Royal Brackla is one of only two distilleries left that still uses the "Royal". Royal Lochnagar being the other one, and neither of these are often bottled as single malts. Here we go...
Royal Brackla 10yo 1969-1979 40% Gordon & Macphail Connoisseurs Choice
Some oldies in this tasting, one with that old brown G&M CC-label. A very young/old whiskymatured for only 10 years, from a very active cask? It smells roasted nuts, almonds, sugary, syrupy, stewed apricots, other sweet boiled fruits. The taste is all on bittersweet notes, tonic water, banana and dried spices. It needs some water. More earthy now, rich, a bit sulphury, raw honey, pine wood, flinty, big old greasy whisky style. Fatty ribs and grilled mushrooms. The aftertaste is spicy with lots of dried fruit notes.
Another style than what's produced today, will this style ever return?: 7
Royal Brackla 16yo 1970-1986 40% Gordon & Macphail Connoisseurs Choice
Distilled only a year later than the previous one, but it has 6 more years in the wood. Amber color. It smells peppery and spirity, vodka and charcoal. Not bad, but very raw and primitive profile if you like. The taste is sweet and peppery, some vanilla but mostly this peppery and slightly bitter greasy feeling. Austere, tongue-prickling. I can't go high on this one, but it sure makes for an interesting whisky. Water just makes it volatile. One might wonder how it still can be so raw and unrefined after 16 years in oak.
Almost newmake-style: 3
Royal Brackla 14yo 1978-1993 43% Signatory Vintage cask#11079,11080,11081 btl.768/2400
This one has the color of very very light white wine, borderline water. It smells sweet, vanilla, bananas, leather, roasted squash and onions, garlic, very fresh and good, seems more than 43%abv. The taste is sweet, green grapes, sawdust, fish sauce, wasabi paste, extremely rich and expressive for a whisky at this age and strength. I wonder what would've happened if they bottled this at cask strength. However, its also a bit raw and spirity, and perhaps the cask hasn't done a proper job here. It lacks a bit of mellowing and this spiritiness leaves a disturbing shadow over the other nice notes.
Until the finish it was a very good whisky: 4.5
Royal Brackla 13yo 43% Master of Malt
If the last one was pale in color, I'll tell you this one is completely like water, or Vodka if you like. Let's hope that's a similarity that's only definable by looks. It smells herbal, spirity, vodka, unterberger, lots of herbs going on in this one, alongside a heavy spiritiness. I have to say, if this one is close to the new-make, which it very well could be as this one also has that young and rawish spiritiness like the SV-version, then the spirit from Royal Brackla must be quite brilliant. The taste is, oh yes, this has little or no aftertaste, a quite neutral and spirity flavor and little to no aftertaste. If this was served me blind I'd think it was some sort of Vodka. Thankfully I have some more, higher strength Royal Brackla left to try.
Almost like a new-make, a good new-make that is: 4
Next tasting: Linkwood Distillery
lørdag 31. mars 2012
fredag 30. mars 2012
Tasting 4 Balblairs
I knew I should have had some Bladnochs today, but due to unforeseen circumstances there will be some Balblair instead. I have had some very good experiences with whisky from Balblair, the 16yo still stands out as one of the best standard bottlings I've tried. I'll have another go at this in this tasting. Unfortunately there aren't very many indie Balblairs around these days, and the new vintage expressions seems to be a bit of a questionable decision what quality is concerned. Of course a very personal opinion.
Balnagown/Balblair NAS 40% Harrods
One bottled for the Harrods department store. The color is golden, it smells honeyed and peppery. Light. After a small breathing period, a more spirity note appears on the nose. The taste is burnt and spirity, seems like some vodka. The aftertaste is bitter and spirity. I'd like to think Harrods would choose better (more complex) whisky for their tartan series, but I guess money matters and this was perhaps a cheap alternative. But why Balblair distillery has allowed their name on the label in this case, seems a bad move. If I never had tried Balblair before, this one sure would give me low expectations for next tasting.
young and unfinished whisky: 1.5
Balblair 16yo 40% OB
My favorite Balblair, but from an earlier batch then the one I rated a very good 8.5 back in the days. How is the consistency? Light copper hue. It smells spirity, honey and vanilla, mostly bourbon-matured. The taste is light and heathery, bourbon, vanilla, honey, elements of pistachio and granulate. Medium spicy. The aftertaste is short and fluffy (I know it isn't a tasting note) but it gives this loafy light bread feeling which I can't describe any better right now.
Not as good as I remember it, but still a nice whisky: 6
Balblair 22yo 1973-1995 40% Gordon & Macphail Centenary Reserve
A very dark whisky. I know there's gold to be found amongst these old, low strength G&M bottlings. A dark orange hue, perhaps from some old sherry casks? It smells sherried, chili, cinnamon, oaky, dry, lime peel, ginger, horse meat, blood, iron, a very good whisky with some old sherried style. The taste is thick, dry, cinnamon, honey, caramel and butter. I believe this one needs a small drop of water to really shine. With about two teaspoons of water it tastes red wine, honey, rich oaky notes, licorice, orange peel, grapefruit and raisins. The finish is drying and bitter, more in fino territory.
For hardcore sherry fans only: 6
Balblair 10yo 1997-2007 43% OB
One of these I dread a bit as the 1989 was a huge letdown. For what I know, this is only bourbon-matured whiskies. Apple juice color. It smells banana liqueur and gin. A sweet treat. The taste is very sweet, vanilla and banana, some hints of black peppers and once agin gin. The aftertaste is peppery.
Very drinkable, but not very interesting: 4
Next tasting: Royal Brackla Distillery
Balnagown/Balblair NAS 40% Harrods
One bottled for the Harrods department store. The color is golden, it smells honeyed and peppery. Light. After a small breathing period, a more spirity note appears on the nose. The taste is burnt and spirity, seems like some vodka. The aftertaste is bitter and spirity. I'd like to think Harrods would choose better (more complex) whisky for their tartan series, but I guess money matters and this was perhaps a cheap alternative. But why Balblair distillery has allowed their name on the label in this case, seems a bad move. If I never had tried Balblair before, this one sure would give me low expectations for next tasting.
young and unfinished whisky: 1.5
Balblair 16yo 40% OB
My favorite Balblair, but from an earlier batch then the one I rated a very good 8.5 back in the days. How is the consistency? Light copper hue. It smells spirity, honey and vanilla, mostly bourbon-matured. The taste is light and heathery, bourbon, vanilla, honey, elements of pistachio and granulate. Medium spicy. The aftertaste is short and fluffy (I know it isn't a tasting note) but it gives this loafy light bread feeling which I can't describe any better right now.
Not as good as I remember it, but still a nice whisky: 6
Balblair 22yo 1973-1995 40% Gordon & Macphail Centenary Reserve
A very dark whisky. I know there's gold to be found amongst these old, low strength G&M bottlings. A dark orange hue, perhaps from some old sherry casks? It smells sherried, chili, cinnamon, oaky, dry, lime peel, ginger, horse meat, blood, iron, a very good whisky with some old sherried style. The taste is thick, dry, cinnamon, honey, caramel and butter. I believe this one needs a small drop of water to really shine. With about two teaspoons of water it tastes red wine, honey, rich oaky notes, licorice, orange peel, grapefruit and raisins. The finish is drying and bitter, more in fino territory.
For hardcore sherry fans only: 6
Balblair 10yo 1997-2007 43% OB
One of these I dread a bit as the 1989 was a huge letdown. For what I know, this is only bourbon-matured whiskies. Apple juice color. It smells banana liqueur and gin. A sweet treat. The taste is very sweet, vanilla and banana, some hints of black peppers and once agin gin. The aftertaste is peppery.
Very drinkable, but not very interesting: 4
Next tasting: Royal Brackla Distillery
torsdag 29. mars 2012
8 Whyte & Mackays (W&M.#5)
The concluding tasting of Whyte & Mackay. The tasting will be a progression from left to right. Let's see what affordable whiskies Richard Paterson has been able to develop over the years.
Whyte & Mackay NAS 40% Special Scotch Whisky
A flat bottle, probably from the 80's. Golden hue, probably adjusted to not lead astray from the standard blend color. It smells oranges, lemons, nectarine, honey, fruity and fresh. A dessert whisky? The taste is bittersweet and light, if to guess I'd say it has some Tomintoul in the mix. Also zesty, honey and briny. Blueberries and wood polish. Some soapy notes and lime leaves. The finish shows its a rather easy whisky, but not light in any way, ending with some wheat and damp notes.
For a young standard blend this is quite impressive: 5
Whyte & Mackay NAS 40% Special Reserve
Another flat bottle, from the same era I guess, just small variations on the label. But I could be wrong. Perhaps the whiskies are very different. It has the same color too, but the nose is much lighter here, small hints of malt and gravel, more towards Fettercairn so far what distillery character is concerned. The taste is more bitter, more towards fizzy candy and earthy notes, gravel again? I think that Tomintoul and Fettercairn are the two main malts in this blend, but I could be wrong.
It lacks the richness of the SSW: 3.5
Whyte & Mackay NAS 40% Matured Twice
I think "Matured Twice" means double wood, but since it's a blend I believe that its whiskies that's been in only one cask each, to be put in another cask to mature for a final period. So, I guess there has only been blended enough whisky for one cask in each batch? Or the whisky from one batch could of course be put into several casks and each cask then bottled single. A bit lighter color than the prior two, but not much. It smells old leather, wool, fabric, latex, drying, a very special one so far. The taste is The taste is honeyed and rustic, certainly some Fettercairn going on here. Could be some Dalmore as well, but very discreet if so. Goes on with peppery notes, manchego cheese, honey, vanilla, sweet green grapes. The aftertaste is bitter and peppery.
Doesn't end on a high note, but starts of very well: 4
Whyte & Mackay NAS 40% Special Double Marriage Blend
Another one that I'm assuming to be a double wood, or a batch of blend whisky put into wood casks for a final period of maturation.This bottle is more like the 5cl round ones you see today. A more recent version? The color is the same as the first two, golden standard blend coloring. It smells rich honey and toffee, certainly Fettercairn here, and also some Dalmore, if tasted blind I think I'd say sherried Dalmore. The taste is light, vanilla all the way, some resinous notes but more vanilla, and nutty, biscuity notes. wheat, marzipan and brown sugar dominates the finish.
A pretty perfect blend for blend lovers, not me though: 5.5
Whyte & Mackay NAS 43% De Luxe Scotch Whisky
A flat plastic bottle, probably from the 80's, bottled at 43%abv. 3% higher than the ones tried so far in this session. Amber color, surely enhanced by some E's. It smells minty and light, bitter too. Tomintoul for sure, and young Invergordon grain whisky. Some sweet sherried malt in this as well, perhaps some young Dalmore. The taste is dry and sweet sherried, much thicker and bigger than the last 4. Sweet cinnamon, strawberries, dry red wine, honey, this is at another level for sure. The aftertaste is burnt and phenolic, a lot of sherried notes in this one, and I'm sure there are some heavily sherried Dalmore whiskies involved.
A big whisky, one for the sherry lovers: 6
Whyte & Mackay 12yo 43%
The 12yo, the standard by any blend really, or so it used to be, now more and more whiskies are being bottled at a much younger age due to big increase in demand and credit demands. Not that its a bad thing, I sure like a powerful youngster once in a while. An even darker color than the "De Luxe" version, perhaps even more old Dalmore in this one? I could only imagine. It smells earthy, cinnamon, coriander, oregano, basil, lots of green herbs that just makes me think of fino sherried whiskies more than what distilleries the whiskies used in this blend could be from. It tastes of burnt oak, honey, smokiness, dark chocolate, rhubarb, very rustic. The aftertaste is burnt oak and olive oil.
Amazing stuff, but the finish makes it fall a bit: 6.5
Whyte & Mackay 21yo 43%
The only real oldie in this tasting, a copper toned 21yo. I already sense a big Dalmore influence in this one since they're being the first distillery bought by the W&M. Dark color, it tastes cinnamon, coffee beans, roasted almonds, plum juice, apple cider, wheat, hay, cherries, swamps, paint, rubber, old newspapers. It tastes of currants, vanilla, honey, cinammon, blackcurrants, port wine, leather, drying, bas armagnac, dark grapes. I love it, and so far its been nothing but great.
A great and complex blend: 7.5
Whyte & Mackay NAS 52.5% High Strength
It's a high strength bottling, not a cask strength, or it could be both. When reaching below the 53%abv, the whisky usually spent some time in the cask. This could be a bit different. Another golden color, just like the first ones. Smells of honey and butter, lots of butter. The taste is burnt, a bit phenolic. The taste is rich and honeyed, coffee, vanilla, licorice, more honey. The finish is on cigars and cinnamon.
A very good one, Dalmore style: 7
Next tasting: Bladnoch Distillery
tirsdag 27. mars 2012
Dalmore Distillery (W&M.#4)
I think the Dalmore Distillery is the most profiled and recognized in the Whyte & Mackay range. With their 70-something year old bottlings off and on being the worlds oldest whisky with some Gordon & Macphail bottlings alternating the position once in a while. Younger Dalmores aren't that much talked about, and I think this is my first real Dalmore vertical. The first distillery purchased by W&M, the one that started it all...
Dalmore 15yo 40% OB
Dark color, somewhere between pink soda and brown/orange. If this color is not tampered with by E's I'm impressed. It smells fresh, kiln fire, grassy, hops, wheat, fresh, dry martini and melon. The taste is nutty, sweet and sherried, I'm sure there are some older sherried ones in this mix. It strikes me as a whisky that would take water well. With additional water it opens up, becomes more floral, honeyed, sweet spices, pineapple and pecan nuts. The finish is drying and tannic, reminds me a bit of some dry port wine.
