June’s whisky reviews began with a 22 yo Littlemill from a boutique German independent bottler. The second review of a month is of an official release from one of Scotland’s most iconic distilleries, Lagavulin. This is a 16 yo but it’s not the well-known and much-loved standard Lagavulin 16. This is a cask strength 16 yo that was released for Feis Ile, the annual Islay whisky festival, in 2017 (almost exactly eight years ago). And, no, it ‘s not a cask strength version of the regular 16 yo either. This was double-matured in casks that had previously held moscatel, a sweet wine. In case the name sounds familiar in a whisky context, the Caol Ila Distiller’s Edition is also double-matured in moscatel casks. I assume there are a number of these casks lying around in Diageo’s warehouses and so this was probably a convenient way to come up with a Feis Ile release in 2017. (I may be misremembering but I think there may also have been a Diageo special release slate one year that featured malts from iconic distilleries being double matured in the casks used for other distilleries’ Distillers Editions.). Anyway, I’ve had this bottle sitting around for a while and am glad to finally have it open. This review joins my reviews of the 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018 and 2020 Lagavulin Feis Ile releases. I have a bottle of the 2016 release on my shelf but I don’t have the 2019—so I’m afraid I’m probably never going to complete that sequence. Anyway, let’s see what this is like. Continue reading
Category Archives: -Whisky by Rating
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
Springbank 15 (2018 Release)
I last reviewed the Springbank 15 more than six years ago. That review was of a bottle of the 2017 release. Today I have for you a review of a bottle from the 2018 release. Or rather, as per the very hard to find code on the bottle, it was bottled in 2018: my guess is it didn’t hit the market till 2019 (if I am reading the code correctly, it was bottled quite late in 2018). By the way, the code is not actually hard to find. It was for me because before opening the bottle I was squinting around the bottom, as that’s where I remembered it being etched/printed. Of course, when I gave up and removed the foil, there it was right at the top of the bottle. An exciting story, I think you will agree, full of the kind of dramatic tension and moral ambiguity that marks great works of literature. You’re welcome. More pertinent information is that the Springbank 15 used to be one of my very favourite whiskies, and the fact that I have lost touch with it has to do only with the fact that all Springbank seems to have become heavily allocated in the United States—with prices rising to match. Not that I buy very much whisky any more but even before I’d slowed down/come to an almost complete stop, it had become very hard to find any Springbank in Minnesota. A far cry from when we moved here in 2007, when a store in Minneapolis—famous for retailing a very wide selection of OB single malts at only 10% markup—was selling it for all of $68. Ah, those were the days. Anyway, here are my notes on this bottle. Continue reading
Glendronach 21, Parliament (2011 Release)
No, you’re not experiencing deja vu: this is my second review this year of a Glendronach Parliament from the early 2010s. Back in February, I reviewed my bottle from the 2012 release, which was the second year that Glendronach released the Parliament—a 21 yo named, if I remember correctly, for a parliament of crows that perched somewhere near the distillery. In the introduction to that review I’d noted that I had emptied a bottle of the original 2011 release a few months before launching the blog, and wondered if I might have put away a reference sample from the bottle—as used to be my practice at the time. Well, it turns out I did. Past me saved 4 oz for future me to drink. Future me is now present me and I have now enjoyed past Glendronach 21. I drank half of it yesterday to make sure it was still in good shape—it was/is—and here now are my notes on the remaining 2 oz.
