Malt Fascination

Last week when some people on Twitter started discussing tasting blind versus not blind when trying new whiskies. It got me thinking on this subject and I thought it good material for a new post.

Of course, both ways of tasting a whisky have their merits, but the purpose of either way is different in my opinion. To me, tasting whiskies blind is very nice to do with a flight of whiskies when you try to find the best of a certain predetermined category.

With that I mean that I like tasting blind when I’m looking for the best in a series of Springbanks, or the best 18 year old among several varieties. When you don’t know what is what you more or less pay a lot more attentions to smaller details and pick up on off-notes and different nuances.

I do believe, however, that tasting blind is quite useless when there is no theme in the whisky you try. To start comparing whiskies that do not have any similarity at all is quite ridiculous. To compare a Talisker 18, Hazelburn 8 and a Glenfarclas 105 40 year old doesn’t make any sense since the tastes will be so incredibly different its like apples and oranges. Both are fruit, but that’s about it.

Be prepared that, when you taste some drams without knowing what they are, you might find some unexpected and surprising (and sometimes embarassing) results. At some point I blind tasted the Longrow CV. I didn’t know anything about it at all, and didn’t think it a very good whisky. Usually, at home, I quite like this one.

I think the cause of this is that the Longrow CV is a rather simple dram with a pretty small taste variety. Nothing wrong with that, especially for a daily dram of which you don’t really expect much. It has some great briny smokiness and what it does, it does very well. But at the tasting I was looking for complexity, for layers of flavour, for depth and balance. In my opinion it didn’t do that very well and I scored it only ‘two stars’. I thought it wasn’t bad, but I didn’t particularly like it either. And as most people know, I can be quite vocal about my opinion…

The result of the Twitter discussing is the first Dutch ‘Blind Twitter Tasting’, hosted by Passie voor Whisky (passion for whisky), a very large Whisky Specialist in Rijswijk, The Netherlands. It will be held on May 31st at 8pm (CET), hashtag #BWTT.

Yesterday a Tweeter (of which I can find little info) and Angela D’Orazio (Mackmyra’s Master Blender) hosted a Twitter Tasting of four (!) of Mackmyra‘s newest releases. As with previous Twitter Tastings the tsunami of whisky tweets started a little while before 8pm, because everybody was very much looking forward to it, and counting down.

Mackmyra Brukswhisky
This whisky is a vatting of different whiskies from the Mackmyra distillery, all single malt. They use multiple recipes and multiple casks to blend this rather elegant mix of flavours. (American oak, new Swedish oak, sherry casks, quarter casks, the ‘elegant’ recipe and a smoky one). Its available in Sweden and Scandinavian Travel Retail at 45 euros.

The nose starts with ground black pepper, unripe pears and it gets more sweet and more fruity after a minute. The palate is a lot sweeter and more sirupy. There are some bubblegum flavours in the mix and it gets just a bit dry in the end. Also some coconut tan lotion (synthetic coconut). The pepper lingers from nose to finish and is the last flavour standing. Not bad, but a bit middle-of-the-road.

Mackmyra Brukswhisky, 41.4%, 45 euros.

 (19 points)

Mackmyra Special 06: Sommaräng (Summer Meadow)
Even more different casks in the mix varying from blood tubs (30 liters) to barrels, from new oak to bourbon casks to sherry casks. This whisky was released in Sweden yesterday! It is about 7 years old and available in specialist shops by request at about 67 euros.

The general consensus, including my opinion, was that this whisky starts very restrained and needs quite some time to loosen up. Biscuits, pepper, vanilla and dry cereals on the nose. The taste has some hard candy and fresh cut white oak (or Swedish, wouldn’t know the difference yet). There also is some refrigerated creme brulee and a chalkiness like old fashioned toothpaste. Again, the pepper is present every step of the way. According to Angela D’Orazio, the Swedish oak adds a lot of pepper flavours, which would explain a lot! Again, not bad, but the slow starting nose hinders me a bit.

Mackmyra Special 06 Sommaräng, May 2nd 2011, 46.8%, 67 euros

(25 points)

Mackmyra Moment Jord (Earth)
Another special release of which most bottles have stayed in Sweden. It will be released in August 2011, so that’s a cool look into the future! Mostly refill hogsheads used for this one with some whisky finished in French Bordeaux casks. It will be available in Sweden for about 125 euros.

This one took me by surprise. The wine casks influence is very weird and since there is no smoky whisky in this one, it doesn’t have that edge to it. In the end the first thing that came to mind was Bowmore without the smoke. It was heavily perfumed, but not necessarily in a bad way. It starts very light and there are some flavours and scents associated with light whiskies, but underneath is a very heavy spirit. I got some Napoleon Lemon sweets but after that there was some leather, cocoa and a definite woody tone as well. The finish is long and dry with blue grapes and sour cherries. A nice and evolving dram, with a lot of different flavours.

