Yes, I actually AM a Mojito snob …
1 Like
Mousse (Mango) (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-16-23) – While not eating much mousse, except for maybe a chocolate one from time to time, I had NO CLUE what this one would hold in store. As the flavor was breaking in, on the first tester, I was almost SURE, this was an unholy pairing, and NOT a good idea. As it broke in however, it did start to settle into a rather unique flavor profile. Now I don’t think I ever really got a “mousse”, but there was def. some creamy/creamery elements going on and it did seem (oddly enough) to pair with the Mango. The mango was very similar to the one in the Mango Gummy Candy, along with the same light off-note. Because of the pairing with a creamy element, much/most of the bright upper notes of the Mango were subdued, and it centered most around the mid-body notes. The creamy/creamery did seem to dilute the mango somewhat, as it wasn’t as present as it might have been solo’d. At 3.5% it was fairly strong overall, and sweetness was just at mid-level. The (almost) plasticky off-note that I got from the MGC was back again, and still fairly light, and there was an almost dry-ness to the finish. The off-note could probably easily be hidden, but be advised, it was still here. A “Creamy Mango” isn’t exactly what it presented as, BUT, it is close enough for comparison sake. Although I liked it a lot more after it fully broke in, I was still not a HUGE fan of the pairing, and the slight off-notes would need to be tamed/tempered before I could really like it. Putting it a little higher than the Mango Gummy Candy, at a 6.95/10.
2 Likes
Orange Gummy Candy (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-17-23) – If you’re in a hurry, this flavor tastes exactly like this. If you’re NOT in a hurry, read on. This one presented literally almost exactly as an orange slice candy, with even SOME, of the sugar granules on the outside. It leaned almost entirely towards an artificial orange, with some of the “Tang” mixed in. It was very good at 3.5%, and like almost all of the other “gummy” candy flavors here, I didn’t get much gummy. Now, with that said, when I think of “gummy” I’m thinking of Haribo Gummy Bears, which have the gelatinous gummy-ness to them. This one while NOT a hard candy, DID favor the aforementioned Orange Slice Candy. Now if that equals a “gummy” to you, then you ARE in luck with this one. Sweetness was just above mid-level, and no overt off-notes, except for maybe a slight “twinge” of sharpness on the finish, but it was minor. All in, an almost PERFECT Orange Slice Candy, that while def. a candy, didn’t push the gummy envelope for me. It was soo authentically close to the Orange Slices, I will have to rate it much higher than the previously tested gummy candies, and leave it at a 9.1/10.
3 Likes
Pastry Cream (SC )(WF) 3.5% (3-22-23) – This one presented as a fairly neutral creamery, with some nicely defined mouthfeel. . Not sure if the attempt was for a Mascarpone Cream or not, but there were some clear BA notes that persisted throughout. I didn’t get the clear sense of a Pastry Cream, but it was much more than a simple dairy or cream. There was some light undertones that resembled a pastry filling, but they were undertones only. It was fairly full at 3.5%, yet still somewhat light. It was sweetened, and tasted a little below mid-level. The BA did thicken it up a bit, and also added a slight sourness on the finish. Your BA sensitivity (or lack thereof) may decide whether or not this one is for you or not. All in, a fairly generic, mostly neutral cream, with some good mouthfeel with a slight sourness on the finish. It felt fairly placed at 6.5/10.
2 Likes
Thank you SD for all the testing and having these single tests in my Gmail has been priceless in determining what’s going in my cart.So far there’s 4 WF you’ve tested im def grabbing and cant wait to hear and read your thoughts on the final ones left. I agree with 90% of all your thoughts and ratings from the concentrates i bought from various brands.Again thanks for these posts,gmails,and testings that prob can be tedious at times but saves me the trouble of doing it as i generally just take your word/words for it and in my recipies they go,it’s def really helpful and im sure many will agree.
I’ll give you my own score of 10/10 for you keeping the descriptions Accurate, Interesting and many ticks above Helpful for anyone who’s deciding what to throw in their Carts they may have been pondering about 
3 Likes
Peach (Juicy) (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-18-23) – As I always mention, I try to NOT read other flavor reviews before reviewing them, to avoid any “contamination” of my own review(s). I have some VERY interesting thoughts on this one, and did check others thoughts on it, JUST to see if anyone else got, what I was getting. Interestingly enough, no one did, or had. Pressing on with my seemingly unique thoughts on this one. When loading the first tester, I was immediately greeted with what I can only describe as a fairly “cactus” like dominant note. After that, I did get some good yellow peach behind that, and at times, slight hints of an almost Fuji Apple. Yeah, that’s why I checked around, as no one else got that from this flavor. It never presented as a full on, juicy yellow peach to my tastes, and the peach notes I did get, while good, played almost second fiddle to the cactus note(s). It was quite a bit different than say TPA’s Juicy Peach, which I use regularly. It wasn’t that it was a bad flavor, but I’ve got a rather “hate/hate” relationship with cactus, and despite it adding “juicy-ness” to mixes, I cannot use it, so keep that in mind with this review.
