Glen Grant 66yo, 1948-2014, 46.6% by Gordon & MacPhail, for Wealth Solutions

Posted on 6 August 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

For the third year in a row I’ve been picked to receive a review sample of Wealth Solutions‘ epic annual release of whisky.

Wealth Solutions has, since it’s start in 2007, become a big player in Poland for people of some money. They offer solutions for wealth, so to say. The focus on collectibles in the way of whisky, wine and art, and since this year also a cognac.

These are, of course, not just any expensive bottle of hooch, but some extremely precious releases. First there was the Glenfarclas 1953. At the time of release the oldest Glenfarclas ever. Then came the Karuizawa 1964. At the time of release the oldest Karuizawa ever. Now they’ve bottled a Glen Grant from 1948. At the time of release the oldest Glen Grant ever. I spot a trend here.

I also received a sample of their Lesprit de Tiffon cognac, but I’m saving that for a later moment after I’ve tried some more cognacs, so I at least have a bit of a clue what I’m doing.

This Glen Grant was presented by Charles MacLean in Warsaw a couple of months ago with all kinds of bombast. I watched part of the release party but found it not all that interesting at the time. Mostly because I didn’t have a sample and was not expecting there to be samples. I try to not gawk at things that are beyond my reach.

Anyway, I got contacted by Piotr Suchodolski of Wealth Solutions whether or not I’d be interested in receiving a sample for some coverage on my blog. I guess that question was a rhetoric one… Let’s get to it.

Glen Grant 1948, 66 years old

Glen Grant 1948, 66 years old

Sniff:
It’s full, rich and old fashioned to begin with. A light dusting of wood spices with aniseed, cinnamon, clove and nutmeg. There’s oak and ‘speculaas’ spices, some dried apple. The nose is oh so classic. Very distinguished and sophisticated. Hard to describe. I also get Valencia oranges in the background.

Sip:
The palate is gentle but has a rather mature bite to it (this sounds way more than a cougar than I’d like it to). It focuses heavily on the oak and spices, but it’s not as rich as on the nose. It’s gentle and does have a hint of clear spring water running through the Scottish hills. Moss and the tiniest hint of minerals, I’d say. Slightly drying with some red peppers, warming and a tiny hint of paper.

Swallow:
The finish is incredibly gentle. It’s certainly there and lasting, but it never bites. It caresses. Classic and old fashioned with some spices and hints of dried orange slices, apple too. Maybe some ripe pear. It lasts forever.

Now, to rate this and write something coherent about such a whisky…

I should start by saying it’s beautiful. It’s a little thin on the palate and I think they shouldn’t have left it any longer in the cask because the oak is about to take over and go for more paper and cardboard flavors.

Having said that, the balance between the oak NOW, and the spices with the tiny hints of lovely dried fruit is, as Charles MacLean said it, exquisite. It tastes of Speyside. It tastes of small rivers running through meadows over rocks and moss. It tastes of gentle spices.

Without getting any more prosaic, this is a stunning dram. One you have to sit down for. One that is gentle and would definitely not fit at a festival. One that does fit in leather armchairs in some luxury gents club in some hamlet in Scotland, after hunting deer for day in a drizzle.

I don’t have a clue to what the price is, this one has not been for sale like the previous two bottlings but believe me it’s not cheap. I’d say around ten grand, and probably over.

Glen Grant 66yo, 1948-2014, 46.6% by Gordon & MacPhail, for Wealth Solutions

Full disclosure:
I got this sample from Wealth Solutions, my sample number was 26 so if you see that in auctions, don’t buy it, it’s a fake. Thanks a million to the people at Wealth Solutions for sending me this. I love you.

Sample #26

Sample #26

Posted in Glen Grant, Wealth Solutions | Tagged , , , , | 6 Comments

Looking back at four years of blogging

Posted on 4 August 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

I have looked back in the past, around New Year’s. Those reflections were on which whisky’s were awesome, which weren’t. Of course, there has been attention on music, events, tastings, festivals, and other things that happened during the year.

