Flor de Caña Centenario 25 (40%, Nicaragua, 2013)

Sometimes I get lucky, and somebody steps forward and sends me samples of (potentially very good) Rums. Not from the industry, but from a fellow Rum-lover, just to read my opinion. Samples are welcome indeed, since I’m actually running a bit low on my stash of samples for reviewing, and there is only a certain amount of open bottles I can have around the house, and at the same time, maintaining a certain level of normality, or at least, faking normality towards the rest of the world. Well Rik, thank you very much indeed, so here is the first one!

Looking back at older posts, I already reviewed two expressions of Flor de Caña. The 12yo and the 18yo, so how fitting is it to get this 25 (yo). Both earlier reviews were written about Rums still in the old bottle. The labels back then mentioned the age of the Rum. 12 years and 18 years. Since 2014, the Flor de Caña range is bottled in new big, flat, and square bottles. However, this time they only have a number on them: “12” and “18”. The word “years” has vanished. On the company website, they mention that the 18 is almost two decades in the making. So still an 18yo? Do we smell a rat? We know about numbers without a true age statement from Solera Rum producers. No, they haven’t, haven’t they? No. Another surprise is the price. You can easily say that the 12 (yo) and the 18 (yo) are very reasonably priced. The 25 (yo) costs the same as two bottles of the 18 (yo) ánd a bottle of the 12 (yo). It was always said that Flor de Caña ages their Rums for the full amount of time, as mentioned on the bottle, although I remember a 21, that actually was 15 years old and the 21 referred to the century we live in. For now, lets give them the benefit of the doubt, shall we?

Or shouldn’t we? Early 2015 saw a report by Nina Lakhany, and near the end of 2015, a report by Clarissa Wei, showing that it is not healthy to work for the Nicaraguan Sugar and Rum industry. During the harvest season, the La Isla Foundation held a survey under workers from Chichigalpa showing workdays of 12 hours under extremely hot conditions, without proper hydration and time to recuperate. Workers are poor and are paid per tonne cut, so they work as much as they can to provide for their families under abysmal conditions. A study performed by the Boston University, following workers in Chichigalpa, shows that alarming numbers of planters and cutters are dying of Chronic Kidney Disease from nonTraditional causes (CKDnT). As a response, many bars started boycotting Flor de Caña products.

I urge you, dear reader, to click on the links above and read the corresponding articles, for you to see the dark side of Rum making.

Flor de Caña 25If you still are interested, here is the review of what turns out to be a very good Rum, alas made with blood…

Color: Full gold.

Nose: Yeah funky with a dry, spicy and woody backbone. Very chewy smelling and high on esters. Isn’t this Jamaican? Definitely well-integrated banana, coconut, vanilla and a whiff of lavas, dried salty vegetal mix and mint. Slightly burned (brown) sugar and fresh, slightly moist brown sugar. The sugar seems to be attached to the wood aroma. Nice. Love this smell. These brown sugar notes combined with the wood notes make it an absolute dream to smell. If this tastes anything like it smells, this will be an amazing Rum. Nutty and waxy. If smelled blind I would have never thought this was a Flor de Caña, especially with the experience of the old 12yo and 18yo behind my belt. Give it some time to breathe, and this will give off some fruity and floral notes as well. Wonderful. Well balanced and well made.

Taste: Sugary, but not overly sweet. A bit thin on entry, although the mouthfeel is syrupy. The way down takes some time and there are some wonderful burnt notes emerging. It has hints of burnt spicy wood, cask toast, maybe even some charcoal and tar. The spicy and peppery wood note stays with you throughout the whole of the body. Burnt sugar as well, but the amazing part is how toned down these notes are. Nothing overpowering, just well blended together. Not to sweet too. Nutty and again some hints of banana and sugared yellow fruits, but again so well-integrated, that the point this Rum tries to make isn’t about fruitiness. By the way, I don’t get the florality from the nose here. There are definitely some old Rums in the mix, but I doesn’t taste like everything is 25 years old. Medium long finish, but not a lot stays behind for the aftertaste. Sure, the nose is stellar, but the taste isn’t far behind. Marginally weaker and simpler, but still very good, even when reduced to 40% ABV.

I wasn’t blown away by the old 12yo mentioning that is was “not for me” and luckily, the old 18yo was already a bit better “Pretty light yet well-balanced”. More than a year and a half have passed since writing the review of the 18yo, and more than three and a half years since writing about the 12yo. A lot of Rum has flowed under the bridge since then and a lot of experience gained, I hope.

