
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
Tag Archives: Single Malt
Caperdonich 36, 1972 (Lonach)

Back in the early days of the blog—back when I had more energy and was known for being a thorn in the side of not food writers but the whisky industry and its many amateur apologists and spokespersons—one of the pet mythologies of the whisky enthusiast community that I often took issue with was the belief in magic vintages at particular distilleries. Indeed, one of my earliest reviews featured Caperdonich, which is one of the distilleries around which a lot of the magic vintage talk used to center (do people still go on about this kind of thing?). 1972 was the year about which people were most apt to wax rhapsodic. I never tired of pointing out—as I did in that first Caperdonich review—that what was almost certainly happening was that for entirely random reasons more casks of 1972 Caperdonich had survived to be bottled in the 2000s than of other years in the 1970s. I guess I just did it again. Anyway, I have for you today another Caperdonich 1972. This one was also bottled by Duncan Taylor—who bottled so many of those fruity Caperdonichs that made the dead distillery’s reputation—but not for one of their premier lines. The Lonach releases typically featured low bottling strengths and were not single casks. Quite likely these were vattings that had been used to rescue casks that had fallen below the minimum required strength of 40%. Many of these whiskies were very good anyway. Let’s see what this one is like. Continue reading
Longmorn 15

So far this month I’ve reviewed whiskies released in 2021 (this Highland Park), 2017 (this Caol Ila) and 2009 (this Talisker). Here now is an even more untimely review: of the Longmorn 15. This release was discontinued in 2006, being replaced the following year by the just about whelming Longmorn 16. The 16 yo added three more percentage points in abv but you would have had a hard time finding people then who preferred it to the 15 yo. But we took what we got. Back then there was barely any official Longmorn on the market, as most of it went—and still does—into the group’s blends, particularly Chivas Regal. Your best bet beyond the 15 yo, and then the 16 yo, were the occasional limited 500 ml releases in the Cask Strength Edition series from Chivas that used to be available at the group’s distilleries and a few retailers. Now there are three official releases: an 18 yo, a 22 yo, and a 30 yo. I haven’t tried any of them and couldn’t tell you when they were introduced. I have an idea though that they probably cost a lot more than the 15 yo or even the 16 yo ever did. The 15 yo, in case you’re wondering, went for about $50 back in the day (hell, the 16 yo cost me $70 in 2012). Anyway, this bottle remained unopened for about two decades. No longer. Let’s see what it’s like. Continue reading
Caol Ila 12, for Feis Ile 2017

Until a few years ago I used to purchase whisky occasionally from auctions in the UK and somehow accumulated a number of Caol Ila’s releases for Feis Ile, the annual Islay whisky festival. They’ve been sitting on my shelves ever since; it’s time to start opening them. For no particular reason, I’ll start with the 2017 release which was a 12 yo bottled at cask strength. The twist was that it had been double matured in amoroso sherry casks; and not just in any amoroso sherry casks but ones that had previously been used to make the Talisker Distillers Edition. I could be wrong but I think Diageo did that kind of a thing with a bunch of their distilleries either that year or around that time. I have a vague memory of there being another Diageo distillery’s whisky that had been double matured in casks that had previously been used to make the Caol Ila Distillers Edition. Or maybe I dreamed that up—it’s been a long time since I paid attention to this kind of thing. In this case, this complicated maturation process means the amoroso casks would have contributed not just the sweet/savoury character of the original contents but also some of Talisker’s brand of peppery peat. Let’s see what it all adds up to. Continue reading
Secret Orkney 15, 2005 (Cooper’s Choice)

The last Highland Park I reviewed was an old release of the official 18 yo that was put out in 2002. This is a much more recent release. Well, I suppose officially it’s not a Highland Park but an undisclosed distillery; but there are only two distilleries on Orkney and only one that makes its casks available to independents so you do the math. Anyway, officially this is a Secret Orkney. It’s a 15 yo, distilled in 2005 and released in 2021. It’s also an example of something we usually get only from independent bottlers: bourbon cask Highland Park. The distillery’s official “character” is associated with sherry cask aging, and high quality sherry cask Highland Park is indeed an excellent thing—see, for example, that 2002 release of the official 18 yo. But bourbon cask Highland Park is a truly wonderful profile as well and one that has almost never let me down. I always look forward to drinking it and so was very happy to find this bottle on my shelves while trying to figure out what to open this month. I think this was part of one of the very last whisky I orders I placed, back in the spring of 2021. I’ve already opened it and know that it was a good choice. Here now are my notes. Continue reading
Talisker 14, 1994, “Manager’s Choice”, Take 2