This time, I’m looking back in a slightly different way. This time, it’s about blogging itself, and what has happened in that respect, and because of the blog.

The start
The first 12 months were a bit of trial and error. At first I dabbled a bit in Dutch, and I still mean to translate these posts. I did a couple of bottle-shares to see what that would bring. Luckily, I was already on Twitter yapping away about whisky and that did a lot for hits, visits, statistics in general.

Bottle-shares
The bottle-shares worked rather well, except the first one with SMWS whiskies, since I expected to fill two bottles of each whisky (which I didn’t) I ended up with a lot of unexpected whisky (for which I had to pay. A lot).

Even though that happened and I spend a few months’ budget in one go, I continued doing bottle-shares. I eventually stopped for a bit and have picked it up much more slowly since there is a shitload of work, financial management (at which I suck) and trips to the post office involved. I don’t do four to five per year anymore. One, sometimes two. Smaller ones at that, sometimes just one or two special bottles. I like it this way.

Samples
Of course, ‘us bloggers’ are supposed to get all kinds of freebies from the industry to give positive reviews. And of course, that happens sometimes. Just keep in mind that for most of us small time bloggers, an occasional sample is all. The professional writers were giving us a lot of flack a while ago for ruining their work and polluting honest reviews because of the free shit we get. We don’t. Not often at least, and most of us never get anything more than a sample.

I’ve never been invited on a paid trip to a distillery. I’ve not gotten any freebies to go to festivals or tastings except when I was volunteering behind a stand or organizing that particular tasting.

I am very grateful for the stuff I do get. There have been some epic samples, not least the ones from Wealth Solutions (to continue the celebratory stuff, the 1948 Glen Grant will be reviewed next). In total, over the four years I’ve been at it, I expect I’ve gotten about 150 samples for reviewing. A lot if you think about it, but when you do some 250 posts a year, you need some fuel to keep the engine going! Anyway, thanks to all who supplied booze!

Budget
When I started this blog, I was still getting used to owning a house for grown-ups and the financial ramifications that brings. Then we got our daughter, and now we have a second one on the way. Keeping in mind that we lived really cheaply before we moved to our current residence this tells you two things:

  1. My budget was truly staggering when I started blogging
  2. It has been shrinking every year since

I try to keep my spending in check, but not a day goes by that I am not tempted by some new release that’s coming out. I am also ridiculously bad at thinking ahead. I know when the Feis Ile bottlings are coming out. I know when our club bottling comes out. I know when Maltstock is. I still manage to spend all my budget before I need it, on bottles I don’t want as bad as what comes next.

This is something I’m trying to cope with but I have to admit that with the current state of the whisky world and the high prices asked per bottle, it’s not as hard as it was before. I don’t mind missing some bottles that I would otherwise have ordered without thinking. I taste first on almost all occasions. And something WhiskyNotes’ Ruben once said which rings very true: “The moment has gone”.

My collection
The amount of bottles I own has not changed much in the last four years. It grew massively before, and the first year I was at this shtick it grew considerably. The last couple of years it’s stagnant. What has changed, massively, is the amount of open bottles. About two years ago I had 140 bottles open. Let that sink in for a bit. One hundred and forty. This currently is down to just over 75 and my target for this year is to bring it down to 65. It’ll go down again next year. I hope to end up around 30 in a few years time.

I’ve been shifting focus quite a bit too over the last couple of years. Three years ago I was in a quality over quantity mode. By this I mean I bought less but more expensive bottles. Better whisky, so to say. With the budget cuts this is not really feasibly all the time and as I wrote a little while ago, I like buying bottles too much to save up for months for that special one.

I am now, and have been for a while, in a state of mind where I want to pick the best value for money. That doesn’t mean a bottle cannot exceed a certain amount. That means that I compare a bottle to the price and what else I can do with that money. Based on the reviews I might find the £ 200 for a Feis Ile Lagavulin worth it, but I’m not taking that risk. I like it when I find a good deal like last week’s Benromach 10. I also love that I bought that Mortlach by SMWS, since it’s epic.

