When digging through tasting notes I found this one from a sample I got a LONG time ago. Back in the day I probably thought it was a good idea to wait with posting this until I had something to compare it to, but that never happened.
So, real classy of me to not write a review of a sample like this, which I got especially for reviewing. Sorry about that, Lukasz!
A 30 year old rum from Guyana, distilled in a wooden Port Mourant still. Somehow this works rather awesomely in the Caribbean, and was also tried by Lost Spirits Distillery in Nevada to far worse results. At least, a decade ago that was the case. While they’re also hard to get in Europe, I’m not going to be sending money that way…
So, this one. High expectations. Mostly because it’s a Jack Tar bottling and those have never disappointed. Let’s crack in!
Image from Jack Tar
Sniff: Funky and rich with lots of molasses, some heat and a bit of sweetness. Quite woody, minerals and plants.
Sip: An initially gentle arrival, but it builds very quickly to a chili pepper heat with a creamy, syrupy texture. Funky with molasses, Caramac bars, sugar canes and a slightly vegetable like sulfur note. Lots of oak too, and some fruit.
Swallow: Again, funky, creamy with an almost moldy flavor. Strangely, with funky stuff like this, that’s a good thing. A long finish with the same caramel/vegetable/pepper flavors.
This one seems to have it all. A nice but not overdone rum sweetness. Funkiness, some heat, weird notes that you want from old rum. Very, very solid stuff, and a minor hint of sulfur that I have zero problems with.
‘De Verloren Whisky’ or ‘the lost whisky’ is based on a story of ships losing casks of whisky in a storm in 1969. The casks washed up on a beach on Terschelling (one of the Dutch islands). The story inspired Joris Dam of Dam Dranken and King Cask to start bottling his own whisky and to make the change from having a liquor shop to being a bottler.
The whisky itself is a blended whisky sourced through a broker in Scotland. It matured there for almost its entire 15 years, except for the last year in which it was laid to rest on Terschelling. So, no mention of it being a scotch/Scottish whisky anywhere. Interestingly, the cask had a ‘Creative Whisky Company’ tag on it when it arrived at King Cask.
Image from Moutmolen / King Cask
Sniff: Warming with some notes of sherry. The kind that is not just dried fruit and not just dark oaky stuff. There’s a bit of everything. The backdrop of it is a blended whisky with a bit of grain-whisky-sweetness.
Sip: The palate brings less sweetness, a bit of a woody bitterness, but does feel a little bit thin. A hint of leather, dried plums, almond flour. Some grain and oak.
Swallow: The finish veers back to what the nose was doing and the slight thin feeling is completely gone. There’s quite some nice sherry notes, and a bit of age to it.
While this whisky might not change your mind about anything, it certainly is worth the € 40 that it is going for if you need a daily drinker that doesn’t underperform in any way.
Bottle number 37 of this release is empty now. Yesterday saw the last couple of sips being drained from it. After using it in a tasting almost a year ago I decided it was time to get the last glass or two out of it and make room in the cupboard for something else.
This undisclosed Islay whisky matured in a Port hogshead, which is not overly surprising even if tasted blind. It’s rather obvious on the nose and palate. Surprisingly, with eight years of maturation the ABV is already quite low. Generally, at this age, whiskies clock in at a higher alcohol content. I think this is a good thing, because it leaves more room for other flavors to pop up instead of your palate being seared shut by the strong booze.
Image from Whiskybase
Sniff: A big smokiness with a really heavy fortified wine effect behind it. At the time of writing I hadn’t checked the cask type, even though it was on the label. I went with Port, but it wouldn’t be the first sherry cask to have a profile like this either. Jammy and stewed red fruits on top of wet soil.
Sip: The palate is quite peppery. Even though it says Islay and it’s more intensely smoky, it’s not unlike Talisker in that regard. Dry, with plum stones and almond flour. Sawdust, soil, and slightly harsh peaty notes.
Swallow: The finish stays dry, but adds that jammy sweetness again. It’s not unlike treacle and golden syrup, with red fruits added.
It’s a fun whisky, but a tad on the sweet side. The jam notes are really prominent, but the smoke keeps them a little bit in check. It’s a rather typical port cask, but port and smoke tends to work quite well.
When I tried it the first time I wasn’t rating this at 85 points. In this case, giving it quite a bit of time and oxygen really helped the whisky along.
