Tag Archives: NAS

Lot 40 Dark Oak

For the last few years, one of the most anticipated events in the Canadian whisky scene has been the annual Fall release of the special whisky set from Corby known as the Northern Border Collection. Consisting of unique bottlings from each of their major brands (Lot 40, J.P. Wiser’s, Gooderham & Worts, and Pike Creek), this specialty series typically generates a lot of buzz. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Corby announced earlier this year that they wouldn’t be doing a Northern Border Collection for 2020.

However, over the course of the year, they have starred releasing certain select specialty bottlings individually (often with very limited numbers).  The first was the Pike Creek 15 Year Old Finished in Ontario Cabernet Sauvignon Barrels (limited release at the LCBO in August 2020). This was followed in early November with a limited online-only Ontario release of a few cases of their second aged cask-strength blend under the J.P. Wiser’s brand – a 22 year old bottling, finished in Port casks. I missed that one, but a wider release of it is planned “in the new year.”

Now comes the initial release of a special version of Lot 40 known as Dark Oak. Released in BC and online-only in Ontario in late November 2020, it sold out in under 3 minutes (!) at J.P. Wiser’s website (despite being limited to only 2 bottles an order, shipping in Ontario only). Again, a wider release is planned for February 2020.  I was lucky enough to grab one of these first bottles (all personally signed by Dr Don Livermore, as shown below).

This is a no-age-statement (NAS) release, bottled at a slightly increased strength of 48% ABV compared to 43% for regular Lot 40 (but not cask-strength, like the recent Northern Border Collection Lot 40 releases). Like regular Lot 40, this is a 100% rye that is column and then pot distilled, and aged in virgin American oak casks (no. 2 char). This special release has then undergone additional finishing in heavily-charred oak casks (no. 4 char). This should impart greater oaky notes, includes caramel sweetness and wood spice (plus of course, darker colour).

Dr. Don has indicated that he hopes this will eventually become a core release, depending on how well it sells. Sold for $59.95 CAD in BC and Ontario, which is $20 more than standard Lot 40 (which is similarly NAS, but bottled at 43% ABV). However, that is still $30 less than last year’s third cask-strength release (also NAS, finished in French oak).

It is too early to find sufficient reviews of this one online, so here are how the other Lot 40 bottlings out there compare in my Meta-Critic Database.

Lot 40: 8.88 ± 0.36 on 26 reviews ($$)
Lot 40 Cask Strength (Single Cask): 9.16 ± 0.10 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
Lot 40 Cask Strength 12yo (2017): 9.04 ± 0.30 on 20 reviews ($$$$)
Lot 40 Cask Strength 11yo (2018): 9.17 ± 0.20 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
Lot 40 Cask Strength Third Edition (2019): 8.80 ± 0.41 on 10 reviews ($$$$)

Let’s see what I find in the glass for Dark Oak:

Colour: Medium tan. Definitely a darker hue than regular Lot 40, more on par with the aged cask-strength releases (or even darker).

Nose: The substrate is clearly classic Lot 40, with its fruity, floral, and baking spice notes (nutmeg and cinnamon in particular). But it is richer here, especially on the spicy side, with cardamom and some cloves. Caramel and creamy vanilla custard. Sour cherries add to the typical lighter fruits (apple and pear). Interestingly, I also get a lot of bubblegum (rare for Lot 40, but present on many other straight ryes). Some actual woody oak. Bit of nose prickle, likely coming from the higher alcohol strength. Still very clean overall, but there is a touch of organic solvent. Water brings up brown sugar (and dill), but deadens the other notes if you add more than a drop or two.

Palate: Heavier brown sugar and caramel than typical Lot 40. Cherries are also more prominent. But it is the heavier spice that really standards out, with dill and chilies added to the typical baking spices (plus cloves again). Strong peppermint note. Very oaky in the mouth as well. Noticeable alcohol zing from the higher strength, combined with the extra spice gives it a real kick. Drying on the swallow. Water lightens the mouthfeel quickly, and just delays the spice attack (i.e., it doesn’t reduce its impact).

Finish: Medium length. Hot chilies and sweet caramel initially, followed by the dill. A lot of woody notes. Bubblegum and cloves return at the end, and it is again drying on the final finish.

This is a different type of Lot 40 release. I found the various cask-strength specialty releases all quite drinkable neat, but this Dark Oak comes out of the gate with a lot more spice and kick. However, adding even a few drops of water sweetens the taste (and lightens the mouthfeel) without actually adding anything or dampening the spice. Indeed, it quickly drowns out the subtle flavours (and may accentuate the dill note), so I recommend drinking it neat, or with no more than a drop or two.

It is certainly an interesting concept, but it takes the already fairly spicy Lot 40 and amps it up to very heavy levels. I would only recommend this release if you like your rye whiskies very spicy. Personally, I prefer the regular lot 40 and the previous cask-strength releases (although it is close in quality to last year’s French-oak finished cask-strength release). To put that in context, and using my own scores (on the Meta-Critic scale), I would personally score and rank them all as follows:

11 Year Old cask strength 2018 (9.3) > 12 Year Old cask strength 2017 (9.2) > regular Lot 40 (9.1) > Third edition cask strength 2019 (8.9) > Lot 40 Dark Oak (8.8).

My ranking here is actually consistent with the overall Meta-Critic scores for these releases, but of course individual tastes vary (e.g., most reviewers who have tried both prefer the original 12yo release over the second 11yo batch). Regardless, I expect Dark Oak will settle in around the level of the third cask-strength release, once more scores come in.  For one early review, check out Davin at canadianwhisky.org. I’m sure more will be coming as we get closer to wider release in February.

Midleton Barry Crockett Legacy

Midleton Barry Crockett Legacy is a premium blend of single pot still whiskeys which have been matured exclusively in American ex-bourbon barrels. First released in 2011, this whiskey bears the the name of their second-generation Master Distiller, and is one of the top quality products produced by Midleton (as you can see from the presentation case, shown below).

As previously discussed, Single Pot Still whiskey is closely associated with Ireland, where it has come to be seen as their quintessentially distinctive style. It is made from a mash of malted and unmalted barley, triple-distilled in traditional copper pot stills. This tends produce more delicate but potentially complex flavours, including the so-called “green” fruity notes, along with a characteristically sticky or greasy mouthfeel (Midleton’s promotional material calls it “creamy”). The aging in standard ex-bourbon barrels allows the distillate the shine through here, without the complex cask management and finishing that comes into play for most blended whiskey products.

Bottled at 46% ABV. I first got to try this whisky in late 2016, from a miniature bottle included in the Midleton premium whiskey set sold at the Duty Free in Ireland’s International terminal (included along with Redbreast 12yo, Powers John’s Lane 12yo, and Green Spot). Although that Powers bottling remains one of my favourite Irish whiskeys, I enjoyed this one enough to purchase a full bottle when I found it at a great deal.

