Port Charlotte Scottish Barley, 50%

Posted on 16 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

It’s been forever since I last tried an official Port Charlotte. Somehow after the PC8 they dropped off my radar and I don’t know why since I really like this Bruichladdich brand. I did try some indies here and there, and those I really liked too. It sounds like a solid plan to keep an eye on a product like this, but somehow I don’t.

I know they’re up to PC12 by now, and I know there have been hundreds of indie bottlings that were received very well. I tried some from the SMWS and Malts of Scotland, probably others too. I can’t remember NOT liking a Port Charlotte.

Honestly I can’t tell you why I don’t buy much more of such a safe bet. But then again, I haven’t been drinking that much peated whisky over the last couple of years.

Bruichladdich is focusing on provenance for the last couple of years. Their Scottish barley, Islay barley and some of that single farm stuff has been surprisingly good, even if it’s really young. This Port Charlotte fits that bracket as well with all the barley coming from Scotland and not being imported from all over the world. Kudos to them!

Sniff:
There’s a lot of peat scent, but not much smoke on the nose. Grass and straw, quite spicy and not much oak at all. The sea side aromas of sand, salt, brine and minerals are present as well.

Sip:
The palate is smooth but does gain some strength after a few seconds. Straw and grass again. More barley now too, ears of barley. Peat and smoke. Salt, sand, beaches. Rocks and minerals too.

Swallow:
The finish continues down the road of typical flavors. It’s mellowing quickly with lots of barley and straw. The saltiness is mostly gone but the sand flavors stays longer.

While this whisky will not change your opinion of Port Charlotte if you don’t like it, it fits the bill if you do. Everything that’s coming by is quintessential for the brand’s flavors. The bourbon casks work really well and it feels naked without any intensive cask influence and no sherry whatsoever.

So in short, I really, really enjoyed this whisky. Much more than I expected too, to be honest. It’s easily drinkable and interesting enough for an occasional tasting as well. Well done, Bruichladdich!

Port Charlotte Scottish Barley, 50%. Available everywhere and prices vary from € 42 to € 65.

Posted in Bruichladdich, Port Charlotte | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Photo bombing: The Usquebaugh Society’s 25th Anniversary party

Posted on 15 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I generally only take pictures of the drams I’m having, and yesterday afternoon was no exception. The pictures and impressions of the event itself are on Facebook in a lot of different posts by a lot of different people.

Here’s the booze I had:

The Wine cask didn't do it for me.

The Wine cask didn’t do it for me.

A nice Single Barrel, but not spectacular.

A nice Single Barrel, but not spectacular.

A very good, and rather light HP

A very good, and rather light HP

A rather surprising Fettercairn (in a positive way!)

A rather surprising Fettercairn (in a positive way!)

Also a lot better than expected

Also a lot better than expected

Great on the nose, but the palate couldn't keep up

Great on the nose, but the palate couldn’t keep up

Nice and fruity!

Nice and fruity!

Connemara single casks are so much better than the regulars

Connemara single casks are so much better than the regulars

A blended malt from Whiskybase. Very, very good.

A blended malt from Whiskybase. Very, very good.

Very good for a Bladnoch...

Very good for a Bladnoch…

A lot of sherry in this Bowmore. Still in doubt whether I like it or not.

A lot of sherry in this Bowmore. Still in doubt whether I like it or not.

Bourbon matured Mortlach. Not as good as others I've had.

Bourbon matured Mortlach. Not as good as others I’ve had.

A beast. Really sharp and massive flavors.

A beast. Really sharp and massive flavors.

A blend bottled in 1967. Impressive!

A blend bottled in 1967. Impressive!

Apart from these I remember (which is kind of miraculous) having the Whisky Nerds GlenDronach 1995 (which was good, a review will follow), the new club bottling (which was a lot better than I remembered) and the old club bottling (which I still love)

Posted in - American Whiskey, - Blended Malt, - Blended Whisky, - Irish Whiskey, - Japanese Whisky, Ben Nevis, Bladnoch, Bowmore, Cooley, Four Roses, Glen Grant, Highland Park, Iwai, Mars Komagatake, Mortlach, Tomatin | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Tomatin 2001-2013, 12 years old, 58.1%, Burns Malt – The Whisky Barrel

Posted on 12 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I don’t have much experience with Tomatin, for some reason. Contrary to some other brands and distilleries, which I sometimes avoid based on past experiences, this is not the case with Tomatin. Somehow I just never get around to trying many of their bottlings.

