Raspberry (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-3-24) – BACK into the Raspberries from NomNomz with this one. The thing I liked best about this one, was it was just different enough from all of the RB’s on my racks. It tasted a little like this one, and a little like that one, but no direct comparisons. It seemed to be a 50/50 mix of natural to artificial with neither taking the lead. It was fairly candied however, and at about mid-level sweet, it seemed somewhat “smoother” overall. There was just a hint of tart on the finish, but only a hint, as the “candied” washed over it fairly fully. No florals, medicinals, or perfumes present, and no off-notes to complain about. My tastes lean heavily towards all natural RB’s, so keep that in mind regarding my scoring. As far as “colors”, it tasted like some red, more black, and no blue for comparison. Tasty, semi-complex, and fairly candied was what this one was, and it did taste good. The somewhat “candied”-ness of it could (not assured) limit some uses, or at least as the primary RB driver. Very tasty, and my only “wishes” would have been a little more natural, and a little less candied, BUT, that’s on MY list, hehe. Still a good one, and hard to fault, and finalized it @ a still very high 8.9/10.
Peach (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-3-24) – Wow, this peach had an interesting profile that I’m not sure if I’ve ever gotten from a Peach flavor before. It almost had the FUZZ nailed down. YES, you could almost taste it, like you were biting into a fresh peach. Now, that was only best way to describe the effect it had, because no, it wasn’t a “fuzzy flavor” LOL. It presented as an almost entirely natural peach, but with notes from both yellow, and white peaches. It had a slight dryness on the finish, and not sure if that was what was fuzzing it up, or maybe even adding a little bit of “ripeness” to it. Probably the latter. At 1.5% it was “kinda” strong, but felt like maybe a bit more, possibly 2.0% might have helped it a bit. Sweetness was a few ticks below mid-level, and it had none of the “canned” or “syrup” peachy-ness. No off-notes, and it stayed consistent till the last tester with no real shifts. All in, it was a natural mashup of a yellow and white peach, somewhat sweet, with an almost tangible “peach fuzz” nuance. Might not be the star of the peach show, but definitely a big player. It felt good around the 8.7/10 mark.
Hazelnut (Roasted) (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-3-24) – Holy HazelnutZ !!! Wow, this one required NO break in time in the tank, and was 100% spot on from beginning to end. Having previously tested Chefs Creamy Hazelnut I was interested to see how, or if they differed, and they DID. This one was NOT creamed, but still had a slight creamy-ness, and it was very true to the natural creaminess. Earthy, darker, and slightly toasted undertones swirled around with this one, and on the finish, you almost got a hint of the paper skin on the actual nut(s). Sweetness was about a tick below mid-level, but was in no way overpowering, or out of place. This one was a VERY well constructed Hazelnut, and with the actual nut profile, along with the earthy, darker, slightly toasted notes, along with the slight natural creaminess, it was the whole thing. I will admit to not using Hazelnut as often as many other flavors, but this one, may just be the new King. The more I tested it, the more realistic it became, and even from a “Not Often Hazelnutting” guy, it was impressive. Sounds weird saying it, but I’m going to RELEASE the Kraken on a HAZELNUT ?? !!! Yes. 10/10. To authentic, natural, and complex NOT to.
Red Currant (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-3-24) – Tart, Red Berry Bliss !!! Wow, this was spot on, and the added tart, and acidity made them possibly the best RC I have tried to date. Very natural tasting with little to no artificial distraction. You could taste the little red berries from beginning to end, and it never let up. The flavor was so accurate, I didn’t get a HINT of any other non currant flavor in this. The tart, sweet, and acidity were perfectly paired, which left it hyper accurate, and zingy. I wish the RB had this much pop. No off-notes, florals, or soaps here people, just clean, zingy, red currants. It was perfect at 1.5% without needing any changes, and sweetness, while tempered by the tart, and acidity, stayed just below mid-level. Often, when I’m testing “currant” flavors, they are in the ballpark, or “kinda”, but not this one. Full on, all go and no quitting here. Even though this flavor was a stellar one, I did look hard trying to find anything out of place, or off, but I couldn’t. If you’ve never tried currants, or been let down by other flavors, you should buy this one now. This one, was a perfect 10/10. Release the Kraken again, and that’s TWO in a row now.
