Irish Single Malt Whiskey, 2002-2015, 13yo, 51.8% – Creative Whisky Company

Posted on 22 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

This Irish whiskey came out last year in spring and it was released on the back of a lot of ridiculously popular bottlings from other independent parties. Those whiskeys were more expensive and often twice as old as this one, but that didn’t stop me form buying this bottle.

What also didn’t stop me was that this one was quite pricey compared to other, similarly aged bottles from, for example, The Nectar of the Daily Dram. Blackadder bottlings came at the same price as this, but somehow I’m not often enthused by Blackadder these days.

Anyway, what surprised me when I got home was that this whiskey was anything but clear. There was a very distinct cloudiness to it that was very surprising and not something I’ve seen before in any whisk(e)y that I can remember. Not like this at least.

I asked David Stirk what this could be, or what could cause it, but he didn’t have a clue either. But, after all, it’s the taste of it that matters, right?

Sniff:
Very light with lots of malt. Even some rye-like spiciness. But, mostly very light. Slightly fruity but nothing exotic. Some grapes and apples. Slightly chemical with wine
gums and artificial sweetener. Plastic bags. Green malt. Some freshly cracked black pepper in the background. Some mulchy oak too.

Sip:
Some vanilla on the arrival but quickly replaced with lots of strange, chemically sweet things. Winegums, the plastic bags they come in, artificial sweetener. Quite sharp with
the black pepper coming back with some chili backup. Mulchy oak again. Strangely sweet. Not sure what to think of this.

Swallow:
The finish ramps up the chemical bits more. Very, very sweet with all the fruit being replaced by similarly coloured winegums. Some oak, some pepper. It mellows quickly but lasts long.

This is a strange one. It doesn’t stand a chance compared to the other similarly aged releases from last year. The ones from Daily Dram and such. It’s just weird with the immense and chemical sweetness that’s overpowering everything else. I have no idea what’s going on with this whiskey, and it sure is something unique.

So, recommended for trying it, but not for buying it. As in, at some € 95, compared to Daily Dram’s € 60/70 for 12 and 14 years old, this doesn’t stand a chance, but it sure is a unique dram.

So, unique: yes. Tasty: not to me. I really didn’t like this one. The sweetness is ridiculous and not balanced out by anything, and on top of that it’s a very chemical kind of sweetness too. I did sort of enjoy this in the beginning, but as I go further down the rabbit hole, it’s not getting better.

Sorry, David…

70/100

Creative Whisky Company: Irish Single Malt 2002-2015, 51.8%, cloudy stuff. Cask 20021

Still available for around € 90

Posted in - Irish Whiskey, Undisclosed | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Arran 12, 2001-2014, 56% – OB Private Cask for The Netherlands (Bright Early Spring)

Posted on 19 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Back in 2014, right on the heels of The White Wizard and The Dark Lord came this release. Since then there have been a few, mostly bourbon casks from the importer and mostly sherry casks for festivals, shops and clubs.

This one is slightly younger than The White Wizard was so it’s interesting to see how much a couple of years matter for a whisky like this.

Also, when this came out I took a bit of time to see if I wanted to start focusing on Arran. Mostly since the whiskies they were releasing around that time were fairly awesome, and the 18 years old was about to come out as well.

In the end I decided I didn’t want to do that, even though the whisky is great. It’s mostly that all their whisky is about the same age and they still need some time to get a proper spread. Apart from that I don’t care for the wine finishes they’re doing either. But still, I wouldn’t mind picking up a cracking bourbon cask release like this every few months.

Sniff:
Lots of fruit and vanilla. Fruit salad, some chalky notes too. Spirity still, not as wood driven as its predecessor, The White Wizard. Some honey in the background too, and some malt. But not a lot.

Sip:
Quite sharp, sharper than you’d expect at 56%. More spirit driven too, with some sweetness coming from the alcohol as well as the oak. Pineapple, pear, vanilla. Slightly oily but also dry and sharp.

Swallow:
Less sweet on the finish with more dried pineapple, oak and spirit. The chalky notes are more prominent here than earlier. Rather long.

This is actually a very good whisky. The wood is present and makes itself well known, but the spirit is not completely smothered yet. I think they bottled this at exactly the right time.

