Author Archives: selfbuilt

Writers Tears Irish Pot Still Whiskey

Leave a comment

Writerṣ Tears is an unusual Irish whiskey.  Classically, the Irish method is to triple-distill malted and unmalted barley together, in a single copper pot still. This is known as a Single Pot Still whiskey. But most entry-level Irish whiskey is actually a blend of single pot still whiskey and cheaper-to-produce grain whiskey (i.e., much like a blended Scotch whisky, except with single pot instead of single malt).

Writers Tears is priced similarly to some entry-level Irish blends, but is actually a vatting of 60% malt whiskey and 40% single pot still whiskey, all distilled in copper pots. This is an unusual pairing, and is likely to be more flavourful than a typical Irish blended whiskey.

The name reflects a fanciful association of this style of malt/pot still Irish whiskey and writers’ inspiration. It has been said that they enjoyed it so much, that when they cried, their tears were of whiskey. 😉

Writers Tears is sourced from a “Cork distillery” (read: Midleton). It is aged in American Oak bourbon casks, and bottled at 40% ABV. It is currently $50 CAD at the LCBO.

Here is how it compares to some typical Irish blends at this price point:

Bushmills Original Blended: 7.69 ± 0.44 on 14 reviews ($$)
The Irishman Founder’s Reserve: 8.37 ± 0.31 on 6 reviews ($$)
Green Spot: 8.46 ± 0.42 on 14 reviews ($$$)
Jameson Irish Whiskey: 7.81 ± 0.55 on 19 reviews ($$)
Jameson Select Reserve (Black Barrel): 8.32 ± 0.41 on 16 reviews ($$)
Jameson Signature Reserve: 8.40 ± 0.37 on 4 reviews ($$)
Powers 12yo Reserve: 8.60 ± 0.26 on 6 reviews ($$$)
Powers Gold Label: 7.88 ± 0.48 on 10 reviews ($$)
Redbreast 12yo: 8.77 ± 0.42 on 21 reviews ($$$)
Teeling Whiskey Small Batch: 8.24 ± 0.42 on 18 reviews ($$)
Tullamore Dew Blended: 7.75 ± 0.39 on 15 reviews ($$)
Tullamore Dew Blended 12yo: 8.10 ± 0.27 on 8 reviews ($$$)
Writers Tears Pot Still: 8.48 ± 0.38 on 14 reviews ($$)
Yellow Spot: 8.77 ± 0.27 on 14 reviews ($$$$)

Writers Tears is clearly one of the best values for the price in this class (i.e., has the highest score for the $$ price class of Irish whiskeys).  This is particularly impressive, given that it is close to the overall average rating across my entire Whisky Database (~8.54).

I recently sampled this from a friend’s bottle, newly opened for the evening.

Nose: Crisp orchard fruit, with green apples, pears, and plums.  Light honey sweetness. Fragrant camphor/eucalyptus aroma, which is distinctive. Unfortunately, there is also a fairly strong organic solvent smell, mainly acetone (i.e., nail polish remover). If not for the latter, this would be a lovely nose. May fade once the bottle has been opened for awhile.

Palate: Same fruits as the nose, along with a touch of green banana now. Not really floral, but I am getting a dried hay note. Vanilla, butterscotch and a touch of baking spice (mild – maybe nutmeg). Still with the eucalyptus, moving more into sweet menthol. Unfortunately, this still brings with it echoes of that solvent – it seems like the two are somewhat inseparable. No real burn from the ethanol, easy to sip.

writers-tearsFinish: Medium. I suppose you could describe it as gently warming. Slightly sweet up front, dries to a more astringent effect.

I haven’t come across this much eucalyptus since the Swedish malt whisky, Mackmyra First Edition. Unfortunately, I can’t really separate it from the solvent aroma, which drags down Writers Tears to a below average score from me personally (although still close to the Meta-Critic average). This is an easy to sip whisky, more flavourful than your typical Irish budget blend.

I think it makes a very good introduction to the lighter Irish pot still style, as it still has a decent amount of flavour. I don’t have a lot of experience of this malt/pot still class, but Writers Tears strikes me as very Midleton-like in its profile (not surprisingly).

For reviews of this whisky, Jim Murray, Tone of Whisky Saga, and Serge of Whisky Fun are all very positive.  Ralfy is also generally supportive (and has an amusing backstory for his review).  Somewhat less positive reviews include Richard of the Whiskey Reviewer and the guys at Quebec Whisky.

Glengoyne Cask Strength – Batch 4

4 comments

Glengoyne is a Scottish distillery that straddles the traditional border between Highland and Lowland regions. Technically, I believe their stills are located north of the imaginary line, and their maturing facilities are to the south. They don’t use any peat for drying their barley, and are thus probably closer stylistically to the typical lowland producers.

They are also known for their reliance on sherry casks for maturation.  That is not to say all their expressions are “sherry bombs”, but you can typically detect a consistent sherry flavour motif running across their lines.

They used to produce a 12 year old cask strength single malt, but this was replaced a few years ago with a no-age-statement version, prepared in defined batches. As with the GlenDronach Cask Strength Batch 4/5 recently reviewed, you can expect some variability from batch to batch. For this review, I have a sample from a recently acquired batch 4 bottle – brought back from the distillery by a colleague of mine.

Glengoyne reports that the composition of this whisky is 20% first-fill European oak sherry casks, 10% first-fill American oak sherry casks, and 70% oak refill casks. It is not chill-filtered, no colouring is added, and is bottled at cask strength (58.8% ABV in the case of batch 4).