Statistics
The blog has gone from below 30 visitors per day to averaging some 110 currently. It has been significantly higher earlier this year when I was posting a solid 6 times per week, but that wasn’t manageable in my current situation.

I know that compared to other bloggers out there this is peanuts and my daily hits happen on their site every hour, but I guess my style or level is not as appealing as theirs. That’s fine.

What I love is that there is a steady group of readers who checks my wee site every now and then. I love to get feedback on Facebook, Twitter and the occasional comment on the blog itself. There might be some tricks I can pull to increase the numbers, but I don’t feel much for digging into SEO and SEA. I’ll see what happens organically.

Currently, after all is said and done I get somewhere between 40000 and 50000 hits per year. I find that a lot for my inconsistent ramblings. Thanks all!

Posted in - News and Announcements | Tagged | 4 Comments

Bowmore 37 year old, 1968, 43.4% and the 1000th post

Posted on 3 August 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Today is not only the exact day I started blogging again four years ago, it is also the 1000th post on MaltFascination.

To celebrate these things without indulging too much I decided to taste something really special. I can’t taste several special things in a row like some other bloggers regularly do, since my wife is 39 weeks pregnant and I have to be in driving condition all the time. I’m on call, so to say.

Right after the birthday tasting two weeks ago I received a package from Teun van Wel, Mr. Maltstock, containing a sample of this 1968 Bowmore. I’ve been eyeing this bottle in his collection for a while but the time never felt right to order a € 50 sample to give it a try. Now he sent it to me as a gift. Good things come to those who wait?

I’ll probably do some posts reflecting on four years of blogging and how I feel about things now, but that’s for another day. Let’s just do this review!

Bowmore 1968, 37 years old

Bowmore 1968, 37 years old

Sniff:
There is a lot going on here, that’s clear from the start. Mainly fruit and spices at first. A heavy scent of cereal, a bit like an oatmeal mash. The peat pops up after those initial scents. So, peat, with some other Islay flavours like salt, iodine and rope. A tiny hint of ammonia as is not uncommon in 1960s Bowmore. Lemon curd and blood orange too, rather sweet, but very gentle and complex. After a while I get a scent of apple and well matured Calvados.

Sip:
The palate is a bit more spicy than I expected with and orange sweetness and some white pepper. Salt, peat, but also heather. After a minute of ‘swimming’ it does get a little bit drier. A rather oily texture with the tiniest hint of iodine too.

Swallow:
The finish is fruity too, in a 1981 Lochside way (this should probably be the other way around, right?). Tropical and I suddenly get more peaches, but also the blood orange that was there earlier on the nose. It’s very smooth and has a certain earthiness with autumn leaves. Orange marmalade. The saltiness is present too, and it lasts long. Very long. I was still properly tasting this dram after half an hour or so.

This dram was two things. One: Absolutely f-ing spectacular. Two: A reminder of some sorts. I generally expect, when I taste something legendary, that it’s going to be all kinds of new and grand flavours. That is, of course, not the case. What such a whisky brings you and why they’re legendary is not because they veer so much away from common ground. They are so hugely appreciated because they do what whisky does, bring flavours that whisky bring, but they’re just better at it. They give you the expected flavours but the balance is stunning, the smoothness and complexity makes you sit back and just enjoy the moment. That kind of stuff.

So, this dram then. This is a bloody great whisky. Not the most intense dram ever, not the most fruity, not the most salty, not the most spicy, it stays in the middle of all flavour groups, but the quality is stunningly high. Absolutely great stuff and lots and lots of kudos have to go out to Teun for sending me this.

If you get the chance to taste something like this, and you appreciate the fact that you have to take your time and NOT expect some flavour bomb that blows everything else out of the water in sheer immensity, go for this. Spend those five tenners. If you want some kick-in-the-balls Octomore like intensity, don’t.

Another interesting thing that I’ve come to more consciously realize lately is that very old bourbon cask matured whiskies start tasting a lot like gentle sherry matured whisky. I wonder if this is because the whisky gets some serious time to break down the oak, oxidize in a different way, or if bourbon in those days was just very different.