I know it generally is a very fruity Speysider, which is a profile I actually quite like. I also know that people have been on tours at the distillery and really enjoyed that part. And there’s a lot of good indie and official stuff out there. There’s nothing to dislike, apparently.

A while ago I got this sample from my mate Ben Cops, who also runs a whisky blog (who doesn’t, nowadays).

The whisky was bottled from a sherry hogshead, so a combination of sherry and American oak. This usually makes for a very fresh sherry experience.

 

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
The sherry starts really fruity with dried plums and dates. It’s sharp (the ABV is quite noticeable) and spicy with baking spices. It becomes heavier after a minute or so with more scents of spices and less fruit. A lot of wood influence.

Sip:
Sweet and fruity on the palate. Lots of sherry, and really sharp. It needs a couple seconds to settle. The palate is slightly peppery and bitter, again with dates and plums. Lots of oak.

Swallow:
The finish quite bitter with lots of wood influence and a lot of ‘wet’ sherry. Very juicy and fruity. Lots of alcohol, fruit and fairly long.

At first I was a bit surprised by the two tracks this dram was following. The fresh sherried fruitiness on one side and the heavier spices and oak on the other. It turned towards the fruity side right after nosing it and stayed there.

It’s huge on the sherry and huge on the fruit. It’s also huge on the alcohol which could be a bit more tame, but there’s always water to sort that out. In short, this is a very nice dram that’s really well priced at some € 70 / £ 50 (back in 2013 that is). I would gladly buy stuff like this for an affordable sherry bomb.

Tomatin 2001-2013, 12 years old, 58.1%, Burns Malt, Sherried hogshead 1598, The Whisky Barrel

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

Jura 18, 1966-1984, 46% – Cadenhead

Posted on 11 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

About two months ago a guy from our club posted a picture of a supposedly awesome Jura on Facebook. I don’t have much experience with Jura, mostly because a lot of not-so-nice whisky comes from there, and most affordable indies are heavily peated, which I don’t find that interesting.

Jura from the sixties was supposed to be incredible, according to fellow Usquebaugh Society member. I decided to take a guess and order a sample (2cl for € 30…) to see if I agree with that statement.

 

 

Sniff:
The nose is immediately impressive. Smooth, complex, very old fashioned with quite some oak but never overpowered by it. The scents become richer and richer. Oak, mint, chocolate and other spices. In a way there’s a hint of cork, but in a good way. Bread, rye bread. After a while (like half an hour or so) I get some more tropical fruit like mango and blood orange. Leather and shoe polish too.

Sip:
The palate is smooth too, although you do recognize this as not being 40% but over. Rich, with pepper, oak, leather. There’s a light salinity with a tiny hint of fruit. Apples, blood orange. Bread and a tiny hint of cardboard (it’s a 60s whisky, after all).

Swallow:
The finish is long and big. Comparable to the palate, so very consistent. A tad more sweet, less like an Island whisky and more like a Highland whisky. Quite some oak, but in a gorgeous way, and lots of spices too.

The finish lasts half an hour or so. Ridiculously long.

I didn’t really know what to expect when I bought this apart from a ‘it’s good’ from someone who knows what’s what in single malt whisky. He was raving about it and while this is a ridiculously tasty whisky, it’s not a top five dram for me.

All flavors are awesome, really so. The flavors and scents are deep and old fashioned and everything you want them to be. I love this kind of whisky, and it’s a shame I can’t actually afford it. Getting a sample of something like this is highly recommended though!

The only thing I miss is the typical 1960s fruitiness. But then again, I’ve not that much experience with hooch from that era so that might be only Bowmore.

Jura 18, 1966-1984, 46% – Cadenhead Dumpy.

Posted in Jura | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Glen Garioch 21yo, 43%

Posted on 10 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

At the Hielander Whisky Festival in Alkmaar in February I tried a 21 year old Glen Garioch towards the end of the afternoon and was raving about that. When I got home I checked all shops and auction sites to see if I could get a bottle at an acceptable price. This was, obviously not the case.

On Whiskybase, which is one of my favorite whisky-info resources, I found that there’s a huge difference in rating between certain Glen Garioch 21s. Some score very highly, other are rating rather lowly and people talk about FWP in their review.

This made me a bit scared to just shell out money for a bottle of the stuff with it possibly being the one that I want, and possible some utter shite whisky that I’ll end up bringing to some BYO event and never taking it home again.

