Author Archives: Master Quill

Kilchoman 5yo 2008/2013 (59.4%, OB, Sherry Finish, Small batch for Germany, Cask #392-393-394/2008, 780 bottles)

Kilchoman, even though not that old (first distillation was performed in 2005), seems to be fully accepted as a full blown Islay Malt. Good when young, and it also matures well. Great people with great vision. Lots of variants around, however for me, Kilchoman still works best in a Bourbon cask or the occasional Sherry cask. That’s why my attention mainly goes out to the bottles with the red labels and boxes (pictured below). Often single casks at cask strength. By the way, worth a mention, the Sauternes I reviewed last was very nice as well. This time around, on our hands, seemingly the best of both worlds. Bourbon matured Kilchoman, finished in Sherry casks. I guess the mentioned cask numbers are for the initial Bourbon casks, and it probably has been finished in one Sherry butt (considering the amount of bottles in this release), since the label states this is a single cask release. What was the number of the Sherry cask I wonder. There are probably some SWA-rules for this, for which I’m now too lazy to look up. Anyone? All in all quite a confusing small batch/single cask release…

Color: Full Gold (slightly hazy).

Nose: Well, heavily peated indeed. Lots of luscious sweet, tarry and smoky notes. Salty kippers with crushed beetles, giving me salty dried out lips (after sipping it obviously). Tarry rope. Notes we know from Islay. Amazing balance for a five year old Malt. Mature stuff, and rightly accepted into the Islay fold. Nutty. Definitely not a sunshine Malt. Who needs sunny beaches when you can have this beach with grey skies and torrential rain in a bottle right here with you. Nothing bad about bad weather, with a dram like this in your glass. Sweet licorice powder and powdered sugar. Dare I smell a slightly floral note here? You might resent me for this, if you’re one of those brutal-Malt lovers. Mint candy (you know those with lots of sugar, a trace amount of mint, which is probably artificial). Not a lot of noticeable Sherry influence though. The Pulteney I reviewed before this Kilchoman, also wasn’t very Sherried, but at least it had some noticeable Sherry influence. Maybe the sherry influence in this Kilchoman lies within the slightly cherried fruity sweetness and the wonderful balance of the nose. However, when this Kilchoman heard me talk about a fruity note just now,  it responds with even more licorice powder and peat. Hints of warm mineral machine oil. The nose, especially after some extensive breathing turns into something really wonderful. OK, it is wonderful in a way a tank can be wonderful. The nose is really, really good.

Taste: Initially a sweet Beer-like quality. More licorice notes and definitely less peaty than the nose. WYTIWYG (What You Taste Is What You Get). It is Whisky like a peaty lemonade. One big taste. Where the Pulteney, was complex and layered, this tastes like one big thing. Salty kippers with crushed beetles, giving me salty dried out lips (yes, copy & paste indeed). Salty and peaty licorice All-sorts. The nose seems complex and somewhat layered, the taste isn’t. Don’t get me wrong, in general this isn’t a bad thing. It just isn’t complex at all. Even the finish is rather simple, yet very tasty, as is the aftertaste. Simple, yet very tasty and effective. Hey, and it’s only five years old, and in no way is it immature or “un-finished”. My tongue reveals (in the aftertaste), that this has some wood, which is completely masked by the licorice, the dominant note in this Malt. This one worked very well for me in the morning (on a day off from work for writing reviews). Ain’t that brutal, ‘eh?

Well one thing is sure, the nose of this Malt is better than the taste. The nose is actually truly amazin’, the taste is actually really very good (to put it in perspective for you). Simple or not this is great stuff. So it’s WYTIWYG and WITIRL (What I Tasted I Really Liked) or to paraphrase agent Cooper; “damn good Kilchoman!” Dear Readers (and Nico), you might want to consider picking this one up from an auction (just make sure to let this breathe for a while).

Points: 90 (yes I must be mad, second 90 points in a row).

Pulteney 15yo 2004/2020 (63.3% Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Cask Strength, Refill Sherry Butt No. 629, 20/092, 507 bottles)

Pulteney is the most northerly Distillery on the mainland of Scotland, just 30km shy of John O’ Groats. The distillery is situated in Wick and lies in a part of Wick that used to be called Pultney Town named after its founder Sir William Pultney. The distillery itself was built by James Henderson in 1826 and was initially called Pultney Town. I don’t think James built the entire distillery with his own two hands though. The distillery was owned by the family of James for nearly a decade, but the family had to sell off the distillery in 1920 due to financial hardship caused by WW I. The distillery was sold to James Watson & Co, owners of Ord and Parkmore. In 1923 James Watson & Co. dissolved into John Dewar & Sons (D.C.L.), which closed the distillery in 1925. The distillery in its closed state changed hands several times, and several owners were busy rebuilding the distillery. In 1951 production resumed and in 1959 new stills were installed. In 1995 Pulteney, together with Balblair (part of the same portfolio by then) were sold to Inver House Distillers, the current owners. The last review of an official (Old) Pulteney on these pages, was distilled in 1982, and must have been one of the early releases by said owner. This time however, we are going to have a look at a 2004 distillate bottled by good old Gordon & MacPhail in their new Connoisseurs Choice Cask Strength range.