Here is how it compares to other Glengoynes, and similar cask-strength whiskies in the Meta-Critic Database:

Glengoyne Cask Strength (batch 1): 8.74 ± 0.47 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne Cask Strength (batch 2): 8.69 ± 0.40 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne Cask Strength (batch 3): 8.49 ± 0.81 on 5 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne Cask Strength (batch 4): 8.58 ± 0.15 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne Cask Strength (all batches): 8.61 ± 0.48 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne 10yo: 8.22 ± 0.34 on 12 reviews ($$$)
Glengoyne 12yo Cask Strength: 8.57 ± 0.40 on 10 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne 12yo: 8.50 ± 0.40 on 10 reviews ($$$)
Glengoyne 15yo: 8.47 ± 0.54 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
Glengoyne 17yo: 8.44 ± 0.21 on 11 reviews ($$$$$)

Amrut Intermediate Sherry: 8.99 ± 0.31 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
BenRiach Cask Strength: 8.85 ± 0.11 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
Benromach 10yo Cask Strength (100 proof): 9.09 ± 0.12 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 1): 9.06 ± 0.28 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 2): 9.05 ± 0.09 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 3): 9.02 ± 0.36 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 4): 8.91 ± 0.31 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 5): 8.87 ± 0.10 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Solist Sherry Cask: 9.14 ± 0.35 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Macallan Cask Strength: 8.89 ± 0.40 on 12 reviews ($$$$$+)
Redbreast 12yo Cask Strength: 9.02 ± 0.32 on 14 reviews ($$$$)

There is an unusually high variance in scores across most batches of the Glengoyne Cask Strength. The number of reviews are low across batches, but it seems like there are higher differences of opinion than usual. There also seems to be a trend toward lower scores over subsequent batches, but that is hard to tell for certain – the numbers are low, and I have few examples of repeated batch testing by individual reviewers.

Here is what I find in the glass, for batch 4:

Nose: Intense dark brown sugar, almost Demerara level.  Maple sugar too – so sweet, I can imagine the crunchy sugar crystals. A bit of cream thrown in. Mixed berry compote, with a pastry note (berry crumble). Figs and raisins, but not very pronounced. Oat cakes. A bit of alcohol singe (which water oddly doesn’t help). A nose for baked fruit lovers!

Palate: More fruit shows up now – apple, pear, and peaches – none of which I detected on the nose. And even more raisins and sultanas, very ripe and juicy. Cinnamon toast. Peppery kick. Rich mouthfeel, somewhat buttery. You can feel the higher ABV, but it doesn’t need much water to tame it – I recommend just a few drops.

glengoyne-caskstrengthFinish:  Medium long. The buttery oak flavours linger a good while, along with cinnamon and a stronger white pepper presence. Pancake syrup sweetness initially, but bitterness comes in over time, and builds over sips, which detracts for me personally.

A real dessert dram, with all its sweet fruit, brown sugar, and baked-goods notes. As an aside, I checked the producer’s tasting notes after finishing my own above, and was pleasantly surprised to find such a close concurrence. Didn’t notice any banana initially, but I can kind of see that too.

I initially thought I would rank this one higher than some of the equivalent age-statement Glengoynes, as the Cask Strength benefits from the higher ABV. But I don’t like the lingering bitterness in the finish, which increasingly detracts for me as I sip it. In the end, I think the Meta-Critic average score for batch 4 (and all batches overall) is fair.

But I can see why reviews of this whisky would be so variable – while some might like the punch it packs, it is likely going to be too sweet for others. Nathan the Scotch Noob has just posted a review of batch 4. Although of the previous batch 3, André and Patrick of Quebec Whisky neatly encapsulate the widely differing opinions of this whisky. Otherwise, Serge of Whisky Fun was very enthusiastic for batch 1, and only slightly less so for batch 2. Thomas of Whisky Saga gives a typical score for batch 2. Redditor xile_ gives a low-normal score for batch 4.

 

Gouden Carolus – Belgian Single Malt

Leave a comment

On a recent trip to Belgium, I had the opportunity to sample an unusual offering – a new single malt whisky from a respected local beer producer: the Gouden Carolus single malt.

Gouden Carolus is a beer brand made by the Het Anker brewery in Mechelen, Belgium.  The Gouden Carolus Classic is actually one my favourite Belgian “brown” beers, although this new single malt whisky is distilled from the mash of Gouden Carolus Tripel, a pale malt beer. Belgian tripel beers use three times the typical amount of malt, combined with high fermentation (so they pack quite a kick).

The pure Tripel beer mash (without the hops and extra aromatics) is distilled in copper pot stills at the brewery. It is initially matured in ex-bourbon barrels, with some further finishing in custom-made Het Anker casks. There is no age statement for the final whisky, but it is believed to be 3 years old. Refreshingly, it is not chill-filtered, no colouring is added, and it is bottled at a respectable 46% ABV.

There are not a lot of reviews for this whisky, as it is not commonly available outside of Belgium (yet). The 500mL bottle retails for 40€, or $60 CAD, in local shops.

Here is how it compares in my database to some other young malt whiskies from outside of Scotland:

Amrut Single Malt (India): 8.37 ± 0.47 on 13 reviews ($$$)
Balcones Texas Single Malt (USA): 8.72 ± 0.24 on 10 reviews ($$$$)
FEW Single Malt (USA): 8.45 ± 0.51 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Gouden Carolus (Belgium): 8.00 ± 0.21 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
Glen Breton Rare 10yo (Canada): 8.05 ± 0.42 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Single Malt (Taiwan): 8.41 ± 0.52 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Kilbeggan Irish Reserve Malt (Ireland): 7.97 ± 0.52 on 6 reviews ($$)
Mackmyra The First Edition (Sweden): 8.66 ± 0.38 on 16 reviews ($$$)
Millstone 8yo French Oak (Netherlands): 7.89 ± 0.72 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
Penderyn Legend (Wales): 7.46 ± 0.93 on 4 reviews ($$$)
Penderyn Aur Cymru (Wales): 7.69 ± 0.61 on 8 reviews ($$$$)
St George’s Chapter 6 (England): 8.23 ± 0.48 on 10 reviews ($$$)
Teeling Single Malt (Ireland): 8.46 ± 0.36 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Tyrconnell Single Malt (Ireland): 8.13 ± 0.42 on 13 reviews ($$)

I was lucky enough to get a generous free sample of this single malt at The Bottle Shop liquor store in Bruges, on Wollestraat street just off of the Grote Markt. Here is what I found in the glass:

Colour:  “Gouden” apparently means golden in Dutch, and I can believe it. Hard to believe no colourant was added, as this is exactly the shade most distillers try to make their whisky.