At this price-point, this should have been higher in ABV. I feel it is a direct competitor to the Abuelo Centuria, which is even a bit higher in price. Yes, the jump from the 18yo to this 25 is quite big, mind the gap, but compared to the competition, the price may not even be that bad. All things considered, this should have been way more expensive than it is… Don’t buy it…

Points: 90

Heartfelt thanks go out to Rik, for providing this and several other samples soon to be reviewed on these pages. Cheers mate!

Glenfiddich 21yo “Havana Reserve” (40%, OB, Circa 2003)

And here we have an old, and somewhat controversial, Glenfiddich that was totally matured in boxes that once held cigars. Oops, I mean, casks that once held Cuban Rum. Cuban Rums is a light Spanish style Rum which doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a lot of aroma. Rum casks weren’t used much for finishing Whisky, and even today distillers and bottlers tend to prefer the obvious Bourbon and Sherry casks. Especially today, other casks are used as well, from fortified wines like Port and Madeira and red and white, sweet and dry Wines. So a Rum cask you say? Yes, we have had more of those on these pages. A fairly recent Benriach comes to mind, to name but one. Controversial? Yes. Problems arose when Whisky like this was sent to the US of A. They still had an Cuban Embargo, so more cigars for us, as can be read on these pages as well, oops I slipped up again. There still was an Cuban Embargo back then, so no Whisky with the word “Havana” on the label was allowed into the country.

Glenfiddich and The Balvenie have the same owners, William Grant & Sons. Yup, those from Hendrick’s Gin as well. Bad boys down there! Bad boys since they also decided to sue our beloved New Zealand Whisky Company for blatantly stealing the “Double Wood” words and misguiding the poor public, who now must believe that Balvenie Double Wood is the same as the NZWC’s Doublewood, and New Zealand is somewhere in the Speyside region…

William Grant was looking for the perfect Rum casks for their Glenfiddich and considered casks that once held Rums from Venezuela (Spanish style), Guyana (Demerara Rum a heavy English style Rum) and some others. Finally Rum from Sancti Spiritus was chosen to fill up the casks for two years, After two years the Rum was replaced with Whisky for a six month finish.

If I’m not mistaken, the first release was called Havana Reserve and the second was called Gran Reserva. Rumour has it, that for this second release the same casks were re-used, thus explaining reports of the Gran Reserva being lighter than the initial release. A third version was released. Just to be absolutely sure, this Whisky was not finished in Cuban Rum casks, but in casks that once held Dominican Rum. The label now mentions Carribean Rum finish in stead of Cuban Rum finish. Later, subsequent batches simply were called Rum cask finish, so absolutely nothing could be misunderstood and when changing Rums the label can stay the same.

Glenfiddich 21yo Havana ReserveColor: Full gold.

Nose: Very aromatic. Creamy, toffee, nutty, thick and chewy. Next a floral layer which at times is quite perfumy, with great earthy undertones (given by the Rum cask). Vanilla and restrained wood. Half dried grass is noticeable, but covered under a thick semi-sweet layer of aromatics. Fruity, baked banana and dried sweet apricot. In the distance there is even a hint of licorice. But the Rum, is the Rum noticeable? Yes If you know the style of Rum the Cubans make, and you know this Whisky is finished in Cuban Rum cask, than yes, its noticeable, otherwise you must have some experience in tasting to smell and taste it. The Rum upped the aromatics and the chewyness a bit, as well as the sweetness. Great nose.

Taste: Sweet with lots of toffee. Earthy and “green”. Broken off branch and fresh tree sap. The baked banana returns. It’s a big Malt. It is overwhelming in fruit and floral notes. Has some bitter wood and slightly burned edges to it. Wood obviously. Oak, fresh oak and even some pencil. The body of the Whisky already shows it will not be as complex as the nose. However the biggest problem, relatively speaking of course, is the partial disintegration towards the finish. It’s like a band just before breaking up. Some aroma’s don’t want to work with each other anymore, and get separated from each other. Still in the fold though, but more apart. Underneath the woody bitter note and on top some acidity. Short finish, which surprised me since it’s a bigger Glenfiddich than usual, and this has aged for a whopping 21 years, you know. Not a lot happening in the aftertaste. So on entry I was quite happy with the performance of the 40% ABV. but the finish needed some more.

This is a beauty. Excellent smelling Glenfiddich. Tastewise, well, not at the same level of greatness as the nose, then again, it was (since it was bottled some time ago, and since has been discontinued) a mass-produced Whisky aiming at the public already gained by the rest of the Glenfiddich bottlings, without scaring them away. With this in mind, they did what they could, to keep this public and at the same time be a bit more adventurous.