Then, a while ago, I saw someone on Facebook having a bottle of it and I thought it would be nice to ask for a sample. That all worked out and last weekend I finally got around to trying it.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
The nose start fairly malty with some soapiness in it as well. I already get weary. Some myrtle and eucalyptus, in a way that some Corsican forests smell and it reminds me of P&M from there. Finally I get a hint of dark chocolate.

Sip:
The palate is gentle and even a little thin. Some pepper and oak here, and some spices. Those spices go back to eucalyptus, plants and flowers.

Swallow:
The finish picks up a little bit, somewhat stronger. More oak, but not very long.

Well, nope. This isn’t it. A whisky that reminds me of P&M better be P&M since that is one weird dram. Lovable in its own way, but mostly because I picked up my bottle during our honeymoon in Corsica and it came with good memories.

This whatever this is, with flowers, and eucalyptus and other not so regular spices and herbs. Just no. It seems that at some point all Morrisson Bowmore whiskies were plagued by FWP flavors. Their 198x Auchentoshans can have it, and most of the Bowmores from that era do.

In short, avoid this one. At least try it before spending money on it, since you might like it, but the majority of folks out there will probably not.

Glen Garioch 21yo, 43%, bottled around 2005/2006. Now going for some € 200 in shops, less in auction.

Thanks to Jeroen for the sample. Stuff is on it’s way back to you!

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

One Eight Sherry Finished Bourbon, 52.5%

Posted on 9 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

One Eight Spirits seems to be one of those sort-of random spirits producers in the USA of which there are hundreds popping up everywhere. They are called One Eight for Article One, Section Eight of the constitution which provided for the area now known as DC to exist as the USA’s capital.

Apart from that they produce vodka and gin, like all other start-up distilleries. They have recently released a bourbon which they finished in sherry casks. I can’t find whether or not they distilled the bourbon themselves or bought the product.

New American distilleries generally try to be at least slightly obscure about when they went into business, but I think those guys started in 2013. With it only being two years, I suspect they’ve not really had time to make a proper bourbon AND finish it in a sherry cask. But then again, maybe they did. FEW’s bourbon is also just about a year old.

I got this sample from a bottle share by DSA, like yesterday’s Rhetoric. I had never heard of the distillery before, but I like trying new things. A sherry finished bourbon is not something you come across often so that was a nice change of pace.

Sniff:
The nose starts with big bourbon hints. Spicy with lots of corn, caramel and oak. It becomes a bit sweeter after the initial arrival with dried fruits, apricot and plums and fresh cherries. From there on the fruit gets bigger and bigger. It’s weird, but tasty, if you can handle the slightly rubbery note.

Sip:
The palate again starts with lots of bourbon, heavy, spicy, with oak. Slightly bitter even. Less sharp than the 52.5% ABV made me expect. It’s getting drier after a few seconds and has a tiny hint of cardboard. Then, like on the nose, the sherry does it’s thing. Massive notes of apricot, but also plums and peaches. The fruit with the thick corn like sweetness is very interesting and quite unique.

Swallow:
The finish is gentle, with, again, first bourbon and then sherry. There’s a certain rye like spiciness here. The finish is long, sweet and oaky with hints of corn.

This is a strange drink. Mostly because it combines things that are normally an ocean apart. Bourbon normally comes with very oaky notes of the fresh wood used for the barrels. The layer of sherry is entirely new (to me, I know there’s been a Jim Beam and a Wild Turkey from a sherry cask).

What matters, of course, is whether or not it’s any good. In short: Yes. I think it’s more interesting than good, but it still is really good and I’d happily work my way through a bottle. It actually works very well to have the bourbon sweetness on top of the sherry sweetness. I expected it to be too much and too cloying, but that’s not the case.

Well done by the guys at One Eight Distilling!

One Eight Sherry Finished Bourbon, 52.5%, Not a clue to where you can get this.

Posted in - American Whiskey | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Rhetoric Bourbon, 20yo, 45% – Diageo’s Orphan Barrel series

Posted on 8 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Diageo’s has been releasing ‘Orphan Barrels‘ for about a year now. It’s a series of premium bourbons from different distilleries, and sometimes even a blend from various places. They’re priced at a relative premium in America. When they would come to Europe they’d be far from affordable, most likely. Generally when a $ 90 comes across the ocean, it’s costing close to € 200 nowadays.

Rhetoric is from Bernheim distillery and apparently showcases their classic flavor profile. I don’t have much experience with Bernheim and therefore don’t have a clue what that means.

