The Heart Cut - KOVAL and the Discipline of Precision in an Age of Excess.

There is a passage in Austerlitz where memory resists chronology, arriving instead in partial architectures - corridors without exits, textures without names, moments that feel intact but refuse to situate themselves. It is not recollection so much as excavation, as though time had been misfiled and could only be retrieved in fragments. You move through it obliquely, recognising surfaces before you understand their origin.

It may seem a circuitous way into whiskey, but it begins to make sense when thinking about Koval - not as a custodian of tradition, but as something more restless. Less interested in preservation than in the conditions under which memory is allowed to persist. What is kept, what is discarded, and how the past is reassembled so that it remains legible without becoming fixed.

American whiskey, in its prevailing idiom, has often leaned on accumulation as a form of rhetoric - char layered upon char, time thickened into proof, oak enlisted as both narrator and editor. It is a literature of saturation, closer perhaps to the late chapters of Moby-Dick, where meaning accrues through density rather than precision. Age becomes argument. Weight becomes authority.

Koval moves along a different axis. Not in opposition, exactly, but in refusal of that excess. Its cadence is closer to something pared back, almost aphoristic - where distillation becomes less an act of accumulation than of subtraction. The insistence on the heart cut - that narrow, lucid interval between volatility and fatigue - feels less like technical refinement and more like editorial discipline. A decision not just about what to include, but about what to exclude without regret.

What is absent is not loss. It is structure. And what remains is required, quietly but firmly, to account for itself.

This becomes most apparent in the rye, though “apparent” might be the wrong word - it is something you arrive at gradually, the way certain passages in The Emigrants disclose themselves only after you’ve moved past them. Built entirely from organic grain - a decision that exceeds regulatory necessity and edges closer to conviction - it sidesteps the familiar assertiveness of the category. Where many ryes declare, this one modulates.

The opening is oblique. Spice, certainly, but not in the expected register. It arrives refracted, as though passing through something finer - star anise loosened at the edges, caraway and white pepper diffused into a faint floral lift that reads almost as jasmine or orange blossom. There is a suggestion of heat, but it is tempered by brightness: citrus oils expressed rather than squeezed, a trace of candied peel hovering above a quieter note of toasted sugar, closer to brûléed edges than overt caramelisation. Even the vanilla, when it appears, feels aerated, less cream than vapour.

What distinguishes it is the sense of tension - not in the structural sense alone, but in how the aromas seem held slightly apart, never collapsing into each other. A kind of aromatic suspension, where each element remains legible without insisting on dominance.

On the palate, this restraint becomes more deliberate. It doesn’t arrive with weight so much as with direction. The entry is composed, almost soft, before widening into a more intricate field: ginger first, but fresh rather than candied, followed by clove and a dry, dark note that gestures toward cocoa husk rather than chocolate itself. There is a fleeting sweetness - something akin to honey warmed just past fluidity - but it never settles. Instead, it moves laterally, carried by a cooling thread that reads as mint, though not quite peppermint; more the suggestion of it, the way coolness registers along the edges of the tongue.

Mid-palate, a different texture emerges. Almond, perhaps, or something faintly marzipan-adjacent, though less confectionary and more structural. Coconut appears briefly, but again in outline - a dryness rather than richness, like the grain of it rather than the oil. The spices reorganise themselves here, less pronounced, more integrated, as though the earlier articulation has been folded inward.

The finish resists the usual crescendo. It extends rather than expands. Maple is present, but not as syrup - more as a trace, a residue of sweetness that sits lightly alongside a gentle dryness. There is a quiet creaminess that carries through, not heavy, but enough to give the closing moments a sense of cohesion. The oak, throughout, remains measured. It does not frame the experience so much as contain it, providing structure without overt declaration.

If there is a literary parallel, it sits closer to The Waves than to anything overtly narrative - a movement built from recurrence and variation, where meaning accumulates not through emphasis, but through attention. The rye does not insist on itself. It holds a line, and asks that you follow it.

The bourbon complicates the conversation in a way that feels less like variation and more like a shift in grammar. Millet - an ancient grain that seems almost indifferent to the conventions of American whiskey - introduces a different set of behaviours. If rye tends to define and articulate, millet disperses. It resists edges. It softens the outline of what you think you recognise.

