Glen Scotia, Double Cask


I don’t have any experience with recently released Glen Scotias and so when I noticed this mini as I was leaving the Whisky Exchange’s London store towards the end of our trip last month, I couldn’t resist picking it up. I somehow missed Glen Scotia’s psychedelic cow period entirely and I figured I might as well check out what they’re up to now in more staid livery. Having spent a decent amount of money in the store purchasing full bottles of other things, I decided to give this NAS Double Cask a go (though as I say that I cannot recall if they even had minis of the age stated line available). Reading up, I learned that this is made from whisky matured in first fill bourbon barrels and then finished “for up to 12 months” in PX casks. Of course, when a distillery can’t even tell you exactly how many months their “finish” lasted you don’t get a good feeling about how many total years were likely involved in the maturation process; but I am, as you know, a very positive person and so I poured this with an open mind. Here’s how it went. 

By the way, prices for this whisky are all over the place in the US. Winesearcher tells me that it goes for less than $45 in St. Louis and New York but in other states the lowest price is $70 (and it’s that price in some stores in New York as well). Did it start out high and is now being discounted in many places? Or is this just more of the crazy American whisky pricing bullshit?

Glen Scotia, Double Cask (46%; from a purchased mini)

Nose: Pleasant citrus (orange), some malt, some dried leaves. No real depth to any of it though and no change with time. No real change with water either.

Palate: Rather acrid with some orange behind it. Decent texture. Quite cardboardy on the second sip and that acrid note intensifies. Keeps falling apart with time. Let’s see if water fixes things. No, it does not; the bitterness gets more vegetal.

Finish: Medium-long. The acrid notes are at the top, yielding to some musty cardboard. As on the palate with water.

Comments: This started out decently on the nose but went rapidly downhill from there. I would not buy this for $20, leave alone the $75+ being asked for it in Minnesota and California.

Rating: 72 points.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.