There’s fruit, herbs, honey, oak, quite a bit of everything, really. So, because of that this is exactly what you’d expect it to be, but it does that really, really well. Quite an awesome dram.

It’s probably long gone but this was for the Dutch market so there might be some off-the-beaten-path shop that still has it. Recommended if you can get it at a decent price.

88/100

Arran 12yo, Bright Early Spring, 56%, 13/12/01-09/12/14, Bourbon Barrel

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

BenRiach 25 Authenticus (peated), 46%

Posted on 18 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

About 10 years ago, well, 10 months, I did a bottle share with two 25 year old BenRiachs. The regular one, and the peated Authenticus one. I also did a review of the regular one earlier after I tried at De Whiskykoning.

This one was still waiting to be reviewed and with the bottle nearing its end, I thought it was about high time I did just that.

Generally I like BenRiach. Having said that, I’ve never been a huge fan of their older peated expressions. I might love some 1976 peated whatever, but the Authentici at 21 and 25 years old have never been to my liking.

Sniff:
Gentle peat and quite a lot of malt. Some slate and basalt. Sawdust, mint, chalk. Builds up some intensity (which it needs) and becomes more smoky, and more woody. Some wood spices. Some cracked leather, a tinge or rubber. Shoes. Musty and funky.

Sip:
Smooth but not without a punch. Quite some malt and thick, syrupy sweetness. Caster sugar, but not much vanilla. Tingling smoke and peat, with quite some oak. More vanilla after a couple of seconds. Herbaceous with conifer, mint and wood spices. Less funky, but with some leathery notes.

Swallow:
The peat is more forward here, but the whisky catches up quickly. Smoke, wood, malt. Fairly simple, but with some sweetness and some depth. Quite long.

This one needed quite a long time in a half empty bottle. It’s been open for about a year but I’ve never really enjoyed it as a casual dram. Now I’m sitting down for it and it
actually works quite well. It still isn’t nearly as good as the regular 25 year old, but it’s still quite good. I don’t think I’ve liked any ‘Authenticus’ as much as this one before now.

86/100

BenRiach 25yo, Authenticus (peated), 46%. Regularly available, with prices starting at € 170 in The Netherlands

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

Johnnie Walker Blue Label, and another, and another

Posted on 17 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

A couple of months ago a guy from the Usquebaugh Society, let’s call him Martin, decided to share his stash of Johnnie Walker Blue Labels. He had three waiting for us. A 40% version from the naughties, a 43% version from the eighties and the cask strength version from a couple of years ago.

The samples have been waiting for a while to be tasted, and then the notes waited for another while before being typed up. Finally, I’m getting around to it, about a month after Thijs did his interesting take on them.

As far as I know, Mortlach is a big part of the Blue Label core so somehow I expect a lot of big flavors. Somehow is in that sentence because I tried the 40% version before and was quite underwhelmed by it.

It’s a bit of a strange whisky, this. Some people who’ve been at it (whisky that is) for ages absolutely love it, but I feel the vast majority of afficionados don’t care about this whisky at all. I know lots of people who strong opinion is that the only people buying blue label are people who want to show off to their mates. And Chinese businessmen. There are always Chinese businessmen.

Johnnie Walker Blue Label, 40%, 2000s

Sniff:
Slightly sweet with some dryness and some tannin. A combination of light and heavy scents. Quite some oak with some spices and fruit.

Sip:
The palate is tingling with white pepper. It’s quite thin (too watered down?), but does become slightly more balanced after a while. Dried peaches, slightly meaty. The grain whisky is not very light. Some oak.

Swallow:
Dry and some heat, a minor hint of raw oak. Quite long and smooth.

I’ve got the idea, in some way, that this is a whisky for wine drinkers. It misses a bit of the oomph I like in whisky and therefore I don’t really enjoy it. Especially not at € 150 a pop.

80/100

 

Johnnie Walker Blue Label, 43%, 1980s

Sniff:
The scent of this one is slightly more rough, and more punchy than the previous one. More whisky like. Quite heavy in the spirit and meaty. More oak, more fruit, more straw.

Sip:
The palate clearly shows the blendedness of this dram. Lighter grain whiskies and heavier single malts. Oak, straw and some fruit, but still a bit thin. Dry with peaches and apricot. Quite nice except for the thin mouth feel.