Nose: Incredibly fruity nose, but heavily candied (i.e., fruit gummies). Really took me by surprise, and brought me back to my childhood. Otherwise, cherries, peaches, and a touch of green apple – there is a slight sourness that balances out the candied sweetness. Malty, with Scottish oat cakes and Arrowroot biscuits. Vanilla and some anise (black licorice). A touch of acetone and definite ethanol burn (consistent with the young age), but not as bad as I was expecting for a 3 yo. Pleasantly surprised.

Palate: The same fruity candy and malty biscuits notes as the nose, without much else coming through I’m afraid. Maybe a bit of caramel now, to complement the vanilla.  Otherwise, seems rather thin – and very grain alcohol hot.  The young age is really showing through here, with typical roughness. Water may help, but I didn’t have any to add.

goudencarolusFinish: Medium length. It actually lasts longer than I would have expected, given the youthful grain alcohol sensation in the mouth. The fruity character disappears quickly, and you are left mainly with the oak-driven caramels and vanilla. A touch peppery too, which I like.

This one really impressed me on the nose, but then turned into the expected youthful disappointment in the mouth.  Still, very respectful quality for the young age.  If Het Anker can give this a few more years in quality barrels, they are likely to have a nice sipper on their hands.

Although based on few reviews, I think the current Meta-Critic score is fair.  For some online reviews of this whisky, I recommend you check out Ruben of Whisky Notes, Jonny of Whisky Advocate, and Joel and Annibel of Whisky Magazine.

 

BenRiach 15 Year Old Tawny Port

Leave a comment

BenRiach has recently announced a new 21 year old Tawny Port expression, apparently to replace the current 15 yo Tawny port-finished single malt in their core line-up.  As such, I figured it was about time I write up my review of this one, before it disappears off the shelves for good.

Port is a Portugeuse fortified wine, and comes in sweet, dry and semi-dry forms. I’ve even had white port, which is distinctive. I am typically a fan of port finishes for malt whisky, as I find it adds slightly sweet grape notes to the basic malt profile. Tawny port in particular is typically sweet (or medium dry), and often somewhat “nutty”.

As I mentioned in my 12 Year Old Matured in Sherry Wood review, BenRiach typically has a fairly gentle base spirit. This makes it well suited to fortified wine barrel finishing, in my view.  Here are how some of the typical BenRiach expressions compare:

BenRiach 12yo: 8.42 ± 0.26 on 13 reviews ($$$)
BenRiach 12yo Matured in Sherry Wood: 8.69 ± 0.21 on 11 reviews ($$$)
BenRiach 15yo Sauternes Finish: 8.11 ± 0.53 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
BenRiach 15yo Tawny Port Finish: 8.51 ± 0.21 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
BenRiach 17yo Septendecim Peated: 8.51 ± 0.57 on 17 reviews ($$$$)
BenRiach 17yo Solstice Peated Port: 8.90 ± 0.29 on 10 reviews ($$$$)

And now some other port-finished whiskies:

Amrut Portonova: 8.98 ± 0.30 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Amrut Portpipe Peated Single Cask: 8.80 ± 0.37 on 8 reviews ($$$$)
Arran Malt Port Cask Finish: 8.59 ± 0.40 on 11 reviews ($$$)
Balvenie 21yo Port Wood: 8.74 ± 0.40 on 13 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach 18yo Tawny Port Finish: 8.54 ± 0.39 on 4 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Concertmaster Port Cask: 8.32 ± 0.59 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Longrow Red 11yo Port Cask: 8.64 ± 0.38 on 10 reviews ($$$$)
Penderyn Portwood: 8.61 ± 0.42 on 5 reviews ($$$)
Tomatin 14yo Portwood: 8.57 ± 0.37 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
Tyrconnell 10yo Port Cask Finish: 8.55 ± 0.37 on 10 reviews ($$$$)

BenRiach 15 Tawny Port is certainly within the typical range of other port-finished expressions (although at the low end of them).

I had a glass of the BenRiach 15 Year Old Tawny Port from a recently opened bottle at a bar here in Ontario.  It was my only drink that night, so I took my time with it.  Here’s what I found in the glass.

Nose: Sweet, as I would expect for a tawny port. Main fruits are raisins and grapes (doh!), with some subtler lighter fruits like apple. Net effect is sort of like a grape jam. Milk chocolate. I also get dry, musty woody notes, like sawdust. No off-putting solvent notes or alcohol singe (surprisingly mild, in fact).

Palate: Fruit jammy, but with less distinct fruits now. Milk chocolate again, and even more musty oak. Pepper, producing some tongue tingle. Chewy mouthfeel, even a bit syrupy. It’s a great malt to hold in your mouth – you don’t want to swallow.  Somewhat tannic and tart once you do, though. Fairly simple in composition, without much influence from the base spirit it seems.

Finish: Medium finish. Oaky bitterness present throughout, as it has been all along.  Surprisingly astringent. Nothing really unpleasant though, just a simple and gentle fade-out. Reminds me a lot of Kavalan Concertmaster.

Benriach.15.TawnyThe BenRiach 15 Tawny Port Wood Finish is an easy-drinking whisky, in much same the category as of the Kavalan Concertmaster. It has less character on the nose though, earning it a lower score in my books (although it does about the same or better with many reviewers). There’s nothing to particularly recommend BenRiach 15 Tawny Port over other port-finishes, but not much to complain about either.  I’m curious to see if the extra aging in the new 21 year old version brings up anything new.

Some of the highest scores that I’ve seen for this 15 yo expression come from the folks at Quebec Whisky (André and Patrick in particular).  Personally, I’m somewhat closer to Martin and Eli (Elisabeth) in my rating. Richard at the Whiskey Reviewer is similarly moderately positive, as is Jim Murray. End of the day, this is a decent dram, but nothing to get too excited about in my view.

Kavalan Sherry Oak

4 comments

I’ve covered a few Kavalan single malts now, including one of their higher-end single cask offerings, the Solist Sherry Cask.

Kavalan also offers both the Solist Bourbon Cask and Solist Sherry Cask in a vatted format, known as the Kavalan Ex-Bourbon Oak and Sherry Oak, respectively.  Interestingly, these batch versions are available at both cask-strength (typically ~54-59%, like the single casks Solists) and at a reduced 46% ABV.

