Category Archives: 85-89 points

Cambus 30, 1989 (Alambic Classique)

Posted on by


My second week of reviews of older single grain whiskies got off to a decent start with the Cameronbridge 27, 1990 bottled by Jack Wieber for their 20th anniversary. Here now is another sherried single grain bottled for another German indie, Alambic Classique. Where the Cameronbridge was a sherry finish, this 30 yo Cambus was entirely matured in a sherry cask (or so I think anyway). The Cameronbridge was let down a bit by sherry separation; in theory at least that shouldn’t happen here. Let’s see if that’s the case.

Cambus 30, 1989 (61.1%; Alambic Classique; sherry cask 19094; from a bottle split)

Nose: Bright orange and polished oak on the first sniff; some brandied raisins on the second. The oak expands a little as it sits and then there are hints of sweeter, muskier fruit (roasted pineapple?) and some cereals. Bitter caramel here too with time. A few drops of water push the oak and caramel back and bring out some apricot and more orange and also some toffee. Continue reading →

Cameronbridge 27, 1990 (Jack Wieber)

Posted on by


I did a week of reviews of old single grain Scotch whiskies in October: a 43 yo North of Scotland, a 43 yo Invergordon, and a 40 yo Caledonian. Of the three, I was only particularly enthused by the Caledonian. Best to quit while ahead, you might say. Accordingly, here is another week of reviews of old single grain Scotch whiskies. Three completely different distilleries this time, all of whose names start with “c” (a good omen perhaps). They’re also all either from sherry casks or sherry finishes (the previous trio were all ex-bourbon). They’re also not quite as old as that 40-something trio. Well, one of them is older than all three of those but the other two are quite a bit younger. We’ll start the week with the youngest, a 27 yo Cameronbridge that was distilled in 1990 and received a sherry finish (of what duration, I do not know) before it was bottled in 2017 by the German bottler, Jack Wieber on the occasion of their 20th anniversary. You’d expect a quality pick for the occasion. Let’s see what I make of it. Continue reading →

Edradour 12, 2010, Super Tuscan Cask (for Spec’s)

Posted on by


This has been a mult-themed week. All Edradours. All single casks bottled for Spec’s in Texas. All wine casks of one kind or the other. The week got off to a rocky start on Monday with a 10 yo chardonnay cask that had just a bit too much sulphur in it. Wednesday’s 12 yo moscatel cask presented a course correction. Let’s see if we can remain on a positive trajectory with the last cask, which is also a 12 yo distilled in 2010 (and a fairly proximate cask number). I’m a bit nervous as it’s a red wine cask. I don’t have the best history with red wine cask whiskies: I really did not like the last red wine-bothered whisky I reviewed (this Talisker handfill). Let’s give it a go.

Edradour 12, 2010, Super Tuscan Cask (54.6%; cask 93; for Spec’s; from a bottle split) 

Nose: The nutty, beany notes are trying, they’re trying hard, but they’re mostly covered up by the wine. The good news is there’s no eau de cologne, just some red fruit (cherry) and a touch of orange peel. As it sits, some of the nutty/beany complex emerges. With more time still there are softer, sweeter notes of cream and butterscotch. Water brings out more of the citrus—and it’s brighter now; some plum in there too now. Continue reading →

Edradour 12, 2010, Moscatel Cask (for Spec’s)

Posted on by


This week I’m reviewing single casks of Edradour that were recently bottled for Spec’s in Texas; the further twist is that they’re all wine casks of one kind or the other. The series didn’t get off to the best start on Monday. That 10 yo Chardonnay cask had a little too much sulphur in it even for a non-sulphur-phobe like me. Water rescued it but, on the whole, it was underwhelming. Today’s cask, two years older and filled a year prior, is a moscatel cask. I don’t know that I’ve ever had a moscatel cask Edradour or Ballechin before. Let’s hope it gets the week back on track.

