Two young Caol Ilas from 2007

Since the theme of the first bit of 2017 is to get through a boat load of samples, here’s two in one go. Both are from Caol Ila distillery on the eastern shore of Islay, and both are from 2007. The biggest difference is the alcohol percentage. One is bottled at a drinking strength of 46%, while the other sits at a slightly higher cask strength of 51.2. The last one is surprisingly low in alcohol for an eight year old whisky.

My approach for these two whiskies is a bit two faced. On one hand I recently found out, while tasting some Islay whiskies, that I’ve not gotten tired of peaty drams and I thoroughly love them if they’re done well. On the other hand there are way too many young Islay whiskies on the market as we speak. It’s incredibly hard for one to stand out from the crowd since the numbers are huge and the vast majority of these whiskies is good, but not exceptional.

cilsig2007Caol Ila 2007-2016, 8yo, bourbon barrel 315325, 46% – Signatory for The Whisky Exchange

On the nose this one is surprisingly heavy, with an oily sense to it, and quite a lot of thick smoke. Quite green, forest-like with ferns and underbrush. Some apple, grains and wood. The palate is gentle, as expected from 46%, with quite a lot of fresh oak. It’s rich and dry with oak and barley. Gentle smoke, apple peels and apple cores. The finish focuses more on the smoke, but is gentle. Grains and oak, and it lasts quite long.

Interesting and completely to expectation. A good whisky, but not one that stands out from the crowd. I do like that this is bottled at a lower strength, contrary to what’s popular at the moment. It gives room to more flavor notes to come through.

85/100

20160510_caol_ilaCaol Ila 2007-2016, 8yo, 51.2% – Beacon Spirits Belgium

This one is slight more fatty with buttery vanilla custard on the nose. A slight focus on the barley, not unlike an apple crumble with custard. Some smoke and oak, with a crisp note hiding behind it all. Leafy greens and some sugary sweetness. The palate is slightly sharper, but not overly so. It’s quite dry and sweet, again with the vanilla and crumble pastry. The finish starts very sharp but mellows to a more nicely warming level. Rich with lots of flavor. It’s pretty long with barley, oak and smoke.

This one is comparable to the previous one, but still different enough to be interesting to taste side by side. There’s a bit more focus on the cask instead of on the spirit, with some vanilla notes. It’s also slightly sweeter.

85/100

The biggest difference between those two whiskies is that the Whisky Exchange one goes for little under 70 euros, while the Beacon Spirits one goes for 95. That’s a pretty big difference and that would by my main concern when choosing between these two drams.If you prefer cask strength whiskies, I suggest shelling out for the Belgian bottling, since the 46% one is surprisingly gentle, even for a 46% one.

Still, both are very solid drams and deliver exactly what you expect from young Caol Ila.

Thanks to both The Whisky Exchange and Beacon Spirits for these whiskies! I quite enjoyed them!

Posted in Caol Ila | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Ledaig 1999-2015, 46% – Gordon & MacPhail’s Connoisseurs Choice

Since I’m trying to ‘pay my dues’ to the people who sent me samples over the last year or so, I just grabbed the one closest to me when I checked my cupboard. It just happened to be this Ledaig.

Ledaig it peated Tobermory, in much the same way that Port Charlotte is peated Bruichladdich and Longrow is (more) peated Springbank. I think it’s quite practical that they use a different brand name for it. Mostly because, apart from some indies occassionally mixing it up, it’s quite clear what to expect from a bottle when deciding what to buy.

Ledaig (and Tobermory) is a distillery that is not really on my radar. Ledaig as a brand is doing something about it and I’ve tried some really nice ones over the last two years, but somehow I never consider picking up a bottle except for a bottle share. Much the same can be said about Tobermory, but I’ve not tried many, ever. The final dram in the Blind Tasting Competition told me I was wrong about not trying Tobermory.

ledaig

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
Lots of ashy smoke, and quite a clean whisky behind that. Lots of grass and straw. Dry oak. There is a certain minerality. Not unlike the irony taste (although now it’s the smell) of apples, or some slate like scent.

Sip:
The palate is quite course. There’s a rough, grainy feel to it that is not unlike how sand would taste if you’d just have the taste instead of the feel. Still, there’s a bit of dry white oak and lots of smoke. A wood smoke kind, instead of a peaty, earthy kind. Less irony, but a bit more focus on wood.