Bowmore 1968, 37yo, 43.4%, available in auctions for some serious Benjamins. Expect to pay over € 1200 for a bottle.

Posted in Bowmore | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Benromach 10, 43%, 2014 edition

Posted on 31 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Benromach has never really been on my radar. I have tried some before, but that’s been years. I liked that one, I think, but for some reason I never decided to put any money in their coffers. Even when I drove past the distillery last summer I didn’t stop there. I was on my way to BenRiach. The other ‘Ben’ with all those high profile releases over the last couple of years.

When I got into whisky, it was the period, if I recall correctly, when they started profiling themselves with those Organic releases, in all kinds of casks (up to Sassicaia), and that also didn’t really feel all that appealing.

Then, when I visited DH17 some years ago to pick up a pile of South Pole Shackleton whiskies which I traded and bottle-shared, they had a ‘very affordable’ Benromach 1981. That went on the wishlist, but as most of the bottles there, it slipped into oblivion until it sold out (I think). Still no Benromach.

Maybe even more remarkable, in some 10 bottle-shares there never was one. Maybe because the indie releases are few and far between, and apart from some American whiskeys I never did a bottle-share of OBs.

Then, last Thursday, on Ruben’s excellent WhiskyNotes, a review of this 10 year old baby popped up. As it happened, I was about to put an order in at Master of Malt, to order my father-in-law’s belated birthday present. Some colleagues wanted me to mule some booze into the country (all perfectly legal, mind) and asked for advice. This seemed a smart buy.

Benromach 10

Benromach 10

Sniff:
Heavy, thick, and very old fashioned. Leathery, with some beef stew with lots of bay leaf, and other ‘northern’ spices. Quite some oak, with furniture polish and then some fruit comes through. Again, rather northern. Plums with their stones, stewed apples. Some sherry sweetness with more tropical fruit behind all that. There’s a whiff of smoke too.

Sip:
A lot richer than I’m used to for 43% and 10 year olds. Some slate, oak, smoke, and leather. That’s the first impression. Then there’s some peppery heat, with a slight bitterness from fruit pith. Plums, dried peaches and dates, but also the stewed apples and raisin stems. Furniture polish and waxed leather coats. Sheep in the rain. Rather earthy too, forest floor in autumn.

Swallow:
The finish gives some more heat at first, white pepper. Then it coats your entire mouth with an earthy richness that makes you want for winter and hearth fires. Maybe not very summery, but very delicious. The fruit and oak come later. Pretty long, regarding this is 10 year old, and 43%.

As Ruben stated, the 1960s style can be confirmed. This not only smells and tastes old fashioned, it also smells a bit like my nan’s house when she was still alive. We sat in the dining room drawing on the insides of rice cartons. The potato chips were left overs from the week before.

This is an utterly delicious and one the best value for money bottlings I’ve ever come across. I absolutely love this stuff. And to think a bottle costs only about € 37! Damn.

I still have some trouble believing the richness and flavours of this. I would expect this stuff to be twice as old and thrice as expensive. I think I’d still would have bought it (this is not a hint, Benromach!).

To be honest, if I read a review like Ruben’s I tend to become skeptical, and that was how I started on this dram. I was expecting a nice whisky, but not more than that. Value for money. In the end, I think the 87 points Ruben awarded are selling it short.

Benromach 10, 2014 edition, 43%, available at most half-decent liquor shops, and about € 37 everywhere. You can get it at Master of Malt for that, and I’ve also seen it in The Netherlands for that.

By the way. I’m in no way paid for this review. I wrote it after I opened the bottle I bought. No samples available either. This one I’m drinking entirely. And probably too fast.

Posted in Benromach | Tagged , , , | 14 Comments

Rum – Ian Williams

Posted on 30 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Somewhere on the internet I saw a review of this book, I guess it was about two years ago. Back then I was a little bit into rum, so I thought it would be wise to gather some knowledge on it. Now I’m not saying I’m not into rum anymore, but I just don’t have a clue what’s what and I don’t want to spend money outside my whisky budget on stuff that might not be all that!

