Highland Park 1999, 16yo, cask 4260, 56.6% – Gordon & MacPhail for The Whisky Exchange

Posted on 17 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

The second sample I got from The Whisky Exchange is a cask strength Highland Park from 1999. About the same age (or exactly the same age) as the Aberlour. This one’s from a bourbon cask, which deviates a little bit from Highland Park’s own more sherry focused bottlings.

Over the years I’ve been able to try some sherry casks, bourbon casks, and batches made up of both. I have to say that, generally, Highland Park puts out some amazing whisky that works in both types of wood. There might have been some finishes too, but I’ve chosen to forget them if I ever tried them. I generally am not a huge fan of finishes when they’re not done in sherry or bourbon casks.

Anyway, a bourbon cask matured Highland Park. Bottled for picky choosers at The Whisky Exchange, by picky cask selectors at Gordon & MacPhail. Should be good, right?

Sniff:
Quite rough and coastal. Slightly salt and less vanilla than I expected from a first fill bourbon cask. Straw and marram grass. Hard fruit candies. A slight trace of smoke and quite briny. Some sand and sea shells.

Sip:
The palate is less sharp than the nose, but there is some peppery heat from the alcohol. Some oak, but not a lot, and some vanilla. Light smoke and fruit. Pear, apple, melon and pineapple. Yellow fruits, so to say. Twigs and green leaves.

Swallow:
The finish is long with beach flavors. Sand, salt, brine and some wood. The kind you also find on the beach. Somewhat less fruity.

Well, it might not be as awesome as the Aberlour (but it’s hard to compare directly, since they’re so different) but it sure is a tasty whisky. It has more or less everything you hope from a bourbon matured Highland Park with it being a fruity and coastal dram. To me, that works.

The ‘coastality’ of this whisky is what I find most appealing. It reminds me of the Dutch beach in autumn. Lots of stuff left by the tide with ropes, and bits of wood lying around. The smell of the beach and the sea. Gorgeous stuff.

89/100

Highland Park 16yo, 30/08/1999 – 13/01/2016, first fill bourbon barrel 4260, 56.6%, Gordon & MacPhail for The Whisky Exchange. Available at TWE for £ 80

Thanks to TWE for sending a sample!

Posted in Highland Park | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Aberlour 16yo, Cask 4738, 53.5% – OB for The Whisky Exchange

Posted on 16 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Just to keep things fresh, The Whisky Exchange keeps bottling casks of whisky from all over the place. Their newest releases are a vintage 1999 Highland Park from a bourbon cask, and this 16 year old Aberlour from a first fill sherry cask.

Generally, Aberlour releases their regular releases and the always impressive A’bunadh. That’s a NAS full frontal sherry release at a very high strength. This is something similar to that, but with more age under its belt.

While I’m generally quite impressed with Aberlour, I don’t think I’ve ever bought a bottle of it, unless it was in a bottle share which I don’t remember. Since my memory is pretty okay, normally, I think I never bought a bottle.

This happens, there are quite some distilleries for which that is true. But somehow, with Aberlour this strikes me as quite strange. Especially since they’re normally quite nicely priced.

Sniff:
The sherry notes on the nose are fairly huge. Slightly dry, and a lighter sherry style. I would say Oloroso over PX, in this case. The nose is smoother than I expected, and there’s a minty note in the background that keeps things fresh. Dried plums, clove and nutmeg, wood pulp and sour cherries.

Sip:
The palate too, is rather smooth. Still quite spicy but slightly more focus on pepper (chili and black) and it tastes a bit like a dry barbecue rub (mind, not the greasy, smoky barbecue itself). Oak and fruit as well. Plums, cherries, some cherry stones too. Slightly bitter because of that. But also syrupy, almost fatty.

Swallow:
The finish goes back to the sherry notes themselves. Oak and fruit, but also the spices. It’s long and rich.

Dare I say it? I think this almost tastes like a Yamazaki 18, minus the Mizunara notes, but more intensity. That can also be read as: I friggin’ love this stuff. Somehow I hoped the bourbon Highland Park would be better than this, for some reason. But this one does sherry so very well there’s just nothing to complain about.