Color: Light orange gold.

Nose: Very malty and lightly Sherried. Slightly sweet smelling, soapy and dull (and I don’t mean boring). Right from the start a classic smell. I would have never guessed this was distilled in the 21st century. Slightly off-balanced acidic fruity smell. (This is the Sherry influence). Old paper, hints of pencil shavings and spices (part of the “classic” smell). It doesn’t have perfect balance, but still I do like the nose of this dram a lot. Who cares about perfection? Old, dusty, at times waxy, yet fresh and vibrant. It has been a while, analysing something like this. I have to say, based on the nose alone, this was a very welcome buy. Just lay back and sip it, clear your mind and let everything go away for a while. No children, no work, just you, Norah Jones, and your dram with its classic feeling. Wonderful wood spices. Fruity and some distant meaty notes as well. Aromas of an old court yard, of old buildings. An usually busy place, but now quiet on a Sunday. More nice wood spices, yet now helped along with some old honey (which has some nice staying power), soft mocha and whipped cream. Soft licorice added to the spices already present. The balance regains itself after some breathing, and it doesn’t need a lot of time to get there. Occasionally more whiffs of old paper, toasted cask and breaths of fresh air. Yes very special, what this is able to bring up from my memory of old places I visited and classic drams I had before. Keep it moving around in your glass. Keep Matilda waltzing so to speak. After some more extensive breathing the (sweet) licorice note gains in strength. Yes, this has a wonderful nose. A fresh pour is definitely more closed, so there is quite some nice evolution going on in my glass.

Taste: Prickly and again initially somewhat unbalanced (or is it?), yet so tasty. Quite sweet now, perfectly balanced by the woody notes and cigarette ashes, so it doesn’t feel sweet overall. After the first sip, the nose of this Whisky is really excellent more. Right out of the gate, a lot of different things are happening. Different tastes shoot off in many different directions. Pepper, Peppermint, bamboo, cold dishwater, licorice and fruit to name but a few I just caught in the moment. I’m sure I’ll catch some more going forward. Second sip starts again somewhat sweet, yet less so than the first sip. It shows almonds and more creamy notes, as well as more dry wood. A medium Talisker-like white pepper attack, paired with the licorice and cigarette ashes I mentioned earlier, and some sweetness. All of this also paired with the almonds, wood and its medium bitterness, which is hidden well by the medium sweetness. I guess all these paired notes constitute a very good balance. The fruits here seem somewhat different, more acidic and lemony than the nose showed. The balance is good and the palette of tastes and aroma’s is just great. Give it enough time to breathe. I’m stopping writing notes now, but rest assured, this still has even more to give, it just keeps evolving like mad. Wonderful tasty and fruity finish, with some nice oak, just not a lot of it. Aftertaste is perfectly balanced and friendly. Amazing drinkablity at this ABV. This never needed any water.

Even though this might have some minor flaws across the board, it is also a very good and tasty Malt. I don’t even know why I’m pointing out these minor flaws all the time, because by now we also know this is an excellent malt. Both the nose and the taste of this Pulteney are complex, the layering (the evolution over time in my glass) is impressive. We’re definitely in the in the “you-should-have-bought-a-second-bottle” territory with this one. But as is always the case on these pages, this is only my personal opinion, and as we all know, tastes can differ a lot. Keep in mind that ones taste can shift over time and are highly dependent of the moment as well. Tasting is a subjective science. So for me this is really great stuff, and it might, it just might not be entirely true for you. It is for me!

Points: 90

Glenrothes 19yo 1997/2017 (58.7%, Cadenhead’s, Sherry Butt, 528 bottles)

Glenrothes is not an unknown on these pages. I come across a lot and on occasion I do buy some. However, somehow it never really became one of my favourite Whiskies. Sure, its good and I do by them and it does the job very well and so on, but it never passed that particular epic status for me. As I said, it’s very good, but it never pops up in any top 10. This Cadenheads expression, I have tasted before at a Whisky Festival, and by accident I bought two at auction in stead of the planned one. The second time around I forgot I already had one from the previous auction. Believe it or not, this happened to me twice recently, with yet another Glenrothes, strange enough. Go figure. I will probably replace this Cadenhead’s bottling, when its empty, with the other “doubly-bought” Glenrothes. I hope both are pretty decent though since I got two of both. This particular Cadenhead’s bottling, was picked by Mark to commemorate Cadenhead’s 175th anniversary, and if Whiskybase is anything to go by (very wonky scoring there), these 175th anniversary picks are usually better than the sister casks bottled by Cadenhead.

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Soft Sherry notes. Creamy, slightly tarry and meaty. Nice soft wood, almost a bit paper-like. Quite fruity. A very well balanced dram without any flaws. Soft and smooth smelling, yet also a bit boring? Apple skins, warm apple compote. Red berry syrup with sugared lemon. Warm dishwater (a soft note), mocha and milk chocolate. Boring, because nothing really sticks out. All aroma’s flatlined, like a sleepy afternoon in warm wind. After some extensive breathing, some wood pops up. Not a lot, but just enough to make it slightly more interesting. However, this is a 19yo fully Sherry butt matured Whisky and it’s so soft, that it is in no way a Sherry bomb, it is not even a Sherry grenade. It has more colour than oomph, yet, as I stated above, it is flawless. It smells like an easily drinkable Whisky. It doesn’t even smell alcoholic, even though this has more than 58% ABV. A freshly poured dram smells better than one that sat in my glass for a while. A freshly poured dram has more notes like a Rhum Agricole, which dissipates with time.