To explain, the price of this whisky is rather high – for years, it was fairly consistently around ~$300 CAD in Ontario and Quebec, and in the ~$330-340 CAD range out west (BC and Alberta).  Then about a year and half ago, one of the big retailers in Alberta got their hands on a large inventory, and dropped the price by ~45% (when I bought my bottle, shown below). Other retailers in Alberta followed suit, and it actually went as low as ~$175 before selling out. Thanks to COVID-19, I haven’t been out west since early this year, so I don’t know its current availability. But it seems to be pretty much sold out most places at the moment (except in BC, which still has it listed at $340, but with low inventory).

For a comparison, Midleton’s other high-end offering – Midleton Very Rare – similar sells for ~$330-340 out west, but oddly is listed at the more reasonable ~$200 in Ontario/Quebec. Again, as a limited batch offering, these bottlings don’t hang around indefinitely, and are not currently in stock in most jurisdictions.

Here is how these higher-end Irish whiskeys compare in my Meta-Critic Database:

Bushmills 21yo Single Malt: 8.97 ± 0.37 on 11 reviews ($$$$$)
Midleton Barry Crockett Legacy: 9.10 ± 0.23 on 16 reviews ($$$$$)
Midleton Dair Ghaelach: 9.06 ± 0.40 on 10 reviews ($$$$$)
Midleton Very Rare (all vintages): 8.81 ± 0.40 on 15 reviews ($$$$$)
Powers 12yo John’s Lane: 8.84 ± 0.37 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
Redbreast 12yo: 8.71 ± 0.41 on 26 reviews ($$$)
Redbreast 12yo Cask Strength: 9.03 ± 0.27 on 27 reviews ($$$$)
Redbreast 21yo: 9.10 ± 0.29 on 20 reviews ($$$$$)

In terms of relative ranking, I agree with the Meta-Critic assessment giving Barry Crockett Legacy a higher score than than the average Midleton Very Rare bottling. Batches can vary though, so you may find an individual Very Rare that better matches your tastes (e.g., see my comparison of the 2015 and 2016 batches).

For this review, I am relying on my notes of the 2016 bottling of Barry Crockett Legacy. When I open my 2018 bottle, I’ll provide an updated review.

Colour: Golden light caramel

Nose: Honey sweetness, with a touch of vanilla. Lots of fruits, with banana, apple, pear, peach and citrus. Some malty notes, with plenty of grass and hay. And something lightly floral, but I can’t quite place it. A bit of caramel shows up eventually. Complex nose, with a lot going on. Slight acetone smell. Water brings up the vanilla, and seems to diminish the acetone note – I recommend a few drops.

Palate: Leads off with honey, caramel and vanilla. Loads of fruit (over-ripened, gooey fruits in particular – almost stewed). The citrus has picked up significantly (grapefruit). Creamed wheat. Some unusual earthy notes, like dried leaves and tobacco. Some cinnamon and cloves, plus ginger. Very complex for an Irish whiskey.  Syrupy mouthfeel, you want to hold in your mouth for a long time to experience the flavours. More ethanol burn than typical for the class and ABV. Slight bitterness creeps in at the end. Water seems to accentuate the tongue tingle a little, but helps with the bitterness.

Finish: Medium long (for an Irish whiskey). Creamed wheat sensation holds the longest, along with some light toffee and vanilla. Fruits fade in and out (winds up being a bit Juicy Fruit gum-like).  Well balanced, with a good mix of sweetness and astringency.

I can see why Midleton Barry Crockett Legacy is so highly ranked – it is one of the most complex Irish whiskies I’ve tried to date.  Personally, I would probably rather sip on a good batch of Midleton Very Rare or Powers John’s Lane 12yo for a relaxing evening – this one demands your attention more. But it definitely seems to highlight the spirit character well (compared to say Redbreast 21yo, where the cask management comes up more clearly).

Among my database reviewers, everyone ranks it highly.  The most outstandingly positive scores come from Michael of Diving for Pearls and Josh the Whiskey Jug. Serge of Whisky Fun, Richard of Whiskey Reviewer, Dominic of Whisky Advocate, The_Muskok and xile_of Reddit and Jim Murray all give it very high marks as well. More moderately positive are TOModera and Whisky_Lads of Reddit.  I’m personally closer to middle of the range of the Reddit reviewers (so, not as high as the Meta-Critic average), but I still consider this a very good dram.

Two Brewers Yukon Single Malt Innovative (Batch 14)

This is my first review of a Two Brewers single malt whisky – but I’ve actually enjoyed many of their releases over the years. In my opinion, they are one of the best single malt whisky makers currently operating in Canada.

Two Brewers was originally started by two friends as a brewery in the Yukon in 1997. In 2009, they bought their first still and decided to make whisky. As I’ve noticed in my travels, many new whisky producers started out as beer brewers (e.g., Copperworks in the US, and Santis in Switzerland). The main differences are that you don’t need to boil the wort if you are making whisky (as you will distill it later), and you will need to add hopps to stabilize the lower-proof beer.

Two Brewers whisky is always made in small batch releases, which vary in the varieties of of malted barley used, fermentation techniques and types of barrels for aging. While the intent is to make it so that no two releases are the same, they alternate releases into four main classes (labelled on the bottles): Classic, Peated, Special Finishes, and Innovative.  The last is the most distinctive, as this is where they vary their malt recipes and fermentation styles.

I’ve actually had the the Classic (including a cask-strength version), Peated and a PX Special Finish, and enjoyed them all. But this is my first review of a purchased bottle, under the Innovative label.  My bottle is Batch 14, bottled in 2019. Only 1460 bottles were produced (mine is bottle 0561). Bottled at 46% ABV. What is distinctive here is that they used roasted malts, dark malt, and chocolate malt (apparently the same recipe as used in their Midnight Sun Expresso Stout beer). This should bring in extra coffee, chocolate, and nutty notes to the whisky.