Swallow:
The finish is dry and slightly fiery. Not thin at this point, but showing flavors peach. Nicely balanced with lots of oak.

I think this one is much better. It shows more age and lots of flavors that should be present in any Blue Label. Mostly since you can spend the same money on quite a number of great alternatives. Still, I think even at 43% the ‘up to 50 year old whiskies’ should show more weight on the palate.

83/100

 

Johnnie Walker Blue Label, The Casks, 55.8%, 2012

Sniff:
This is like the previous 43% version on steroids. More focus on the wood and straw. More fruit and even the dreaded fruitcake descriptor should be used here. Quite sharp.

Sip:
The palate is warm and sharp, with baking spices, ginger. Not dry as I expected, but with peaches, spiced cake and dried fruits. Rather sharp.

Swallow:
The finish starts sharp and warming. It’s dry with straw and peach. Quite long.

Quite a bit better than the 40% one, which should be the most comparable. However, the 43% feels closed to this one based on the flavors I’m finding. Still, this doesn’t really feel old since it’s a very modern style of whisky. Generally when I think of old whisky, I think of more depth, more layers. That still doesn’t happen.

84/100

So, I think this concludes my personal interest in Johnnie Walker Blue Label editions. It’s nice to have tried several head to head, but my conclusion is that you pay more for reputation and marketing than you do for the whisky in the bottle.

The simple conclusion is that it’s not worth it. If I think of the awesome blends you can get for similar prices, from old (with an age statement) Campbeltown Loch editions, or Compass Box’ Flaming Heart and ‘This is not a Luxury Whisky’, I just can, for the life of me, figure out why I’d ever buy this.

Harsh? Maybe.

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

Invergordon 1972-2016, 43yo, 49.7% – Whiskybase (70,000 bottles)

Posted on 16 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Whiskybase made it a thing to release a new whisky under their own label at every 10k mark in their database. The 70,000th whisky was added a while ago and this whisky was bottled to celebrate that.

What’s even better is that those whiskies generally are really decently priced. This 43 year old Invergordon was ‘only’ € 145, but in the current market that is a really, really good price for such an old whisky, even if it’s a grain whisky.

Obviously it sold out in an hour or so and the email newsletter that announced it wasn’t even on time to announce it, actually. Luckily, I just happened to be Facebooking at the moment and saw their post on it. I ordered two right away, and since I’ve been overspending for a while again, I decided to share both of them. They filled up quickly.

Sniff:
The nose is crisp and sweet with lots of barley and pastry goodness. That this is a grain whisky is very, very clear. Lots of oak, some basil, banana and it doesn’t go the Armagnac route. Slightly vinegar like but with fresh peaches and orange. Mint, and overripe tropical fruits.

Sip:
The palate is slightly drying but quite sharp and full. Sweet, with lots of barley and pastry again. Some honey sweetness too. Oak, banana, peach, orange, nectarine. Subtropical fruits galore!

Swallow:
The crispness of the nose makes a comeback, and the finish is long, fruity and sweet. Some green oak and green barley is present suddenly. When it starts fading it’s gone fast.

This is a typical grain whisky. The flavors are fairly simple but there’s a lot of them. There’s not much depth, and not much layeredness. However, the fruits and barley flavors are awesome. It’s much better than I expected, and it’s not just all oak.

The guys at Whiskybase really picked a good one this time around. Apparently there are a couple more being bottled by Whiskybroker (where this one comes from too) and I can only imagine how these compare. But, since it’s grain whisky they will compare quite well.

88/100

Invergordon 12/1972 – 01/2016, 43yo, bourbon barrel, 49.7%, Whiskybase (70,000 bottles on the wall). Originally available for € 145, but already people are trying to flip it for a hundred more.

Posted in - Grain Whisky, Invergordon | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Benromach 35, 43%

Posted on 15 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Little over a week ago I got a nice, but empty envelope from G&M in Elgin. The only thing in there was a description of how nice it would be to taste the new 35 year old Benromach. I expected a mail man or DHL delivery guy to have a rather cracking week night, but the samples that should’ve been there got returned to Benromach.

Two days later (ridiculously fast) I got a new envelope, this time actually containing the samples that should be there. Me happy.

Benromach was never much on my radar. Not until they released the revamped 10 year old some two years ago. Before that it was so far off my radar that I didn’t even buy the 1981 vintage when I could for only € 90. I feel like a dick about that.