A well made sherried whisky that I think would benefit from a higher strength: 6.5
Dalmore 30yo 1966-1996 53.7% The Bottlers cask#6870
Whiskies distilled in the 60's are become increasingly rarer, I remember just a few years back, if roaming for older whiskies there would be plenty 60's material to reasonable prices in most online auctions and such. At twice the age and a higher strength than last whisky, this should be intereseting. And my little to no experience with The Bottlers makes me even more excited. It smells fresh once again, pine and nuts, needs some time to open up. Given time it goes on to more vegetal notes, onions, vegetal broth, boiled broccoli, earthy, brussels sprouts. The taste is amazingly sweet and dry, caramel, honey, lime juice, plum spirit, club soda, ginger, white rum. The aftertaste is long, peppery and bitter.
A very good expression that require both time and patience: 7
Dalmore 14yo 1996-2010 55.5% Master of Malt
The only "recent" bottling in this round, bottled for the online shop Master of Malt, which does have quite some bottlings up their sleeves. Seems the IB business is blooming these days. White wine color, one of those natural much refilled bourbon casks? It smells wool, blood, iron, slaughterhouse. The taste is peppery and vanilla, very easy and one-dimensional. A good one for sure, but hardly expressive. Kind of a misfit in this rather "fresh" session. Maybe the style of Dalmore has changed in more recent time.
A powerful but non-complex whisky: 5.5
Dalmore 20yo 1978-1999 56.6% Signatory Vintage cask#10133 btl.299/1250
One from a sherry butt. Golden orange hue. Smells rich, creamy, sherried, toffee, honey, cinnamon, blood oranges, grapefruit, dark grapes, red wine balsamic, much richer and fuller than the other ones in this session. The taste is rich, sherried, almonds, honey, cigars, smoky, olive oil, sun-dried tomatoes, peppery, very different from the previous Dalmores I've tasted, period. The spirit seems to have lost some of its nuances, freshness, nutty flavors, yet the cask does such an amazing job here. A real sherry bomb, for the ones that enjoy sherry apart from the sweet oloroso style. I'd say this is more like the dry side of amoroso. And it's so thick and rich as well. If to ever have a favorite Dalmore (without tasting the latest 70+something with R. Paterson nearby) I guess this would be it for me. Something special.
It's all on the nose and palate in this one, the finish is rather standard: 8
Dalmore 15yo 40% OB
Dark color, somewhere between pink soda and brown/orange. If this color is not tampered with by E's I'm impressed. It smells fresh, kiln fire, grassy, hops, wheat, fresh, dry martini and melon. The taste is nutty, sweet and sherried, I'm sure there are some older sherried ones in this mix. It strikes me as a whisky that would take water well. With additional water it opens up, becomes more floral, honeyed, sweet spices, pineapple and pecan nuts. The finish is drying and tannic, reminds me a bit of some dry port wine.
A well made sherried whisky that I think would benefit from a higher strength: 6.5
Dalmore 30yo 1966-1996 53.7% The Bottlers cask#6870
Whiskies distilled in the 60's are become increasingly rarer, I remember just a few years back, if roaming for older whiskies there would be plenty 60's material to reasonable prices in most online auctions and such. At twice the age and a higher strength than last whisky, this should be intereseting. And my little to no experience with The Bottlers makes me even more excited. It smells fresh once again, pine and nuts, needs some time to open up. Given time it goes on to more vegetal notes, onions, vegetal broth, boiled broccoli, earthy, brussels sprouts. The taste is amazingly sweet and dry, caramel, honey, lime juice, plum spirit, club soda, ginger, white rum. The aftertaste is long, peppery and bitter.
A very good expression that require both time and patience: 7
Dalmore 14yo 1996-2010 55.5% Master of Malt
The only "recent" bottling in this round, bottled for the online shop Master of Malt, which does have quite some bottlings up their sleeves. Seems the IB business is blooming these days. White wine color, one of those natural much refilled bourbon casks? It smells wool, blood, iron, slaughterhouse. The taste is peppery and vanilla, very easy and one-dimensional. A good one for sure, but hardly expressive. Kind of a misfit in this rather "fresh" session. Maybe the style of Dalmore has changed in more recent time.
A powerful but non-complex whisky: 5.5
Dalmore 20yo 1978-1999 56.6% Signatory Vintage cask#10133 btl.299/1250
One from a sherry butt. Golden orange hue. Smells rich, creamy, sherried, toffee, honey, cinnamon, blood oranges, grapefruit, dark grapes, red wine balsamic, much richer and fuller than the other ones in this session. The taste is rich, sherried, almonds, honey, cigars, smoky, olive oil, sun-dried tomatoes, peppery, very different from the previous Dalmores I've tasted, period. The spirit seems to have lost some of its nuances, freshness, nutty flavors, yet the cask does such an amazing job here. A real sherry bomb, for the ones that enjoy sherry apart from the sweet oloroso style. I'd say this is more like the dry side of amoroso. And it's so thick and rich as well. If to ever have a favorite Dalmore (without tasting the latest 70+something with R. Paterson nearby) I guess this would be it for me. Something special.
It's all on the nose and palate in this one, the finish is rather standard: 8
mandag 26. mars 2012
Tomintoul Distillery (W&M.#3)
Whyte & MacKay is no longer in legal possession of Tomintoul Distillery, having sold it to Angus Dundee Distillers back in 2000. That being said, the reason for these tastings are to try and recognize single malt characters in W&M blends at the final tasting, and I reckon there were quite some Tomintoul single malt in the W&M blends back in the days. Today I'll actually have my first ever cask strength Tomintoul, but lets start off with some probable lightweighters. I guess I'll make this session in two parts.
#1
Tomintoul 17yo 40% OB St. Michaels OB for Marks & Spencer
One bottled for/by(?) high street groceries and clothing chain Marks & Spencer of the UK. They do in fact have a nice variety of wines, but hardly a place you'd normally go to because of their single malt selection. Adjusted with some E's to a nice copper hue. Smells slightly bitter, varnish, lime peel, old chewing tobacco, burnt. Even though all these put together should make for grim expectations, its not the case, its just very bland somehow, I really have to use a while to distinct some real notes here by just the smell. The taste is burnt, bitter oranges, kirsch-wine perfumy, needs some water I think. It's not bad at all, it's just a very weird flavor for a whisky. With water it turns more vanilla, rubber, acid, pool water with chlorine, extremely weird is the best description I can give. Absolutely worth trying if you want a "once in a lifetime" experience that's not necessarily good.
Hard to give points, doesn't even come across as whisky to me: 3
Tomintoul 10yo 40% OB
I think this is the most recent standard OB, which states both "Single Highland Malt" and "Speyside Single Malt" on the bottle, benefitting on both names, as usually other distillers seem to wanna profile themselves with either or. Golden hue. It smells light, floral, vanilla and malty. The taste is rounder and sweeter, toffee, honey, creamy, vanilla, butterscotch, very gentle. The aftertaste is bitter and peppery. Not a finish that I really enjoy, but here it provides a nice break after the very gentle and smooth palate.
Gentle and pleasant, one for the newbies or blend-lovers: 4
Tomintoul 33yo 43% OB
There aren't many other distilleries out there with 27yo and 33yo standard bottlings, but I guess being such a young distillery, founded in 1964, they must do something to make some ground on the market. They have a big blending plant, but the single malts I guess have not been used too much there as they now seems capable of producing such old whisky for the single malt market. Same color as the 10yo, how strange. Smells smoky, pine wood, paint, vanilla, oak, rum, smoked salmon and mustard sauce. The taste is drying, sweet licorice, very pleasant with those two nuances being the only two I'm able to spot. It's almost like a dry liqueur whisky style. Dirty Harry with malt. But, for being a 33yo single malt, it sure could use some better wood or higher strength or whatever really, to enhance this rather light and easy produce. I have tried more complex 10yo's even at 43%abv.
A good whisky: 5.5
#2
Tomintoul 43yo 1967-2011 42.8% The Nectar of the Daily Drams
Then for some oldies, perhaps, and hopefully, this will make me understand a bit more about Whyte & Mackays motivation for buying this distillery. Remember, this whisky was distilled only 3 years after the distillery first opened. The color is same as 33yo and same as 10yo. Golden. It smells sweet and honeyed, nectar-ish. Fresh cinnamon, coriander, vanilla, sweet smoke, sauteed onions, baked apples, apple pie, peach, fresh and fruity. The taste is hot, spicy cinnamon and strawberries, currant jam, aniseed, licorice, vanilla, perfectly drinkable, perhaps it just needs a small drop of water to reach that higher state that's required to make for full enjoyment purpose only. With a small drop of water it turns lighter and fresher, but the spicy notes disappears. Try it neat first, I beg you.
A malt that shows that 33yo isn't even necessarily old enough for a Tomintoul: 7
Tomintoul 43yo 1968-2011 43.2% The Whisky Agency
From a bourbon hogshead. I know that whiskies in hogsheads doesn't always stand the test of time as well as those in the bigger puncheons and so. Hopefully this whisky won't be another over-oaked one. Same color again. It smells light beyond light, toasted bananas and vanilla. No need to go any further here. It's far from oaky, and seems much younger than 43yo. The taste is yoghurt, vanilla and big amounts of burnt oak, charcoal that is. This one is not for me unless some kind water can help. It just gets even lighter, this was a bit of a letdown after the very good Nectar.
Light stuff, a whisky that seems barely a fourth its age: 3.5
Tomintoul 39yo 1972-2011 45.7% The Whisky Agency
Another one from TWA, another one from an ex-bourbon hogshead, hopefully this one can be able to create more of a thick and syrupy bourbon-feel as i'm used to find from these old bourbon casks. Or it could just be a peppery one, all good. It smells exactly peppery and robust, herbal and grassy, lowland-style, some floral notes of dandelions and buttercups. But most of all there's grounded white pepper and mint. The taste is heavy on licorice, pepper notes and grassiness, kind of raw. It's quite amazing how there's now vanilla or oaky notes in the whisky at all after spending 39 years in a hogshead.
Again it seems a bit light for its age: 5
Tomintoul 44yo 1967-2011 47% The Whisky Agency
This one is just from an ex-bourbon wood, which means its probably from a bigger barrel. I don't know if that would make any difference at this point. A lighter color than the past ones. Smells vanilla and cream, butter, vanilla extract, fried noodles, maple syrup, another one that's light and easy on the nose. I hope the palate follows up, and maybe with a small twist, just to make it all more exciting. The taste is sour, lemony, lime rind, passion fruit, grape seeds, needs some water. Now it turns lighter and easier. Once again it seems that a Tomintoul doesn't necessarily behave its age.
Light and easy once again: 5
Tomintoul 14yo 1976-1990 62.6% James MacArthur's
Now, a jump at over 15%abv, I hope that this will show me the reason Tomintoul still has a single malt production, despite its blending plant being so much bigger in production. As I've mentioned before, I recommend JMcA for bottling those young whiskies at their prime before many other IB's will, instead of waiting for them to become old and hard to distinguish from one another, such as a few that we've seen in this session. Maybe they should have bought some sherry casks when they opened this distillery? Golden color. It smells sweet, vanilla, heather, honey, roasted almonds, dried barley, sage, soap, mint, eucalyptus, very fresh. The taste is drying, minty and peppery, a rather harsh experience, I'll have to add some water, even though it does much mroe of the walk than the prior ones. A few drops of water makes it more tender, some cinnamon, apples, pears, fruity, sweet spices, garlic, herbs, roasted almonds, dark chocolate, cardamum. The aftertaste is more bitter and makes me a bit nauseated.
If you look apart the finish, it'd be a winner, but the ending ruins an otherwise great dram: 6
#1
Tomintoul 17yo 40% OB St. Michaels OB for Marks & Spencer
One bottled for/by(?) high street groceries and clothing chain Marks & Spencer of the UK. They do in fact have a nice variety of wines, but hardly a place you'd normally go to because of their single malt selection. Adjusted with some E's to a nice copper hue. Smells slightly bitter, varnish, lime peel, old chewing tobacco, burnt. Even though all these put together should make for grim expectations, its not the case, its just very bland somehow, I really have to use a while to distinct some real notes here by just the smell. The taste is burnt, bitter oranges, kirsch-wine perfumy, needs some water I think. It's not bad at all, it's just a very weird flavor for a whisky. With water it turns more vanilla, rubber, acid, pool water with chlorine, extremely weird is the best description I can give. Absolutely worth trying if you want a "once in a lifetime" experience that's not necessarily good.
Hard to give points, doesn't even come across as whisky to me: 3
Tomintoul 10yo 40% OB
I think this is the most recent standard OB, which states both "Single Highland Malt" and "Speyside Single Malt" on the bottle, benefitting on both names, as usually other distillers seem to wanna profile themselves with either or. Golden hue. It smells light, floral, vanilla and malty. The taste is rounder and sweeter, toffee, honey, creamy, vanilla, butterscotch, very gentle. The aftertaste is bitter and peppery. Not a finish that I really enjoy, but here it provides a nice break after the very gentle and smooth palate.
Gentle and pleasant, one for the newbies or blend-lovers: 4
Tomintoul 33yo 43% OB
There aren't many other distilleries out there with 27yo and 33yo standard bottlings, but I guess being such a young distillery, founded in 1964, they must do something to make some ground on the market. They have a big blending plant, but the single malts I guess have not been used too much there as they now seems capable of producing such old whisky for the single malt market. Same color as the 10yo, how strange. Smells smoky, pine wood, paint, vanilla, oak, rum, smoked salmon and mustard sauce. The taste is drying, sweet licorice, very pleasant with those two nuances being the only two I'm able to spot. It's almost like a dry liqueur whisky style. Dirty Harry with malt. But, for being a 33yo single malt, it sure could use some better wood or higher strength or whatever really, to enhance this rather light and easy produce. I have tried more complex 10yo's even at 43%abv.