Taste: Fruity with a white pepper kick, well, the latter came a bit as surprise. In a way it is syrupy, yet a somewhat thin syrup. The kick still lasts and stays a while to manhandle the back of my tongue. Black fruits as in very good Sherried bottlings from yesteryear. Apart from fresh fruit, also (again) the syrupy black fruits are here. If you give it more time and you keep the dram in your mouth for a while, the classic black fruit note becomes even more pronounced. I guess this is why it was picked for the 175th anniversary, because this is the note that makes this Whisky tick. On top of this, a slightly more acidic, fresh and fruity note, reminding me of sugared lemons again. Towards the finish a more tarry note, with its slight bitterness. Still not a lot of wood notes or any of its derivatives, so seemingly this wasn’t a very active cask. Hints of warm solid licorice. The chewy candy type licorice if left in the sun for a while. Vanilla powder. Just like the nose, on the palate a very well balanced Whisky. Since on my palate the Whisky is less soft and dares to show some spices, I do like the taste better than the nose, which is pretty good as well in its own right.

So, pretty good it is, with a nice, yet slightly boring nose. Tastes better than it smells, which is a big plus. Other than that, I still do like it. it’s good. ’nuff said. Moving on…

Points: 87

Glen Garioch 16yo 1995/2012 (55.3%, OB, Batch No. 10, 1st Fill Bourbon Barrels, L122205)

Onwards with another Glen Geerie. This is the fourth review of Glen Garioch on these pages. Until now, all are OB’s and all are modern OB’s presented in the bottle pictured. Earlier we had the “Founder’s Reserve” (yes a NAS), a “Virgin Oak” (yes, another NAS) and finally one with an age statement, the wonderful 15yo “Sherry Cask Matured”. This time around a 16yo “Vintage 1995” a.k.a. “Batch No. 10”. As the label states, this is from the very last production prior to the shut down of the distillery in October 1995. The label doesn’t say what happened next, but a quick dive in the Whisky history books reveals that the after the closure the Japanese owners (Suntory) tried to sell off the distillery. This failed and production was resumed again in June 1997. 1995-1997, could be worse, no mayor changes (apart from halting the use of the malting floor), so I guess after the restart the Whisky should have been more or less the same. See how marketing works? By the way, Suntory is still the owner (in the form of Beam Suntory now).

Color: Pale gold.

Nose: Malty and creamy. Lots of vanilla ice cream and some creamy pudding aroma’s. Initially, nice, friendly and appetizing. Mocha and soft vanilla-like oak. Wet biscuits, cereal-like and dust. Old books in a dry warm wind. Damp earthen warehouse floor. If you let this stand for a while, more spicy wood aroma’s prop up, helped along with some potent alcohol. Infused wood. Deeper down a more meaty bit, some cold gravy. Distant yellow fruits, ripe, aromatic yet not sweet smelling. Distant sweetness. Still this has a woody backbone to it all, with charcoal as well as a breath of fresh air. Sort of a combination of modern sharpness and some older style American oak aroma’s. Very fragrant. There is a lot coming out of my glass. After some more breathing, more of the fruits emerge, making for a very pleasant nose.

Taste: Big explosion of flavour with the first sip. Spicy, prickly, it almost seems carbonated. Hot going down, with already a vegetable bitter note, right upfront. Initially some fruity syrupy sweetness as well. It seems my wind pipe reveals some paper and bitter wood (this strengthens the gravy bit hidden deep down in the nose). Yes, dry, yet less dusty but more like vanilla powder. These must have been very active casks, because a lot of the mouthfeel is wood and there is a plethora of bitter notes in here as well, making this less of an any-occasion Whisky. Bitterness dominates the otherwise waxy finish and the aftertaste as well. Now we know what dominates this Whisky, it still is a fruity one as well.

Definitely a wood driven and somewhat bitter Glen Garioch. Lots of wood notes and lots of shades of bitterness, although non of them are really overpowering, yet it does makes me wonder if this wasn’t kept in the casks too long. It is here, yet it is also do-able. However do-able is not why we sip Whisky now do we? So again an anorak-y Whisky. Very good, but please read the manual, because again, this is not for everyone. I liked it quite a bit, with some reservation about the bitter notes. I’m not regretting buying it, but I wouldn’t buy another one anytime soon. The Tormore of the previous review is friendlier and definitely more approachable then this Geerie, even though I said that one wasn’t for everyone as well…

Points: 85

This review has been written from a nearly empty bottle. I feel like the many different bitter notes evolved a bit after extensive breathing. Initially it wasn’t as bitter as it was now.

