Lagavulin 12 CS (2012)

Lagavulin 12, 2012

This is the last in my long, drawn-out vertical of Lagavulin 12 releases from 2009 to 2012. At the tasting with friends back in September when we actually drank all four head-to-head-to-head-to-head the group was unanimous that this was the one that was a bit of an outlier as the peat seemed a little “dirtier” or farmier. Let’s see if that holds up two months later or if that note seems less pronounced when the whisky is tasted by its lonesome.

Lagavulin 12 CS, 2012 (56.1%; from my own bottle)

Nose: Nope, this is still farmy. Iodine, kelp and lots of lemon. And lots of briny green notes too: olive brine, rotting kelp. Gets rather salty very quickly. A touch of creamy vanilla too with time but you have to work to find it. With a lot more time the farmy note dissipates somewhat and now there’s a distinct cereally character, with the lemon-olive thing right below it. With a few drops of water the creamy vanilla expands and there’s a bit of a smoky lemon curd thing going on. Continue reading

Old Pulteney WK 217, Spectrum

Old Pulteney WK 217This was the third in Old Pulteney’s WK series, each named for fishing boats associated with the port town of Wick that is home to the distillery. I have previously finished a bottle of the cask strength WK 499, Isabella Fortuna, which I rather liked (I think I may have a reference sample saved). Later editions of the WK 499 and also the second release, the Wk 209, Good Hope were not at cask strength and nor is this edition, the WK 217 Spectrum. As per the tin this is entirely from sherry butts, but from a combination of Spanish and American oak. (As I noted here, I’ve only recently learned that butts used for maturing sherry in Spain are typically made from American oak while European oak casks are used primarily for shipping; I have to quit my knee-jerk equation of American oak casks with ex-bourbon casks.) This makes it quite different from the Old Pulteney 12, which is the most ubiquitous of the distillery’s releases in the US, and which I rather like and also from the WK 499, which I recall as being quintessentially ex-bourbon in character.  Continue reading

Corsair Triple Smoke (Batch 85)

Corsair Triple SmokeI approach this whiskey with some trepidation as my limited experience so far with smoky American whiskey has not been a positive one. Nor is it a good sign that the distillery puts the word “artisan” in its name: Corsair Artisan Distillery. In the food and drink world in the US the intersection between those who bill themselves as artisans or artisanal and those who talk a better game than they play is large enough to accommodate Jim Murray’s opinion of himself. It’s true that earlier this year this was named the “Artisan Whiskey of the Year” for 2012 by Whisky Advocate, but given that the competition likely included the Balcones Brimstone that may be akin to being named “Most Reasonable Person” at a Tea Party convention.

Anyway, let see what this is actually like. It’s called “Triple Smoke” because it comprises whisky from malt smoked with peat, malt smoked with beech wood, and malt smoked with cherry wood.

Corsair Triple Smoke (40%; Batch 85; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Yow. Sour wood and leather armchair on which someone’s spilled Cherry Coke. Then a sweet gingeriness arrives (powdered ginger) along with a lot of something that smells like wood floors that have been cleaned with a solution designed for getting rid of pet stains. I’m not making it sound appealing but it’s actually not bad. The whole smells very much like one of those childhood tonics I mention every once in a while. The peat’s not very apparent but smoked wood, yes. There’s a richer sweetness after a while and it all begins to smell very much like an old polished wooden box that once held dried flowers. I like where the nose goes but somehow this has me a little nervous about taking a sip. Later, however, it goes back to just being very powdered gingery-sweet.

Palate: Hmmm. There’s almost nothing on the palate but the wood. It’s not overbearing or nasty wood but that’s all there seems to be. It’s not particularly smoky in any way, let alone three ways, and it’s rather watery and thin. With time the ginger shows up here too and there’s a little more spice and a little more sweetness.

Finish: Medium. The wood gets a little spicier and a little sweeter. Later it gets just a little bit astringent.

Nothing new with water.

Comments: I’m not sure how much batch variation there is or at what stage in the bottle’s life this was poured but while the nose is expressive this starts out rather blank on the palate. Later some woody sweetness develops but it never quite makes it to being interesting. It’s drinkable, I guess, and there’s nothing here I dislike per se but there’s also nothing here that makes me want to drink it again; the Brimstone at least has character. 2012 must have been a terrible year for “Artisan Whiskey”.

Rating: 75 points (pulled up by the nose).

Thanks to Bryan F. for the sample.