A good whisky: 5.5
#2
Tomintoul 43yo 1967-2011 42.8% The Nectar of the Daily Drams
Then for some oldies, perhaps, and hopefully, this will make me understand a bit more about Whyte & Mackays motivation for buying this distillery. Remember, this whisky was distilled only 3 years after the distillery first opened. The color is same as 33yo and same as 10yo. Golden. It smells sweet and honeyed, nectar-ish. Fresh cinnamon, coriander, vanilla, sweet smoke, sauteed onions, baked apples, apple pie, peach, fresh and fruity. The taste is hot, spicy cinnamon and strawberries, currant jam, aniseed, licorice, vanilla, perfectly drinkable, perhaps it just needs a small drop of water to reach that higher state that's required to make for full enjoyment purpose only. With a small drop of water it turns lighter and fresher, but the spicy notes disappears. Try it neat first, I beg you.
A malt that shows that 33yo isn't even necessarily old enough for a Tomintoul: 7
Tomintoul 43yo 1968-2011 43.2% The Whisky Agency
From a bourbon hogshead. I know that whiskies in hogsheads doesn't always stand the test of time as well as those in the bigger puncheons and so. Hopefully this whisky won't be another over-oaked one. Same color again. It smells light beyond light, toasted bananas and vanilla. No need to go any further here. It's far from oaky, and seems much younger than 43yo. The taste is yoghurt, vanilla and big amounts of burnt oak, charcoal that is. This one is not for me unless some kind water can help. It just gets even lighter, this was a bit of a letdown after the very good Nectar.
Light stuff, a whisky that seems barely a fourth its age: 3.5
Tomintoul 39yo 1972-2011 45.7% The Whisky Agency
Another one from TWA, another one from an ex-bourbon hogshead, hopefully this one can be able to create more of a thick and syrupy bourbon-feel as i'm used to find from these old bourbon casks. Or it could just be a peppery one, all good. It smells exactly peppery and robust, herbal and grassy, lowland-style, some floral notes of dandelions and buttercups. But most of all there's grounded white pepper and mint. The taste is heavy on licorice, pepper notes and grassiness, kind of raw. It's quite amazing how there's now vanilla or oaky notes in the whisky at all after spending 39 years in a hogshead.
Again it seems a bit light for its age: 5
Tomintoul 44yo 1967-2011 47% The Whisky Agency
This one is just from an ex-bourbon wood, which means its probably from a bigger barrel. I don't know if that would make any difference at this point. A lighter color than the past ones. Smells vanilla and cream, butter, vanilla extract, fried noodles, maple syrup, another one that's light and easy on the nose. I hope the palate follows up, and maybe with a small twist, just to make it all more exciting. The taste is sour, lemony, lime rind, passion fruit, grape seeds, needs some water. Now it turns lighter and easier. Once again it seems that a Tomintoul doesn't necessarily behave its age.
Light and easy once again: 5
Tomintoul 14yo 1976-1990 62.6% James MacArthur's
Now, a jump at over 15%abv, I hope that this will show me the reason Tomintoul still has a single malt production, despite its blending plant being so much bigger in production. As I've mentioned before, I recommend JMcA for bottling those young whiskies at their prime before many other IB's will, instead of waiting for them to become old and hard to distinguish from one another, such as a few that we've seen in this session. Maybe they should have bought some sherry casks when they opened this distillery? Golden color. It smells sweet, vanilla, heather, honey, roasted almonds, dried barley, sage, soap, mint, eucalyptus, very fresh. The taste is drying, minty and peppery, a rather harsh experience, I'll have to add some water, even though it does much mroe of the walk than the prior ones. A few drops of water makes it more tender, some cinnamon, apples, pears, fruity, sweet spices, garlic, herbs, roasted almonds, dark chocolate, cardamum. The aftertaste is more bitter and makes me a bit nauseated.
If you look apart the finish, it'd be a winner, but the ending ruins an otherwise great dram: 6
tirsdag 20. mars 2012
Fettercairn Distillery (W&M.#2)
Fettercairn is a malt whisky that's being used extensively in the Whyte & Mackay blends as there's not much going to single malts and W&M has a vast range of different blends with a big output altogether. While a big fan of this distillery I am not thrilled by some of the standard bottlings they put out. The 10yo seems to have had some good batches, but more often than not it has shown to be a lightweighter more in blend territory. The Fior I have given a decent review, but it seems to be a whisky thats very good from a newly opened bottle, but when it comes in touch with a bit of air it quickly fades to being a mediocre malt. I'll have those two today alongside two single cask bottlings.
Old Fettercairn 10yo 43% OB
From a flat plastic container, probably bottled in the 80's. Coloured to reach that golden color that most standard bottlings seemed to have back then. Smells bittersweet, nail polish remover, spirity, soapy, briny, sweet onions, picks itself up a bit after some breathing. The taste is vanilla and sour cream, onions again, red pesto, ginger, a light and easy aperitif style whisky that proves to be a good value-for-money even today after its discontinuation. But beware, with this whisky there can be big leaps in quality from batch to batch.
A nice and good whisky, with much bourbon-influence: 5.5
Fettercairn NAS 42% OB Fior
This is the big melting pot from Fettercairn with some young peated, some older sherried and some bourbon-matured whisky. Kind of a what you might find in some of the high shelf blends out there. The color is dark orange, I'm not sure if this is the natural color of this whisky, smells a bit peaty, a bit sherried but most of all it has this indeterminate lightness, remember, this is one of the last drops from this bottle, and when it was newly opened it had a lot more power from both sherry and peat. Maybe a splash of water will help. Now it tastes even lighter, it seems its not a whisky anymore, some light rum or vodka maybe, but if you go purchase a bottle of Fettercairn Fior, make sure you enjoy it all the first month after opening because when it starts breathing it starts dying.
Tame and non-motivational experience, makes me a bit drowsy to be frank: 3
Fettercairn 22yo 1989-2011 54.6% Premier Bond Co Ltd. cask#1372 btl.21/228
Over twice the age of the next oldest whisky in this session, from a bourbon hogshead. I feel often the hogsheads fits better, because of their small size and big, often oaky, taste impact, to be bottled at a younger age when the spirit still is in vigorous form. This "Private Edition" bottled for the, to me unknown, Premier Bond, seems to be a cask sold from the distillery directly to them and therefore has the statement "Private Edition" on the label. Color of straw. It smells spirity and bourbony, if to guess I'd say this was a high strength bourbon whisky. Peppery, vanilla, spirity, oaky, musty, heated steel, custard, cloudberries. The taste is burnt, spirity and oaky. This was a rather unpleasant experience, and I see why most of the old glorious Fettercairn comes from sherry wood.
I'm sorry, but this one should have gone to some blend: 1.5
Fettercairn 6yo 1997-2003 62.3% OB cask#2302 btl.270/308
Last drop of the first bottle I ever purchased from this cask. I have 4 more to go. Another one from a bourbon hogshead, this time bottled at the age of which I'm thinking is appropriate for such a small cask. I have already tasted this before, but to do justice to the later on tasting and trying to distinguish the different malt influences of Whyte & Mackay blends, I'll now try it once again. Color of white wine. It smells big, huge on vanilla sweetness and licorice, about as fresh as it gets. Some mint and honey arrives later on. It's quite perfect so far, not complex but it doesn't need to be when this simplicity works so well. The taste is smoky, sweet and herbal, peppery, vanilla, bananas, grape fruit, honey, coriander, green tomatoes, juniper berries, white peppers, a small but very pleasant dryness in the finish alongside lime rind and salt.
Again it has shown me that not all Fettercairns die while breathing: 8.5
Bonus:
Fettercair 11yo 1992-2003 46% Gordon & Macphail Connoisseurs Choice
I remember there were some 1992 Fettercairns around especially two versions from James MacArthur's were good. Lets try this one, hopefully it will still be a potent spirit even though being reduced down to 46%abv. Oops, it was corked, which means the stopper broke in half before it was opened. What to do? Well, I try to get as much of the stopper as I possibly can out first, then I take a coffee filter and drain the whisky through it into the glass. Then most, if not all, of the cork sediments have left the spirit and is remainig in the coffee filter. Light golden color, smells austere and spirity, not a very good expression. The taste is burnt and bitter. I think this is another one that should have been used for blending purposes. Light and bitter.
It seems this whisky should always be bottled at cask strength: 3
Old Fettercairn 10yo 43% OB
From a flat plastic container, probably bottled in the 80's. Coloured to reach that golden color that most standard bottlings seemed to have back then. Smells bittersweet, nail polish remover, spirity, soapy, briny, sweet onions, picks itself up a bit after some breathing. The taste is vanilla and sour cream, onions again, red pesto, ginger, a light and easy aperitif style whisky that proves to be a good value-for-money even today after its discontinuation. But beware, with this whisky there can be big leaps in quality from batch to batch.
A nice and good whisky, with much bourbon-influence: 5.5
Fettercairn NAS 42% OB Fior
This is the big melting pot from Fettercairn with some young peated, some older sherried and some bourbon-matured whisky. Kind of a what you might find in some of the high shelf blends out there. The color is dark orange, I'm not sure if this is the natural color of this whisky, smells a bit peaty, a bit sherried but most of all it has this indeterminate lightness, remember, this is one of the last drops from this bottle, and when it was newly opened it had a lot more power from both sherry and peat. Maybe a splash of water will help. Now it tastes even lighter, it seems its not a whisky anymore, some light rum or vodka maybe, but if you go purchase a bottle of Fettercairn Fior, make sure you enjoy it all the first month after opening because when it starts breathing it starts dying.
Tame and non-motivational experience, makes me a bit drowsy to be frank: 3
Fettercairn 22yo 1989-2011 54.6% Premier Bond Co Ltd. cask#1372 btl.21/228
Over twice the age of the next oldest whisky in this session, from a bourbon hogshead. I feel often the hogsheads fits better, because of their small size and big, often oaky, taste impact, to be bottled at a younger age when the spirit still is in vigorous form. This "Private Edition" bottled for the, to me unknown, Premier Bond, seems to be a cask sold from the distillery directly to them and therefore has the statement "Private Edition" on the label. Color of straw. It smells spirity and bourbony, if to guess I'd say this was a high strength bourbon whisky. Peppery, vanilla, spirity, oaky, musty, heated steel, custard, cloudberries. The taste is burnt, spirity and oaky. This was a rather unpleasant experience, and I see why most of the old glorious Fettercairn comes from sherry wood.
I'm sorry, but this one should have gone to some blend: 1.5
Fettercairn 6yo 1997-2003 62.3% OB cask#2302 btl.270/308
Last drop of the first bottle I ever purchased from this cask. I have 4 more to go. Another one from a bourbon hogshead, this time bottled at the age of which I'm thinking is appropriate for such a small cask. I have already tasted this before, but to do justice to the later on tasting and trying to distinguish the different malt influences of Whyte & Mackay blends, I'll now try it once again. Color of white wine. It smells big, huge on vanilla sweetness and licorice, about as fresh as it gets. Some mint and honey arrives later on. It's quite perfect so far, not complex but it doesn't need to be when this simplicity works so well. The taste is smoky, sweet and herbal, peppery, vanilla, bananas, grape fruit, honey, coriander, green tomatoes, juniper berries, white peppers, a small but very pleasant dryness in the finish alongside lime rind and salt.
Again it has shown me that not all Fettercairns die while breathing: 8.5
Bonus:
Fettercair 11yo 1992-2003 46% Gordon & Macphail Connoisseurs Choice
I remember there were some 1992 Fettercairns around especially two versions from James MacArthur's were good. Lets try this one, hopefully it will still be a potent spirit even though being reduced down to 46%abv. Oops, it was corked, which means the stopper broke in half before it was opened. What to do? Well, I try to get as much of the stopper as I possibly can out first, then I take a coffee filter and drain the whisky through it into the glass. Then most, if not all, of the cork sediments have left the spirit and is remainig in the coffee filter. Light golden color, smells austere and spirity, not a very good expression. The taste is burnt and bitter. I think this is another one that should have been used for blending purposes. Light and bitter.
It seems this whisky should always be bottled at cask strength: 3
søndag 18. mars 2012
Isle of Jura Distillery (W&M.#1)
As I already told you, I'm embarking on a small journey of the malt whiskies that's most likely to be found in Whyte & Mackay blends, leading up to a big Whyte & Mackay blend tasting. The second newest addition to the Whyte & Mackay family is the Isle of Jura Distillery. This distillery was purchased by W&M as late as 1993, one year prior to that of Tamnavulin, and there have been released some interesting CS-versions lately. I won't have any Tamnavulins in these tastings for two reasons. There are very few around and it has been closed from when W&M purchased it and all the way up until 2007 except for some active weeks back in 2000.
Isle of Jura NAS 40% OB
This bottle was originally sold on the 24/9 1990 according to a receipt I got when I bought it, so there might have been some bottle maturation going on, and by the looks of it, a tiny evaporation. Colored with some E's. Smells musty, sauna, sweat, charcoal, not very nice to say the least. The palate shows some peatiness, burnt wood, pine, peppery, doesn't exactly get any better. It has aftertaste of dry soil and ashes.