Anyway, I love the distillery since I got to know their products. The 10 is a staple, the 10 at 100 proof is ridiculously good value and we (me and mates) visited the place in November. We did the tour with Keith Cruickshank. It was an awesome afternoon.

Now I got to try the brand spanking new 35 year old whisky!

Sniff:
The nose starts rather timid with lots of old oak. There are some baking spices too, but again, in a very mellow way. I get quite a lot of fresh peaches, or better, old peaches, just not dried. You know, those wrinkly, intensely sweet ones. Some banana too. A touch of mint in the background. Honey and warm sponge cake.

Sip:
The palate is very smooth, but rich. Old and fruity. Peaches, some raisins. It’s soft and slightly spicy, again with the baking spices. Light hints of pepper and clove, some cinnamon. Sawdust in the background and after half an hour I get a (rather delicious) flavor of matches. It’s a tiny hint but done in a way that is absolutely gorgeous.

Swallow:
The finish is more dry than I expected. At first I thought it was going away quickly, but it just mellows and then lasts rather long. Old peaches, dried peaches. Smooth with some spices and sawdust.

Oh yes. Very much yes. The ‘oldness’ is restrained, as in the whisky isn’t completely overpowered by oak and the spices work very well. I am so happy this is in line with their other products and some vanilla focused whisky (like so many others nowadays).

The spiciness from the sherry casks works very well with the oak and the spirit, and it makes for a delicious dram. The 43% make it a whisky to spend an evening with since it is quite easily overpowered.

Also, I think you notice the difference in approach between the new and old owners. This is a slightly more modern version of Benromach with not as much focus on the peat and a more gentle spirit. I think it still is awesome, but slightly more timid than a 35 year old of their current spirit would be.

91/100

Benromach 35, 43%. Available in various markets for around € 550.

Thanks to Benromach for sending a sample, twice! Much obliged.

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

Hielander Whisky Festival 2016

Posted on 14 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Yesterday I went to another awesome session of the Hielander Whisky Festival in Alkmaar. I took some pictures, but obviously not of everything I tried. I am far too forgetful for that, and I also don’t want to disclose my intake.

I also had, these deserve to be mentioned, an 18 year old Ben Nevis from First Cask, a 1976 Tomatin by Liquid Sun and quite a few others that were nice. A 25 year old Longmorn by The Ultimate, and a 1985 Linkwood by the same bottler. Those were great.

Posted in - Festival, Ben Nevis, Bunnahabhain, Clynelish, Kavalan, Linkwood, Longmorn, Springbank, Tomatin | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rosebank 1990-2010, 59.3% – SMWS (25.57)

Posted on 12 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Strangely, there is barely any information on this bottling on the internet. As in, none. I do get some Asian search results, but as you might expect I can’t really work with that.

Anyway, we had this sample as the last one from our Scotch Malt Whisky Society pickings. Rosebank has been a favorite of ours ever since we tried the first one (in our case, the 12 year old Flora & Fauna bottling, back when that was still available).

So, upon seeing this still available, the choice for that one was made. At the time we crossed fingers that it would be still available. As it turned out, the book with the options of the Society’s Share wasn’t 100% up to date.

Also, closed distilleries always have a been of mystery surrounding them. Especially since what you drink will never come back again. There’s just a very finite amount of hooch from brands like Rosebank.

Sniff:
The nose is very light with some hints of straw. Apart from the lightness it’s really strong and sharp with a touch of vanilla. Slightly mineral like with flint and a certain fieriness. Quite thin with lots of alcohol.

Sip:
The palate is really sharp and dry. Hot even. Really coarse and dehydrating. Some oak and vanilla. Some straw and pepper. Lots of alcohol and bone dry.

Swallow:
Again, alcohol, dryness. Oak, with lots of active spirit. Really sharp.

As you might guess from the notes, I didn’t really enjoy this one. It is far too strong and far too alcoholic for an enthusiastic review. It needs water to be tamed, but even then doesn’t have much flavor. The only reason this could be recommended is if someone wants an alcohol kick and not much else.

There’s not much depth at all, and even with water it doesn’t do much. It seems that even the vast stocks of Rosebank of the SMWS are getting low. They used to have awesome bottlings of this brand, but it’s been quite a while since I tried any of those. The last couple seem less than impressive. Either too spirity or too overpowered by the vanilla from the oak.