If you’re a long-time, particularly dedicated reader of the blog [you are not], you might feel a sense of deja vu. Yes, I’ve reviewed the Talisker Manager’s Choice before. Almost five years ago, in fact. I loved it then. So why am I reviewing it again? Well, my initial review was of a sample from a friend’s bottle, and now I’ve finally gotten around to opening my own bottle (which I’d referred to in my previous review). And so I am curious to see how close the two experiences—one from a 1 oz sample taken from the end of the bottle’s life and one from the fourth pour from a freshly opened bottle—will be. I’ve not re-read the original review before taking these notes. Okay, let’s get to it.
Talisker 14, 1994, “Manager’s Choice” (58.6%; bodega sherry European oak cask; from my own bottle)
Nose: Very recognizably Talisker off the top with peppery peat and salt. Sweeter notes come up from below (pipe tobacco) along with beef bouillon and savoury gunpowder. Gets earthier as it sits with mushrooms—more specifically the liquor from soaking dried shiitake mushrooms. With more time there’s some orange peel in the mix and a touch of butterscotch as well. A few drops of water and the salt and orange peel combine and turn to preserved lime; a hint of apricot jam in there too. Continue reading
Ben Nevis 21, 1997 (Maltbarn)

Here is my last whisky/booze review of the month and also of the year. (Yes, there are five Mondays this December but I’m sticking with my regimen of only opening four bottles each month). I’ve not chosen anything particularly special to close out the year but I’m looking forward to this one anyway as well-aged Ben Nevis from a bourbon cask is usually a good bet. This one was distilled in 1997 and bottled in 2018 by Maltbarn, who’d then been on the indie bottling scene for almost a decade and had built a strong reputation over that time. They’re still around but, as I’ve not kept up with the whisky world in the last few years, I’m not sure if they’re still releasing whiskies at the clip they had been at the end of the previous decade. For that matter I’m not sure how many of the other stalwart European indie bottlers who came to prominence in that decade and the one previous are still as active as they used to be. I’m no longer in the whisky accumulating business and no longer a good source of information—if I ever was one—on what’s being released and by who. But I am glad to have a number of good bottles on my shelves from my whisky accumulating days to drink now. Let’s see if this is one of them. Continue reading
Port Charlotte 7, 2002 (Whisky Doris)

The third whisky review of the month is of a malt that is considerably younger than the previous two (a Strathisla 30 from G&M and a Bunnahabhain 33 from Whisky Doris). This Port Charlotte was distilled in 2002 and bottled from a single bourbon hogshead in 2010, a few months shy of its eighth birthday. The bottler again is Whisky Doris. I purchased it not too long after it was released and it has sat unopened on my shelves for almost a decade and a half for no good reason. I opened it in November and took a large sample with me to Delhi to both drink there and review. Here now are my notes.
Port Charlotte 7, 2002 (63.5%; Whisky Doris; bourbon hogshead 1171; from my own bottle)
Nose: The usual lactic notes off the top: scalded milk, parmesan rind. Big phenolic smoke too, of course, of course, along with sweeter coastal notes: shells, rotting kelp. Some apple as well. With some air some cream emerges. More cream with a few drops of water and the smoke expands as well. I think this might need a little more water as it still hits my nostrils hard. Yes, a second splash and it’s now just mellow enough: big smoke and cream still and some of the lemon from the palate emerges as well. Continue reading
Bunnahabhain 33, 1980 (Whisky Doris)

A day later than usual, here is the month’s second booze review. Following last week’s Strathisla 30 it is both another single malt review and another review of an older whisky. This time it’s a Bunnahabhain bottled by Whisky Doris, a 33 year old distilled in 1980 and bottled in 2013. I’ve previously reviewed a 31 yo Bunnahabhain distilled in 1980 (that one was also bottled by Whisky Doris) and a 34 yo Bunnahabhain distilled in 1980 (that one was bottled by Whisky Fair). I liked both of those but neither got me very excited. Will this one break that streak? Hopefully, it will in a positive direction. Let’s see how it goes.
Bunnahabhain 33, 1980 (45.6%; Whisky Doris; sherry butt #92; from my own bottle)
Nose: Honey, brown butter, wood glue, dried leaves, some oak extract. On the second sniff it’s quite reminiscent of some tonics I did not enjoy being forced to drink as a child—not objectionable in this case though! As it sits the organic notes recede and some toffee emerges. A few drops of water pull out more of the oak extract. Continue reading
Strathisla 30 (Gordon & MacPhail)