If offered to me knowing what I know now, I would say no thanks: 2.5
Isle of Jura 23yo 1988-2011 52.9% The Whisky Agency
Another on that were distilled prior to the W&M ownership, but bottled very recently. There aren't much whisky sold by independent bottlers from distilleries owned by W&M. I wonder why... Mahogany color, it smells sweet, honey nectarine and sweet red wine, zinfandel style. again this musty old smell, but works better this time as the sweetness kind of balances it out. The taste is peaty and peppery, more coastal, soap, burnt oak, roasted pine nuts and almonds. It's not bad by any means, it's just that this rough and dirty style isn't my thing. But if you like a whisky that burns a bit and leaves you tastebuds numb then this is for you.
For those with a sort of "special" taste, I can see why some people would love this: 4
Isle of Jura 13yo 1991-2004 55.1% James MacArthur's
Color of white wine, smells smoky, soapy, rhubarb, dark chocolate, rubber, phenol, gin, earthy, musty once again. The taste is peaty and peppery, vanilla, lime peel, ginger, bittersweet, tonic water, a better whisky than the prior two I must say. Its far from perfect but it seems more balanced and more fresh. There's this pine sensation that I'm starting to come familiar with and here it works. The flavors are not running over each other and not fighting to shine, its just a whisky with lots of layers that shifts very well. All in all I think this might be one of the best Isle of Juras I've had so far.
Here's to James MacArthur's for once again selecting a good and young whisky: 6.5
Isle of Jura 15yo 1992-2007 55.4% The Single Malts of Scotland
Not to be confused with Malts of Scotland, which is a whole other IB. Once again white wine color. Smells more spirity this time, and more peaty. Vanilla. Very bourbon-wood influenced. Peat, vanilla and alcohol. Sounds almost like some young peated highlander, Old Ballantruan or something. The taste is more burnt and spirity, I usually don't do this with such peaty whisky, but I'll add water to this. Hopefully it will now prove to have some personality. It gets sweeter, more vanilla, but again the spirity and bitter/burnt notes runs the show. This was some of a letdown after the very good JMcA version.
Bitter and spirity: 2
Isle of Jura 15yo 1995-2010 56.5% OB Boutique Barrels
Using a french word to describe an american oak cask used to mature scotch whisky. Hopefully this will give me more pleasure than the dreadful SMOS-bottling I had prior to this. Light brown hue. It smells peppery, ginger, raw chopped onions, again very bitter yet sweet. More influence from the bourbon cask on this one. The taste is bittersweet, lime rind, sulphur, honey, vanilla, rhubarb, grape seeds, olive oil, oak, no pine in this one. It is the first, and only, whisky in this session that has been distilled after W&M became owners. But I believe that the style of the whisky not necessarily changes because of a new ownership, after all, its the same equipment and more often than not, the same workers. I must say that this bottling shows some potential. To make a wild guess, I guess that we will see even more good Jura bottlings in years to come.
Nice stuff, a close second so far in this tasting: 6
Jura 10yo 1984-1995 58.8% Cadenhead's
The oldest, yet the youngest whisky in this tasting, apart from the OB, which of course could contain some very old whisky, but I doubt it. There are many old glorious Cadenhead's out there that goes for a fair price on auctions and such, at least compare to the rather hip newcomer indies such as TWA, Douglas Laing and Malts of Scotland. There is no "Isle of" on the label, its simply called Jura, but there's only one distillery on Isle of Jura, so its not difficult to reason its origin. Color of apple juice. Smells quite spirity, some vanilla and some peat. Most of all its spirity. The taste is, well, it goes from hell to heaven, dry notes of marzipan, dark chocolate, lavender, vanilla, rhubarb, strawberry jam, honey, salt, dry biscuits, amazing... To think that in these days, people are buying 30+yo whiskies a year for the total amount that a new car would cost, there's so much good young whisky around that probably goes to blending, vattings and such. I have praised James MacArthur's and also Cadenhead's for bottling young and extremely good whisky before. Even Signatory with its CS range have had some fantastic young whiskies, a 7yo Laphroaig to mention one. I hope that there will be more good young IB bottlings in the years to come, and not just because the old stock in distillery warehouses have been drained, but because the whisky is of superior quality.
The best (Isle of) Jura bottling I've ever tried: 7.5
Isle of Jura NAS 40% OB
This bottle was originally sold on the 24/9 1990 according to a receipt I got when I bought it, so there might have been some bottle maturation going on, and by the looks of it, a tiny evaporation. Colored with some E's. Smells musty, sauna, sweat, charcoal, not very nice to say the least. The palate shows some peatiness, burnt wood, pine, peppery, doesn't exactly get any better. It has aftertaste of dry soil and ashes.
If offered to me knowing what I know now, I would say no thanks: 2.5
Isle of Jura 23yo 1988-2011 52.9% The Whisky Agency
Another on that were distilled prior to the W&M ownership, but bottled very recently. There aren't much whisky sold by independent bottlers from distilleries owned by W&M. I wonder why... Mahogany color, it smells sweet, honey nectarine and sweet red wine, zinfandel style. again this musty old smell, but works better this time as the sweetness kind of balances it out. The taste is peaty and peppery, more coastal, soap, burnt oak, roasted pine nuts and almonds. It's not bad by any means, it's just that this rough and dirty style isn't my thing. But if you like a whisky that burns a bit and leaves you tastebuds numb then this is for you.
For those with a sort of "special" taste, I can see why some people would love this: 4
Isle of Jura 13yo 1991-2004 55.1% James MacArthur's
Color of white wine, smells smoky, soapy, rhubarb, dark chocolate, rubber, phenol, gin, earthy, musty once again. The taste is peaty and peppery, vanilla, lime peel, ginger, bittersweet, tonic water, a better whisky than the prior two I must say. Its far from perfect but it seems more balanced and more fresh. There's this pine sensation that I'm starting to come familiar with and here it works. The flavors are not running over each other and not fighting to shine, its just a whisky with lots of layers that shifts very well. All in all I think this might be one of the best Isle of Juras I've had so far.
Here's to James MacArthur's for once again selecting a good and young whisky: 6.5
Isle of Jura 15yo 1992-2007 55.4% The Single Malts of Scotland
Not to be confused with Malts of Scotland, which is a whole other IB. Once again white wine color. Smells more spirity this time, and more peaty. Vanilla. Very bourbon-wood influenced. Peat, vanilla and alcohol. Sounds almost like some young peated highlander, Old Ballantruan or something. The taste is more burnt and spirity, I usually don't do this with such peaty whisky, but I'll add water to this. Hopefully it will now prove to have some personality. It gets sweeter, more vanilla, but again the spirity and bitter/burnt notes runs the show. This was some of a letdown after the very good JMcA version.
Bitter and spirity: 2
Isle of Jura 15yo 1995-2010 56.5% OB Boutique Barrels
Using a french word to describe an american oak cask used to mature scotch whisky. Hopefully this will give me more pleasure than the dreadful SMOS-bottling I had prior to this. Light brown hue. It smells peppery, ginger, raw chopped onions, again very bitter yet sweet. More influence from the bourbon cask on this one. The taste is bittersweet, lime rind, sulphur, honey, vanilla, rhubarb, grape seeds, olive oil, oak, no pine in this one. It is the first, and only, whisky in this session that has been distilled after W&M became owners. But I believe that the style of the whisky not necessarily changes because of a new ownership, after all, its the same equipment and more often than not, the same workers. I must say that this bottling shows some potential. To make a wild guess, I guess that we will see even more good Jura bottlings in years to come.
Nice stuff, a close second so far in this tasting: 6
Jura 10yo 1984-1995 58.8% Cadenhead's
The oldest, yet the youngest whisky in this tasting, apart from the OB, which of course could contain some very old whisky, but I doubt it. There are many old glorious Cadenhead's out there that goes for a fair price on auctions and such, at least compare to the rather hip newcomer indies such as TWA, Douglas Laing and Malts of Scotland. There is no "Isle of" on the label, its simply called Jura, but there's only one distillery on Isle of Jura, so its not difficult to reason its origin. Color of apple juice. Smells quite spirity, some vanilla and some peat. Most of all its spirity. The taste is, well, it goes from hell to heaven, dry notes of marzipan, dark chocolate, lavender, vanilla, rhubarb, strawberry jam, honey, salt, dry biscuits, amazing... To think that in these days, people are buying 30+yo whiskies a year for the total amount that a new car would cost, there's so much good young whisky around that probably goes to blending, vattings and such. I have praised James MacArthur's and also Cadenhead's for bottling young and extremely good whisky before. Even Signatory with its CS range have had some fantastic young whiskies, a 7yo Laphroaig to mention one. I hope that there will be more good young IB bottlings in the years to come, and not just because the old stock in distillery warehouses have been drained, but because the whisky is of superior quality.
The best (Isle of) Jura bottling I've ever tried: 7.5
lørdag 17. mars 2012
Grain tasting!!!
My final round of obscurities today, there have been blends, single grains, irish malts, irish blends, canadian, new-make spirit, whisky liqueur, bourbon, kiwi(an???), czech single malt whisky and norwegian single malt eau de biere. A rollercoaster with both highs and lows. I'll do my last tasting of this sort today with two wee verticals of Scotch single grain, actually its just four whiskies from two distilleries, so as small a vertical as it gets. I see myself doing tastings like this in the future as well, but after this one there'll be a while with mainly scotch malt tastings, except a Whyte & Mackay tasting not so far ahead. That meaning, after this tasting I will enjoy whisky from Dalmore, Fettercairn, Isle of Jura and Tomintoul. I know that there probably are some Tamnavulin and perhaps other whiskies in these blends, but apart from Isle of Jura in the oldest bottlings, I think it consists mainly of whisky from the 4 distilleries I've already mentioned. After those tastings I will do a big blend vertical of Whyte & Mackay and see if I can find what distillery does most of the talking in these blends. Now, let's try some whisky from the short-lived distillery North of Scotland...
North of Scotland 37yo 1972-2009 50.6% Clan Denny
Everytime I try whisky from a distillery that ceased to exist less than a decade after opening, I wonder why? And more often than not, I am pleasantly surprised, and a bit saddened with the quality it shows despite never being very popular back in days. But at 37yo this surely isn't the standard quality of North of Scotland. Golden brown color, smells gasoline and licorice, burnt car tires, gasoline again, alongside heavy vanilla. I don't think I've ever come across such a distinct gasoline expression in a whisky before. The taste is peppermint and licorice, old candy. I think its pretty perfect in its own way, but you have to like this old and a bit perfumy style. The aftertaste is sugary and bitter, more like a herbal liqueur now. Water deducts the sweetness and makes it more bitter and spirity, not recommended.
A very old-style whisky, this style is getting scarcer by the minute: 7
North of Scotland 17yo 1964-1981 57% George Strachan Ltd.
A miniature which is still around at auctions and such. I believe it's, although pricy, still an affordable alternative to the full bottles if you want to try whisky from this distillery before its all gone. And its as I see it, due to its rather young age, perhaps as close to the "original spirit" as you might get today. Nice golden hue, I don't know if this is bottled at CS, I doubt it. It smells camphor, licorice, honey, vanilla, cream, caramel, seems to be a rather light and sweet dessert whisky so far. The taste is sweet and spirity, it needs to be diluted I think, although it has this meaty/smoky twist just at the finish when neat. When diluted it turns drying, grainy, wool, plastic, certainly sheds some light on why this distillery was closed down.
Interesting, probably shows why malts often superior to grains at young age: 2
Girvan 15yo 1989-2004 58% James MacArthur's
http://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies.php?merkid=186&whiskyid=15291 It says it's a 16yo doesn't it? Well, the back label on my bottle says its a 15yo. I trust my bottle. White wine color. It smells sweet vanilla and burnt, burnt but not spirity, a high strength bourbon matured whisky that already now screams for some recognition from the spirit. The taste is licorice, strawberries, fruit jam, ammonia, vanilla, thick and sweet vanilla, orange marmalade, it has a lot going for it, but the burnt varnish notes and sort of phenolic sweetness drowns many of the other flavors. With water it becomes lighter and sweeter, and if possible even more vanilla.
A nice whisky, I can see why this is a blenders favorite: 5.5
Girvan 15yo 1989-2004 60.4% James MacArthur's
Same distillery, same vintage, same bottler, will it have the same sweet vanilla character as the 58%? It's a bit darker than the 58% which tells me its from a different cask, as they're both bottled at CS. It smells sweet and vanilla again alongside some oaky notes, burnt peppers, fabric, polystyrene, marshmallows, pine nuts and cardamom. This lightly dryish spiced notes that I found on the nose makes for an interesting start. The taste is sweet and honeyed, not so much vanilla this time, a richer spirit, thyme, oregano, basil, cooked tomatoes, salty shrimps, a mixture of bacalao and italian herbs. It's pretty much a more intimate and complex version of the 58%. If you want something that will keep you up all night smelling, tasting, wondering, smelling, tasting, wondering, smellin, tasting...
Then this is the one for you: 6.5
North of Scotland 37yo 1972-2009 50.6% Clan Denny
Everytime I try whisky from a distillery that ceased to exist less than a decade after opening, I wonder why? And more often than not, I am pleasantly surprised, and a bit saddened with the quality it shows despite never being very popular back in days. But at 37yo this surely isn't the standard quality of North of Scotland. Golden brown color, smells gasoline and licorice, burnt car tires, gasoline again, alongside heavy vanilla. I don't think I've ever come across such a distinct gasoline expression in a whisky before. The taste is peppermint and licorice, old candy. I think its pretty perfect in its own way, but you have to like this old and a bit perfumy style. The aftertaste is sugary and bitter, more like a herbal liqueur now. Water deducts the sweetness and makes it more bitter and spirity, not recommended.
A very old-style whisky, this style is getting scarcer by the minute: 7
North of Scotland 17yo 1964-1981 57% George Strachan Ltd.