Vanilla Cupcake (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-5-24) – Trying to explain or define a “cupcake” is quite hard, and I’m sure making one is equally hard. This one had a great vanilla overtone with SOME cupcake-y undertones. It was def. not cake-y, and much more cupcake-y. No baking soda notes, or frosting that I could pick up on, but it was still tatsty. While somewhat creamy, it was not a vanilla cream, and if the “cupcake” could have been a bit higher, I think it would have worked a little better. Sweetness was about mid-level, and no off-notes, baby powder or otherwise (long story) present. Maybe increasing it a bit might help, but I suspect as far as the cupcake, it was, where it was. Very tasty, and not off-target, and the somewhat softened vanilla was damned good, just not 100% sold on the (you guessed it), cupcake. At times, I got light almost “batter” notes, which I think helped it out a bit. No “bakery” notes, which worked, as that would have pulled it into a cake instead. Good, tasty, vanilla-y, just needed a little more cupcake-ry. Leaving this tasty one at a 7.5/10.
Pineapple (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-6-24) – This one smelled great, and tasted great. A bright, juicy, yellow pineapple. It tasted fairly sweet, at about mid-level with no “candied” notes, and overall it tasted like a 50/50 mix of a fresh sliced pineapple, and a slightly baked pineapple. It was not browned, singed, or sauteed but just baked. Now at 1.5% it wasn’t an “in your face” flavor. The initial on-rush was quite intense, but it fell off somewhat quickly. I tried increasing it slowly to see it it would “bloom” a little more, but it stayed fairly consistent until I pushed it too high into muting. The muting was entirely expected, as it was doubled at that point. 1.5% seemed to be the sweet spot. No off-notes, no florals, and at about mid-level sweet. The somewhat noticeable fall off appears to be “baked in” as it were. I would have rated much higher it it had stayed consistent all the way through. Now, even with all of that said, it WAS a juicy, flavorful pineapple, that could be used a lot, but lacked some of the brighter “punch” that might be required. It’s probable that the “baked”-ed-ness might have been responsible. All in, a tasty, juicy one, but might need a little boosting. What I did get, was too flavorful to down-rate too much, and I decided on a 7.0/10. Good, just not the star of the show.
Raspberry Custard (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-7-24) – With this being one of my favorite profiles, I was anxious to dive into it. As always, your definitions of Custards or Puddings may vary. This one plain worked for my tastes, BUT, yours might be different, so READ on. The Raspberry notes were on point, and were very evenly paired with the Custard making it hard to pick it out completely, but it still had some sharp punchy notes helping it shine through. It also had some light jammie-ness, which also helped it to stand out a little. The Custard was much more like an American Pudding, as some of the heavier, egg-ier notes were absent. They were there, just not in a heavy handed fashiot, so if you need the Eggy-iest of eggy custards, this may not be Custardy enough. The “custard” (pudding) was sweet, creamy, and smooth, with some great Vanilla accents, which favored a Madagascar.
The pairing of the two was very nicely done, leaving them both playing center stage. Beyond that great taste, and perfect ratios, the interesting thing was the Custard, and Raspberries stayed seperated enough that they did seem like two different elements, as opposed to a blurry mashup if the two, if that makes sense. The reason why I think this flavor (and other’s like it) are so valuable is that they can easily be push/pulled into YOUR favorite profile. Need more RB, add it, need mo egg, add it. I suspect there are going to be a LOT of people, who might just solo this silly as is. Plenty full at 1.5%, sweetness was at mid-level, and I had NO complaints, issues, or off-notes. I literally bled the third tester dry, before finally giving up, and writing this. A very good RB Custard that ticks most of the boxes, and can easily be tailored to any specific needs. Not perfect, but MAN, it was close. 9.8/10.
Rhubarb (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-9-24) – I have had some BAD Rhubarbs before, so I am always cautious when testing them. This one smelled very rhubarb-y in the bottle, and that continued on to the testing. Slightly floral, and had some nice tartness on the finish. At 1.5% it was full, and sweetness was just below mid level. It had a certain “cooked” overall taste however, that seemed to detract from a fresh rhubarb that was hard to quantify. It’s like it was partially blanched or cooked out a bit. It was def. a rhu, but not all the way, and at times I got an almost plasticky undertone. Very light, and would be easy to cover/hide in a mix, but I did get it. I think making Rhubard flavors is very hard, and credit out to NomNomz for getting it squarely in the ballpark. After rolling through 3 testers of this one, it still presented more as a cooked or partially blanched rhubarb, with some nice sweetness, and a tart finish, with that slight off-note that came and went. It felt fair to leave it at a 7.0/10.
