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
Tag Archives: Lowlands
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
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
Littlemill 23, 1990 (Archives)
This week’s review is of a Littlemill. As I’ve noted before, Littlemill didn’t have the best reputation when it was a going concern. Indeed, when I first started getting interested in malt whisky as something other than an occasional indulgence, the official 12 yo—pretty much all that was easily available then—was one you learned to stay away from (though I didn’t think it was that bad when I finally tried it). As with so many other distilleries though, the distillery’s reputation improved after it closed, when older single casks began to become available from independent bottlers. In the early-mid 2010s, in particular, a number of 20+ yo casks filled in the late 1980s to the early 1990s showed up on the market that put the distillate in a very different, very fruity light. A number of these casks were bottled by Whiskybase under their Archives label. This bourbon cask 23 yo, distilled in 1990 was one of the first (though not, I think, the very first—there was one in the inaugural Archives release as well). As with so many bottles I purchased in those years, I’ve had it sitting on my shelves for a long time now. I’m glad to finally open it and am looking forward to drinking it down over the next few weeks. Continue reading
Glenkinchie 27, Special Release 2023
And so, finally, I am the end of my reviews of Diageo’s 2023 Special Release slate. To close out the series I have the oldest of the lot: a Glenkinchie 27. (Already reviewed: Talisker, Lagavulin, Roseisle, Glendullan, Mortlach, Clynelish and Oban.) Unlike the others—bar the Lagavulin 12, which always had a place in the lineup—this Glenkinchie would have made sense in the lineup back when the Special Release did seem special and aspirational. In those days almost every whisky in the lineup bar the Lagavulin 12 was usually pretty old. See, for example, 2013 when other than a NAS unpeated Caol Ila, every other whisky in the lineup ranged from 21-37 years old. (Consider also that while 2013’s Port Ellen 34 cost £1500, this year’s Port Ellen 43—now in the Prime & Ultima series—will set you back £15,000.) Well, I’ve saved the oldest of the current lot for last; but is it the best? Not that the competition has been very stiff: the Clynelish 10 is the only one of the other seven that really seemed special to me. One way to find out. Continue reading
Bladnoch 20, Cow Label
The first two days of this week of reviews of bourbon cask malts were spent in the Speyside: at Dailuaine on Monday, and at Linkwood on Wednesday. Let’s now close out the week in the lowlands, at Bladnoch. This 20 yo was released in the early-mid 2010s, during the Raymond Armstrong-led heyday of the distillery. Under Raymond Armstrong, Bladnoch was a significant force in what, with hindsight, was the last gasp of the golden age of single malt whisky. They released whiskies, both their own and of casks from other distilleries, for the regular drinker. Their whiskies were priced well, did not come with any marketing flim-flam, and were usually of a high quality. This was true both of their independently bottled and directly sold whiskies on offer from their Bladnoch forum (I think I might still have one Caol Ila 25 left) and of their own releases. Many of their releases of Bladnoch’s whisky were single casks, but they didn’t always mark this information on the labels. And the way to know if many of these releases were sherry matured or bourbon matured was by checking to see if the label featured sheep (sherry) or cows (bourbon). See here for a review of a 19 yo cow label. This 20 yo cow label is one of the very last Bladnochs left on my shelves (I still have two bottles of a 12 yo sherry cask). Let’s get into it. Continue reading
Bladnoch 11, 2001, Lightly Peated
For the last whisky review of the week, month and year let’s go all the way down to the lowlands of Scotland, to a distillery whose most famous recent proprietor liked to remind us is closer to Ireland than to most of the other Scottish distilleries: Bladnoch.
This whisky was distilled and released in the era of that proprietor, the excellent Raymond Armstrong. Under Armstrong Bladnoch was a unicorn: a small producer that kept its prices down—both for its own releases and those of casks from other distilleries that it released for the Bladnoch forums—and didn’t engage in marketing malarkey. The good times eventually came to an end and the distillery was sold in 2014 or 2015. I’ve lost touch with it since then, as it got the predictable premium coat of paint from its new owners. But I still have a few bottles left of the Armstrong era. This release of their “Lightly Peated” label is one of them. I’ve previously reviewed a 9 yo from this series from 2001 that was a single bourbon cask. This one, featuring sheep on the label, as every Bladnoch fan of the era knows, is a sherry cask and is two years older. Let’s get into it. Continue reading
Littlemill 22, 1990 (Berry Bros. & Rudd for Total Wine)
At this point everyone knows that a whole slew of casks filled at Littlemill in the 1988-1992 period and bottled 20+ years later by various indies has made us forget how awful the distillery’s official releases before it closed were. One wonders how many distilleries with indifferent to bad reputations that scenario might not work out well for. All this to say, I’m expecting this sample to blow my socks off and if it doesn’t then I will blame Michael K.