This is a rather special one. Not only is it a bottle that was/is only available through auction and the secondary market, it’s also a very old fashioned ‘one ‘Fiddich with proper European oak maturation for a longer period of time.
Through some online channels I was able to purchase a sample and after two years of moving around through the Netherlands, it made it to my a little while ago. Contrary to many other samples, I managed to remember trying this rather quickly!
I’m not entirely sure what a conference on climate change has to do with whisky. Even more so because I don’t think many distilleries are that eco-friendly, even though many steps have taken in the right direction. But, the fact that money is generated for a charity makes up for a lot of it, I think. And I don’t even mean that in my usual cynical way.
Image from Whiskybase
Sniff: A very date and prune forward sherry cask at a significant age. That means that the very gentle spirit of Glenfiddich is really pushed back. There is old leather, caramel and honey, some almonds too.
Sip: The palate brings a bit more of a bitter bite than I expected. Almonds, prune and date stones, dry barley and oak too. A bit of black pepper, but with a coating sweet ness behind it all. So, honey and caramel again.
Swallow: The finish is very old fashioned in the sherry department. Leather, dates and prunes. Not as sweet as the palate, but with more barley and oak. Some honey, but not a lot. Slightly green with mosses and ferns too.
I was thinking about a one point lower rating, but the finish really makes this one more interesting. The palate and nose are amazing, very old fashioned but also a little straight forward. However, the finish with a bit less sweetness and those green notes kick this up to a 89 point whisky. That is where it truly shines.
And with Cognac, I mean two official Cognacs and one that cannot be called Cognac because it was sent to the UK in a cask before being bottled there. It has to be bottled in the Cognac area to be called that, if I am not mistaken.
I got these samples ages ago and as things go, I haven’t reviewed them yet. Mostly because I wanted to have something to compare them too, since I’m not overly familiar with Cognac.
The 1993 one I have reviewed, however. That’s the one that’s not an official one. I did check it out again just because I wanted to and to see how my ratings hold up with spirit that I’m more unfamiliar with. Although, going by the Caol Ila review I did recently, even if I’m familiar with a spirit there’s not much to go by…
French Brandy 1993-2022, 47% – Michiel Wigman’s Precious Moments
Image from Dutch Whisky Connection
Sniff: Lots of rancio and big red wines and dried grapes on the verge of being raisins. A hint of copper, orange zest, and quite a rich oakiness.
Sip: The palate arrives with more punch than I expected. Lots of sharp oaky notes, with iron and copper. Some red chillies too. Raisins, blue grapes, lots of wood. Chocolate oranges, cherries.
Swallow: The finish is much more dry than the palate, and loses the syrupy texture right away. Quite mature on the rich oak and dark fruitiness of blue grapes and cherries.
Delicious!
Lots of lovely flavors that really make this rather ‘young’ one sing. It’s a stellar drink and it not being bottled in France doesn’t do anything to diminish it!
Sniff: Very oak forward, with a bit of sweetness. Syrupy grapes, very pastry like compared to the ’67. Orange, canned cherries, grape jam.
Sip: The palate packs a punch and is very dry, especially compared to the nose. Lots of wood, raisin twigs, cherries, grape seed, and a bit of peppery heat.
Swallow: The finish is a bit more sweet but doesn’t lose all its dryness. Big flavors of oak and fruit. Lots of grape, stewed pear.
Massively fruity and not overly singular, which sometimes happens with these ridiculously old brandies. It is true to the grapes it was made from but the fermentation, distillation and maturation have added lots of gorgeous flavors.
Sniff: A slightly fiery nose, with oak and a bitterness like grape seeds. Rancio, blue grapes, wood, a hint of warm tar?
Sip: The palate is very similar to the nose buts adds a chili pepper heat. There’s a syrupy sweetness behind it, with banana and strawberry cream.
Swallow: The finish merges the wood and fruit flavor into one blast of flavor. It mellows quickly and flavors last rather long.
Even though it’s rather similar in statistics with the previous one, there are lots of differences in flavor and aroma to be discovered. It might not have the bandwidth of whisky but it still sure is amazing. This one is comparable to the 1969, I think. The main difference is that this one is sold out…
It happens quite a lot that I go in without any expectations, when trying a whisky. With Linkwood, I tend to go in with a bit of apprehension. Experiences have been mixed at best, but if you don’t try, you don’t win.