Since there are relative few scores for most releases, I’m combined the scores for the main classes in my Meta-Critic Whisky Database, presented below compared to some other craft single malt whiskies:

Two Brewers Classic (all releases): 8.61 ± 0.41 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
Two Brewers Cask Strength (all releases): 8.77 ± 0.26 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Two Brewers Innovative (all releases): 8.56 ± 0.37 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Two Brewers Peated (all releases): 8.75 ± 0.46 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
Two Brewers Special Finishes (all releases): 8.73 ± 0.19 on 6 reviews ($$$$)
Two Brewers Release 14 Innovative: 8.77 ± 0.32 on 6 reviews ($$$$)

Copperworks American Single Malt: 8.50 ± 0.26 on 6 reviews ($$$)
Glen Breton 10yo Rare: 7.99 ± 0.54 on 17 reviews ($$$$)
Glen Breton 10yo Ice: 8.22 ± 0.58 on 8 reviews ($$$$)
Lohin McKinnon Wine Barrel Finished: 7.98 ± 0.64 on 6 reviews ($$$)
Lohin McKinnon Single Malt: 7.98 ± 0.36 on 9 reviews ($$$)
Lohin McKinnon Choclolate Malt: 8.21 ± 0.50 on 3 reviews ($$$)
Lohin McKinnon Peated: 8.63 ± 0.46 on 3 reviews (reviews ($$$)
Santis Edition Dreifaltigkeit (Cask Strength Peated): 7.20 ± 1.75 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
Santis Edition Säntis: 7.49 ± 0.86 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
Santis Edition Sigel: 7.91 ± 0.75 on 8 reviews ($$$)
Shelter Point Artisanal Single Malt Whisky 8.15 ± 0.49 on 10 reviews ($$$)

As you can see, the Two Brewers Release 14 outperforms most Innovative releases, and is on par with the higher average class scores for this distillery. What you can also see from above is that Two Brewers typically out-performs other small “craft” single malt whisky operations in Canada and elsewhere.

Let’s see what I find in the glass:

Nose: Very sweet nose, caramel and honey. Apples, pears, plums and cherries. Baked bread with mild baking spices, like nutmeg, plus a touch of pepper. I find the grain is coming through most clearly, but in a subtle way – definitely getting some roasted notes, but it is just providing a touch of distinctiveness, nothing too strong. No real off notes. A pleasant and enticing nose.

Palate: Caramel and honey sweetness to start, with the same fruity notes as the nose (plus raisins). But the grain really begins to assert itself now. The bread has turned decidedly toasted, with all the baking spices more prominent (along with a touch of salt and more black pepper). This going to sound strange, but it tastes like licking a baguette! Actually, toasted raisin bread is probably the best analogy. On the swallow, I’m getting a strong coffee/expresso note. Dark chocolate throughout. It is quite the evolution in the mouth – which is like having an appetizer, dessert and then after-dinner coffee while skipping the main course.

Finish: Medium-long. Fairly simple to start – lightly fruity, more candied now (e.g. red licorice). But holy cow do those coffee/expresso and dark chocolate notes dominate and linger – their impact builds with time. I’ve never found chocolate malt “coffee beers” all that strong, but the malt is coming through in an almost overwhelming way now.

This is a pretty unique experience – I’ve never seen this level of chocolate malt influencing the final whisky like this. But its approach is subtle, building over time and really dominating only on the finish (in contrast, the roasted malt bread notes are present throughout). “Innovative” is the right term for this bottle – it is unlike any of the other Two Brewers I’ve tried.

The highest score I’ve seen for this batch is from Andre of Quebec Whisky, followed by Jason of In Search of Elegance. These are balanced by average scores from Patrick of Quebec Whisky and Jim Murray, and a Silver medal from the 2020 Canadian Whisky Awards. My own rating is actually pretty close to the resulting Meta-Critic average. I highly recommend you give this distillery a try if you come across their bottlings.

 

Kavalan Solist Port Cask

Kavalan is the best known whisky distillery in Taiwan.  It makes a number of relatively entry-level single malts (like Kavalan Single Malt, Podium, Conductor and Concertmaster), but is best known for higher-end single cask whiskies sold under the Solist label (detecting a theme there?). I’ve previously reviewed a number of most popular Solist series (e.g., ex-Bourbon, Manzanilla Cask and Sherry Cask) and now add the Solist Port Cask.

I am typically a big fan of port-finished whiskies, even more so than sherry-finished – which is not surprisingly, since I typically prefer Port over Sherry (see my Port primer here). I’ve actually had this Kavalan bottle for awhile now, which I picked up at a Hong Kong duty free in November 2018. I figured it was about time I reviewed it.

As always, these single cask Solist series whiskies have a lot of information on their labels. On the front, my bottle identifies Cask O110112009A and Bottle 055/144. The latter is self-explanatory, but the former provides a lot of cask information; specifically, O is for Port cask, 11 is the distilling year (2011), 01 is January, 12 is the 12th of the month, and 009 is the 9th barrel of that day’s dumping run. On the back is a sticker with ” 2018.09.20 11:37 HK (1 L)”, which is the date and time it was bottled, plus for what market and the bottle size (travel retail often offers larger bottles). That makes this single cask over 7 and half years old, which seems slightly above-average for a Kavalan Solist.

Don’t be fooled by that apparent young age though – Taiwan has a marine tropical climate, which means whiskies mature more quickly there than in more temperate northerly climes like Scotland and Ireland.

Bottled at cask-strength, 58.6% ABV in this case. I paid $175 CAD for the 1L bottle (with fancy presentation case with metallic closing clasp) at the time in 2018, which was a very good price compared to other markets.

Here are how some of the major Kavalan expressions compare in my database.

Kavalan Concertmaster Port Cask: 8.31 ± 0.54 on 25 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan ex-Bourbon Oak: 8.89 ± 0.25 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan King Car Conductor: 8.47 ± 0.31 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Podium: 8.66 ± 0.27 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Sherry Oak: 8.50 ± 0.51 on 11 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Single Malt: 8.42 ± 0.44 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
Kavalan Solist Amontillado Cask: 9.02 ± 0.24 on 8 reviews ($$$$$+)
Kavalan Solist Ex-Bourbon Cask: 8.84 ± 0.25 on 25 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Solist Fino Sherry Cask: 8.83 ± 0.51 on 16 reviews ($$$$$+)
Kavalan Solist Manzanilla Cask: 9.02 ± 0.20 on 10 reviews ($$$$$+)
Kavalan Solist Port Cask: 8.92 ± 0.32 on 17 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Solist PX Cask: 9.04 ± 0.51 on 8 reviews ($$$$$+)
Kavalan Solist Sherry Cask: 8.97 ± 0.31 on 26 reviews ($$$$$)
Kavalan Solist Vinho Barrique Cask: 9.05 ± 0.21 on 20 reviews ($$$$$)

Let’s see what I find in the glass.

Nose: Brown sugar and molasses. Vanilla and milk chocolate. Raisins, grapes, currants and dark plums. Red licorice and swedish berries. A bit of orange zest. No real off notes, but some nose prickle from the high ethanol heat comes though. Otherwise you could almost mistake this for a Port, give how strongly those characteristics are really coming through. Water accentuates the candied fruit notes.

Palate: Sweet, with the candied fruit notes amplified, along with the grapey and plumy characteristics. Has a luscious mouthfeel, thick and syrupy. The oaky backbone asserts itself mid-palate, with wet oak, vanilla, nutmeg, and touch of pepper. Burnt brown sugar, with a bit of ginger and coffee showing up as well (plus the chocolate is still there). Great complexity here, with the base spirit poking through on the swallow. With water, the sweetness increases, as do to the fruity notes initially – it can handle a lot of water before feeling diluted, but the simple sugar goes up and the fruitiness goes down if you add too much.