It felt like a 6.5/10 on the strength scale, and it felt like it could be stronger, and that was at my 3.5% testing weight. Sweetness was a few ticks below mid-level, and no off-notes, BUT, for the cactus. It did have a fairly juicy overall profile, but I wouldn’t call it mouth wateringly so. I didn’t really get much if any skin, and that was probably (again), due to the cactus note. All in, I couldn’t see using it to pull the main Peach freight, but def. could see it in mixes. With my disdain for cactus-es out in the open, I would have to leave this one at a 6.0/10. …
2 Likes
Well thank you very much @Mookeye. I actually had a conversation about that very feature with @Grubby, and I felt it really made the VC/VCC unique, that people could get SFT updates via email, in regards to my dumping SFT’s on the VCC side as well.
Well in that case, GOOD, hehe, so we do have similar palates. WHEW !!!
Well, you’re very kind, and thank you for that mate.
3 Likes
Pecan Pie (SC )(WF) 3.5% (9-21-23) – Having tested the WF Pecan, this one was very similar to it, but tempered by a sweetened, almost thick, pie filling like main note. I didn’t get much butter from this one, and that was great, as it was NOT a Butter Pecan flavor. The crust was much lighter in the mix, and would need some boosting to make this a full on “pie”. The Pecan notes were actually very good, accurate, and had just enough earthy tones to keep it realistic. Throughout the 3 testers, this one proved to be really centered around the deliciously sticky rich filling of the pie, WITH Pecans mixed in. The stand along Pecan was earthier, but with this one, it was much lower to the “filling”. At 3.5% it was very good, convincing, and almost thick, and with no off-notes. About my only nit-pick would be the very light (if at all) crust, but that could easily be fixed. This one tastes improved from the Alpha tests somehow, and was just a great Pecan Pie Filling. All it needed was some crust. Pushing this one up higher to 9.0/10.
2 Likes
Persimmon (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-22-23) – I have never eaten a Persimmon, so (as always), had to research it a bit to give you a more comparative review. From what I found, this one appears to be spot on. This one presented as an ALMOST Apricot, tempered in Honey. Now it wasn’t EXACTLY like an Apricot, but it was damned close to a lighter version of one. The Honey part, just seemed a bit MORE accurate, as I couldn’t think of a closer comparison. If any of you have indeed tried honey flavors in the past, and have blown up, hehe, fear not, there’s none of that here. It was very natural tasting, AND, with no off-notes or florals.
It was just almost strong enough at 3.5%, but felt like it could use a SMIGE more, but only a smidge. This is/was a fairly unique flavor, and I could see a LOT of uses for this, in a lot of mixes. There was just a hint of tart in the beginning, but the honey-like elements smoothly rolled from the middle to the finish. I can’t think of any of my flavors that are exactly like this, and I have a LOT of flavors, so you may want to pick this one up and experiment with it. Very tasty, and will rate this “Honey Apricot”-ish flavor very high @ a 9.5/10.
2 Likes
Pudding (Milk Chocolate) (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-29-23) – I remembered my reaction to this one during the Alpha tests, and guess what, they IMPROVED it. NOW (unlike before), I was getting ONE clear profile, and that profile was Jello Chocolate Pudding !!! It’s NOT that it exuded raw pudding, BUT, it was unmistakenly, exactly that. The chocolate profile wasn’t exactly what I would call a Milk Chocolate, but it wasn’t a light or dark, so maybe that was more implied than not. Sweetness was actually below mid-level, which was surprising, but it actually didn’t feel like it needed any more. No off-notes, and it was just a smidge below where I would have liked it to be at 3.5%. No rubber bands, or band aids, so the chocolate notes were very well done.