The first impression is not immediate clarity, but a kind of layered arrival - closer, perhaps, to the tonal ambiguities in The Sound and the Fury, where meaning emerges through accumulation rather than sequence. On the nose, there is a brief, almost volatile lift of tropical acidity - something green and slightly sharp, like unripe mango or even tamarind - before it settles into something rounder, more textural. Melted butter, or the suggestion of it, sits beneath, though it never becomes heavy. Instead, it diffuses into a softer register: vanilla not as sweetness, but as a kind of aromatic anchor, accompanied by a subdued grain note that feels closer to warm starch than sugar.

There is a hesitation in the way these elements assemble. They don’t resolve quickly. They hover, overlap, retreat. Even the sweetness - present, but difficult to name - seems to resist categorisation. Not caramel in the conventional sense, nor honey, but something quieter, more internal.

On the palate, this ambiguity becomes structure. The texture arrives first - a fine, almost powdery tactility that recalls chalk or compressed grain, giving the spirit an internal architecture that feels distinctly different from the oilier profiles of more traditional bourbons. It is not weight that carries the flavour, but suspension.

From there, the profile unfolds laterally. The tropical note returns, but altered - less acidic, more integrated, moving toward mango chutney rather than raw fruit. Vanilla threads through it, but again without excess, more pod than custard. A line of caramel develops, though it behaves differently here - gathering warmth gradually, edging toward a gentle heat without tipping into viscosity.

Mid-palate, the grain asserts itself more quietly. Millet introduces a softness that reads almost as neutrality, but on closer attention reveals itself as precision. A delicate mineral trace threads through, quiet yet insistent, offering a dry counterbalance to the gentler, sweeter notes.

The finish resists closure. It disperses rather than concludes. Dried fruit appears in fragments - apricot, perhaps, though slightly sulphured, lending it a faintly oxidative quality. The pepper arrives late, not sharp but diffused, settling into a low, persistent warmth that sits at the edges rather than the centre. What remains is not a singular note, but a series of impressions that linger in parallel.

If the rye holds a line, the bourbon behaves more like a field - less about direction, more about atmosphere. It recalls, in a distant way, the spatial looseness of The Unnamable, where definition is constantly deferred, and meaning exists in the act of staying with it.

What binds the two expressions is not flavour alone, but a refusal to dissolve into generality. There is an insistence on being from somewhere, and more importantly, on being accountable to that origin. Grain-to-bottle, in this context, reads less like a positioning than a declaration of authorship - not in the romantic sense, but in the structural one. The work is traceable. The line from soil to glass is not smoothed over, but deliberately kept intact.

It recalls, in a distant way, the granular attentiveness of The Peregrine, where observation becomes a form of commitment, each detail held long enough to resist abstraction. Here, the Midwest is not invoked as a backdrop or a convenient signifier. It is operational. The grain is sourced from specific networks of farmers, the rhythms of organic agriculture shaping not just the material, but the timing, the yield, the constraints under which decisions are made. Nothing is neutral. Everything carries a context that cannot be outsourced.

Kosher certification, similarly, does not present itself as an external marker of compliance, but as an internal logic. A discipline that governs what can and cannot enter the process, narrowing the field of possibility in ways that sharpen intention. It is less about inclusion than exclusion - a set of boundaries that force clarity. In that sense, it aligns less with branding than with method, a quiet insistence that the process remain legible at every stage.

Even the technical choices carry this same inflection. The use of smaller, 30-gallon barrels - increasing the ratio of wood to spirit - could be read as acceleration, a way of intensifying interaction. But here it feels closer to calibration. Not pushing the spirit toward a predetermined outcome, but tightening the exchange between liquid and oak so that it remains responsive. The wood does not overwhelm; it engages. It becomes less a dominant voice than a counterpoint, shaping without obscuring.

If there is a literary analogue, it sits somewhere near The Living Mountain, where immersion replaces overview, and understanding emerges not from distance but from proximity. The process here does not seek to generalise. It insists on specificity - and in doing so, resists anonymity at every turn.

Some couples collect passports - these two collect stills, secrets, and a quiet monopoly on knowing exactly what’s in your glass.

Chicago, too, exerts its influence, though not in the softened, pastoral language distilleries often borrow when they speak of place. There is little here of terroir as romance. Instead, something more structural, more procedural. The city operates as a system before it becomes an image.

In that context, Koval sits slightly askew. Its distillation methods draw from Austrian brandy traditions - techniques that privilege precision, restraint, a kind of attentiveness that feels almost at odds with the city’s broader cadence. And yet, the tension does not fracture. It holds.