The fruit is not all encompassing, but neither are the spices and the wood. The balance is quite extraordinary. Absolutely gorgeous stuff, and really highly recommended.

91/100

Aberlour 16yo, First Fill Sherry Butt 4738, 53.5%, OB for The Whisky Exchange. Available there for £ 100

Thanks to The Whisky Exchange for sending me a sample. I’m thinking whether or not I can afford this at this point 😉

Posted in Aberlour | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Paul John 6yo, Batch 2, 54.7% – That Boutique-y Whisky Company

Posted on 13 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Starting a blog post by telling a certain brand is not on my radar is nothing new. Actually, it’s starting to become a bit tedious. As it turns out, a lot of brands and/or distilleries are not on my radar. It seems I’m not really keeping track of many developments in the world of whisky.

I think that’s because whisky news, most times, is also becoming a bit tedious. A new distillery around every corner. A new release from every distillery with some weird name that suggestively tells you what to taste. You know the drill.

I feel that, for my personal view on whisky, I’m veering back to the more established flavor profiles and styles. Not necessarily older brands, but older styles. Maybe that’s a bit because there are so many ‘off the beaten path’ and ‘original’ whiskies out there that a good bit of old fashioned single malt is becoming a curiosity.

Back to Paul John. For information about the distillery, I suggest you try Googling it. I don’t know anything about them, except that their oldest releases are about 6 years old and Master of Malt and its subsidiaries are the only bottlers (MoM and TBWC) that have ever released a Paul John whisky with an age statement. All of those are six years old.

I know they’re from India. I know the company hasn’t been producing single malt for long. By their labels I figure out they’re doing things a bit like Amrut, and are going for a Scottish style whisky.

Sniff:
Based on the previous statement, this might be a bit surprising. If you would have told me I was drinking a rye whisky, I’d have believed you. This is so sharp and spicy it’s really weird, for a single malt. Lots of freshly sawed oak. Rye, hay, pink peppercorns and some mint. Only after half an hour of airing it tones down a bit and becomes a bit more single malt like.

Sip:
The palate is incredibly dry with a mountain of fresh, and raw, oak. Again, sharp and spicy. It is quite consistent, with rye and pink and red peppercorns. Some old leather. Superbly dry.

Swallow:
The finish is mostly sharp, without a lot of flavor. Or maybe, the flavor is overpowered by the fierceness. Some bitter caramel towards the end.

Well. I’m not sure what to say about this. I added a drop of water but that didn’t do much. So, it might need more or it just doesn’t react all that well. It’s insanely sharp and I’m not overly enjoying this.

I generally like dry and spicy whiskies. But this is just over the top. Also, it’s so much like a rye whisky, I think if I want something like this I’d buy a rye whisky. So, again, this isn’t really for me I think. Especially at the price (€ 125-ish), I’d buy a nice single malt, and a nice rye instead.

Oh, and somehow, I missed the peat. Not sure what’s going on here.

81/100

Paul John 6yo, Batch 2, 54.7%, That Boutique-y Whisky Company. It’s available from Master of Malt for € 126

Thanks for That Boutique-y Whisky Company for sending the sample!

Posted in - World Whisky, Paul John | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

English Whisky Co. 5 year old, Batch 1, 49.5% – That Boutique-y Whisky Company

Posted on 12 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

This just might be the first English Whisky Co. Whisky with an age statement that I’ve tried. I have to admit that I’ve not tried all that many. Some chapters at Bottoms Up tastings here and there, and some indie bottlings. Most notably, the The Whisky Exchange’s one which they released last year.

I have to admit also, that I don’t really care about the brand. Somehow, the entire fact that it’s an English whisky doesn’t really interest me one way or another. It’s strange, since I’ve been enthused by other newish startups over the years, like Wolfburn, Kilchoman and others.

So, St. George’s whisky from That Boutique-y Whisky Company, a five year old. Not the oldest whisky from the distillery but with all their (rather crappy) chapter releases it’s certainly not the youngest either.