Anyway, rum is a spirit from the Caribbean, based on molasses or sugar cane. I think everybody knows that. Most of the crap whisky from India (not the single malts, mind!) is technically rum too, but that’s another story.

Rum - Ian Williams

Rum – Ian Williams

What I do know from the rum tasting I’ve been to in Krommenie, some years ago, is that rum doesn’t really have a big set of rules regarding to what kind of production methods, aging and labeling there has to be. Ages are generally an average, or just a number (Ron Zacapa 23, for example, is made of rums ranging from 6 to 23 years old).

This book doesn’t really go into detail on the production process. Of course, there are some pages spent on it, but it’s never too technical or matter-of-factly, mostly because there are so many variables. What also doesn’t help is that the producing region is split over some 30+ tiny countries.

The history of rum is what this book mostly is about. It tells the tale of the original colonization of the Caribbean, the slave trade that rum allowed to be set up, all the way to all the wars between England and France, the American War for Independence to Prohibition. These chapters start of very interestingly written, with quite a lot of wit in them which makes for an easy read. After about 70 or so pages is does get rather tedious.

I guess this is not entirely fair since I just finished reading “A Renegade History of the United States“, which covers a lot of the same data, but just from another angle. The contents were rather similar, and in both cases there were too many pages spent on this. I got bored.

Luckily, the last 100 pages or so are far more interesting when the chapters get shorter and modern history regarding rum is described. It takes in the last century or so, starting with prohibition, to the Cuban revolution and how a country like Haiti has nothing set up properly except for a hotel and a distillery.

All in all it’s a very interesting read, and if you don’t know much about rum I certainly recommend it, but do keep in mind that so many pages spent on the back and forth in the Spanish Main and all other colonies in the Caribbean does get a bit ‘long’ after a while. It’s a very good read and Ian Williams is a very good writer.

What I also like, by the way, is that he is not shy of giving his opinion, especially on the more contemporary chapters of the book. He doesn’t shy away of talking crap about Bacardi, and the way they lobbied their way into almost every spot of the world, while pushing rum producers (that actually make tasty rum) out.

Posted in - Book | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Redbreast 12, 40%

Posted on 29 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Another standard bottling from my own collection. I’m not entirely sure when I bought this, but I think the excuse was that we just moved in to our new house. New is a relative term in this, because it was valid then, about 4.5 years ago.

Redbreast is, like many Irish whiskeys, a product from Irish Distillers in Midleton, the massive plant that also gives us Green Spot, Yellow Spot, all Jameson varieties, Tullamore Dew, Paddy’s, Powers, and probably some others that I am forgetting right now.

It is a big plant. Luckily for Irish whiskey there are some other distilleries being built or have gone into production over the last couple of years. Cooley was a while ago in 1989, but Tullamore Dew is being rebuilt, Dingle, Kilbeggan, and some others I never heard of. (More info here).

Redbreast was one of the few Single Pot Still whiskeys before their revival, together with Green Spot. Ever since the massive increase in interest in whiskey there have been many other releases. Redbreast is a mainstay, and the range has been expanded over the last couple of years to contain also a 15 year old, 21 year old and a 12 year Cask Strength release.

The regular one then:

Red Breast 12, available from Master of Malt

Redbreast 12, available from Master of Malt

Sniff:
It’s sweet and smooth, with hints of sherry, both malted and unmalted barley. A hint of plastic, banana and banana flavour. Some roses too.

Sip:
The palate is again smooth and sweet. A little more floral than the nose was, but it also has a dusting of crushed black pepper on top of the roses. There’s oak and malt, with a syrupy coating happening too.

Swallow:
The finish is fruity, and has a very ‘Irish’ feel to it. That’s probably that green malt coming back. It’s not too long and that floral note again.

It’s a very easy drinking dram and a nice step up from Irish blended whiskies. I do think this one doesn’t offer you a very in depth journey and many layers to peel back, but in many cases that isn’t what you’re looking for anyway. Straight forward, easy going and pretty delicious nonetheless.

