Category Archives: K&L

Karuizawa 13, 1999 (Cask 869 for K&L)

Posted on by

Karuizawa, K&L
The Karuizawa I reviewed on Tuesday didn’t impress me overmuch; will this one, a single cask bottled for K&L in 2013, be better? This came with one of the striking “Noh” labels usually associated with much older single cask Karuizawas—it doubtless helped justify the cost: about $150 at the time (which would, of course, be a steal now, just two years later, for a 13 yo Karuizawa). Let’s get right to it.

Karuizawa 13, 1999 (57.7%; cask #869 for K&L; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Oh, this is much better to begin. Rich, nutty sherry with hints of chocolate, leather and earth (I was gardening today) with some orange peel and gunpowder behind it. The gunpowder starts getting stronger and then transitions to rubber and then, alas, to the sharper kind of sulphur. But most of it burns off soon enough, leaving behind tobacco and a growing fruitiness (marmalade, apricot). With more time there’s some cola concentrate and some beef stock. Water brings out some toffee and some caramel and cream and knocks the sulphur back even further. Continue reading →

Glenburgie 19, 1995 (Signatory for K&L)

Posted on by

Glenburgie 19, 1995
Here is another of K&L’s exclusives for 2014. This is another cask strength bottle from Signatory wearing the livery of their 46% UCF series. This is from Glenburgie, a workhorse distillery from the Speyside that produces malt for Chivas Bros.’s blends, in particular for Ballantine’s. It’s a distillery that flies under the radar but their malt can be very good indeed. In fact, one of the malts that spurred me to further exploration of releases off the beaten track was a 500 ml bottle of Glenburgie from Chivas Bros.’ Cask Strength Edition series. That was a 15 yo, 1992 that I reviewed not too long after starting the blog and I already know that this one is not quite in that class: I opened it for one of my local group’s tastings a couple of months ago. That’s not to say it’s not good, however; we all liked it a lot. In fact, at the time I liked it more than the Signatory/K&L Glen Ord 17 that was released at the same time—and that one improved by the time I got around to reviewing it. Will the same be true of this one? I hope so.

Continue reading →

Glen Ord 17, 1997 (Signatory for K&L)

Posted on by

glenord17-1997
I’ve noted a number of times that I was less than impressed with what I tasted of K&L’s selections for 2013 (most of which showed up in early 2014 for reasons outside their control). Despite having resolved to “try before buying” as far as possible for their future selections I was predictably unable to resist getting some of their 2014 selections when they showed up early this year. I’ve already reviewed one of these, the Hepburn’s Choice Craigellachie 18, which I quite liked. The other two that I purchased are both cask strength bottles from Signatory (though in the livery of the regular UCF series rather than the decanters—a change I welcome heartily). One is a Glenburgie 19 that I hope to review soon; the other is this Glen Ord 17. Both of these are distilleries whose malts I enjoy more often than not, and both of these are also distilleries whose malts are not often available in the US—which is my way of justifying my lack of self-control. Anyway, let’s see what this is like.

Continue reading →

Bladnoch 11, 2002 (for K&L)

Posted on by

Bladnoch 11, K&L
Whisky geeks with good memories will remember David Driscoll of K&L making some impolitic remarks about Bladnoch a couple of years ago (first on his blog and then in an attempt to defend them on the WWW forum). Among his claims were that Bladnoch’s reputation was poor and that the Armstrongs’ “blending skills” for what they’d put out themselves had not been strong either. This was news to most of us as a) Bladnoch seemed to us like one of the most grounded and solid distilleries in Scotland: putting out quality malt at excellent prices with no marketing nonsense; and b) Bladnoch’s various “sheep” and “cow” label releases had been very well received in the main.