It was simply put, about as close to a Jello Choco Pudding. It was almost as if it tasted like a mix of both the dry (in the box) pudding mix, AND, one that had been mixed/heated with milk (finished), and I would put it at a ratio of 25% dry, 75% finished if that makes sense. Smelling it, the chocolate had this delicious darker coffee undertone, and testing it, it was still there, just somewhat lower in the undertones. If you want a chocolate pudding, that tastes just about as close as I have ever tasted, then you WILL love this one. I suffered (LOL) through 3 testers trying to find faults with this one, and I came up short. I even compared my Alpha notes, which did not seem to apply to this, the finished version. All in, it was just below perfect to my tastes, and it felt solid at 9.9/10.
3 Likes
Powdered Donut (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-26-23) – I spent some extra time with this one, to better try and figure it out before posting this. I have had very few good donuts, and a lot of terrible donuts. This one, thankfully was one of the good ones. It does seem however, that many people have different takes on what a “donut” should or does taste like. For my American friends, this wass NOT a Krispy Kreme donut, but actually more like the small Hostess powdered donuts. The donut body was more of the slightly denser yellow cake-ish type, than the lighter deep fried type. The powered sugar aspect(s) kind of came and went, and didn’t always present for me consistently, so I would call that a lighter note. The cakey bakery note(s) were convincingly done, and although I didn’t get any spice or cinnamon, there was ALMOST (but not quite) an undertone of it. At 3.5% it was very full, and I didn’t feel the need to increase it. Sweetness was about mid-level, and good for this type of flavor. There were some “fried” notes going on, but they weren’t intrusive, or “greasy”, but still there. I didn’t get any off-notes, BUT, I did get somewhat of an almost “powdered milk” undertone that actually seemed to work with the overall profile, so I didn’t mark down for that. All in, a pretty impressive lightly fried donut, that was centered around a denser yellow cake interior with very light powdered sugar notes. It felt very good at a 9.3/10.
2 Likes
Raspberry Gummy Candy (SC) (WF) 3.5% (9-30-23) – While never fully getting what I would call a “gummy” from these gummy flavors, this one seemed to have more than the rest, but just by a bit. The star of THIS show was the Raspberry. It did not present as a darker purple RB, but much more of a candied Red Raspberry. I think what made the RB soo much better in this one WAS the pairing with the “candy” elements, errrr “gummy” elements. The Raspberry was somewhat unique, and reminded me of a candied red raspberry, with some hints of INW Raspberry Malina, and maybe a touch of RF’s Yummbery. Yeah, hehe, that’s as close as I can get, and it was good. NOW, the RB felt like it was somewhat diluted (as in the case of another gummy candy flavor) by the gummy candy elements. It tasted like it was about 75% of the way there, and I don’t think increasing the flavor percentage would make it pop any more due to the (along for the ride) gummy candy-ness
With that said, it was still fairly strong and present, and I couldn’t detect any florals (like Raspberries LOVE to do), or off-notes. The gummy candy was present, but instead of being gummy (for my tastes), it just seemed to “candy up” the RB, and it DID work. VERY good RB profile overall, but just not as strong as it needed to be to fully POP, and the gummy-ness was questionable. The RB did have a nice little tarty kick on the finish, and that helped pull it from being completely candied, and added some natural-ness to it. All in, and very good RB flavor, with good candy notes. About the only take-offs (like before) would be for the lightness of the “gummy”, and for a slightly diluted RB overall profile. It was too good to take-off too heavily for the minor aforementioned nit-picks, and it felt good at a punchy 9.1/10.
2 Likes
Redcurrant Gummy Candy (SC) (WF) 3.5% (10-2-23) – This one didn’t change much at all from the Alpha tests, and proved to be my not most favorite of the Gummy Candies. There were some aspects of Redcurrants in there, but I still continued to get an almost Pomegranate undertone throughout, while lower in the mix, was always there. I also got a sort of “funkyness” from it, again, while lower in the mix, stuck around for the entire show. Surprisingly the “gummy” was a little MORE present than in most of the other gummy candy flavors, so that was a plus. At 3.5% it was full, but still felt like it could use some MO Redcurrant to be honest. Sweetness was a few ticks below mid-level, and there was a nice tart pinch on the finish, that I really enjoyed, and kept it somewhat interesting. Not terrible, but it would also probably not be the main RC note in your mixes. About the only overt off-note would be the slight funky-ness previously mentioned. My opinion on the Alpha was about the same, and I decided to better hone in my rating on this one, and am going to place it squarely at a 6.5/10. Not terrible, not great, but somewhere in between.
