Bowmore 16, 1996 (Faultline)

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

Caol Ila 11, 2000 (G&M)

Caol Ila 2000, G&MFor whatever reason Diageo does not put out very many sherry matured Caol Ilas. This is generally a shame as sherry matured Caol Ilas can be very good indeed. See, for example, this 10 yo from 1996 put out by Gordon & Macphail. G&M, not surprisingly, are the source for a good many sherried Caol Ilas. As they are one of the few indie bottlers with their own filling contracts (at least they used to be) this may possibly be because they fill their own sherry casks (as opposed to buying matured butts from Diageo)–this is all speculation, so please confirm or deny below if you know more. The young sherried Caol Ila I am reviewing today is also from Gordon & Macphail and I hope it will be not too far away from the one linked above in quality.

Caol Ila 11, 2000 (61.4%; Gordon & Macphail; first fill sherry butts 309558 + 59; from a purchased sample) Continue reading

Green Spot

Green SpotGreen Spot, a pure/single pot still whiskey from the Midleton distillery (they of Jameson fame) has been a bit of a cult whiskey in the US for some time, largely on account of its unavailability. It showed up on these shores again a month or two ago and was greeted with excitement and hype. One retailer sent out a sales email proclaiming it “The Pappy Van Winkle of Ireland” (I’ll let you guess who that was). Once upon a time this kind of thing would have made me want to score a bottle right away but I am more cautious now. In this particular case, as you will see, I am very glad I waited till I’d had a chance to taste a sample.

Green Spot apparently comprises 25% sherry cask matured spirit, and the spirit itself is triple-distilled in a pot still from a combination of malted and unmalted barley (which is what makes it different from Scottish malt whisky, which is also distilled in a pot still and can also be triple-distilled). Continue reading

The Black Grouse

The Black Grouse
The Black Grouse is the smoky one in the Famous Grouse stable of blends. The Famous Grouse itself is a decent blend and very popular, and it has been joined in recent years by the Naked Grouse (sherried), the Snow Grouse (all grain and to be served chilled; and best this way as otherwise you might be able to taste it) and the Black Grouse which sees the core Grouse blended with Islay malts. Which Islay malts, I’m not sure. I’ve not really tasted my way around the smoky blend corner of the market and so I’m intrigued to see how this compares to entry-level smoky malts.

The Black Grouse (40%; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Sour, farmy peat with strong mossy, vegetal undertones. Some woody/spicy notes and after a while there’s a little dark honey or maybe it’s caramel. Much later there’s a bit of dried orange peel as well.

Palate: Ashier smoke here but not much else. Very watery mouthfeel. With time there’s a slight stony/minerally sweetness but there’s really not a whole lot happening here. Continue reading

Tobermory 10 (46.3%)

Tobermory 10

I’ve not had very much Tobermory–just a few iterations of the 10 yo over the years. This is both because there isn’t a very large amount of Tobermory around in the US and because their malt does not, in general, have the best reputation and so I haven’t been moved to go out of my way to try it. In fact, Michael Kravitz, who I am once again simultaneously reviewing this one with, may be the only person I know who is generally a fan. (He’s reviewed two other Tobermorys leading up to this review and you should check those reviews out too.) The reputation of their peated malt, sold as Ledaig, has been on the upswing of late so it may well be that Tobermory is also due for rehabilitation. I have to admit I didn’t care overmuch for the Tobermory 10 when I last tried it back in February–let’s see what I make of it now.

Edit: Here is the link to Michael’s review. He liked it quite a lot more than I did (though our samples did not come from the same bottle). Continue reading

Knockando 12, 1999

Knockando 12I don’t know much about or have much experience with Knockando. It is one of Diageo’s less glamorous distilleries and the only thing that makes them stand out is that they put a vintage and an age statement on their bottles. The only one I’ve tried to date is the 25 yo that was part of the special annual release a couple of years ago. I thought that was pretty good but it didn’t particularly wow me (perhaps because I tasted it alongside some powerhouse sherried malts). Will this 12 yo hold any surprises? Let’s see.