Of course, the subtext, as always with Driscoll, was that it was K&L that was going to release the first good OB Bladnochs. When K&L’s casks did show up my plan was to ignore them—I have a number of other Bladnochs already on my shelf. But when I saw this 11 yo lightly peated in the lineup I couldn’t resist. I really enjoyed this Armstrong release of a 9 yo lightly peated cask and hoped this would be as good. I’m sorry to say it wasn’t. Continue reading →

Craigellachie 18, 1995 (Hepburn’s Choice for K&L)

Posted on by

Craigellachie 18, 1995, K&L
I don’t have very much experience with Craigellachie; in fact, I’m not sure if I’ve had anything other than this G&M bottling for the Party Source. As with Diageo’s Mortlach, Craigellachie produces a heavier, meaty spirit and the G&M cask I tried was as close to Mortlach as I’ve come from any other distillery. I did like that one quite a bit and so have been on the look out for more since: of course, there hasn’t been very much of it around—especially in the US—since, as with so many distilleries, it mostly produces for blends (it is a core component of the Dewars blends). The owners, Bacardi announced last year that they would be launching a new range of single malts from Craigellachie. The new 13, 17 and 23 year olds have been well-received, on the whole, but from what I can tell they’re not deeply sherried brutes. And so when K&L announced this single sherry cask I put aside my misgivings based on their 2013 selections and got a bottle.

Well, I opened it for my local group’s April tasting and it was quite popular. Due to the vagaries of schedules we actually did two small group tastings separated by a couple of weeks, and while I liked it fine the first time, I liked it even more on the second occasion. Let’s see what I think of it now that it’s been open for about a month. Continue reading →

Longmorn 21, 1992 (Faultline)

Posted on by

Longmorn 21, Faultline
This is the whisky that caused me to abandon my better judgement and buy an entire parcel of K&L’s exclusive selections for 2013. I’m a sucker for older Longmorn and when I saw a 21 yo Longmorn from a sherry cask offered for less than $100 I didn’t ask myself if it might possibly be too good to be true and ordered it. And then, because I am weak, I ordered a bunch of other whiskies to go with it. Some turned out to be good (this heavily peated Jura), some were okay (this Imperial), some were boring (this Bunnahabhain) and some were not good (this Bowmore). You’d think I’d have learned my lesson, but no: I bought a few more of their exclusives this Spring (those turned out much better, by the way—more on those next month).

Anyway, as you can probably guess, I did not end up being crazy about this Longmorn, but I am happy to say that it was not a disaster either. Continue reading →

Bunnahabhain 21 (Faultline)

Posted on by

Bunna 21, Faultline
This is one of K&L’s cask selections for 2013, though it arrived in early 2014. They bottled a number of casks for their Faultline label, many of them at very good prices relative to age and so laden with temptation I could not resist. Alas, my random sampling of these bottles—based on what I ordered and tasted via swaps—suggested the prices may have been good for a reason. A few were pretty decent, most were mediocre, and a couple were less than mediocre. In the last category I’d place the Bowmore 16 and this Bunnahabhain (though, as you’ll see, I liked it a bit more than the Bowmore).

I’d purchased it (and some of the others) for the tastings I do for our local group—this allows me to spread the risk of unknown quantities at attractive prices around a bit (which I’m sure the few members of my group who read the blog will be very happy to know). I first opened it for our October tasting and most present were not very enthusiastic though nobody actively disliked it. I tasted it a couple of times after that and it seemed like it might be improving. Accordingly, I poured it again at our most recent tasting. Our scores and comments suggest that while we thought the nose had improved the palate and finish had degraded. This review is an amalgam of notes taken at our tasting and at a more focused session at home before emptying the bottle. Continue reading →

Faultline Bourbon (Smooth Ambler)

Posted on by

Faultline Bourbon
I don’t really know much about the ins and outs of the American whiskey world (“makes perfect sense that you’d do a whole month of American whiskey reviews then,” ed.) and I’m not even sure who or what Smooth Ambler is. Smooth Operator’s more leisurely sibling? Eric Ambler’s porn name? Anyway, I got this sample from Sku on my recent trip to LA and from his typically verbose review I gather  that some entity named Smooth Ambler put together this bourbon for K&L’s Faultline label from two MGP bourbons—one from a low rye mashbill and one from a high rye mashbill; and it was doubtless the greatest bourbon ever in at least one excited email from David Driscoll.

Anyway, this been has an entirely pointless and almost entirely content-free introduction—though hopefully I’ve caused at least one of you to look up Eric Ambler.

Continue reading →

Jura 23, 1989 (Signatory for K&L)

Posted on by

Jura 23, 1989, Signatory

Following the official “Prophecy”, here is an older, independent, heavily peated Jura. This was bottled by Signatory for K&L in California, and is one of the few of K&L’s selections for 2013 that I thought was pretty good.

