{"id":5307,"date":"2018-05-24T19:22:03","date_gmt":"2018-05-24T23:22:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/?p=5307"},"modified":"2018-05-24T19:26:07","modified_gmt":"2018-05-24T23:26:07","slug":"amrut-peated-port-pipe-single-cask","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/2018\/05\/24\/amrut-peated-port-pipe-single-cask\/","title":{"rendered":"Amrut Port Pipe Peated Single Cask #2712 (2016)"},"content":{"rendered":"

This single cask Amrut was first matured in charred American virgin oak casks, followed by further maturation in a Port Pipe cask (which are very large casks, holding 650 litres). I have a bottle from the third batch of this whisky matured in Port Pipe cask #2712, exclusively bottled for Western Canada (where I picked this up).<\/p>\n

To clarify a point of confusion – Amrut sometimes re-uses finishing casks (like these Port Pipes). The front label of my bottle indicates that the barrel was first filled in January of 2011, and the whisky was bottled in February of 2016. There’s a Batch No 3 imprint on the back label, indicating that this is the third time Port Pipe 2712 has been used.<\/p>\n

I don’t know how long this batch was finished in this Port Pipe, but there are reviews out there for an earlier August 2013 release from this same #2712 finishing cask (so, this release has to be finished for less than 2.5 years, by definition). I have one of 660 bottles of this third batch. It is bottled at cask-strength of 59.0% ABV.<\/p>\n

I am currently tracking four Amrut Port Pipe casks in database (#2713, 2714, 3881, and 4668). To date, it is only #2712 and 2713 where I can find multiple bottlings reported.<\/p>\n

Let’s see how the various Amrut offerings compare in my Meta-Critic Whisky Database:<\/p>\n

Amrut 100 Peated: 8.90 \u00b1 0.34 on 7 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Bourbon Single Cask: 8.74 \u00b1 0.33 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Fusion: 8.89 \u00b1 0.25 on 25 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Greedy Angels: 9.12 \u00b1 0.18 on 8 reviews ($$$$$+)
\nAmrut Intermediate Sherry: 8.91 \u00b1 0.46 on 21 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Peated Single Malt: 8.70 \u00b1 0.31 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Peated Single Malt Cask Strength: 9.08 \u00b1 0.28 on 12 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Portonova: 8.97 \u00b1 0.30 on 19 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Portpipe Peated Single Cask #2712 (2013): 8.95 \u00b1 0.09 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Portpipe Peated Single Cask #2712 (2016): 8.76 \u00b1 0.50 on 4 reviews ($$$$)<\/strong>
\nAmrut Portpipe Peated Single Cask #2713 (2013): 8.68 \u00b1 0.12 on 3 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Portpipe Peated Single Cask (all casks): 8.75 \u00b1 0.38 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut PX Sherry Single Cask (all casks): 8.82 \u00b1 0.48 on 13 reviews ($$$$)
\nAmrut Spectrum (all batches): 9.13 \u00b1 0.18 on 10 reviews ($$$$$)<\/p>\n

Interesting, the Amrut single cask expressions (on average) don’t seem to fare quite as well as some of the standard bottlings – although they still get above-average overall scores for the single malt class. Let’s see what I find in the glass for my bottle:<\/p>\n

Nose<\/strong>: A pleasantly peated nose, with a strong salted-meat aroma – smoked bacon and salted pork in particular. Smoked BBQ ribs. This is a very “meaty” nose, unlike the medicinal or rubbery noses of most heavily-peated Islay malts (i.e. its more like some Highland Park<\/a> or Ledaig<\/a> expressions, or even Springbank<\/a>). Anise and dark chocolate, very earthy. Blueberries and raisins. It’s a great combination of peat and sweetness – it works. Surprisingly little alcohol burn for 59% ABV. No real off notes.<\/p>\n

Palate<\/strong>: Strong attack of peat and sea salt to begin, followed by classic bourbon notes – honey and brown sugar.\u00a0 Honey glazed ham. Not as smokey in the mouth. Anise and dark chocolate again, plus caramel. Cinnamon and black pepper. Fruits lean more toward the tropical now (mango, papaya), not really finding the port so much. Bacon notes come back at the end. Thick mouthfeel, slightly oily. Surprisingly easy to drink for 59% ABV.<\/p>\n

Finish<\/strong>: Long. Leaves a noticeable tingle on the lips and tongue that is oddly pleasurable – this is actually quite anesthetizing (as you would expect from the strength). Sea salt and BBQ-glazed ribs. Some dried fruit notes appear over time.\u00a0 Smoke lingers to the end.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>With a little water, the sweet fruity notes on the nose are accentuated. Mouthfeel is unaffected. Lingering sweetness is increased on the finish as well, which becomes more sticky on the lips and gums.<\/p>\n

If you keep adding water, to bring it down to more typical whisky strength, you will find the wood spices pick up a lot in the mouth (especially the cinnamon and pepper) – so it still leaves a sting.\u00a0 Finish becomes more astringent at this diluted level. This is one that can handle of wide range of water, with differing effects. I suggest you experiment to find your personal sweet spot.<\/p>\n

A pleasant dram, but not overly complex. I find the average Meta-Critic scores for the peated Port Pipe singe casks to be a little on the low side. I would rate this particular bottling slightly higher than what it gets above (i.e., ~8.9).<\/p>\n

A number of Reddit reviewers have sampled from this particular single cask #2712 (2016), such as xile_<\/a>, Devoz<\/a>, Ethanized<\/a>, Saba007<\/a> and Pork_Bastard<\/a>. Thomas of Whisky Saga<\/a> was a big fan of another batch, as was Serge of Whisky Fun (for this batch<\/a>) and Michael of Diving for Pearls<\/a>. My Annoying Opions<\/a>, Ralfy<\/a> and Jim Murray all give their batches good scores. Jonny of Whisky Advocate<\/a> and Serge of Whisky Fun (for this batch<\/a>) were not impressed.

This single cask Amrut was first matured in charred American virgin oak casks, followed by further maturation in a Port Pipe cask (which are very large casks, holding 650 litres). I have a bottle from the third batch of this whisky matured in Port Pipe cask #2712, exclusively bottled for Western Canada (where I picked this up). To clarify a<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5332,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[78,55,137,80,52,105,17],"class_list":["post-5307","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-whiskies","tag-amrut","tag-cask-strength","tag-india","tag-peated","tag-port","tag-single-cask","tag-single-malt"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5307","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5307"}],"version-history":[{"count":21,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5307\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5344,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5307\/revisions\/5344"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5332"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5307"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5307"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/whiskyanalysis.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5307"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}