Finish: Long. The fruity, candied characteristics return initially, and then fade into the more oaky elements (love that burnt sugar note). And that classic Kavalan astringency shows up now on the finish – glad to see it wasn’t lost under all that Port. Water actually accentuates the astringency, and increases the ginger notes.

It’s not surprising that I enjoyed this expression – it is clear to me that a good quality Port cask was used.  And as I observed on the entry-level Concertmaster, Port seems to combine well with the astringent base Kavalan spirit. But the quality and complexity is hugely amped up here  – this is a great example of what good Port casks can do with a distinctive base spirit, accentuating rather than masking.

For a second opinion, you might want to check out Jason of In Search of Elegance and The_Muskok on Reddit – both actually reviewed from this bottle. Other reviewers with similarly very high scores are Serge of Whisky Fun, Thomas of Whisky Saga and Jim Murray. Most Reddit reviewers were consistently moderately positive – like Devoz, strasse007, TOModera, , and Unclimbability, washeewashee and xile_, among others) Lower scores (but still favourable reviews) from Jonny of Whisky Advocate, and Josh the Whiskey Jug.

Yellow Spot 12 Year Old Irish Whiskey

Yellow Spot is a member of a family of “bonded” Irish Whiskies produced by Irish Distillers for an independent wine merchant in Ireland, Mitchell & Son, of Dublin.  As with Green Spot and the recently re-released Red Spot, the whisky name derives from Mitchell’s historic practice of marking casks of different ages with spot of coloured paint.

Green Spot – the youngest in age and the lightest in flavour – became their most popular seller, and is the only one to remain in continuous production over the years (albeit with no age statement in recent years). The others were discontinued in the late 1960s, with Yellow Spot (12 years old) relaunched in 2012, and Red Spot (15 years old) recently relaunched in 2019.

All are examples of single pot still Irish whisky (aka pure pot still). This is when a  combination of malted and unmalted barley are distilled together in a single, large copper pot still. This is the traditional method for whisky production in Ireland.

Yellow Spot has a 12 year old age statement, and is a combination of pot still whiskies matured in three types of casks: American bourbon casks, Spanish Sherry butts and Spanish Malaga casks. The latter two are is in keeping with Mitchell’s tradition of importing fortified wines. The Malaga casks are an unusual choice, very rare in the whisky world. Malaga is a sweet fortified wine originating in the Spanish city of Málaga, and is made from a mix of Pedro Ximenez and Moscatel grapes. Full-term maturation is used for this component, which should impart a richer and sweeter flavour than more typical sherry cask finishing.

The whisky is non-chill-filtered, and bottled at a respectable 46% ABV. I picked up my bottle a couple of years ago at the LCBO here in Ontario for $100 CAD.

Let’s see how it compares to other higher-end Irish whiskies in my Meta-Critic database:

Green Spot: 8.51 ± 0.35 on 24 reviews ($$$$)
Green Spot Chateau Leoville Barton: 8.82 ± 0.35 on 14 reviews ($$$$)
Green Spot Chateau Montelena: 8.44 ± 0.29 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
Red Spot 15yo: 8.61 ± 0.35 on 9 reviews ($$$$$)
Yellow Spot 12yo: 8.79 ± 0.24 on 22 reviews ($$$$)

Jameson 12yo Special Reserve: 8.37 ± 0.27 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
Jameson 18yo Limited Reserve: 8.65 ± 0.26 on 12 reviews ($$$$$)
Jameson Gold Reserve: 8.44 ± 0.49 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Midleton Barry Crockett Legacy: 9.10 ± 0.24 on 15 reviews ($$$$$)
Midleton Very Rare (all vintages): 8.81 ± 0.42 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Powers 12yo John’s Lane: 8.84 ± 0.36 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
Redbreast 12yo: 8.71 ± 0.41 on 26 reviews ($$$)
Redbreast 12yo Cask Strength: 9.02 ± 0.30 on 26 reviews ($$$$)
Redbreast 15yo: 8.73 ± 0.26 on 20 reviews ($$$$)
Redbreast 21yo: 9.11 ± 0.31 on 20 reviews ($$$$$)
Redbreast Lustau Edition: 8.66 ± 0.32 on 20 reviews ($$$$)

Let’s see what I find in the glass:

Nose: Definitely woody, with light caramel, vanilla and honeysuckle notes. Fresh and dried apricots and peaches, and a touch of fresh cherries. Wood spice, especially nutmeg and cloves. Wet green tea leaves. Hay and fresh-cut green grass. It is unusual to find both the fresh and dry notes at the same time, which must be due to the diverse wood aging. Faint hint of sweat socks, but not objectionable. With a bit of water it gets sweeter, as brown sugar joins the mix – plus a creamy custard.

Palate: Spicier than I expected, with the wood spice up front (especially the cloves), as well as black pepper. Caramel, vanilla and honey sweetness. Ground cherries. Consistent with the nose, it is very earthy, with moist and dry notes both present. Oily mouthfeel, likely thanks to the higher ABV (which also brings with it a fair amount of alcohol heat, unusual for an Irish whisky). Dry paper note returns on swallow. A bit of water sweetens and helps with the ethanol sting, without affecting the pleasant oiliness. Definitely recommend you add a few drops.

Finish: Medium long. Cinnamon and nutmeg are prominent now. Dried apricots again. Astringency shows up, in a tannic tea way. A faint lingering sweetness for sure, but I find the oaky notes dominate, with a mild woody bitterness. The classic Irish pot still “greasiness” shows up at the end, with a sticky coating on the lips and gums. With water, I find a bit of anise joins the woody/earthy character, which I like.

A bit of water really helps here, restoring a more typical Irish whisky sweetness, and taming the mouth burn and bitterness on the finish. Highly recommended you add a few drops.

My only (minor) complaint here is that the classic Irish pot still character is a bit submerged under the fortified wine finish. It is still there if you hunt for it though. A very nice example overall of what good sherry finishing can do with a delicate base spirit.

Yellow Spot receives very high scores from Nathan the Scotch Noob, Josh the Whiskey Jug, Kurt of Whiskey Reviewer and Jan of Best Shot Whisky (honestly, I’m in this camp as well).  Moderately positive are Jonny of Whisky Advocate, Serge of Whisky Fun, and The Muskok and Tomodera of Reddit. The lowest scores (although with still fairly positive comments) come from Ruben of Whisky Notes and Thomas of Whisky Saga.

Pacto Navio and Other Cuban Rums

On a trip to Cuba earlier this year, I had the opportunity to do some local rum tastings. While I am not typically a big rum guy, I do appreciate rums that have had extended barrel aging, or interesting finishing.

Cuba has had a tumultuous history (for more than just rum!), and this has lead to a complicated history of rum production and distribution. Simply put, all rum production was nationalized after the revolución, but in recent years it has had a global resurgence from partnerships and investments by international drinks conglomerates. I won’t pretend to know the full history, so I am happy to refer folks to these recent articles in Esquire and Forbes for further background.