Littlemill 22, 1990 (54.3%; Berry Bros. & Rudd; cask 17 for Total Wine; from a sample from a friend)
Nose: Lemon, grapefruit, tart pineapple, a whiff of gasoline. Chalkier and more mineral on the second sniff and there’s some gooseberry in there too now. With a few drops of water the acid backs off a bit and there’s some cream and a leafy note. Continue reading
Littlemill 20, 1992 (Archives)
Let’s start the month with a closed distillery—that seems appropriate for the pandemic. Earlier this year I reviewed a 29 yo Littlemill that was distilled in 1988 and bottled in 2018. This one was distilled a few years later but also bottled near the very start of the Littlemill renaissance when several excellent casks from the late 1980s through the early 1990s suddenly became available in Europe. The distillery’s low reputation—well earned by official releases—rebounded dramatically and prices for these releases started going up before they eventually all but dried up. This particular cask was bottled by the Whiskybase store in Rotterdam under their Archives label. Menno of Whiskybase is a Littlemill collector and that always seemed like a good guarantor of quality for their Littlemill releases. They’ve put out eight or so of these casks, of which I think this was the second. I’ve previously reviewed the first one, which was from a refill sherry hogshead. I quite liked it. This is from a bourbon hogshead. I’ve had it open for more than a month now and have been dipping into it on the regular. Here now before I finish the bottle before remembering to take notes (which has happened on some occasions), is my review. Continue reading
Auchentoshan “Heartwood”
I know I’d said I’d have a review today of barbecue from Ted Cook’s 19th Hole in Minneapolis but what can I say? I spent last evening watching Basu Chatterjee’s 1974 gem Rajnigandha and a few episodes of Schitt’s Creek and didn’t get around to it. If your primary interest is food, go back and read yesterday’s post on American food media’s relationship with diversity. Or if you want to read about barbecue in the Twin Cities, go back and read my review of Big Daddy’s from a few years ago (but keep in mind that they’ve changed ownership since then). Today I have another whisky review. This is an Auchentoshan, shockingly only the second official Auchentoshan I’ve ever reviewed (the first was the cask strength Valinch). Well, maybe it’s not so shocking: there aren’t that many official Auchentoshans around. I believe this one was released only for the Travel Retail market—I’m not sure if it’s still on the go there. It’s a NAS vatting of spirit matured in ex-bourbon and ex-oloroso casks. Let’s see what it’s like. Continue reading
Auchentoshan 15, 1997 (Old Malt Cask)
I often say that every distillery is capable of producing high quality malt. But I have to admit that Auchentoshan is one of the distilleries that really tests my faith in this proposition. In my years of drinking single malt whisky I have not yet come across an official Auchentoshan that I have wanted to purchase or even drink again; and, more damningly, I have not also come across any indie releases that have convinced me that owners Morrison Bowmore have been blending quality casks away, whether in the official vattings or in the group’s blends. I’m not denying the possibility that they exist; merely noting that I have not yet randomly encountered one. Of the few I have reviewed, I liked this 23 yo from Archives the best and I gave that 86 points. But hope springs eternal and perhaps this will be the one that rewards my faith. Like some of the other whiskies I’ve been reviewing recently it too was a release from a long time ago—I’ve been sitting on this sample too for a while. Well, let’s get to it now. Continue reading
Linlithgow 28, 1982 (Mackillop’s Choice)
Last month I reviewed whiskies from Port Ellen and Brora. Here now is a whisky from another distillery that closed in the early 1980s but whose post-closure releases have not developed the aura, on the whole, that the whiskies from Port Ellen and Brora have: the Lowlands distillery, Linlithgow/St. Magdalene. I’ve only reviewed two other Linlithgows (and not had very many more than two). At the time of my first review (also of a 1982 distillation), I noted that I did not know if anything distinguished the malt released under the Linlithgow name from that released as St. Magdalene. Almost six years later, I still don’t; if you know the answer, please write in below. This particular Linlithgow was released in 2011 or 2012 by Mackillop’s Choice. I’m not entirely sure if Mackillop’s Choice is still on the go (another question for the better informed to answer)—at any rate, I don’t see any 2019 releases from them on Whiskybase and there were only a handful in 2018. Anyway, let’s get to the whisky! Continue reading
Littlemill 24, 1988 (Exclusive Malts)