Charbay R5, Lot R5 610A

Charbay R5 Lot 5
Charbay are an outfit in northern California who make a wide range of spirits and wines. Among whisky geeks they’re best known for a few releases of rather expensive whiskey made from pilsner beer. While all whisky is in a strict sense distilled from beer Charbay use beer made for commercial release. And what’s further unusual about their whiskey–including the one I am reviewing today–is that it is made from hopped beer. This is, in fact, rather different and I’m curious to see what this whiskey—distilled from Racer IPA—is like, though also somewhat wary. There are two versions of the Charbay R5, which is double-distilled in a pot still, Scotch style–one unaged, and the other aged in French Oak casks. This is the latter.

There is, by the way, some controversy over whether this is in fact distilled from hopped beer (as Charbay claim) or whether hops are added somewhere else in the process. I don’t personally find this to be such an interesting question (only because I’m not that into the ins and outs of American whiskey) but you can read a report here that treats it like the stakes are at Watergate level (to be fair, there’s a lot of other very interesting information there about the production process, if you’re into that sort of thing). Continue reading

Laphroaig Cairdeas 2013, Port Wood

Laphroaig Cairdeas 2013
The 2013 edition of the Laphroaig Cairdeas was double matured in bourbon and port casks and was met with the usual gnashing of teeth by the usual suspects who decry single malt whisky going near any sort of wine cask (never mind that the most traditional of all casks used to mature single malt whisky previously held wine too: sherry). Well, I guess I’ve said rude things about the Glenmorangie Artein and the Bruichladdich Black Art as well, but that’s because I don’t think those whiskies quite work. I don’t rule out the possibility that port/marsala/madeira/etc. cask matured whisky can be very good, and as it happens I think this Cairdeas is very good. At least so I and all the others (including a couple of people who’re not big fans of peated whisky) thought at our local group’s October tasting where I opened this bottle. It’s now past the halfway mark—let’s see how it holds up. Continue reading

Kavalan Concertmaster, Port Finish

Kavalan Concertmaster

This is my third Kavalan. I thought the basic Single Malt was just about acceptable and the King Car Conductor was decent. Now to see what this port finished Concertmaster is like. I’m not sure if this is just the regular Single Malt finished in port pipes or what the relationship is between this one and the higher strength Vinho Barrique (which I have not tried). So many mysteries. So many uninteresting mysteries.

Kavalan Concertmaster, Port Finish (40%; from a purchased sample)

Nose: Rich and fruity. The influence of the wine is clear but this still smells like whisky. Red fruits lead (cherries, strawberries and cream) and then some oak behind it. Some apricot and citrus emerge as well after a minute along with some flambeed banana. Quite nice. Now will the palate match it? Quite some time later the red fruits are all gone, and now it’s just the apricot and tangerine peel and some honey. Continue reading

On’s Kitchen

On’s Kitchen (at 1613 University Avenue W. in St. Paul) is one of our very favourite places to eat in the Twin Cities. It is a family-owned Thai restaurant started a few years ago when owner/chef On Khumchaya left the kitchen of the Bangkok Thai Deli (further down University Avenue). There was a marked dip in the quality at Bangkok Thai Deli after she left, and we haven’t gone back since we found her again a couple of miles up the road–they may well have recovered.

Anyway: On’s Kitchen’s menu contains a lot of the familiar Thai dishes that can be found on the menu of every Thai restaurant in the US, but there are also a number of more esoteric things on it that are well worth checking out. We’ve eaten up and down the menu and every meal has been at least very good–with one exception when On was away in Thailand. Everything is made to order and has the clarity and depth of flavour which tells you that they’re not using commercial pastes or taking any shortcuts. And unlike at almost every other Thai restaurant in Minnesota the food here is not cloyingly sweet. Service can be a little bit spotty when the restaurant is full–there are only two people serving and bussing the tables–but this is really a very minor complaint. Continue reading

Kavalan King Car Conductor

Kavalan King Car Conductor

After yesterday’s unprepossessing and prosaically named Kavalan Single Malt here is another that is at least more extravagantly named. “King Car”, it turns out, is the name of the conglomerate that owns the distillery. As to whether “Conductor” is meant to call up an image of a man in a penguin suit in front of an orchestra or someone selling tickets on a bus, I don’t know but it’s a good job this conglomerate has an evocative name; though it would also be fun to drink a whisky named Taiwan Heavy Industries Limited or similar. But enough meaningless chit-chat. On to the whisky.