Supposedly, these two “oak” brands are vatted from the exact same type of casks used for the Solist series. But it stands to reason that they probably cherry-pick the best casks for the single cask offerings, and vat the rest. Note that all the “oak” series variants are hard to come by outside of Asia.

Here is how the various Kavalan bottlings compare in my Whisky Database.

Kavalan Solist Sherry Cask: 9.14 ± 0.35 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Solist Fino Sherry Cask: 9.08 ± 0.27 on 9 reviews ($$$$$+)
Kavalan Solist Vinho Barrique: 8.94 ± 0.36 on 12 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Sherry Oak: 8.72 ± 0.32 on 4 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Concertmaster: 8.32 ± 0.59 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Solist Bourbon: 8.87 ± 0.25 on 16 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Single Malt: 8.42 ± 0.54 on 15 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan King Car Conductor: 8.39 ± 0.37 on 8 reviews ($$$$)

The single cask offerings consistently outperform the vatted malts. Unfortunately, I don’t have enough reviews of the ex-Bourbon Oak to compare here. But to give you an idea for the sherried malts, here are how some of the GlenDronach single casks compare to vatted bottlings:

GlenDronach vintage 20yo Single Cask: 9.05 ± 0.44 on 11 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach vintage 19yo Single Cask: 8.97 ± 0.39 on 12 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach 18yo Allardice: 8.70 ± 0.40 on 15 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach 21yo Parliament: 8.68 ± 0.39 on 13 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 4): 8.92 ± 0.31 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 5): 8.88 ± 0.11 on 5 reviews ($$$$)

You can see a similar pattern, whereby the single cask offerings typically out-perform the vatted age expressions, or NAS cask-strength batches.

For this review, I have a 50mL sample bottle of the 46% Kavalan Sherry Oak that I picked up during my travels. Bottling code is 2015.01.31 15:50. The bottle came in a cardboard box, and so was protected from light.

In terms of appearance, the Sherry Oak is not as dark as my Solist Sherry Cask (as you might expect due the additional water). But it still has a rich reddish gold colour.

Nose: Typical sweet sherry bomb opening, with classic figs, raisins, prunes, and a few red fruits (including strawberry). Also shows more pronounced tropical fruit notes than I usually get from Kavalan (like kiwis and papayas). Cocoa powder and black licorice. The vegetal notes – present on many Kavalan whiskies – are pronounced here. There is a distinct solvent smell that detracts for me personally. A touch of alcohol singe as well (oddly, more than I detected on my cask-strength Sherry Solist).

Palate: Oily, but not as thick as the almost resinous Solist. Definitely fruity, with the tropical notes being most prominent (which I like). A fair amount of vanilla now, as well as the classic pancake syrup noted in my previous review. The vegetal notes run more toward autumn leaves on the ground than the moist earth I detected on the Solist. Sweet cinnamon. A bit of bitterness comes in at the end.

Finish: Medium length. The sweetness continues the longest, but there is a slight artificial tinge to it. Some cinnamon still. The bitterness from the end of the palate also continues as well (not uncommon on many sherry bombs).  Decent, but disappointing compared to my Solist cask.

Kavalan.Sherry.OakThis whisky tastes like I would expect – a slightly watered-down version of the Solist Sherry Cask (and likely from an inferior selection of casks).  That is not to say it is bad. Indeed, this strikes me as a fairly “typical” sherry bomb in many ways. If I had a sample at cask-strength, I would probably put it on par with the Glendronach Cask Strength Batch 4/5 that I reviewed recently. If you have the option between the two, I recommend picking up the Sherry Oak at cask-strength (typically only available in Asia, though).

While this is a good introduction to the Kavalan sherry character, you may want to jump right to the Solist if you can find it at a reasonable price.  When you have sampled outstanding single cask expressions from Glendronach or Kavalan, the vatted whiskies don’t quite compare.

Reviews of this whisky are hard to come by, but do check out Dominic at Whisky Advocate, and Serge of Whisky Fun. Serge in particular seems to have lucked out with a particularly excellent batch.

 

Amrut Fusion

Leave a comment

Amrut is a very popular single malt whisky maker from India.  Yes, you heard that last part right. As discussed in my earlier Kavalan (Taiwan) reviews, you can actually make excellent malt whisky in hot and humid tropical environments.

Wood barrel aging is a complex thing, with many different processes occurring simultaneously (see my Source of Whisky’s Flavour article for more info). A lot of these can be accelerated by temperature – although not all, and not uniformly. One key difference is that hot and humid environments increase both water and alcohol evaporation (respectively), leading to a greater combined “angel’s share” over time. This differs from traditional malt whisky matured in relatively cold and damp Scotland (which preferentially favours the loss of alcohol over water, and more slowly over time).

The end result is that barrel aging is largely accelerated in hot and humid climates, and thus Indian whiskys (like Taiwanese ones) are typically bottled very young. As such, don’t expect to see age statements on any Amrut malt whisky – it would be very misleading, relative to our typical Scottish age “calibration.”

Fusion is one of Amrut’s most popular entry-level single malts.  Unusually, it is a mixture of 25% peated Scottish barley and 75% unpeated Indian malt (both distilled independently). The combined product was then matured in a combination of new and used American oak barrels at the Amrut distillery in Bangalore. As a result, you can expect a lightly-peated malt whisky – but one with many of the “tropical” fruit flavours common to Indian whisky.

As an aside, my initial exposure to Amrut was their basic Indian Single Malt expression – which is pure Indian barley, matured in a mix of new and old American oak. Personally, I am not a fan of that one – I find it too sweet, almost like a banana liqueur. Let’s see how the Fusion does instead. I obtained a sample through a swap with 89Justin on Reddit.