Edradour 12, 2010, Moscatel Cask (53.1%; for Spec’s; cask 88; from a bottle split)

Nose: Starts out nutty, beany and yeasty, just like the chardonnay cask. Some roasted malt on the second sniff and then a big wave of citrus (lime peel) and chalk. Spicier here too with time even as some sweeter fruit is teased—let’s see if water brings it out. No, not really; in fact, it washes it out. Continue reading →

Compass Box, The Circle No. 2

Posted on by


I am at the end of my week of Compass Box reviews and you’ll be relieved to hear that I’m not closing it out with another release from seven years ago. The last review of the week is of a release from just last year and it was not made as protest against whisky industry regulations. It seems to have some connection to a international bartender conversation called the Circle. This is the Circle No. 2, which implies—if you’re good with the detective work like me—that there was another release before that. And for all we know there may have been one after as well. It’s also different from the Enlightenment and Three Year Old Deluxe in that it’s got a lot more parts to it. While the Enlightenment had malt from four distilleries in it, and the Three Year Old Deluxe had malt from only two distilleries in it, this has malt from five distilleries, as well as a not-inconsiderable portion of blended whisky. About half of it is bourbon cask Glen Elgin and another 17% or so is bourbon cask Speyburn. The remaining 33% is made up of first-fill sherry hogshead Ardmore (2.2%), first-fill sherry butt Teaninich (13.5%), a little bit of wine cask Linkwood (2.3%) and that parcel of blended Scotch, said to be “primarily first-fill sherry butt” (14.3%) . I got all this from Compass Box’s fact sheet, which also tells me that I might know the person who composed this whisky. Let’s hope I like it. Continue reading →

Compass Box, Three Year Old Deluxe

Posted on by


Here is the second Compass Box review of the week. The first was of the Enlightenment, which was released in April 2016 as a response to EU and UK regulations that forbid whisky producers from disclosing the ages of constituent whiskies in their blends/vattings (at least I think that’s what they were responding to—it’s been a while and I confess I didn’t follow the drama very closely even then). Today’s review is of the so-called Three Year Old Deluxe which was released a few months later in August 2016 and was marketed as yet another salvo against the arbitrariness of those regulations. Here, the whiskymakers told us, they had composed a whisky that comprised only 1% of a 3 yo single malt from a highlands distillery (“near the village of Brora”; i.e Clynelish) and 90% of “considerably older” whisky from the same distillery; the remaining 9% came from a distillery on Skye (i.e Talisker). Of course, by the regulations the only age that can be disclosed is that of the youngest whisky in the vatting, making it a 3 yo and isn’t that silly? Continue reading →

Compass Box, Enlightenment

Posted on by


For the first full week of November let’s do a series of reviews of releases from the boutique indie bottler, Compass Box. As you doubtless know, unlike most Scotch whisky indies, Compass Box does not release casks of whiskies from distilleries but their own blends of one kind or the other: vatted malts (or whatever they’re officially called now), blends of malt and grain, all grain whisky: they’ve released them all. They are very popular with the whisky geek corner of the market. I have previously aired my skepticism about aspects of Compass Box’s presentation and appeal to this part of the market. In short, I’ve speculated that their bespoke presentation and facility with the language of whisky geekdom is a large part of their success. The whiskies themselves have often seemed to me to be adjacent to the presentation of them. That said, I’ve liked a number of their releases even as I’ve wondered about the fuss. Enlightenment, released in 2016, was one of their releases about which a fair bit of fuss was made. Continue reading →

Laphroaig Cairdeas 2023, White Port & Madeira

Posted on by


My whisky readership has shrunk dramatically in recent years (I base this entirely on the lowered level of engagement with my whisky reviews). And so I almost feel I should apologize to the little that remains of that readership for trying their patience in October. So far this month I’ve posted two weeks of reviews of mezcal, one week of reviews of brandy, and one week of reviews of grain whisky (I am assuming here that my whisky readership is really mostly interested in single malt whisky). Please accept as penance this very timely review of a recent release, one that should be widely available all over the United States: the 2023 release of Laphroaig’s annual Cairdeas, bottled for Feis Ile, the Islay whisky festival. The Cairdeas releases have come to the US every year since 2011 (the series itself is only a few years older than that). The price has slowly edged up (it’s now in the mid $80s in Minnesota, before tax) and this year—for the first time—it’s a 700 ml bottle even in the US. Which means it’s a bit more expensive still per pour. Continue reading →

Rey Campero, Pechuga de Codorniz

Posted on by


Let’s close out this week of reviews of mezcals from Rey Campero (see here for Monday’s Jabali and here for Wednesday’s Mexicano+Madrecuishe; and here for last Friday’s Tobala) with a somewhat unusual pechuga. Pechuga, as you may know, is a category of mezcal in the traditional production of which a chicken or turkey breast is hung over the still during the final distillation of the spirit, and which also deploys fruits, vegetables and nuts in the distillation process. That’s the traditional version. In recent years, however, many twists on the savoury component used have emerged. None of the three pechugas I’ve previously reviewed have involved chicken or turkey breasts. I’ve reviewed a Del Maguey that used Iberico ham, a Quiquiriqui that used cacao beans, and a Cinco Sentidos that used mole poblano! This Rey Campero pechuga is relatively staid by comparison as it involves a bird, even if it is quail. Also used in the distillation were grilled pineapple, grilled banana and grilled corn cobs. The unusual part is that it is only double-distilled whereas most pechugas are triple-distilled. It was produced in February 2022 and rested in glass for three months. Oh yes, the maguey used was Espadin, which is apparently the norm with pechuga. Okay, let’s see what it’s like. Continue reading →