Knockando 12 (43%; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Mild sherry notes–some citrus, some milk chocolate but also some dusty and grassy notes. Nothing terribly exciting. With more time darker notes emerge–raisins mostly. Water lightens the nose and re-emphasizes the citrus.

Palate: As on the nose–the citrus and grassiness are most to the fore. Some mild raisiny notes too. Very thin mouthfeel. On the second sip there’s a low-level but pretty pervasive metallic bitterness to go with the citrus. I’m picking up a very faint soapiness as well. The bitterness expands as it goes. Let’s see if water improves this. Well, it cuts down the bitterness and lets the citrus come back to the fore but the already watery texture is done no favours.

Finish: Medium. Nothing interesting though. Some of the citrus lingers but mostly it’s grassy malt and that bitterness. As on the palate with water.

Comments: Mostly inoffensive and drinkable but there’s nothing even barely distinctive about this. I think I understand why Knockdhu were worried about being mistaken for Knockando.

Rating: 78 points.

Thanks to Florin for the sample!

Deanston 12

Deanston 12I know nothing about Deanston. I even had to look up which region it’s in (the Highlands). It’s owned by the same group that owns Bunnahabhain and Tobermory/Ledaig and is one of a few distilleries that has never been listed as anyone’s favourite (the most Serge has ever given a Deanston is 82 points). In fact, I’m not sure it has an identity or a style as such that I’ve ever read or heard anyone talking about. But somehow it chugs on; if it were an action film star it would be Gerard Butler. Anyway, now that I’ve spent all this time insulting the distillery maybe it’s time I actually taste this 12 yo (which along with the rest of the group’s whiskies got upgraded to 46.3% abv and no chill filtering a few years ago).

Deanston 12 (46.3%; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Nothing at all at first and then a sour, yeasty note. After a while, nothing at all and a sour yeasty note. This must be what people who interact with Gerard Butler experience. After a bit the yeasty thing recedes and there’s now some dry, acidic white winey notes and wait, is that acetone? This may be the first time that I’ve marked the presence of acetone as a positive development (not because I like it here, but because something happened). After a lot of time some of that lime and maltiness from the palate make themselves known on the nose. No real change with a drop or two of water. Continue reading

Corsair Triple Smoke (Batch 85)

Corsair Triple SmokeI approach this whiskey with some trepidation as my limited experience so far with smoky American whiskey has not been a positive one. Nor is it a good sign that the distillery puts the word “artisan” in its name: Corsair Artisan Distillery. In the food and drink world in the US the intersection between those who bill themselves as artisans or artisanal and those who talk a better game than they play is large enough to accommodate Jim Murray’s opinion of himself. It’s true that earlier this year this was named the “Artisan Whiskey of the Year” for 2012 by Whisky Advocate, but given that the competition likely included the Balcones Brimstone that may be akin to being named “Most Reasonable Person” at a Tea Party convention.

Anyway, let see what this is actually like. It’s called “Triple Smoke” because it comprises whisky from malt smoked with peat, malt smoked with beech wood, and malt smoked with cherry wood.

Corsair Triple Smoke (40%; Batch 85; from a sample received in a swap)

Nose: Yow. Sour wood and leather armchair on which someone’s spilled Cherry Coke. Then a sweet gingeriness arrives (powdered ginger) along with a lot of something that smells like wood floors that have been cleaned with a solution designed for getting rid of pet stains. I’m not making it sound appealing but it’s actually not bad. The whole smells very much like one of those childhood tonics I mention every once in a while. The peat’s not very apparent but smoked wood, yes. There’s a richer sweetness after a while and it all begins to smell very much like an old polished wooden box that once held dried flowers. I like where the nose goes but somehow this has me a little nervous about taking a sip. Later, however, it goes back to just being very powdered gingery-sweet.

Palate: Hmmm. There’s almost nothing on the palate but the wood. It’s not overbearing or nasty wood but that’s all there seems to be. It’s not particularly smoky in any way, let alone three ways, and it’s rather watery and thin. With time the ginger shows up here too and there’s a little more spice and a little more sweetness.