The website is no more forthcoming with details about how this is made than they are with the regular Single Malt, but it is distinguished from the other by at least a higher abv: this is at 46%. Continue reading

Kavalan Single Malt

Kavalan Single Malt

The new’ish Taiwanese distillery Kavalan have been the next new sensation in the whisky geek world for a while now, usurping that role from Amrut, who in turn had taken it from Japanese whisky more generally. Kavalan’s whisky is not yet in the US but is said to be coming any day now. As I’ve noted before, I’m always a little sceptical about the level of excitement about many new distilleries, especially those from non-traditional whisky producing regions of the world. I’m never sure how much of the excitement is driven by the novelty and how much by actual quality. The charitable reading of the former impulse, I suppose, is that some people do genuinely want to support the early efforts of new(er) whisky producing regions and sustain them as they move to maturity.

But the whisky I am reviewing tonight is not one of Kavalan’s ballyhooed expressions (those would be the cask strength Solists). This is the entry-level single malt at 40%. Still, it’s won gold medals at a couple of spirits competitions/awards (yes, yes, I know they’re mostly dubious).

This is the first of three Kavalans I’ll be reviewing in succession. Continue reading

Lagavulin 12 CS (2011)

Lagavulin 12, 2011Part three of my Lagavulin 12 CS series brings me to the 2011 release (see here for the 2009 and here for the 2010).

Lagavulin 12 CS, 2011 Release (57.5%; from my own bottle)

Nose: Very close to the 2010, with lemon, cereally peat and whiffs of gasoline leading the way. Deep inky sweetness below that–iodine and mercurochrome and gauze bandages. Some fruit too–grapefruit? melon?–and sharp, acidic smoke. With more time there’s a leafy, humusy quality and some green olive brine too. The lemon turns to lemon peel and gets more intense; some almond oil too. The cereal never goes away though. Water pushes the lemon back and there’s more of a straight ahead medicinal peat blast now.

Palate: Acrid smoke and lemon do battle, and battle to a draw. Salt after that and then more lemon and then the inky sweetness. More aggressive than the 2010 at full strength. With time the smoke is not as aggressive on initial entry and the (bitter) lemon becomes the top note and the medicinal notes (bandages, iodine) arrive much earlier. Much more phenolic now. Water makes the palate brighter and a bit sweeter–still very phenolic though and the smoke expands again. Continue reading

Caperdonich 12, 1998 (Single Malts of Scotland)

Caperdonich 12Here is another Caperdonich from the 1990s. This one is younger and from later in the decade than yesterday’s bottle from Hunter Hamilton. This was bottled by the Whisky Exchange for their Single Malts of Scotland line. And in a bit of a twist it’s heavily peated. I don’t think Caperdonichs were commonly heavily peated so this must have been a part of distillation runs made for specific blending needs.

Caperdonich 12, 1998 (57%; Single Malts of Scotland; Barrel 8712, Heavily Peated; from my own bottle)

Nose: Yes, this is indeed heavily peated. A big wave of smoke comes wafting out of the glass before I’ve finished pouring. By turns acidic, cereally and even a little bit fruity (lime but also some apples). I must say this is very Islay. With time there’s some ink as well and the lime gets stronger too. There’s some grapefruit too and a musky sweetness develops as well. Really quite fruity after a while (though I can’t quite pick what the fruit is exactly) and quite a lot of salt too. Gets more and more medicinal (bandages, mercurochrome) with time. Really very nice. Will the palate match it? And what will water do? Well, water seems to make it even more intense as the peat and lime try to beat each other up my nostrils. After a minute or so there’s some vanilla, but not a whole lot. More sweetness (and vanilla) as it sits and more cereal too. Continue reading

Caperdonich 18, 1994 (Hunter Hamilton for K&L)

Caperdonich 18
This Caperdonich was bottled for K&L in California by Hunter Hamilton under their Sovereign label. Hunter Hamilton in turn is one of the many Laing outfits, I believe. All the Caperdonichs I’ve had have been very old and from the halcyon period from the late 60s to the early 70s so I am curious to see what this middle-aged one from 1994 is like. You don’t really hear too much about Caperdonich from the 1980s and 1990s.