The Orphan Barrels is called that because the barrels for these releases were forgotten, or so they say. I highly doubt that in this day and age many barrels are left unindexed, and actually forgotten. I’d say the warehouse managers have been saving these for a special project for a couple years now. That’s fine too, and I understand ‘forgotten’ sounds more quaint and interesting.

In the what matters is the juice that’s in the bottle. I got this from a bottle-share that DSA did when he was stateside a couple of weeks ago. There’s more stuff coming soon, varying from Maker’s Mark Cask Strength, some sherry finished bourbon and something called Barrell. I still have to read up on those, but that’s in the pipeline.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
The nose is absolutely huge with sweet corn and oak. Very sweet with sweet caramel and popcorn. There’s a thing layer of baking spices, clove and nutmeg mostly. Lots of oak, but not bitter at all (surprising for a 20 year old bourbon). Very deep and rich.

Sip:
The palate is smooth, rich and sweet. Here there’s a tinge of bitterness with mountains of timber. Warming but light. Clove, orange, apple.

Swallow:
The finish is very soft and gentle again. Again, lots of oak and a warming feeling. It’s not very long.

Not necessarily a strange whiskey, but one that’s hard to form an opinion on. Mostly because for someone who likes to ‘taste’ a whiskey, this isn’t all that complex or captivating. On the other hand, when you’re just in for a drink and want to simply enjoy a dram without any complication, this is an ace whiskey. It’s highly drinkable, maybe dangerously so. It’s also ridiculously tasty, but there’s just not that much to discover.

I guess that’s where the problem is. If there’s not that much to discover, I can simply knock back a couple of regular Bernheims, or any other standard bourbon for about a quarter of the investment. But still, if I’d bought this at the full price, I wouldn’t be too disappointed.

Rhetoric bourbon whiskey, 45%, Diageo’s Orphan Barrels. Sold out in most shops.

Posted in - American Whiskey, Bernheim | Tagged , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Talisker 25 years old, 2004 bottling, 57.8%

Posted on 5 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Another rather awesome sample from a recent sample swap. It’s been at least a couple of years since I tried any 25 year old Talisker, and even longer since it was one of the older cask strength versions.

A couple of years ago (2011 to be exact) saw the watering down of Talisker 25. According to Whiskybase there was no release in 2010 and all that came before were at cask strength. The strange thing is that with the new 45.8% Talisker 25 it also saw a massive price hike. Where it used to be below 100 euros before 2010, after 2011 it saw over € 200.

Even our tour and tasting guide at the distillery in 2013 said he’d rather buy three bottles of the 18 for the same money as one bottle of the new 25 year old. If I remember correctly he amassed quite some bottles of the old 25 when they were still for sale side by side at the distillery.

I once read that Diageo realizes it’s running out of Port Ellen and Brora, and because of that they’re positioning Caol Ila to take Port Ellen’s place (last year’s 30 year old saw a Port Ellen-like price hike) and Talisker and Clynelish to compensate for the loss of Brora.

Of course, this is speculation, but with where things are going from a price perspective, and the complete lack of independent bottlings of Port Ellen (2014 saw 8, 2015 has none yet) and Brora (one indie in 2014, and that was the ‘cask end and bottle end’ series of Master of Malt, That Boutique-y Whisky Company), it might hit the mark.

Image from Whiskybase

Image from Whiskybase

Sniff:
The nose hits you right away and is far from shy. Leather, spices, peat, salt. Quite different than Islay, though. Peppery, as you expect from Talisker, with oak, rope and a heavy grainlike flavor, like oats. Fruity too, tropical and sweet.

Sip:
The palate is spicy with some heat, but on average, it’s quite gentle. Black pepper, oak, licorice root. Peat, smoke, salt, fruit. Combined and balanced awesomely.

Swallow:
The finish starts a tad spicy again but mellows quickly. Still peppery of course, and the oak and salt and smoke are present as well. Moss, tree bark (the rugged, mulchy kind), tropical fruits like mango.

As you might have guessed from the ‘balanced awesomely’ bit earlier, I kind of like this one. And that’s a massive understatement.

It’s quite remarkable what they’ve done with this. There is single flavor that dominates above the others. The fruit, pepper, oak, peat are all balanced perfectly to a savory and sweet mixture of awesomeness.

I like that the peat flavors are so different from the regular Islay whiskies, which are far more medicinal, salty and have a certain resemblance of the plants you see on Islay. While Talisker is also a coastal whisky, the island is vastly different. And so is the whisky.

Kudos to Diageo for making this. Less so for changing the regimen to no longer being cask strength.