Mackmyra Moment Jord, 2011, 55.1%, 1470 bottles, 125 euros

(26 points)

Mackmyra Moment Drivved (Driftwood)
This is another limited release for August 2011, but this time with some smoky whisky added to the recipe and matured in Mackmyra’s mine warehouse. The price in Sweden will be 145 euros. The casks used are 4 Bourbon barrels with some smoky whisky from a bourbon cask and from Swedish oak.

This one starts off very bourbon cask-y, with lemon curd and biscuits. I get tea, butter, lemon, vanilla and a hint of salt. Butterscotch as well. Certain hints of peach as well. The finish is quite long and gives a little bit more wood flavours than the previous whiskies. The hint of smoke that is present in the nose, on the palate and on the finish is very smooth throughout this whisky. Very nice! Lots of influences from bourbon casks, and the hint of smoke is really appealing!

Mackmyra Moment Drivved, 2011, 55.5%, 1460 bottles, 145 euros

 (36 points)

I haven’t taken the prices into account, since alcohol is VERY expensive in Sweden, and the prices here can be quite different.

Things are getting stranger and stranger in the world of whisky. Last week I read that Bruichladdich will be releasing “Single Farm” whiskies, distilled from malted barley from one farm on Islay.

On Friday, I found out that Buffalo Trace is planning to release 96 different versions of their bourbon called the Single Oak Project. They have made casks from hand picked oak trees from the Ozark Mountains in Missouri. From each tree came two casks and the casks were used to mature the great spirit from Buffalo Trace.

Apart from the 96 different trees they also cut them so that the casks from each tree are from the bottom or top, so no mixture of closer and further from the ground wood.

So, 192 single barrel bourbons coming up, planned to be released over the next 4 years. There is a lot more to be found in this press-release (Thanks JMPyle).

I just hope some of these bottles will find their way to Europe, or I find my way to some of these bottles, because I really like to try a few of these. Head to head, if possible to see if each tree really impacts the flavour of a whisk(e)y.

The day before yesterday, when I wasn’t paying attention, a huge discussion started on Twitter about my rating of the Glenfarclas 175th. Everybody disagrees with me and is a lot more positive about it. All nice and dandy of course, I don’t really care about people disagreeing. Tasting stuff is very subjective, after all.

What I do care about is that people think my 6/10 rating is very low, while it still results in 3 stars. My point is that you can’t compare the points I give to a whisky with the Dutch public school system. Its not a ‘just acceptable’ whisky. Most reviewers give 3 stars for a whisky that scores about 80 points and no stars for anything from 1 to 59 points, which seems odd to me.

I posted here what each star rating means in my view, and since its in Dutch, I’ll post it in English here:

0 stars: This is a dram I really don’t like. One that I won’t even finish. If I have a full bottle of this, I’ll make it into a sauce, or give it away to someone who does like it (0 to 4 points).

1 stars: A whisky that is not good and/or very uninteresting. One that I can drink, but not one that I enjoy (5 to 11 points).

2 stars: An average whisky, not much very wrong with it, I just don’t care too much about it (12 to 19 points).

3 stars: A little above average. A well-made whisky that I enjoy, but I wouldn’t buy a bottle of it. Its not bad at all, but I’ve had many better drams (20 to 27 points).

4 stars: A very good whisky that I recommend anyone to try. It has a lot to offer when nosing and tasting it. In short: A whisky that makes me happy and I wouldn’t mind owning a bottle (or two) (28 to 35 points).

5 stars: This is great stuff. These drams belongs on the list of drams that make me a very happy camper. I’d like to order a bottle of this stuff right away, if I can afford it at that moment (36 and more points).

I hope this clarifies some reviews and odd ratings. I am thinking of ditching the point system all together and just use the stars, but that doesn’t seem right to me. There is still an order of preference within 5-star-rated drams, which would be lost then.

Still, it is very dependent on the moment and my mood. Also, the expectation is critical. I gave a Tullibardine that I didn’t really like 3 stars, and the Glenfarclas that I did like as well. The point is that the Tullibardine was above expectations, and the Glenfarclas below. 2 and 3 stars is a bit of a grey area…

This Highland Park sample was sent to me by the chaps at the Master of Malt to get some publicity for their own  bottlings. A very good way of doing that, and I really love the idea that I got these samples this way!

