Post #430019 by bigbrotiki on Thu, Jan 22, 2009 10:58 AM

On 2009-01-22 09:24, arriano wrote:
I guess what I was getting at from the beginning was whether Bacardi was:
A. At one time a very good rum that has since gone downhill in quality.
B. Always a fairly mediocre rum that was simply inexpensive and easily obtainable.
C. As good as it has always been, but connoisseurs of rum prefer to sub Cuban, Virgin Island or another like rum instead.

If you would have had the dough, you could have found out :) :

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=200294927680

And what I was trying to say is that there is no totally objective judgment on what is good or bad in terms of many things, it has to do with purpose (like for rum and Coke, Bacardi is fine), individual preference, and especially, Zeitgeist, the spirit of a times. While in the 70s and 80s the dry, non-rummy taste of Bacardi was THE thing to enjoy, the pendulum is swinging back now, so that REAL rum lovers like us nowadays exclaim "How could anyone ever swallow this swill!" and prefer more aromatic white rums. Tastes change, evolve and devolve. I bet you there were rum connoisseurs in the 70s that wholeheartedly declared white Bacardi to be THE rum...and I don't think ITS taste has changed that much since -- but the taste of the people has.

The only way to find out is ask the opinion of an old rummy who has tried Bacardi since the 50s through today --but how objective/subjective would that opinion be?