Talisker 25 years old, 2004 bottling, 57.8%. Currently available for € 285 at Jurgen’s Whiskyhuis

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

Burnside 1989-2014, 24 years old, 51.7% – Whiskybase

Posted on 4 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

This is a blended malt, in a way. Well, officially it is. It’s a cask of Balvenie, teaspooned with Glenfiddich. So actually, it’s just Balvenie which they put some Glenfiddich in to make sure no one can call it that.

The bottling was done by Whiskybase for the 50,000th bottle in their system, little over a year ago. By now there’s 60,000 and for that purpose they bottled a Ben Nevis from 1996. I bought neither, and I think should’ve bought both. And all the earlier anniversary thingies: a Littlemill from 1990, a Laphroaig from 1998 and an Islay malt also from 1990.

Anyway, older Balvenie is not always a success in my book. All of them are pretty good, but most of them are not spectacular. Of course, Balvenie has released some of their own bottlings that are awesome and contain a lot of older whisky like their Tuns, and the 30 year old is pretty awesome too.

Sniff:
Typical with lots of honey on the nose. Barley and wood too. Some vanilla, slightly spicy with baking spices. Some mint, creme brulee, peppermint and caramel.

Sip:
The palate is not too sharp, and again shows lots of honey. More nutty now, like those honey roasted peanuts. Slightly salty even. There is oak, but less spices than on the nose. Caramel apple!

Swallow:
The finish shows wood, honey, syrupy sweetness. Salted peanuts and honey again. Slightly drying and warm. Quite long.

Over the years I’ve tried some indie Balvenies. Most of them were around this age, and some younger. This might be the best one yet. Generally I thought most of them were slightly bland (our local shop’s 9 year old is pretty awesome though), but this one packs some serious flavor.

It might be the flavor reminiscent of the honey roasted peanuts, since I really love those. The baking spices on the nose to a slightly more savory palate and finish really works for me and doesn’t feel inconsistent at all.

Awesome pickings by the guys at Whiskybase! Kudos!

Burnside 1989-2014, 24 years old, 51.7%, cask 12452, Whiskybase.

Posted in - Blended Malt, Balvenie, Glenfiddich | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Springbank 1995-2012, 56.5% – The Whisky Exchange Retro Labels

Posted on 3 June 2015 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

As far as I know, Springbank is a popular distillery. Yet somehow, it took The Whisky Exchange over two years to sell this 16 or 17 year old whisky from their shop. It was quite reasonably priced as well, especially for the age and the ABV.

I know Billy brought it to his masterclass at Maltstock in 2013, but unfortunately I didn’t participate in that one. I went to his booze-party the year before and was still discovering all that Maltstock had to offer, so I went elsewhere. This year, I’m going to try and be at Billy’s again. We just got a newsletter saying that he’s hosting one again, and that’s something I’m happy about.

The Whisky Exchange’s website states that this whisky is quite smoky and therefore might be ‘the other brand’, which would obviously be Longrow. I didn’t really pick up on that so my guess goes back to Springbank, so far as this can be a guess with the name of the distillery in big print on the label.

Sniff:
The nose starts quite salty. There’s also basalt (whinstone), the kind used in harbors. Straw, light oak notes and rather sharp. Warming and somehow classic, attics with old cardboard boxes and dust. Bread too.

Sip:
The palate is sharp too, again with salt, straw and sharp alcohol. The mustiness I got on the nose appears here too, and there’s a hint of minerals. Apple. Rather drying with hints of pepper too. It does get a bit sweeter but you have to take a long time for that.

Swallow:
The finish is very consistent with earlier findings. Straw, salt, minerals, basalt, oak. That old fashioned-ness (quite different than the kind in the earlier Bunnahabhain or Port Ellen) is almost moldy here.

This is a strange whisky, but also not at all. Its quintessential Springbank, all scents and flavors are right for that. It does exactly what you expect it to do, and that should be a good thing.

Somehow, however, in this case I also find it rather boring. Somehow, doing what you’re supposed to do is predictable. Maybe boring is not the right word, but I should say unexciting.

The whisky is incredibly consistent, maybe one of the more consistent drams I’ve recently had. But again, that also makes it quite predictable. I think that’s the main issue here. As soon as you’ve smelled the whisky, there are no surprises anymore. Unless you count the total lack of new flavors a surprise.

Again, it’s a very tasty dram, but not one that surprises you.

Springbank 1995-2012, 56.5%, The Whisky Exchange Retro Labels. No longer available.

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