Orange (Blood) (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-9-24) – “Blood, blood, blood makes the grass grow”. Sorry, hehe, I work with a guy who was 82nd Airborne. This indeed was an orange, and it was somewhat leaning towards a Blood Orange. Plenty of citrus, and with hints of a nice citrus oil which improved it’s real-ness. It was less sharp and edgy than a regular orange which was in keeping with it’s “Bloodline”. I often think of Blood Oranges like regular oranges, somewhat tempered by a Raspberry undertone, and this one had some of that, but not fully. At 1.5% it wasn’t overly strong, but not weak, somewhere in the middle. Sweetness was just below mid-level, and as mentioned, some of the tart punchy-ness of a regular orange were gone, which was realistic. Tasty, fairly accurate, and also fairly smooth. I didn’t pick up any off-notes or anything out of place, but I wished for maybe some more intensity, would be my only complaint. Accurate, kind of bloody, but just kind of recessed. Possibly increasing the percentage, or even adding a drop of sweetener might help. It felt like it was just almost there, so I settled on a 7.5/10 for this one. Good, and close.
Chocolate Hazelnut (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-10-24) – Having recently tested NomNomz Roasted Hazelnut and loving it, wanted to see what was going on with this one. Now, I did get some of it in here, but not all of it, and probably because of the pairing with the Chocolate. It tasted like 50% Hazelnut, and 50% Nuts, so the tempering came at a cost. The chocolate tasted almost like a mashup of NomNomz Milk, and Dark Chocolates, which leaned towards the MC. At 1.5% it was nicely strong, and a few ticks below mid-level sweet. No off-notes, and/or out of place. I think my only “want” would have been, you guessed it, MO HazelnutZ. Now, this may not be everyone’s perception, but for my tastes, I would have liked the Hazel just a bit higher. As it stood however, no dryness, bitterness, and much of the earthy, darker tones from the Hazel managed to pull through, despite the choco pairing. All in, a good showing, but needed just a bit more Hazelnut. I struggled to score this one, marking down solely for the light(er) Hazelnut, but finally decided on an 8.95/10.
Tobacco (Gold) (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-10-24) – Being an avid NOT-toabacco-er, I won’t be able to break this one down or compare it to most other tobaccos, and NO, I don’t NET. My tobacco reviews typically go something like this, so read on at your own risk. No doubt, this was a tobacco. It presented fairly complex, to my non-bacco tastebuds, and had a nice “fresh cut” taste to it. It had hints of fresh straw,very light chocolate, nuts, and coffee if you can believe it or not. There was a certain “dirty-ness” to this one, not ashy, but a nice grungy, dirty undertone.that really worked with this one. It was fairly sweet, but still a few ticks below mid-level. There was an almost creamy-ness to it, but it wasn’t creamy, if that makes sense. Yeah, I got ALL THAT from this one. Hopefully a NET’er, or BACCO’er will chime in, and give you a better perspective on this one. All in, it was a convincing tobacco, with a very natural overall taste, with some very complex undertones. Having little to nothing to compare this to, AND being the “Not Bacco Guy”, I’m going to leave this grungy, little dirty one at a 9.5/10…
Toffee (Candy) (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-10-24) – Having had STELLAR results with NomNomz Toffee(Butter) , I had VERY high hopes for this one. Boy, was I in for a surprise. I actually got little to none of the delicious buttery toffee mentioned above, and instead got a very slight HINT of it, and I think they paired it with a butterscotch-ish flavor, but it went sideways, and ended up throwing a somewhat “Play-Doh” note. Not as much as CAP’s Glazed Donut, but once I tasted it, I couldn’t un-taste it. I also picked up on a somewhat creamy Vanilla swirling in around in there as well. For me, as soon as I didn’t get much of the OG Butter Toffee, it was already sliding downward, but the Play-Doh-ish element pushed it even further. It wasn’t a terrible flavor, but I don’t know if I’d have thought Toffee Candy though. At 1.5% it was full, and just below mid-level sweet, and that pretty much about sums that up. I DO think I’ll be getting a BIGGER bottle of the Toffee (Butter) though. Dropping this one down a bit, to a 4.5.
Candy Floss (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-10-24) – This one smelled like a fresh spun cotton candy in the bottle, and the room note on it, was the same if not better. Literally, you start clouding a room up with it, and you’d think you were at a Carnival. Now, hehe, what was ODD with this one, was the taste, was EXTREMELY light. Wispy thin. There was an initial sweet on-rush, but after that, it just all but disappeared. Very light at 1.5%, and what little flavor I did get was almost like a very light vanilla, and hints of cotton candy, and not much else. Tasting it directly off the finger it had more ooomph, but testing it, it just evaporated. There was a very light scorched note, but it came and went. No off-notes, but sadly not a lot of ON-notes either. Maybe increasing it might help, but unknown. Great room note, and air freshener. 4.9/10.