Finish: Medium. The wood gets a little spicier and a little sweeter. Later it gets just a little bit astringent.

Nothing new with water.

Comments: I’m not sure how much batch variation there is or at what stage in the bottle’s life this was poured but while the nose is expressive this starts out rather blank on the palate. Later some woody sweetness develops but it never quite makes it to being interesting. It’s drinkable, I guess, and there’s nothing here I dislike per se but there’s also nothing here that makes me want to drink it again; the Brimstone at least has character. 2012 must have been a terrible year for “Artisan Whiskey”.

Rating: 75 points (pulled up by the nose).

Thanks to Bryan F. for the sample.

Kavalan Single Malt

Kavalan Single Malt

The new’ish Taiwanese distillery Kavalan have been the next new sensation in the whisky geek world for a while now, usurping that role from Amrut, who in turn had taken it from Japanese whisky more generally. Kavalan’s whisky is not yet in the US but is said to be coming any day now. As I’ve noted before, I’m always a little sceptical about the level of excitement about many new distilleries, especially those from non-traditional whisky producing regions of the world. I’m never sure how much of the excitement is driven by the novelty and how much by actual quality. The charitable reading of the former impulse, I suppose, is that some people do genuinely want to support the early efforts of new(er) whisky producing regions and sustain them as they move to maturity.

But the whisky I am reviewing tonight is not one of Kavalan’s ballyhooed expressions (those would be the cask strength Solists). This is the entry-level single malt at 40%. Still, it’s won gold medals at a couple of spirits competitions/awards (yes, yes, I know they’re mostly dubious).

This is the first of three Kavalans I’ll be reviewing in succession. Continue reading

Bowmore 21, 1982 (Prime Malt)

Bowmore 21, 1982
Yes, a bottle from the very beginning of Bowmore’s dark period in the 1980s (see here for my thoughts about all of that and for a review of an underwhelming official bottling from the tail end of the decade). This is from a mysterious outfit called Prime Malt who seem to have only operated in the US. Michael Kravitz has more information about them in the fourth paragraph of his review of this same whisky and also in the comments (he got his sample from the same source: Florin who comments often on both our blogs). This one was billed as “Prime Malt Selection No. 4”; I’m not sure how many selections there were from this bottler/label.

The last 1982 I tasted–(also) from Duncan Taylor–had the notorious soap on the palate and finish but no real offensive perfumed notes. Will this one be any better or worse? Continue reading

Glen Moray: Regular and Variation

Glen Moray

Which of these would you say was matured fully in a white wine cask?


Glen Moray is another distillery about which I know very little. I know that it is in the Speyside, that it doesn’t have much of a reputation and that its whisky is available for not very much money in the US. Until recently, that whisky was a 12 yo at 40%, which retailed in most places (and still does) for less than $30. As of a year or two ago (or at least that’s when I noticed it) it has been joined in the US by a 10 yo at 43% (higher than the 40% of the European release) that has been matured entirely in chardonnay casks, and which also retails in most places for less than $30. I’d resisted the blandishments of the 12 yo for many, many years on account of snobbery: an undistinguished distillery with “Glen” in its name and very low prices, I reasoned, was unlikely to add up to promising whisky. And the 10 yo I resisted when I first saw it on shelves last year because even goddamned Murray McDavid (who have finished whiskies in everything but a septic tank) did not mess with chardonnay casks (as far as I know). A gimmick, I thought.
Continue reading

Bowmore Legend

bowmore_legendFor my first review on this blog I thought I would go with something relatively pedestrian. The Legend is the entry-level, no age stated (NAS) malt from the venerable Islay distillery of Bowmore. It is cheap and ubiquitous. The following review is from a large pour from a bottle I purchased myself, sampled before the bottle reached the halfway mark.

Bowmore Legend (40%; from my own bottle)

Nose: Not much happening; faint, minerally peat, a little bit of Bowmore’s trademark floral notes, and some over-ripe melon. Gets salty with time, with a slight hint of iodine. Continue reading