I didn’t like it so much from the get-go though. I first opened it for one of local group’s tastings and at the time I thought it was fine but nothing more. The group (who tasted it blind) seemed to agree and it didn’t do very well in terms of either ranking or overall score. I let it sit in the bottle for a few more months and then brought it back to another of our tastings (the photograph was taken right before the second tasting, and the notes were taken the night after). Lo and behold, the whisky seemed to have improved dramatically in the bottle and it took top honours for the night (everyone but me again drinking blind). Yet more evidence of how dynamic a whisky can be and how misleading reviews based on single samples (as so many of mine are) can be if they’re presented or taken as comprehensive pronouncements (as I hope mine aren’t) rather than as snapshots of a particular tasting experience and moment in a bottle’s life.

Continue reading →

Bowmore 11, 2002 (Exclusive Malts for K&L)

Posted on by

Bowmore 11, 2002I received a sample of this Bowmore 11 in a swap with Michael K. of Diving for Pearls and after I received it I realized I already had an unopened bottle of it. I finally opened it a few months ago for one of our local group’s tastings and we finished the rest of the bottle at our August tasting—I occasionally repeat bottles that were contentious in some way or the other to see if our responses might change as the whisky does with time and air. I’d planned to review it when the bottle had just been opened but didn’t get around to it because I read Michael’s review and wanted to forget about it before tasting—and then I forgot about the whisky completely. This review is of the last pour from the bottle, but please keep in mind that the evening before this had been at the halfway point—so it’s not a hugely oxidized pour that’s been sitting at the very bottom of the bottle for a long time (and the bottle itself was only open for less than five months).

(I’d also assumed I’d photographed the bottle when I’d originally planned to review it but while posting this review realized I never had: hence the picture of the empty bottle.) Continue reading →

Imperial 17, 1995 (Signatory for K&L)

Posted on by

Imperial 17, 1995, Signatory for K&LThis Imperial was bottled by Signatory for K&L as part of their 2013 release of handpicked casks. I bought a number of these and I’ve had decent to bad experiences with the ones I’ve opened so far. This one, I’m sorry to say, also falls into middling territory. It made me decide to skip K&L’s releases this year—with my luck this may be the year that everything is very good and actually as described by K&L’s notes.

Imperial 17, 1995 (52.7%; Signatory; hogshead 50135; from my own bottle)

Nose: A little neutral at first and a bit cardboardy. There’s some biscuity malt below that and then the fruit begins to show up: apple, a touch of apricot, some lime and something a little more musky. That initial cardboardy note turns into dusty wood. With more time the wood is a little too present. Water knocks back some of the wood and pulls out more of the lime and malt and some creamy vanilla. Continue reading →

Bowmore 16, 1996 (Faultline)

Posted on by

Bowmore 16, 1996, Faultline
This Bowmore 16 was one of K&L’s cask selections for 2013 that was delayed and finally arrived in early 2014. It’s been the subject of some mixed reviews since, with at least one prominent (ex?)blogger recording very less than enthused notes on it while the purveyor reports that many customers like it a lot (see the comments on Tim’s post). Me, I’ve not had any bad mid-1990s Bowmores, especially from sherry casks and so I was not overly bummed to read Tim’s pan. Bowmore can be an idiosyncratic spirit and there are other bottles, official and indie, from the distillery that I seem to like a lot more than many others.

Accordingly, I opened the bottle for our local group’s tasting in June and the response was all over the map. A few in the group had it as their top whisky of the night, a few had it at the bottom, and most had it somewhere in the middle (we drink one ounce each of four whiskies). Personally, I liked the nose and thought it was otherwise pedestrian but not objectionable. The bottle went to the halfway mark that night and I haven’t tried it since. Let’s see what I make of it now. Continue reading →

Island Distillery / Ledaig 7, 2005 (Exclusive Malts for K&L)

Posted on by

Ledaig 7, 2005The run of reviews of smoky whiskies is threatening to become a run of reviews of Ledaig. Well, this one from David Stirk’s Exclusive Malts at least doesn’t say Ledaig on the bottle. It says “Island Distillery” but it has all but explicitly been confirmed that this is a Ledaig. This was an exclusive bottling for my old pals at K&L. Let’s see what it does to my fairly positive streak with Ledaig.