2 Likes
Red Velvet Cake (SC) (WF) 3.5% (10-6-23) – I knew this one was a keeper as soon as I tested it. VERY accurate Red Velvet Cake, with delicious almost cocoa notes, tempered by a velvety smooth (sorry) cake profile. I have gotten more than my fair share of “baby powder” notes from more than a few RVC’s, but NOT HERE. Clean, accurate and just almost rich, with no off-notes. The cake element(s) were so accurate that at times I thought I was getting hints of baking soda !!! Needless to say that cake profile was just about as close as you could make it, short of a mixing bowl. I typically use Vanilla when I make the actual cake, and I didn’t get a lot of that in here, as (you guessed it), the Cake and Cocoa notes were the stars here. At 3.5% it didn’t leave me wanting, BUT, I wouldn’t have argued with a smidge more so the % will be up to you guys to decide. Sweetness was actually just below mid-level, and I did blow through all 3 testers before I knew it, and I hadn’t written a single word LOL. All in, a VERY good, and accurate Red Velvet Cake with super delicious cocoa and cake notes. NOT a chocolate cake, but squarely a RVC. I’m moving this one up a tick from my original Alpha rating, to a 9.85/10.
2 Likes
We’ll have to have a RVC bake-off, SD! Hehe…
1 Like
Mmmmm, nom nom …
1 Like
Strawberry (Sparkling) (SC) (WF) 3.5% (10-7-23) – 2nd to LAST one on deck people. Normally something in the smell or finger test sets the tone for me with flavors, but this one, it might just have been the COLOR. Post steeped this one had a somewhat lighter pinkish, almost amber color which was interesting being a Strawberry flavor. Normally they are clear, so WHAT exactly WAS in this flavor ?? Well, I can make it easy for you, it tasted like a juicy red strawberry, mixed with a light, sweet champagne, with a touch of marshmallow. Yes, I know what that sounds like, hehe. Now, I have to clarify the previous profiles. The champagne was my best, closest comparison, but without any dry-ness, wine-ish notes, but with some “sparkle” in it. The marshmallow was more about some of the mouthfeel I got from this one, and a hint of the taste, as opposed to a full on marshmallow assault. There weren’t any “sharp” edges on this one, and had a slight smoothness to it, hence my thoughts of MM. The strawberry, while reduced somewhat due to the other profiles, tasted mostly red, juicy, and with hints of white/green SB thrown in. 3 testers later, I couldn’t find any off-notes, and overall, it was full at 3.5%, BUT, the SB was not as pronounced as I would have liked.
This is where YOUR personal preferences will come into play. The ratios. The SB did NOT taste like it was dominant here, so that may decide for you where to rate this flavor. A completely guessed ratio would be 40% Red Strawberry, 50% light, sweet champagne, and 10% marshmallow. Wow, this one was tough to describe for you guys, but there you have it. It indeed DID “sparkle”, and did so in a very unique fashion. Overall, my only complaint would be the somewhat recessed SB, so I finally decided on an 8.0/10. Dropping in some SB on top would easily resolve it for my tastes.
2 Likes
LOL @woftam, SOOOO close. TWO Flavors left, and I got caught …
2 Likes
Sugar Cane (SC) (WF) 3.5% (10-7-23) – Finishing up this series I started about a month ago, with this, the Sugar Cane. I really liked this one during the Alpha tests, and that continued here as well. This presented as a fairly rich, almost buttery (without any butter notes) sugar cane. It had an almost “thickness” to it that really added to the realism. There were some darker sweetened notes, BUT, not of the molasses type, just darker sweet notes. At 3.5% it was damned good, rich, and full, and didn’t leave you wanting. Sweetness was just at about mid-level, but it wasn’t cloying OR annoying (hehe). Despite not being overly complex, it was still a very enjoying flavor to test.
I couldn’t get past the (repeating) buttery richness of it SANS the butter, and I’m not sure how Frank and his crew over at Wonder Flavors did it. No off-notes to be found EXCEPT (gotcha), I got a very distinct undertone from beginning to end, and I’m going to ask @Lynda_Marie to chime in on this and see if she got it as well. I think one (or more) of the compounds used in this flavor are/were also used in more than a few DONUT flavors. I knew it the moment I tasted it. I’m NOT going to qualify it as an “off-note” because it seemed to help push the “darker” envelope, and it just worked. All in, this one was a great, darker, sugary, almost buttery rich flavor, that kept you coming back for more. I’m pushing this up a tick from my Alpha rating and dropping it at a solid 9.3/10.
2 Likes
What you could do in the first post is put the name then link the actual post so peeps can jump right to it
Eg
Strawberry (Sparkling) (SC) (WF) 3.5% (10-7-23)
or
2 Likes