First, the Meta-Critic scores:

Amrut 100 Peated: 8.91 ± 0.37 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Amrut Fusion: 8.90 ± 0.24 on 22 reviews ($$$$)
Amrut Peated Single Malt: 8.66 ± 0.35 on 10 reviews ($$$$)
Amrut Single Malt: 8.37 ± 0.47 on 13 reviews ($$$)

Ardmore Traditional Cask: 8.51 ± 0.23 on 19 reviews ($$$)
Bowmore 12yo: 8.36 ± 0.23 on 16 reviews ($$$)
Highland Park 12yo: 8.65 ± 0.22 on 21 reviews ($$$)
Jura 10yo Origin: 8.01 ± 0.38 on 16 reviews ($$$)
Ledaig 10yo: 8.21 ± 0.35 on 16 reviews ($$$)
Longrow Peated: 8.81 ± 0.19 on 12 reviews ($$$)
Oban 14yo: 8.44 ± 0.40 on 15 reviews ($$$$)
Springbank 10yo: 8.69 ± 0.24 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
Talisker 10yo: 8.92 ± 0.19 on 21 reviews ($$$$)

I’ve focused on many of the classic lightly-peated (flavour cluster I) whiskies from my database above. As you can see from the mean scores, Amrut Fusion is extensively reviewed, and does very well in comparison. It’s also typically a good value (~$80-$85 CAD at the LCBO in Ontario, or SAQ in Quebec)

And now my tasting notes:

Nose: Red-skinned fruits, especially currants and plum, followed by tropical banana, pineapple, and guava. Definite smoke, but more campfire-style than peaty. Vanilla and brown sugar. Malty, with a faint yeasty smell.  Also a touch of glue, unfortunately.  Definitely complex and distinctive, a nice mix of aromas.

Palate: Red fruits again, and some citrus now (orange). The caramel and vanilla picks up, as do the classic rye baking spices (especially all spice). Some tongue tingle and a bit of burn (likely due to the 50% ABV). Smoke is still there, and complimented by some dry peat. Slightly oily mouthfeel, with a good substantial weight.

Amrut.FusionFinish: Fairly long. Lingering orange and berry sweetness, plus some artificial sweetness (banana candies?). Otherwise, lots of extinguished smoke on the way out, which makes for a nice finish.

This was a pleasant surprise after the basic Amrut Indian Single Malt.  While I get the same tropical fruit notes here (especially banana), they are not as overwhelming. Given that Fusion is typically only typically ~$10 more, I strongly recommend you skip right over to this one.

In some ways, Fusion reminds me of a tropical fruit version of Highland Park – lightly peated, with loads of fruit flavour. It is probably a bit sweeter up front, and the character of the peat is bit different, but I expect fans of the classic HP style would appreciate this Indian malt as well.

Amrut Fusion is an extensively reviewed whisky, with a fairly consistent above-average ranking from most reviewers.  At the lower end (but still positive) are Serge of Whisky Fun, Oliver of Pour Me Another One, and Ruben of Whisky Notes.  At the high end are Thomas of Whisky Saga, Jim Murray (96 score), and Josh the The Whiskey Jug. More typical are Nathan the Scotch Noob, and the boys at Quebec Whisky.

Springbank 18 Year Old

Leave a comment

As mentioned in my recent review of the entry-level Springbank 10 year old, this Campbeltown distiller still performs the entire production process – from malting through to bottling – on site. They release lightly-peated offerings under the Springbank label, and also produce heavily-peated malt whisky (as Longrow), and peat-free malt whisky (as Hazelburn).

The Springbank 18 year old is a popular expression among enthusiasts, having a garnered a number of awards. My sample is from the second batch, and is courtesy of the redditor xile_. It has a bit of everything in it – the classic briny Springbank character, a bit of smoke, and a bit of sherry.  Bottled at a refreshing 46% ABV, Springbank doesn’t use coloring (or chill-filtering).

Here is how it compares to the other Springbank single malts in my Meta-Critic Whisky Database:

Hazelburn 8yo: 8.39 ± 0.36 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Hazelburn 12yo: 8.63 ± 0.25 on 14 reviews ($$$$)
Longrow Peated: 8.82 ± 0.19 on 12 reviews ($$$)
Longrow 10yo: 8.57 ± 0.42 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
Longrow 18yo: 9.17 ± 0.22 on 7 reviews ($$$$$)
Springbank 10yo: 8.69 ± 0.25 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
Springbank 12yo Cask Strength: 8.84 ± 0.28 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Springbank 18yo: 8.96 ± 0.19 on 17 reviews ($$$$$)

And here is how it compares to some other whiskies of similar age and style (although most below are more heavily peated):

Ardbeg 17yo: 9.04 ± 0.28 on 7 reviews ($$$$$+)
Bunnahabhain 18yo: 8.99 ± 0.17 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Caol Ila 18yo: 8.66 ± 0.51 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Highland Park 18yo: 9.11 ± 0.25 on 22 reviews ($$$$$)
Lagavulin 16yo: 9.23 ± 0.23 on 25 reviews ($$$$)
Laphroaig 18yo: 9.03 ± 0.27 on 18 reviews ($$$$$)
Longrow 18yo: 9.17 ± 0.22 on 7 reviews ($$$$$)
Oban 18yo: 8.70 ± 0.22 on 12 reviews ($$$$$)
Springbank 18yo: 8.96 ± 0.19 on 17 reviews ($$$$$)
Talisker 18yo: 9.20 ± 0.20 on 15 reviews ($$$$$)

Springbank 18 yo gets a very respectable score for a lightly-peated whisky (recall that heavily-peated whiskies invariably score higher in my database).

Here is what I find in the glass:

Nose: Sweet fruit compote, with tons of berries (blueberry, strawberry, raspberry), plums, rhubarb, raisins, and even some banana oddly enough.  Vanilla and toffee. Much less peat than the 10 yo, but still a bit of smoke.  Has the classic briny Springbank character, with a bit of pepper now. Rich, like creamed wheat. Very nice.

Palate:  Vanilla and toffee dominate, with fruits taking a back seat (although some red currants coming through now). Salty. Good peppery kick, with black licorice (anise) and some extra chilli spices thrown in. Cereal notes coming up now too. Very oily mouthfeel, rich and decadent.  A bit of tongue tingle builds. Faintest hint of smoke.

Springbank.18Finish: Long.  Salty, briny sea air with new notes of sweet chocolate showing up now. None of the bitterness or artificial sweetener I noticed on the 10 yo. Lingering spice. Just the right mix for my palate.

