Last week I reviewed a 30 yo single malt (the 2017 release of the Talisker 30). Here now is one slightly younger. This Littlemill was distilled in 1989 and bottled in 2014 by Whiskybase for their Archives label on behalf of a Dutch whisky enthusiast group named the CasQueteers. It was one of several older Littlemills from the 1988-92 era that were bottled in the early-mid 2010s, many of the others also by Whiskybase (one of whose founders, Menno Bachess is a well-known Littlemill collector). I’ve reviewed a few of these Littlemills before, including some others distilled in 1989. Such were this 22 yo also bottled by Whiskybase, this 22 yo bottled by Glen Fahrn, and this 24 yo bottled by the Whisky Agency. And I’ve reviewed a bunch of others from 1990 too, as well as a few from 1988. What all of them have in common are the qualities that made Littlemill celebrated not when the distillery was on the go but when these accidentally aged single casks were released long after it had been demolished and the ground it had stood on plowed with sand (well, it was turned into a block of flats). Those qualities could perhaps be summed up by my description of this 24 yo on Instagram a couple of days ago: a cocktail of tropical fruit and diesel. I’ve had this bottle open for a few days now; it’s time to expand on that note. Continue reading
Category Archives: Whisky by Bottler
Laphroaig 17, 1995 (The Whisky Agency)
I haven’t reviewed a Laphroaig in a while (this 21 yo bourbon cask, back in February). I was hoping to set that right this month with a review of the 2025 Cairdeas, but I haven’t yet come across it in Minnesota. That’s not to say it’s not here; I’ve not looked very hard: just on a few stores’ websites. If any of my local readers have a line on where it’s available, please let me know. In the meantime, here’s a review of another bourbon cask Laphroaig. Like February’s 21 yo, this is also an indie release from a while ago—from The Whisky Agency—but it’s a bit younger at 17 years of age. It’s also from a slightly smaller cask: a barrel to the 21 yo’s refill hogshead. I do prefer hogsheads and refill hogsheads in particular to the smaller barrels, as they have less oak contact—and in the case of the refill casks, that contact is with less active oak. But I’ve had some very nice bourbon barrel Laphroaig before (this 19 yo, for example) and so have no reason to think that this one will be anything but good. Let’s see if my positivity will be rewarded. Continue reading
Glenburgie 24, 1992 (Cadenhead)
Here to close out the month in whisky reviews is my review of an older Glenburgie. This 24 yo was released by Cadenhead in 2016 and is a vatting of two bourbon hogsheads. I thought it might be the oldest Glenburgie I’ve yet reviewed but I see I previously reviewed a 29 yo from Signatory in 2018. I rather liked that one, and I also quite liked this 23 yo from Chester Whisky. Those were both bourbon cask whiskies as well and so I have high hopes for this one. Let’s see if they’re borne out.
Glenburgie 24, 1992 (51.6%; Cadenhead; two bourbon hogsheads; from my own bottle)
Nose: A lovely mix of oak and fruit. The oak is toasted and the fruit a melange of citrus (lemon peel), pineapple, tart-sweet apple, gooseberry and kiwi. Just a bit of freshly cut grass as well. Sweeter as it sits and a bit of cream emerges. With time the oak recedes; the lemon expands and picks up some honey. Water resets it and brings some of the oak back. Continue reading
Littlemill 22, 1989 (Glen Fahrn)
To kick off June’s whisky reviews, here is an older Littlemill. This is another of the many casks of 20+yo Littlemill that were bottled by various indie outfits in the early 2010s, well after the distillery had closed, been demolished and the ground it stood on plowed with sand. Well, the latter only happened in a figurative sense. The distillery closed finally in 1994 and was dismantled in 1997. What was left of it burned down in 2004 and now a housing development stands on the site. As I never get tired of noting, Littlemill had a very negative reputation among whisky aficionados when it was open. The official releases were not very inspiring. But a number of casks that remained in storage were aged into an excellence that the official releases never reached and many of them were released 15 odd years ago. As the whisky market was not insanely overheated at the time, bottles from these casks were available at quite reasonable prices from various indie bottlers (my spreadsheet tells me I paid just about $114 for this one) and I socked a few away. This cask was released by a German outfit named Glen Fahrn. The latest release Whiskybase logs from them was in 2017—I’m not sure if they’re still a going concern. Anyway, I’m glad to have finally opened this bottle a few nights ago. Here now are my notes. Continue reading
Ben Nevis 22, 1991 (Signatory)
May was going to be a month of single malt Scotch reviews but it turned more specifically into a month of reviews of sherry cask single malt Scotch whiskies. Things kicked off with an Ardmore 1977-2003 bottled by Scott’s Selection; next up was the 2011 release of the Glendronach 21, Parliament; last week I reviewed the 2018 release of the Springbank 15. And here now is a review of a Ben Nevis 22, 1991 bottled by Signatory. Whiskybase lists seven different casks of Ben Nevis 22, 1991 bottled by Signatory, but only two were at cask strength. This is one of the two. I’ve actually reviewed it before, back in 2020. That review was of a sample that had come to me from Michael Kravitz of Diving for Pearls (whose reviews I hope you are all still reading). I have to admit I had forgotten that I had already reviewed this but I’m always happy to re-review whiskies, especially when the first set of notes had come from a sample. Well, I really liked it back in 2020 from the 2 oz sample bottle and—spoiler alert—I can tell you that I really like it now that I have my own bottle open. These notes are being taken from the fourth pour from the bottle. Let’s get right to it. Continue reading
Ardmore 1977-2003 (Scott’s Selection)
After a month that featured no whisky reviews—instead, I reviewed a rum, an Armagnac, a Calvados, and a mezcal—let’s do a month of nothing but whisky reviews. Don’t get too excited now—it’s still just going to be one whisky review a week.