Rey Campero, Mexicano + Madrecuishe

Posted on by


Here is my second Rey Campero review of the week and the third overall (see here for last Friday’s review of the Tobala, and here for Monday’s review of the Jabali). This mezcal is made from a 50-50 mix of two different kinds of maguey: the Mexicano and the Madrecuishe. Madrecuishe is not the same as the cuishe maguey, in case you’re wondering (as I was before I looked it up). This was distilled in February 2020 and rested in glass for 18 months. That’s quite a bit longer than the five months the Jabali spent in glass (the Tobala’s label did not include that information). I’m not sure how common it is for joven (or mezcal not aged in oak) to be rested in glass for extended periods or where 18 months of resting in glass falls on the range of times common in the industry. If you know more about this, please write in below (or point me to good sources of information on mezcal production processes). In the meantime, here are my notes. Continue reading →

Rey Campero, Jabali

Posted on by


The seven or eight people who read my mezcal reviews last week will be thrilled to know that I’m doing another full week of mezcal. Last week I reviewed two releases from Mal Bien (the Alto and the Verde) and one from Rey Campero (the Tobala). This week will be all Rey Campero. First up, the Jabali. Yes, Jabali is the name of the maguey varietal used to make this mezcal. As per Mezcal Reviews, this variety is apparently seldom used in mezcal making as it is apt to foam during fermentation and distillation. As someone who has been known to foam at the mouth himself from time to time, I’m going to take that as a good sign. Let’s see what it’s like.

Oh yes, this is from lot DS029-J. It was distilled in August 2021 and rested for five months in glass vats. I could even tell you what type of yeast was used for fermentation, what the source of the water used was, the type of mill used etc. etc. This is not because I know so much but because artisanal mezcal producers seem to put all this information on their bottles. Viva transparency! Continue reading →

Rey Campero, Tobala

Posted on by


The first two reviews of this week of mezcal were both of releases from Mal Bien (the Alto and the Verde). Mal Bien is an American company that works with small producers in Mexico. Today’s review is also of a mezcal from a company that works with small producers in Mexico but this time it’s a Mexican company: Rey Campero. They are based in a small village in Oaxaca and are a family-owned company led by a mezcalero, Romulo Sanchez Parada. So if you like the idea of the bulk of the profit from the sale of mezcal going to producers based in Mexico—and I have to admit I do— Rey Campero is the brand for you. They make mezcal from a range of maguey varieties and in a number of styles. I’ll review a few more of their releases next month but first up, I have for you a review of a Tobala (the name of the variety of maguey it is distilled from). This variety is apparently grown at high altitudes, which gives it a distinct character. As I’ve said before, I’m not knowledgeable enough about mezcal to confidently tease apart the characteristics of different varietals of maguey but I am willing to slowly learn. I do know I really liked the Del Maguey Tobala I’ve previously reviewed. Let’s see what I make of this one. Continue reading →

Mal Bien Alto

Posted on by


After a week of reviews of brandies and then a week of reviews of single grain whiskies, let’s shift all the way over to the Americas, to Mexico, and do a week of mezcals. I’ve reviewed a few mezcals in recent years and every time I do I become more enamoured of the general profile. My exposure to the category is not very wide or deep, however, and I am the furthest thing from an expert on it. I can’t tell you very much about the producers or the companies that release mezcals in the US, or about the characteristics of particular types of agave grown in particular regions, or about the effects of particular distillation regimes. For that kind of information you should look elsewhere—perhaps on the Mezcal Reviews website. What I can tell you is what I make of the mezcals I drink; it should go without saying that my responses are those of someone who usually drinks single malt whisky in the Scottish style. Alright, disavowals out of the way, I can tell you that the first two mezcals I am reviewing this week are from Mal Bien who bottle mezcals from small producers around Mexico. This alto was made by Isidro Rodriguez Montoya from the town of Río de Parras in Michoacán. Okay, let’s see what it’s like. Continue reading →