Cuban rum is typically made from locally-produced molasses. Local sugarcane is harvested and mashed to extract the guarapo (juice), which is then boiled to create local molasses. This molasses is combined with water and yeast to ferment in tanks before it is distilled in copper-lined columns stills. It is typically aged in extensively well-used American oak casks (as with Canadian whisky).

First up in the recommended tasting order was one I had heard a lot about:

Havana Club Selección de Maestros

This “Masters Selection” amber rum was a popular member of the Havana Club line when it was available at the LCBO and SAQ. Missing for the last couple of years, it used to retail for ~$60 CAD, and can still be found in Cuba today for the equivalent ~$40 CUC ($40 USD).

Masters Selection features an unusual finishing step (for a rum). As mentioned above, pretty much all Cuban rum is aged in well-used, American white oak barrels. Once the barrels are selected for this release, they are blended and then finished for a period of time in young, fresh oak casks for some active wood aging. This should impart some extra woody notes.

The bottle has a quality presentation (nicer than other Havana Clubs), and comes in a protective tube sleeve. It also is bottled at higher proof, 45% ABV.

Nose: Caramel, with a light, sweet bourbony character. I am definitely getting some oaky notes (more than typical for a Cuban rum). Orange rind. Ginger. A touch of tobacco and nuts. It’s a nice mix, with no off notes.

Palate: The oaky notes are more prominent now, definitely woody, with tobacco leaves and some leather. Helps offset the sweet caramel. Cinnamon and nutmeg show up. It is very light in the mouth, lighter than I expected for 45% ABV. Honestly, the texture is a bit of a let down.

Finish: Medium. Some spicy tingle, with cinnamon notable. Some dried fruits. Sweet, but also a bit of an artificial note, which is surprising.

This is nice, but not quite what I was looking for – bourbony, and a bit woodier than I would like. To be honest, it lacks the rum character I was expecting from the rich amber colour – it does indeed seem like a younger rum that has had some extra fresh oak finishing. The higher proof is appreciated, but that also seems like it was necessary here, given the lighter mouthfeel.

A good bourbon-drinker’s rum. I would give it ~8.3 on the Meta-Critic scale.

Ron Santero Añejo 11 Años

I must admit, I knew nothing about this rum (aside from recognizing the name of the producer), when my host suggested it for the line-up.

This 11 year old is bottled under proof at 38% ABV. It sells for ~$40 CUC in Cuba ($40 USD). It is apparently known for the distinctive character of the soil where it is produced, with a high mineral content (or so I was told).

Nose: Getting a lot more classic rum notes,  with heavy molasses. Very earthy, with lots of tobacco and old leather. Something different here, with a slightly funky off-note (but it is not off-putting)

Palate: Rich rum molasses to start. Some oaky bitterness is also present. Cinnamon and nutmeg. Minearality and a meaty character, making me think of sulphur. Mouthfeel is impaired by the below-proof 38%, but still seems richer somehow than the HC Maestros.

Finish: Medium. Getting candied fruits now, which I didn’t notice earlier. Nice sweet finish, with that “meatiness” lingering in the background.

There is certainly different about this one – I would be more likely to peg it as sulphur, but “minearality” would also do. This is a hard one to score. On one hand, I like the distinctiveness of the earthy notes, as it adds some character. But it also makes it not your typical rum.

Despite the low proof, I would give this a slight leg up on the Maestros – say ~8.4 on the Meta-Critic scale. I was tempted to pick up a bottle.

Havana Club Añejo 15 Años

A classic of the class, all spirits in this Havana Club bottling have been aged for at least 15 years. I am not entirely clear about how barrels are selected for this rum, but I gather repeated blending and re-gauging of casks is involved, using standard old American oak casks.

Bottled at 40% ABV. It sells for 150 CUC ($150 USD), which seems rather steep to me.

Nose: Liquid caramel, honey, and brown sugar. Fruit blossoms. Very nice, classic rum notes.

Palate: Moves into heavier molasses notes, plus some vanilla. Dark fruits, dried (figs in particular). Relatively light mouthfeel, but no bitterness.

Finish: Medium long. Brown sugar comes back, and some light cinnamon spice. Nice lingering sweetness, no bitterness.

This is what I was expecting from a Cuban rum – a sweet, uncomplicated experience. No heavy wood influence, but the extended aging does comes through as a general enrichment of the sugarcane sweetness. I like the caramel and fruity notes. Not particularly complex, but a satisfying dram none-the-less.

I would rate it ~8.6 on the Meta-Critic scale. A bit too steep in cost for me though.

Finally, I went back another night to try one that I hadn’t gotten around to the first evening – and I’m glad I did.

Pacto Navio

The name of this rum literally means shipping treaty, and is a cute nod to the history of trade between France and Cuba. After the Napoleonic wars ended, a treaty signed in Europe allowed the freer flow of trans-Atlantic goods. Casks holding Sauternes (a sweet white wine from Bordeau) were shipped to the New World, where they were emptied and refilled with local spirits (including rum) for the return voyage.

So this serves as a convenient backstory for what is simply a young Cuban rum that has been finished for a period of time in French Sauternes casks. The rum come from the newest distillery in Cuba, in San José de Las Lajas, near Havana.

Bottled at 40% ABV. It sells for $45 CUC ($45 USD).

Nose: Light and sweet, with simple spun sugar (think cotton candy). Caramelized plantains. Peaches, plums, and apricots. Candied rum raisins. Light wood notes, like nutmeg. No real off-notes, very nice.

Palate: Caramel comes up clearly now. Banana bread (with nuts). A touch of citrus. Relatively light mouthfeel, but not bad. Some faint rye-like spices, giving it a bit of zing.

Finish: Fruit returns, but definitely candied – like wine gums. Artificial sweetener note shows up now. Turns a bit astringent on the way out, but not bad.

While still fairly simple, it has a nice mix of sweet fruity notes (more so than the other rums I tried), with banana and a nutty character being fairly novel here. This one would best suit a scotch drinker with a sweet tooth (which I suppose would best describe me).

Of all the ones I tried, this was my favourite – I would rate it ~8.6 on the Meta-Critic scale. Indeed, I liked it enough to pick up a bottle as a souvenir of my visit.

Elmer T. Lee Bourbon

Elmer T. Lee was one of the most well-known Master Distillers of Buffalo Trace, retiring in 1985 after 36 years. One of his main claims-to-fame was the introduction of mass-produced single barrel bourbons, most especially the Blanton’s brand in 1984. Eventually, Buffalo Trace decide to honour his legacy by producing a single barrel bourbon in his name (just as he had chosen to name the distillery’s first single barrel product after one of their early leaders, Albert B. Blanton).