And Caperdonich is really not a well-known name, in general, outside whisky geek circles. This bottle started out north of $100 at K&L and eventually got discounted down to the mid-$70s. Hard luck for those who bought it at the original price but so it goes, I suppose. Anyway, now that the distillery is closed down for good it might well be that there’s a lot of stock from its later period as well that might get to mature to a ripe old age as the older stock did through the 70s, 80s and 90s. Continue reading

Bowmore 21, 1982 (Prime Malt)

Bowmore 21, 1982
Yes, a bottle from the very beginning of Bowmore’s dark period in the 1980s (see here for my thoughts about all of that and for a review of an underwhelming official bottling from the tail end of the decade). This is from a mysterious outfit called Prime Malt who seem to have only operated in the US. Michael Kravitz has more information about them in the fourth paragraph of his review of this same whisky and also in the comments (he got his sample from the same source: Florin who comments often on both our blogs). This one was billed as “Prime Malt Selection No. 4”; I’m not sure how many selections there were from this bottler/label.

The last 1982 I tasted–(also) from Duncan Taylor–had the notorious soap on the palate and finish but no real offensive perfumed notes. Will this one be any better or worse? Continue reading

Bowmore 20, 1991, Cask 2061 (A.D. Rattray)

Rattray Bowmore 20, 2061
Another Bowmore from A.D. Rattray who seem to have a pipeline to a lot of excellent Bowmores from the early-mid 1990s. This is the period right after Bowmore’s notorious run in the 1980s, associated with soapy and perfumed notes. I’ve expressed my views about the nature of the talk around that period before and so will not repeat them here. I’ve also noted that none of the 1990s Rattray Bowmores I’ve had have been anything less than good, and I’ve had another sherry cask from 1991 (an 18 yo, cask 2075) that was excellent. As this seems like it must be from the same distillation run I’m hoping #2061 was as good a cask as #2075 was. Let’s get to it.

Continue reading

Lagavulin 12 CS (2010)

Lagavulin 12 CS, 2010This is the second entry in my ongoing, slow-motion Lagavulin 12 vertical. The first is here. Let’s get right to it.

Lagavulin 12 CS, 2010 Release (56.5%; from my own bottle)

Nose: Cereally, lemony peat. But beneath the soft cereal note there lurks a pungent, iodiney (iodinesque? iodinysian?) beast that is waiting to punch you in the nose if you get said organ too close to it. And this beast has been chomping on some rotting kelp. After a few more minutes though the beast calms down (I really regret starting on this metaphor, can we agree to abruptly let it go now?) and there’s a very nice deep, organic sweetness that emerges (“organic” as in sweet, rotting organic material) but it’s accompanied by salt crystals. With more time, the lemon, the organic sweetness and the salt are in perfect balance and there’s also strong whiffs of gasoline. It gets sharper with time and there’s more aromas of bandages etc. in an old-timey doctor’s office. I realize I haven’t actually mentioned smoke, but there you are. Gets sweeter again much later and there’s some vanilla fighting its way out too now. With water the lemon intensifies and turns to citronella. Continue reading

Jameson 18

Jameson 18After the NAS Black Barrel disaster here’s an older Jameson that will hopefully be better. In fact, this is the oldest Irish whiskey I’ve tried. Its makeup is not entirely clear. On the Jameson website there’s an unexplained reference to it being comprised of “3 beautifully matched whiskeys…matured for at least 18 years”. There seems to be some explanation in the TWE listing which refers to it as a “blend of two potstill whiskies and a single grain”. However, while the TWE listing also adds that this blend “is matured in Oloroso sherry casks and finished in bourbon wood for 6 months” the official website suggests a different maturation regime, saying the whiskeys are “matured for at least 18 years in hand selected American bourbon barrels and European oak casks, where they complete their rite of passage and are finished in first fill bourbon barrels”. So as per the website, it would seem that bourbon wood is involved in the primary maturation as well. But what does it taste like? Continue reading

Jameson Select Reserve, Black Barrel

Jameson Select ReserveI don’t know too much about Irish whiskey (as I have noted before). I believe this Black Barrel is a blend like the regular Jameson, though priced a rung above. Indeed, a quick glance at the official website confirms this. It also informs me that this is matured only in ex-bourbon barrels–whereas the regular Jameson seems to be from bourbon and sherry casks–and contains a larger proportion of pot still whiskey in the blend; and like all Jamesons this is triple-distilled. The barrels would seem to be charred more than usual a la the Ardbeg Alligator (hence the name, I suppose). Let’s have at it.

Jameson Select Reserve, Black Barrel (40%; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Soft vanilla, toasted (dried) coconut and some grainy spice. The toasted coconut transitions quickly to lightly toasted wood. Very clean but not a whole lot happening. After a few minutes it gets quite neutral and borderline unexpressive–wait, there’s something that puts me in mind of talcum powder. Water doesn’t do anything for the nose. Continue reading