Cranberry (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-10-24) – Two things jumped out immediately with this one, the first was, there was some Cranberry in there, and the second was a musky-ness. It was almost like the true muskiness you get from authentic blueberry flavors, and I’m not sure if it helps, or hurts here. Once I tasted it, I couldn’t stop tasting it. It wasn’t off-putting, and you could probably work with it in a mix, but solo’ing it, it did distract from the Cranberry notes somewhat. The cranberry felt like it was maybe 50-60% of the way there, and it tasted stewed, not freshly picked. There was some sizzling tart-ness on the finish, but only a bit, and it was overshadowed by the sweetness. I wouldn’t call it candied, but it was a tick above mid-level sweet, which helped keep it in the stewed camp. A bold flavor choice for sure, and I’m sure not easy to create. Overall, it could work in a mix, but it would need some help. The muskiness was present till the end, although somewhat recessed. This bold flavor felt good at a 6.5/10.
Chocolate (White) (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-13-24) – Took a little extra time with this smooth one, just to make sure. Just in case not everyone knows what White Chocolate really is, it’s not even really chocolate !!! I have had some very bad, chalky White Chocos before, and thankfully this one wasn’t one OF them. This is probably one of the BETTER ones I’ve tested. Even with that, it wasn’t a spot on replication, but it got further than most others. The cocoa butter was actually very accurate, creamy, smooth, and delicious. Now despite not having ever tasted explicit Milk Solids, suffice it to say, they were IN here. They clearly added to the creamy, smoothness of this flavor. Sweetness was surprisingly a few ticks below mid level, and I got NO off-notes.
Now, quite frankly, when dealing with White Choco’s whether or not they completely hit the mark or not IS important, but the OFF-NOTES are what kills most of them. 3 testers later, I couldn’t find any, and THAT, is a big damn deal, or at least in the world of WC’s it is. Not quite velvety smooth, but very close TO it, IMO. I could think of a plethora of uses for this one from Chocolates, Deserts, Milk Shakes, Dairys and much, much more. At 1.5% it was fully present, and didn’t feel, or taste lacking. I couldn’t hope to quantify exactly what was missing, but it was close to hitting the mark. Very close to nailing it, AND, with NO off-notes, dryness, bitterness, nothing. Going to mark this one up a bit, for the complete lack of offensive off-notes, and leave it at a 9.5/10.
Raspberry Jam (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-17-24) – Out of the gate, you KNEW this one was a Jam. BUT, was it jammie enough ?? Yes, it was. This one actually took a little bit to settle down in my tester, so I gave it a little extra time. Once it did, it rocked all the way till the empty-ness of the third tester. I can’t say for sure, but similar to Nomz OG Raspberry, but better. At 1.5% it tasted fuller, richer, and with, (you guessed it), some very nice jammy undertones. It had some nice pectin-ish tarty notes that convinced you it was a jam. Some bright, some mid, and a few darker RB tones in this one. Sweetness was at about mid-level, and down near the bottom there was an almost buttery light note on the finish, but only slightly. The RB was convincingly natural, and none of the “candied”-ed-ness that I got from the OG RB, which is/was to my RB liking. Sweet(er), jammed, authentic, and with no off-notes to complain about. IMO, this was was quite superior to the OG RB, and I could use this one, all day. DId I find it hard to “move on” after the third tester ran completely dry ?? YES. As far as “wishes”, maybe just a hint more of the jam would have been my only wish, and a small one at that. Very tasty, hard to put down, and dare I say, damned good, all on it’s own. Slight take-off for just wanting a HINT more of jam, but only slightly, and leaving this tasty little jammer at a high 9.8/10.
Guava (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-17-24) – How DO you describe a Guava ?? Cross between a Strawberry, and a Pear ?? Maybe. This one did capture a lot of what a Guava tastes like. You could indeed taste the pink-ish fleshy notes in this one. Now, they were somewhat relaxed at 1.5% and possibly bumping it up, MAY yield a more saturated flavor, but as it stood, not out of the ballpark at 1.5%. It was fairly sweet, but not candied, and tasted like a tick or two above mid-level. There were hints of the slightly funky, slightly fermented-ness that you get from real Guavas in there. No off-notes, and no florals (thank God), perfumes, or soaps in this one. Fairly accurate, natural, and tasty. Because the sweetness was somewhat high(er) it felt like it detracted a little from the overall flavor saturation, so my “wishes” on this one would be slightly less sweet, but with more saturation. No complaints on the actual flavor though. For my tastes, the little bit of fermented “zing” on the finish helped keep it’s score higher than without, and it felt solid at a 8.9/10. Just needed a little more saturation, and zing to complete it.