Sniff:
A nice balance between light, vanilla-rich wood and sweet, slightly fruity spirit. Apple, pear and white grapes. Orchard fruits, so to say (although that slightly weird since peaches and bananas also grow in orchards, but then they’re called plantations). Also scents of grass and straw.

Sip:
The palate is sharper than I expected, with a combination of black pepper and chili pepper. Some oak, but not too much. Straw, alcohol, vanilla and creme brulee. Quite rich, but a bit clumsy, maybe.

Swallow:
The finish is, again, quite rich. It’s slightly more balanced than the palate, with oak and straw, pepper and fruit. As in, the fruit is back again, since I missed that on the palate. Not overly long.

A whisky that, in a way, has two faces. On one hand it’s a mile ahead of anything I’ve tried from the official bottlings. On the other hand it still not a very interesting dram. The flavors are all there and it shows enough complexity. But…

But, where the TWE version had some off the beaten path flavors that made me think of a mix between single malt and single pot still whisky, this just doesn’t do anything unique, or different from many Scotch whiskies. In a way, it’s ‘yet another whisky’.

Then again, it’s not expensive either, especially not for a whisky that you don’t see too many releases of and is not as regularly available as many other brands. So there certainly are redeeming factors.

84/100

English Whisky Co. 5 year old, Batch 1, 49.5%, That Boutique-y Whisky Company. Available from Master of Malt for € 50

Thanks to That Boutique-y Whisky Company for the sample!

Posted in - World Whisky, English Whisky Co., St. George | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Blended Whisky #1, batch 3, 35 years old, 46.5% – That Boutique-y Whisky Company

Posted on 11 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

So, it’s batch three of whisky number one? What’s the story there?

Apparently, at least according to Master of Malt’s website, they named it Blended Whisky #1 because in 2015 at the World Whisky Awards it was chosen as the world’s best blended whisky. To automatically assume that the follow ups are just as good might sounds a bit presumptuous but that’s how marketing works. All the big guys do it, so why not the little ones?

Anyway, a 35 year old blended whisky, fairly warm on the heels of Murray McDavid’s one from Monday sounds like a happy coincidence to me. A happy one since I generally don’t mind sipping a 35 year old whisky at all.

Contrary to Murray McDavid, TBWC hasn’t disclosed what the components of the whisky are for this one, and I think they’re staying true to the That Boutique-y Whisky Company approach. If you don’t disclose it, you don’t have to explain when or why you change it.

Sniff:
It’s light and dry with quite a lot of grain on the nose. Not as much wood as you’d expect from something that’s older than me. Some sherry and a very light trace of smoke. A tiny hint of cardboard. Lots of American oak, en therefore quite a lot of vanilla too.

Sip:
The palate is soft and fruity. A tiny bit of spiciness, with white pepper for some heat. Peach, apple, banana, brown banana peels. It becomes quite dry after a while but it stays sweet. Not too sweet, mind. Pretty rich.

Swallow:
The finish is quite lovely and rich. More wood than before, dryer, older, even slightly bitter because of the dryness and oak. Long.

The finish ‘saves’ this whisky. Not that it needed saving, but that’s there my opinion of it increased. It’s a very, very lovely dram, it just gets slightly better on the finish.

The fruits and spices work well together, although it does feel a bit like a jumble of flavors on the palate. There’s a lot going on there, and while it’s hard to keep track of things there, it’s also what keeps a whisky interesting for a while. There’s some stuff to discover there.

It’s a real blended whisky. It has a lot of complexity and all areas of flavor are ticked off, except maybe the feinty area of the flavor wheel. There’s fruit, spices, oak, some smoke. It’s sweet, bitter and fresh. Very well done by That Boutique-y Whisky Company!

87/100

Blended Whisky #1, Batch 3, 35 years old, 46.5%, That Boutique-y Whisky Company. Available from Master of Malt for € 153.

Thanks to Master of Malt for sending the sample!

Posted in - Blended Whisky | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Macallan 25, batch 5, 48.8% – That Boutique-y Whisky Company

Posted on 10 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

In support of Compass Box’ Transparency Campaign, That Boutique-y Whisky Company have decided to add age statements to all their whiskies. This is a curious decision since the concept of the brand initially was to not do this.