This is the fourth Littlemill I’ve reviewed this year. The first was the old Littlemill 12, which was, as I said then, as unloved an OB whisky as you could hope to find. The other two were much older, part of the revival of Littlemill’s reputation that got underway in the early years of this decade as a number of casks bottled in the late 1980s came to market that had been matured to a far greater age than was probably intended for them at time of distillation. One of of those I really liked—the Archives 22 yo distilled in 1989. The other—a Berry Bros & Rudd 21 yo bottled distilled in 1992—was quite good but nothing so very special. This one from the Creative Whisky Company, under their Exclusive Malts label, is older than both of those and distilled the earliest. That might lead you to think that it’s got a good chance of being the best of the lot but things don’t always work out that way with whisky: the idiosyncrasies of individual casks are hard to predict and not all bottlers can be relied on for consistency. Anyway, let’s see what this is like. Continue reading
Littlemill 21, 1992 (Berry Bros. & Rudd)
In my review last week of the very good Littlemill 22, 1989 from Archives, I said I’d have more older Littlemill next month. But here I am, a week early. And to think people say my reviews are untimely. This was distilled in 1992, a couple of years before the distillery closed. It was bottled in 2014 by Berry Bros. & Rudd. I believe this was a US release—I don’t think the cask number was specified.
By the way, though the distillery officially closed in 1994, distillation ended in 1992: the distillery was mothballed till 1994 before being dismantled and largely destroyed over the next decade. Given that a housing development now occupies the site, this is one dead distillery that will not be coming back to life anytime soon. Anyway, let’s see if this is as good as the Archives bottle. Continue reading
Littlemill 22, 1989 (Archives)
After my review of the old, unlamented official Littlemill 12, I’d lined up reviews of a number of more recently released older, indie Littlemills from the late 1980s and early 1990s. Somehow, I never got around to posting any of them. Here’s the first one.
This was released by Whiskybase as part of the inaugural release of their Archives line. As you may know, Menno B. of Whiskybase is a renowned Littlemill collector, and all the Littlemills released by Archives have very good reputations. Unlike the other Littlemills of this era that I’ve reviewed—see this 20, 1990 from the Nectar and this 24, 1989 from the Whisky Agency—this is from a refill sherry hogshead. I opened this a while ago and liked it so much that it disappeared in just a few months—that might seem like a long time but I usually have bottles stay open for at least a year. Here now are my notes. Continue reading
Littlemill 12
As you may know, in recent years malts from the closed lowlands distillery, Littlemill have become among the most sought after whiskies on the market. This mania, I should quickly clarify, is focused entirely on much older casks from the late 1980s and early 1990s that began to come to market in the early years of this decade. There was something very ironic about this development because when Littlemill was in fact open nobody had very much positive to say about it. I joke sometimes that more unsung or disliked distilleries should close down to turn their reputations around, but in Littlemill’s case this seems to be what’s happened. The truth, of course, is more likely to lie in the fact that once the distillery had closed, more of its surviving casks accidentally aged to a quality that was previously undiscovered in the official releases. For example, in this 12 yo, which is as unloved an OB release as you can hope to find. Having been warned away from it when I first began to pursue single malt whisky, this will actually be my first time tasting it. Will the bad reputation be warranted? Or will I regret not having tried it when bottles could easily be found on shelves in whisky stores everywhere? Let’s see. Continue reading
Bladnoch 18, 1992 (Chieftain’s for K&L)
My last two reviews have been of long-forgotten samples of bourbon cask whiskies released in 2010-2011 and, given how much I enjoyed those Aberlours (here and here), I figured I might as well keep that trend going. Here now is a review of a Bladnoch 18, distilled in 1992 and bottled by Chieftain’s in 2011 for my old friends in California, K&L. This was a more innocent time at K&L: Driscoll’s hype machine had not been cranked up to 13 yet and the hit rate for their cask selections was pretty good. It’s probably the case that the latter was true largely because more quality casks were available to independents then; and it’s also probably the case that the former was true because the latter was true. That is to say, the noise seems to have increased steadily over the years in inverse proportion to quality and value. Anyway, this Bladnoch, distilled before the Armstrong era at Bladnoch (now also ended), was rather good indeed and at $89.99 it was an excellent value. I’d meant to buy a second bottle but never got around to it. Thankfully, I saved 6 ounces from the middle of the bottle for future reference. Even more thankfully, that sample did not go flat in the intervening years. Let’s get to it. Continue reading