Bowmore 15, 1992 (Douglas Laing)

No, I haven’t already rolled back my commitment to slow the pace of my whisky reviewing and to restrict it only to bottles that have lain unopened for years in my stash. It’s only that I still have a few samples left over from before I left for Bombay in early January and I may as well get through all of them as well. And so here’s a Bowmore 15. This was distilled in 1992 and bottled in 2007 from a refill hogshead by Douglas Laing in their Old Malt Cask series.  Back when this came out a lot of whisky geeks were still very wary about Bowmores distilled in the early 1990s. This was on account of the proximity to the long problematic preceding decade at the distillery. As I’ve noted before on the blog, my random sampling suggests that by the early 1990s most of those problems had been worked out. Indeed, I’ve had quite a few rather nice indie Bowmores distilled in the early 1990s. That’s not to say, of course, that there aren’t casks from that period that still bore/bear traces of the major problems of the distillate in the 1980s, particularly a strong soapy note. Let’s hope this cask is not one of those. When teenaged bourbon cask Bowmore is good it’s very good indeed, with that unique mix of smoke, fruit, florals and coastal notes. Let’s see where this one falls on the spectrum. Continue reading

Bowmore Vault Edition, Second Release


Alright, let’s close the month out with a week of single malt whiskies. And as the blog’s 11th anniversary was yesterday, let’s start with a Bowmore. [My first-ever review was of the lowly Bowmore Legend, and so I’ve marked every anniversary with a Bowmore review.] This is the second release of Bowmore’s Vault Edition and hit the market back in 2019. The Vault series was apparently intended to showcase different aspects of Bowmore’s character—I’m not sure if it’s still on the go—and the second edition emphasized peat smoke. It was matured in bourbon and then sherry casks. No word on age but the price on release was £70. This was down from the first edition’s original asking price of £100, which I guess might mean that even in the inflated market of recent years, drinkers are not uncritically buying up every official release from a name distillery no matter what ludicrous price is being asked for them. That said, I’ve no idea what the prices asked for later releases were. Let’s see if I like this one more than the Legend all those years ago. Continue reading

Bowmore 20, 1983 (Mackillop’s Choice)


My second week of reviews of releases from Mackillop’s Choice got off to a strong start yesterday with a 19 yo Scapa (see here, here and here for the reviews from the first Mackillop’s Choice week back in May). We’re now on shakier ground for the second review. It’s of a Bowmore that’s a year older than the Scapa but was distilled right in the thick of Bowmore’s dangerous decade: the 1980s. Much—though, it must be said, not all—of the whisky distilled in this period at the great Islay distillery has been marred to some degree or the other by a soapy, artificially floral character.

The problem had begun to sort itself out by the end of the decade—and was mostly gone by the early 1990s—but today’s whisky was distilled in 1983. Will it be an exception or an exemplar of everything people dislike about Bowmore from that era? Only one way to find out. Continue reading

Bowmore 17, 2004 (SMWS 3.339)


Let’s bring this series of reviews of Bowmore 17, 2004s bottled by the SMWS to a close. The three whiskies reviewed this week were from consecutively numbered casks, all filled on the same day in 2004 and matured in second-fill hogsheads. On Monday, I reviewed cask 3.337; on Wednesday, I reviewed cask 3.338. I liked both very much indeed; and liked 3.338 a bit more than 3.337. If you’re good at math like me, you’ll eventually figure out that today’s review is of cask 3.339. And you might also expect that I will like it a bit more than 3.338. But that’s now how whisky reviewing math works, fool! The SMWS’ tasting panel named this one “So wonderfully close, yet so wonderfully far”. This is, as far as I can make out, a reference to the whisky having conjured up visions of the Caribbean for them. I’ll be happy enough if it’s close enough to cask 3.331—which I reviewed last month, and which I liked the most so far of all these SMWS Bowmore 17, 2004s. Okay, let’s get to it. Continue reading

Bowmore 17, 2004 (SMWS 3.338)


Here is the second of three reviews this week os Bowmore 17, 2004s distilled on the same day, matured in second-fill hogsheads and bottled by the Scotch Malt Whisky Society. On Monday I reviewed cask 3.337; here now is cask 3.338. The Society’s panel dubbed it “Smoky ‘spice of the angels'”; spice of the angels is a fancy name for fennel pollen. I would have preferred “Smoky fruit of the tropics” but maybe I’ll get it anyway. Let’s see.