Nose:
Quite a fierce nose on this dram, with a lot of alcohol. It is a cask strength whisky, so that’s not a big surprise. There is not a lot of wood influence but there is a lot of smoke. A LOT of smoke, more like an Islay whisky instead of typical Highland Park. There is smoke dry grass and straw, a hint of pepper and a very obvious lack of typical Highland Park sweetness.

Taste:
I got really surprised here, and started thinking my nose was a bit off, because here the lacking sweetness of the nose came ramping up to me. A lot more treacly than I expected. It also has a nice build-up and displays some notes of sweet fruit. Lightly smoky here, but still a tad more than expected.

Finish:
Here, the big peat is back again and there are flavours of sweet heather. Quite a long finish, but still reminiscent of an Islay whisky.

I found this dram quite unexpected, flavourwise. I did like it however, and the idea that Highland Park can produce many different kinds of spirits is something I like. Not necessarily the best Highland Park I’ve tasted, but a very nice dram indeed.

Fun Fact: We also had a bottle of this personalized for a Stag night of my brother in law!

Highland Park 13, 1997, 57%, available at Master of Malt for 52 euros.

Nose: 8
Taste: 7
Finish: 7
Overal experience: 8
Price/quality: +1

Total: 31 points

Follow Master of Malt on Twitter or Facebook!

This Glenfarclas was released to celebrate the 175th anniversary of the distillery a while ago in the Netherlands. It sold out pretty quickly here, but when it was released in other countries more recently it didn’t cause the same hype. Strange.

It is a whisky created with whiskies from the last 6 decades, so there is some fifty year old stuff in there, but also (and probably more of) 3 to 10 year old…

Nose:
Some pretty heavy whisky is there first but there is some influence from old and new too. The woodiness with fruit and spices from older whisky and some fiercer notes and peppery style from younger whisky as well. Its pretty hard to pinpoint some smells because of the complex mixture of styles. I do get some European oak with some leather, and it gets a bit lighter after a while.

Taste:
A lot of sweet tropical fruit and some apple too. Not as much wood as I expected, the older whiskies are less pronounced here. It does taste a bit ‘average’. It does, however, have a typical Glenfarclas ring to it.

Finish:
This is where this whisky lost me. The more typical flavours I would expect after the scents and taste were not really here and it tasted a bit flat. Also I thought it quite short.

This whisky fascinated me more as a gimmick than as a great dram. It has its qualities, but I think its not as good as other Glenfarclases you can get for this kind of money.

Glenfarclas 175th Anniversary, 43%, about 85 euros at Master of Malt.

Nose: 8
Taste: 7
Finish: 4
Overal experience: 6
Price/quality: -1

Total: 24 points

This bottle was quite the hassle to get home. Together with Marco I bought a bottle and to get my share I sent him an empty 35cl bottle, which he would fill and send back. However, the parcel service thought it unnecessary to have their regular schedule and rang our doorbell around a quarter to five on two days. Of course, like any regular working lad, I wasn’t home. And instead of delivering at the neighbours they sent it back to Fryslan after 2 tries (and they state they will always try three times…). One angry email later and the package was delivered after all…

Nose:
Spicy caramel with nutmeg. Slightly burnt toast. A rather known absence of sweetness, almost savory with dark bread.

Taste:
Savory again, with a slightly drying edge to it. There isn’t much alcohol burn, but that is a good thing. The taste is rather smooth with a mouth coating effect. I get some anise in the background.

Finish:
Again, a quite bready taste in the finish, with a little cocoa added to the mix. A little more spicy than it was on the palate. A bit more drying as well. There finally is some sweetness in it.

This is a very unexpected dram. I’ve tasted quite a few rye whiskies over the last year, but not that tasted anything like this. There were spicy ones, and sweet and fruity ones, but never this savory. A nice addition to the flavour package that can be gotten from Rye Whiskey. Not bad at all, but it did seem a bit lacking in some parts, balance wise.

Van Winkle Family Reserve Rye 13 year old, 47.8%, around 70 euros.

Nose: 8
Taste: 7
Finish: 8
Overal experience: 7
Price/quality: +2

Total: 32 points

Recently in a nice package from Ewald (of the Usquebaugh Society) I got a sample of Willett Singel Barrel Rye 25 year old, from 1983. There were very nice samples in that package, also the other two George T. Staggs in the head to head post.

Willett is a rather unknown distillery from Kentucky, to me at least. I’ve read its name in the occasional magazine or in some reviews, but you don’t find many of their bottles at your local whisky specialist. This rye was my introduction to their range.

Nose:
Red chilli peppers and pink peppercorns at first. After a minute I get wet bread crusts with more dried peppers. The typical rye scent is in the background, but the spices that usually go with a rye whiskey are there. Its very different from Sazeracs and Rittenhouses I know.