Vanilla (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-17-24) – I have to admit to being quite interested in this one. “Vanilla ?? What KIND of Vanilla ??”. Well it’s a Frenchie !!! A French Vanilla variant to be exact. But it wasn’t named that, so what’s up ?? Well, it was tempered by something, and it took me a while to figure it out, but I DID. It tasted like a French Vanilla tempered by candy (small) marshmallows. There you go. Took you a few seconds to read it, but FAR longer for me to figure it out. Now, this was NOT a Vanilla Marshmallow, but literally a Vanilla with small type marshmallows jammed in. Overall it was an interesting flavor, and the MM worked to soften up the vanilla quite a bit, which may, or may not work for your Vanilla needs. Most times on the finish, I could even pick up on the powdered coating ON the mini marshmallows. As a mixer, or baser, I could see a lot of uses for this one, but as the primary driver in a Vanilla mix, not so sure. There was a note near the middle, and finish that reminded me of CAP’s Vanillas, and whether or not that’s an “off” note or not is up to the individual, and I didn’t count it as one. Sweetness was somewhat high, and was a few ticks above mid level sweet, which I either attributed to, or added credence to the mini-marshmallows. No off-notes, with the exception of the aforementioned “CAP Vanilla” thing, and it was full at 1.5%. I could see a lot of uses for this, as it did double duty as a Frenchie and a Mini Marshmallow at the same time. I am going to kick it down a few, because the inclusion OF the mini MM’s did somewhat detract from the pure(r) Vanilla notes, softened the flavor overall, and probably was to blame for the hightened sweeteness. Tasty, but leaving it at a 6.9/10.
Raspberry (Wild) (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-17-24) – Sadly for ALL Wild Raspberries, they have a high bar to meet, so all WRB’s I test, I can’t NOT compare them. This one presented as a “different” raspberry, and while tasty, I wasn’t 100% sold on the “Wild”. Now while I can’t fully quantify exactly what makes a Wild a wild, I can always tell if it’s “In There”. This one presented almost like a candied Raspberry, with some interesting accents, and it took me QUITE a while to figure it out, but I did (again). I think the paired profile was similar to that of a grape. It was VERY hard to tell when riding around with the Raspberry, but it seemed more purple than green, but maybe a hint of green grape in there as well. NOW, this was not a straight mashup of a grape and raspberry, but the grape was almost slid in, underneath (undertone) below the more dominant Raspberry. The raspberry stayed fairly candied, and partially artificial throughout my tests, and that damned interesting grape-y undertone never left. It tried to stay hidden below the RB, but once I tasted it, (you know), I couldn’t UN-taste it.
Now, overall the flavor WAS very good, and it was nicely full at 1.5%, and was just below mid-level sweet. No off-notes, florals, soaps, or perfumes, and about the ONLY thing I wasn’t 100% sure of, was the grape-y undertones, and/or if that sold the “Wildness”. In the end, I couldn’t decide, so I decided to take-off just a bit as to my tastes, it was a grape, and although a VERY tasty flavor, didn’t sell me on the “wild”. All in, a fairly candied Red (guessing) Raspberry, tempered by a super interesting grape undertone, which when combined, yielded a very interesting flavor. Even without selling me entirely on the wild, it still was too good to go below a 9.0/10.
Hibiscus (SC) (Nomz) 1.5% (3-18-24) – Wow, this one was a PUNCHY lil’ one. I have to check, but I’m pretty sure I have all of ONE Hibiscus flavor on my racks (well, TWO now), and that’s saying something, so keep that in mind. This one DID hit me with some Florals right out of the gate, BUT, in the case of this flavor, that wasn’t off-putting, or a negative. It was a VERY strangely interesting flavor, and it seemed to revolve around two main notes. The first was a light, sweet floral that was bright, and very light on the palate, and the second was a darker, almost tart berry-ish note, that was similar to a pomegranate mashed up with a cranberry. And THERE you go, hehe. Trying to explain these notes was actually a challenge, or at least making them make SENSE was a challenge. Together, the light floral along with the dark/er tart berry-ish tones was QUITE an interesting combination. I think it was a little dark(er) and tarty-er than the only other one I’ve ever tested. Now the light florals may or may not be for everyone’s tastes, but in this case, they really seemed to play well off of the darker, tart notes. No off-notes with the exception of the light florals for some people, and at 1.5% it was really good. Because it wasn’t in my normal wheelhouse I’d have to think about some good uses for this one, but as it stood, it was a VERY unique one, and am going to place it high, as it seemed to do what it needed to do, and it did it well. Light florals, sweetened, and with a darker, tart berry low end. Leaving this one high @ a 9.6/10.