Bowmore 17, 2004 (57.6%; SMWS 3.338; second-fill hogshead; from a bottle split)

Nose: The smoke in this one is more ashy than mineral. There’s also more fruity and custardy notes here from the get-go: peach, a bit of passionfruit, blueberry. More fruit than smoke with time. Three drops of water bring out more of the custardy/creamy sweetness. Continue reading

Bowmore 17, 2004 (SMWS 3.337)


Back in the end of March I reviewed a Bowmore 17, 2004 bottled by the Scotch Malt Whisky Society. It was full of everything that is typical of the best of modern-era bourbon cask Bowmore: coastal notes, mineral peat, lots of fruit (acidic, sweet, tropical). Not surprisingly, I really liked it. I noted at the time that the SMWS had released a fair number of casks of Bowmore 17, 2004, all of which were distilled on the same day and, like the one I reviewed in March, matured in second-fill bourbon hogsheads. I also noted at the end of that review that I had samples from three more casks in that sequence. This week I’ll be posting reviews of that trio.

First up is cask 3.337 (my previous review was of cask 3.331). With unusual restraint, the Society’s tasting panel gave it the relatively sober name of “Pure Timelessness”. Let’s see if it lives up to the expectations set by 3.331. Continue reading

Bowmore 17, 2004 (SMWS 3.331)


The first whisky I ever reviewed on the blog was a Bowmore (the lowly Legend of yesteryear), and since then I’ve marked every anniversary of the blog with a Bowmore review. All except for the 10th anniversary this past Friday when I instead posted a look back at the decade on the blog. And so, a few days late, here is the requisite anniversary Bowmore review. This is a Bowmore 17, 2004, bottled by the Scotch Malt Whisky Society, and is one of several they’ve released that were distilled on the same day in 2004 and matured in second-fill hogsheads. Indeed, the whole sequence of releases from 3.330 to 3.341 (where 3 refers to the SMWS’ distillery code for Bowmore and the other digits to the release number) are casks that were filled with spirit distilled on February 16, 2004; and almost all of those casks were second-fill hogsheads. Confusingly, this release, 3.331 was put out under two different silly names by the SMWS. Whiskybase shows one with the name “Taken out to sea” and one with the name “Ice cream dusted with chimney soot”. The former was the allocation for the US market and I guess they may have given that a different name—everything else is the same, down to the tasting notes on the label. Fascinating, no? Continue reading

Bowmore 21, 1998 (Old Particular)


Today is the ninth anniversary of my blog’s launch. I had no particular thoughts then—that I can remember at any rate—of how long I’d keep it going but nine years seems quite long. When Sku signed off from his blog after it turned 10 I’d thought I might one-up him and end mine when it turned nine. But don’t get your hopes up: I’m not going to. I don’t know how many more years I’ll keep at it but for now I’m still enjoying blogging—especially with the dual food and whisky focus, and the occasional foray into other things. I know that I’ve lost many of my original whisky readers with the diluted focus on whisky after the first couple of years. I do very much appreciate those of you who’ve stuck with the blog no matter when you happened on it, whether whisky or food is your prime interest. I’ve never been a volume reviewer of whisky—in the first year or so I posted a whisky review every day but I couldn’t keep that up very long. It’s been three reviews a week for a long time now and it’ll stay that way. My practice of only reviewing what I choose to drink and not accepting commercial samples will also continue. And my reviews of restaurant meals—in the Twin Cities metro and beyond—will also continue to be independent and will doubtless continue to win me more friends online as my recent review of Owamni did on Facebook; I’m glad to have at least a few blog readers who find those reviews of value (whether you agree or disagree). To those who cook from the recipes I post I feel perhaps the greatest gratitude—for in a sense letting me into your kitchen and making some of what we eat part of your own and your family’s repertoires.

But enough cloying sentiment! It’s been a tradition for every blog anniversary to be marked with a Bowmore review—as my first review happened to be of a lowly Bowmore—and so it will be this year as well. Continue reading

Bowmore 15, Feis Ile 2019


After a week of Talisker let’s keep the focus on peat but shift south to another island: Islay.

Up first is a Bowmore 15, released for Feis Ile 2019 and put together from spirit matured in first-fill bourbon casks. In this it differs from the other Bowmores I’ve reviewed this year, which include one from refill sherry casks, a port finish, one from a mix of oloroso and PX casks, and another single refill sherry cask. Well, bourbon cask Bowmore is a particular favourite of mine and so I hope this is a good instance of that style. Let’s see.