I tend to think of this Scotch as a slightly saltier and smokier version of my favourite Bunnahabhain 18 yo. Not quite as overtly sherried perhaps, but still a relatively sweet dessert dram.

While the Springbank 18 shows a relatively low standard deviation, opinions on this whisky can still vary. A particular point to keep in mind is that individuals differ in their ability to detect trace amounts of sulphur and other (typically) averse aromas and flavours. I discussed the genetics of this briefly in my Mortlach Rare Old review. For further discussion related to this particular sample, check out my comments in xile_’s review of the same bottle on the reddit whisky network.

As a general rule, if you are someone who is sensitive to bitter/sulphur notes, try a splash of water – that typically helps.

The highest praise I’ve seen for this whisky is from the Reddit whisky network, followed by the guys at Quebec Whisky, Oliver of Pour Me Another One, Ralfy, and Michael of Diving for Pearls. Although I have yet to see a truly negative review, more moderately positive examples come from Thomas of Whisky Saga, John of Whisky Advocate, and Jim Murray.

 

 

66 Gilead – Crimson Rye and Wild Oak

Leave a comment

I’m a late entry on the Canadian whisky scene for these whiskies.  Like my review of the Collingwood 21 yo, these two reviews come about as a result of recent “mystery swaps” that I have done with other whisky enthusiasts on the whisky network of Reddit.

This is a fun challenge whereby you hone your whisky sensory analysis skills by tasting (and reviewing) whiskies “blind”. In this case, I had two mystery samples from redditor 89Justin, with no indication as to what was in the bottles (no info on country, style, ABV, etc.).  See my full reviews there to see how well I did in my guesses for these two whiskies.

Unlike the Collingwood experience, you can actually still buy these two 66 Gilead whiskies – but probably not for much longer.  They were recently marked down to $40 CAD for clearance at the LCBO, so you may need to hunt around to find a local store that still carries them.

Based in the Prince Edward County region of Ontario, 66 Gilead could best be described as a craft distiller.  With their close association to wine makers in the area, they have had the ability to experiment with some interesting barrel finishes.  Their two signature whiskies are the Crimson Oak (finished in red wine casks, mainly pinot noir, and made up of 100% unmalted rye) and Wild Oak (done “bourbon-style”, matured in new charred oak casks with a custom mashbill of 51% corn, followed by rye, wheat and peated barley, in that order). I don’t know the exact age of the whiskies, but they are both believed to be young (i.e., I’ve seen 3.5 to 4.5 year old estimates online). Both are bottled at an impressive 47% ABV.

They don’t score particularly highly for Canadian whiskies – here is how they compare to other Canadian “craft-like” whiskies in my Meta-Critic Database:

66 Gilead Crimson Rye: 8.30 ± 0.47 on 6 reviews ($$)
66 Gilead The Wild Oak: 7.99 ± 0.58 on 5 reviews ($$)
Alberta Premium Dark Horse: 8.63 ± 0.33 on 15 reviews ($)
Canadian Rockies 21 yo: 9.04 ± 0.29 on 6 reviews ($$$)
Danfield’s 21 yo: 8.61 ± 0.56 on 12 reviews ($$)
Forty Creek Evolution: 8.85 ± 0.65 on 7 reviews ($$$)
Forty Creek Confederation Oak (All Batches): 8.80 ± 0.39 on 18 reviews ($$$)
Forty Creek Three Grain Harmony: 8.26 ± 0.59 on 5 reviews ($$$)
Glen Breton Ice 10yo: 8.24 ± 0.63 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
Glen Breton Rare 10yo: 8.06 ± 0.42 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
Gooderham & Worts Four Grain: 8.64 ± 0.34 on 8 reviews ($$)
J.P. Wiser’s Last Barrels: 8.89 ± 0.29 on 4 reviews ($$$)
Lot 40: 8.91 ± 0.40 on 18 reviews ($$)
Pike Creek 10 yo: 8.22 ± 0.53 on 11 reviews ($$)

Below are my tasting notes.

66.Gilead.Crimson66 Gilead Crimson Oak

Colour: Slightly rose-tinted, dark orange/red-brown

Nose: Very fruit sweet with rich grape, raisins, plums, prunes, pears and apricot notes. I initially guessed port-finished, as this is fruitier than a typical sherry-finish. Dry, dusty rye baking spices, with lots of cinnamon and nutmeg. Gingerbread baking in the oven. Not really malty, but some cereal (grape nuts comes to mind). No off notes, but hard to tell under all that fruity sweetness.

Palate: Heavy spicy kick, with lots of rye spice and pepper. Same fruitiness as the nose, with maybe a bit of citrus (judging from the mouth pucker). Raw and extreme on first sip, seems youthful. Definitely very hot. Recommend small sips, letting it mix with saliva. A bit of bitterness on the finish.

Finish: Fairly long lasting, due to the spicy kick and heat. A bit oaky. Some artificial sweetness creeps in over time, unfortunately.  Cinnamon lasts until the end (cinnamon red hots in particular).

A bit two-dimensional, with searing hot spice/pepper and heavy grape-like sweetness. Those two dimensions really dominate.  While simple, I kind of like it – it is certainly bold (and thus likely too hot for most people).  A bit like an amped-up version of Alberta Premium Dark Horse, but with even more sweet fruit and spicy rye kick.

Not sure if I could recommend it to most, but I personally would rank it a bit higher than the consensus Meta-Critic score for my personal palate.

66.Gilead.Oak66 Gilead Wild Oak

Colour: Typical light gold

Nose: Sweet, with light fruits, like pear and apple – also citrus (grapefruit). Some rye spices. Very woody. A bit of solvent smell, mixed with old sweat socks.  Not as bad as it sounds, but not very distinctive either.

Palate:  Not really detecting a lot of fruit. Rye spices are most prominent, mainly cinnamon and cloves. Tons of vanilla, and bit of caramel as well. Definitely oaky. Slight bitterness hiding under the sweetness (which quickly veers into the artificial sweetener realm, unfortunately). Good spicy kick to it. Somewhat watery mouthfeel for 47% ABV.

Finish:  Medium short.  Not really that much of interest going on.  Seemed to me originally like a light, young, entry-level Canadian whisky, but with some added spice and heavy oak presence. Unfortunately, the oaky bitterness lingers the longest.