Just like Blanton’s, Buffalo Trace uses their mashbill #2 for this single barrel bourbon, which is a high rye bourbon (~12-15% rye, at least 51% corn, and some malted barley). This sour mash bourbon is aged in charred virgin American oak barrels. No age statement on the bottle any more, but this used to have 12-year statement in older days. Bottled at 45% ABV. In comparison, regular Blanton’s single barrel is 46.5% ABV, Blanton’s Special Reserve (green label) is 40% ABV, Blanton’s Gold is 51.5% ABV, and Blanton’s Straight from the Barrel is true cask-strength.

While this was always a popular bourbon for Buffalo Trace, it has become relatively unobtainable (at least at MSRP prices). The LCBO here in Ontario, Canada puts it into its allocation process any time it is available (typically once a year). A relative of mine was lucky enough to pick one up in their lottery last year, for $60 CAD (which is equivalent to the $40 USD list price). On secondary markets, this goes for >$100 USD (sometimes considerably more). The issue seems to be mainly relative scarcity of release, as it isn’t that different from regular Blanton’s single barrel (although presumably, they try to keep a certain consistency in the barrels they pull for the Elmer T Lee brand).

Here is how it compares to other Buffalo Trace bourbon products in my Meta-Critic Database:

Blanton’s Gold Kentucky Straight Bourbon: 8.72 ± 0.37 on 21 reviews ($$$$)
Blanton’s Original Bourbon Single Barrel: 8.65 ± 0.29 on 27 reviews ($$$)
Blanton’s Special Reserve Single Barrel (Green label): 8.31 ± 0.35 on 8 reviews ($$)
Blanton’s Straight from the Barrel Bourbon: 8.97 ± 0.22 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Buffalo Trace Bourbon: 8.55 ± 0.38 on 28 reviews ($$)
Eagle Rare 10yo: 8.64 ± 0.28 on 29 reviews ($$)
Eagle Rare 17yo: 8.86 ± 0.29 on 17 reviews ($$$$$+)
Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel Bourbon: 8.75 ± 0.35 on 20 reviews ($$$)
George T Stagg: 9.20 ± 0.25 on 30 reviews ($$$$$+)
Stagg Jr (all batches): 8.69 ± 0.41 on 25 reviews ($$$$)
Stagg Jr (batches 1-2): 8.38 ± 0.42 on 16 reviews ($$$$)
Stagg Jr (batches 3+): 8.99 ± 0.22 on 17 reviews ($$$$)

And now what I find in the glass:

Nose: Honey and light caramel. Simple sweetness. Vanilla. Graham crackers (definitely somewhat “biscuity”). Dry spice. Dark fruits, plums. Light pepper. A nice nose, not overly oaky. No off notes. Smells like a dessert bourbon.

Palate: Very sweet initially, with all that honey. Corn syrup. Plums and peaches. Nutmeg, but not cinnamon or cloves. A bit of pepper. Paper, pencil shavings. No burn, very light and syrupy mouthfeel. Surprisingly light tasting – again, consistent with the nose. Seems like something you would pour over ice cream.

Finish: Some oaky bitterness shows up now, with dry paper notes. Touch of tobacco. Dry, and earthy.

Lighter than I expected, very easy to drink. Sweet overall, with wood influence only showing up at the end. This is not an in-your-face bourbon – it is a very balanced product, certainly an easy sipper. A pity it is so unobtainable now.

Among reviewers, the highest score I’ve seen comes from Ralfy. Jordan of Breaking Bourbon, MajorHop of Reddit (indeed, most reviewers there), and Jason of In Search of Elegance and are all very positive. Moderately positive are Jim Murray and John of Whisky Advocate (on average, across various bottlings). More middle-of-the-road reviews comes from Matt of Diving for Pearls, Kurt of Whiskey Reviewer, washeewashee of reddit and Josh the Whiskey Jug. Lower scores (but still positive comments) come My Annoying Opinions and TOModera of reddit.

 

Matsui Mizunara Cask

This is a new Japanese whisky that I debated purchasing. Not because of the likely intrinsic quality of the whisky itself, but because of the history of the producer.

As I’ve discussed in some of my travelogues (most recently my Whisky in Japan – a 2014-2019 Perspective), the rising popularity of Japanese whisky has led to a proliferation of “faux” or fake Japanese whisky. They can certainly look a lot like the bottles from established whisky-makers Yamazaki and Nikka – and the brand names may indeed be recognizable as established spirit producers in Japan – but the bottles don’t actually contain any Japanese whisky.

The problem is loose labeling laws that allow Japanese distilleries to import whisky from other countries and re-package it for sale in Japan. If you are looking for a way to separate out true Japanese whisky from the fakes, here’s a useful infographic chart and table courtesy of nomunication.jp.

As an aside, there is an understandable historical basis for these labeling laws, as the raw materials for whisky production (e.g. barley, oak casks) are often imported from Scotland. In some cases, established whisky makers also import distillate from Scottish distilleries to blend into their own production (e.g., Nikka owns Ben Nevis distillery, in part for this reason). But the bottling of pure out-sourced whisky for domestic sale in Japan – in highly misleading age-stated packaging, and at steep prices – seems designed to purposefully gouge ill-informed consumers (and tourists on local shopping sprees).

High on the list of worst offenders is Matsui Shuzo, owner of the Kurayoshi “whisky” brand. Kurayoshi is a well-established schochu distiller in Tottori, Japan (in operation since 1910). The problem is that for many years now, they have been selling aged-stated single malts in Japan, despite only starting to distill whisky in 2017. This has given “Kurayoshi single malts” a well-deserved black-eye among Japanese whisky enthusiasts.

Of course, we have now reached the point where many of the relatively new entrants to whisky-making in Japan have barrel-aged their own distilled spirit sufficiently long enough to sell it (domestically and internationally) as true Japanese whisky. In this case, Matsui Shuzo has begun selling blended Japanese and Scottish malt whiskies under the Tottori label, and pure Japanese malt whisky under the Matsui label. Given the negative association with Kurayoshi “malt whisky”, I can understand this labeling change. Of note, the malt is apparently still largely sourced from Scotland – but that is true for many Japanese whiskies.

And thus my personal dilemma; I am loathe to support someone who has engaged in such misleading business practices. Personally, I find the whole Kurayoshi age-stated single malt whisky scam an affront to both the Japanese character and the quality of their whisky. But is also true that many of the world’s established whisky makers started out with less than squeaky-clean reputations (i.e., the history of bootleggers, moonshiners and tax-dodgers in North America and Europe, and the early producers in Japan). At the end the of the day, I thought I would give this bottling a chance, to see how Matsui’s true distilled-in-Japan product fares.

One feature common among new whisky-makers the world over is experimentation with different casks types, to try and introduce additional character into their youthful spirits. Matsui is following a standard path with this bottling by the use of Japanese Mizunara oak casks (Quercus mongolica). I previously reviewed Ichiro’s Malt Mizunara Wood Reserve, which attempted a similar approach to distinctive aging/finishing.