This 10 year old from Dràm Mòr came in a little while ago and I tried it over the weekend. I had no idea what to expect, when something is a bourbon barrel finish. It does sound a bit like Woodford Reserve’s ‘Double Oak’, but it could be that the first cask was not a bourbon cask?
Anyway, Linkwood. It tends to show some hop like notes and therefore can be a bit beery. Of course, I love beer so that’s not a problem at all. It does make for a slightly more unique experience, with all its hits and misses.
Image from Whiskybase
Sniff: There’s a strange sweetness that I can’t pin down. Parma violets, but also a herbaceous note. There’s quite some barley too, and a light oaky note. A bit of burnt caramel as well.
Sip: There’s the beer like bitterness that is not uncommon in Linkwood. I was hoping for this note. A certain hop-like herb flavor. Crisp and dry barley, with some dark caramel.
Swallow: The finish is very similar, with bitterness, dryness and that plant like sweetness.
So, after trying this, the first thing I did was look it up on Whiskybase and when finding that there are no bottles for sale in The Netherlands, send a message to Viktorija of Dràm Mòr if she knew any addresses that might not have added their stock to the base. It seems like this is not the case and ordering it in from Germany or Austria adds € 25 in shipping. I’m still considering it.
In short, this is a lovely dram with some unique flavors. I was very surprised by it and the ‘weird’ scents are weird in a good way. Lovely stuff!
So, one of these was a semi-recent buy that I sort-of regretted. The other was bought because it is one of the whiskies that opened my eyes to the world of independent bottlers. Or at least very similar to that.
First Cask is a series by Whisky Import Nederland that started out really strong but has somehow fallen by the wayside over the last couple of years. Bottles aren’t moving, and when you try the more modern bottlings, you kind of understand why.
Sniff: For whisky that’s ‘only’ been bottled 25 years ago, there is quite a lot of OBE (Old Bottle Effect). There are hints of barley, beery mash, a note of iron and earthy peat smoke. Salty, tarry notes too, but all very gentle. It comes across as older than 10/11yo.
Sip: The palate is very similar to the nose but is surprisingly punchy, with more hints of tar, diesel and iron. Still there’s a lot of malted barley and earthy peat.
Swallow: The finish has the same ‘ship’s engine’ notes, but is slightly less weighty, and a bit more coastal. Some breezy salinity and a hint of sand.
In a way I expect a 10 year old Caol Ila to be a bit more intense than this, but with a quarter century in a bottle, and it being made to the late eighties’ standards it’s not surprising this is a different thing that contemporary versions. And I like it for it. It’s not as obviously peaty as modern variants, but that timidness is quite lovely and gives room for nice, other flavors.
88/100
Caol Ila 10, 2011-2021, Hogshead, 56.2% – First Cask by WIN
Image from Whiskybase
Sniff: A rather sweet and pastry driven nose, with a certain malt and strawberry milkshake aroma. There is some smoke, but the sweetness suppresses it.
Sip: The palate packs a punch, and is bone dry. Abit of a rubbery, whale skin texture and massive heat.
Swallow: On top of all the heat it veers back to the milkshake and strawberry sweetness as well as vanilla and pastry notes.
The milkshake like sweetness is very weird. Not in a ‘Bruichladdich’ sherbet way, but in a artificial flavor and sugar way. I can’t really be more enthusiastic about this.
79/100
I find it hard to be this harsh on a dram bottled by people I know and like, but I guess honesty comes first in this world of whisky reviewing. I wanted to like this whisky a lot more, but I can’t.
Only after reviewing this I found out I had already done so, much closer to its release. Strangely, I found it WAY more enticing than I did now.
This inconsistency is surprising to me, generally I remember things better, but I tend to be a bit more consistent than this time too. Strange.
I’ve only had one other whisky from Distillery 291 from Colorado. I was immediately thrilled by the concept of a minuscule distillery doing everything themselves including building the stills. On top of that, contrary to some other small distilleries, the whisky was actually really good.
So, following that, I decided to get my hands on a bottle of the stuff, and this was the only one that was available at a reasonable price in Europe. A few days later it arrived and some samples were shared. A little while ago I finally wrote tastings notes. Interestingly, I can’t remember whether I actually already finished the bottle or not, and I’m not going to look for it now…
Anyway, here it goes. For more info on the really interesting distillery, check out the earlier post here.
Sniff: A rather gentle and complex rye with lots of notes of orange. Fried pumpkin, dark rye bread.
Sip: There’s some typical rye spiciness, and dark crusty bread. Some chili heat, pumpkin seeds, orange (both flesh and pith).
Swallow: The finish is largely similar. Lots of spicy notes, but the heat diminishes quickly. Dry, slightly sharp, orange, bread, pumpkin.
It does exactly what you expect a rye whisky to do, but it’s a bit less interesting than I hoped for. It’s a bit more straight forward, so I guess I’ll have to get my hands on another original bottling to find out whether I was wrong the first time, or not.
Still, a rye whisky doing what it is supposed to is a nice thing in the worst of circumstances. So, I am far from disappointed.
When traveling to Scotland in 2022, and staying on Arran we also made the obligatory trip to Campbeltown. While there we didn’t visit Springbank or Glen Scotia, but we did visit Watt Whisky.
Back then we were the first to get a bit of a tour of the town from them, based on them just getting their license to do tastings. I contacted Mark Watt about a tour of Campbeltown, since we initially booked that with Springbank, but they stopped doing that when Covid hit, and hadn’t picked it up by then.
Kate and Mark showed us around the town, and we saw a lot of old distilleries that are no longer operational, or the sites where they sat a hundred years ago. After the tour we had a tasting at the Watt Whisky Headquarters, and we took home a bottle or two each. Even though it was after Brexit we decided to gamble on that.
Image from Whiskybase
This Highland Whisky, of which Mark said he also doesn’t know which distillery it’s from, was the one I took home. And now, almost two years later I’m writing a review while the bottle is nearing its end.
Sniff: This is a Highland whisky with some serious ‘authentic elements’. And by that I mean it’s massively funky with heaps of leather, shoe polish and mango peel. Wet casks, soaked barley. A bit of cork and a rubbery note as well.
Sip: The palate doesn’t really bite, even though it’s over 50%. There’s a bit of intensity, but it’s not aggressive. There’s oak, whisky infused casks, some stewed red fruits, cork, leather. It’s slightly less funky, and the rubbery note is gone. It focuses on oak a lot more, as well as there being a certain dry graininess.
Swallow: The finish veers right back to the massive funkiness from the nose. Leather, mango peels (leathery stuff again), shoe polish. Wet oak, some sponge cake.
As described, it’s a bit of a strange one. It appeals to me because of that, but I can imagine this not being for everyone. The funkiness is through the roof, with all kinds of notes that are not usually found in whisky of this type. Leather, soggy bread, cork. Very interesting, and I am enjoying it. Although based on the Whiskybase score not everyone is as much.
Why is this one not available anywhere, you say? That is mostly because this is not out yet, much like last week’s BenRiach. It’s going to be out 9 February, but even then you’ll be hard pressed to find this one, since it’s going to be a ‘shop only’ release for Best of Wines.
So, a trip to Bussum seems in order, in a week or two. This Mortlach is a youngster, with a full maturation on a PX cask. That normally isn’t something that would peek my interest, but with this being a Duchess bottling, I tend to have expectations that are slightly higher than from another random bottler.
Mortlach tends to be a rather meaty dram. Or at least, it used to be that in the past. The last couple of year’s releases are a bit more middle of the road, with the occasional but rare throwback to the more original style. Let’s hope this one is such a one.
Sniff: This is a BIG whisky. Lots of meaty notes with a bit of barbecue char, grilled banana and a heavy fruitiness like that. There’s quite some oak, and a sweet wine-like note.
Sip: The palate packs a little bit of a punch, but not as much as some 7 year old Mortlachs do. There’s some dusty, peppery heat, a lot of dry oak. There’s a note of barbecued beef again, with a rich sweet fruitiness as well. Thick sherry too, with that hint of wine in it.
Swallow: The finish brings more notes of wine, a rather dessert-y note. Some oak, meat, banana, papaya.
A lot of rich fruit backed up with meat and oak, and some barbecue-y notes without smoke. This one does pack that meaty punch that I was hoping for, and because of the immensely rich distillate, the cask is kept in check. It might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but it sure is mine!
Malt Fascination 