Swallow:
The finish is quite warming and simple, but the smokiness is very nice and it’s quite smooth.

Normally, bottlings with this profile from Ledaig come at a near 60% ABV and are scorching hot. Initially those put me off Ledaig for a long while. Luckily nowadays these gentler bottlings are around too. It’s a far better whisky for drinking.

Having said that, this whisky is a bit of two things:
On one hand it’s a nice drinker for someone who wants something else than an Islay peat bomb, with a different flavor profile. On the other hand it’s also a drinking whisky. By that I mean there’s nothing really wrong with it, but it’s also not very complex. Good, but not multidimensional and I if you’re looking for something to draw your attention, this one isn’t it.

83/100

Ledaig 1999-2015, Refill American Oak Hogsheads, 46%, Gordon & MacPhail’s Connoisseurs Choice. Available in Germany for some 60 euros.

Thanks to Gordon & MacPhail for sending a sample!

Posted in Ledaig, Tobermory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Springbank 1969-2004, 35yo, 58.5% – Adelphi

Last week I finally got in the bottles for the most recent bottles share of The Whisky Agency. A nice Blair Athol, Allt-a-Bhainne and a blended malt which was released for Maltstock last year.

Also in the box were two samples Teun (Maltstock Teun, that is). One of which was this Springbank 1969. I think I did a double take when I saw this label. Just a random Springbank from the sixties. You don’t come accross these all too often, and for good reason since they are unaffordable. I bet this one was a lot more reachable when it came out over 12 years ago, but how things have changed…

It’s no secret that Springbank is one of my favorite distilleries on the planet, if not THE favorite. I’ve unfortunately only been there once, but I hope to change that in 2018, and just maybe, but those chances are tiny, this year.

Sniff:
Quite fierce on the nose with a lot of dry oak, and a light whiff of smoke. A bit salty, some black pepper and there’s some ‘temperate’ fruit too. Apple, dry pear peels, grape twigs. Some spices too. I think I’m getting some woody cinnamon too.

Sip:
The arrival is slightly hot, but there’s a lot of flavor too. Lots of old oak, and the typical Springbank dirtiness. Some salt and pepper again, as well as dried apple. The pear peels from the nose as well. And something else. Dry and old sponge cake, maybe some other spices?

Swallow:
The finish is surprisingly gentle and warming. Quite long, some sweetness like in the old sponge cake. It has that dryness, and staleness, but in a good way (somehow). Still a bit of fruit, but the salt and pepper aren’t as noticeable.

This is a truly tremendous whisky. It’s a bit different, since most old stuff that comes out nowadays is heavily sherried, or at least far more sherried than this one. This is a whisky from a refill butt, but I only noticed that from the finish, somehow.

The flavors are fairly straight forward and even a bit predictable. The beauty of this whisky is that everything is spot on and utterly beautifully done. The flavors are very wood driven, but never so woody that it tastes like you’re licking the cask.

92/100

Springbank 1969-2004, 35yo, Refill butt 149, 58.5%, Adelphi. Available at The Whisky Exchange for 2500 quid…

Thanks a million, Teun!

Posted in Springbank | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Connemara 1992-2006, K92/33 4109, 46%

A few years ago when I was having dinner at Scottish Restaurant Hielander we got an Irish single cask Connemara whiskey with our main course. If I remember correctly it was a grilled duckbreast, but I don’t know anything about side dishes and what else was on the plate. It must have been almost five years ago since my wife was pregnant with our daughter.

Anyway, the whiskey was awesome and I set out to get myself that same cask. Obviously, that wasn’t available anymore but I did get another one at an acceptable price. Unfortunately the thrill was gone by the time I opened it so it took a while to be reviewed, and the only reason I’m nearing the end of my bottle is because I sold quite a lot of samples from it.

Strangely, I didn’t like this whisky initially. I thought it was soapy and didn’t offer much else. Now, after a year or two of airing and oxidizing in the bottle things have changed.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
Very floral with a very gentle peaty smokiness. Floral, almost to a level of lavender and the perfume of Bowmore’s more notorious years. Luckily, a long while in the bottle with more than half of it gone has taken the edge off and now it’s nicely balanced and pushed back by smoke, grains and grassy notes.