Caledonian 40, 1974, “The Cally”

Posted on by


Old single grain whisky week began on Monday with a 43 yo North of Scotland, distilled in 1973 and bottled by Gordon & Company. I quite liked that one. The series continued on Wednesday with another 43 yo distilled in 1973, this time an Invergordon bottled by the Whisky Agency. I didn’t like that one quite as much. Let’s end the week with a whisky distilled a year later in 1974 but three years younger than the others at 40 years of age. It’s also unlike the others in that it is an official release: not from the distillery per se but from Diageo who own the distillery and made this 40 yo part of their special release slate in 2015, calling it “The Cally”. It’s not, therefore, a single cask but a vatting of several bourbon hogsheads. I could be wrong but I think it might have been the first time a single grain whisky was part of the special release slate. If I am wrong about that, I trust someone will write in and let me know. If I remember to check later, I’ll look it up myself and amend if necessary. Anyway, let’s see what it’s like. Continue reading →

North of Scotland 43, 1971 (Gordon & Company)

Posted on by


Alright after a week of brandy reviews (Armagnac, Calvados and English cider brandy), let’s go back to Scotland for some whisky. But instead of my usual regimen of single malt, this will be a week of reviews of single grain whiskies; and pretty old ones at that. First up is a 43 yo, a North of Scotland distilled in 1973 and bottled by Gordon & Company. I reviewed a grain whisky from Teeling this summer and a few years ago I reviewed another from Nikka; but it’s been a while since I’ve reviewed a Scottish grain whisky. More than eight years, in fact. Coincidentally, that one was a North of Scotland bottled by Gordon & Company as well—though a 42 yo distilled in 1971. I was not overly impressed by it, and, frankly, I don’t believe I’ve ever been very impressed by a grain whisky. But there’s always a first time for everything and I’m hoping this one will exceed my expectations. I do feel nostalgic as I get into it; not on account of the whisky but because of the sample bottles. These are a pair of 20 ml sample bottles from Whiskybase. I’d purchased them back when I used to purchase whisky from Europe—a lot of it from Whiskybase. I haven’t done so in many years now. Shipping became too expensive and whisky became not just expensive but stupid. And, indeed, I don’t think Whiskybase even ships to the US anymore. So it goes. Continue reading →

Darroze 50

Posted on by


I’ll be starting the month with a week of reviews of brandies. First up, an armagnac. It’s been more than three years since my last armagnac review. Frankly, I have not been drinking very much armagnac in the last few years. I’m not sure why—I do have some nice bottles on my shelves. To make up for this neglect, I have for you today a review of the oldest armagnac on said shelves: a 50 yo Darroze blend (Les Grand Assemblages is their term). I’ve actually had this bottle open (and preserved with inert gas) for quite a few years now. Indeed, I had been under the impression that I had reviewed it right after I’d bought and opened it. A good thing I checked as the bottle is now well into the last quarter and I am unlikely to ever purchase a 50 yo armagnac again. Now, for those of you who don’t follow booze pricing, I should say that back when I bought this, it cost less than most official release 25 yo single malt whiskies, and I’m sure it still does by quite a margin. Indeed, this year’s Diageo Special Release slate includes an NAS Mortlach for only a little bit less than I paid for this 50 yo several years ago. I’ve enjoyed it a lot as I’ve dipped into it over the years and I’m glad I finally remembered to take some notes before it’s all gone. Continue reading →

Clynelish 1996-2015, Prenzlow Portfolio (Jack Wieber)

Posted on by


Back to a sherry cask to close out this week of reviews of whiskies from highlands distilleries, and also to close out the month. We’ll go a bit further north than Tomatin, to Clynelish. It’s been a while since I’ve reviewed a sherry cask Clynelish; my last three reviews were all of bourbon casks of one kind or the other (here, here and here). Well, the label on this bottle does not specify the cask type but it was very clearly a sherry cask. It was distilled in 1996 and bottled in 2015 by Jack Wieber’s Whisky World in Germany (and it’s been even longer since I reviewed a Jack Wieber release). The “Prenzlow Portfolio” part of the name refers to the label painted by the artist, Alfred Prenzlow. I assume there were other Jack Wieber bottlings in this series with labels created by Alfred Prenzlow but I have not come across them. This is another of many bottles that I purchased almost 10 years ago but for some reason never got around to opening. Well, I finally opened it over the weekend. Here now are my notes. Continue reading →