There is a lot heat on this one too – both alcohol burn and rye spice (although it is not as searingly spicy hot as the Crimson Rye). Unfortunately, I don’t find much else going on here. Ironically, it seems both under-aged (i.e., young, with raw distillate notes) and over-oaked (from the bitterness and woody flavours). Maybe a cask preparation issue?

Not quite sure what would need to be done to improve this, but I really can’t recommend it in its current form.  I find the Meta-critic score to be reasonable.

Definitely an interesting experience to try these two whiskies blind as to the contents. I’m intrigued enough by the Crimson Rye to consider picking up a bottle at the LCBO. But be forewarned if you considering buying it un-tasted – you better really like wine-based fruit flavours and cinnamon red hots!

Generally positive reviews for these two whiskies come from Davin of Whisky Advocate. Jason of Whisky Won is also generally supportive of the Crimson Rye, less so for the Wild Oak. The guys at Quebec Whisky were not enthused about either (although again gave Crimson Oak a better score). The redditor muaddib99 has the most positive reviews I’ve seen online for both the Crimson Rye and Wild Oak.

GlenDronach Cask Strength Batch 4 and Batch 5

Leave a comment

GlenDronach traditionally used sherry casks to mature its malts, and has thus long been known as “sherry bomb” maker.  As discussed in my commentary of their 12 year old expression, the distillery was shut down between 1996 and early 2002. When production re-started with new owners, the focus was on aging in more typical ex-bourbon casks.

Over time though, GlenDronach re-discovered its sherry mojo, and now emphasizes this aspect in most of their new releases.  As an aside, I find some of their vintage single casks expressions to be among the best heavily-sherried single malts that I have tried.

For those on more of a budget, a good option to consider are the batch releases of the GlenDronach Cask Strength.  Lacking an age statement, these releases (now up to five) combine whiskies aged in different sherry barrels, bottled at cask-strength. They are also reasonably well priced (although this has been going up on recent batches).

I haven’t had the pleasure of trying the early ones, but I do have on hand a sample of Batch 4 from Redditor xile_, and a recent bottle of Batch 5 that I purchased at the SAQ in Quebec (regularly $150 CAD, got it on sale for $128).

Here is how they compare in the Meta-Critic Whisky Database, relative to other Glendronachs, and to other cask-strength sherry-bombs.

GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 1): 9.06 ± 0.28 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 2): 9.05 ± 0.09 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 3): 9.05 ± 0.33 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 4): 8.92 ± 0.31 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach Cask Strength (batch 5): 8.92 ± 0.08 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach 12yo Original: 8.57 ± 0.22 on 20 reviews ($$$)
GlenDronach 15yo Revival: 8.91 ± 0.29 on 18 reviews ($$$$)
GlenDronach 18yo Allardice: 8.70 ± 0.40 on 15 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach 21yo Parliament: 8.68 ± 0.39 on 13 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach vintage 20yo Single Cask (all vintages): 9.05 ± 0.44 on 11 reviews ($$$$$)
GlenDronach vintage 19yo Single Cask (all vintages): 8.96 ± 0.38 on 12 reviews ($$$$$)

Aberlour A’Bunadh (all batches): 8.97 ± 0.20 on 22 reviews ($$$$)
Glenfarclas 105: 8.78 ± 0.37 on 20 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Solist Sherry Cask: 9.14 ± 0.35 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Macallan Cask Strength: 8.89 ± 0.40 on 12 reviews ($$$$$+)

And now my tasting notes:

Batch 4

Batch 4 consists of 17,806 bottles released in early-mid 2014, bottled at 54.7% ABV. The whisky was drawn from a mix of Pedro Ximénez and Oloroso sherry casks.  While you would normally expect a dark sherry appearance, I note the colour is more of a light golden brown (suggesting a sweeter and fruitier ride is in store). Note that GlenDronach does not artificially alter the colour of these whiskies.

Nose: Syrupy, like stewed fruits. Main fruit notes are pear, peaches, plums and some raisins. Baking spices, like cinnamon. Very sweet overall, makes me think of rum-raisin ice cream on top of a moist dessert cake. Some nose hair singe due to the high ABV. Water brings up the cereal/cakey notes more.

Palate: Thick, luxurious mouthfeel – like a good cask-strength sherried whisky should be. Very fruity, getting more of the classic prunes, raisins and plums now from the sherry. Cereal again. The rum-like flavours only intensify on the palate. A touch of bitterness creeps in too over time. Water really brings up the baking spices, cinnamon and nutmeg especially.  Doesn’t need much to tame the burn.

Finish: Sweetness dies down a little, reminding me more of dried fruits now (still raisins and prunes mainly). Pretty good balance of sweet and bitter (although perhaps a bit too much of both, if that is possible?).

I don’t know the exact mix of sherry casks that went into this, but I’m going to guess it is biased toward the sweeter PX.  Indeed, it is so sweet that it actually reminds of some rum-finished malts, like the Glenfiddich 21 year old Gran Reserva.  Certainly a decent malt, but the sticky sweetness seems a bit out of character for GlenDronach.

Batch 5

Batch 5 is again from a mix of Pedro Ximénez and Oloroso sherry casks, bottled at 55.3%. Released at the end of 2015, this batch has just shown up here in Canada. Colour is quite a bit darker now, more of the expected medium red gold.

Nose: Less fragrant than Batch 4. Definitely dryer, not as overtly sweet (think dried fruits instead of stewed ones). Lighter fruits dominate again, mainly pear, apple and apricot this time, and a bit of orange. Also getting some cocoa now, and a slightly nutty aroma (almonds?). No real nose hair singe, but a touch of glue is present unfortunately. Time in the glass helps with the solvent note (as does water, which also brings up the sweetness). I recommend adding a few drops of water, for the improved effect.

Palate: Rich, with dark berries join the other fruits now. Citrus picks up further, with some lemon. Silky and syrupy in texture, without being overly sweet – very nice. Milder baking spices, like nutmeg, mixed with some brown sugar. Not bitter, and the glue note from the nose turns into a dry cardboard sensation in the mouth. Malty.  Surprisingly drinkable at this ABV. Water lightens the mouthfeel slightly, and raises the sweet fruit factor.  Enjoyable either way, frankly.

