Ashes

BigDan.

well i dont think there have been to many posts or threads on this topic. and i was just reading a article about this topic i believe it was in CA but im not positive. this article was about how the color and shape of the ash show the quality of the cigar and do in fact change the flavor and aroma of a cigar. does this mean that your taste and your palatte have a particular ash preference? im not sure...

in this article it talks about how the white the ash is the better the cigar is. this has something to do with the soil and the minerals in the soil and that grayer ashed cigars have too much mercury or some kind of element with a M maybe magnesium i doubt it is mercury cuz that is deadly...... anyhow

has anybody heard of this before. is there science to back this up, do people on this site have a ash preference?

also how does the firmness of the ash and its length affect the flavor of the cigar. im sure it will affect the burn but im not sure how it affect the flavor?

i look forward to hearing your opinions on this topic

thanks,

-Dan

BigDan.

ooh by the way i also have another question ... .while smoking a cigar the other day i realized a chemical like aroma coming off the cigar alomst like a chlorine or almost sulfur like smell? is this possible? why would this happen?

j0z3r

The only significance of the color the ash holds is as an indication of the amount of chemicals in the tobacco, it has no bearing on the quality of the cigar. A better indication of quality is how well the ash holds on the cigar, at the very least this will tell you if the cigar is rolled well or not.

Was the smell perhaps ammonia? If it was, there is a good chance your cigar was not aged enough and was going through its ammonia phase.

kuzi16

the only ash preferance that i have is that it doesnt fall on me. otherwise joe was spot on with his post.

BigDan.

im not sure what the chemical was it could have been that so im not sure. and if the cigar is rolled wrong how bad of a problem is it?

kuzi16

the ash will fall early and often. it wont hold together at all.

madurofan

Joe and Kuzi are spot on. I'm with Joe the chemical smell was likely ammonia and isn't a big deal. It just means that the cigar hadn't been properly aged, if you have anymore of those cigars leave it in the humidor for at least 6 weeks before smoking.

As far as the color of the ash, I've heard that same BS that you read plenty of times but here's the truth. Each type of tobacco grown in each region has a different color ash. It isn't a quality thing its just different. TO give you an example two of my favorite wrappers, the maduro and the Sumatra. The maduro has the whitest ash of any type of wrapper, irregardless of its quality. The Sumatra wrapper usually is a darker salt and pepper. It would be a hell of a stretch to say that a Macanudo maduro was a higher quality cigar than a RP Vintage 1992 because its ash is whiter.

The "shape" of the ash makes no sense, if they meant how well the cigar holds its ash then that shows one aspect of quality but is far from being the measuring stick of quality. There are some cigars that consistently score extremely well and are loved by consumers but are infamous for not being able to hold their ash. The Illusione cg:4 is one of these cigars.

Good job putting together a readable post Dan, thanks for taking our advice on this.

sane

I kind of thought that the color of the ash, as others have stated is more to do with the type of tobacco used, but I also thought that it had to do with how hot the cigar was burning.

zoom6zoom

Sherlock Holmes, in "The Sign of the Four"

"Oh, didn't you know?" he cried, laughing. "Yes, I have been guilty of several monographs. They are all upon technical subjects. Here, for example, is one 'Upon the Distinction between the Ashes of the Various Tobaccos.' In it I enumerate a hundred and forty forms of cigar-, cigarette-, and pipe-tobacco, with colored plates illustrating the difference in the ash. It is a point which is continually turning up in criminal trials, and which is sometimes of supreme importance as a clue. If you can say definitely, for example, that some murder has been done by a man who was smoking an Indian lunkah, it obviously narrows your field of search. To the trained eye there is as much difference between the black ash of a Trichinopoly and the white fluff of bird's-eye as there is between a cabbage and a potato."

madurofan

NICE!

Lasabar

zoom6zoom:

Sherlock Holmes, in "The Sign of the Four"

"Oh, didn't you know?" he cried, laughing. "Yes, I have been guilty of several monographs. They are all upon technical subjects. Here, for example, is one 'Upon the Distinction between the Ashes of the Various Tobaccos.' In it I enumerate a hundred and forty forms of cigar-, cigarette-, and pipe-tobacco, with colored plates illustrating the difference in the ash. It is a point which is continually turning up in criminal trials, and which is sometimes of supreme importance as a clue. If you can say definitely, for example, that some murder has been done by a man who was smoking an Indian lunkah, it obviously narrows your field of search. To the trained eye there is as much difference between the black ash of a Trichinopoly and the white fluff of bird's-eye as there is between a cabbage and a potato."

That's actually a pretty cool find! Now if only I can get that government grant to do the same test in my own home...

But I have a theory that you cannot just let those cigars burn, you gotta actually smoke every single cigar...

LOOK MA!! I'm a scientist!

Rob1110

I recently read that cubans (obviously very highly regarded in the cigar world) typically give off a dark grey ash due to the magnesium (I believe it's magnesium, either that or nitrogen) content in the soil. Potassium is the chemical that would cause the ash to burn more of a white color.

j0z3r

madurofan:

irregardless

*Wince*

BigDan.

madurofan:

Joe and Kuzi are spot on. I'm with Joe the chemical smell was likely ammonia and isn't a big deal. It just means that the cigar hadn't been properly aged, if you have anymore of those cigars leave it in the humidor for at least 6 weeks before smoking.