So, a bottle that will do nicely and be finished in due time, but not one that is overly spectacular. I’ve heard about the older versions being much better, but I’ve only had the 12 CS variety. That was pretty tasty too and had a much bigger punch. I wonder what the regular 12 would have tasted like at 46% or so.

But then again: Those in the know, know Redbreast, as WhiskyCast‘s commercial tells me every week.

Redbreast, Single Pot Still Irish Whiskey, 40%. About € 50 at Master of Malt

Samples available.

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

About being priced out.

Posted on 27 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Malt Maniac Oliver Klimek wrote a sincere article about him not (being able) to buy much whisky anymore in the current pricing climate. He talks about prices being on the rise, something he has actually shown in a ‘study’ he started many years ago and recently updated.

The result is that with the same budget as a couple of years ago, you can only buy about half (or less) the whisky you used to. This isn’t particularly well represented in his study, since this focuses on bottlings that were available on both points of time. That loosely translates to the single malts of bigger brands.

However, I don’t think anyone will deny it when I state that the price hikes of Original Bottlings are rather comparable to those of Independents. There is a difference, of course: OB bottlings start in a lower price bracket but end way higher, where IB releases usually have a fairly high entry level but don’t rise as much (generally).

While such price rises are fairly normal in a climate where you sell your bottles anyway, I do feel for the long time whisky aficionados. I don’t count myself among them because I’ve only been ‘collecting’  for a decade or so, but those guys that have been gathering obscure bottles since the 80s or 90s will sure feel a little betrayed by the industry they helped set up.

I’m not saying that they built distilleries, but they kept the flame alive when nobody actually cared about single malt whisky, and single cask, cask strength releases were all but unthinkable.

Where my direction with this differs from Mr. Klimek’s is that he’s looking into the so called Malternatives. Other booze that has not risen in price as much but offers the level of ‘interestingness’ as Single Malt whisky, such as rum, gin, cognac and all kinds of other distillates.

I have thought about this too. I like mostly anything that comes from a still and has a certain level of depth, layeredness and flavor. My preferences go to certain rums, calvados, some vodka, some gin, absinthe, you name it. I could even go on about beer for an hour now.

While I do occasionally buy something that doesn’t come from a pot still and is made from barley, wheat, corn or another cereal, I tend to not spend a significant amount there. Why is this? I simply prefer whisky. Or whiskey. And even though I cannot buy nearly as much bottles as I was used to some five years ago (having two incomes and a really cheap house then, an expensive house now, with only 1.6 incomes and a kid with a second one on the way does that), I still prefer to save up for some nice bottle(s) of whisky and go for that. I simply get the most joy out of that. Buying other stuff gives me even less to spend on whisky. Counterproductive, I think.

The biggest drawback is that when I started my whisky hobby I lived really close to De Whiskykoning in Den Bosch, and since he then had 1400 different bottles on the shelves, I had to go there every two weeks or so, for some three years, to buy something. I dived into the deep end and got spoiled for choice, availability and I got used to playing with the big boys.

That, as said, has changed. I still like playing with the big boys, but I am torn between buying some bottles of very good whisky every few months, and saving up for that one big cracker instead. There’s the difference between really good and absolutely stunning. The difference between buying the newest Arran Cask Strength, Clynelish Masterpiece, Benromach 10 and saving up for a 1968 Ben Nevis.

What doesn’t help is that I really enjoy buying whisky. If I go for the really expensive ones I can indulge three, maybe four times per year. If I don’t act out like that but behave slightly more ‘normal’ (my wife’s term for it) I can do that once every month. An argument for the opposite way of doing things is that I have more than enough whisky to last me a decade, if not more, so saving up for that cracker might even be more sensible from a stock level perspective.

Old Crow, bottled in 1970. Pretty kick-ass bourbon.

Old Crow, bottled in 1970. Pretty kick-ass bourbon.