First up, is an Ardmore bottled by Scott’s Selection in 2003. It was distilled in 1977 and so would have been either 25 or 26 years old. Scott’s Selection was always reticent with detail on the label. Though in this case they somewhat unusually specify that the cask type was “sherry wood”. They don’t say it’s a single cask, mind you. In fact, I can’t remember if Scott’s Selection ever released any single casks from this era. Or at least any that they marked as such. There was another 1977-2003 “sherry wood” Ardmore, by the way, that was released in Europe at a different strength; this is the one that was released in the US. 15 odd years ago, you could still find bottles of this—and several other Scott’s Selection releases of whiskies distilled in the 1960s and 1970s—hanging around in whisky stores for prices that now seem like they must have been out of a fantasy. Those days are long gone. But at least I have a bottle of this left and now it’s open. Continue reading
Laphroaig 21, 1990 (Whisky Import Nederland)
For my last whisky review of the month I have an older Laphroaig. This is a 21 yo distilled in 1990 and bottled in 2012 from a single refill hogshead by Whisky Import Nederland. I don’t think I’ve ever had an older bourbon cask Laphroaig that I’ve not liked a lot and this one is no exception. I opened it a few days ago and have been enjoying it greatly. I purchased this bottle a long time ago and had it sitting around ever since for no good reason. Now that it’s open, I don’t expect it will make it to the end of March. Here are my notes.
Laphroaig 21, 1990 (52.6%; Whisky Import Nederland; refill hogshead 5936; from my own bottle)
Nose: Bright, carbolic peat (Dettol) with a big dose of lemon. On the second sniff there’s some cereals in there too. A little sweeter here too with time with just a bit of vanilla emerging. With more time there’s salt here as well. A few drops of water emphasize the sweetness but everything else is still here. Continue reading
Caol Ila 30, 1983 (Wilson & Morgan)
I reviewed a 12 yo sherried Caol Ila last month. Here now is a much older one. While the 12 yo—bottled for Feis Ile in 2017—had been double-matured in sherry casks (in casks that had previously been used to make the Talisker Distiller’s Edition), this one came out of a single sherry butt. It was distilled in 1983 and bottled in 2013 by the Italian indie, Wilson & Morgan (yes, it’s not a very Italian name). I quite liked the only other Caol Ila I’ve had from Wilson & Morgan, but that was much younger and from a second-fill bourbon cask (this 16 yo). Indeed, I’ve generally liked almost all the Wilson & Morgan releases I’ve tried (not very many). And I can tell you—spoiler alert—that I quite like this one too. I opened this bottle, which I’ve had sitting on a shelf for a long time now, a few days ago and have been dipping into it ever since. These notes are being taken from the fourth pour from the bottle. The bottle was more than a bit hot when opened and I am hopeful that it may have mellowed a bit. Let’s see. Continue reading
Caperdonich 36, 1972 (Lonach)
Back in the early days of the blog—back when I had more energy and was known for being a thorn in the side of not food writers but the whisky industry and its many amateur apologists and spokespersons—one of the pet mythologies of the whisky enthusiast community that I often took issue with was the belief in magic vintages at particular distilleries. Indeed, one of my earliest reviews featured Caperdonich, which is one of the distilleries around which a lot of the magic vintage talk used to center (do people still go on about this kind of thing?). 1972 was the year about which people were most apt to wax rhapsodic. I never tired of pointing out—as I did in that first Caperdonich review—that what was almost certainly happening was that for entirely random reasons more casks of 1972 Caperdonich had survived to be bottled in the 2000s than of other years in the 1970s. I guess I just did it again. Anyway, I have for you today another Caperdonich 1972. This one was also bottled by Duncan Taylor—who bottled so many of those fruity Caperdonichs that made the dead distillery’s reputation—but not for one of their premier lines. The Lonach releases typically featured low bottling strengths and were not single casks. Quite likely these were vattings that had been used to rescue casks that had fallen below the minimum required strength of 40%. Many of these whiskies were very good anyway. Let’s see what this one is like. Continue reading
Ben Nevis 21, 1997 (Maltbarn)
Here is my last whisky/booze review of the month and also of the year. (Yes, there are five Mondays this December but I’m sticking with my regimen of only opening four bottles each month). I’ve not chosen anything particularly special to close out the year but I’m looking forward to this one anyway as well-aged Ben Nevis from a bourbon cask is usually a good bet. This one was distilled in 1997 and bottled in 2018 by Maltbarn, who’d then been on the indie bottling scene for almost a decade and had built a strong reputation over that time. They’re still around but, as I’ve not kept up with the whisky world in the last few years, I’m not sure if they’re still releasing whiskies at the clip they had been at the end of the previous decade. For that matter I’m not sure how many of the other stalwart European indie bottlers who came to prominence in that decade and the one previous are still as active as they used to be. I’m no longer in the whisky accumulating business and no longer a good source of information—if I ever was one—on what’s being released and by who. But I am glad to have a number of good bottles on my shelves from my whisky accumulating days to drink now. Let’s see if this is one of them. Continue reading
Bunnahabhain 33, 1980 (Whisky Doris)
A day later than usual, here is the month’s second booze review. Following last week’s Strathisla 30 it is both another single malt review and another review of an older whisky. This time it’s a Bunnahabhain bottled by Whisky Doris, a 33 year old distilled in 1980 and bottled in 2013. I’ve previously reviewed a 31 yo Bunnahabhain distilled in 1980 (that one was also bottled by Whisky Doris) and a 34 yo Bunnahabhain distilled in 1980 (that one was bottled by Whisky Fair). I liked both of those but neither got me very excited. Will this one break that streak? Hopefully, it will in a positive direction. Let’s see how it goes.
Bunnahabhain 33, 1980 (45.6%; Whisky Doris; sherry butt #92; from my own bottle)
Nose: Honey, brown butter, wood glue, dried leaves, some oak extract. On the second sniff it’s quite reminiscent of some tonics I did not enjoy being forced to drink as a child—not objectionable in this case though! As it sits the organic notes recede and some toffee emerges. A few drops of water pull out more of the oak extract. Continue reading
Strathisla 30 (Gordon & MacPhail)
Here to kick off the month in whisky reviews is a rather old and rather good Strathisla. This 30 year old was one of those licensed bottlings by Gordon & MacPhail but I can’t get a fix on year of release. Whiskybase does not have a listing for this 750 ml bottle at 43% abv. We can cautiously assume it was released at the same time as the 700 ml bottle at 40% but there’s no release date on the listing for that bottle either. My spreadsheet tells me I acquired it in 2013 from Binny’s in Chicago but I am pretty sure it was released in the previous decade. If I’m right about that, this is distillate from the 1970s, possibly even the early-mid 1970s. That’s generally a good thing when it comes single malty whisky from Scotland and especially when it’s older Speyside whiskies bottled by Gordon & MacPhail. Anyway, if you know more about the release year etc. please do write in below. In the meantime, here are my notes taken from the fourth pour from my bottle (which I am very sorry to be separated from here in Delhi). Continue reading
Aberlour 20, 1990 (Single Malts of Scotland)
Last week I reviewed a 19 yo Lagavulin released in 2015. This week I have for you a review of a 20 yo Aberlour released in 2011. This was bottled by Single Malts of Scotland, which was then just one of the Whisky Exchange’s labels. Some years later they spun their independent bottling concern off as a separate concern, Elixir Distillers. But back in December 2011 when I purchased this, all of that was some distance in the future. And you’ll know 2011 was a lot more than 13 years ago when I tell you that this 20 yo single cask whisky at cask strength from a well-known distillery cost all of $77. Well, I’ve finally got around to opening the bottle. As always, I have no idea why I waited so long, especially as I rather enjoy bourbon cask Aberlour—see here, here and here for a few reviews. Most official releases from the distillery involve sherry maturation; in fact, I can’t remember trying an official bourbon cask release that was not a hand-filled distillery exclusive. Alas, when I was at the distillery in 2018—when I did one of their tours with a friend—they did not have any casks available for hand-filling, leave alone any bourbon casks. Anyway, let’s get to this one now. Continue reading
Littlemill 24, 1990 Revisited (Alambic Classique)
I don’t have a new whisky review for you this week. Or more accurately, I do not have a review for you this week of a whisky I have not reviewed before. This is my second review of this Littlemill 24, 1990 from Alambic Classique. I posted my first review of it almost exactly two months ago. That review was based on my fourth pour from a recently opened bottle. The first couple of pours had been somewhat spirity but it had calmed down by the fourth pour with some air in the bottle and I liked it very much at the time (to the tune of 88 points). I enjoyed the next few pours as well but then it seemed to come apart in the bottle, with a bit too much acid and powdered ginger. Disappointed, I set the bottle aside for a while before giving it another go last week. And, hey presto, it had improved dramatically, and has since stayed that way as the bottle now approaches the end. And so, I figured I would do something I’ve long talked about doing more often but not actually done very much of: a re-review of the same bottle from a different time in its life. In this case the reviews are just two months apart but I’m interested to see what I make of it now just the same. I will be looking at the first review while taking my notes tonight. Here goes. Continue reading
Caol Ila 22, 1990 (Archives)
Okay, after a week off, let’s get back to the booze reviews. My most recently bottle is this Caol Ila 22, 1990 bottled by the Whiskybase shop to mark the first anniversary of their Archives label. (There were a few other anniversary releases as well but I can’t recall off the top of my head what they all were.) This was from a single bourbon hogshead and Whiskybase only got 130 bottles from it—I don’t know where the rest went. Well, the Whiskybase database lists four other Caol Ila 22, 1990s, three of which were released in 2012 along with this one. None are at the strength of this release but two were diluted to 48% and 46% respectively. So it’s conceivable that one of those might have been the destination of the rest of this hogshead. As it happens, I reviewed one of those two just over a year ago (this Mackillop’s Choice release at 46%) but it has a different cask number. So too does the Ian Macleod Dun Bheagan release at 48%. So there are either more Caol Ila 22, 1990s out there than are listed on Whiskybase or the rest may have gone into a vatting or a blend or aged further for a later release. If you know more about this, please write in below. Anyway, I opened the bottle last week and here now are my notes from the fourth pour. Continue reading
Littlemill 24, 1990 (Alambic Classique)
Alright, after two Armagnacs in a row (here and here), let’s get back to single malt Scotch whisky. And after four reviews of whisky samples let’s get back to the business of opening and finishing bottles I’ve been hanging on to for a very long time. Today I have for you a Littlemill that has been on my shelves for almost a decade. This is a 24 year old bottled by the German outfit, Alambic Classique in 2015 from an oloroso sherry cask. There were 295 bottles released, which is too small a number for a regulation sherry butt and just a bit too high for a hogshead after 24 hours. Maybe a butt split with someone else? Or was some of it held back for a later release? I’m not sure—if you know more, please write in below. Anyway, this was another of the many casks of late 1980s, early 1990s Littlemill that were released in the early-mid 2010s and which were key to the rehabilitation of the reputation of the distillery. The distillery, of course, had long been closed by then; indeed, what was left of the distillery was destroyed by a fire in 2004. So this improvement to its reputation has not been damaged again by official releases the owners might have continued to put out. Anyway, let’s see what this one is like. Continue reading
Benriach 26, 1987 (Exclusive Casks)
Last week’s booze review was of a sample sent to me a long time ago by Michael K. of Diving with Pearls. That was of a bourbon released in the 1980s. Here now is a review of another sample sent to me a long time ago by Michael. This one is a single malt whisky distilled in the 1980s. This is a 26 yo Benriach, distilled in 1987 and bottled in 2014 or so by Exclusive Malts/The Creative Whisky Co.. I apologize if I am killing them off prematurely but I don’t think they’re still a going concern. Back in the day they were a middle of the road indie bottler who sought to project a more premium feel via branding and design. I don’t think they ever quite pulled that off very successfully but they did bottle some decent whiskies. And the proprietor, David Stirk, was an energetic participant in whisky forums and so forth. I was reminded of this when I went to Michael’s own review of this whisky in search of cask info. I realized then both that there is no specific cask info for this release and also that I had participated in a conversation in the comments on that review alongside one David Stirk and some likely sock puppets. I’ll leave it to you to go check those shenanigans out for yourself if you’re so interested. For now let’s get to this whisky. Continue reading