As far as the color of the ash, I've heard that same BS that you read plenty of times but here's the truth. Each type of tobacco grown in each region has a different color ash. It isn't a quality thing its just different. TO give you an example two of my favorite wrappers, the maduro and the Sumatra. The maduro has the whitest ash of any type of wrapper, irregardless of its quality. The Sumatra wrapper usually is a darker salt and pepper. It would be a hell of a stretch to say that a Macanudo maduro was a higher quality cigar than a RP Vintage 1992 because its ash is whiter.

The "shape" of the ash makes no sense, if they meant how well the cigar holds its ash then that shows one aspect of quality but is far from being the measuring stick of quality. There are some cigars that consistently score extremely well and are loved by consumers but are infamous for not being able to hold their ash. The Illusione cg:4 is one of these cigars.

Good job putting together a readable post Dan, thanks for taking our advice on this.

you make a really interesting and solid point about how the different regions of the worlds tobacco would ash differently. im now a little bit thrown off at why people would rate the ash then if it has nothing to do with the quality of the flavor and the stick itself other than not being a pain in the ass when it falls all over the place. if the ash holds no value than why do cigar smokers leave there ash on for so long and not just flick it off like a cigarette.

Fourtotheflush

I think that the color of the ash really doesnt signify much. But the hold of the ash can. Although there are a few good cigars that dont hold there ash I think they are few and far between. If you ash is dripping off your stick --Insert joke here-- then there is probably a lack of quality in rolling the cigar. Again knowing and noting that there are exceptions to that!

I will say regardless of the quality of the stick, it is nice to smoke ans just look at that nice ash hanging off the end...
Again insert ash jokes anywhere in here

kuzi16

BigDan.:

if the ash holds no value than why do cigar smokers leave there ash on for so long and not just flick it off like a cigarette.

the ash does have value... just not as a determining factor in the quality of tobacco used.

the ash actually acts as an "air filter" in a way. If the ash is still on there then not as much oxygen can reach the ember. this helps the cigar burn cooler. Cooler smoke = more flavor.

madurofan

j0z3r:

madurofan:

irregardless

*Wince*

You got a problem with a double negative? You gong to send me to a work camp?

madurofan

Fourtotheflush:

But the hold of the ash can. Although there are a few good cigars that dont hold there ash I think they are few and far between.

Exactly!

Fourtotheflush:

I will say irregardless of the quality of the stick, it is nice to smoke ans just look at that nice ash hanging off the end

Fixed that for ya, LOL! you like that Joe?

Fourtotheflush

Ha Ha, dont change my good grammer to bad grammar/

madurofan

Its not great grammar but it is actually in the dictionary now and is considered acceptable.

Fourtotheflush

I heard that at work last week too! Do you know when Webster put it in there?

dutyje

Fourtotheflush:

Ha Ha, dont change my good grammar to bad grammar.

madurofan:

It's not great grammar, but it is actually in the dictionary now, and is considered acceptable.

Fixed those for both of you. Maddy, irregardless is not acceptable.

dictionary.com:

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

Fourtotheflush

I once corrected my boss using it a few times
Yeah, good career move!

zoom6zoom

I didn't have to look up the Sherlock Holmes bit... it came instantly to mind. It doesn't hurt that I've read the entire Holmes canon cover to cover at least five times. By the way, if you're a "House, M.D." fan, you may have noticed that his home address is also 221B Baker St...

Anyway, here's a view of an ash that just wouldn't give up... the cigar is a Natural by Drew Estates Root (robusto). Only dropped ash once.

dutyje

Nice ash, zoom

pilot711

Very nice!!

madurofan

dutyje:

Fourtotheflush:

Ha Ha, dont change my good grammar to bad grammar.

madurofan:

It's not great grammar, but it is actually in the dictionary now, and is considered acceptable.

Fixed those for both of you. Maddy, irregardless is not acceptable.

dictionary.com:

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

There is no doubt that punctuation is not my strong point and probably never will be. I know the rules and apply them properly in formal writing but it doesn't come naturally to me like spelling does so I don't try unless needed.

Your article is correct it is not proper in formal style but just like dictionary.com said it is used in casual situations. It is acceptable in the same sense that ain't and y'all are acceptable, its understood they aren't proper but they are in fact words.

Did everyon miss my family guy reference?

urbino

"Irregardless" isn't a word. Well, it could be a word, but it would mean the opposite of what everyone who uses it intends it to mean. It's a double-negative. "Regardless" means "without regard to." "Irregardless" would mean "not without regard to."

zoom6zoom

dutyje:

Nice ash, zoom

Thanks, but you're not my type.

j0z3r

madurofan:

j0z3r:

madurofan:

irregardless

*Wince*

You got a problem with a double negative? You gong to send me to a work camp?

Your orders have come in... Off to the Siberian Work Camp at 0430 hours.

Fourtotheflush

Totally missed the family guy ref.