know if I can buy that, but I hadn't considered that guys may be purposely blending out complexity for some insane reason. I can find consistant from beginning to end in lots of super cheap value smokes, so I don't think that really requires much skill. Maybe it'd require more skill in a double churchill or a big honkin figurado, but that's another idea.

I guess, I really should clarify, I don't want drastic change - I just want some complexity, same flavors even with some different nuances making and appearance would be great. I notice that lots of reviews look at cigars in 1/3s, and how cigars change. I think my real problem is with cigars with no change whatsoever, the first puff is the same as every puff inbetween.
Agreed on the drastic change, to a point. Developing into a climax is more accurate. Even if that apex is a mixture of all or some or the flavors that creates something, that's good. That made me think "cooking". Take good stuff, apply heat, something really good happens that's even better, but you can tell where it came from.
I've seen the thirds reviews. I think that's helpful when a cigar has really done nothing to mention and there's some need to heap words on it at a few waypoints. You can't do that with a cigar that's morphing (beit quickly at times or slowly throughout) and tossing in some nuances and flashes along the way. You really have to review it in a storyline just the way it happens. Those are fun reviews to read. :-)

Peace of the Lord be with you.
And also with you, my friend. :-)
[Reply]

That's the complexity we're talking about. I really enjoy that, too. Little cigars and long skinnies don't tend to culminate into something greater at the end. They just tend to blow up and turn to crap with about a third left. At least in my palette they do.
I can't think of any cc's off the top that don't offer complexity, at least to a point.
This is why I made this thread specifically about nc's. :-)
[Reply]

I posted a thread a while back and it dealt with the issue of definitions and complexity. Here it is: http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...hlight=dynamic

What I think might help is to first define terms, or else the discussion will go round and round.
[Reply]

I think my brain is about to explode......I have so much to learn. Lately I have been using the smoke what you like philosophy and trying a bunch of new sticks. I am still trying to develop my palette and distinguish the different flavors I am experiencing.

Thank you Scott and crew for the great posts and Q&As. :-)
[Reply]

the only truly complex cigar i've ever smoked is a San Lotano Habano torpedo. i enjoyed it, but i wouldn't want it every day. for me a cigar that screams for my attention too often is a little irritating if i experience that cigar too often.

i like a cigar that has all the elements working together. i don't mind if the flavor is consistent from beginning to end as long as it's pleasant. sometimes theres 2-3 flavors that are present from start to nub and they're always there. that's good enough for me, but if they're not accompanied by a cooperative draw and burn (if i have to pay more attention to those things than what i'm thinking about, listening to, etc.) it can ruin the experience. i don't care if the flavors are amazing if the draw and burn are no good because that can cause me to miss some of the flavors. the only cigars i've ever been bored by are 1 flavor cigars where the flavor is barely there in the first place. mind you i've also experienced cigars that had 1 overpowering flavor the entire time that didn't bore me but it was overkill.

so i guess my answer to you, scott, would be that for me a good cigar has to have some of everything (good flavor, good draw, good burn).
[Reply]

That's what I'm looking for, brother. I'm really hoping everyone will throw in their two cents so I can re-examine what I was thinking in the first place. :-)
[Reply]

All I can think of is rice Krispies :-)

Rob
[Reply]