Taste:
At first I get a huge hit of cherries, with toast. Also some tree bark and curry spices. A lot of sweet spices are present which makes for a very high complexity. After a few minutes it starts to look like a more typical rye whiskey with cinnamon, clove and pepper.

Finish:
On the nose I got a rather hard to point out smell that did ring a bell, but I couldn’t find which one. I missed that in the taste, but here its back. Some clove again, and quite some wood influences. The rye flavours linger for quite some time. I think I also get some fruitiness somewhere…

This is, again, a very nice old rye. Everytime I taste a properly aged rye whiskey, I fall more in love with its style, complexity and many layers of flavours. I might have to start spending a little more on that section of my collection and a bit less on ‘bottles I buy because I wanted to buy something’. To be honest, at € 137, the price is acceptable for an aged Rye whiskey, compared to Rittenhouse, for example.

Willett Single Barrel Rye, 25 years old, 47%/94 proof, 5/10/1983, barrel #1372, €137 at OnlyBourbon.nl

Nose: 9
Taste: 8
Finish: 8
Overal experience: 9
Price/quality: +1

Total: 35 points

I traded a sample of this GlenDronach 16 with Marlie, of whisky club The Whisky Club (what’s in a name) in the south of the country. I’ve had it sitting around for a while and thought it time to taste it. Also, I was in dire need of the 60.8% the label states, since I just found out my package with half a bottle of Van Winkle Family Reserve Rye 13yo got sent back to the Marco because the delivery dude couldn’t drop it off at my house…

Nose:
Enormously fruity with clear hints of cherries and quite some fresh European oak. After the initial alcohol shock has passed I also get Sticky Toffee Pudding. Which I like. A lot. Somewhat later I get chocolate with raisins.

Taste:
The alcohol really overpowers the flavours. It almost feels like your tongue gets singed. After a minute you get some more tastes, mostly of the typical sherry cask type. Toffee, nuts, some fruits. A lot of tannines and quite some wood as well.

Finish:
The finish displays a lot more fruit of the confit kind. Like the fruits you find in Christmas Cake, which is nearly as good as Sticky Toffee Pudding. It lasts quite long, but that also might be from my tongue bleeding because of the alcohol burn!

The flavours are all correct, but this dram NEEDS water. Badly. Although I’ve tasted many drams at higher proof than this one, it just burns a hole in your cheeks. I love the completeness of the sherry flavours, however. Fruit, nuts, a touch of wood and the toffee is all there.

GlenDronach 16, 1992-2009, 60.8%, bottled for whisky club The Whisky Club.

Nose: 9
Taste: 7
Finish: 7
Overal experience: 8
Price/quality: +1 (it used to cost €75)

Total: 32 points

This single cask Lagavulin from 1993 is part of the Manager’s Choice series, which was released during 2009 and 2010. The entire series consisted of a single cask bottling of each of Diageo’s (malt) distilleries in Scotland. 27 single casks that is! The aspect for which these bottles got the most notoriety was that they each cost almost 300 euros or more.

There were all kinds of excuses from Diageo’s marketing crew for this, but in my book its still a bit much for a single cask bottling from the 90’s. You can usually buy those for about 60 to 80 euros from independents. While there are of course some distilleries that you hardly ever find a single cask of (Lagavulin, Talisker, Cardhu, Oban) its still a bit much for, say, a Caol Ila or Clynelish

This sample was given to me by my good whisky-friend Rob Stevens, the owner of whisky specialist De Whiskykoning in Den Bosch. Heaps of thanks for that, Rob!

Nose:
It starts with heavy mossy peat. The wet stuff you smell on a damp morning on Islay. There is also a slight grassy note and something that reminds of old leather bounds books in a library. To finish it all off I get a little bit of cigar tobacco.

Taste:
The taste is rather smooth with full heathery smoke and peat. Its a bit salty too, and the general idea I get is of ‘age’. Although this is only a 16 year old whisky there is a lot of maturity here and the thick peaty smell works its magic on me!

Finish:
The finish is long and quite level. The tastes that are there linger for a while and slowly die away all together. After about a minute there is a bit more vibrancy and then its all over…

This is one damn fine whisky. I understand why Lagavulin’s distillery manager would pick a cask like this for the Manager’s Choice since it sums up a lot of Lagavulin’s qualities. I would definetly buy a bottle of this, were it a lot less expensive! The only drawback of this whisky is its price, since its just way too much, in my opinion.

Lagavulin Manager’s Choice, 1993, 54.7%, € 350 at Royal Mile Whiskies

Nose: 10
Taste: 10
Finish: 9
Overal experience: 9
Price/quality: -2

Total: 36 points