A miniature which is still around at auctions and such. I believe it's, although pricy, still an affordable alternative to the full bottles if you want to try whisky from this distillery before its all gone. And its as I see it, due to its rather young age, perhaps as close to the "original spirit" as you might get today. Nice golden hue, I don't know if this is bottled at CS, I doubt it. It smells camphor, licorice, honey, vanilla, cream, caramel, seems to be a rather light and sweet dessert whisky so far. The taste is sweet and spirity, it needs to be diluted I think, although it has this meaty/smoky twist just at the finish when neat. When diluted it turns drying, grainy, wool, plastic, certainly sheds some light on why this distillery was closed down.
Interesting, probably shows why malts often superior to grains at young age: 2
Girvan 15yo 1989-2004 58% James MacArthur's
http://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies.php?merkid=186&whiskyid=15291 It says it's a 16yo doesn't it? Well, the back label on my bottle says its a 15yo. I trust my bottle. White wine color. It smells sweet vanilla and burnt, burnt but not spirity, a high strength bourbon matured whisky that already now screams for some recognition from the spirit. The taste is licorice, strawberries, fruit jam, ammonia, vanilla, thick and sweet vanilla, orange marmalade, it has a lot going for it, but the burnt varnish notes and sort of phenolic sweetness drowns many of the other flavors. With water it becomes lighter and sweeter, and if possible even more vanilla.
A nice whisky, I can see why this is a blenders favorite: 5.5
Girvan 15yo 1989-2004 60.4% James MacArthur's
Same distillery, same vintage, same bottler, will it have the same sweet vanilla character as the 58%? It's a bit darker than the 58% which tells me its from a different cask, as they're both bottled at CS. It smells sweet and vanilla again alongside some oaky notes, burnt peppers, fabric, polystyrene, marshmallows, pine nuts and cardamom. This lightly dryish spiced notes that I found on the nose makes for an interesting start. The taste is sweet and honeyed, not so much vanilla this time, a richer spirit, thyme, oregano, basil, cooked tomatoes, salty shrimps, a mixture of bacalao and italian herbs. It's pretty much a more intimate and complex version of the 58%. If you want something that will keep you up all night smelling, tasting, wondering, smelling, tasting, wondering, smellin, tasting...
Then this is the one for you: 6.5
fredag 16. mars 2012
Two whiskies, one by request and one for comparison.
A while back I received a mail about one of my canadian whisky reviews, "Long Wood blend", which was to be fair, a bad whisky. The mail from mr. Staples, a canadian living in Germany, who'd unfortunately was now stuck with bottle of this, agreed that it is a crappy whisky. However, as a canadian he told me he'd never seen this whisky in Canada, or anywhere outside of German borders for that matter, and therefore questioned its land of origin. Stating "Long Wood is as Canadian as Königsberger Klopse". Maybe I wouldn't go that far, but I can surely agree that it seems a bit weird for a canadian whisky only to be sold in german Aldi Supermarkt. However, I do believe that this might be real canadian whisky, probably some batches of bad casks mixed together, that have been imported to Germany from Canada to be sold as Canadian whisky here in europe. More important, Long Wood is one of the only canadian(!) whiskies I've ever tried, so for me to make amends, and following the request of mr. Staples, I will now try a Canadian Club, and after that, a very popular european whisky for comparison.
Canadian Club Premium NAS 40% Canadian
From a plastic miniature bottle, it is the standard of the CC-bunch, and I believe it is about 6 years old. It's pretty dark for a 6yo, perhaps the color's been tangled with. It smells wheat flour, huge on wheat and honey, fresh bread, caramel, mint julep, it's rather unfamiliar for my palate. Better than most Bourbons I've come across, reminds me a bit of some fresh highlanders such as Ben Nevis, Glencadam and Balblair. The taste is rather sweet and light, caramel and butter, vanilla extract, caramelized onions, honey, roasted almonds. A very good, although not very challenging dram. Certainly a whole other aspect on canadian whisky than what the "Long Wood" gave me.
What can I say, a perfect light and easy Canadian whisky for a beginner like me: 6.5
Jameson NAS 40% Irish Blend
So, I guess this is the closest to Canadian Club we'll come in Europe when scotch is excluded. Triple distilled which means all whiskies in this blend are. Lighter in color, golden hue. Smells burnt and oaky. The taste shows that its a lighter whisky, lots of vanilla and oregano, basil leaves, coriander leaves, fresh herbs. The finish is all on red onions and bitterness. Sweet bitterness, tonic water... It's not my favorite, and surely, it will never be, but I can understand how its easy for people making irish coffees or bar-owners wanting an easily available cheap whisky for st. Pat's Day or the heavy partying student or the ignorant wine snob who just wants an alternative in his collection to choose this blend. It can't compare to some of the other blends I've tried lately and it looses this duel by a mile.
It's a mediocre blend, nothing more, nothing less, yet better than "Long Wood": 2.5
Canadian Club Premium NAS 40% Canadian
From a plastic miniature bottle, it is the standard of the CC-bunch, and I believe it is about 6 years old. It's pretty dark for a 6yo, perhaps the color's been tangled with. It smells wheat flour, huge on wheat and honey, fresh bread, caramel, mint julep, it's rather unfamiliar for my palate. Better than most Bourbons I've come across, reminds me a bit of some fresh highlanders such as Ben Nevis, Glencadam and Balblair. The taste is rather sweet and light, caramel and butter, vanilla extract, caramelized onions, honey, roasted almonds. A very good, although not very challenging dram. Certainly a whole other aspect on canadian whisky than what the "Long Wood" gave me.
What can I say, a perfect light and easy Canadian whisky for a beginner like me: 6.5
Jameson NAS 40% Irish Blend
So, I guess this is the closest to Canadian Club we'll come in Europe when scotch is excluded. Triple distilled which means all whiskies in this blend are. Lighter in color, golden hue. Smells burnt and oaky. The taste shows that its a lighter whisky, lots of vanilla and oregano, basil leaves, coriander leaves, fresh herbs. The finish is all on red onions and bitterness. Sweet bitterness, tonic water... It's not my favorite, and surely, it will never be, but I can understand how its easy for people making irish coffees or bar-owners wanting an easily available cheap whisky for st. Pat's Day or the heavy partying student or the ignorant wine snob who just wants an alternative in his collection to choose this blend. It can't compare to some of the other blends I've tried lately and it looses this duel by a mile.
It's a mediocre blend, nothing more, nothing less, yet better than "Long Wood": 2.5
tirsdag 13. mars 2012
Blends from White Horse Distillers
What will I find in tonights session? Some peat from Lagavulin, some gentle malty notes from Glen Elgin or even some spirity notes from Craigellachie? I bet there are and has been even more single malts involved in the blending of brands from White Horse Distillers, yet, the reason it seems to have established itself as sort of a cult blend is the use of whisky from Lagavulin Distillery. And as often as almost ever, the grain whiskies included in the mix are rarely spoken of. Btw, I rarely (or never it seems nowadays) purchase full bottles of blends, as I'm not familiar in that territory, and have had some bad experiences in the past. Therefore I have just posted this picture of the miniature bottles which I'm about to try. I'll be doing this vertical from left to right.
Logan NAS 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd.
First of all, the Logan blend is named after James Logan Mackie who was one of the partners owning Lagavulin in 1837. With that in mind I'm assuming there's a bit of Lagavulin in this blend. This blend is unfortunately no longer produced, but there are plenty of them, at least these miniatures to be found at online auctions and such. A small bit of blending history perhaps. Cobber hue. The nose is peaty at first, peaty and floral, but it has a lot of Islay going on. It leans more towards the 12yo Caol Ila in style, a bit briny and some thousand Island dressing acidity. The taste is phenolic, burnt, sweet, coal, rubbery, very expressive for a blend, even though the peat still does most of the talk here. I think I've done just about my part now as the finish just gives way to more peaty notes. For a blend, this is very good, and I think they could've sold much more of this blend by putting a more commonly recogniceable twist on the Lagavulin link. I must confess I had to google a bit to find the meaning behind "Logan".
A blend with a huge peaty kick: 6.5
Logan 12yo 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd.
One with an age statement, will it have a softer side as the ingredients have had some more time to mellow? A bit lighter color, more orange. It smells peaty once again, bot more restrained this time. licorice, gasoline, gunpowder, shoe-polish, a weird mixture that I think fits the style of young Laphroaigs or some high proof Isle of Jura. The caramel flavor is intense in this one, although I wouldn't say it's due to the E150's, I know too little about that stuff. Some say however, that the coloring can inflict some desired/undesired taste on the whisky. It tastes much rounder and gentler, malt notes, some hints of sherry wood, old attic, worn out polyester, succulent, malt syrup and grape soda, reminds me of some sweeter alcohol infused longdrink.
More in a blend-style territory, but complex enough to receive a decent rating: 5.5
Logan NAS 43% White Horse Distillers Ltd.
A small bounce up from the 40%abv. Not that the %abv usually matters too much when the difference is in such small quantities. But I have it as a golden rule that if the peat level is the same then alcohol level should count before age in which whisky to drink first. It smells peaty and sherried, dry sherry, parmesan cheese, olive oil, smoked salmon, creamy mascarpone. The taste is drying and sweet, lots of sherry notes, not much peat left now. Dark grapes, balsamic vinegar, very rustic. The aftertaste is short and falls flat after a second or two, mainly it shows some similarities to what I find in some kräuter likörs.
The palate alone awarded Logan another decent rating: 5.5
White Horse Fine Old NAS 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd
Yellow/green-ish color on this one. which I think is a bottling from the 80's. It smells peppery and sweet, like some young bourbon matured single malts. I'm not able to detect any peat in this one. A really boring whisky, far from making a real alternative to "Logan". This is light and easy, but extremely uninteresting.
If you want something bland and boring, try this one: 2
White Horse NAS 40% America's Cup
One sold on the American market. Pretty much the same color, perhaps a bit darker, than the Fine Old, which we could assume also were sold in America by the "70 proof" on the label, but I know there are similar bottles with a "40%"-print. Notes of spicy orange liqueur, apple vinegar, more peaty notes in this one, combined with the sweetness of the Fine Old. Peaches and pears, a fruity style. The taste is peppery and rich, like bourbon sweetness with orange marmalade and banana cream. The aftertaste is short and light. Some maltiness.
Another boring one, but the nose and palate was a wee bit better: 3
White Horse Cellar NAS 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd
This one's from the late 70's or early 80'sI think, and makes for some of the reputation that this blend has been given the last few years. I think much of that reputation is a consequence of the formerly tight bond between White Horse Distillers and Lagavulin Distillery. The color is light brown. It smells a bit lighter than Logan, but still peaty. The taste is briny, acidic, smoked haddock, coal, cigars, black pepper, leather, much more like the aforementioned Lagavulin. The aftertaste is sweet, yoghurt and anis. No need to say, I can understand how it got its reputation.
Forget your Big Peat, Smokehead or Black Bottles, this is the real Islay blend style: 7.5
Logan NAS 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd.
First of all, the Logan blend is named after James Logan Mackie who was one of the partners owning Lagavulin in 1837. With that in mind I'm assuming there's a bit of Lagavulin in this blend. This blend is unfortunately no longer produced, but there are plenty of them, at least these miniatures to be found at online auctions and such. A small bit of blending history perhaps. Cobber hue. The nose is peaty at first, peaty and floral, but it has a lot of Islay going on. It leans more towards the 12yo Caol Ila in style, a bit briny and some thousand Island dressing acidity. The taste is phenolic, burnt, sweet, coal, rubbery, very expressive for a blend, even though the peat still does most of the talk here. I think I've done just about my part now as the finish just gives way to more peaty notes. For a blend, this is very good, and I think they could've sold much more of this blend by putting a more commonly recogniceable twist on the Lagavulin link. I must confess I had to google a bit to find the meaning behind "Logan".
A blend with a huge peaty kick: 6.5
Logan 12yo 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd.
One with an age statement, will it have a softer side as the ingredients have had some more time to mellow? A bit lighter color, more orange. It smells peaty once again, bot more restrained this time. licorice, gasoline, gunpowder, shoe-polish, a weird mixture that I think fits the style of young Laphroaigs or some high proof Isle of Jura. The caramel flavor is intense in this one, although I wouldn't say it's due to the E150's, I know too little about that stuff. Some say however, that the coloring can inflict some desired/undesired taste on the whisky. It tastes much rounder and gentler, malt notes, some hints of sherry wood, old attic, worn out polyester, succulent, malt syrup and grape soda, reminds me of some sweeter alcohol infused longdrink.
More in a blend-style territory, but complex enough to receive a decent rating: 5.5
Logan NAS 43% White Horse Distillers Ltd.
A small bounce up from the 40%abv. Not that the %abv usually matters too much when the difference is in such small quantities. But I have it as a golden rule that if the peat level is the same then alcohol level should count before age in which whisky to drink first. It smells peaty and sherried, dry sherry, parmesan cheese, olive oil, smoked salmon, creamy mascarpone. The taste is drying and sweet, lots of sherry notes, not much peat left now. Dark grapes, balsamic vinegar, very rustic. The aftertaste is short and falls flat after a second or two, mainly it shows some similarities to what I find in some kräuter likörs.
The palate alone awarded Logan another decent rating: 5.5
White Horse Fine Old NAS 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd
Yellow/green-ish color on this one. which I think is a bottling from the 80's. It smells peppery and sweet, like some young bourbon matured single malts. I'm not able to detect any peat in this one. A really boring whisky, far from making a real alternative to "Logan". This is light and easy, but extremely uninteresting.