It might also have something to do with the flack NAS whiskies are getting all over the world, and the fact that with this campaign support there’s some marketing spin off. I cannot blame them. I love them for it.

So, the first whisky I tried of the samples I got in last week is their 25 year old Macallan. On Master of Malt’s website this is already sold out, but since they also sell TBWC through other outlets, you might be able to find one if you want.

Macallan is a bit of a strange one at the moment. Once they were the pinnacle of branding and luxury whisky. But when they started releasing the Fine Oak series little over a decade ago many whisky fanatics think of them as a waning whisky. They used to be great. They used to be awesome. They used to be proud for doing things their way:

Golden Promise barley, only sherry casks from Jerez, no compromises. Not much of that is still left and it’s even getting harder and harder to find proper sherry cask matured whiskies from them. Unless, of course, you’re willing to shell out massively.

Then this. A vatting of at least a lot of sherry casks. There might have been some bourbon casks involved, or just American oak sherry casks.

Sniff:
Typical old style Macallan with lots of orange, orange zest and fruity sherry. Slightly fatty, like a custard and some vanille. Sweet baking spices with a hint of pepper. Caramel sauce and orange peels.

Sip:
The palate is slightly more spicy than I expected, and less sweet. Black pepper, peaches and citrus fruits. I get Valencia oranges and tangerine. The orange is both fresh and candied, and there’s a hint of cheese cake. Not as much wood as you’d expect of a 25 year old.

Swallow:
The finish is drier than the palate was, with more oak on the forefront. Slightly less fruity too. The caramel lingers, as do the sweet spices (cinnamon and clove). Dried oranges.

Well, this is a gorgeous whisky. The migration from really fruity on the nose to more and more spicy towards the finish makes for a really interesting, and delicious drink. It doesn’t feel inconsistent at all.

What also works is to take your time with a drink like this. I found that after half an hour of airing there were more leathery notes. The caramel was a bit more pronounced and it didn’t go flat at all.

With the way Macallan is going, it’s a good thing these bottlings are around. It’s a shame there’s so few of them and that too is reflected in the price. Still, quite recommended, since it’s lovely.

89/100 (gaining point because of added goodness after airing)

Macallan 25 years old, Batch 5, 48.8%, That Boutique-y Whisky Company. It used to cost just under 500 quid.

Thanks to Master of Malt / That Boutique-y Whisky Company for supplying the sample!

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

Bodach Aislig, 35 Years Old blended whisky, 1980, 46% – Murray McDavid

Posted on 9 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

When I think of Murray McDavid I think of Bruichladdich’s finishing regime, or ACEing as they like to call it.

Random whiskies bottled after being finished in off-kilter wine casks. Caol Ila from a Chateau d’Yquem cask, or anything going from there. I know that they have all kinds of great whiskies available from ‘normal’ casks too, but that’s just not what comes to mind initially.

Their Mission Gold range should be the range they’re known for since that contains some really, really epic whiskies. Quite expensive overall, but what isn’t nowadays?

Anyway, this Bodach Aislig blended scotch came out a few weeks ago, as far as I know, and someone in our little bottle-share club shared it. I bought a 10 cl sample. Mostly because you don’t often get to see a 35 year old whisky for a price like this, even a blend.

And by ‘even a blend’ I do not mean that to make blends sound inferior. It’s just that those are or at least should be cheaper than single malts since grain whisky is dirt cheap to produce.

They even produced the list of contents, without exact ages to not upset the SWA and they also omitted the precentages. Here’s the list:

  • Glenrothes
  • Glengoyne
  • Bunnahabhain
  • Tamdhu
  • Cameronbridge
  • North British
  • Port Dundas

Sniff:
Old with quite a lot of sherry, leather and some other dirtiness. Plums and dried dark fruits. Dry spices too, with toasted oak. Slightly sweet because of all the oak and sherry casks. Overripe banana, a tiny bit of sulfur. And that ‘old’ scent.

Sip:
The palate is dry and slightly bitter with all the oak. Chocolate and mocha, heavy and sweet fruits. It gets drier as you let it swim and there’s quite some sherry going around too. Lots of oak too, obviously, but not too much.