Tormore “Batch 2” (51.4%, That Boutique-y Whisky Company, 103 bottles, 50 cl)

Third Boutique-y bottling on these pages, yet the first one that is not an Arran. Earlier I reviewed Arran batch #3 and Arran batch #4. When writing about batch #3, I completely forgot I earlier had done a review of Batch #4, so when that one popped up whilst scrolling through my own pages, it gave me quite a scare, because both labels are the same. As I mentioned before, I neglected Arran for a long time and especially after tasting batch #3, it brought Arran back for me. This time around however a Boutique-y Tormore. Tormore is a beautiful distillery with a very typical output. The word “metallic” often pops up when people taste Tormore. One of my first encounters with Tormore was a 13yo Cadenheads bottling from 1997 (distilled 1984). It was industrial all right, maybe even metallic, but I also became an immediate fan. It’s quirky and expressive, unique and definitely not for everyone, but I really liked its stand-offish character, so I always look at Tormore with great interest and a smile. In comes this Boutique-y expression I got from an auction site. Love the looks, and 50 cl is a nice volume (unless you really, really like it). The bottle looks cute in my hand. Love the humour and the label, not a fan of the lack of information though.

Colour: White Wine, pale gold.

Nose: Very funky, malty, grassy and fatty American oak. Waxy and also quite sweet smelling, fruity yet at the same time also quite floral. One reads a lot about banana on the nose, which I often don’t get actually, but in this one, there is certainly banana here all right. Very fruity overall, overripe fruit. A lot of peach, but only after the first sip. All the wood influence is quite soft and definitely present. Very waxy now, gravy, very fragrant, it leaps out of my glass. Big one and quite unique alright, that’s Tormore for you! Not aggressive at all though, no, this is actually a friendly and well-balanced Tormore. Excellent American oak, quite active indeed. Vanilla, with dark chocolate, dusty and it smells somewhat organic, almost human, which is quite a surprise after all those “metallic” Tormores. This one smells rather “classic”. Good and unique spirit matured in a good American oak cask. Smells fantastic.

Taste: Same here, very fruity initially and the wax is even slightly more prominent. Some bitterness to the back bone and quite hot going down. Waxy, sweet wood. Green yes, but the mix of herbs are not your favourite most liked herbs and dare I say that some of the overripe fruit may have passed the overripe stage altogether. All of this framed by some bitter wood with quite some staying power. Unique? Yes! Quite nutty with added licorice to the back bone. The licorice-note comes from the wood. Greenish, fresh almonds, yet also some hints of paper and cardboard. Here a more industrial feel pops up which is normal for Tormore, but it doesn’t match the nose entirely. This one strips the throat cavity of any fat, so it is somewhat harsh going down. Not your fatty vanilla, creamy feel when swallowing, so you’d better be prepared for that. The nose is definitely the more likeable of the two. Yet metallic it is not. The bitterness is more prominent in the finish and even more so in the aftertaste.

After the very promising nose, on the palate this is a somewhat more difficult puppy. Definitely not one for casual drinking. Tormore in general is not an easy one. I guess this is one for anoraks as well. But oh boy, is this an unique profile, and if you manage to “click” with it, you’re definitely in for a kick.

Points: 86

Since this is quite an unique offering, I’m sure this is not for everyone. For some of you this might seem to be a high score. For me this is a great trip though. Yet it suits the 50 cl format though.

Glenburgie 20yo 1998/2019 (58.6%, Elixir Distillers, The Single Malts of Scotland, Hogshead #751403, 246 bottles)

Glenburgie is one of those Malts with a profile that just suits me well. Most of it is used for blending, and not a lot of official bottlings exist. The owners are definitely not putting it in the spotlight I personally feel it deserves. Sure, the quality is there, but maybe Glenburgie is just too unknown to the general public and therefore hard to market. There are two bottlings released under the Ballantines label, a 15yo “Ballantine’s series no. 001” and a 18yo “Ballantine’s series no. 001”. Both are bottled at a whopping 40% ABV, so definitely targeted at the (adventurous) Ballantine’s drinker. For a Single Malt, 40% ABV was very nice in the seventies and before, but is not very 21st century if you ask me. Both bottlings seem rather obsolete (apart for the group mentioned earlier). I guess Pernod Ricard (Chivas Bros.), the owners, like, for instance, Aberlour a lot more. That “brand” definitely receives a lot more love from the company. Rightly so, it is an excellent Single Malt (but so is Glenburgie). The blend where most of Glenburgie goes into, is obviously Ballantine’s but also Old Smuggler and Teacher’s contain a lot of Glenburgie. For Anoraks there are some pretty rare 500 ml single cask bottlings or Distillery Reserve’s. Nope, If we want to have a serious taste and get a feel for Glenburgie, we are yet again saved by the ever so important independent bottlers (all hail to them all!), who luckily are able to put out Glenburgie for you and I to enjoy. In this case in comes Elixir Distillers of London…

Color: White Wine.

Nose: Creamy and lemony, yet also dusty and waxy. Soft mocha and slightly funky. Initially quite closed and smells a little bit dull, dusty and something like a wood shop. Old sawdust though, not the fresh stuff, that has been lying around for quite some time. Trodden down. Perfumy, and somewhat elegant, yet different than the elegance of the Macduff 10yo from the previous review. Actually typical for a refill hogshead. I expected more of a fruity nose to be honest. Slightly smoky nose, ever so slightly, maybe this comes from the toasted insides of the cask. Some dry kitchen spices come next, as well as some honey, hints of pine and fresh rain. Still closed, yet some well balanced beautiful details come up from the liquid. It seems a bit shy.

Taste: Quite sweet on entry and definitely way more fruity than the nose. Again some smoke and toasty bits, as well as some cannabis I sometimes also get in Bunnahabhain. This, plus the detailed nose, make the Whisky special. Quite tasty, even at this ABV. Sure, it is a bit hot going down, but the onset and the body are very nice. Where the nose was a bit closed, no problem like that here. Tastes open and ready to please you, me, us, the drinker(s). The cannabis bit returns in the finish where the aftertaste shows us some more of the wood the cask was made of. The roof of my mouth clearly shows this is a high ABV Malt, something that didn’t come to mind when tasting it initially. By the way, ripe, sweet yellow fruits also pop up in the aftertaste. The finish, as well as the aftertaste are the best traits of this Malt. When this is bottle is gone (and it almost is), I’m going to miss it. Glenburgie spirit is wonderful, both in Ex-Sherry and Ex-Bourbon casks. I have a soft spot for it.

I have said it before and I am going to say it again. This is yet another Whisky that really needed (a lot of) time to breathe. The second half of the bottle was better than the first half. A very laid back Malt, or so it seemed just by smelling it. Still, having spent some time with this in my glass, I do have a late found fondness for this Glenburgie. I like Glenburgie so I was a bit disappointed with this one at first. Not so much now, yet I think it is a bit of a shame that it wasn’t as good as it is now, from the moment you open the bottle. If decanting would work for a Whisky, this would be one to experiment with. The beauty of this one is also in the details, because it has those almost hidden elements that make it special. So, good for analysing and anoraks, not so much for casual sipping. It is certainly not an easy one. If you are new to Single Malt Whisky and you have this, keep it, don’t open it all to soon.

Points: 90

MacDuff 10yo 2000/2010 (56.5%, The Creative Whisky Co, The Exclusive Malts, First Fill Sherry Butt #3525)

Just like the Dailuaine from the previous review, Macduff is featured quite some times on Master Quill already, twice in 2012 and twice in 2014. That’s certainly a while back. What also isn’t new on these pages is a Whisky featured from David Stirk’s old company: The Creative Whisky Company. Earlier I tried a 20yo Bunnahabhain and much later a quite quaffable 10 yo Girvan and not so long ago a very good 14yo Highland Park, I had to work hard for to get the most out if it. The Bunnahabhain was bottled in 2011, the last two mentioned offerings bottled somewhere around 2017.

This time we’ll have a look at a 10 yo Macduff distilled in 2000, and bottled in 2010, in a different style bottle than the Girvan and Highland Park yet the same as the Bunnahabhain. The bottle I bought is an example with an over-glued back label. The original back label mentions that the Whisky was selected by our Belgian friends of The Bonding Dram (200 bottles for them) and that this Whisky shows what can happen when a great Malt Spirit is put in an excellent Sherry cask. The rest of the cask was bottled probably at the same time, with some of them (or the rest of them) with the over-glued label. The label also learns us that the bird on the label is a Eurasian Jay (Vlaamse Gaai, a bird common to Belgium). See the bottle on the right here. The over-glued label that’s on the bottle I have, mentions non of this all, not even what kind of bird is on its label, yet it does mention that Macduff produces a strong Spirit used in major Blends. From my label we can also find out that the Sherry Butt is a First Fill, hardly a surprise looking at the colour of this Whisky. David would never tamper with his Whisky, so the colour does say something in this case. The label promised that the Whisky will have rich stewed fruits, raisins and plums and sweet syrupy-flavours. Knowing The Bonding Dram (a very knowledgeable bunch) as well as David (an even more knowledgeable man), I’m sure I will be in for a treat with this one! (I know I am, I’ve had this one several times before…).

Color: dark orange, almost brown.

Nose: Soft and sometimes a bit harsh at the same time. Soft fruits with vanilla and some harsh fresh oak. Harsh might be a slightly too big of a word to describe what I am smelling here. Smells very tasty and red fruity. Dusty and chilly fruits still in the cold shop. Cold cooked vegetables, cold dishwater, Rhum Agricole (closest to J.M from Martinique). In a way also a bit floral, like a nice floral perfume in a fine detergent. Well kept in check, so not a problem (I know, it may sound horrible, but believe me it isn’t). It’s not soapy. Sometimes even hints of honey, pine, horseradish and cola. Well masked wood spice. Sometimes animalesk and sometimes farmy. How’s that for complexity. What a wonderful combination. The wood smells like pencil shavings and after a while more green and leafy. After this, whiffs of fresh air. Starts to smell somewhat elegant after breathing. A rich and wonderful nose. Definitely more special than a hard hitting all-overpowering Sherry monster. Quality stuff this one, with amazing complexity.

Taste: Big, sweet and sour. Tasty! Big, yet also lively and fresh. Fruity cherries, black coal and some tar (woody bitterness). Chewy (not always though, it seemed thinner when tasted late in the evening) and some late, mouthwatering, spicy and prickly bits with just enough oaky bitterness. A good kind of bitterness. Tarry and toasted oak. Unlit cigarette tobacco. Slightly minty feel. Ever so slightly soapy, masked well by dark syrupy fruit. This is a big one, but not a monster. This is, as well as the nose is, and the whole of the Whisky, very well balanced. Very nice spirit and a very nice cask did come together in this one. This is better than many 10yo Whiskies from first fill Oloroso Sherry casks that see the light of day these days. Whiskies that taste like they only are used to season the cask for use as a refill, where the refill is more important than the first fill. This one tastes fantastic. It just stays on the right side of being over the top. With some notes it hints at the past, yet in an entirely different way than the old skoolness of Dailuaine 16yo and Strathisla 25yo mentioned in the previous review.

By the way, I mentioned the knowledge of David in the intro. He has a new book out, and if you are interested in independent bottlers please check it out, since it is about… well… independent bottlers (he should know, he is one). Here is a link, but there are many others that are selling his crowdfunded book as well.

I originally planned to compare this one to the Flora and Fauna Dailuaine 16yo of the previous review, still some drops left in that one, but this wouldn’t work, both are so different and actually incomparable. The difference in ABV’s also wouldn’t help. As a whole, both Whiskies are entirely different. Yet again the Macduff is a whisky that smells really good but tasted even better. Dirt cheap when it came out, now worth looking for at an auction.

Points: 89

Dailuaine 16yo “Flora & Fauna” (43%, OB, L5042CR000, Circa 2005)

I feel that nothing from the Flora & Fauna series will ever surpass the legendary Mortlach 16yo. But hey, we can never be sure, so we have to regularly test this “feeling”. An interesting journey all by itself. Apart from the aforementioned Mortlach, one can also find reviews of Teaninich 10yo and two, yes, two batches of the Benrinnes 15yo here at Master Quill. One from 2001 and one from 2008. The two Benrinnes reviews showed that there can be substantial batch variation within this series. Both similar yet one “bigger” than the other. From memory, I also compared once, head to head, two different batches of Blair Athol 12yo (both batches some ten years apart) that also had a staggering difference of 10 points. Both essentially different from one another.

Mortlach, Benrinnnes, Dailuaine and Blair Athol are the most prominently Sherried expressions within the Flora & Fauna series, and the Teaninich, in comparison, was a very light (probably Bourbon only) offering and to be honest quite underwhelming as well. Mind you, I have a soft spot for Teaninich, just not this particular Flora and Fauna bottling. Alas. But hey, it might only just be a lesser batch. Considering the cost, and being official bottlings, the Flora and Fauna series are quite popular with seasoned Whisky aficionado’s. I’m not even sure the general public even knows what the Flora and Fauna series is. If you want to know a bit more of its history, please have a look at the intro of the Teaninich review.

Color: Copper brown.

Nose: Very, very old skool Sherry bottling, instant reminder of, for instance, the Gordon & MacPhail Strathisla 25yo I reviewed earlier and also an old skool Sherry bottling (@ 40% ABV). Mind you, that Strathisla scored 94 Points in the end, so that’s saying something. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves, we all know that ones Whisky-experience is more than the nose alone. Beautiful sweaty and funky Sherried Whisky with chocolate powder, tar and coal dust. A true classic nose. I can hardly imagine this was distilled at the end of the eighties, surely there must be some (much) older Whisky in here? Chances are slim though, with such a large general release. Old Sherry, slightly tarry with spicy old toasted wet oak and sweet mocha. Haagsche Hopjes (a Dutch coffee candy, pictured here to the right). Dusty, coal dust, paper dust and hot clear machine oil. Slightly spicy. Old oil-based half dried out paint. Lots of ripe red fruits mixed in with the coal. Tarry even. After all of this, some more wood emerges, still wet and more of the paper note, yet also slightly more modern now. A quality like this from the end of the eighties is in fact possible, the nose of the very first Hazelburn 12yo (Rotation 09/335) is similarly good, as well as its predecessor, the first edition of the Hazelburn 8yo. Reviews of both are already in the works. Maybe all three came from the same sort of casks? What was in these casks previously I wonder. I’m looking at this bottle, and still I can’t believe this smells like it does. Amazing, really. A fresh pour has some farmy elements to it that dissipates very quickly. The only beef I have with this Whisky is that it smells a wee bit too sweet, so I did have some worries about the taste.

Taste: Sweet and very syrupy right out of the gate. Yes the old skool is here too, or is it still my extensive sniffing that does this trick? This syrupy thickness doesn’t have a long life though. It becomes thin quite quickly and some unexpected bitterness emerges. Tarry, licorice and coal, as well as some hot plastic from burning cables. The sweetness does pop up now and again with a new sip taken. Taste wise definitely not as stellar as the nose. Less complex, not that big any more and also somewhat less balanced. But tasty it still is and warming as well. Right now the sweetness is kept in check, but I know from carelessly sipping the first half of the bottle, this Whisky can also be quite sweet. By now its not as sweet as the nose seemed to have promised. Actually the sweetness itself is quite well balanced by now. Strange enough the nose now seems even sweeter than it is on my palate. Especially late in the evening. (Sniffing it, the nose is still stellar, and still evolving a bit). I know, you can’t smell “the sweet”. It has bitter and astringent notes, yet right after these notes seem to dominate, the whisky lets free some creamy vanilla notes as well, which fit the steam punk industrial notes quite nicely. Nice. The finish does let it down a bit, the balance also suffers a bit in the finish. To be honest, they are not the nicest aromas that manage to stay behind the longest. More wood, spice and bitterness. All of a sudden a hint of oaked Chardonnay. Didn’t see that coming.

This one really benefited from extended breathing, the emptier the bottle the better the Whisky became. Even though the taste is definitely less special than the nose, the Whisky is still a cracker. On par with the quality of the Mortlach I would say. I enjoyed both thoroughly, and for the price you pay,,this one can be considered as dirt cheap, whereas the Mortlach is getting more and more expensive on the secondary market with every passing month. Supply (none, the Mortlach F&F is discontinued) and demand (high). I wonder how newer batches of this Dailuaine are (the label has been changed from 2017 onwards). Nice smell from the empty glass as well. Definitely recommended. I wonder if newer batches of Dailuaine manage to maintain the style of this older one. Only time will tell.

Points: 88 points (again)

Arran 16yo 1997/2014 “The Un-Official almost 17th” (52.1%, OB, Private Cask, Sherry Hogshead #1997/525, 270 bottles)

Some 10 years ago, I reviewed the official 16yo (bottled at 46% ABV) and quite liked it. Back then it scored 87 points which is quite a good score. Here we have another 16yo from the distillery itself. The Un-Official almost 17th? Surely they mean The Un-Official almost 17yo? Nevermind. Since the 2013 review, I also came across some reasonable Arran’s but nothing really cached my eye and for me personally Arran slipped into the darkness of oblivion a bit. Fast forward some years and in comes this Arran Batch 3, I reviewed a year ago. That one did the trick of bringing Arran back into the (lime)light again. Batch 3 made me look into Arran again, and in stead of going to the shops, I went for some single cask versions at my favourite German auction. Sherry Hogshead #1997/525 is one of those auction lots…

Color: Copper gold, slightly hazy.

Nose: Nutty Sherry. Freshly made alcoholic toffee or runny caramel used for ice-cream. Toffee backed up by super ripe yellow fruits and still green, starting to become yellow, banana’s. So not really unripe banana’s then. Peaches also come to mind a lot. Dusty. Fresh oak. Well balanced, It may be simple (is it?), yet all these aroma’s go together quite well. Also, it smells like it will taste quite sweet and fruity. We’ll see about that later. Hints of polished furniture. Again fruity and sweet smelling. Cocktail cherries. Diluted red fruit syrup. Sometimes a whiff of a more fresh and minty aroma passes by. Come to think of it, this one does have an aura of old skool Sherried Whisky about it, which I quite like. Hmmm, I also got some old skool in Batch 4. More soft, actually very soft wood and some cardboard. Almost no cask toast, I mention this because there can be a lot of this in Sherried Whiskies. More syrup and now a fresh butter note, adding to the balance, because this is a pleasant smelling Whisky. Sometimes a whiff of sea-air and after some extensive sipping, a more friendly and nice floral detergent note pops up, not a really soapy note, which usually is somewhat more negatively perceived (by me). Yup, nice stuff. Very nice indeed.

Taste: Sweet Sherry and vanilla. Apple pastry, very much so. This surprises me a bit, since I didn’t pick up on apples in the nose (and still don’t). Apple compote. Apple beignets, including the dough. Luckily not to sweet. Nutty and waxy. Some wood in the beginning, but only the more astringent bit of it stays behind on my tongue, the rest of the woody notes are soon overpowered by the vanilla and the toffee ice-cream note, as well as the aforementioned fruit and some freshly baked cookies. After a while the astringent bit I just mentioned, turns into something somewhat bitter. Medium bitterness from wood, as well as from some licorice notes. After some proper tasting, and smelling, this does remind me of old skool (making me feel melancholic) Whisky. In the review of Arran 16yo I mentioned the potential Arran has and that I hope it would someday really show it, well here it is. What a wonderful Arran this turned out to be.

Arran seems to me to be a Malt that shows what it’s got right out of the gate. Well balanced and nice, yet less of a layered kind of malt or one with a substantial development in your glass. This one is no exception. It shows you what its got and thus lacking some development and complexity. Nevertheless, what it does have is very good. So I’m not complaining. There is definitely room for instant gratification Malts on my lectern. It might be me again, but for me, the second half of the bottle seemed better than the first half, so again one that needs to breathe a lot. Usually I review a Whisky I own myself halfway through, this is again a Whisky that went quicker than I thought, so I had to review it before it’s gone. Ain’t that a recommendation for ya!?

This Arran, in a way, seems to be a companion to the Highland Park 14yo I just reviewed. The Highland Park is almost overly complex, whereas this Arran is not. They differ a lot yet also have quite some similarities. Due to the complexity, the Highland Parks scores slightly better, but Arran isn’t any worse. The Highland Park you have to work, this one is as laid back and easy as they come. This Arran will always welcome you with open arms, where the Highland Park is essentially a grumpy git. Arran by now has gained yet another fan. I love the melancholy around this one, reminding me of Whiskies I tasted a long time ago…

Points: 89

Highland Park 14yo 2003 (52.9%, The Creative Whisky Company, The Exclusive Malts, Refill Hogshead #751, 235 bottles)

This Highland Park was a bit hard to review. The rule of thumb is usually, when reviewing a Whisky I have a full bottle off: open a bottle, let it breathe a bit, try it several times and when it’s about half full, (or half empty), review it, A review not only based on the tasting experience when analysing and writing, but also from memory of the first half of the bottle. Well, this bottle has now only 20% left in it and from memory alone, I would have a hard time writing something up, not because I killed off most of my brain cells, no, more because this is a very particular Whisky, one that seems to have an attitude, grumpy if you will. One that needs all your attention, and if not, sod it; “I’m not opening up to you drinker!” “I will keep most of my secrets to myself!” I have no clue how this Whisky really is, after an evening on my couch watching something or reading, thus giving less attention to the Whisky it requires. This was not an instant gratification Malt and I might have told you it is a disappointing Malt. Only when I took it with me to a friends house for a dedicated evening of a lot of great Whiskies and music, thus giving it the attention the Whisky itself feels it deserves, it finally did shine. What a moody piece of work! I could pick a fight with this Highland Park, telling it to behave or grow up or just… (pardon my French).

Color: Light gold (not pale).

Nose: Creamy toffee. Bourbon hogshead alright. Fatty and big. Quite aromatic. Fruity with some nice smoke to it, as well as slightly nutty (oak). Soft bonfire and waxy oak. Right out of the gate it smells quite complex, with a lot of creamy, toffee and caramel notes, but also a lot of ripe yellow fruit notes and on top if this, the smoky bit. A very clean smelling Highland Park, big and aromatic, so clean and in a way also modern. Sweet smelling. Very ripe and sweet white peach. Dried apricots. Pineapple syrup. After a while the soft oak comes forward, smelling almost as if the wood was painted white on the outside, because of the tiny chemical aroma this Whisky has. The small chemical bit smells thus of white paint but also whiffs of moped (warm oil, exhaust fumes) and polyester (probably from inside the saddle of the moped), otherwise clean oak (it still matured in a hogshead) and a wee bit of horseradish and unlit tobacco. All of this is so minutely present, that it only adds to the complexity without putting you off. See how strangely complex this one is? This must be why it does need your full attention. Do you also see what is happening here, I give the damn thing the attention it wants and it gives me all these complex and wonderful big aroma’s in return, however if I carelessly sip it away…nothing much! What a piece of work this is. This one seems to be alive and having a personality. There is just too much (happening) in the nose, and it is just too complex for casual sipping, and if you don’t understand its components, it will tell you off. I guess this is one of those Malts not for novices (yet again). I’ll get back to that later.

Taste: (Heathery) sweet, waxy, nutty and woody and pretty smoky on entry, fatty smoke with again some minor hints of plastics and/or polyester. Creamy fruit, mixed with some woody bitterness that not always pops up. In fact all the chemical bits mentioned above are here, yet not causing any problems. The entry is fantastic. It is not entirely similar to the nose, but seems to build on it, extending it. It is chewy and stays moderately sweet. With enough wood and smoke (and peat) to balance this out. Its certainly prickly on my tongue. White pepper? Apart from the heathery sweetness of the initial taste, this could have been a Talisker. Amazing complexity and a wonderful balance. Also some green notes, like dried out leaves and garden waste in autumn (dry, so the pre-rot phase, although close to it). Since I found the pre-rot here, I now also detect it on the nose. These green notes I mentioned earlier, also show up in the nose, after it showed up in the taste. That’s the workings of your oral cavity for you! Warming, The finish is long, complex and warming, and the aftertaste is an extension of the finish. Great balance! After a while the finish shows some bitterness from the wood paired with some licorice and the tiniest hint of some soapiness on the back of my tongue. The amount of bitterness seems different from day to day and is definitely saying something about the taster and not entirely about the Whisky.

A wonderful piece of work. Complex and of very high quality. Ranking very, very high on the interesting Whiskies list as well. Amazing how this Whisky manages to takes some off-notes (The bitter, the soap, the paint, the polyester and the moped for instance) and turns them around into something nice in the balancing-out-department. You as a consumer better be a skilled and an experienced taster, if not, this most definitely is not for you. It will sense that and will try to piss you off, making you think this is a mediocre and not so nice Whisky. It is not. It’s amazing. It really is. If anything, it might be slightly too sweet in the beginning and slightly too bitter at the end. If you try this on a couch or a reclining seat, you will miss the point. You need to try it sitting upright on a chair at the table, alert, without being distracted, giving it a lot of time, and then, if you’re “lucky” (actually luck has nothing to do with it), and the planets align as well, you will finally get it, like I just did. This one will not stop giving. It’s special stuff, ’nuff said…

Points: 90