Points: 84

The New Zealand Whisky Collection 18yo 1993/2012 (51.9%, The New Zealand Whisky Company, Cask #21)

After one blend and three reduced bottlings from their standard range, here is finally the first example of an “untouched” New Zealand Whisky. A 1993 expression bottled at cask strength and from single cask #21. That’s more like it. This way we can finally find out what the distiller intended. How did the spirit interact with the wood from the cask. No information about the cask itself has been given so we aren’t handicapped with information this time, and can just dig in…

The New Zealand Whisky Collection 18yo 19932012 (51.9%, The New Zealand Whisky Company, Cask #21)Color: Light gold.

Nose: Fruity and dusty, carried with an undertone of fresh wood. I would say this came from a Bourbon cask. Not hard to tell since the wood impaired quite a lot of vanilla-flavours. One with green fingers too, since it has more traits from the kingdom of plants, than the wood alone. It’s easy to admit, this one is driven by wood. Even the spices are wood related, and what about the whiff of pencil-shavings and the aroma of freshly broken off twig? Does this mean this one is dominated by wood? Not at all. The wood gave of various elements of itself, without overpowering it. All in good measure. It has a promise of sweetness (toffee) and the big wood-vanilla synergy makes this a fruity and creamy nose with some backbone and character given by the wood. Slightly oriental (Indian) and floral. Restrained, elegant and wonderful.

Taste: Nice spicy, prickly and woody entry. It starts out with fresh oak and a quite big, nice vegetal sweetness. Tiny hint of bitterness. Right from the start it is obvious this one is carried by the cask strength. Good this wasn’t reduced. It doesn’t seem to have as many woody traits as the nose. Definitely simpler in design than the nose. The fruity bit I taste is a bit peculiar. To me it seems, the mixture of yellow and red fruits don’t combine perfectly here. More cereals and bread tones towards the end. The finish is shorter than expected and it’s the grainy, bread-like and slightly bitter bit that has the biggest influence on the finish.

The strength of this malt is the wonderful nose, as well as well on entry in the mouth. From there it goes a bit downhill. The body sort of disintegrated in my mouth and although the cask strength is noticeable, it doesn’t carry the aroma’s into the finish in a big way. This is a Malt that needs to be tasted, taking big sips. Good stuff nevertheless, easy drinking Whisky, but probably not the best single cask bottled by the NZWC. We’ll see because I have two more hidden away somewhere.

Points: 85

Hendrick’s Gin (41,4%, OB, Scotland)

Earlier I reviewed two very good Gins: Hven and Dutch Courage (the aged version). Both are very nice spirits, good enough for sipping. For me however, I already have lots of other spirits lying around the house which are even better for sipping than your average Gin, so for me, Gin is a spirit to do something with. Call me boring, but the best way to do something with Gin is to partner it up with a good Tonic. Many people can tell you how to make a nice Gin & Tonic, so I won’t do that here. Since I’m a taster of spirits, that is what I do. I taste the Gins on these pages neat, but I hope to put something down as well how a particular Gin behaves with a good Tonic. When I do that I’ll use a big balloon copita and very big spheres of ice or chunks of frozen spring water. For review purposes I do not add any garnish, but when you make your own G&T, please do to enhance the experience.

Hendrick’s is a Scottish Gin produced since 1999 in small 450 litre batches by William Grant & Sons. Whisky-people know them better as the people behind Glenfiddich and the Balvenie Single Malts. In the 60’s Charles Gordon, at that time the president of William Grant & Sons, bought a Carter-head still and a Bennett still (a small pot still) at an auction. Both were restored and put back into service for the production of Hendrick’s Gin. Both stills are producing a different Gin which are later blended together. Part of the botanicals used are macerated and subsequently distilled in the Bennett still with neutral spirit and water. The rest of the botanicals are put into a copper basket that hangs well above the spirit in the Carter-Head still, extracting the more sweet floral and elegant aroma’s by the rising vapour. Finally essences of Cucumber (from the Netherlands and Belgium) and Red Roses (from Bulgaria) are added to the blend of Gins, post distillation. The botanicals used in distillation are: Juniper, cubeb aka tailed pepper, caraway seeds, camomile, elderflower, meadowsweet, yarrow, orange peel, lemon peel, coriander seeds, orris root, and angelica.

Hendrick's GinColor: Colorless.

Nose: Juniper obviously, but also quite some toned-down citrus in the mix. All of this is aided by a rather sweet and very appealing floral aroma. Elderflower and meadowsweet for sure. It is said Bulgarian Rose and Cucumbers are the main markers for this Gin (I am assuming this, since they get mentioned a lot). I eat many cucumbers and I recognize the smell of cucumbers a mile away. Here I don’t get it (yet). I’m sure it’s there, but it is drowned out by the other, much stronger aroma’s. Same goes for the Bulgarian Rose. Although faintly present, it smells a bit more like marketing to me. Do Bulgarian roses smell better than other roses anyway? If mentioned so often, why does the Gin smell of juniper, elderflower and meadowsweet instead of the aforementioned rose and cucumber? Hmmm, maybe that’s why they ask you to garnish it with cucumber, to make it noticeable. Let’s not get carried away now, since the beauty lies in the details, even I should know that! Some whiffs of spicier ingredients pass by. Pepper and a more earthier and rootier smell. Sweet camomile is there too. It is no surprise. Hendrick’s is a wonderful smelling Gin. Well balanced and very appealing.

Taste: Quite spicy, cumin for sure. Oily and nice. Sweet and earthy. Coriander is definitely here, but used with taste. It’s the “hint of” I expected from the cucumber, but it is from the coriander instead. I usually don’t care too much for coriander, but here it does seem to work rather well. Luckily some other, very pleasant, floral, botanicals overpower it. This is quite a surprise. It packs quite an aromatic punch, but also the sweet florality is easily detected. Yes we have some rose-water in the taste. The cucumber however, absent for me. As I said cucumber is very common to me, but I can’t detect it. Maybe something wrong with me these days? It has some sweet barley and aroma’s of dry biscuits. The different tastes work together well, nothing really stands out making for a well-balanced big uniform taste. Subtle (the Zuidam and the Hven are bigger Gins).

Combine with a neutral Tonic like Fever Tree and maybe even more exiting, the aromatic Fever Tree Mediterranean Tonic works quite well since the floral part played by the geranium is a nice match with the Bulgarian Rose from the Gin.

Points: 79 (yup high score again)

Longrow 10yo 1993 (46%, OB, 2003)

Another peated whisky in the summer? Has Master Quill gone completely crazy? Yes, because who wants to be “normal”! If you feel like it, just do it… By the way, it’s raining like crazy outside, so it only seems fitting.

2001 saw the first release of a 10 year old, with a vintage. Remember the classic brown paper Longrow label on the tall bottle? The first two releases, both in 2001 and both distilled in 1991 were a “normal one” said to be only from Bourbon, but also, for one time only, a Sherrywood. The series was short-lived, and was discontinued in 2006 after the 1996 vintage, in favour of the 10yo without a vintage statement. Throughout the series I don’t believe all normal ones were from Bourbon casks only, if any. You know Springbank, they tend not to repeat themselves. Just compare the last two releases of the Longrow 18yo (with the white labels), since the 2016 release contains Rum casks. Never a dull moment with Springbank and all of their other brands. Today we’ll have a look at the 1993 vintage of the 10yo, that was released in 2003.

Longrow 10yo 1993Color: Light gold.

Nose: Nice fresh peat. Fatty and smoky. The peat is smelling three-dimensional. It’s not only just there, it goes deep, and seems without end in complexity. Peat mixed with hints of lemon, waxy apple skins and vanilla. Cookie dough. Whiffs of warm apple pie. Burning leaves, sugared yellow fruits and even hints of sweet-smelling sweat, crushed beetle and slightly burned herbs and even has a quaint nuttiness about it. Very balanced stuff, with only a mere hint of wood. All seems to fit in together nicely. This is the best peat I’ve smelled in quite some time. I must admit, it had plenty of air to work with. Love it.

Taste: Quite sweet on entry. Heavy on licorice and the peat is shoved into the background, by the sweetness. The sweetness dissipates and leaves more room for a sort of herbal fruitiness. Prickly licorice and the nuttiness from the nose. Alas the peat never really makes it to the top and the wonderful depth it has on the nose doesn’t really blossom tasting it. Long finish, built around the caramel sweetness and with a larger role for sour oak. Coffee and chocolate in the aftertaste. It still is a wonderful Malt. Just if the complexity of the nose would have shone through in the taste, it would have been a truly exceptional Whisky.

Well this might not be a Whisky from the seventies, but it does remind me of the quality of that decade. I’m actually amazed a bit that many of the vintages are still available, although somewhat more expensive than the new 10yo.

Points: 88

Caol Ila 1991/2000 (46%, Wilson & Morgan, Barrel Selection)

This Caol Ila is one I just cracked open, literally. It is an oldie I bought some 15 years ago. Sure it is a reduced independent bottling, and it didn’t cost much, but its a Caol Ila and its bottled by Wilson & Morgan, who have bottled a lot of good Caol Ila’s, just have a look at this 24yo expression distilled in 1975, to name but one. The cork broke on this one. This time it didn’t only just break off, it seemed to disintegrate completely. Vaporized into thin air, so to speak. Luckily most of the crumbs were easy to fish out of the bottle and hardly anything sank to the bottom. Just a few weeks ago I wrote an ode to the screw cap, now you know why… Karma strikes again.

Caol Ila 1991/2000 (46%, Wilson & Morgan, Barrel Selection)Color: Pale gold.

Nose: Ahhh, right after pouring the room filled with the smell of beautiful peat. Nothing harsh and rough, but smooth and refined. Nice, clean and soft and aromatic peat. Helped along with a citrussy fruitiness. Well-balanced and much nicer to smell than the Kilchoman Spring I reviewed (much) earlier. Smells quite sweet. Leafy and chewy. Dry vanilla powder, maybe even some powdered coffee-creamer. Some hidden tar, but also an expansion on the fruits. We have hints of sweet, ripe pineapple, mango and banana, mixed with vanilla from the wood, and the wood itself somehow didn’t make it. Crushed beetle and some distant dried basil in the background. Remarkable. Ohhh yes, and some bonfire smoke. I nearly forgot to write that down! I have to say it again, well-balanced stuff and remember, this isn’t even ten years old, which today has become standard.

Taste: Quite sweet on entry. Sugar water. Syrup. Very fruity and a little hoppy bitterness. Big and chewy. Sweet, funky and nutty peat. Not at all earthy. Nice touch of smoke, but not much. It’s like all the aromas are fighting over front row seats. As mentioned, there is a lot of sweetness, that exerts itself right from the start, but these is a lot of fruitiness as well. The Whisky is also nuts. I mean, full of nuttiness. All big and all upfront. I always get some coffee in good Caol Ila’s, and this time is no exception. Sweet coffee, with a tad of toffee in the coffee. It’s not stong black coffee but rather a sweet Cappuccino or Latte Macchiato. Underneath a nice, herbal and lightly bitter undertone (from oak). Long finish and similar aftertaste. Leaves me behind with salty lips. Good Whisky! I hope todays young Caol Ila’s are just as good and affordable.

Ohhh these were the days, where young Whisky seemed better than it is these days, or maybe I’m biased.  This is a very tasty Caol Ila, not overly complex and one I’ll come back to again and again. This will not take years to empty, which it usually takes me, since there are lots of open bottles around the place…

Today there is much ado about young Whiskies, especially NAS Whiskies. It seems NAS isn’t really accepted by everybody. It sometimes is viewed as a devilish plan selling us inferior and immature Whisky (sometimes at a premium price). On the other hand, when distilleries and independent bottlers alike, just mention an age statement of a young whisky there doesn’t seem to be much of a problem anymore, since you know what you’re getting. Just look at the recently released Lagavulin 8yo and compare that to the plethora of NAS Taliskers (also owned by Diageo) and NAS Laphroaigs (not owned by Diageo), which seem to be under par and the fantasy names do not help the acceptance process of the (educated) public, or those who have seen different times buying Single Malt Whiskies.

For the fun of it, let’s compare this “9yo” Caol Ila to the NAS Talisker ‘Neist Point’. Smelling the Talisker after the Caol Ila, it is remarkable how much the Talisker smells of grainy immature Whisky and even shows some whiffs of new make! Much more than when smelled by itself alone. Although having new make in the mix is illegal, since Whisky must be at least 3 years old, there must be a big component of very young Whisky in the Talisker. The Caol Ila behaves like a 9yo, nice, well made, good cask, but lacking some of the complexity often brought to a Whisky by extensive maturation. In the taste it is noticeable that the Talisker has some more happening than just the new make, and young Whisky, alone. Thank God almighty. The Talisker needs some air to get the new make out, after that it is not bad, not bad at all. Sweet as well and buttery. The taste of the Talisker grows on you, even though the new make never really leaves the scene. A draw, or is it? Considering the amount of money Diageo wants for the Talisker (in some markets), the jury made a unanimous decision in favour of the Caol Ila. [sound of judge’s hammer on wood]

Points: 85

Lagavulin 12yo 1995/2008 (48%, OB, European Oak, for the Friend of the Classic Malts)

So with the longest day of the year at hand, some would say that this isn’t the time for Peat. Peat needs rugged shores, strong gale force winds and driving rain to be thoroughly enjoyed, doesn’t it? Why not take a light, grassy and lemony Lowlander instead, or even some tropical stuff? Well what can I say, I just felt like it, that’s all.

A week ago I hosted a Whisky-tasting centered around the indie bottler, Signatory Vintage. I opened some bottlings of them, which will feature on these pages soon. Of course a good tasting needs an even better after-tasting, like a good party needs an even better after-party. The after-tasting, yes you’ve guessed it: Lagavulin. The distillery that’s celebrating its 200th anniversary this year, with the release of a 8yo, which will also feature on these pages shortly.

But first this oldie (but goldie). Relatively speaking of course. This Lagavulin was released in 2008 and it took well into 2015 to sell out. It was available in shops for a whopping 7 years! Now that its gone, prices are soaring. It was available for such a long time, because there may have been a lot of bottlings around, but it also gained a bit of a reputation. A lot of people, including fans of Lagavulin weren’t very fond of this particular bottling. I consider myself a fan of Lagavulin, so I just has to open it, and try for myself! But first a thought…

Bottlings like this, baffle me to the max. All this time we hear the industry explaining to us, that colouring is done to ensure consistency in colour from batch to batch. Also, the public, when buying Whisky, or any other brown spirit, may be put off when the aforementioned spirit is too light in colour. So why then is this one-off Lagavulin, bottled in a brown glass bottle, coloured with E150, when we, the public can’t even see the colour of the spirit untill after the purchase? Boggles the mind, and mind you, don’t go around thinking that caramel colouring doesn’t affect the taste, because it does, just read Michel’s article back from the day I used to be in the “Coloured Gang”. Sure, it may be a bit lengthy, but it definitely worth it.

Lagavulin 12yo 1995/2008 FFOTCMColour: Orange brown, just like a Bourbon.

Nose: Excellent smoky nose. It starts with more smoke than peat. Sure peat is next. Earthy, sweet and fatty clay. Ashes. Nice wood, accompanied by red fruity notes and some Italian laurel licorice as well. The fruity bit smells more yellow than red. Funky chewy sweetness. Cream Sherry. Mocha cream, cookie dough and light chocolate powder. Leather. Milk chocolate shavings on vanilla ice-cream held up by the wood. Again a lovely smelling Lagavulin, which always works well when it’s matured in Sherry casks. Hints of tar and also some spices. The creamy Sherry notes overpower the spices a bit, so its hard to tell them apart. If you have read the article I mentioned above, you might remember my comments about mellowing out the aroma’s by E150. I feel that is the case here also. This Lagavulin has a nice, very nice actually, but rounded out smell.

Taste: Quite sweet and creamy on entry, quickly followed by peat and toasted cask. Small vegetal bitter note. Very nice. Lots of sweet licorice, almonds and black and white powder. Pepper & salt and definitely some smoke and nuts. Smoked nuts? Smoked sweet almonds (not the salty ones). Red cocktail cherry and a whiff of artificiality in the fruit department. The sweetness is of the typical sugar-water kind. Its fantastic on entry, but the body is losing it at bit already. Falling apart and being quite simple. In no way, has the finish the length of other Lagavulins, but the one big taste lingers on for a while in the aftertaste. However, it’s more the sweet and fruity bit, with only a hint of smoke, than the peat.

This Lagavulin has matured in first fill Sherry casks, not made with American oak. There was a time when (probably) all Sherry matured in European oak butts and puncheons, which are quite large casks. Today a lot of Sherry casks are made from American oak, impairing vanilla and giving off a more creamy feel. Also the casks made today (hogsheads) are smaller than the butts and puncheons, thus allowing for some quicker maturation.

Let me start by saying this is a good Lagavulin. It drinks easily and there is more than enough happening. I like it a lot. However, if I compare this to other Lagavulins, it isn’t the best one out there. I believe the colouring did its part in mellowing out the aroma’s and blending them together into one big (nice) taste. Nothing sticks out really. Apart from the E150, the casks themselves probably weren’t the best money could buy as well, as well as its previous contents. So for a Lagavulin its good, but nothing more than that, but it’s also a Whisky most others can only dream of producing. Lagavulin has stiff competition from… itself.

Points: 88