Here to kick off the month in whisky reviews is a rather old and rather good Strathisla. This 30 year old was one of those licensed bottlings by Gordon & MacPhail but I can’t get a fix on year of release. Whiskybase does not have a listing for this 750 ml bottle at 43% abv. We can cautiously assume it was released at the same time as the 700 ml bottle at 40% but there’s no release date on the listing for that bottle either. My spreadsheet tells me I acquired it in 2013 from Binny’s in Chicago but I am pretty sure it was released in the previous decade. If I’m right about that, this is distillate from the 1970s, possibly even the early-mid 1970s. That’s generally a good thing when it comes single malty whisky from Scotland and especially when it’s older Speyside whiskies bottled by Gordon & MacPhail. Anyway, if you know more about the release year etc. please do write in below. In the meantime, here are my notes taken from the fourth pour from my bottle (which I am very sorry to be separated from here in Delhi). Continue reading
Laphroaig Cairdeas 2024, Cask Favorites

Well, I finally found the 2024 Cairdeas in the Twin Cities. I don’t mean to suggest that it had been hard to find until now. For all I know, it’s been out and easily available for a while. It’s just that I had not looked. But a week ago I stopped in at South Lyndale Liquors to buy some salumi (yes, I now go to liquor stores to buy cured meats) and when I took a look at their single malt whisky section, there it was. $85 was the price, I believe—quite reasonable in the current market. I noted two things of interest right away: 1) this is the first Cairdeas since 2011 (at least) to be packaged not in a tube but in a box; 2) it has an age statement. Personally, I prefer tubes to boxes but, really, who gives a fuck? The age statement is interesting though. Not just because it’s 10 years old but because of the way it’s supposed to have been put together. Apparently, this year’s Cairdeas is comprised of whisky from casks of the previous cask strength Cairdeas incarnations of the Triple Wood and PX releases. Why is that interesting? Well, the Triple Wood Cairdeas was released in 2019 and the PX in 2021. So either they’ve vatted leftover Triple Wood casks that were a few years older than 10 years of age with PX casks that just hit that number or the Triple Wood Cairdeas was very young indeed in 2019. Well, I guess that’s not really very interesting. More interesting, or rather, amusing, is that Laphroaig is now apparently approaching the Cairdeas releases the same way I approach bottles I’m not terribly enthused about finishing once they enter the home stretch: by mixing them together and hoping for something more interesting than the originals. Let’s see if that’s what we have here. Continue reading
Aberlour 20, 1990 (Single Malts of Scotland)

Last week I reviewed a 19 yo Lagavulin released in 2015. This week I have for you a review of a 20 yo Aberlour released in 2011. This was bottled by Single Malts of Scotland, which was then just one of the Whisky Exchange’s labels. Some years later they spun their independent bottling concern off as a separate concern, Elixir Distillers. But back in December 2011 when I purchased this, all of that was some distance in the future. And you’ll know 2011 was a lot more than 13 years ago when I tell you that this 20 yo single cask whisky at cask strength from a well-known distillery cost all of $77. Well, I’ve finally got around to opening the bottle. As always, I have no idea why I waited so long, especially as I rather enjoy bourbon cask Aberlour—see here, here and here for a few reviews. Most official releases from the distillery involve sherry maturation; in fact, I can’t remember trying an official bourbon cask release that was not a hand-filled distillery exclusive. Alas, when I was at the distillery in 2018—when I did one of their tours with a friend—they did not have any casks available for hand-filling, leave alone any bourbon casks. Anyway, let’s get to this one now. Continue reading
Lagavulin 19, 1995 for Feis Ile 2014

I still haven’t gotten my hands on a bottle of the Feis Ile release I was expecting to review this fall. I am referring, of course, to the 2024 Laphroaig Cairdeas. For all I know, it’s been in Minnesota for a while: I just haven’t stopped in at a liquor store for a while—if you’ve seen it around somewhere locally, please drop me a line. In the meantime, here’s a review of a Feis Ile release from ten years ago. You are welcome. This was Lagavulin’s release for 2014. The total release was of 3500 bottles, which tells you a number of casks were involved—as your average sherry butt holds between 475-500 liters. Those casks were all European oak sherry casks and were all filled on January 30, 1995, which would make this whisky 19 years old. When sherry cask Lagavulin is good, it’s really, really good. Such were the 2013 and 2015 Feis Ile releases, both of which I’ve reviewed on the blog (here and here). I’m also remembering the 12 year old Lagavulin for Friends of the Classic Malts, which was also a 1995 distillation and which might also have been from European oak casks (I’m too lazy to go down to the whisky lair and check the label on my last surviving bottle). Anyway, let’s see what this one is like. Continue reading
Amrut Cask Strength, Batch 8

I was going to say it’s been a long time since my last Amrut review but it turns out it’s only been a year and a half. In February 2023 I reviewed (the?) four releases in the distillery’s Aatma series (here, here, here, and here). And in 2022 I’d reviewed another couple of releases that were exclusives for US stores (K&L and Spec’s). But it would be accurate to say that it’s been a long time since I’ve reviewed a whisky from what used to be Amrut’s core range: the Fusion and the unpeated and peated releases (at both regular and cask strength). I’m not sure what Amrut’s core range looks like one or if they still have one. As I’ve said before, it’s been a long time since I’ve paid any attention to whisky industry news. I did always enjoy that core range, especially the cask strength incarnations of their base malts. I’ve previously reviewed Batch 2 of the unpeated Cask Strength and Batch 4 and Batch 9 of the peated. I see now that I never did review the Fusion—an oversight I should do something about. Here now is a review of Batch 8 of the unpeated Cask Strength. As this was bottled in 2010, I can’t tell you what relationship it has to Amrut’s current whisky but if you have kept up with it, perhaps you could let me know in the comments. 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
Laphroaig Cairdeas 2011, Ileach Edition

It’s Laphroaig Cairdeas season in the United States of America and accordingly I have for you a review of the Laphroaig Cairdeas. In my helpful way, it’s not a review of the 2024 Laphroaig Cairdeas but of the 2011 release. It’s not my fault: the 2024 Cairdeas is not in Minnesota yet. Or at least it wasn’t in the closest Total Wine when I checked a couple of weeks ago. But I had two unopened bottles of the 2011 Cairdeas on my shelves and was somewhat surprised to discover that I’d not previously reviewed it on the blog, despite having gone through at least one bottle, if not more after launching the blog in early 2013. Anyway, no time like the present. The 2011 Cairdeas, the so-called Ileach Edition—a reference to then-distillery manager and native son of Islay, John Campbell—was the first edition of the Laphroaig Cairdeas to come to the US. It was also the first one I ever tasted and purchased a bottle of. It was right in my wheelhouse: young, bourbon cask Laphroaig. In 2013 the distillery began to go down a path of wine finishes and double maturations for the Cairdeas releases, pausing only in 2015 when they put out the outstanding bourbon cask 200th anniversary release. I’ve liked some of those later releases but I’m looking forward to renewing my acquaintance with this more straightforward expression of the distillery’s classic profile. Continue reading
Caol Ila 22, 1990 (Archives)

Okay, after a week off, let’s get back to the booze reviews. My most recently bottle is this Caol Ila 22, 1990 bottled by the Whiskybase shop to mark the first anniversary of their Archives label. (There were a few other anniversary releases as well but I can’t recall off the top of my head what they all were.) This was from a single bourbon hogshead and Whiskybase only got 130 bottles from it—I don’t know where the rest went. Well, the Whiskybase database lists four other Caol Ila 22, 1990s, three of which were released in 2012 along with this one. None are at the strength of this release but two were diluted to 48% and 46% respectively. So it’s conceivable that one of those might have been the destination of the rest of this hogshead. As it happens, I reviewed one of those two just over a year ago (this Mackillop’s Choice release at 46%) but it has a different cask number. So too does the Ian Macleod Dun Bheagan release at 48%. So there are either more Caol Ila 22, 1990s out there than are listed on Whiskybase or the rest may have gone into a vatting or a blend or aged further for a later release. If you know more about this, please write in below. Anyway, I opened the bottle last week and here now are my notes from the fourth pour. Continue reading