Glendronach 21, Parliament (48%; 2011 Release; from a reference sample saved from my own bottle)
Nose: A big rich sherry nose with leather, figs, damp earth and a touch of apricot jam. On the second sniff there’s a fair bit of salt and a little ham. Continues in this general vein with a bit of pencil lead popping out as well. With a drop of water the fruit expands (plum and apricot and dried orange peel) and the ham turns to beef broth. 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
Rancho Vale Madre Añejo: Straight and Mixed
This month’s booze reviews kicked off with a rum: the Amrut Two Indies. Though this was not planned, it ended up becoming a non-whisky month, with two reviews of French brandies following: an Armagnac from Cardinat and a Calvados from Toutain. To close out the month, I have a mezcal. This represents novelty for me in two ways: this is a mezcal from a producer I have not previously encountered, and it is an añejo, having been matured in oak casks for at least a year. The producer is Rancho Vale Madre in Oaxaca. My friend Ben visited the distillery in February and very kindly brought me back this bottle. Unlike mezcals released in the US, this is a fairly bare bones label: there’s no detail of any kind on the production method or the variety of agave used; indeed, not even the abv/strength is noted (though I am pretty sure it’s around 40%). I was very curious to try it as the word on the American mezcal enthusiast street is not very positive on oak cask-aged mezcals in general. The thinking is that the quintessential qualities of mezcal are best expressed in joven/blanco spirit that has been “aged” only in glass. I’ve no idea what the status of añejo and reposado mezcals in Mexico more broadly or Oaxaca in particular is. Nor do I know very much about Rancho Vale Madre beyond the fact that they seem to a popular stop on mezcal tours in Oaxaca; the estimable Mezcal Reviews site does not list any of their releases. Anyway, as you’ll see below, while I enjoyed this añejo fine on its own, I think I will probably finish most of the bottle via cocktails. Continue reading
Toutain Hors d’Age
This month’s booze reviews have included a rum (this Amrut) and an armagnac (this Cardinat). Might as well make it a full month of non-whisky reviews. Here now is another brandy, albeit a Calvados. I’ve not reviewed a Calvados in a while—the last one was this 15 yo from Domaine Montreuil, which I reviewed in October 2023. Today’s review is also of a 15 yo, though the age is not mentioned on the label of this release from Toutain. The label only says “Hors d’Age” but it seems pretty common knowledge that the brandy inside is a minimum15 years old—that’s what pretty much everyone who sells it notes. Toutain sits on the border of the Pays d’Auge production region of Calvados and the question of which region their Calvados is actually from is a little complicated. I purchased this bottle—along with another of their releases—in Europe some years ago. At the time their releases were not sold in the US. Now, however, they are; indeed, their Hors d’Age is available if you look around online—though at a price that is quite a bit higher than I paid for it. At any rate, this means that my review will not be as useless as usual for my predominantly US-based readers. Let’s get to it. Continue reading
Cardinat 13, 2009 (for Serious Brandy)
I haven’t reviewed a brandy in a while. The last was a very old armagnac from Pellehaut that was one of two bottled for the Serious Brandy group on Facebook back in 2023. Here now is a review of the other. This, a Cardinat, is much younger than that Pellehaut. It was distilled in 2009 before being bottled in 2023 at the age of 13. I believe the cask was split with K&L (the California mini-liquor chain). These days I have almost nothing to do anymore with the whisky or spirits world, and no longer read any spirits-related news or websites or blogs—with the exception of my friend Michael’s notes over on Diving for Pearls. And so it’s hard to imagine that there was a time when I actually spent time and energy arguing with K&L employees online. I wonder what became of David Driscoll—last I heard, he was planning to cure cancer or something. I guess I would have heard if he’d succeeded. Anyway, I don’t know why I went on this K&L tangent. Let’s instead get to my notes on this brandy. Continue reading
Amrut Two Indies (Rum)
Here is an Amrut to start the month. It’s not a whisky though but a rum. Though Amrut is most famous now for its single malt whisky, they’ve actually been making rum for much longer. This, however, is not one of their old-school rums but a blend of their own rum with several Caribbean rums—from Jamaica, Barbados and Guyana: hence Two Indies. I’m not sure when it was first released but I first encountered it last December when I was visiting a friend in Coonoor in South India. She had a bottle that had come her way from Karnataka, the state in which Amrut is located. I tasted it then and really liked it. I didn’t look for it on my return to Delhi on that trip but when I was there again last month I made it a point to seek it out. Sure enough, it was easily available in liquor stores in Gurgaon (where my parents live); and since Gurgaon is located in Haryana and Haryana has some of the lowest prices for alcohol in all of India, I got this bottle for a very reasonable price: Rs. 1500 or $17.50. I opened it a few days after getting back to Minnesota and am very pleased to say that I like it as much now as I had in December. Here now are my notes. Continue reading
Bowmore Tempest, Batch 2
Today is the 12th anniversary of the blog. My first-ever booze review—posted on March 24, 2013—was of the Bowmore Legend. I’ve since marked every anniversary of the blog with a review of a Bowmore. Accordingly, here is a review of a Bowmore. This is in keeping as well with this month’s “young whisky” theme, being 10 years old. The secondary theme of the month’s reviews has turned out to be “throwback whisky”, as they’ve also all been reviews of whiskies released in or before 2013 (the year the blog launched—I note this in case you are even worse than me at arithmetic). Already reviewed this month: a 2013 release of the Ardbeg 10; the first release of the Kilkerran Work in Progress; and the Springbank 11, 1997, Madeira Cask. Here now is a review of the second release of the Bowmore Tempest (see here for my review of the first release). It was bottled in 2010 and, like the first batch, comprised whisky matured in first-fill bourbon casks. I can’t remember now how many batches followed this one but I do recall that the second batch was the last one to bear the name “Tempest” in the US. This on account of some brand infringement issue with an American wine. Subsequent batches were put out in the US under the name “Dorus Mor”. Anyway, I quite liked the first batch and am glad to finally be tasting this one. Continue reading
Springbank 11, 1997, Madeira Cask
Let’s keep the month of reviews of younger whiskies going. Following my reviews of the Kilkerran Work in Progress 1 and an Ardbeg 10 from 2013, here is a Springbank 11. This was released around the same time as that Kilkerran and was one of my first forays into purchasing limited release whiskies. I had enjoyed the Springbank 10 and the Springbank 15 (available at a startlingly low price from a store in Minneapolis known for their low mark-ups) a lot and so plonked down my money for this 11 yo. It was not a single cask release—900 bottles total were bottled at cask strength—but the spirit had spent the entire 11 years in the madeira casks. I enjoyed it greatly and purchased more than one bottle over the next year or two (of course, in those days excellent whiskies stayed on the shelves for much longer). Indeed, it was the gateway for me into Springbank’s Wood Expressions series (see also the Claret Wood and the Calvados Wood—to say nothing of all the 12 yo sherry cask releases from the 1996 vintage). Years later, when my friend Patrick S. offered me a bottle, I was only to happy to take him up on it. Now that it’s open, I can finally review an old favourite. Continue reading
Kilkerran Work in Progress 1, Take 2
In February I reviewed four older whiskies: a Caperdonich 36, 1972, a Caol Ila 30, 1983, the 2012 release of the Glendronach 21 “Parliament”, and a Laphroaig 21, 1990. March’s first review, on the other hand, was of a 10 yo: the 2013 release of the Ardbeg 10. Accordingly, let’s make this a month of younger whiskies. Up next, is the first release of the Work in Progress series from Kilkerran. I’ve actually reviewed this one before—about three years ago. That review was from a sample from a friend; this is from my own bottle. It was released in 2009 and contained spirit distilled in 2004, making the contents four or five years old. The vattings for these early releases of the Work in Progress series were said to contain both ex-bourbon and ex-sherry spirit, but I’m not sure what the ratios were. I do know I’ve liked most of the Work in Progress releases a lot. I’ve previously also reviewed both the sherry and bourbon cask releases of the fifth release and the bourbon cask releases of the sixth and seventh releases. I have an unopened bottle of the third release on my shelf. I haven’t tried the second or fourth releases since starting the blog. Anyway, let’s get reacquainted with the first release and see what I make of it now. Continue reading
Ardbeg 10, 2013 Release
My previous review of the venerable Ardbeg 10 was an unusually timely review. That was back in 2017 and I was reviewing the 2016 release. Today I have a review for you of the 2013 release. (I’ve previously also reviewed the 2007 and 2009 releases.) I’m not sure if I’ve had any Ardbeg 10 released since 2016 and I don’t have any sitting on my shelves. After this bottle is done, the only Ardbeg 10 I’ll have left is a bottle from the 2008 release. And so my reviews are going further back in time. That’s a bit of a shame as this is one of the great classic malts; along with the Lagavulin 16 and the Laphroaig 10, it used to be the cornerstone of the collection of every lover of peated whisky from Islay. I really should seek it out again—and I should probably check in on more recent releases of the Laphroaig 10 and Lagavulin 16 as well. I’m not buying much whisky any more these days—can’t remember which the last bottle I purchased was, or when I purchased it—but these are easily available in bars. Okay, let’s see what this one is like. 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
Glendronach 21, Parliament (2012 Release)
I reviewed an 11 yo Glendronach back in August. Six months later, here is one that’s almost twice as old. This is the Glendronach 21, Parliament, specifically from the 2012 release. If I’m remembering correctly, the Parliament was launched in 2011. I was under the impression that I had reviewed a bottle of that 2011 release in the first year of the blog but I see now in my spreadsheet that I emptied that bottle two weeks before I launched the blog. Back in those days I did used to save large reference samples from bottles for future tastings; I wonder if one might be kicking around somewhere in my hoard or if I finished that as well at some point! Anyway, here is the 2012 release. The Parliament is unlike the more sought-after single casks Glendronach had begun to release around that same time in that it is a vatting, did not bear a vintage statement and was not bottled at cask strength. It was, nonetheless, usually better than many of those so-called single casks. Of course, I am referring to the earlier releases: I’ve not kept up with the distillery and have no idea if the 21 yo is still bottled or if not, when it was pulled. If you know more, please do write in. 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