Swallow:
The finish mellows quickly. It’s dry with lots of oak, lots of fruit and some spices. It’s quite long.

Well, this is awesome. Blended whiskies are normally much lighter than this, in my experience. And while that can have it’s charms, I really, really love this one for the heaviness and the weight it brings. The fruits, spices and oak works really well together and since they used whiskies that go well with sherry casks, that also did some tricks.

The weightiness, the dirtiness is what makes this dram work. If it was only the sherry and fruits it would have been quite ‘regular’, but now it’s something special. Highly recommended!

89/100

Bodach Aislig, 35 Years Old blended whisky, 1980, 46%, Murray McDavid. Available from Master of Malt for £ 73.95 (only 74 quid!)

Posted in - Blended Whisky | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

GlenDronach 2003-2015, 12yo, Virgin Oak Hogshead, 54.7% – OB for The Netherlands

Posted on 6 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

So, first a bit of background on the weirdness that is a Virgin Oak cask.

Initially, I, and lots of others with me, figured that a virgin oak cask means that a cask hasn’t been used before. Like every cask in the American bourbon industry, more or less.

However, when I was at Tomatin in November, the tour guide told us that in Scotland a virgin oak cask means that a cask hasn’t been used after charring (or toasting). That means that sherry or bourbon casks can become virgin oak casks after being rejuvenated.

It does explain why some virgin oak casks taste like sherry casks and others like bourbon casks. Even apart from being made from either European or American oak.

This GlenDronach then. According to my information, this was selected by whisky club ”t Woest Genoegen’ for the Dutch market. GlenDronach has been quite popular for a long time in The Netherlands, but it seems to be a bit waning at the moment. Maybe it didn’t help that practically every club, festival and shop had their own casks bottled at some point during the last couple of years.

Our own Usquebaugh Society played its part too, since we’ve also had a virgin oak cask bottled, albeit slightly earlier.

Anyway, upon tasting this I thought it was a sherry cask, but that might have been the oak and spirit combining to show some similar flavors. Here it goes!

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
Lots of fruity sherry (little did I know!) without being cloying or heavy. Lots of spicy wood scents, maybe even a bit of wine? Oloroso like, since there’s some acidity to it as well. The acidity and salt combination of some Olorosos is here.

Sip:
The palate is dry but also shows juicy fruit with quite a lot of oak. Peach, plum, apricot. It becomes a bit sharper after a few seconds when the spices set in. Lots of oak and baking spices, and a hint of pepper. Slightly beefy towards the end, with some fatty flavors too.

Swallow:
The finish goes back to those wood/fruit sherry flavors, but it’s not too much. Lots of oak, but again, not too much. Long, fruity, spicy with a good balance. Baking spices and dried fruit.

In my book, this all reads like a sherry cask matured whisky, instead of a youngish virgin oak. Interesting how these casks all differ so much! In a good way, obviously.

I’m thoroughly loving this dram. There’s a lot of great flavors and the balance is surprisingly good for a single cask. No flavor trumps the other, but all aspects of the spectrum are lit. There’s fruit, spices, wood, some beefy flavors towards the end. A ridiculously good dram, I think.

91/100

GlenDronach 12 years old, 14/01/2003 – 03/2015, virgin oak hogshead 1749, 54.7%

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

Edradour 42yo, 1968-2010, 46% – Captain Burn’s

Posted on 5 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Sometimes you come across a whisky that you really want to like. I’ve had that with quite a few Edradours over the years, but so far it’s never really worked out. In this case I’m not talking about all those freaky maturations and finishes, with which I don’t even bother anymore.

Just regular bourbon or sherry casks, when they come by. Some I do like, but others not so much. Unfortunately for Edradour (while I seriously doubt they care what I think of their product) the ones I enjoy are vastly outnumbered by the ones I don’t like.

I tried this one blind, without knowing anything about what was in my glass. No age, abv, region or distillery. No information apart from the color of the whisky, which is no information at all, really.

So, I went about this as honest as can be. No information also means no prejudice.

Sniff:
Quite ethereal, somehow. Light on the nose, but a hint of hospital ether, and some dry leather. Straw and husk without the richness of the barley itself. Very light, maybe a little bit too light? A very light hint of oak.