If anything, the contrast clarifies the work. Precision, here, is not aestheticised; it is operational. It meets a city that understands systems, that recognises the value of process without needing to narrate it. The result is not a fusion, nor a reconciliation of opposites, but something more exacting - an alignment of logics.

There is a passage in Working where labour is described not in terms of output, but in terms of identity - the ways in which people understand themselves through what they do. That sensibility lingers here. The whiskey does not attempt to reflect Chicago in any overt sense. It adopts its discipline.

What begins to take shape, gradually and without declaration, is a different proposition for what whiskey might be. Not as an artefact secured to the past, nor as a performance of lineage rehearsed for the present, but as a medium through which attention is trained. A way of working through material - grain, heat, time, restraint - until it begins to articulate something on its own terms.

There is a useful parallel in The Craftsman, where making is framed not as execution, but as a sustained dialogue between intention and resistance. The material pushes back. The process adjusts. Meaning emerges not from control, but from staying with that exchange long enough for something precise to surface. In this sense, the whiskey does not represent an idea; it arrives at one.

What is being proposed, then, is not a new style so much as a different orientation. Less concerned with asserting identity than with maintaining a certain clarity of method. A willingness to remain in flux - to treat inheritance not as something to stabilise, but as something to test, to interrupt, to carry forward without resolving too quickly.

It recalls, in a quieter register, the open-ended structures of The Open Work, where form is not fixed but continually reinterpreted through engagement. Here, the work resists closure. It remains deliberately unfinished in the best sense - responsive, adaptive, in motion.

And it is within that space - somewhere between discipline and drift, between what is known and what is still being worked through - that Koval continues to take shape. Not as a static identity, but as an ongoing practice.

To understand how that motion is sustained, and where it continues to lead, we spoke with Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart.

KOVAL’s name carries a sense of motion, i.e. not just making, but moving forward. I’m curious whether you think of the distillery as an inheritance fulfilled, or something more restless: a continuation of a story that was never meant to settle.

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: The name Koval means "blacksmith" across the linguistic landscapes of Eastern Europe. In the Yiddish tradition, however, it implies the capacity to alter the trajectory of one’s own life, much as a blacksmith redirects the shape of metal. Our name is a dual homage: to my great-grandfather, who earned the moniker when he traded the streets of Vienna for the promise of Chicago at the turn of the century, and to Robert’s grandfather, Schmied, whose name also means blacksmith in German.

KOVAL represents a legacy of forging new paths. We abandoned established careers to found the first distillery in Chicago since the mid-1800s, and in turn, created a new school of craft distilling focused exclusively on the "heart cut" of the distillate (the purest essence of what comes off the still). Founding KOVAL also afforded us an opportunity to work with, and live close to family, while making something we can be proud of in the city we love. Essentially, we created a circumstance to focus on what, for us, is the ‘heart cut’ of life.

There’s a particular kind of courage in exchanging the architecture of ideas for the contingencies of production. When you left academia, did you feel you were abandoning a framework or finally finding one that could hold weight, smell, and time?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: In the academy, one inhabits an architecture of ideas, observing the flow of time as a synthesizer of ideas. For me, the lens I used to examine time was that of cultural history in Germany and Austria from 1890-1938. Many historians, like myself, elucidate the past in hope to inform the present.

Moving into production was not an abandonment of that framework; rather, it was a shift toward creating a physical marker for time, that I hope can also be used to make life in the present better. Since spirits are so often the silent witnesses to our celebrations, our milestones, and our necessary reprieves from work, they become imbued with the occasions they accompany. A specific whiskey, gin, or cocktail can serve as a visceral form of time travel, transporting one back to the scents and sensibilities of a moment long since passed, like a piece of music, scent, or item of clothing. It really is a spirit!

Your whiskeys often read as unusually precise, almost tensile in their clarity. Was that aesthetic always the ambition, or did it emerge as a quiet resistance to the heavier, more familiar grammar of American whiskey?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: The "heavier grammar" of traditional American whiskey often relies on a broader distillation cut and a heavy reliance on charred wood to mask the "tails" of the spirit. Our aesthetic, by contrast, is an inheritance of the Austrian brandy-making tradition, which Robert mastered alongside his grandfather. In that tradition, there is no room for the "wet dog" aromas of a broader cut; the focus must remain squarely on the elegance of the heart. We achieve a tensile clarity by pairing medium-charred barrels with the brightest portion of the distillate. This is an element of what sets us apart: a marriage of iconic American grains, like Rye and Bourbon, with an Old-World precision.

Working with grains like millet asks something of the drinker, it disrupts recognition. Do you think of KOVAL, in part, as an exercise in retraining taste? A way of slowing people down long enough to notice what they don’t yet have language for?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: To work with millet is to intentionally disrupt the familiar. We invite the drinker to move beyond the easy "vanilla and oak" tropes of corn-heavy bourbon and notice something more delicate, more nuanced. It is an exercise in slowing down enough to truly taste and understand something new, which can be exciting. Beyond the palate, millet offers a moral dimension. It is a regenerative grain that breathes life back into the soil rather than depleting it. When we use organic millet, we are not just crafting a spirit; we are honoring the land. The result is a whiskey that is as emotionally resonant as it is visceral.

There’s a sense that “grain-to-bottle” at KOVAL isn’t just about control, but about authorship and about refusing anonymity at every stage. How important is it to you that the whiskey remains traceable not just in origin, but in intention?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: In an industry often obscured by sourced spirits, traceability becomes our compass. We work directly with organic farmers in the Midwest because the intention must begin in the soil. We are engaged with every step of the process. We know the farmers, we mash the grains, we distill the grains, we are in control of the process, and in turn, more accountable and transparent.

Your distillation approach feels informed by European traditions, yet it resists nostalgia. Do you see heritage as something to be preserved, or something to be edited and kept alive precisely by changing it?

Dr Sonat Birnecker Hart: We view heritage as a living form of inspiration for everything we do. While Robert’s family has distilled in Austria for generations, we did not come to Chicago to replicate the past. We brought those European techniques, such as the focus on the heart cut that Robert learned from Austrian brandy making, to "alternative" American grains, like oat and millet. We honor the past by pushing its boundaries, ensuring our tradition remains a conversation between what was and how it can influence the now, and the future.

Chicago is not the obvious stage for a distillery revival, which makes the decision feel deliberate rather than convenient. What does the city give back to the whiskey, beyond geography, that another place might not?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: Chicago is the "city that works," built upon the grit of industry, located in the heart of the bread belt. The city’s culinary sophistication provided the perfect crucible for a distillery that values authenticity over artifice. Chicago does not merely offer us geography; it offers us an audience that understands that true depth requires both the best raw materials and the hardest work.

Through your teaching and consulting, you’ve shaped a generation of distillers who may never carry your name. Is that diffusion of influence something you value, or does it complicate the idea of what KOVAL is, or belongs to?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: Through our consulting, we have helped establish over 250 distilleries worldwide. We view ourselves as architects of a broader movement. If the KOVAL style, meaning a devotion to the heart cut, clean, grain-forward flavor spreads to others, it does not diminish our name at all. In fact, we see it as elevating the entire craft by offering something new to the conversation.

Organic certification, kosher production - these are often treated as labels of reassurance. With KOVAL, they feel more like structural decisions. Were they always non-negotiable, or did they become essential as the philosophy clarified?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: These were never marketing badges or peripheral reassurances; they were structural, non-negotiable decisions. Growing up on a farm, Robert had a real connection to farming and the necessity of forgoing harsh chemicals. Kosher certification similarly demonstrates that we are not using any colorings derived from bugs, or other items that would keep people from enjoying our spirits. These certifications are our guarantee of purity. They ensure that our supply chain remains as clean as our distillate, reflecting a commitment to the drinker that predates any modern trend.

There’s a quiet confidence in releasing whiskey that privileges brightness and structure over age. Do you think the industry’s fixation on time sometimes mistakes duration for depth?

Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart: The industry is obsessed with age statements as a proxy for quality, but time in a barrel can lead to over-extraction and bitterness and is not always what determines great flavor. We believe that what one puts into the barrel in the first place makes a big difference. Our philosophy suggests that depth comes from the quality of the grain and the distillation cut, not just the number of years a barrel has seen. It is really a different style. Nevertheless, we also value the proper balance and flavor that age imparts. KOVAL whiskeys are aged similarly to many of the larger companies' standards of around 5 years.

We appreciate the notes of time, but choose to focus on a dedication to the materials and distilling approach, as the foundation for our spirits.

--

Words and questions by AW.

Answers courtesy of Dr. Sonat Birnecker Hart.

Photo courtesy of Koval.