Island Distillery/ Ledaig 7, 2005 (57.2%. Exclusive Malts for K&L; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Ah yes, the familiar farmy/organic peat. There’s a fair bit of vanilla sweetness with it though along with some salt and lemon and a bit of rubber/vinyl. After a few minutes the vanilla sweetness eases into a creamier, butter-pastry kind of thing, and I’m getting some sort of baked fruit as well (apple maybe?). With even more time (10-15 minutes in) the farmy/organic peat is still there but more muted and in better balance with the other notes. Water pushes back the smoke and accentuates the lemon and the sweetness (stony now as it was on the palate). Continue reading →

Cragganmore 23, 1989 (Faultline)

Posted on by

Cragganmore 23, Faultline
This is the second of two reviews of 1989 Cragganmores. Unlike yesterday’s iteration this one is from a refill sherry cask. It was bottled for K&L in California for their Faultline label. This is the second Cragganmore they’ve bottled in that series, and I’ve had a sample of the previous one, a 20 yo, 1991 from a bourbon cask. That one didn’t impress me overmuch. As I paid for a full bottle of this one I’m hoping it puts on a better showing. I have a pretty good streak going with K&L’s selections and despite what I think of their marketing ways I’m not bloody-minded (or rich) enough to want to have paid for middling or poor whisky just so I can complain about them even more.

Cragganmore 23, 1989 (54.6%; single refill sherry cask; from my own bottle)

Nose: Orange peel and cloves. With more time there’s apricot jam and a leafy quality; some salt too. Very nice. With even more time notes of brandied raisins emerge and some toasted oak and roasted malt as well. Water mellows it out and emphasizes the raisins and the wood. Continue reading →

Talisker 5, 2008, “The Speakeasy” (Douglas Laing)

Posted on by

Talisker 5. The Speakeasy
This 5 yo Talisker is rather unusual. Both because it is very young and because it is almost as rare to see a Bengal tiger in the wild as it is to see an indie bottle of Talisker that is allowed to bear the distillery’s name. Dubbed “The Speakeasy” this is from the Laing warehouses and was bottled for K&L. I was unable to resist getting one for myself when they were announced. When I mentioned this on Twitter I was asked what on earth the appeal of this bottle could be and my response was that it was a combination of perverse curiosity and a desire to compare it with the Talisker 57 North, which is probably the youngest official Talisker. Frankly, I have no expectations of this whisky–I am a huge fan of Talisker and given how few opportunities we have to drink their malt the reasonable price on this made it hard for me to pass up.
Continue reading →

Bowmore 11, 2000 (Hunter Hamilton)

Posted on by

hunterhamiltonbowmore112000

This Bowmore was bottled by Hunter Hamilton (one of the 5000 Douglas Laing spin-offs) under the Sovereign label for K&L in California in 2011. I purchased it in 2012, and opened it late last year for a Bowmore tasting with friends, where it was very well received. As I’ve noted before, I have my issues, to put it mildly, with much of K&L’s marketing, but I’ve generally liked their selections a lot and this is no different.

Bowmore 11, 2000 (57.5%; Hunter Hamilton for K&L; from my own bottle)

Nose: Raisins and apricot jam at first. Then a meaty/savoury quality mixed in with something inky–almost gamy. Gets fruitier as it sits with some honeyed citrus poking its way out through the darker notes. Not a whole lot of smoke but it’s there underneath, tying everything together. The fruit and the Bowmore flowers get stronger with time. Really quite nice. With water there’s some cream or maybe it’s shortbread. Continue reading →

Miltonduff 18, 1995 (Signatory for K&L)

Posted on by

Miltonduff 18, 1995 Well, as my first Miltonduff was pretty good I figured I’d open a recently purchased independent bottling and taste a bit right after so as to make a direct comparison to an official bottle. This one is in Signatory’s Cask Strength Collection and is a single cask selected by K&L in California. I’ve generally liked all the K&L selections I’ve had in the last few years so I’m optimistic.

Miltonduff 18, 1995 (56.9%; bourbon barrel #4115; from my own bottle)

Nose: Not quite as expressive as the 14 yo; not quite as much fruit at first nosing. It’s a freshly opened bottle though, so let’s give it some time. Okay, with a few minutes to breathe it does open up a little: there’s more vanilla now and more musky, malty sweetness; fruit too but it’s more tightly coiled. Water should help, I’d think, but let’s take a sip or two first. Ah yes, with water it’s much brighter–more lime now and more vanilla and cream and a little malty/sweaty sweetness. Continue reading →