I did try to go with bourbon and rye whiskey for a while though. That was relatively affordable some two to three years ago and you could get really obscure stuff from auctions at low prices. Unfortunately, that has changed too and everybody else has discovered that too. Where I could buy a bottling of Old Crow from 1970 for € 30 some years ago, that is rapidly approaching € 100 now too. Let alone everything that resembles the name ‘Van Winkle‘.

So, in the end, I’m still torn between sides. I love buying whisky and I believe that bottles of around € 75 give you the most value for money if you are picky. Those are more than good enough and you can keep buying interesting stuff in that price bracket for years to come. On the other hand, I also like having truly exceptional whisky and I don’t mind scaling down size-wise a little bit. I should stop buying bottles for half a year and save up some money to spend on better stuff. Quality over quantity and all.

I discuss this very often with Gal, I guess about every week at least. We both keep coming to the same conclusion, as above. But we both like buying bottles too much. We also are more than happy with that great € 50 find that tastes awesome and is so affordable you can buy something again next month. Of course, after a couple of months of doing that we feel like crap since we both can’t afford that great 1982 Clynelish that comes out (or whatever).

So thanks to Oliver for some new perspective and food for thought.

Posted in - News and Announcements | 5 Comments

Tobermory 15yo, 46.3%, Limited Edition 2008

Posted on 24 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Ah, Tobermory. I have a weird relationship with that distillery. When I went to my first whisky tasting ever, in Den Bosch at Barrique, there was one which I thought absolutely sublime.

I only ended up not buying it since there also was a cask strength Bowmore available that just had to come home. Mostly because the 60% abv. That how I rolled back then.

This turned out to be a bad investment. Mostly because Barrique works with single barrels and you can buy per centiliter in the shop. Their corks are shite so within a week my Bowmore tasted like wet wallpaper.

Anyway, Tobermory. After tasting a terrific one there I bought their old 10 year old. I guess that was about a decade ago. That was a terrible dram. Barely any flavour, very watery. I gave the bottle away after a few glasses. Then, some years later, this 15 year old came out, in a kick-ass box, all fancy looking. I wanted it before I even tasted it. That’s how I rolled about 6 years ago. At least, partially.

I hear they are regularly pretty good nowadays, and I read several enthusiastic reports on single casks from indie bottlers. This one is from themselves, and if this is a benchmark, they’ve picked up a notch or two.

Tobermory 15, available from Master of Malt

Tobermory 15, available from Master of Malt

Sniff:
Big and rich sherry, right from the get-go. Heaps of raisins and dried peaches. A hint of black pepper and sweet malt in the background. Also, if you’re familiar with sherry, oloroso to be more specific, you get slight yeasty, sour note too.

Sip:
The palate also has the crushed black pepper, but a little bit more so than the nose. There’s barley here too, and the sweetness of the sherry is incredibly rich. Raisins, with a slight bitterness of the stems added. Some oak. All in all, where the nose leaned very heavily on the sherry this goes more towards whisky.

Swallow:
The finish is largely consistent with the palate. The bitterness is bigger, but never surpasses the sweetness of the dried fruits and sherry. It’s really big on sherry, fruit and quite oaky at this point too.

While this one is huge on the sherry, it’s not overpowering at any point. It’s also not sherry with increased ABV, which does happen sometimes with these big, rich drams. This is just a lovely whisky with great fruity influences.

Highly recommended, although I don’t really get the marketing blurb on maturing on the mainland and then back to Mull and so on. I would have to try a separate one that wasn’t matured on the mainland, and a third one that was matured fully on Mull. (That’s a hint, Tobermory!)

Tobermory 15, 46.3%, Gonzalez Byass Oloroso Casks, Limited Edition from 2008. Still pretty easy to get at some € 85

Samples available

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

Altore, 40%

Posted on 23 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

About a year and a half ago I blogged about the Altore Moresca Reserve Finish. One of two of a ‘Corsican’ whisky you can more or less just buy on the island. Corsican is between quotation marks because the whisky is distilled in Scotland, and then matured in Corsica, in a selection of their wine barriques.

The Moresca finish and this one are only eight years old, but eight years on Corsica are different from eight years in Scotland, mostly because of the hot summers in the south of France.