If you want something bland and boring, try this one: 2
White Horse NAS 40% America's Cup
One sold on the American market. Pretty much the same color, perhaps a bit darker, than the Fine Old, which we could assume also were sold in America by the "70 proof" on the label, but I know there are similar bottles with a "40%"-print. Notes of spicy orange liqueur, apple vinegar, more peaty notes in this one, combined with the sweetness of the Fine Old. Peaches and pears, a fruity style. The taste is peppery and rich, like bourbon sweetness with orange marmalade and banana cream. The aftertaste is short and light. Some maltiness.
Another boring one, but the nose and palate was a wee bit better: 3
White Horse Cellar NAS 40% White Horse Distillers Ltd
This one's from the late 70's or early 80'sI think, and makes for some of the reputation that this blend has been given the last few years. I think much of that reputation is a consequence of the formerly tight bond between White Horse Distillers and Lagavulin Distillery. The color is light brown. It smells a bit lighter than Logan, but still peaty. The taste is briny, acidic, smoked haddock, coal, cigars, black pepper, leather, much more like the aforementioned Lagavulin. The aftertaste is sweet, yoghurt and anis. No need to say, I can understand how it got its reputation.
Forget your Big Peat, Smokehead or Black Bottles, this is the real Islay blend style: 7.5
lørdag 10. mars 2012
Mixed tasting...
So, just a small tasting today, of whiskies that's far from what I'd normally enjoy.
Metropolitan NAS 40% blend
A blend from the 80's, dyed and all. The nose is on the light side of light, perhaps some sweet juice, white wine and vodka. The taste is light and sweet, a bit like apple vinegar. Gone in a flash with no finish that I'm able to detect.
Light and easy, one to mix drinks with perhaps, but the small apple sensation was nice: 3.5
Bell's NAS 43% blend
Another one from the 80's, it has the statement of Liqueur and the meaningless yet very proudly used description "Extra Special" on the label. Anyway, Bell's are a brand to be reckoned with anytime there's a blend-discussion, one of the big guys so to speak. The recent Bell's consists of among others Blair Athol, Caol Ila og Glenkinchie. So could there be some peat involved here? Smells light, flinty, esters, charming stuff, seems older than it probably is. The taste is light and sweet. Some peat I find, but also vanilla and brandy notes. A bit too sweet for me. The aftertaste is bitter and doesn't help lift this experience at all for me.
Okay, nice to have tried, middle of the road blend: 3
Glencoe NAS ?-1992 46% Single Malt bottled for Clan MacKenzie Restaurant
Bottled to celebrate the Tercentenary, which is the 300th year anniversary of the massacre of Glencoe. If to make a guess of which distillery this could be from I'd have to say Ben Nevis, as they have produced both the blend and single malt earlier bottled under the name "Glencoe", but I have no other support of this theory. The nose is lightly spiced, caramel, grass, dried basil, herbal, not as fresh as I'd expect a Ben Nevis to be. The taste is sweet, honey, basil again, thyme, licorice, salty water, marshmallows, ginger, floral, butter. It's a fine whisky that I think, if bottled with a distillery name on it, would do very well for that distillery. Fine stuff.
A complex and fresh 12yo: 6
Isle of Skye 18yo 43% Private Stock #45
See last blend tasting:)
Bladnoch 0 days old 72.2% OB Peated Newmake
A peated lowlander, there sure aren't many of those around, at least not at this age. Color, make a guess... I guess a newmake was the one thing I have yet to try in these non-malt session. Well, there's one single malt in this one, but since I'm unsure of its origin, I decided I might as well just throw it in this one. It smells spirity and peaty, but mostly peaty, nice stuff. But I have this small notion that whiskies with no coastal character often struggles carrying bigger levels of peat, maybe this one can change my mind? The taste is extremely peated, it seems more peated than any other whisky I have ever tried, perhaps except some young Laphroaigs and Octomore. Is it because maturation tires the peat a bit, or that the whisky through maturation gets its own character, so to speak, which casts some shadows on the peat? It's a perfectly good new-make which I think one day would made a very good whisky, but now its all gone. Hmm... Perhaps a good candidate to be used in a new cask project?
Very good newmake: 6
Metropolitan NAS 40% blend
A blend from the 80's, dyed and all. The nose is on the light side of light, perhaps some sweet juice, white wine and vodka. The taste is light and sweet, a bit like apple vinegar. Gone in a flash with no finish that I'm able to detect.
Light and easy, one to mix drinks with perhaps, but the small apple sensation was nice: 3.5
Bell's NAS 43% blend
Another one from the 80's, it has the statement of Liqueur and the meaningless yet very proudly used description "Extra Special" on the label. Anyway, Bell's are a brand to be reckoned with anytime there's a blend-discussion, one of the big guys so to speak. The recent Bell's consists of among others Blair Athol, Caol Ila og Glenkinchie. So could there be some peat involved here? Smells light, flinty, esters, charming stuff, seems older than it probably is. The taste is light and sweet. Some peat I find, but also vanilla and brandy notes. A bit too sweet for me. The aftertaste is bitter and doesn't help lift this experience at all for me.
Okay, nice to have tried, middle of the road blend: 3
Glencoe NAS ?-1992 46% Single Malt bottled for Clan MacKenzie Restaurant
Bottled to celebrate the Tercentenary, which is the 300th year anniversary of the massacre of Glencoe. If to make a guess of which distillery this could be from I'd have to say Ben Nevis, as they have produced both the blend and single malt earlier bottled under the name "Glencoe", but I have no other support of this theory. The nose is lightly spiced, caramel, grass, dried basil, herbal, not as fresh as I'd expect a Ben Nevis to be. The taste is sweet, honey, basil again, thyme, licorice, salty water, marshmallows, ginger, floral, butter. It's a fine whisky that I think, if bottled with a distillery name on it, would do very well for that distillery. Fine stuff.
A complex and fresh 12yo: 6
Isle of Skye 18yo 43% Private Stock #45
See last blend tasting:)
Bladnoch 0 days old 72.2% OB Peated Newmake
A peated lowlander, there sure aren't many of those around, at least not at this age. Color, make a guess... I guess a newmake was the one thing I have yet to try in these non-malt session. Well, there's one single malt in this one, but since I'm unsure of its origin, I decided I might as well just throw it in this one. It smells spirity and peaty, but mostly peaty, nice stuff. But I have this small notion that whiskies with no coastal character often struggles carrying bigger levels of peat, maybe this one can change my mind? The taste is extremely peated, it seems more peated than any other whisky I have ever tried, perhaps except some young Laphroaigs and Octomore. Is it because maturation tires the peat a bit, or that the whisky through maturation gets its own character, so to speak, which casts some shadows on the peat? It's a perfectly good new-make which I think one day would made a very good whisky, but now its all gone. Hmm... Perhaps a good candidate to be used in a new cask project?
Very good newmake: 6
torsdag 8. mars 2012
2nd Grain Tasting!!!
Time to try some more single grain whiskies. I think that my last tasting of single grain whiskies proved to be somewhat of an eye opener, and I will not be surprised if there are some more winners in this tasting.
Caledonian 45yo 1965-2010 46.1% Clan Denny by Douglas Laing
Clan Denny is as far as I know a single grain only series by independent bottler Douglas Laing. Kinda pale for a 45yo, light orange hue. It smells vanilla, oak and polyester. Different unnatural fabric, different work clothes, polyester and acrylic. Weird and rather unpleasant. I have to add that this distillery were closed back in 1988 and there are as far as I'm aware of no official bottlings still around, and IB's are few and really far between. The taste is more bitter, again this rubbery, polyester notes, really weird, kind of reminds me of some younger Glen Scotia bottlings. It's not that its bad or anything, it just very short and very light, with some rubbery notes that I'm still not able to compare to those that are found in certain sherry bottlings. It has some nice rubber notes if such a thing exists.
Kind of boring and, well, unlikely for a whisky this age: 3
North British 26yo 1974-2000 50% Scott's Selection
I think that the founding of North British Distillery, britain's biggest Grain Distillery were over the years the demise for many other grain distilleries such as the aforementioned Caledonian Distillery. With a 1.25m liters capacity each week, it makes for enough grain whisky a year to satisfy the needs of many of the blends produced in Scotland altogether. But how is it when bottled single? The color is golden, the nose is licorice, spirity, oaky, vanilla, honey, diet milk, cardboard, turmeric, another grain that needs some "wood polish" to really shine. The taste is sour and bitter, lemon rind and herbal tea and some earthy notes. The aftertaste is sour fruity, grapefruit, kiwi juice, dark grapes.
A good palate, but not very interesting: 4
Cameronbridge 30yo 1979-2009 51.9% Duncan Taylor cask#3585 btl.114/206
The only Single Grain Distillery that has fetched a 8+score in my book is Cameronbridge. That were a dark sherried one, which is quite unusual for a grain as they're almost exclusively matured in bourbon casks. As is this one. Golden color. It smells thick, vanilla, butter, chocolate, pistachio, toffee, extremely well developed over its 30 years in #3585. The taste is thick and syrupy with an oaky and drying side that's perhaps needed in this one as it easily could get a bit too tame if lacking. It needs a bit of water I think. The taste is now more on the bittersweet and soapy side, I would not recommend adding water to this one, but I will score it only on the neat tasting.
A good one, seems Cameronbridge may be one of the most distinctive blends: 6
Carsebridge 28yo 54.7% James MacArthur's
From the Fine Grain Selection, another grain distillery that incidentally was a founded and operated as a single malt distillery, but later went on to producing single grain. I don't think I have seen to many distilleries going in the opposite direction. This is the darkest one so far, somewhere in between orange and brown hue. Probably from a sherry cask, but I couldn't say that for sure. The nose is rich and honeyed and spirity, the spirityness takes a leave after just a couple of minutes. More cinnamon, dried fruits, very good one. The taste is all on sweet cinnamon, honey, pineapple and green peppers. Sun-dried tomatoes alongside some bold and rich cinnamon, chilies, curry and sweet licorice. This one needs no water, it's just a perfectly smooth and sweet sherried whisky.
Beautiful stuff, one to be on the lookout for: 8.5
Lochside 31yo 1962-1994 Cadenhead's Single Grain
A rare single grain bottling from Lochside Distillery, a distillery that, when in business used to produce both single grain and single malt whisky. There's still two distilleries left that does this, Loch Lomond and Ben Nevis, but I think there's been a decade or two passing by since any grain spirit were produced at the Ben Nevis Distillery. Lochside has seen some of a revival since they closed, and perhaps this also will underline that the closure was a mistake. About the same color as the Carsebridge. The nose is spirity and foul, oaky and spirity, very much like paint thinner and nail polish remover. It is very spirity for such an old whisky. The taste is much better, again cinnamon, honey, leather, butter, burnt sugar, smoked ham, amazing, a really rich and mouth-filling grain whisky, although the nose prepared me for so much worse. The aftertaste is chili and gorgonzola, very dry.
Another one that makes me wonder why they closed this distillery down: 8
Caledonian 45yo 1965-2010 46.1% Clan Denny by Douglas Laing
Clan Denny is as far as I know a single grain only series by independent bottler Douglas Laing. Kinda pale for a 45yo, light orange hue. It smells vanilla, oak and polyester. Different unnatural fabric, different work clothes, polyester and acrylic. Weird and rather unpleasant. I have to add that this distillery were closed back in 1988 and there are as far as I'm aware of no official bottlings still around, and IB's are few and really far between. The taste is more bitter, again this rubbery, polyester notes, really weird, kind of reminds me of some younger Glen Scotia bottlings. It's not that its bad or anything, it just very short and very light, with some rubbery notes that I'm still not able to compare to those that are found in certain sherry bottlings. It has some nice rubber notes if such a thing exists.
Kind of boring and, well, unlikely for a whisky this age: 3
North British 26yo 1974-2000 50% Scott's Selection
I think that the founding of North British Distillery, britain's biggest Grain Distillery were over the years the demise for many other grain distilleries such as the aforementioned Caledonian Distillery. With a 1.25m liters capacity each week, it makes for enough grain whisky a year to satisfy the needs of many of the blends produced in Scotland altogether. But how is it when bottled single? The color is golden, the nose is licorice, spirity, oaky, vanilla, honey, diet milk, cardboard, turmeric, another grain that needs some "wood polish" to really shine. The taste is sour and bitter, lemon rind and herbal tea and some earthy notes. The aftertaste is sour fruity, grapefruit, kiwi juice, dark grapes.
A good palate, but not very interesting: 4
Cameronbridge 30yo 1979-2009 51.9% Duncan Taylor cask#3585 btl.114/206
The only Single Grain Distillery that has fetched a 8+score in my book is Cameronbridge. That were a dark sherried one, which is quite unusual for a grain as they're almost exclusively matured in bourbon casks. As is this one. Golden color. It smells thick, vanilla, butter, chocolate, pistachio, toffee, extremely well developed over its 30 years in #3585. The taste is thick and syrupy with an oaky and drying side that's perhaps needed in this one as it easily could get a bit too tame if lacking. It needs a bit of water I think. The taste is now more on the bittersweet and soapy side, I would not recommend adding water to this one, but I will score it only on the neat tasting.
A good one, seems Cameronbridge may be one of the most distinctive blends: 6
Carsebridge 28yo 54.7% James MacArthur's
From the Fine Grain Selection, another grain distillery that incidentally was a founded and operated as a single malt distillery, but later went on to producing single grain. I don't think I have seen to many distilleries going in the opposite direction. This is the darkest one so far, somewhere in between orange and brown hue. Probably from a sherry cask, but I couldn't say that for sure. The nose is rich and honeyed and spirity, the spirityness takes a leave after just a couple of minutes. More cinnamon, dried fruits, very good one. The taste is all on sweet cinnamon, honey, pineapple and green peppers. Sun-dried tomatoes alongside some bold and rich cinnamon, chilies, curry and sweet licorice. This one needs no water, it's just a perfectly smooth and sweet sherried whisky.