Sip:
The palate is quite gentle at 46%, but not without a bit of bite. Nicely tingling, with flavors of grass, straw and a dry smoke. Some earthy notes, as well as a tiny note of perfumy lavender.

Swallow:
The finish is a bit more candy like with a surprising sweetness of pear drops. Slightly dusty and dry, with more focus on the oak as well.

I’m quite glad I left this out for later reviewing. I find that this whisky has improved massively with some oxidation in a contained area. Initially I was quite disappointed with this, when I first tasted it. Now, however, I find it’s a rather nice dram and well worth the 75 bucks I spent on it (I think). The current price according to Whiskybase is some 145 euros, and that’s too much.

Also, I see it promoted as ‘almost 14 years old’ and ‘handfilled label’. Which means there’s an autograph on it, as with a lot of single casks out there. Almost 14 years old is 13 years old, folks. Don’t be pretentious.

86/100

Connemara 26/08/1992 – 02/06/2006, K92/33 4109, 46%. Available for 145 euros.

Posted in - Irish Whiskey, Connemara, Cooley | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Another January 1st.

Apart from wishing everyone a happy 2017, I’m sitting here being glad the holidays are over. Mostly because the kids went completely ballistic with a lot of holidays in succession in The Netherlands, and the run up to these festivities.

I could go over the goals I set myself last year and wallow in self pity for not really achieving much of these. The biggest things, booze wise, I wanted to do last year is getting the count of open bottles down to some thirty-odd bottles. I got stuck at 40, but that’s pretty okay. I’ve been nagging about this for a couple of years now, but it’s working out slowly, but steadily.

The second thing was to get the amount of samples I still have to go through down. That didn’t work out, although I think the amount has sort of stayed the same over 2016.

I also wanted to do an Armagnac bottle share, but I got that out of the way in January, and it was a pretty fun thing to do. Quite interesting, but Armagnac will not be replacing whisky in any significant manner any time soon.

This year I’m not going to do any non-whisky-bottle-shares. At least, I’ve got nothing planned. Armagnac and Mezcal were on the top of my list and those have been done. Mezcal has been done three times, even. Of the last bottle share I did with Mezcal, I’ve not tried any drinks yet. Somehow I’m not getting around to it.

My main focus for this year is paying my dues. I’ve been receiving samples from several bottlers and distillers and while a lot of them have been reviewed over the last year, I still have quite a few of them lined up still.

I think it’s unfair to the good people that sent me stuff that I postpone the reviews sort-of indefinitely. I know I’ve got stuff waiting from Gordon & MacPhail/Benromach, Wemyss/Kingsbarns, Master of Malt, The Whisky Exchange, Tomintoul, Beacon Spirits/Liquid Art and I’m probably forgetting some brands. Bad Sjoerd!

Let’s say I hope to taste those samples first and get them reviewed on this wee blog in a month or two.

Apart from that I’m not setting any goals since I’ve got some major DIY-ing to do at home for our third kid. That wee crap-canon will arrive in May if everything goes according to plan, and before that we have to redo the entire attic.

2017 is promising to be an interesting year again, but thank the high heavens the holidays are over 😉

Posted in - News and Announcements | 2 Comments

My whisky of the year

I love end of year lists. Mostly reading them, because it sifts a lot of the corn from the chaff. It means cutting 200-odd posts from every blog with just the top of that annum.

There’s always this division between blog lists. Some blogs go for the whisky they rated highest. While this would statistically be apt, it also removes the ‘appreciation’ factor that sometimes happens with a whisky that doesn’t necessarily rate stellarly.

I prefer to go for the whisky that I remember best and most favorably. For example, I think it was 2014 that I had some stellar whiskies, but one of the whiskies I remember best is the Benromach 10 that came out then. That one killed it, and especially so because it only set you back 40 euros.

Last year I picked an amazing Bowmore from Wemyss that probably didn’t score highest either. The point I’m trying to make is that my whisky of the year pick is not the statistically highest scoring whisky I’ve had this year. I’m also trying to exclude whiskies that weren’t bottled this year.

The reason for that is to not say my favorite whisky of 2016 is a whisky distilled in 1912. Also, while I really, really like (and appreciate getting a sample of) Glenlivet 1974, Glen Grant 1954, Highland Park 1956 and such. It’s just that practically no-one can afford that, and if you could (and want to) it’s hard to get.

So, without too much further ado, the best my favorite whisky of 2016! (There can really be only one)

Springbank Local Barley 16, 1999-2016.

I seriously, seriously love this whisky, and I was happy to have a big sample and some back-up for later.

The whisky does everything right. It has the typical Springbank flavors I love so much, it’s slightly dirty which makes it works so well. It’s strong, it’s quite big and it’s what the Malt Maniacs would call a ‘natural cask’.

I am really looking forward to the next four releases (it’s a series of five, I’m told), and if they’re anywhere near this awesome, we might be in for a boring streak of whiskies of the year for a while!

Very honorable mentions:

 

Posted in Springbank | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Speyside Region, 1975-2016, 40yo, Fino Sherry Butt, 55% – The Whisky Agency (Good Vibes)

This bottle is from one of the more expensive bottle shares I did last year. Initially it was a bit painful (financially) that it didn’t sell out, but at this moment I am glad it didn’t.

It’s not often anymore that bottles from 1975 come by, which results in The Whisky Agency having become one of the slowest bottlers to release stuff at the moment. This unnamed distillery from Speyside (of which we generally know what that means) was distilled years before I was born (6, to be exact) and spent an awesome 40 years in a Fino cask.

Shamefully there aren’t too many Fino casks out there, which I would love to see remedied. Fino is a weird kind of sherry with a nose that’s generally quite different from the palate. But when the casks are used for whisky maturation, I generally am interested since almost all of those whiskies are friggin’ amazing.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
Dusty peach skins and a bit of warmth from the 55%. That typical scent of flinty fino sherry, which is gorgeous. Some chalky notes and match heads, in a very good way. Soft stone fruits, apricots, reine claude plums. Quite intense, especially for this age.

Sip:
A touch of peppery heat at the arrival, but the slightly sweet stone fruits comes right after. That chalky, flinty note of the Fino sherry again, and after that there’s more heat. The alcohol seems to reactivate. Lots of fruit and gentle oak influences. Dry and sweet, with loads of fruit. Is that guava?

Swallow:
The big and bold finish with most of the flavors amped up a bit more. Incredibly fruity, but also some soft grains and oak. Long, flavorful and those white-ish stone fruits are great. Maybe some lychee as well?

So, an incredibly fruity dram in which I kept discovering new flavors with every sip. It started with (wild) peaches and apricots, then came reine claudes, guava and even lychee. Underneath all this awesome fruitiness there’s a flinty, chalky dustiness that is quite typical of fino sherry in my view. Add some minor grain notes and a gentle oakiness and you’ve got yourself a dram you wish you’d bought more of.

93/100

Speyside Region, 1975-2016, 40yo, Fino Sherry Butt, 55%, The Whisky Agency (Good Vibes). Available on Whiskybase for 440 euros.

Posted in Undisclosed | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

BTC Sample 18: Tobermory 20, 1995-2015, 54.7%, Rest & Be Thankful

This Rest & Be Thankful brand is a bit of a strange one. When they started bottling two years ago they got things riled up with some hugely overpriced Octomores. If I remember correctly those were twice as expensive as the already ridiculously expensive Octomore bottlings from Bruichladdich themselves.

However, after getting a bit of a bad rep for that they seem to have been turning things around with some very decently priced bottlings. This one is no exception. It also is my first encounter with the whisky itself, and not just the brand as a name in web shops.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
The nose starts sharp, with lots of barley at first. Some dry notes as well and a spiciness that my wife and I identified as mustard seed. Interesting stuff, with also some hints of both grass and sand.

Sip:
The palate starts sharp too, but mellows a little bit right away. Oak, grass, again the mustard seed. Lots of barley notes, but also the dryness I associate with the chaff of the grains. Dry and slightly syrupy.

Swallow:
The finish is rich, and the spiciness from earlier is a bit more generic now. Oaky and syrupy but not sweet. Quite a long finish.

This is not something I would call and easy sipper or an effortless dram. There are some interesting and curious flavors, that surprised me a little bit. Because of the spices and combined oak and grass I went for a highland dram and (randomly) picked Clynelish. Not sure why since I pretty much knew it wasn’t that, but I didn’t have a better guess either. Well, apart from ‘anything else’.

I did get 30 points for the age so I did get over 300 points this year. Only a sixth of the possible score. It got me to 53rd place, out of 71, so a pretty shit spot to end up in. I have no idea how to improve my game, except maybe to stop tasting so damn much and take more time with each dram. Do more verticals to get to know the ins and outs of a distillery would also help. That may be a resolution for 2017!