I recently bought my bottle of Matsui Single Malt Mizunara Cask through the LCBO in Ontario for $130 CAD. It is bottled at 48% ABV, and the label states no artificial coloring is added, and it is un-chillfiltered. It also states distilled in Japan (finally!).

As an aside, I note the bottle design is very similar to the higher-end Suntory bottles, something of a hybrid between the simple-but-elegant Yamazaki/Hakushu bottles and the fancy decanter-style Hibiki bottles (although with a screw cap here – see the pic below). The labels and box are very distinctive, with classic Japanese iconography throughout. They certainly have a classy look to them.

Here is how the whisky compares to some other entry-level Japanese single malts in my Meta-Critic Whisky Database – and other Mizunara cask finished whiskies:

Bowmore Mizunara Cask Finish: 8.84 ± 0.45 on 3 reviews ($$$$$+)
Chivas Regal Mizunara: 8.09 ± 0.58 on 8 reviews ($$$)
Hibiki Harmony: 8.36 ± 0.48 on 23 reviews ($$$$)
Hibiki Harmony Master’s Select: 8.25 ± 0.67 on 7 reviews ($$$$$)
Ichiro’s Malt Mizunara Wood Reserve: 8.33 ± 0.53 on 14 reviews ($$$$$)
Kanosuke New Born 2018 8mo: 8.97 ± 0.26 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
Matsui Mizunara Cask: 8.86 ± 0.20 on 4 reviews ($$$$)
Matsui Sakura Cask: 8.55 ± 0.46 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
Nikka Miyagikyo NAS: 8.47 ± 0.27 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Nikka Taketsuru NAS: 8.40 ± 0.47 on 11 reviews ($$$$)
Nikka Yoichi NAS: 8.57 ± 0.30 on 15 reviews ($$$$)
Yamazaki Mizunara: 8.95 ± 0.23 on 8 reviews ($$$$$+)
Yamazaki NAS: 8.45 ± 0.23 on 6 reviews ($$$$)

Let’s see what I find in the glass:

Colour: Pale straw. Remarkably light, reminds me of Timorous Beastie. The promotional picture above is more accurate in colour balance than my cell phone pic below.

Nose: Very candied fruit nose, with pear, kiwi, green apple, honeydew melons and banana – also lychee. Reminds me of the Meiji gummy versions of most of the above flavours. Honey and a bit of vanilla. Almonds. Faintly fusil (gunpowder). The Mizunara is also coming through as a light wood spice and a very faint funky, sour smell (like old sweatsocks or baby vomit). Believe it or not, it works well with the candied spice, seems elegant. I am quite pleasantly surprised.

Palate: A quick hit of caramelized apples and banana candies to start, followed by starfruit and grapefruit bitterness. Tons of pepper (wow, it is a hot one!). It is very sharp in the mouth, definitely feeling the burn from the extra ABV. Sandalwood and oriental incense notes. Dry paper on the swallow. Not particularly woody, but you can feel the subtle Mizunara wood spice notes – and the overwhelming pepper.

Finish: Fairly quick on the way out, with a simple lingering sweetness. Not cloying, reminiscent of caramelized apple and pear mixed with just a touch of grapefruit citrus (but definitely more sweet than bitter). Not overly woody, which helps keep the bitterness in check. While not complex, most people should find it quite pleasant.

On the nose, there is something here reminiscent of the older-style, lightly-peated Highland malt whiskies, like Ben Nevis 10yo or the older peated Glen Gariochs (e.g., 1995 vintage). It really is a lovely nose, but it then starts to show its youthful age by the burn on the palate and relatively quick finish. It reminds me a bit of Hakushu NAS in the mouth, although there is a lot more pepper here. Finish is fairly simple, but elegant and pleasant enough.

The Mizunara effect is also rather understated (which I personally like), except for the strong peppery spice. I’ve never been a big fan of strong Mizunara wood notes (e.g., Ichiro’s Malt Mizunara Wood Reserve), so this level is just about right for me. It feels like a good balance. They are definitely on the right track, it just needs more maturity and character in the mouth. In comparison, the Kanosuke New Born had remarkable character at a younger age, although with some similar heat issues.

I would give this Matsui Mizunara Cask a slightly above average score, ~8.5-8.6. It has less character in the mouth than I would like, but it does have a refined elegance (and a great nose). Good balance of Mizunara spice.

Among reviewers, Jim Murray was extremely positive, followed by Jonny of Whisky Advocate. Richard of nomunication.jp was more moderately positive (and more consistent with my own scoring and views).

Helios Whisky Reki Pure Malt

Helios is not exactly a familiar name in Japanese whisky making. Indeed, they were originally known as a rum distiller (yes, you read that correctly). Based in Okinawa, this region remained under the administrative control of the US into the 1960s, when Helios was founded. I guess rum production for US pacific regions was all the rage in the early days of this distillery.

Beyond the initial rum staple, Helios eventually branched out into various liqueurs, awamori (a distinctive Okinawa beverage made from distilled rice), and the standard Japanese distilled spirits shochu and umeshu. The distillery prides itself on using local materials for its production.

Helios started making whisky during the early phase of rising Japanese domestic whisky popularity in the 1980s. Apparently that popularity didn’t last for Helios, as they seemed to have gotten out of the whisky making game by early 2000s. Indeed, the last age-stated whisky I’ve seen from Helios (under the Reki label) was a 15 year old expression released in 2016.

In recent years, Helios has been cashing in on the modern whisky boom by sourcing Scottish whisky to sell under their Kura whisky brand. See my recent Japan travelogue for an introduction into so-called “faux” or fake Japanese whisky. I believe they have also attempted to brand some of their barrel-aged, rice-distilled awamori and schochu products as whisky (see another example in my Ohishi Sherry Cask review).

All that said, the Reki brand name has been retained by Helios for actual Japanese whisky, as far as I know. See for example this helpful infographic and searchable table at nomunication.jp. But the fact that this is described as a “Pure Malt” (i.e., a vatted malt or blended malt) indicates that this whisky comes from more than one distillery.

This particular Reki Pure Malt whisky was released by Helios in 2017 for a whisky exhibition, in distinctive 180 mL bottles made of Cobalt blue glass (a classy touch). My bottle was given to me as a gift by colleagues on a trip to Japan in early 2019. Bottled at 40% ABV. The label simply says “Produced by Helios Distillery Co. Ltd, Okinawa, Japan”.

There are too few reviews of this whisky to make it into my Meta-Critic Whisky Database to date, but please see some preliminary comments at the end of the review (and continue to check the database for updates).

Let’s see what I find in the glass:

Colour: Very pale yellow gold, straw.

Nose: Very briny, with lots of minerality (flint, gunpowder). Rubber. Very earthy and herbaceous (dry herbs). Apples and pear. Lemon curd. Reminds me a lot of Ledaig 10yo, but not as overtly smokey. Me likes!

Palate: Light caramel sweetness, but with a malty core. Orange/tangerine show up now. Reminds me of an orange-infused sponge cake with lemon frosting – a real “light” dessert whisky. Relatively thin mouthfeel, even for 40% ABV. Ashy taste on the swallow, but still not exactly smokey. I’ve had some very youthful Bowmores that similarly seem both peated and non-peated at the same time.

Finish: Medium. Honey shows up now, adding to that lingering frosting sweetness. The ashyness persists as well, but it is faint. No off notes, very pleasant on the way out.

It is a very pleasant sipper, but it has a definite “smoke but no fire” character – the nose promises a peated experience, but the palate and finish remain surprisingly gentle (and very “cakey”). My main impression is that the core spirit of this blended malt is quite youthful – but without the harshness that mars many young spirits. I would guess whomever made this knows how to run a still! I would be very keen to try aged spirits from this distillery.

There is something very Japanese about this whisky – it is well constructed, and gives no offense at any point in its development. That being said, I was hoping for more character in the mouth, given the promise of that mineral/rubbery nose. Bottling at a higher ABV would also certainly have helped.

In terms of a score, I would give it a slightly below average rating, maybe ~8.3-8.4 on the Meta-Critic scale. Serge of Whisky Fun gave it a slightly more positive score, by his personal rating system. While I enjoyed it, the thin mouthfeel and soft character on the palate contribute to my giving this a lower overall rating. A pleasant surprise, but still a ways to go.

Super Nikka (aka Nikka Super Rare Old)

This blended Japanese whisky has been around since 1962, in a distinctive glass bottle clearly meant to represent a whisky still. Created to commemorate the death of Masataka Taketsuru’s beloved wife Rita, I understand that the early batches were sold in hand-blown bottles.

In Japan, Super Nikka is generally perceived as being a higher-end NAS Nikka blended product – or, if you prefer, it is an entry-level premium blend. According to Nikka, Super Nikka is meant to represent a classic style of easy-to-drink blended whisky (i.e., “smooth and mellow”) with only slight touches of peatiness and sherry. The exact mix is unknown, but Nikka reports that this blend contains a “high proportion” of malt from the Yoichi and Miyagikyo distilleries. I have also seen it stated that Nikka Coffey Malt and Coffey Grain whiskies (from their Coffey column still at Miyagikyo) are also present in the blend.

By the way, the nomenclature for this whisky gets a little confused online. In Japan, most people tend to call it Super Nikka (although Nikka Super is also fairly common). But because the label says (on different lines, in different orders on different batches): Nikka Whisky / Rare Old / Super, many list this whisky as Nikka Super Rare Old, or some similar variant

In Japan, you will commonly find 700 mL bottles of Super Nikka for ~3500-4000 Yen, or $40-45 CAD. This is double or even triple the cost of true entry-level Nikka blends (only found in Japan). But this is still a discount compared to other well-known Nikka offerings like Coffey Grain, Coffey Malt or any of the Nikka single malt NAS bottlings. Again consistent with its premium blend status, Nikka sells miniature 50 mL bottles of Super Nikka – but for the entry-level price of ~350 Yen each, or $4 CAD. I picked up a miniature bottle for that price on a trip to Tokyo last year.

When I first start noticing full-sized bottles it in Canada a couple years ago (only in Alberta and BC), it typically retailed for a reasonable ~$70 CAD, about the same price as the 500 mL bottles of the well-respected Nikka From The Barrel. For some reason though, Super Nikka shot up to more than twice that price at most liquor stores in Calgary last year (with no change in the price of other Japanese whiskies). It has since come back down to its more typical lower Canadian price.

Super Nikka is bottled at 43% ABV. It is clearly coloured, to a classic medium amber whisky colour.

Here is how it compares to other Nikka whiskies in Meta-Critic Whisky Database:

Nikka 12yo Premium Blended: 8.53 ± 0.17 on 6 reviews ($$$$$)
Nikka All Malt: 8.44 ± 0.18 on 8 reviews ($$)
Nikka Coffey Grain: 8.47 ± 0.51 on 18 reviews ($$$$)
Nikka Coffey Malt: 8.75 ± 0.40 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
Nikka From the Barrel: 8.81 ± 0.36 on 25 reviews ($$$)
Nikka Gold & Gold: 8.18 ± 0.27 on 8 reviews ($$$)
Nikka Miyagikyo NAS: 8.56 ± 0.21 on 9 reviews ($$$$)
Nikka Pure Malt Black: 8.75 ± 0.24 on 16 reviews ($$$)
Nikka Pure Malt Red: 8.53 ± 0.31 on 10 reviews ($$$)
Nikka Pure Malt White: 8.69 ± 0.33 on 13 reviews ($$$)
Nikka Super Nikka: 8.13 ± 0.46 on 10 reviews ($$$)
Nikka Yoichi NAS 8.59 ± 0.29 on 13 reviews ($$$$)

And now what I find in the glass:

Nose: Fairly basic, with honey and caramel. The fruit tends toward over-ripe banana and stewed apples. Touch of nuts. Vaguely herbaceous and mildly earthy (dry earth). Unfortunately, there is also a spirity aspect that I typically associate with grain whisky blends, along with some light acetone. Nothing offensive, but nothing very interesting either – mild and pleasant enough.

Palate: Similar to the nose, starts with light honey and caramel, with maybe a touch of chocolate. Apple, pear, and various tropical fruits. Some lemon citrus shows up. Peanuts. Rye spices (cinnamon and cloves). A good mix of malt and grain, aspects of both are clearly present. Mild, but with a bit of heat on the swallow.

Finish: Medium short. Oak asserts itself a bit. Some mouth-puckering astringency creeps in. An artificial aspartame note shows up at the end (and very little else).

As an aside, I purposefully didn’t look up the composition of this blend before sampling – and am thus (pleasantly) surprised that I accurately picked up on the faint peat and sherry notes on the nose and palate.

This is a good example of an easy-drinking, simple blend. Not offensive but not much character beyond the faint hints of peat and nuts. It also fizzles out quickly on the way out. While you could easily drink it neat, I think it is probably more suited for mixers. Not surprisingly, I find the similar-style but more expensive Nikka Premium 12yo, Nikka Pure Malt Black and Nikka Coffey Malt all better quality. Nikka Gold & Gold is probably the best comparable.

I think the Meta-Critic average for this one is very reasonable, and matches my own assessment. Among reviewers, the only truly “super” positive scores I’ve seen come from Jim Murray and Patrick of Quebec Whisky. Most reviewers give it scores comparable to mine, including Oliver of Dramming.com, Serge of Whisky Fun, Michio of Japan Whisky Reviews, and Andre of Quebec Whisky. The lowest score I’ve seen come from Thomas of Whisky Saga and Dramtastic of Japanese Whisky Review.

1 2 3 12