I bought this bottle on Friday the 13th of June, 2008. My wife and I got married on the Tuesday before. It was in a small grocery shop near Ajaccio near the camp ground where we had stayed the first night of our honeymoon. I believe it set me back € 23. I knew there was some Corsican whisky to be had, but that’s about as far as my knowledge went.

I think I popped the cork that same night, but I’m not entirely sure about that. I’m also not sure if I had already bought the second one (The Moresca Reserve finish) that same day, or the next. What I do know is that it’s taking me forever to finish this bottle. Not even because it’s bad, but mostly because there’s a lot of better whisky to be had. Even at the same price.

Altore whisky

Altore whisky

Sniff:
There’s some malt on the nose, with oak and an unexpected richness. Some minor hints of fruit. Stewed apples mostly. The sweetness (of which there is a lot) is reminiscent of Moscatel/Muscat wines.

Sip:
It’s very smooth, velvety almost. Also very, very sweet and oily like simple syrup. Some malty flavours in the background, porridge like, with a hint of white pepper. Rather rich, especially for a 40% ABV one. There’s apples too and I think I’m getting the faintest whiff of smoke.

Swallow:
The finish is rather long with more fruit than on the palate. Sweet malt, sweet oak and heavy fruit. Very syrupy and rich.

If you’re into sweet and smooth without a lot of difficult flavours, this one is for you. The closest Scottish whisky I think I’ve had is Aberfeldy. It does taste a lot older than 8 years, but there’s not much depth to be discovered. Actually, I keep being surprised by how good this actually tastes.

It’s funny, though, that something that you actually like it sitting on a shelf for six years and a bit before getting close to being finished. I think I might just make it a goal to finish this next weekend. There isn’t much left in the bottle, but if you’re game, there are some samples available.

Altore 40%, available here for € 31

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

Campbeltown Loch 30, 40%

Posted on 22 July 2014 by Sjoerd de Haan-Kramer

Several years ago I bought this bottle after tasting it and mistaking it for a single malt. I’d like to say I’ve come a long way since then, but I guess that’s just wishful thinking. In this case I feel less like an idiot since this is a rather ‘malty’ blend. By that I mean there’s, I think, quite a lot of malt whisky in this blend, compared to its well known siblings from the blends stable.

Campbeltown Loch is a blended whisky produced by J&A Mitchell so it’s safe to say/guess there’s a lot of the Springbank malts in here. Apart from that, little is known and no information is given. The back label just has a barcode, some mandatory icons and the logo that’s also on the front. No info whatsoever.

Apart from that, when this came out it was a steal. I bought it in The Netherlands at a slightly inflated price of some € 75, while it would have been available from closer to € 60 online, by the looks of it. Even then, a 30 year old blend at any of those prices is a steal.

I just checked Whiskybase for current availability, and you still can get this, but its popularity hasn’t gone unnoticed. Only Whisky-Online.com has it, at £ 175 a pop. What I just realized is that in the current market, 175 quid for a 30 year old blended whisky isn’t even that bad a deal, right?

Campbeltown Loch 30yo

Campbeltown Loch 30yo

Sniff:
Very malty and not too heavy at all. There’s quite a lot of salty scents present, hence my guess for Springbank. There’s sugar and vanilla, and some apple and pear. Not too complex but superb balance and smoothness.

Sip:
Gentle and mature with vanilla, ripe pear and salt. Slightly drying and light, with the tiniest hint of pepper. There’s a tiny layer of smoke behind all this with oak and cinnamon. Quite a lot of oak, but not too heavy.

Swallow:
The finish is very similar to the palate but not overly long. Rich and smooth.

By the tasting notes you can get the idea that this is not an overly complex and layered whisky. That is true. It’s rather straight forward but the three decades in oak worked very well for all parts and make for a great sipping whisky. Highly recommended, but a little expensive at £ 175.

Campbeltown Loch 30, 40%, at Whisky-Online.com £ 175

Samples available

Posted in - Blended Whisky, Campbeltown Loch | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments