Another 15 yo whisky, and another that may still be available: I’m in severe danger of losing my “untimely reviews” edge. This was bottled by the distillery for the Nectar, a store in Belgium. It’s a single cask release (though the cask number is not mentioned) of a total of 198 bottles. And that single cask was a fresh rum cask. Now, of course, this doesn’t tell us anything about how many years the rum that had previously been in there had spent in that cask or what kind of rum it was (which, of course, is the same with bourbon cask maturation as well). I assume it would have been an American oak cask. I’m not sure what the story is with the low abv (relatively speaking). As it happens, the last rum cask Springbank I reviewed (this 1998-2014 release from Malts of Scotland) also had an abv below 50% (just a coincidence, I’m sure). I wasn’t hugely taken with that one. Let’s see what this one is like. Continue reading
After a geographically appropriate review on Wednesday (of a Caol Ila, posted while on Islay), I’m back to commemorating my first trip to Scotland by posting reviews of whiskies from distilleries that I’ve not actually visited or gone very close to. Well, in this case, we will be within 37 miles of Springbank a few hours after this review posts, but we’ll be turning in the other direction to drive back to Glasgow, where we’ll spend one night before returning to London on Saturday and then to Minnesota on Sunday. This has been a wonderful trip and I’ll have more posts about it than you can bear in the weeks to come. Though I did not tour many distilleries I did visit a bunch and have a lot of pictures. I will also have some reports on eating in the parts of Scotland we visited.
Okay, to the whisky! This is the 14th (current?) release of Springbank’s cask strength 12 yo. I’ve previously reviewed the 7th—the review was written in London, where I purchased the bottle and then drank it down at a very rapid clip. Though I don’t note this below it paired really well with all kinds of cheese. Continue reading
Kilkerran, as previously explained, is the name of the whisky produced by the Glengyle distillery in Campbeltown. They’re a part of the Springbank family and, as I’ve also noted before, the Kilkerran profile bears lots of genetic markers of the Springbank/Longrow line. This profile has until now been accessible only through a few years worth of “Work in Progress” releases—(not-so) small batches released every year after the distillate got past the legal minimum of three years, showing the progress of the aging barrels. Unlike Bruichladdich with their Port Charlotte line, the Kilkerran WIPs were not put together in complicated ways and were thus likely to be pretty good indicators of what the profile of the eventual regular release would be. I will say that I’ve liked every edition of the WIP that I’ve tried (though I’ve only reviewed a couple so far) and I’ve thus been looking forward to the regular release, which I’d thought would be ready at 10 years of age. Well, the distillery waited till it was 12 years old, which brought us to 2016. Towards the end of the Work in Progress series they started putting out parallel sherry and bourbon wood expressions; it turns out that this 12 yo is a vatting of 70% ex-bourbon and 30% ex-sherry casks. Continue reading
I think the seventh release was the last of Kilkerran’s Work in Progress series. As with the previous couple of Work in Progress releases it came in both “Bourbon Wood” and “Sherry Wood” incarnations. However, this bourbon wood version was released at cask strength. I think by this point these releases were at 10 years old, give or take a year—someone will be along to confirm shortly. I don’t know if there’s a reason why this, of all the WIP releases, was bottled at cask strength (or why the companion sherry wood wasn’t). The regular release 12 yo that followed it this year is at the 46% of all the other Work in Progress releases. Anyway, I quite liked the bourbon cask Work in Progress 6, which I reviewed earlier this month (and which I tasted right before this one) and am looking forward to reviewing the regular 12 yo next month: let’s get this intervening release out of the way first. Continue reading
Until Kilkerran’s whisky began to be available a few years ago there were only two functional distilleries in Campbeltown—once the heart of Scottish whisky production. These distilleries were/are Glen Scotia and Springbank. Now Springbank does produce the Hazelburn and Longrow malts as well, but as any whisky geek will tell you, these are merely production variants of Springbank, produced at the same distillery. Kilkerran, however, is distilled at a completely different distillery. Confusingly, the distillery’s name is not Kilkerran but Glengyle. And Glengyle has a long and convoluted history: it was founded in the 1870s but by the early 1900s was not really making whisky anymore. After a number of abortive attempts to get it going again throughout the century it was finally re-started in 2000 by the same people who own Springbank—bringing the distillery full-circle: it was originally started by a member of the same family who’d broken away from the Springbank business. However, at this point Glengyle was a brand name owned by Loch Lomond (who operate Glen Scotia) and so Kilkerran was the name chosen for the malts made at the reopened Glengyle distillery. Continue reading
Longrow, as you probably know, is the name of Springbank’s heavily peated malt (it’s also more conventionally double distilled, unlike Springbank which goes through a complicated “two and a half” distillation and Hazelburn which is triple-distilled). Just as there have been a number of wine cask Springbank releases in the last decade, a number of wine cask Longrows have also been appearing from time to time. Of these I’ve previously reviewed a 14 yo Burgundy cask, which I found to be too heavily sulphured to my taste. As a result I’ve stayed away from the Longrow Red series, which has featured a number of red wine finishes/double maturations—a new kind each year. The first (I believe) was double matured in cabernet sauvignon casks (7 years in bourbon + 4 in the wine casks) and the second in shiraz casks (6+5). The current release is closer to a finish, having spent only one year in New Zealand pinot noir casks after 11 in bourbon. This 2014 release, however, appears to have been matured full-term in fresh port casks (if I am wrong about this, please write in below). In general I have had better experiences with port cask-matured or finished whiskies than with those from other types of wine casks, especially peated whiskies (like this Ballechin, for example) and so I’m hopeful about this one. Let’s see what it’s like. Continue reading
I started the week with a review of a 20 yo Craigellachie which I pronounced to be very Springbank. Here now is a Springbank that is also likely to be very Springbank.
This is an 11 yo from a recharred sherry butt; it was bottle for the Springbank society—I am not a member; I got part of a bottle split from someone who probably purchased it in Europe. This was distilled from local prisma barley. I believe this was from the same set of casks that were aged a few years more for this year’s release of the Springbank 16, Local Barley. I have a bottle of that one that I haven’t yet opened but it has received very strong reviews. Odds are good then that this one will also be excellent. Truth be told the standard issue Springbank 12 CS is usually very good too, as were the old 12 year old sherry wood variations (see here for the oloroso cask from 1996)—I’ll be interested to see if the local barley introduces any discernibly different qualities. Continue reading
The last few Springbanks I’ve reviewed have been matured in a rum cask, double matured in bourbon and madeira casks, and double matured in bourbon and Calvados casks. Here now is one that has been matured in a single sherry hogshead. There’s a strong possibility of this being a sherry bomb—not only is it from a sherry cask but it’s from a cask about half the size of the usual sherry butt. The colour of the whisky, however, suggests that the sherry influence is muted. Let’s see if this turns out to be true on the nose and palate as well. I do expect it will be quite good though. This is not just because it was bottled by Malts of Scotland, who have a pretty good track record: in general, I can’t remember the last time I was disappointed by a Springbank from a sherry or bourbon cask—or indeed by any Springbank product that hadn’t seen the inside of a burgundy cask (see the sulphurous Longrow 14, Burgundy wood). Let’s get to it. Continue reading
Well, the last time I said my nose was back to normal I woke up the next day with it clogged again…but it has been two days in a row now that I have been able to taste and smell absolutely normally, and so here I am with a review of Springbank’s Calvados Wood release from a few years ago. As with many of Springbank’s Wood expressions (see also their Bourbon/Madeira cask, for example) this is genuinely double-matured and nothing like the finishes that bedevil so much of the rest of the industry. Indeed, this one spent 6 years in refill bourbon casks and then 6 years in fresh calvados casks.
I have a bottle of this myself but haven’t opened it yet—I’d wanted to get a better sense of calvados before doing so. Now I’m not suggesting that I have become a calvados expert in the interim but I have had more calvados in the last few months than I’d ever had before, and as luck would have it, Michael K. offered me a sample of the Springbank, allowing me to keep the bottle closed a little while longer as well. Well, let’s see what my minimal calvados experience brings to my experience of this whisky. Continue reading
This is the Springbank whose existence Ol’ Jas denied over Easter weekend. Springbank has released a few madeira casks in the past. I’ve previously reviewed a 14 yo single cask that was a K&L exclusive. I liked it but not as much as the old 11 yo (which I have not reviewed yet on account of a reluctance to open my last bottle). Both of those and this one are from 1997 but obviously not from the same set of casks: those were full-term matured in madeira casks whereas this one was matured for the first 10 years in refill bourbon casks and then for the last six years in fresh madeira casks. So, obviously it’s not a finish either; more like true double maturation. Springbank seem to be the only distillery that does this kind of double maturation as a matter of course (they’re also probably the only distillery that doesn’t make a lot of silly noise about these kinds of releases). And probably because they do double maturation and not quick finishes their wine cask releases tend to be really well integrated with the usual distillery profile. Continue reading
After Monday’s rum cask finished bourbon (a Heaven Hill 14, 2001), which was more than a little reminiscent of a single malt, it was hard not to reach immediately for the one rum cask single malt I had easily at hand. Springbank has released a few official rum casks before but I haven’t seen too many around of late. This one is also from the German indie, Malts of Scotland but, unlike their Heaven Hill, appears to be matured full-term in a rum cask. Or at least, so I think. Let’s get right to it.
Springbank 1998-2014, Rum Cask (49.8%; Malts of Scotland cask 14037; from a purchased sample)
Nose: A slightly sweeter version of the regulation ex-bourbon Springbank profile. Which is to say that the usual machine oil, sackcloth, leather and salt/brine are all there but there’s an extra layer of simple syrup over it all. Gets pretty salty pretty fast; some preserved lemon as well. With water it’s less sweet and also less salty. Continue reading
I’ve previously reviewed a Longrow 18 released in 2011. This one, released in 2008, was the first of the Longrow 18s, and along with the Longrow CV, which was also first released in 2008, filled out the range of Springbank’s double-distilled, heavily-peated malt (the 10 yo and 14 yo had already been released in prior years). It was very well received on release; this is my first time drinking it and I’m very interested to see what its like.
Longrow 18, 2008 Release (46%; from a purchased sample)
Nose: Lemon and minerally, ashy peat. Other fruit as well below the lemon: kaffir lime peel, some kiwi, some grapefruit and also some tart-sweet apple. Quite a bit of salt too along with expanding iodine and olive brine. The classic Springbank leathery/wet sackcloth note is here too. Just lovely. Gets sweeter as it sits with some vanilla popping out as well to join the ever more fragrant citrus. With a lot more time there’s an almondy note as well. Let’s see if water bring out anything new. Well, if anything it seems to intensify that nutty note. Continue reading
Here is the companion whisky to Monday’s bourbon barrel Springbank 14. This has been promised for a long time and occasional commenter, Ol’ Jas can now die happy as all his dreams have come true.
In 2008’ish Springbank released a series of 12 yo’s from different types of sherry casks. These were all distilled in 1996. If memory serves the cask types were fino, oloroso, cream sherry and an amontillado. I’ve reviewed that oloroso cask on the blog; I still haven’t opened my bottle of the fino from that series; I finished my bottle of the cream sherry before I started the blog but I think I have a reference sample stashed somewhere—I never did taste/corral the amontillado. A few years later they released this 14 yo series in the same vein, with a manzanilla cask taking the place of the cream sherry. Once upon a time I was supposed to split the other bottles in the series with some other whisky geeks but I guess that fell through. So this fino cask will probably be it for me from this series: the 16 yo casks that followed this lot cost almost twice as much as these did so please do not expect to see those reviewed here. Continue reading
There’s not a whole lot of indie Springbank around and most of it tends to be expensive. And so when this release from Whiskybroker popped up a couple of years ago I jumped on it: Whiskybroker are known for their very fair, bordering on low prices. I opened it earlier this year at one of my local group’s tastings. This was somewhat different from our usual tastings as we drank two Springbanks of the same age but from different cask types, followed by two Laphroaigs of the same age but from different cask types. I’ve already reviewed the two Laphroaigs (here and here) and now I’m finally getting around to the Springbanks (Ol’ Jas, rejoice!). I was surprised at the tasting by the peaty character of this cask. I’m guessing this was distillate earmarked for release as Longrow—I think I’ve read in a couple of places that Springbank don’t allow indie releases under the Longrow and Hazelburn names (please correct or confirm if you know more). Anyway, let’s get to it.