Anyway, I didn’t like this one.

80/100

Rosebank 1990-2010, 59.3%, SMWS (25.57)

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

Highland Park 1999-2010, 10yo, 59.3% – SMWS (4.141 – Simply Delicious)

Posted on 10 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Apparently, even the SMWS tasting panel is something lost for words when naming their whiskies. I can imagine after having done about 4000 of them, but ‘Simply Delicious’ doesn’t sound very inspired…

Anyway, fresh bourbon barrel and Highland Park is a combination that works well more often than not, so picking this one at The Vaults seemed like a  good idea.

At the moment I’m thinking the Scotch Malt Whisky Society has spirit deals with Highland Park and Laphroaig, since there’s so much being released from these distilleries. Especially in the monthly outturn in the UK there’s almost always a Highland Park and a Laphroaig. So much now that the loyal sharers in the Bottle Share Club I’m in have started skipping them since we’re swimming in these samples.

My expectations for this one were: fruit, some mild spices and mild peat, quite some oak. Let’s see how that works out.

Sniff:
Quite sharp and heavy. The sharpness is logical at almost sixty percent. Lots of yellow fruit. Peardrops, pear, pineapple. Some chalk and white oak, and icing sugar. Lemon curd and custard too, with apple.

Sip:
Sharp, but not too sharp. It does bite a bit. Crisp fruit with sweet lemon curd. White oak.

Swallow:
The chalk is back again. The finish is light, and mellows quickly. Long and sweet. A real fruit bomb with pineapple, pear and lemon.

It’s fairly simple and straight forward. I did miss some spiciness and therefore it’s quite a simple dram. There’s loads of fruit, but I didn’t pick up any peat or much spices. A tad chalky, but not more than that. All in all a dram that’s sweet and fruity, but quite interchangeable. As in, I’ve also had Balmenach, Auchentoshan, and probably many others like this.

84/100

Highland Park 1999-2010, 10yo, First Fill Bourbon Barrel, 59.3%, SMWS (4.141 – Simply Delicious)

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

Clynelish 1984-2010, 25yo, 57.3% – SMWS (26.71 – The Great Outdoors)

Posted on 9 February 2016 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

When given half a chance, I try to pick Clynelish and Springbank as whiskies to taste. As in, I generally like most of what comes from these distilleries and find they have a truly unique character.

When leafing through the book at The Vaults, the book with whiskies we could pick I was very surprised that after five years of giving away samples, there was a 25 year old Clynelish left. This either indicates that most people who take part in The Society’s Share are idiots, or the level of samples available was ridiculously high. I do know that only last year there still was a Glenugie in there, so the latter is at least partially true.

Anyway, Clynelish from the eighties, at cask strength. It ticks all my boxes. Strangely, this is from a refill Sherry butt, which is not noticeable in anything. The price indicated at Whiskybase was the original selling price, I think. It was € 86. This makes me cry, since things have changed so, so much…

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
The nose starts with vanilla and beeswax. Pine and resin, some lactic acid too. Quite a lot of oak, but also honey for sweetness.

Sip:
The palate is sharper than I expected, but has hazelnut, pine, resin and beeswax again. It’s quite autumnal with dead leaves and forest floor. Slightly acidic, that lactic acid again. Black pepper, vanilla and ever so slightly salty.

Swallow:
The finish is very consistent with the palate. Pine, resin, oak. It’s quite long and surprisingly fresh. Old wood, and conifer.

It’s a bit as with the Ardbeg from yesterday. As in, it’s not the most complex Clynelish from the early eighties I’ve had. But it is, in its essence, exactly what Clynelish should be.

Nowadays, that is already quite hard to come by and therefore I was thoroughly loving this whisky. As in, I could only just keep myself from jumping up and down by how awesome this is. The pine, resin and beeswax are exactly what you’re hoping for when opening a bottle of Clynelish, and that tiny whiff of salt that was there just makes it a top notch dram.

The only thing that has me scratching my head is that this is from a sherry cask. I didn’t pick up any sherry notes at all.

92/100

Clynelish 1984-2010, 25yo, 57.3%, Refill Sherry Butt, SMWS (26.71 – The Great Outdoors)

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