Finish: Medium long finish. The lingering fruit notes are mainly raisins and sultanas (but not too sweet). Some oak comes in at the end – but this is again more drying than bitter.

Personally, I find this to be closer to the Glendronach core style than Batch 4 (although perhaps somewhat fruitier here).  It seems like a good selection of the drier Oloroso sherry casks went into this.  If it weren’t for the glue note, this would get an unreservedly high score in my books.

Glendronach.Cask.5Ranking these two whiskies is difficult. On initial tasting, I was inclined to give Batch 5 a higher score – but that was mainly because the sweeter Batch 4 wasn’t quite what I was expecting.  On re-tasting the next day, I’ve revised my opinion, and would give Batch 4 a very slight edge. It is interesting that the current Meta-Critic has the same average score for the two of them.

In the end, it really comes down to how much sweetness you like.  If you are a fan of Pedro Ximenez, I suggest you try to hunt down an old bottle of the Batch 4. Drier Oloroso fans should stick with the new Batch 5.

For reviews of Batch 4, I recommend you check out the guys at Quebec Whisky, Serge of Whisky Fun, and Ruben of Whisky Notes. For Batch 5, I suggest you check out Thomas of Whisky Saga, along again with Serge of Whisky Fun and Ruben of Whisky Notes.

 

Longrow Peated

2 comments

Longrow is the heavily-peated arm of Springbank distillers.  Regular Springbank releases have a certain amount of peat to them, but the Longrow brand amps this up by a considerable amount.

As explained in my Springbank 10 yo review, Springbank is one of the distilleries from the historical Campeltown region in Scotland. They are distinctive among distillers for controlling the entire production process on site (from malting, all the way to bottling). Overall, I find most Springbank whiskies to be fairly light and fruity.

Longrow Peated is the revised name for what was previously known as Longrow CV.  Although I separate these two expressions in my Whisky Database, it appears from the flavour descriptions and scores that what is in the bottle is not very different (i.e., this is just a labeling change).

Here are how the various Springbank offerings compare in my Meta-Critic Whisky Database:

Hazelburn 8yo: 8.40 ± 0.36 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Hazelburn 12yo: 8.63 ± 0.21 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
Longrow CV: 8.82 ± 0.31 on 15 reviews ($$$)
Longrow Peated: 8.82 ± 0.19 on 12 reviews ($$$)
Longrow 10yo: 8.57 ± 0.44 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Longrow 18yo: 9.17 ± 0.22 on 7 reviews ($$$$$)
Springbank 10yo: 8.69 ± 0.24 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
Springbank 12yo Cask Strength: 8.85 ± 0.28 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Springbank 18yo: 8.96 ± 0.19 on 16 reviews ($$$$$)

And here is how it compares to some other whiskies of in the same price range and flavour cluster J class (i.e., heavily peated):

AnCnoc Rutter: 8.97 ± 0.30 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Ardbeg 10yo: 8.96 ± 0.33 on 21 reviews ($$$)
Benromach Peat Smoke: 8.46 ± 0.26 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
Bunnahabhain Ceòbanach: 8.74 ± 0.27 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
Compass Box Peat Monster: 8.64 ± 0.33 on 16 reviews ($$$)
Ileach Peated Islay: 8.35 ± 0.29 on 6 reviews ($$)
Ileach Peated Islay Cask Strength: 8.83 ± 0.38 on 8 reviews ($$$)
Jura Prophecy: 8.64 ± 0.32 on 15 reviews ($$$$)
Kilchoman Loch Gorm: 9.02 ± 0.17 on 15 reviews ($$$$)
Lagavulin 8yo: 8.86 ± 0.27 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Laphroaig Quarter Cask: 9.03 ± 0.27 on 21 reviews ($$$$)
Laphroaig 10yo: 8.86 ± 0.25 on 19 reviews ($$$)
Longrow Peated: 8.82 ± 0.19 on 12 reviews ($$$)

As you can see, the average score for the Longrow Peated fits in quite well with this class, with a very low standard deviation.

Note that while I have assigned Longrow Peated to the heavily-peated cluster J, it is really right on the border with the lightly-peated cluster I (which tends to get lower scores overall). It is definitely more peated than regular Springbank, though.

My thanks to Jason Hambrey of In Search of Elegance for the sample swap. Here is what I find in the glass:

Nose: Sweat peat, very earthy. Initial fruits are pear and apple, with a distinctive citrus element (tangerines) and something tropical (pineapple especially). Very malty. Herbal, with hints of a floral bouquet under the smoke. Definitely medicinal (i.e., antiseptic smell).

Palate: Light but earthy, with some definite salt now. A touch of vanilla for sweetness.  Lemon joins the citrus family, and the other fruit notes die down. Very cleansing. Uncomplicated but not dull, you feel like you are really directly experiencing the distillery character here. A wave of smoke wafts over your mouth as you swallow.

Longrow.PeatedFinish: Medium long, with a return of some of the lighter fruits (pear, and those tropical notes). Juicy fruit gum.  The smoke lingers, with a tingle in the back of your throat. Feels like an antiseptic – something they would have made you gargle with in a previous age.

Despite all the medicinal/antiseptic references above, this is actually quite pleasant. It is sweeter than most light-flavoured peated whiskies at this price point, but never feels artificial.  Quite brisk and cleansing.  This is one where you don’t really pick up much from the wood (beyond the standards in all Scotch). Very spirit-driven, as they say.

It is also very easy to drink – I was surprised to see how quickly I drained my glass.  Definitely up there as one of the lighter-tasting peated whiskies you should try on your Scotch whisky journey.  But the numb throat effect afterwards may make you feel like you’ve swallowed a local anesthetic.

As with Springbank 10 yo, the most favourable review I’ve seen for Longrow Peated comes from Serge of Whisky Fun.  More typical are Micheal of Diving for Pearls, My Annoying Opinions, Josh the Whiskey Jug, and the guys at Quebec Whisky. Honestly, I don’t really see any negative reviews of this whisky among the established reviewers.  A consistently solid choice.

1 … 16 17 18 19 20 … 26