Beautiful stuff, one to be on the lookout for: 8.5
Lochside 31yo 1962-1994 Cadenhead's Single Grain
A rare single grain bottling from Lochside Distillery, a distillery that, when in business used to produce both single grain and single malt whisky. There's still two distilleries left that does this, Loch Lomond and Ben Nevis, but I think there's been a decade or two passing by since any grain spirit were produced at the Ben Nevis Distillery. Lochside has seen some of a revival since they closed, and perhaps this also will underline that the closure was a mistake. About the same color as the Carsebridge. The nose is spirity and foul, oaky and spirity, very much like paint thinner and nail polish remover. It is very spirity for such an old whisky. The taste is much better, again cinnamon, honey, leather, butter, burnt sugar, smoked ham, amazing, a really rich and mouth-filling grain whisky, although the nose prepared me for so much worse. The aftertaste is chili and gorgonzola, very dry.
Another one that makes me wonder why they closed this distillery down: 8
tirsdag 6. mars 2012
Doing some blends containing some Talisker(?)
I know I should have had the 18yo Isle of Skye blend in this tasting, but as I tried it just about 6 months back, and I found it hard to recognize any Talisker in that tasting. So I hope the younger ones I will be tasting today will have more of the smoky Talisker-style in it. But first of all, let's try something that I think is a first for me... A whisky liqueur... and I'll try giving it a fair chance of a good score although I'm not warming much to the idea of blending whisky in liqueurs.
Stag's Breath Liqueur 19.8%
It says its made of "Fine Whisky and Fermented Comb Honey Liqueur". Sounds like something old ladies would nip after a dry biscuit with some veggies in aspic. The color is nice, amber red, the nose is floral and sweet, not bad, reminds me of some honey wine that I purchased in a street fair in Hamburg, Germany, a few years ago. The taste is all on red apples and mango. Far from as sugary and thick as I'd suspect. You know, those old liqueurs that sticks like cling film to the roof of your mouth because of the heavy sugar content. This, I must say, is fresh and fruity, and while I cannot sense any whisky at all it's a fresh and fine liqueur to be served chilled on a hot summers day.
I won't score this one.
Auld Skye NAS 40% The Scottish Collection Edinburgh.
So, are there any Talisker involved in this blend? The name certainly suggests so. I think this is a rather old blend, probably from the 80's. Pale golden whisky. The nose shows there's floral notes, certainly some hints of Lowland ingredients, the grain part perhaps, and then there's also some hints of highland freshness, but not much Talisker yet. Small whiffs of peat and spice comes along after a while of breathing. It's a playful whisky for a 40%abv NAS blend, with more layers than what's usual for such a dram. The taste is like chalkdust and glue. No, thanks, this is not for me. Perhaps a small drop of water can help it just a bit? Water makes it a tad sweeter, but not much better. Stay away from this one!
Foul, one of many contributor's to the bad blend-reputation amongst malt-drinkers?: 1
Isle of Skye 8yo 40% Macleod's
Oddly, this seems much darker than the 12yo that I'm about to taste next, so 4 years younger and much darker, could this one be colored, or is it more older/darker/sherried whisky in the mix here? The nose is big, reminds me immediately of the subtle sherry notes that I usually find in the 18yo OB. I There's more peat in this than the Auld Skye, and even the 18yo IoS as I remember it. The taste is thick and peppery, extremely peppery, not unlike the pepperiness that I often find in younger Taliskers, but it lacks a bit of punch. I wish there'd be more coastal and spicy character to this, and more peaty notes on the palate. Time to try with some water. Now it turns sweeter, but also more spirity. Could there be some Tobermory in this one? I'm sorry, but this one just frustrates me, and I think there's one component (or more) that just cripples this otherwise fine blend. Could a higher bottling strength have done it more justice?
Like a ferrari without an engine, there's something massive missing here: 2
Isle of Skye 12yo 40% Macleod's
A more pale and "natural" color on this one. The nose is much fresher than the 12yo, more salty, more coastal, much more like Talisker, or even Bruichladdich, lightly peated, a wee bit spiced and salted and lots of nice coastal notes such as seaweed, fish stock, sea salt, smoked haddock, beautiful stuff. The taste is lighter, fruitiness, vanilla, honey, strawberry fruit gum, interesting. If not the best blend I've ever had, certainly one of the most distinctive ones. This is in single malt territory for sure. Makes me think of some unsherried indie HP's or Tobermory's or even Arran BC's. This is very good, not by any means perfect, but if you are ever to have a blend to compare single malts with, this could easily be one or your best choices.
Ian Macleod, drop the E150, bottle at CS, and keep the 12yo like it is: 6
Edit:
Isle of Skye 18yo 43% MacLeod's Private Stock #45
So, this one is tasted 2 days later, but since it's from the Isle of Skye range I might as well put it in here. I hope 3% more and extra aging will make this leap a bit in quality from the 8 and 12yo. Certainly much darker. Smells restrained, some old sherry notes way back in the background, but other than that a pretty tame whisky. The taste is caramel, wheat, licorice, a sweet treat that I think makes for an excellent aperitif to any hearty dinner. Really gets the tastebuds swinging. Although its on the more formal and light side of blend territory its a very smooth blend, and for that it deserves a high rating.
Nice and easy, a dram for every occasion: 6
Own blend
Just for fun, I've given myself a chance at doing some blending on my own. I know I'm far from a Richard Paterson, but hopefully, using my nose the best I can at putting together some blends and malt whiskies, and see if it could taste like some of the established blends out there? The components in the blend is as follows:
Long John blend 40%
Tobermory Treasure Blend 10yo 40%
Scots Grey blend 43%
King Edgar blend 40%
Ballantine's blend 40%
Glen Niven blend 40%
Something Special blend 40%
Isle of Skye 12yo blend 40%
Isle of Skye 8yo blend 40%
Scottish parliament 12yo 40% Single Malt
Speyburn 21yo 62.5% OB Single Malt
Cameron Brig 12yo 40% OB Single Grain
Well, the dreaded tasting notes then, remember, I haven't tried this one before up until now. The nose is rustic, drying, apple vinegar and cinnamon, very nice, much better than what I expected. The taste is spicy, a huge influence from the Speyburn, but I believe it lacks either some much peated whisky or some heavily sherried to put it a bit out of the blend neutrality which is now taunting it. And a bit higher strength wouldn't be refused. All in all I think I'd put this one in the middle of the road-range what blended whiskies are concerned: 3
Stag's Breath Liqueur 19.8%
It says its made of "Fine Whisky and Fermented Comb Honey Liqueur". Sounds like something old ladies would nip after a dry biscuit with some veggies in aspic. The color is nice, amber red, the nose is floral and sweet, not bad, reminds me of some honey wine that I purchased in a street fair in Hamburg, Germany, a few years ago. The taste is all on red apples and mango. Far from as sugary and thick as I'd suspect. You know, those old liqueurs that sticks like cling film to the roof of your mouth because of the heavy sugar content. This, I must say, is fresh and fruity, and while I cannot sense any whisky at all it's a fresh and fine liqueur to be served chilled on a hot summers day.
I won't score this one.
Auld Skye NAS 40% The Scottish Collection Edinburgh.
So, are there any Talisker involved in this blend? The name certainly suggests so. I think this is a rather old blend, probably from the 80's. Pale golden whisky. The nose shows there's floral notes, certainly some hints of Lowland ingredients, the grain part perhaps, and then there's also some hints of highland freshness, but not much Talisker yet. Small whiffs of peat and spice comes along after a while of breathing. It's a playful whisky for a 40%abv NAS blend, with more layers than what's usual for such a dram. The taste is like chalkdust and glue. No, thanks, this is not for me. Perhaps a small drop of water can help it just a bit? Water makes it a tad sweeter, but not much better. Stay away from this one!
Foul, one of many contributor's to the bad blend-reputation amongst malt-drinkers?: 1
Isle of Skye 8yo 40% Macleod's
Oddly, this seems much darker than the 12yo that I'm about to taste next, so 4 years younger and much darker, could this one be colored, or is it more older/darker/sherried whisky in the mix here? The nose is big, reminds me immediately of the subtle sherry notes that I usually find in the 18yo OB. I There's more peat in this than the Auld Skye, and even the 18yo IoS as I remember it. The taste is thick and peppery, extremely peppery, not unlike the pepperiness that I often find in younger Taliskers, but it lacks a bit of punch. I wish there'd be more coastal and spicy character to this, and more peaty notes on the palate. Time to try with some water. Now it turns sweeter, but also more spirity. Could there be some Tobermory in this one? I'm sorry, but this one just frustrates me, and I think there's one component (or more) that just cripples this otherwise fine blend. Could a higher bottling strength have done it more justice?
Like a ferrari without an engine, there's something massive missing here: 2
Isle of Skye 12yo 40% Macleod's
A more pale and "natural" color on this one. The nose is much fresher than the 12yo, more salty, more coastal, much more like Talisker, or even Bruichladdich, lightly peated, a wee bit spiced and salted and lots of nice coastal notes such as seaweed, fish stock, sea salt, smoked haddock, beautiful stuff. The taste is lighter, fruitiness, vanilla, honey, strawberry fruit gum, interesting. If not the best blend I've ever had, certainly one of the most distinctive ones. This is in single malt territory for sure. Makes me think of some unsherried indie HP's or Tobermory's or even Arran BC's. This is very good, not by any means perfect, but if you are ever to have a blend to compare single malts with, this could easily be one or your best choices.
Ian Macleod, drop the E150, bottle at CS, and keep the 12yo like it is: 6
Edit:
Isle of Skye 18yo 43% MacLeod's Private Stock #45
So, this one is tasted 2 days later, but since it's from the Isle of Skye range I might as well put it in here. I hope 3% more and extra aging will make this leap a bit in quality from the 8 and 12yo. Certainly much darker. Smells restrained, some old sherry notes way back in the background, but other than that a pretty tame whisky. The taste is caramel, wheat, licorice, a sweet treat that I think makes for an excellent aperitif to any hearty dinner. Really gets the tastebuds swinging. Although its on the more formal and light side of blend territory its a very smooth blend, and for that it deserves a high rating.
Nice and easy, a dram for every occasion: 6
Own blend
Just for fun, I've given myself a chance at doing some blending on my own. I know I'm far from a Richard Paterson, but hopefully, using my nose the best I can at putting together some blends and malt whiskies, and see if it could taste like some of the established blends out there? The components in the blend is as follows:
Long John blend 40%
Tobermory Treasure Blend 10yo 40%
Scots Grey blend 43%
King Edgar blend 40%
Ballantine's blend 40%
Glen Niven blend 40%
Something Special blend 40%
Isle of Skye 12yo blend 40%
Isle of Skye 8yo blend 40%
Scottish parliament 12yo 40% Single Malt
Speyburn 21yo 62.5% OB Single Malt
Cameron Brig 12yo 40% OB Single Grain
Well, the dreaded tasting notes then, remember, I haven't tried this one before up until now. The nose is rustic, drying, apple vinegar and cinnamon, very nice, much better than what I expected. The taste is spicy, a huge influence from the Speyburn, but I believe it lacks either some much peated whisky or some heavily sherried to put it a bit out of the blend neutrality which is now taunting it. And a bit higher strength wouldn't be refused. All in all I think I'd put this one in the middle of the road-range what blended whiskies are concerned: 3
mandag 5. mars 2012
One American Whisky
Fire Water Whiskey NAS 40% American blend Jose Estevez S.A.
"North American Blended Whisky" it says, does that mean it's a blend of Rye and Bourbon? Anyone have an idea? I didn't think the description blend was used much in america. However, an odd, yet historically sensed name for a whisky, which has a picture of a native american chief, not far from assembling the late and great Sitting Bull on the front label. This is also one of the most sold Supermarket Whiskies in Spain, where it is sold for around 10-15euros. So, as much, or little if you like, experience I have had with American Blends, or just American Whiskies in general, I will find it hard to give more than a description if it a preferable whisky to Jack or Jim and such. I know there are said to be many very good american whiskies out there, I just haven't come around to taste them yet. Let's try this one. So, orange E150 color I believe. The taste is oaky, burnt, vanilla, grape concentrate, brut white wine, not bad actually if not for some very spirity notes. The taste is intense and sweet, spirity at first before its all on burnt sugar and lemon rind. I think that's about it. It's all gone within a second or two, and it has no aftertaste no matter how hard I try to find some.
This might not be any better than what they gave old Sitting Bull back in the days: 2
"North American Blended Whisky" it says, does that mean it's a blend of Rye and Bourbon? Anyone have an idea? I didn't think the description blend was used much in america. However, an odd, yet historically sensed name for a whisky, which has a picture of a native american chief, not far from assembling the late and great Sitting Bull on the front label. This is also one of the most sold Supermarket Whiskies in Spain, where it is sold for around 10-15euros. So, as much, or little if you like, experience I have had with American Blends, or just American Whiskies in general, I will find it hard to give more than a description if it a preferable whisky to Jack or Jim and such. I know there are said to be many very good american whiskies out there, I just haven't come around to taste them yet. Let's try this one. So, orange E150 color I believe. The taste is oaky, burnt, vanilla, grape concentrate, brut white wine, not bad actually if not for some very spirity notes. The taste is intense and sweet, spirity at first before its all on burnt sugar and lemon rind. I think that's about it. It's all gone within a second or two, and it has no aftertaste no matter how hard I try to find some.
This might not be any better than what they gave old Sitting Bull back in the days: 2
One reason why never to purchase whiskies solely based on a good rating...
I know this is something like shooting myself in the foot, or throwing rocks in a glasshouse, but as I'm enjoying more and more different whiskies, and often afterwards comparing my notes with what other online spectators have found, I see that very often my combination of score and taste notes is very similar to that of others. But sometimes just one of the two basic factors in a whisky review (notes and scores) are similar. How is that possible?
Well, most recently I had as session of rather good Dailuaines, and one of those hitting a very solid score was this one:
Dailuaine 14 yo 1979 'Friars Carse' (59.7%, The Whisky Connoisseur, cask #8965)
All well, and I also remember my tasting notes including such as herbs, oranges and caramel. I then went to the only other online spectator that I could find which had also posted a review of this, you might have been to his site www.whiskyfun.com. And reading the surprisingly short notes at about 4 lines, he did also recognize herbs, oranges and caramel. So, I think we must have tasted the same whisky, no doubt. But when my score was 8.5/10 I think, which is quite excellent in my book, his score was 63/100, which on his side would be pretty close to rubbish I think as I rarely see scores below 50 there. So, what is the x-factor that makes my experience worth so much more than his with the same whisky? I believe, and this is far from revolutionary, it all comes down to a thing often described as "personal taste". So, when someone says "Oh, S**** gave this one 90, and this one 89, and this one that and that one this and so on..." No disrespect for Serge whatsoever, or any other online spectators, but please, if you find something in the notes that you reckon you would enjoy, I think that is a much better reason to purchase a whisky then just going by a whisky because it got a high number.
So, as I see many people online, and in the industry, namedropping (read. referring to) tasters, commentators and such with a "good" score behind their name quote, to attract the attention of punters. I believe, and I know I'm only talking for myself, if I were to visit the whiskyfun site, or wherever else, to find arguments for my considerations of what to buy, I'd never buy a whisky that had a good score if the tasting notes didn't fit my description of a good whisky.
In other words, and to put it rather blatantly, I'd be much more likely to buy a whisky that caught 63/100 points than a whisky that caught 96/100 points, as long as the notes mentioned herbs, oranges and caramel.
Well, most recently I had as session of rather good Dailuaines, and one of those hitting a very solid score was this one:
Dailuaine 14 yo 1979 'Friars Carse' (59.7%, The Whisky Connoisseur, cask #8965)
All well, and I also remember my tasting notes including such as herbs, oranges and caramel. I then went to the only other online spectator that I could find which had also posted a review of this, you might have been to his site www.whiskyfun.com. And reading the surprisingly short notes at about 4 lines, he did also recognize herbs, oranges and caramel. So, I think we must have tasted the same whisky, no doubt. But when my score was 8.5/10 I think, which is quite excellent in my book, his score was 63/100, which on his side would be pretty close to rubbish I think as I rarely see scores below 50 there. So, what is the x-factor that makes my experience worth so much more than his with the same whisky? I believe, and this is far from revolutionary, it all comes down to a thing often described as "personal taste". So, when someone says "Oh, S**** gave this one 90, and this one 89, and this one that and that one this and so on..." No disrespect for Serge whatsoever, or any other online spectators, but please, if you find something in the notes that you reckon you would enjoy, I think that is a much better reason to purchase a whisky then just going by a whisky because it got a high number.
So, as I see many people online, and in the industry, namedropping (read. referring to) tasters, commentators and such with a "good" score behind their name quote, to attract the attention of punters. I believe, and I know I'm only talking for myself, if I were to visit the whiskyfun site, or wherever else, to find arguments for my considerations of what to buy, I'd never buy a whisky that had a good score if the tasting notes didn't fit my description of a good whisky.
In other words, and to put it rather blatantly, I'd be much more likely to buy a whisky that caught 63/100 points than a whisky that caught 96/100 points, as long as the notes mentioned herbs, oranges and caramel.
torsdag 1. mars 2012
Grain tasting!!!
So, the third one in a row of alternative styles to scotch single malts. Many people alway tells me that really old single Grains can be really good. But young single grains are rarely spoken of, so today we'll have one young just for good measures, and the rest will be more or less old ones. Btw, I have only tried one single grain so far that was a winner, and it was a Cameronbridge from Adelphi. Maybe there will be some more winners in this tasting?
Blackbarrel/Girvan NAS 43% WM Grant's
So, a pretty young distillery, no age statement and bottled at 43%, I'm assuming this is a young whisky. If not I think they've put their old stock in an undeserving vat. But I could be wrong... Sort of the standard bottling from Girvan. Very light in color. Turns hazy immediately after being poured. It smells spirity and grainy, small oakiness, more in Vodka territory than whisky so far. The taste is light, sweet and burnt. soapy, phenolic, cigar smoke, tannins, seems to be some smokiness in this one, but I'm not aware of any peat being used in the production of Girvan. Anyway, its a lightweighter, and not something I'd enjoy more than as a light aperitif whisky. But there's little off-notes except some soapy notes on the palate.
Well made, but a bit boring whisky: 4
Girvan 45yo 1965-2010 47.3% The Clan Denny Douglas Laing
So, quite a jump in length of maturation between these two Girvans, and this one is also bottled at cask strength, but after such a long time in oak it's usually bound to be a significant loss of alcohol content in the spirit. Amber orange hue. Smells oaky and austere at first, needs some time to open up. Now, given about 20 minutes it shows to be a sweet and musty whisky, but far too oaky, I believe water will be added to this one, but let's try it neat first. Licorice, mint, walnuts, pine wood, a weird mixture, the oakiness is gone, and I don't think water is needed here, but it seems a bit too light for all those years in oak, so I'll add some anyway.With about 3 drops of water it opens up and becomes more bitter and gingery, not for the better in my opinion. It's fun to try such old grains, but I'm still not convinced that it's a fair alternative to single malts.
Okay stuff, quite interesting or peculiar if you like, when neat: 5.5
Dumbarton 26yo 1963-1989 40% Signatory Vintage cask#2012-2014 btl.240/1200
I believe this is my first whisky from Dumbarton Distillery, which I believe is now closed alongside many other grain distilleries. Many people discuss what flavors each single malt contributes to the different blends in which they're a part. But very seldom is the distinctiveness of the grain whiskies included in the mix discussed in the same manner. Maybe the reason there were more peatiness in the older bottlings from White Horse, is that the grain whisky in the vat is more demanding than before? Just a bit of thinking I do on rare occasions... The color in this one is amber. The smell is spirity, honey, lavender, caramel, rich, I like this one because the sweetness draws the spirityness aside. The taste is light and peppery, more in blend territory now, a small bitterness, some black pepper and nothing else. The lightest 20yo I've ever tried.
Hard to give points here since it's neither good or bad, just plain and boring: 3
Carsebridge 32yo 1962-1994 54.7% James MacArthur's
I rate J McA rather high as an IB, when compared to many others, but I think I'm still capable of looking past that when reviewing whiskies from that brand. Nice golden brown hue. It smells thick and sherried, cinnamon, cloves, cigar smoke, honey, leather, chalk dust, red curry, wow! The taste is sulphury, chili, apple pie, coriander, very good, but perhaps it needs a bit of water as the sulphure is a bit extreme. Water opens it up a lot, sweet chili, honey, sauteed onions, marzipan, nutmeg, cloves again, and ginger.
One of the best single grains I've had so far: 7
North British 20yo 1991-2011 55.8% Master of Malt
So, a rather new bottling, I have not tried many bottlings for/by Master of Malt, but the ones I've tried have all been recommendable. This one has a light hue, white wine, smells bitter and spirity, vanilla, old jeans, paint thinner, natural fertilizer :(. I'm hoping that the unpleasant start will be followed by a contradictory palate. The taste is sugary, plum juice, malt vinegar, syrup, you could use this one as a dressing, it's a playful and light-hearted whisky that, because of its rather high strength, shows to be a fulfilling alternative to the rather heavy malty notes that I think is the main character difference between single malts and single grains. Cause when push comes to show, there are many single malt whiskies that's way more pesky than this whisky.
Great palate, rubbish nose, well, rather that than the opposite: 7
Port Dundas 20yo 1991-2011 57.4% OB
So, this is an OB from Port Dundas Distillery, who'd knew.. But I do have an 40-something aged Port Dundas in my cabinet, so this might give me a small hint on what to expect? The color in this one is dark brown, must be some heavy oloroso casks involved here? It smells sulphury and peppery, and that's about it, kind of one-dimensional whisky. After a while it turns sweeter with honey, peppermint and sweet wine, sauternes style. The taste is The taste is all on thick, fat oloroso sherry, sweet as the sweetest grape and dry as the driest desert. Amazing on many levels, if you want the ultimate sherry-influenced whisky, I guess you could get it from other whisky mongers and more profiled distilleries, but this one from Port Dundas, that's sold at Master of malt, must be one of the best choices when it comes to value for money.
Maximum drying whisky that takes much water, but if you're a sherry-fan: 8
Blackbarrel/Girvan NAS 43% WM Grant's
So, a pretty young distillery, no age statement and bottled at 43%, I'm assuming this is a young whisky. If not I think they've put their old stock in an undeserving vat. But I could be wrong... Sort of the standard bottling from Girvan. Very light in color. Turns hazy immediately after being poured. It smells spirity and grainy, small oakiness, more in Vodka territory than whisky so far. The taste is light, sweet and burnt. soapy, phenolic, cigar smoke, tannins, seems to be some smokiness in this one, but I'm not aware of any peat being used in the production of Girvan. Anyway, its a lightweighter, and not something I'd enjoy more than as a light aperitif whisky. But there's little off-notes except some soapy notes on the palate.
Well made, but a bit boring whisky: 4
Girvan 45yo 1965-2010 47.3% The Clan Denny Douglas Laing
So, quite a jump in length of maturation between these two Girvans, and this one is also bottled at cask strength, but after such a long time in oak it's usually bound to be a significant loss of alcohol content in the spirit. Amber orange hue. Smells oaky and austere at first, needs some time to open up. Now, given about 20 minutes it shows to be a sweet and musty whisky, but far too oaky, I believe water will be added to this one, but let's try it neat first. Licorice, mint, walnuts, pine wood, a weird mixture, the oakiness is gone, and I don't think water is needed here, but it seems a bit too light for all those years in oak, so I'll add some anyway.With about 3 drops of water it opens up and becomes more bitter and gingery, not for the better in my opinion. It's fun to try such old grains, but I'm still not convinced that it's a fair alternative to single malts.
Okay stuff, quite interesting or peculiar if you like, when neat: 5.5
Dumbarton 26yo 1963-1989 40% Signatory Vintage cask#2012-2014 btl.240/1200
I believe this is my first whisky from Dumbarton Distillery, which I believe is now closed alongside many other grain distilleries. Many people discuss what flavors each single malt contributes to the different blends in which they're a part. But very seldom is the distinctiveness of the grain whiskies included in the mix discussed in the same manner. Maybe the reason there were more peatiness in the older bottlings from White Horse, is that the grain whisky in the vat is more demanding than before? Just a bit of thinking I do on rare occasions... The color in this one is amber. The smell is spirity, honey, lavender, caramel, rich, I like this one because the sweetness draws the spirityness aside. The taste is light and peppery, more in blend territory now, a small bitterness, some black pepper and nothing else. The lightest 20yo I've ever tried.
Hard to give points here since it's neither good or bad, just plain and boring: 3
Carsebridge 32yo 1962-1994 54.7% James MacArthur's
I rate J McA rather high as an IB, when compared to many others, but I think I'm still capable of looking past that when reviewing whiskies from that brand. Nice golden brown hue. It smells thick and sherried, cinnamon, cloves, cigar smoke, honey, leather, chalk dust, red curry, wow! The taste is sulphury, chili, apple pie, coriander, very good, but perhaps it needs a bit of water as the sulphure is a bit extreme. Water opens it up a lot, sweet chili, honey, sauteed onions, marzipan, nutmeg, cloves again, and ginger.
One of the best single grains I've had so far: 7
North British 20yo 1991-2011 55.8% Master of Malt
So, a rather new bottling, I have not tried many bottlings for/by Master of Malt, but the ones I've tried have all been recommendable. This one has a light hue, white wine, smells bitter and spirity, vanilla, old jeans, paint thinner, natural fertilizer :(. I'm hoping that the unpleasant start will be followed by a contradictory palate. The taste is sugary, plum juice, malt vinegar, syrup, you could use this one as a dressing, it's a playful and light-hearted whisky that, because of its rather high strength, shows to be a fulfilling alternative to the rather heavy malty notes that I think is the main character difference between single malts and single grains. Cause when push comes to show, there are many single malt whiskies that's way more pesky than this whisky.
Great palate, rubbish nose, well, rather that than the opposite: 7
Port Dundas 20yo 1991-2011 57.4% OB
So, this is an OB from Port Dundas Distillery, who'd knew.. But I do have an 40-something aged Port Dundas in my cabinet, so this might give me a small hint on what to expect? The color in this one is dark brown, must be some heavy oloroso casks involved here? It smells sulphury and peppery, and that's about it, kind of one-dimensional whisky. After a while it turns sweeter with honey, peppermint and sweet wine, sauternes style. The taste is The taste is all on thick, fat oloroso sherry, sweet as the sweetest grape and dry as the driest desert. Amazing on many levels, if you want the ultimate sherry-influenced whisky, I guess you could get it from other whisky mongers and more profiled distilleries, but this one from Port Dundas, that's sold at Master of malt, must be one of the best choices when it comes to value for money.
Maximum drying whisky that takes much water, but if you're a sherry-fan: 8
Abonner på:
Innlegg (Atom)