Sip:
Surprisingly sharp on the tongue, with quite a bit of alcohol. Somehow this isn’t matched by flavor. There’s some straw, some barley, some oak. But there not a lot of any of them. Again, that dry leather and ether note. A bit austere, but not with the normal notes of minerals or iron. It does turn a bit syrupy after a while.

Swallow:
The finish is very weird. Very old fashioned somehow, but weird. Very austere with some musty, moldy notes of bread. Some oak, some straw. Sweeter than I expected and quite long.

Apparently this needed longer to open up, so a second round was needed.

Sniff:
The moldy notes I got on the finish are present on the nose as well. It’s like the leather and ether somehow had a love child. And it’s an ugly one. Not necessarily bad tasting, but ugly. Oh, certain interesting.

Sip:
The added taste after fifteen minutes of swimming is tooth grit. You know, when the dentist is drilling and tiny bits land on your tongue. On top of everything that was already there before.

Swallow:
The first, but very quickly passing flavor is of fanta. So there some hint of ‘orange flavor’ on the finish too.

A very strange whisky. In no way have I ever had something like this before. It certainly is interesting, if only because of novelty. I’m not liking this very much. One of those dram that you’d love to have a sample of, but not a bottle.

The finish is quite long, which is neither good nor bad. The flavors integrate well, but are just weird. I had associations with this whisky that I’ve never had before, and probably never will again. Strange, not necessarily good, but interesting.

So, when it turned out to be a 42 year old Edradour I was a tad disappointed, but not very surprised. As it seems the age of Edradour doesn’t really matter to me, since I don’t really enjoy most of them whether they’re old or young.

83/100

Edradour 42yo, 1968-2010, 46%, Captain Burn’s. Miraculously, this is still available for € 234. This is very cheap for a whisky of this age.

Posted in Edradour | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Glen Scotia 1991-2013, 46% – Wemyss Malts (Merchant’s Mahogany Chest)

Posted on 4 May 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I think Wemyss has taken lessons from the Scotch Malt Whisky Society based on how they name their whiskies. This ‘Merchant’s Mahogany Chest’ has a name based on the flavor of the whisky. So, I expect deep and woody flavors and aromas when I read it.

I didn’t know it when I tried it though, since it was a blind sample of which I only recently found out what it was.

A small side note to Wemyss’ bottlings. Most of them are done at 46% and I think in quite a few cases a bit of a bump to a higher ABV or even cask strength would serve them well. They seem to start to realize that though, since there’ve been a few Bowmores (at least) that have been released at a higher alcohol percentage.

Glen Scotia is ‘the other Campbeltown distillery’. Or at least it used to be before Glengyle was reopened. I think it still is since Glengyle is part of Springbank’s company and that means this one is still the more quiet one in town. They’re not well known for awesome whiskies but they are changing their reputation cask by cask. The standard bottlings aren’t all that, but a lot of the single casks out there are pretty good if not great.

Sniff:
Lots and lots of sherry, but still slightly timid. A lot of oak too, and chocolate and the fruitiness of the sherry is represented by fresh peaches.

Sip:
The palate is a bit thin, but there’s some spiciness to it. Oak and dried fruits. Plums, dates and some peach. Also a bit of a bread like flavor.

Swallow:
The finish is a bit weird. It has fruit, malt and oak but somehow these flavors don’t seem to be integrated. Like it’s falling apart.

This started as a rather decent sherried whisky. I’ve looked at other blogs out there and there this whisky is getting upwards to 90 points. I don’t think it’s exceptional enough for that, but it sure is a tasty and drinkable dram.

However, after the not so extraordinary nose and palate, the finish kind of ruins it for me. The lack of integration between the flavors is something I find worrisome. If I had a whole bottle I would have a tough time going through it, now that I’ve found this flaw. Strange, though.

85/100

Glen Scotia 1991-2013 (so, 21 years old at least), Sherry butt, 46%, ‘Merchant’s Mahogany Chest’ by Wemyss. It used to cost some € 125

Posted in Glen Scotia | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment