Port Charlotte 10yo, 2002-2013, 62.5% – Private Cask for Nickolls & Perks

Posted on 30 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Last year, when I was participating in quite a lot of bottle-shares I had just told myself to stop doing that. Then this popped up. I had to have it. Why? It’s Port Charlotte, it’s a peated, sherried dram and it’s properly aged. Sounds like reason enough to me. Also, because I could have it was as good an answer as any.

Anyway, a while later my 10cl arrived and I didn’t get around to it for some reason. Summer makes me less inclined to drink ridiculously strong and peated whisky. There’s a style for every season and the style that goes best with roaring fires and snow on roofs didn’t fit 25+ degrees in the back yard.

While the weather hasn’t turned completely yet, it is getting somewhat colder and I decided to crack open the wee bottle that had patiently waited to be tried and tested.

Port Charlotte for Nickolls & Perks

Port Charlotte for Nickolls & Perks

Sniff:
The nose is heavy with thick smoke and sweet peaches. The sherry is quite noticeable and of a very fruity, peach and apricot kind. The smoke is deep, heavy and leathery. Maybe even beefy. There’s ash from wood and vegetables. Grass and hay.

Sip:
The palate is sharp but not overpoweringly so. What also helps is that the flavors are big enough to overcome 62.5% abv. The sherry is here too, still very fruity in a very similar way. Peaches, black pepper and the smoke gets a tad oily. The grass and hay are in the background, which makes for a nice bit of depth.

Swallow:
The finish is surprisingly gentle. It really sticks to the inside of your mouth with syrupy sweet flavors of peach and sherry. There’s smoke, pepper as and oak.

While a whisky like this will never be expected to be the most complex dram ever, this one shows quite some depth and layeredness. There’s quite some flavors to be discovered and the sweetness nicely balances the stellar abv.

It’s been a while since I thoroughly enjoyed a heavily peated whisky and this one reminds me that I really, really like Port Charlotte. Especially when sherried. The weird thing is that this is still available at Nickolls and Perks. For an acceptable £ 78.

Port Charlotte 10yo, 2002-2013, 62.5%, Private Cask #1155 for Nickolls & Perks. Available at Nickolls & Perks for £ 78, or little over € 100

Posted in Bruichladdich, Port Charlotte | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Whisky paraphernalia

Posted on 28 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I like stuff that is related to whisky. I’m not sure why, but when I see adzes on the flea market in town at King’s Day I want them, since it’s a cooper’s tool. I am never going to use them and I don’t want to put them on display, but I just love to buy that kind of crap.

Back in the day when I still had a whisky room I had a display with this kind of stuff. A couple blocks of peat, some malted barley peated to different ppm levels, my certificate of the Friends of Laphroaig, a cask end from Lagavulin. Just loads of stuff which I have absolutely no use for.

By now there is a full fledged industry supplying us whisky geeks with this kind of stuff. Up to and including a subscription service that sends out t-shirts with American craft whiskey distillery’s logos on it (I love these, by the way!). There are a dozen different companies supplying us with whisky rocks so you can chill but not dilute your booze (a refrigerator, anyone?) and even a company that wants to pull one over on unsuspecting whiskey drinkers by supplying them with sticks to put in whisky so it colors quickly. Fair warning: darker booze is not the same as older booze. Wood influence is also not the same as maturation.

Glenlivet 'Dram' Chair

Glenlivet ‘Dram’ Chair

Of course, every once in a while a distillery jumps on this band wagon with something that just baffles me to no end. Macallan had their ‘miniatures cupboard‘ thingy. Bowmore had tailored suits (I think it was Bowmore) and now Glenlivet has a chair. A chair in which to drink whisky. Because we were doing that standing up, I guess.

My problem with this chair is twofold. Well, problem. I just don’t understand it. It’s not exactly a problem and if some Russian oligarch wants to spend shitloads of money on a thing that combines the chairs we sat on in school with a fishing/camping chair with beer holder, that’s fine with me. I just don’t get it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, I just don’t get it. Am I being daft, or is someone try to pull one over on us? Of course I am not against people trying to make a living but at some point shouldn’t someone just say “WTF guys, should we not just focus on making whisky and do that as best as we can? Let’s just leave the furniture for what it is…”.

Also, ‘for collectibility’, the chairs are numbered. I don’t know what that means, but if the number makes it unique, I guess that also warrants us wanting to have ALL bottles from a single cask bottling, since they’re all a unique number…

Also, the chair will set you back some £ 6200. Six thousand two hundred quid. For a chair. The entire furnishing of our house didn’t cost that. And that’s combining the living room, three bed rooms, the attic, the hallway, and the lawn chairs.

Anyway, this all just reminds me that we should be sane with our money. This coming from a guy who just decided to buy shit loads of bottles and just ‘go for all of them for choosing is too hard’.

It’s a strange hobby we’re having.

Posted in - News and Announcements | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Black Bull 30 years old, 50% – Duncan Taylor

Posted on 27 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Black Bull is a blended whisky from Duncan Taylor that exists in a sort of premium space. By this I mean that even the ‘regular’ 12 year old is being held in pretty high esteem is not a whisky scoffed at. They also produce a range of special releases that can get pretty pricy, which puts me off a little bit.

A couple of years ago, when this single release came out I picked it up right away at The Old Pipe. By single release I mean that, contrary to their ‘Special Reserve’ and their 40 year old, this hasn’t come back in new iterations.

Also not like the 40 year old is that they don’t give you much information on which whiskies are included in the blend. What they do state, and this is pretty cool, is that they blended this before maturation, instead of afterwards. I also believe I read somewhere that it consists of 50% malt and 50% grain whisky. It’s bottled at 50% which is a nice percentage for any whisky.

Black Bull 30

Black Bull 30

Sniff:
Big on heavy and fruity sherry. There’s the dried fruits in the form of raisins, plums and dates. The lighter peaches and apricots are all but missing from the mix. It’s sweet with allspice and oak. Lovely deep and rich, and after the initial alcohol has wafted off (there is some of that) a gentle fruity dram with big sherry notes is left.

Sip:
It feels slightly lower in alcohol than it actually is, but there is a certain build up with some alcohol heat and a tinge of peppercorns. Furthermore there’s allspice and then fruit. The fruit and spice seem to have switched position. There’s a bit of ginger, with raisins, oak, dates and a slightly bitter edge. Thicker than I expected, but quite lovely! I don’t smell it but there might be a tiny hint of smoke in here.

Swallow:
The finish is very warming and leaves the fruitiness behind on the palate quite long. A bit of a burn, but in a very nice way, if left too. A very Christmassy dram, that would go well with a roaring fireplace and an armchair (fireplace must be the least inspired word in the English language, by the way). Very long, very good.

Back in the day this would have set you back some € 80 to € 90. Currently I expect it to be some € 200 is last Saturday’s auction is any guide, but I’d still consider buying a bottle at € 150 or so. This is a very, very tasty dram that would easily pass off as a malt. The depth and intensity are stunning and there is quite a lot going on without the flavors being blended into oblivion (my main issue with blends).

I gladly recommend this to anyone who’s up for a sherried whisky and can handle a bit of oak. Bloody good whisky!

Black Bull 30 years old, 50%, blended at birth by Duncan Taylor. Hard to find, check auctions.

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

More Dutch Courage, by Zuidam

Posted on 26 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

A little while I finished my bottle of Dutch Courage. Dutch Courage is the dry gin created by Zuidam Distillers, here in The Netherlands. They aptly named it that since genever (which is technically the same as gin) is the origin of the proverb, from ages ago.

Dutch Courage

Dutch Courage

Anyway, I also have a small ‘free’ booze project at home. This is a thing with which I trick myself into believing I’m richer than I actually am. I don’t want coins in my wallet, so anytime I have them in my pocket I put them in an empty whisky tin (Signatory Laphroaig 1992-2005) and that way I clean out my pants, and I save a bit of money that I don’t otherwise use.

This money is usually spent on gin, vodka, rum or other non-whisky booze. Last year I bought Zuidam’s Dutch Courage. I emptied it and I bought a new one yesteday, also ‘for free’.

I had the added excuse that Anneke suddenly likes Gin Tonic, and all such statements are abused to buy booze I don’t really ‘need’.

The regular Dutch Courage has been out for a while and is a delicious gin. A bit of a clunky bottle like all Zuidam’s Genevers and Korenwijns. The flavours are there, there luckily is no aloe vera or something in there. It’s crisp, lemony and slightly dry.

When it was gone I had half a bottle of tonic left a couple of weeks ago and I remembered having a bottle of Gordon’s Dry Gin in my cupboard, hidden from sight. I tried that. It’s god-awful. If that has been the posterchild for gin for decades, I can understand the decline of it before the last couple of years. Even with a lot of tonic to water it down, it’s hideous.

I needed another bottle of gin. Our local shop has some (not too many, I guess ten to fifteen different ones) and I decided to upturn the whisky tin. There was some 35 bucks in there, so that was enough, I decided.

It only limited my selection by two. Master of Malt’s Bathtub gin was 40, and there was another cool looking bottle slightly over that which I automatically discarded as an option. Also, there was Gordon’s, some Mediterranean gin and a couple of others. Only the couple of others remained as an option. Gin has to come from a country that borders the north sea, or the USA (a nice and snobby remark if there ever was one).

Then I remembered that Zuidam released two new Dutch Courage gins a while ago. There’s an ‘Old Tom’ and an Aged gin at 44%. The Old Tom is aged too, so I’m not entirely sure what the difference is. The Old Tom was recommended, so I picked up that one.

Aged 88 and Old Tom

Aged 88 and Old Tom

It’s a bit sweeter than the regular Dutch Courage, with some vanilla flavors from the oak. Slightly sugary which makes for a sweeter G&T, but nonetheless bloody nice. The depth is similar and because of the cask aging I can’t really say (yet) whether or not any of the other recipe is different.

But in short, buy Zuidam’s gins. They’re good.

The regular Dutch Courage is some € 20. The Old Tom is slightly more expensive at € 27.50, while the ‘Aged 88’ (the aged one) is € 28.50.

They’re all available in Krommenie, at Drinks & Gifts, and I guess most specialty shops stock them in The Netherlands.

Posted in - Other Spirits, Zuidam | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Brewdog’s Russian Dolls.

Posted on 24 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I’ve long been a sucker for Brewdog’s beers. Lately it’s been on the back burner a little bit since I find that they’ve gone a bit awry with their pricing. Most ‘one off’ beers that I would like to try were so prohibitively expensive that I just couldn’t bring myself to order them.

Also, I think they’ve done enough experimenting. Well, that’s not entirely true. I like experiments, I like variations of a familiar theme. However, when you start doing Imperial Weizenbock lagered on whisky casks, or hopping the hell out of Belgian style triple your either brilliant (I didn’t like the beers, so not entirely sure on this) or grasping for anything that you haven’t done before (and sometimes with good reason).

Now, not all is negative. Some of my favorite beers are still from Brewdog. I haven’t had an IPA that topped Punk IPA. Also, when I’m indulging on a beer, I more or less end up buying a Tokyo* every time. And then IF there is a brewery I’m willing to spend more than a couple of euros on a bottle on, it’s Brewdog (or Westvleteren, but that’s another story all together).

Now, Russian Doll. They did IPA is Dead before (different hops to the same beer) and they did a batch of Unleash the Yeast (same beer, different yeast strains). Now there’s Russian Doll. The same beer brewed to different strengths. They increase in strength, which more or less is the same as ‘they increased the malt used to brew the beer’. This results in a Pale Ale, and IPA, a Double IPA and a Barleywine.

This is where I had some alarm bells ringing, since Barleywine and IPA are generally not in the same flavor group. Brewdog informs us that they also adjusted the hops contents to suit the different styles.

Pale Ale
More hoppy than I expected, with a noticeable quantity of barley used. Not overly complex but the flavors do come off as ‘green’. Very herbal with barley and hops in this way.

IPA
The IPA is the more hoppy and slightly stronger variety. The strength isn’t overly revealing but the hops are on overdrive. It’s gentle but very crisp. The green theme is here too. The hops push back the barley flavors a little bit.

Double IPA
I don’t like Double IPAs. They fall outside the IPA category and are not ballsy enough for Barleywine or Quadruple style beers. I always feel like they want to be two things at once and I’ve never tried one that I really wanted to go back for. Some are okay, but most are just not interesting. This one falls in that category. Okay but not interesting. It’s holding the middle ground between the IPA and the Barleywine.

Lots of barley, and quite some hops too. The barley is gaining ground though. Fairly strong but not a belter at that either. The crispness is gone and it’s slightly cloying.

Barleywine
Now this is a rather big beer. The weight of it is considerably bigger than it was in the previous brews. The flavors too, with the hops being turned down and the malts up this is a totally different beer than all others.

The barleywine has flavors of a mountain of malt. It’s sugary and rich with even bay leaf and beef stew.

While I like the intention of the project, I think they should’ve excluded the Barleywine, or choisen a different kind of beer. The way it’s hopped is so vastly different than the other three brews it just doesn’t make sense anymore.

The first three are rather consistent with increasing levels of richness and alcohol. The style of the beer changes significantly if you double the malt, apparently. I wasn’t overly convinced with the Pale Ale and the India Pale Ale, but the Double corrects the experiment.

The beers are nice, but none are exactly ‘new’. Also, I don’t think I’ll remember them that long either. The best of the bunch is the Barleywine I think. That one displayed the most interesting flavors with the stew thingy going on. Rather herbal, and rich. Lovely stuff, that!

You can get this pack at the better beer shops, like Drinks & Gifts in Krommenie. It’ll set you back some € 14.50.

Posted in - Beer | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Wasmund’s Copper Fox Rye Whiskey, 45%

Posted on 23 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

This is a weird one, from an American craft distillery. I’ve come to learn after some years of skepticism that there are quite some kick-ass little distilleries in the USA, whether or not they’re releasing their own spirits or buying and blending for a while before going back to releasing their own stuff.

High West is one of them (Park City Utah), being both a bottler and a distiller. St. George is another (Alameda, California), and during the American Whiskey bottle share from last year I developed a soft spot for FEW Distillery (Evanston, Illinois). Their bourbon at least.

Ever since the Whiskey Tees program I have gotten more curious to other craft distilleries, but with two little screamers at home I’m not expecting to do a road trip of the United States anytime soon. There are drawbacks to having kids. Sleep is another of those.

Anyway, Wasmund’s is a distillery in Sperryville, Virginia and is mostly known for releasing a Single Malt whiskey and a Rye whiskey. The rye is the one  being reviewed here, is only one year old but let’s not get too hung up on age this time!

This whiskey consists of 2/3 Rye and 1/3 malted barley, which is a curious mixture for rye whisky on its own. Also, it’s lightly smoked with apple and cherry wood, and matured in refill casks. Not typically American, that!

Wasmund's Copper Fox Rye Whiskey

Wasmund’s Copper Fox Rye Whiskey

Sniff:
Well, it’s different, that’s for sure! It’s young but not too fierce and raw. There’s rye with its typical spiciness. I get some lemon too, and oak. The oak is gently smoky which is a different smoke than I’m used to.

Sip:
The palate is gentle with cereal (the barley) and whole grain rye bread. There’s the spices again with pink peppercorns. The citrus is present too, with a spice mixture that reminds me of mostly seeds and hard spices instead of powders (not very clear, but I’m not that good at spices). The palate is rather rich and apple-y.

Swallow:
Gentle and young again, but still rather rich and long. I get some balsamic vinegar now with dark cherries and bay leaf. Lots and lots of bay leaf. Slightly charcoal-like, which probably is the wood smoke.

As said I can be a bit careful approaching craft whiskies, especially when very young. This one doesn’t need that carefulness. It’s a lovely dram that certainly is different to anything I’ve tried. The wood smoke effect is nice and definitely different from Balcones’ Texas Shrub oak smoke.

Going back to the palate, the bay leaf becomes more prominent and reminds me a bit of licorice with bay leaf which you can get here. Thanks to Anneke for that note.

While I got this sample recently in a trade, I also bought a bottle of this whiskey some years ago but I haven’t opened it, being slightly afraid it might not be all that. Now I know different. This is interesting, it’s lovely and I really enjoyed it. Cool!

Wasmund’s Copper Fox Rye Whiskey, 45%, bottled on March 15th, 2012. Available from The Whisky Exchange for £ 46 / € 57.50

Posted in - American Whiskey, Copper Fox Distillery | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Two BenRiach cask samples. A Virgin Oak and a PX Sherry

Posted on 21 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Last year I went to Scotland on holiday. We visited BenRiach distillery, which is a truly great place for any whisky lover. Of course, there were some samples tasted and in this case they came straight from random casks in the warehouse. For some reason I didn’t get around to trying them until last night.

I find myself trying to pick a favorite distillery rather often. Of course, I can’t make up my mind as it somehow feels like something definite, instead of a semi random pick from a bunch of places I’ve visited. What I just realized, however, is that I have a couple of distilleries that I keep liking more and more. Those are Springbank, Bowmore and BenRiach (and to some degree, Highland Park).

Of those three, I visited all of them. I did extensive tours of all of them and there were interesting tastings involved too. I like those because of the distilleries themselves. Part of the ‘huh, that’s interesting’ moment regarding this wee list is that all those three distilleries do all parts of the process themselves. As in, they also have an active malting floor which produces at least some of their malt. An interesting realization and something to explore further.

Anyway, the cask samples. I don’t have too much information on them since I didn’t write too much down at the time. I know they’re fairly young, but the year on the cask can be both the year of distilling or the year they were put into this particular cask. And I don’t know if they’re finishes or not. And I don’t know the ABV. What I do know is that I’m going to keep my eye out for the Virgin Oak one.

BenRiach Virgin Oak, sample from cask #3808

BenRiach Virgin Oak cask 3808

BenRiach Virgin Oak cask 3808

Sniff:
Scents of heavy leather and lots of good quality fresh oak come off the glass right after pouring. There’s sherry, strangely, and a certain spiciness that I did not expect. Plums, raisins and some bitter woodiness. Sponge cake with some custard, and I would have sworn sherry trifle.

Sip:
The palate is rather sharp with quite a bit of alcohol and lots of fruit. It’s dry with a lot of oak again. Also roasted barley, like used in stouts, dark chocolate and espresso with its bitterness.

Swallow:
Oak, fruit and quite sharp. It mellows quickly to show a more syrupy fruitiness of raisins, plums and dates.

This is a strange whisky. I know which cask it came from, and I know it’s a virgin oak barrel. It might be a virgin oak finish and have been in a sherry cask before. That would explain a lot since I would have sworn this to be a sherry cask. The richness, and fruitiness were very much in line with that.

Regardless of what this cask is or is not, this whisky is bloody well delicious. 3808 is a number I’m going to keep my eyes out for since I really want a few bottles of it. Let’s say one to drink, one to keep and, well, another one to drink too.

BenRiach PX matured or finished, sample from cask 9138

Since the year on the cask is 2011, I’m taking a guess that this is a finish and the whisky inside is slightly older than two (by now three) years.

BenRiach PX cask 9138

BenRiach PX cask 9138

Sniff:
This is very gentle, and very fruity. Juicy peaches, and sugary grapes. It’s rather light in style for a PX. Some rock melon, mango. Rather timid but oh so fruity!

Sip:
The palate is gentle and syrupy sweet again, with lemon drizzle sponge cake. A hint of pepper with some sweet oak. Peaches with a slightly bitter hint of its stone. Mango, fruit syrup from a tin, wine gums. It takes a while to open up on the palate but becomes increasingly gorgeous.

Swallow:
The finish is unexpectedly different. Oak and wine gums still, but the fruit is more of a tinned red fruit kind. Strawberries, blackberries, that kind of stuff. It’s gently but it lasts quite a while.

Very different but very fruity too. A different beast than the Virgin Oak but not less gorgeous. It’s surprisingly gentle and light, and it reminds me a bit of the Auchentoshan Solera that came out a couple of years ago. There’s a lot going on and a lot to discover, although it’s all in the range of fruit. So, slightly more simple, but almost as delicious as the Virgin Oak.

Two random whiskies picked from BenRiach’s warehouse, and if this is the general quality level they’re putting out there, I might have to start collecting this stuff and forget about many other distilleries!

I’m just hoping they’re going to come out at some point!

Posted in BenRiach | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Lascaw 12 year old, 40%, truffle cask finish

Posted on 17 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I just got to try this one at Zeewijck in IJmuiden, which happens to be a great shop, run by a great guy, who also organizes last week’s Whisky & Rum aan Zee festival. Which is also great.

Anyway, last week he recommended I try the truffle cask finished ‘French’ single malt from Perigord Distillerie in the Dordogne. I didn’t, mostly because my memory was turning to crap already and I am really, really bad at following recommendations.

As a good copy of the American NDP (Non-Distiller Producer) stuff that’s been going on, the label states this whisky is produced by Perigord, but it doesn’t say they distilled it. Producing a whisky can also be buying whisky, finishing it and bottling it. Even just bottling it would be a product of your own, technically. Anyway, the confusing thing is that Perigord actually is a distillery, but the label nicely states that it is Scotch whisky in the bottle. Finished in truffle casks.

What the heck is a truffle cask? I guess in this case it is a cask used to give something a truffle infusion. I’ve a hard time finding out what it actually is. I get some related products online, most also from Perigord, and it is a spirit, but I guess it’s some kind of an infused brandy or so. If someone has more info, please help me out here.

Lascaw 12 year old

Lascaw 12 year old

The whisky then. As I was just standing in the shop collecting my bottles I didn’t really write tasting notes, but I do have some general finding.

The whisky is pretty decent. It’s not overly complex, it’s only 40% and I wouldn’t be surprised to find caramel coloring in it either. Of course, the website doesn’t give me much info either.

On the nose you don’t pick up anything strange. It’s a very smooth and gentle dram, that shows the slightly fruity characteristics of a Speyside dram. A bit in range of Tamdhu, or Deveron/Macduff. It’s on the palate that you get a very slight savory note, like when your paste has some truffle on it.

I was afraid that this would turn out to be a truffle oil with alcohol instead of the whisky that it is. Some chefs overuse the stuff which can turn out really hideous. Some oils have too much of it too. In this case they kept it to a minimum. Just enough to notice.

I actually quite liked this dram. Not on a level that I’m going to get my hands on a bottle of it, since I don’t think this is something you’d enjoy long enough to finish a bottle of. Although, if I was on holiday in the area, I’d sure buy a bottle since it would then be a very tasty souvenir as well a decent bunch of booze.

So, something rather interesting. Not as bad as I would have guessed when someone would’ve just told me I’d be having a truffle cask finished whisky. On the other hand, you do taste something different, but I would never have recognized it as truffle.

Thanks to Richard of Zeewijck for letting me try this!

A bottle should set you back a little over € 40.

Posted in - Other Distilleries, - World Whisky | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Balblair 2002, 1st edition, 46%

Posted on 16 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I love Balblair. Ever since I visited the distillery last year, and a Twitter tasting done before that I just love the distillery. Not even sure why since I didn’t try that many of their whiskies, since not many shops in The Netherlands stock the stuff. Also, the movie The Angel’s Share helped.

I also like what they’re doing with their vintage releases. They’re restricting themselves more than regularly age-stated bottles, but I like it for that very reason. When at the distillery we didn’t have much time after the tour and since I was driving I didn’t drink either, so we just poured samples and got on our way to Glenmorangie. A shame, since I would have enjoyed the guided tasting. If only just to see what they’re about during such an event.

The vintages I’ve tried are all over the map, with the focus being on the younger ones. Unfortunately I never got to try the 1969 and have only tried the second batch from 1975. Apparently, the 1983 is great too, and I’d love to try that. Maybe at some point in the future (read: I just thought of another bottle for on my wish list).

This 2002 bottles was shared between Matt Veira and me, we also shared a 1991 I bought and some samples. I like sharing bottles. It’s keeping the collection of open bottles moving, and you get to try more for your money, without it just being one glass. You still have some time to get to know a whisky before it’s gone, but won’t have to shell out for an entire bottle.

Balblair 2002

Balblair 2002

Sniff:
While there is a lot of aroma coming off the glass, the scents are very light. There’s some licorice root, maybe some pickled ginger too. I get a light vanilla syrup with some other wood spices too. Maybe even thyme.

Sip:
The palate is lightly spicy too, a bit dusty mouth feel with that. Vanilla syrup again. It doesn’t have the creaminess you generally associate with custard. There’s some bite, some spirit. Tasty, but not too special.

Swallow:
The finish is where this one lets me down a bit. It gets a little cardboard-y and isn’t very long.

This is a bit of a strange one. While I respect that this is the entry level Balblair and I can’t expect too much of it, I still think there are some mistakes in this whisky. But I still like it. I do think, however, that for the money they’re asking for it you can better spend another few bucks and buy the next whisky in their line, the second batch of 1997 is great, for example.

Having said that, this is a pretty decent whisky. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with it, but it just doesn’t deliver all that I hoped it would. Still, I’m happily finishing my 35cl sample over the next couple of weeks.

If you can still find this one, it’ll set you back from £ 41 / € 50

Balblair 2002, 1st release, 46%, non-chill filtered and such.

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

The Reference Series by Master of Malt, part 2.2

Posted on 15 October 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

The second part of the second post on the Reference Series by Master of Malt, this time I’m trying II.2 and II.3, to which I still have to look up the introduced variables.

Reference II.2

Reference II.2

I just did that and the addition to II.2 is some heavily peated malt, where II.3 has added caramel. I saw that last one coming since the color was really different from the others, and after yesterday’s post the variable couldn’t be the use of more sherried whiskies, or sherry finishing since that was already done.

Let’s get to it.

Reference II.2

The raw scents on the nose are back, like in II. I missed those in II.1. Quite peaty and spirity, less woody again with some spices. Pepper and heather, but also rather floral. The palate is light with the same spiciness as on the nose. Fairly young tasting again, with heather, pepper, some licorice and maybe ginger. Some smoke, vanilla and caster sugar. The finish is a bit less raw with more flavors of barley and spices. Peaty, some oak, licorice and rather long.

Reference II.3

Reference II.3

Reference II.3

Again, rather light on the nose, warming but a bit more ‘flat’ than the previous one. The peatiness (compared to II) is diminished too. The heather is gone at first and it takes a long time for it to come out. Sweeter with some chocolate tones, and raisins. The palate is spicy with light peat (more like II than II.2, mind). Oak, sweetness and some spices, but again, less than previously. Slightly drying. The finish has the familiar spiciness again with hints of pepper. The finish is shorter and sweeter.

In this case I quickly identified the changes made to the whisky. Of course, the 10% heavily peated malt over other malt (lightly peated? unpeated? Help me out here, Master of Malt!) changes the profile, but not as much as I’d expected. It’s noticeable, but it doesn’t change everything.

The caramel then. This is a highly debated pet peeve of many whisky enthusiasts. I think I’m against it now too. For some whiskies it probably doesn’t matter as much as for others, but I did realize that in this case, it makes quite a difference. The whisky has less depth, there’s more sweetness that diminishes other flavors. I find this worrying, even though everybody in the industry says it doesn’t matter.

Anyway, I prefer II.2 and II.1 over the others. II.3 is the one I like least since that shows so much less depth that there just isn’t much to it. This has, again, been a rather interesting experiment and one that I hope will shed some light on industry practices that are usually shrouded in mist, or at least not many people are too clear about it. I wonder when the chill-filtering range will come out and will definitely get me some samples then!

Reference II.2, 47.4%, 50 cl, £ 56.95 / € 71.25
Reference II.3, 47.2%, 50cl, £ 55.95 / € 70

Master of Malt sent me those samples to review. Thanks guys!

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