Bowmore 15, Feis Ile 2019 (51.7%; first-fill bourbon casks; from a bottle split)

Nose: Takes a few beats to open up and then there’s the sweet Bowmore florals along with some passionfruit, some vanilla; mineral peat runs through it all. Brinier with each sniff. Not too much change after that. A few drops of water pull out some cream and turn the fruit more acidic. Continue reading

Bowmore, Bw1 (Speciality Drinks)


August ended with a peaty whisky (this Ledaig) and September began with another peaty whisky (this Laphroaig). Let’s stay on Islay this week and visit a few other distilleries, so to speak.

First up is this Bowmore from the Whisky Exchange’s Elements of Islay series. Indeed, it’s the very first Bowmore in that series. I’m not sure what number it’s up to now but I’ve previously reviewed the Bw5. As per Whiskybase, this was put together from refill sherry casks from 1994, but as neither piece of information is noted on either the bottle’s label or The Whisky Exchange’s original product listing it’s hard to verify them. I can tell you for sure that it was bottled in 2012, which is when I purchased a bottle for roughly $75 at the then quite brutal, pre-Brexit exchange rate. Since the Elements of Islay bottles are 500 ml that works out to about $112 for a 750 ml equivalent of likely 17-18 yo Bowmore from sherry casks. At the current exchange rate it would have been quite a bit lower. By comparison, the Bw8, said to be 16 years old, is currently available from the Whisky Exchange for £117 ex. vat for a 500 ml. That would be £175 for a 750 ml equivalent or roughly $242 at the current exchange rate. I’m no mathematician but it would appear the price has more than doubled in 9 years. This is why I no longer buy very much whisky. Anyway, let’s see what this is like. Continue reading

Bowmore 15, 2004 (SMWS for Feis Ile 2020)


The blog turns 8 today. What did you get it? Nothing? Typical. As long time readers—down to the low single digits at this point—know, my first-ever review was of a Bowmore—the one-time entry-level Bowmore Legend—and so I’ve marked every anniversary since with a review of a Bowmore: The OB 12 in 2014, the OB 18 in 2015 and so forth—the only other official release since 2015 was the 30 yo Sea Dragon in 2019; other than that it’s been a run of independent releases. Well, today’s is an independent release as well, bottled by the Scotch Malt Whisky Society for Feis Ile 2020. It was apparently finished in a first-fill barrique or port cask after 14 years in a bourbon hogshead and was given the whimsical name, Loungecore Stave Exoticism. (I’m sure this makes sense to someone but I am fine not having any idea what it’s a reference to.) I’m not sure that I’ve ever had any kind of port-bothered Bowmore before. Well, what better time than at the start of the blog’s ninth year? Continue reading

Bowmore 18, Deep & Complex


A Bowmore to close the month. This is a Bowmore 18 but it is not the 18 yo that is part of the core range. No, this is a member of Bowmore’s travel retail collection or at least it originally was. I think all of these whiskies may now be available from regular stores as well in the UK and EU. The 18 yo, at any rate, is certainly listed at a few places in the UK and I got my bottle from a store in the EU. I’ve previously reviewed the two others from that collection that had similar epithets attached to their name: the Bowmore 10, Dark & Intense and the Bowmore 15, Golden & Elegant. I liked the 15 yo quite a bit and the 10 yo rather less (too much sulphur, even for me). Like that 10 yo—but not the 15 yo—this 18 yo is also from sherry casks, being a mix of spirit matured in oloroso and PX casks. What the exact mix is, I don’t know. It’s been a long time now since I last had the standard 18 yo but I rather liked it when I did. If this is as good as that I will be happy enough. Let’s see. Continue reading

Bowmore 25, 1994 (Adelphi)


I’m still on Islay. On Friday I had a review of a 23 yo indie Bunnahabhain; today I have a review of an indie Bowmore that is a couple of years older still. I’ve not had too many Bowmores in this age range and have only reviewed one older than this one (the Sea Dragon). I have had a number of Bowmores from the period in which this was distilled and have liked almost all of them very much indeed. As you may know/recall, 1980s Bowmore does not have a very good reputation—for among other things, a soapy character—and a lot of whisky geeks remained suspicious of the distillery’s output into the early/mid 1990s as well. My own experience—far more limited than some others’—suggests that the problems had begun to sort themselves out by 1989 or so and that by the early 1990s the distillery was once again putting out elegant whisky that displayed fruit alongside its trademark florals. Of course, those floral notes are also not to everyone’s taste but that’s not to say they’re a flaw. Anyway, I’m very interested to see what this one is like, both on account of its age and because it’s from a refill sherry cask. I think all the others I’ve reviewed from this era have been either ex-bourbon or more heavily sherried. Let’s get to it. Continue reading

Bowmore 17, 2002 (Blackadder)


Having arrived on Islay with Friday’s Caol Ila, I might as well stay here awhile. And I might as well follow the path we took when we arrived on Islay in 2017. Then too we got off the ferry not too far from Caol Ila and drove past Bowmore to our B&B. And so let’s do a Bowmore review next. This was bottled last year by Blackadder from a single hogshead.