Also, Tobermory is a blind spot due to one bad experience in the beginning of my whisky drinking days. It’s silly, since ever since I’ve mostly had Tobermorys that were actually very good and I keep telling myself I should give this distillery more credit than I do.

Quite tempted to buy this one too. Just because it’s very good, and very different that things I know.

89/100

Tobermory 20, 1995-2015, Bourbon cask 1076, 54.7%, Rest & Be Thankful. Available for about a hundred bucks

Posted in Tobermory | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

BTC Sample 17: Glenrothes 1990-2015, 24yo, 55.7%, Cadenhead’s

Yesterday I was convinced this was a young-ish, high octane belter from the SMWS. It turns out to be a not-insanely-high-strength Glenrothes with some decent age to it.

Maybe I should just get out of this hobby all together…

Anyway, I had this before in February. You can read the review here. Back then I thoroughly liked it, but yesterday it didn’t really work for me. I didn’t dislike it, but it left me in a shrugging mood, so to say.

My tasting notes are quite different too. This might have to do with me still working through the tail end of a cold I’ve been having for weeks (generally, the evenings are fine though), or my palate has changed, or something else entirely. I guess we’ll never know.

Sniff:
Sherry from American Oak, by the smell of it. Sweet, but really intense with some fruits stewed in syrup. Some toasted oak, with a raw edge.

Sip:
Very sweet, and very strong. Some chocolaty notes, with stewed fruits. Some rhubarb and pears. Syrupy, with some alcoholic hot noets. It takes a long time before it mellows a bit.

Swallow:
The finish ramps up the sherry at first, and then mellows to a rather nice sweetness. Very Christmassy, like boiled Christmas pudding, with the cloying sweetness that it generally has. Quite heavy.

This time around I rated it only with 85/100, instead of a whopping 90. I guess what a good ‘analyst’ would do now is get a bottle and make up his mind, but since I also ordered that Bunnahabhain from yesterday, that’s not going to happen.

I still got points for the region, though. I went for a 10 year old Glen Moray at 60 odd percent…

Glenrothes 1990-2015, 24yo, 55.7%, Cadenhead’s. Available on Whiskybase for 185 euros.

Posted in Glenrothes | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

BTC Sample 16: Bunnahabhain 1991-2014, 46%, Wemyss ‘A Thread of Smoke’

Yesterday’s Whatsapp discussion with SA, on the forum as ‘SigaarJood’ (he can state things like that without it being discriminatory because he’s part of a minority):

Me:
You’re getting a light smoke too?
I’m sure as hell liking it, but not a clue

SA:
Not yet. I’m going to let it sit and open a bit

Me:
I can’t think of anything with this salinity and light smoke that makes sense
I don’t think it’s funky enough for Springbank, it can’t be Talisker or Laddie or Highland Park.
It’s not Bunna

SA:
Pulteney?
I can’t figure it the age at all
You’re right that it’s a hair smokey

Me:
Might be Pulteney, but generally that has far more vanilla

SA:
I wouldn’t put it over 46% though

We carried on like that for a while. The important bit is that I completely wrote off Bunnahabhain. Most Bunnas I know, from before and after 1991 have a far more fatty texture, and are much more malt forward too. So, it wasn’t Bunna. Right.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
Alcohol, a light graininess, and some light smoke. Grass, hay, some dried apples. Very old fashioned complexity.

Sip:
A bit gentle on the arrival, but it gets a bit sharper after a second or two. Quite dry, more straw than hay this time. Slightly austere and lightly smoky. A tad salty maybe?

Swallow:
Dry with some oak, a light woody smokiness and a bit of mineral like austerity. Apple too.

Somewhat short tasting notes but damn. This is one awesome dram. Old fashioned complexity, gentle smoke. I bet it’s from a refill hogshead, since there’s not so much vanilla in there, which is a very good thing.

Last year my whisky of the year was a Wemyss Bowmore. Apparently these people know how to do Islay whiskies! Taking the top spot on my wishlist now!

90/100

Bunnahabhain 1991-2014, 46%, Wemyss ‘A Thread of Smoke’. Available in Germany for about € 110.

Posted in Bunnahabhain | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment