Category Archives: 85 Points

Willett Pot Still Reserve (47%, Kentucky Bourbon Distillers, Barrel #4802, 272 bottles)

After all these Scottish peated giants, and since May descended upon us, maybe a good time to change the tune a bit, an intermezzo of sorts. Over we go to the ol’ U.S. of A. Way back in 2015 I already reviewed another single barrel #82028, mentioning I was looking forward to trying another barrel of the same. That one came from a sample I got, and since I liked it, it must have been the reason I bought me one. Well fast forward for more than ten years, and here we are!

First of all, because you see it first, this rather unusual still type bottle, especially when its full, it is quite the spectacle, because let’s be honest, the darker colour of Bourbon in clear glass makes for a killer look. The bottle itself is very nice looking as well, but also highly unpractical, and since the cork is narrow, it tends to dry out more quickly than other corks. Personally I don’t have all that much room on my lectern, nor in other places I might keep some open bottles. This bottle has thus quite the footprint, so I guess when this one is empty, I can replace it with at least two, and maybe even three “normal” bottles, so much space this one takes up. Thinking like that, I will be happy when this one is gone, because of its size.

Willett distillery was founded by Thompson Willett in 1936. Located in Bardstown, Nelson County, Kentucky. The first spirit was put into a barrel only a year later. Not sure when the distillery actually became dormant, but after renovations the distillery was working again by 2012, however the Willett Pot Still Reserve was introduced in 2008 as a single barrel expression, with distillates of one or several other Kentucky distilleries which, as far as I know, are still undisclosed. The Whisky from those barrels was said to be 8 to 10 years old, but again, this has not been confirmed. The Whisky itself is therefore a bit shrouded in mystery, we all love that transparency. In 2015 Willett Pot Still Reserve was turned into a small batch release, which can be seen on the vertical label across the long neck of the bottle. Since Willett is a small outfit, I guess the small batch is also a really small batch, maybe 10 to 15 barrels? Again, shrouded in mystery, move on nothing to see here. Only in 2016 the first bottle of Whisky distilled on Willetts own still was released (Willett Family Estate Bourbon) in a tall more regular looking bottle, similar to those of the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection. Not sure when, and if, Spirit of the Willett finds its way into the Willett Pot Still Reserve (Small Batch).

Color: Orange Brown. Lively.

Nose: Oak, toasted oak and green sappy vegetal oak. Lots of honey. The wood is beautiful in this one. Amazing. Smells tasty and chewy. Old dried out orange skins and crystallized honey. The toasted oak almost smells smoky. Quite waxy and also fruity, dusty and dry with hints of fresh almonds. Creamy with dusty vanilla powder. Old books and fallen dry garden leaves (from trees, not shrubs) in autumn. Sweet liquorice, dust and more virgin oak notes. Small hints of paint and thinner (I don’t get this on every occasion though). Crystallized honey again with toffee/caramels. A very appetizing and classy nose, almost melancholic. Well balanced, I like it a lot. This also works well with fresh air. Sometimes I do get some whiffs that remind me a bit of Rhum Agricole. A nose based on wonderful wood, yet never overpowered by it. Very well balanced.

Taste: Starts a bit thin, with spicy and waxy wood notes and thus quite some oak (and sawdust). Somewhat sweet with an liquorice edge. A bit soapy as well (rye?). Slightly sweet, a sweetness of the more chewy kind, helped along by the spicy and woody backbone, yes with some bitterness as well. Sappy wood style. The Rhum Agricole notes are apparent here right from the start as well. As said, thin, so maybe this suffered a bit of too much dilution with water. After sipping it, the nose shows some more floral notes, (again rye), than before. The taste shows some diluted sweetness in the realm of vanilla, caramel and honey. Yup a sweet and healthy dose of honey. The amount of wood I get, depends on myself and the moment I sip this, especially late in the evening I found more wood, than in the morning, when ones palate is rested and pick up more on other things.

Bourbon prices are soaring these days due to large demand, not in the least by Americans finally proud of their own product and appreciating aged Bourbons some more. Even though this has been reduced to 94 proof, this is a true gem, and very affordable to boot. I understand this might not be for everyone, since it is not an entry level or easy going Bourbon, because it’s quite spicy and woody as well, and the soapy bit in the taste might put some people off. Still this is so good. When I finally found out how good it was, it may have been a bit wonky when freshly openend, this went very fast and again I had to hurry writing this review before it was gone. Recommended, but a little bit less reduction probably would have been a good thing. I guess this has been targeted at a specific target audience, hence the ABV.

Points: 85

Ardbeg April: Ardbeg Smoketrails Manzanilla Edition (46%, OB, Batch No. SP/MZL: 2022/01-ST, 1000 ml)

Lets close off this Ardbeg April and the entire month of April without recycling earlier material, simply because the Ardbeg at hand is not part of the NAS special releases. This 1000 ml bottle is part of a travel retail series called Smoketrails, of which, at the time of writing, there have been three releases. First this Manzanilla Edition in 2022 (Manzanilla Sherry, a pale and dry Fortified Wine from Sanlúcar de Barrameda, Spain), a Côte Rôtie Edition in 2023 (French Red Wine from the Northern Rhône, mostly Syrah and some Viognier) and finally a Napa Valley Edition in 2024 (Red Wine from California USA, Cabernet Sauvignon). Nothing was released (yet) after these three. Maybe the short series got discontinued or maybe sales were slow, and they are waiting to release a new one, only after the old stock sells (out) some more. I really don’t know. Where the special releases are often not very much liked (not all of them anyway), these travel retail litre bottles get even less love from the “discerning” public. Because of this I was a little bit weary diving into this one expecting a bit of a weak Ardbeg.

Manzanilla is a fortified wine similar to a Fino Sherry. It is made in the same way. It ages under flor, which is a cap made of indigenous yeast. This cap protects the ageing Wine from oxidation. Due to the local microclimate (low temperatures and high humidity) Manzanilla ages under a thicker flor, than a Fino Sherry, which results in a fresher and more crisp Sherry. Manzanilla stands for chamomile infusion because it is one of the aroma’s of this Wine. Apart from this, Manzanilla has a savoury and salty flavour. The grapes that can be used for a Manzanilla are Palomino, Pedro Ximénez, Moscatel de Grano Menudo and Moscatel de Alejandría, and these grow on chalky soil, probably the origin of the salty flavour.

Color: Light Gold.

Nose: First whiff is youth, these young Malts often have this milky smell. Ardcore had the same and luckily in both occasions it dissipates quickly, unless you start rolling the Whisky your glass, than it happens all over again, but only for a short while. In this respect Ardcore and Smoketrail share a common marker. After the initial note(s), smoke comes next, as the name already promised us, and as is often the case with Islay Whiskies, smoke is never far away. Notes of burnt (news)paper. Now it also shows a more spicy (and soapy) feel to it. The “soap” adds to the whole. It’s not a problem. Also the wood starts to play its role, and I do like the wood in this one. Slightly mineral and quite pleasant overall. Definitely not very complex. However, I do like what I smell. So far so good. All in all, this has a very likeable, friendly and well balanced nose.

Taste: What can I say, youth is here as well, like in the nose. Milky again (initially), with smoke and a lot of the now easily recognizable liquorice notes, most, if not all, Ardbeg April whiskies seem to have. Nice sweetness, which fits this profile. The liquorice also develops a sort of peppery edge to it, again, very nice. This has more to offer than people led me on to believe beforehand. Definitely young, and maybe even simple and again slightly soapy, but also very, very drinkable, it tastes like a 43% ABV Whisky, kind of soft so that’s nice. Sweetish, with sometimes a rather artificial winegum kind of note to it. But the sweetness in the taste is well balanced between it and the wood and the liquorice. I guess the occasional wine gum note, as well as a particular part of the spiciness comes from the Manzanilla, otherwise this is definitely not an Ardbeg that is dominated by the Sherry, not at all. The Manzanilla is used with taste, or not a lot is used at all.

Based on comments from my surroundings, this was supposed not to be all that good, but actually, it might be simple, but there is also nothing wrong with it. No off notes whatsoever, and apart from that it has some nice aroma’s to give. This is very affordable and for that you get a Whisky that is young, but also not un-finished. It never feels like something that has been bottled too early, and its a litre bottle to boot. I say go for it! A valid option if you find all those NAS-ers too overpriced.

Points: 85

Batch No. SP/MZL: 2022/01-ST:

  • SP = Spain
  • MZL = Manzanilla
  • 2022 = Year of release
  • 01-ST = First edition of Smoketrails

Ardbeg April: Ardbeg Spectacular (46%, OB, Port Wine Casks & Bourbon Barrels, 2023)

For this third instalment of Ardbeg April, we can go green and totally sustainable, because in the previous review there is a sentence that I can recycle and expand upon with every review of an Ardbeg NAS special release, so here is the updated sentence: “A lot of Ardbeg special releases are different in many different ways. For instance, some of the ones (I previously reviewed) use casks that previously held different kinds of liquids, like fortified Wines of the Pedro Ximénez (Spain) or Marsala (Sicily) kind, probably anything other than Whisky matured in ex-Bourbon casks. Some have a more out of the box idea behind them, like BBQ casks (!), double charred casks, casks with toasted virgin oak lids (funny business with casks) or using a high density mash (funny business during production)”. Obviously there are more expressions, and the real list is much longer. All of the above are experiments from the mad professor Dr. B. Lumsden. Ardbeg Spectacular falls into the first category, since it is a blend of Whisky matured in Bourbon barrels as well as Whisky matured in Port casks. Port is a fortified Wine, from, you guessed it, Portugal. Bottled on November 14th 2023 and November 15th & 16th 2023, (for Feis Ile 2024). The back label of the bottling runs on the 15th and 16th have Shorty in the top right corner, whereas those bottled on the 14th have not. Shortie is Ardbeg’s Jack Russel Terrier pictured above, here on his official portrait.

Color: Light gold, without even the slightest pink hue.

Nose: Smoky, dusty and only mere hints of anything Wine like (apart from a hardly noticeable funky sulphur going on, matches). Smoky sharpness with soft and warming bonfire notes along with some minty notes. The sharpness you smell in the streets walking in the snow, and people burning wood in the fireplace. Mocha and milk chocolate. The whole much softer than Smokiverse. It seems to me these recent (modern?) Ardbegs are more based on smoke than peat. Sure the peat is never far away, but it seems to be a bit turned down in the mix. (Remember Lars Ulrich turning down Jason Newsted in the mix. “Turn him down until you can barely hear him, and then turn him down some more”). So, toned down peat, not very earthy and hints of burning newspaper. Still not a lot of Port like candy, yet there is some (I guess). Not a lot of red fruits in general. Funny enough, towards the finish I do pick up on some well dried orange skin. Well dried, so without the acidic bit. Also some fresh oak, slightly more peat and iodine. Should I again mention the marketing department? Why not, so here we go again (briefly). It seems to me they read somewhere that Port casks were used and came up with the “Spectacular” narrative. Based on the nose alone, let’s say, to cut the story short, not a lot of Port-like aromas can be found. But hey, I still have to taste it. I do have some humongous déjà vu right now, there seem to be some similarities in the construction and marketing between Spectacular and Smokiverse. So I now wonder, will this be the another big gulper? I should trademark this, oh great it already is, bummer.

Taste: On entry quite thin with the same liquorice notes Smokiverse has, just somewhat less of it. Barley with a more milky spirit, which makes me believe this is overall a younger Whisky than Smokiverse. Looking at the two initially it’s like both are very similar with the only difference being that spectacular saw one or two Port pipes. If there were more, I’m sure they are refills, and the heavy mash might be a difference, which also didn’t dominate in Smokiverse. The Port didn’t impair a lot of sweetness. The sweetness this has is more of the toffee kind, than it is fruity. However, after some extensive breathing, they start to differ more. Spectacular gains more wood, with a slightly bitter edge, some tar and a more powdery feel and finally some more (thin) red fruity notes, complete with some red fruit acidity. Although hardly noticeable, I’m now pretty sure the Port used must have been of the Vintage kind (red), since the back of my tongue picks up on some tannin’s. Also the smoke in the nose becomes more “tasty” with an added dimension from what seems to be cigarette smoke). A very interesting development. Dare I say it? Can I, can I? Yes, this is yet another big gulper, with bigger gulps this gains in complexity and overall body, remember the thin entry? This has been remedied by the bigger gulp.

Based on the colour (which is a very dangerous assumption), but also on experience (am I experienced?), it seems to me not a lot of Port casks found their way into the final product. A very understandable decision, since Port can easily overpower, giving the Whisky a sweet candy like taste.

I might seem highly critical of these NAS Ardbegs, but again, the nose of this is very good, but the taste stays behind a bit, also it seems to me to be somewhat less balanced. I did like Smokiverse and most of the others more, but the drinkability of Spectacular is a redeeming factor. These NAS-ers are nice additions across the board, but for what they are, maybe somewhat overpriced. The  higher proof standard bottlings Uigeadail an Corryvreckan are very reasonably priced, and maybe therefore the special NAS releases are getting some slack when they are compared to those. And to finish things off, no mention whatsoever about the kind of Port these casks held before. Based on the colour of the Whisky I would say White Port since it totally lacks the pink hue Red Port impairs. Still Red Port seems to be more likely, why would there otherwise be so much red used on the packaging? Confusing.

Points: 85

Benromach Contrasts: Cara Gold Malt 11yo 2010/2022 (46%, OB, First Fill Bourbon Barrels, 20/01/22)

I almost forgot to write this review, because I though I’d already done it. Here we have the first Benromach on these pages after they revamped the look in to this slightly bulkier glass bottle, more straightforward cardboard box (easier to store) and last but not least the usage of the colour red. I was a bit hesitant at first because I really liked the copper they used in the previous package, but the red stands out, looks fresh, smart and traditional. So I do like the new look a lot now, and love having them around. If this one’s empty, I’ll probably replace it with another (red) Benromach. Most likely another one from the contrasts series, since it offers interesting takes on Malt. Here it is because of the usage of Cara Gold barley.

Most Benromachs that are on the market now are fairly young, sure there are some older bottlings like the 15yo and the 21yo, which are different yet not necessarily better. The Whisky at hand is 11yo and a nice choice for starting a flight of Whiskies or as a casual sipper. Not expensive and an honest pour. Benromach produces a heavier more meaty spirit, often slightly peated and sits well with knowledgeable anoraky aficionados, you know who you are, and since you are reading this, you’re probably one of them. This particular offering is partly made with Whisky made from Cara Gold barley as well as the normal Benromach lightly peated malt, both matured in first fill Bourbon barrels.

Color: Straw.

Nose: Sweet barley first, very appealing and very aromatic. Clean, fresh, fruity and malty with malt sugars and a nice layer of dust and paper-like aroma’s adding to the whole. Nice fresh wood tones, but nothing overpowering or off. Straightforward without any frills. Candied wood and candied yellow fruit, with hints of sweet smelling smoke, as well as some licorice. Clean and modern, although some yesteryear comes through as well. More wood (perfumed, highly aromatic) and wax with ripe yellow fruits. The label claims tropical notes, and sure enough… My perception of the fruit depends on the moment I’m smelling this. The first time around I wasn’t all too sure about the fruitiness, but the second time around, yes, here it is. I recently recovered from a nasty variant of the flu, and now that the nose is working again, I certainly pick up more on the fruit now! I’m very pleased with this Benromach. It smells very nice, accessible, balanced and its very aromatic and appealing. Well made, wonderful stuff and very affordable as well. After smelling this on many occasions over time, the fruity bit does wear off if you keep this for a while in your glass, focussing on the dusty and woody notes. Still soft and friendly though.

Taste: On entry, sweet smoke and sweet licorice. More subdued fruits. Candied Barley. You could smell it already, but it is most welcome tasting it. 46% ABV is a very nice drinking strength, definitely better, for modern Malts, than 40% or 43% ABV. Back in the day 40% ABV worked well, think of very old Gordon & MacPhail bottlings, like early Connoisseurs Choice bottlings (brown label, map label etc.) Yet Malts from this century definitely need a higher strength, higher than 43% if you ask me. Sweet, woody, spicy, somewhat bitter and slightly fruity (less so than in the nose). Tropical, well maybe. The wood has more to say here than it did on the nose. So more wood, slightly harsh even and showing some bitterness. The smoke is here as well and in the triangle between the wood, the smoke and the bitterness, it does take away a bit from the balance of the palate. A new sip with a fruity start masks the bitter bit for a moment. The finish is not very long and not a lot of it carries over into the aftertaste. But almost all you get is good (it turns out the bitterness has the longest staying power). No off notes. A very pleasant, fairly simple (it doesn’t develop a lot) and affordable dram. There is some diluted vanilla present, proving the maturation on (first fill) American oak. By the way, due to the bitter note this has, it isn’t entirely a casual sipper. Good, but I preferred the nose over the palate.

By itself a (partial) Cara Gold offering isn’t saying very much, it would be really interesting to have several Benromach bottlings, like this one, made with different barley varieties, open at the same time, to be able to compare them to each other. I checked my stash, but there isn’t another one at hand. A bere barley version would be nice, come to think of it, because bottlings like this remind me of the rebooted Springbank Local Barley series, where the Bere Barley version bottled in 2017 is my favourite. Yes I often prefer it over the 16yo and the dark 10yo. Sure the 16yo and the dark 10yo are great and definitely stellar as well, but the 11yo from 2017 is so good! Don’t be fooled by higher numbers or the colour of Whisky! Final remark, this particular Benromach worked best for me in a small tulip glass, a narrow, long stemmed Riedel for instance as opposed to a bigger glass, like the Holmegaard Perfection Spirit Glass. Both are very good, yet different. Good glassware always shows you more sides of the Whisky you’re drinking, so I do recommend to invest in good and several different pieces of glassware. It makes exploring your dram a lot more fun!

Points: 85

Paul John (59.2%, OB, Single Cask #4914, for Germany, Peated, 138 bottles, 2017)

For a long time now I have been opening two Paul John bottles at once. One peated and one unpeated, once a mix of both. Very often single cask offerings, simply because they interest me the most and beauty lies in the details. As far as know, all the single cask offerings I came across are ex-Bourbon casks, so no Sherry or Port stuff here. As many aficionados or anoraks know, Paul John appeared on my radar because of the wonderful tornado that is Shilton Alameida, currently of Tel Aviv outfit Milk & Honey. If you ever visit a good Whisky Festival go over and visit Shilton! Paul John does not seem to bottle a lot of single casks anymore, so most of the reviews that will appear on these pages in the future are bottles from my stash. These older single cask offerings will disappear more and more from retail shelves although they still do appear in auctions with decent hammer prices. Decent from the buyers perspective that is.

I’ve had plenty of Paul Johns open, and thus Paul John is no scarcity on these pages, with even several independent offerings from Malts of Scotland and Cadenheads. However the focus now lies on Officially released Single Casks and as has been the case earlier, I will review one peated and one unpeated expression. Until now, three unpeated OB expressions have been reviewed earlier (scores between brackets): cask #1444 (89), cask #1906 (87) and cask #1051 (84). Two peated OB expressions have been reviewed earlier: cask #745 (89) and cask #777 (90). As can be seen the peated expressions right now seem to be “better” than the unpeated ones. So lets see how the next pair will turn out. Let’s start with the peated expression: cask #4914.

Color: light, middle gold.

Nose: Initially quite malty, with fatty, smoky vegetal notes of peat. Clean and smoky, bonfire style. Light (and deep), yet also very balanced, fragrant and laid back. Ever so slightly meaty, more gravy-like actually. Slightly fruity with hints of warm plastic and distant vanilla. Soft wood and fresh almonds. Pencil shavings later on in the mix, and I might add, these are the shavings of a very old pencil. Its warming, fresh and clean at the same time. The nose has a pudding-like quality to it and is actually very nice, not raw or harsh in any way, nor is the smoke sharp. If the taste is anything like the nose is we’ll have yet another peated winner from Paul John. Its almost like a breath of fresh air. Seaside, a strong and windy day kind-a fresh air, mixed in with some minty notes and horse radish, that’s how fresh this smells. This smells different from all other Paul Johns I had before. Much cleaner, and this time around, when sniffed “blind”, I probably wouldn’t have guessed this is Indian Whisky. I struggle to find the six-row barley in this one, its there, but less apparent than in most other ones. Still an amazing Whisky considering it still must be a young spirit, although we know by now how ageing works in the Goan climate.

Taste: Quite an unexpected start after smelling this one for a while. It starts sweet and nothing in the nose prepared me for that. Sweet and fruity and the almonds from the nose are present as well. First sip is very warming going down. Sweet with vanilla and slightly bitter wood. Very tasty, yet also a bit thin and a lot less complex than the nose was. The balance seems slightly off towards the finish, since not everything you taste seems to fit together perfectly. The wood becomes more paper-like, as well as slightly acidic, but not in a fruity way at all. It’s the acid you get from oak. You can almost smell this acidity in freshly cut oak. So the start and most of the body are more than OK, it’s the finish and especially the aftertaste where things start to go slightly wrong. It is layered, but in this case the layers won’t stick to each other. A sort of unpleasant tension is happening between the layers. I have plastic in the finish, and if I smell it right after that, the nose shows this plastic edge as well. Plastic is not uncommon for Paul John, but it usually isn’t a problem. It is actually a bit of a shame the palate can’t keep up with the nose, especially since the nose promised so much, and this is not even a heavy hitter, so go figure. Hey don’t get me wrong, this is still a tasty Whisky, but it certainly does have its flaws. The wood is slightly too bitter, and it goes downhill in the finish and the aftertaste. It loses its sweetness and fruitiness, to be replaced by acidic wood. Easy to pick up on when one’s somewhat experienced with Paul John.

As luck would have it, I still had a sample lying around from cask #745, the liquid of which is quite a bit darker, way more creamy and pleasant and way more balanced. Yeah, cask #745 is really good stuff. Based an a quick comparison on the nose, cask #745 is the clear winner. It has a lot more going on for it. It’s quite a big difference as well for two bottles you would expect to be similar. To sum things up, not all single casks are created equal. If you come across one, you might want to pass up on unpeated cask #1051 and thus this peated cask #4914, both are sub-par compared to the rest, yet still not bad. On the palate, cask #745 is also much better, bigger and way more balanced. The peat is different and more special as well. It also has some off-notes, but these work well with in stead of working against the Whisky, and only adds to the experience.

Do I regret getting #4914? No, not at all. After a few of those single casks, one might think all are quite similar and also might get a bit boring. However cask #4914 is still a good one, and trying it is still a great experience because of the different feel it has, and it also shows me how good #745 really is. By the way, cask #745 also has the same plastic note as cask #4914, and is much better. See, off-notes aren’t necessarily bad, they can work. This review has again been quite educational, and when these two bottles are gone, I will more than happily replace them with two other single casks, one peated and one unpeated. I guess the 89 points for cask #745 still stand, although 90 points would feel good as well.

Points: 85

Ailsa Bay Release 1.2 Sweet Smoke (48.9%, OB, 022 PPPM, 019 SPPM, 2018)

“No other Malt is made with this much science” as said by Stuart Watts, Distillery Manager. Well that’s a first. Single Malt Whisky used to surround itself with romanticism, traditionality and age statements, with people making the stuff, oozing with skills passed on from generation to generation to generation. In the old days it was all handy work and thus skill, so if a Whisky was good it was really excellent, yet also some absolute misses occurred. Today, all seems to be computer controlled and science driven. Good for overall quality, and obviously not forgetting about getting the highest yield from the barley as possible. It also seems that the highs of yesteryear aren’t really there anymore, and I haven’t really encountered any terrible misses as well. So, we now live in a different, flattened out, era, or so it seems.

Ailsa Bay opened with 8 stills in 2007 and is owned by William Grant & Sons, a company we better know as the owners of Glenfiddich and The Balvenie, as well as Kininvie and the Girvan grain distillery. Already in 2013 the distillery was expanded greatly with another 8 stills, all 16 stills similar to that of The Balvenie. The condensers of one pair of stills are made of stainless steel, to make it possible to have more sulfur in the spirit. Usually distillers want to avoid sulfur, that’s why copper is used. Just like Kininvie before it, Ailsa Bay was needed to provide Single Malt Whisky for the many Blends of William Grant & Sons, since the output of Glenfiddich and especially The Balvenie is more and more used for Single Malt alone. Hence commissioning stills in the style of The Balvenie. In 2016 the original Ailsa Bay was released as a Single Malt (021 PPPM and 011 SPPM) and the one we are about to review was the second release from 2018 and that’s more or less it, nothing more has been released as Ailsa Bay. Sure William Grant & Sons also released Ailsa Bay Whisky as Aerstone in 2018 (a land cask version and a sea cask version), dirt cheap and bottled at 40%. Not particularly in a hurry to buy those though, and there are also a few independents that have some Ailsa Bay, often tea-spooned, hence some fantasy names as Ardmillan, Dalrymple and Drumblade. Maybe not entirely fantasy, probably names of hill, water sources etc. etc.

Color: Light Gold.

Nose: Sweet, funky, perfumy, vegetal peat. Wood fire in winter. Cozy and appetizing peat combined with an acidic (almost fruity) note. Quite some smoke as well. Tiny hint of lemon dishwater liquid. This is a good and rather modern smelling peat smell due to the combination of peat with wood fire. Very clean and of medium sharpness, due to the smoky bit. For me peat is usually a more rounded out and earthy smell, and smoke is usually a bit sharper. Nice fresh oak and sandalwood smell come next, as well as a more fire-like a garden bonfire. More vegetal and on the nose definitely more about peat and smoke than it is sweet. If you smell this one carefully, there is also a floral bit (and in my mind also a salty bit), yet not like fresh flowers, more like flowers in peat, if this was possible obviously, without them rotting away to be a part of peat. This is the first Ailsa Bay I’ve had, but based on the nose alone, I’m impressed. It feels like A.I. managed to produce this Whisky, a feeling based on the “science” statement on the label. After a while the peat is still here, softer and more earthy, and the slight sharpness of the smoke dissipated to leave room for a more, sweeter apple compote-like smell as well as some dry, salty and smoked meat. Hints of plastic anyone? Yes even though peaty, this is an elegant and well made Whisky, at least the nose is great, lets have a taste to confirm my suspicion.

Taste: It starts sweet and chewy, but the sweetness, combined right out of the gate with peat, and definitely also with some smoke and acidic fruit. Not apples though as on the nose. Chewy at first (toffee and caramel, check), yet also turning a bit thin. Warming going down. Sappy woody bitterness, wood and smoke. However the perception of this bitterness depends on the moment, and the taster. The second time around, tasting this for this review, I wasn’t picking up as much bitterness as I did the first time. Alas we people are faulty, subjective. I expected the sweetness to be more fruit-like, but it resembled sugar diluted in warm water more. That one wasn’t all that complex as well, but it did show great balance. Hints of mint. Some diluted citrussy and pear-like aromas emerge, hindered a bit by these bitter notes on the side of my tongue. From the wood maybe, but more likely from the peat. F.i. Laphroaig is underneath the peat actually quite a sweet Whisky, but I don’t feel this Ailsa Bay is all that sweet underneath, so 019 SPPM is probably a low number for sweetness. 022 PPPM seems about right for peat, although the whole feel is more peaty than that 022. Peat is definitely what this Whisky is all about. Finally, the taste of this Ailsa Bay is somewhat simpler than the nose, yet I still had a lot of fun with this one. A welcome addition to my lectern. This one most definitely gets a recommendation from me.

So, altogether, this is a true peated Whisky, and a nice one at that to boot. I wonder how this will turn out with some more age to it, when the peat is more sophisticated, leaving more room for the 019-sweetness. Since nothing happened since 2018 I guess William Grant & Sons aren’t really into Ailsa Bay as a Single Malt anymore, probably focusing more on their main brands Glenfiddich and The Balvenie. A shame really, since this is a very nice peated Single Malt as well. I hope there will be a release 1.3 someday, with maybe even more SPPM and maybe slightly less PPPM. The 48.9% ABV works well for me.

Next day, the empty glass feels fatty and slippery (glycerol?), and smells even more peaty than the nose. Still clean and very appetizing though.

Points: 85

Amrut Naarangi (50%, OB, Batch No. 05, August 2018)

This is a very a-typical Amrut, no I’ll correct myself, this is a very a-typical Whisky! Amrut claims this is another first of its kind, (which are the others?), and yes sir indeed is this a first one of its kind, I’ll say. This is a Single Malt Whisky finished in an orange Sherry cask. No they didn’t paint the cask orange, they didn’t, didn’t they? No, Amrut got them some Oloroso Sherry (from Spain, nonetheless) and infused the Sherry with fresh orange peels for over two years. Two whole years of infusion! After this, the cask was filled with some great three year old Amrut Whisky and they let that mature further for another three years or so, resulting in multiple batches of Naarangi (orange in Hindi).

After the reviews of some experimental special releases of Ardbeg concocted by Mad Professor Bill Lumsden, I guess Bill finally met his match, because I guess even Bill didn’t come up with an experiment as bold as this! I’m not entirely sure if this is entirely legal by SWA standards though, so maybe Bill wasn’t allowed to do such a thing and passed the idea on to Amrut? Or more likely, Amrut have even madder professors (12 Monkeys-style, too crazy even to get hired by SPECTRE). I hope for the latter! Bring it on! The bottle I’m about to review is now half full and was opened quite a while back. I remember that it oozed with orange so much when freshly opened, even so much so, that I left it alone for quite a while. I wasn’t really fond of it.

Color: Copper gold, yes, let’s just say orange gold!

Nose: Hints of orange (in the deep, yet definitely present). Smells like orange flavoured dark chocolate. Creamy, spicy wood, and very nice smelling actually. Orange liqueur bonbon, with a vodka-like alcoholic aroma, all of this kept in check and well balanced. Big ‘n bold. Dusty, like a dusty old door mat. Sometimes even slightly meaty. Vanilla cream, more soft wood notes and the nose becomes quite vegetal by now. My imagination makes green vanilla out of this. I wonder how those pods smell before turning brown. Hints of a soft licorice tarry note and more dust and some pencil shavings (especially after sipping, so the oral cavity does its work amplifying certain notes). Next come some notes of Sinaspril (orange flavoured paracetamol for children). So there are real orange-oil notes as well as artificial orange notes in this, both coming from the natural source I guess. The orange bit in the nose dissipates first from my glass, letting other aroma’s come forward. Through all this, yes, the orange notes are more than present, although not (anymore) in an overpowering way. I’m quite amazed actually, that it became more toned down, considering my experiences with a freshly opened bottle.

Taste: Wood with a chewy sweetness. Spicy and a bit prickly. Bit of cayenne pepper and again some licorice. Ashes from toasted oak. Vanilla-orange-wood fusion. Slightly more acidic than expected from the nose alone, kept in check by some honey/sugar sweetness. Initially a thin texture, where I expected it to be more oily or fatty (but this sorts itself out later in the process). The thin feel is a bit of a let down, as if the Whisky isn’t fully up to transporting all the aromas. Definitely not cloying. Surprisingly well balanced though. The wood gives off a more bitter note now, but that’s not bad. It doesn’t say so on the label, but sometimes I do find some peat in this, although I’m sure this isn’t a peated Whisky. Slightly soapy mouthfeel now. In the taste all is more upfront and less complex than the nose is. The body, and the especially the aftertaste, becomes quite creamy and very friendly to drink, with obviously hints of orange-skin oil. Very drinkable now (half full bottle that was open for quite a bit). The nose and the taste have great balance to them (again, because of the half full bottle that was open for quite a bit), and I feel this is because of the way the orange and the wood behave themselves in this expression, they work well together.

After opening this for the first time, I disliked it, I thought the orange was over the top and overpowering. Just too much. I couldn’t get past the orange, but as a flawed human I am, and I hate to break it to you, so are you, (unless you have green skin and read this from another galaxy, then you are perfect and all that we humans ever wanted is peace!) I also expected something like this, the overpowering aroma’s of orange, and maybe therefore I already disliked it before opening? You wonder why I bought it then? Well, it is an Amrut after all, isn’t it? I have yet to taste a bad or mediocre Whisky from them. I tasted a lot of Amruts by now, and they were all good or better than good. But at first the Orangey-idea was a bit to bold, even for me, and I do like extremes in Whisky!

If any Whisky in the world, or the universe if you are green, needed breathing to get the most out of it, than this is the one, boy did this one improve over time. I have to say, this Naarangi was a bit of an experience. Disliked it at first, gave it a lot of time to gather itself, and when it did, it came up trumps. I really thought this would be a negative review, and surprised myself sitting down with it and analysing it. I like it (now). The down side is that this Whisky needs a lot of time to get there, to show its strengths, so not really recommended if your collection of open bottles is rather small, because it still is a niche Whisky.

Points: 85

This review is dedicated to Surrinder Kumar, a truly wonderful, passionate and patient man, who I may have slightly offended in London last year, with my initial thoughts about Naarangi, calling it borderline illegal. I’m sooooory (from Ted 2).

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.

Macallan “The Harmony Collection – Rich Cacao” (44%, OB, Sherry Seasoned European and American Oak, 2021)

When visiting the Whisky show last year (2022), my biggest disappointment came at the huge and wonderful looking Macallan stand. The Edrington group really knows how to market their stuff. I tried two different 12yo’s and the 2022 rare cask. All quite underwhelming for me. I might be spoiled, since I have tasted a lot of Macallans from the glorious days of “Science can’t wholly explain…” I can’t even remember when I bought my last Macallan, I only remember is was probably a Sherried Wilson and Morgan bottling (not the fantastic the 12yo though), yet still an independent bottling of “The Mac”. Good and affordable (for a Macallan). Now this modern “Rich Cacao” found its way onto my lectern… a free sample with a bottle of Cognac. I don’t expect much to be honest, after the aforementioned London experience, but I do hope this will be a good one. Probably sold out already, no surprise there, and I see it already costs a pretty penny in the secondary market, yet not as much as the Macallan from the glorious days, even the pretty standard ones.

Color: Copper gold.

Nose: Clean, fresh, woody Sherry, mocha with hints of latex paint, toast and some over-ripe almost rotting fruit (a good thing here). Better than expected actually, way better. I’m not smelling it blind, but I would say that it is recognizable as a (modern) Macallan Spirit. Nice dry and soft oak nose. Elegant, yet also somewhat robust even since this has been reduced to 44% ABV. Sweet caramel and toffee. Give it some time (but not much) to breathe and the aroma coming out of my glass is big. Dry cocoa powder, cookies and clean, dry, Oloroso Sherry. Dry vanilla powder and cold custard come next. Dark chocolate mousse, slightly sugared. Perfumy and complex. After all those weak Macallans I have tried recently, finally an interesting expression again. At least in the smell. Let’s try it now for real.

Taste: Sweet, waxy and Sherried, likeable and fun. Soft sweet (not acidic) red fruit compote (warm). Yes, a bit thin, tastes like a 40% ABV bottling. Tasty, but this has nothing to do with the Macallans from the glorious Sherry bomb days. Not the same quality and definitely not the same ooomphhh. This is soft, refined, elegant and designed and still manages to pack a small punch of the white pepper kind and some spicy dry oak. Cute. Some sweet licorice and Sherry notes come next. Dark yet sweet chocolate. Otherwise fruity and likeable, with a dry finish.

Well this was a nice surprise, a decent Macallan. Tasty and fun, yet also not all that special. Nice and highly drinkable, but not good enough to warrant the amount of hard-earned cash you have to shell out for this particular bottling (if you plan to drink it). If you are collector, then please do. Nevertheless, with a name so big as The Macallan, I expected a bit more. Good yet not a must try Malt for me. I’ll will continue to keep oogling the Macallan from a distance for the time being.

Points: 85

Springbank 10yo (46%, OB, 14.10.21, 21/159, 2021)

When I wrote the previous review of an older 18yo Springbank (one from 2011), Springbank was readily available in Europe in many guises. Enough to choose from, with decent prices. Today I can paint an entirely different picture. If I would go to several shops I would probably find nothing at all, and with some luck, maybe, and I stress this word, maybe I would be able to buy a 10yo like this, but that’s about it. If I want another Springbank, secondary market is the way to go these days, with secondary market prices as well. Accessibility is low, demand has risen dramatically. Springbank doesn’t have to bother advertising their product anymore, nor do they attend Whisky shows and packaging isn’t necessary as well. It all sells itself. Where does it all go? US, Asia? Well, since this was the only normal buy in recent times, let’s see how the 10yo is doing…

Color: Clear light gold.

Nose: Cardboard and fruity. Slightly creamy and nutty. Recognizable Campbeltown oily funk. A memory of peat, but it is most definitely not up front. Cleaner than I remember other Springbank 10yo’s to be, like for instance the 2003 and 10/342 (2010) editions, yet in the greater scheme of Whisky, clean this is not. Somewhat dusty and waxy. Peaches with a hint of banana, maybe some apricots and a wee backbone of something smoky. A lighter and fruitier take on the 10yo. Sweet fruit yoghurt with more dust and fresh almonds (without their skins). Sometimes I pick up on faint pine resin and/or camphor, or do I fool myself? Band-aids are another strange note that sometimes whiffs by. Very well balanced though. Springbank is just such a good distillery. Amazing smelling 10yo again. As often with Springbank, give it time to breathe. Oxidation is almost always Springbank’s friend. After sipping it for a while, a more green and leafy note emerges adding a little bit to the complexity of this Malt. This is very nice for an affordable 10yo, still one of the best you can get, but wait a minute, before you get carried away, how does it taste?

Taste: Nutty again. Because here there is more wood upfront, it seems less fruity. Very tasty but also a bit thin and rather simple (the nose shows more complexity), still, the balance is here, as well as it is in the taste. However, I expected something more oily or fatty, at least the feel of that, because the oily taste is present, yet the texture isn’t. This is also not very warming going down, so I guess this is more a summer type of Whisky. After swallowing you can pinpoint quite a sharp (woody) bitter note in your mouth, that doesn’t go away for a while. It actually tastes like less than 46% ABV (more like 40% ABV). So the rather thin texture doesn’t help the Whisky along. Nevertheless, this a highly drinkable Malt. Where in the start the wood was masking the fruit a bit, I’m happy to report this has a nice and fruity finish that carries well into the aftertaste (along with the creamy bits).

This isn’t one of the best batches of the 10yo around, yet if I would find myself stranded on a sunny deserted island with a case of this, it still is one of the best you could wish for in a situation like that. Other than that, this is a decent and pretty straightforward and as mentioned earlier, highly drinkable Malt. Just don’t decide for yourself how this one is right after opening the bottle, this really needs some time to properly open up, like most Springbanks do. Drink this too fast is not a good idea, just give it time, put it on your shelf for a day or two without a cork (mind the fruit flies) and you will be rewarded. As said this is definitely not the best batch of the 10yo, but there is still enough here to have fun with or grow a fondness for. I did.

Points: 85 (almost 86)