Bowmore 17, 2002 (53.4%; Blackadder; hogshead 20199; from a bottle split)

Nose: Mineral smoke mixed with lemon and salt crystal. Clean and sharp. On the second sniff the trademark fruit and florals begin to emerge and the citrus and smoke move towards ashy lemon custard. The smoke gets meatier as it sits (ham) and the citrus gets muskier (makrut lime peel). A few drops of water and sweeter fruit begins to emerge from under the citrus (charred pineapple, peach). Continue reading

Bowmore 11, Feis Ile 2017


My love of Bowmore collides here with my poor track record with whisky that has been in close proximity to wine casks. Yes, this 11 yo Bowmore released at Feis Ile in 2017 was matured in a combination of sherry and wine casks. I was not at Feis Ile in 2017—though I did visit Bowmore a few weeks later. I fear I will never be at Feis Ile, not even after the pandemic ends. I know how important whisky festivals are to many enthusiasts, and I know how important a festival like Feis Ile is to not just the distilleries involved but also to the local economy. But no description I’ve read of the crowds at Feis Ile and the long lines to purchase festival exclusives for purposes of auction flipping has ever made me wish I could have been there. And no, I’m not being hypocritical about the auction part. I purchased this bottle not from an auction but from a store in Tarbert shortly after our week on Islay ended in 2017—and I paid less than was being asked at auction at the time. Three years later, I’m finally opening it. Continue reading

Bowmore 11, 2001 (Maltbarn)


Hello, the blog is seven years old today. As per Sku, I have three more years before I have to shut it down. Though, truth be told, I’m having some trouble right now mustering enough enthusiasm to keep it going through the isolation/quarantine—and judging by readership numbers very few of you are currently enthusiastic enough to show up to read this shortly after it posts. But an anniversary is an anniversary.

My very first review was of a Bowmore—the lowly Bowmore Legend of years past—and since then I’ve marked every anniversary with a Bowmore review. What can i say? I’m notoriously sentimental. I am feeling particularly sentimental today as this is the fourth of five reviews of bottles I opened during my 50th birthday week that mark significant years of my life (see here, here and here). This Bowmore was distilled in 2001, the year I met my partner. We’re currently 19 years in but this is only an 11 yo. Continue reading

Bowmore 14, 1996 (A.D. Rattray for BevMo)


Last month I reviewed a Bowmore 14, 1996 bottled by A.D. Rattray for BevMo. This is not that Bowmore 14, 1996. It is another one bottled at the same time but which for some reason does not show up on Whiskybase or have much of any other kind of trail online. I purchased a bottle in the Hollywood BevMo not too long after it was released and finished it not too long thereafter (before starting the blog). As per my spreadsheet I liked it a lot. Reviewing the other one reminded me of this one and the likelihood that I had saved a 6 oz reference sample of it—as used to be my practice back then with all bottles I owned.Sure enough, when I looked there it was. And here now is a formal review.

Bowmore 14, 1996 (59.1%; A.D. Rattray for BevMo; bourbon cask 960029; from a reference sample saved from my own bottle)  Continue reading

Bowmore 21, 1996 (Old Malt Cask for K&L)


Let’s continue with the review of the recent K&L exclusive casks. And no, they’re not paying me for all this free, extended coverage of their whiskies. For that matter, they don’t even appear to be enjoying it. Ah well, can’t please everyone.

Speaking of not pleasing everyone, Bowmore is also a distillery that has not always pleased everyone. This is mostly due to folly on the part of the fraction of everyone who have not been pleased. Bourbon cask Bowmore from the early 1990s on is usually a very good proposition. So much so that I’ve even really liked a K&L exclusive cask in that vein. Last year they had an OMC 22 year old that I purchased on Sku’s recommendation while in Los Angeles and loved to the tune of 91 points. I won’t need this to be that good to make me happy but I will also not object if it is. Let’s see. Continue reading