This is the first Glenlossie I have reviewed on the blog and it may well be the first Glenlossie I’ve ever had. I know very little about the distillery except that it is in the Speyside, is owned by Diageo and produces malt for their blends. As per Whiskybase there have been no official releases other than one each in the Flora & Fauna, Manager’s Dram and Manager’s Choice series and the most recent of those was released in 2009. What this means, of course, is that next year Diageo will put a 37 yo Glenlossie in their annual special release and ask £2000 for it.
There does seem to have been a slight uptick in independent releases in recent years but I’m not sure that I’ve heard or read anyone waxing rhapsodic about Glenlossie. As you will see below, I won’t be waxing rhapsodic about this bottle either but it was a pleasant, easy drinker.
Glenlossie 22, 1992 (46%; van Wees; hogshead #3447; from my own bottle)
Nose: Lovely, fruity nose with juicy citrus (orange), apricot and some honey. Some toasted oak as well. With time there’s more lemon mixed in with the orange and a slight nuttiness (with a slightly metallic edge). That metallic edge expands with water and so does the lemon.
Palate: More acidic arrival on the palate; sweeter notes arrive from below as I swallow but so does an expanding metallic note. The mouthfeel is a bit flat. With time there’s better integration between the brighter citrus and the sweeter notes and the metallic note recedes a bit. Woodier as it goes. The fruit expands with time but that metallic thing comes back too. Water washes it all out I’m afraid, leaving only bitter oak.
Finish: Medium. That metallic note turns into an uninteresting spiciness but the fruit comes back up to redeem it. As on the palate there’s more oak on the finish with time. With water the wood gets more tannic and dominates everything.
Comments: I really liked the nose but the palate didn’t have enough going on. This was as true when the bottle was first opened as it was at the very end. A very pleasant sipper but nothing special. Quite a bit better, though, than the four K&L casks from earlier this month. I bring this up because I’ve heard before that Signatory is also the source of van Wees’ casks—if so, they’re obviously doing a better job with their selections of bargain-priced older casks. Still, I think this might have been better bottled a few years earlier.
Rating: 84 points.