Category Archives: 87 Points

Ardbeg Auriverdes 12yo 2002/2014 (49.9%, OB, American oak casks with toasted virgin oak lids, 6660 bottles)

I have to say that many of Ardbeg’s “special” releases aren’t getting a lot of love. It almost seems to be in fashion to slam these releases. Maybe a combination of NAS and silly marketing or the combination of NAS and the pricing of these “specials”, because obviously these Whiskies could be containing pretty young stuff. Maybe people dislike the posh new owners LVMH. How can a leather bag and a mediocre Champagne be the owners of the mighty beast that is our Ardbeg. Whisky is romantic and better than all other alcoholic beverages! Another explanation might be that the core range is actually quite good. Especially Uigeadail and Corryvreckan if you ask me, both better than the 10yo, An Oa and the 5yo Wee Beastie. All five are more affordable than all these special releases. Most of which are often NAS Whiskies (Hence the funny names) and also are a bit more experimental in nature as well.

In 1997 Ardbeg was bought by Glenmorangie, so the experimental nature of these releases comes as no surprise when, since 1995, they have Bill Lumsden on the payroll (Head of Distilling & Whisky Creation at The Glenmorangie Company). For those who don’t know Dr. William “Bill” Lumsden (The Mad Scientist), he previously experimented quite a bit with Whiskies at Glen Moray before experimenting on an even higher level at Glenmorangie and Ardbeg. Online, two of the most disliked Ardbeg expressions are Perpetuum and the Auriverdes at hand. Perpetuum in fact wasn’t even very experimental. Old en Young Whiskies from Bourbon and Sherry casks. Still, I found it was a decent expression and I never had a dull moment with it. I scored it 86 points which is certainly not bad at all. But the two aforementioned cheaper ones from the core range: Uigeadail (2018 batch) scored 87 and Corryvreckan (2014 batch) scored a whopping 89 points, so both outdid the “special” release. As mentioned above , this time around we’ll have a look at another unloved Ardbeg: Auriverdes. Is it experimental? The Whisky matured in second fill Bourbon barrels. The original lids were removed and replaced with new virgin oak ones, which were toasted using a very special secret toasting process, which accounts for the experimental bit.

Color: Light gold, not pale.

Nose: Nice funky peat, soft smoke with some notes of crushed beetle. A fireplace in December. The smell of Christmas in a log cabin. Hints of black coal and glowing embers. Old bicycle inner tubes. Less salty and fishy than expected from a south shore Malt, even though more than enough organics are happening in this nose. After a while, a more fresher approach starts, with breaths of fresh air, and more citrus-like aroma’s without being overly fresh or acidic, just adding to the perfume. After this fresh phase, we’re back in the realm of black coal and chimney smoke in winter, preferably on a dark evening after a snowy day, only lit by street lights, by odd coloured sodium lamps. Tiny hints of sweetish licorice powder, a Licorice-Menthos combo and some dust for old-times sake. Ooooh, the rubber comes back. I think this is a really nice smelling Ardbeg. Maybe some experimentally and specially and secretively toasted cask ends, but other than that, no funny business and nose-wise quite a successful experiment. I really do like the nose on this.

Taste: Sweet licorice comes first, as well as the crushed beetle. Somewhat vegetal and tea-like. The texture seems a bit thin initially. An indistinct fruity note is also present. Citrus, only more sweet, more sugared, than it is acidic and maybe some other ripe yellow fruits as well. Warming going down. Somewhat sweet, somewhat peaty and more of the Menthos feel that came rather late in the nose. It tastes somewhat like a minty licorice powder. Whisky-candy. The sweetness works very well in this Whisky. After swallowing, a nutty note emerges as well as some distant vanilla. Initially not big-bodied at all, maybe this is what people dislike in this expression. It is definitely simpler than the nose. The nose is really good and melancholic, the taste is initially a bit watered down, or maybe not mature enough. Is this the youth a NAS Whisky allows for? Yet it has great balance. Everything fits and works together well. Mind you, this is still not bad, but the nose carried some sort of a promise of things to come, a promise that hasn’t been kept entirely. I expected more complexity. During sipping, the nose still keeps on evolving, and truth be told, the taste does collect itself, which makes for a highly drinkable Ardbeg. I’m not having a beef with this one at all. Well, well, well, the taste really does develop after a while. This needed some time as well, time I might have saved, if I had added some water (but why hurry). It did gain even more balance and the body and especially the finish are bigger now, still not very complex though.

If really analysed well, with more than enough time, it is much easier to pick up on the true Ardbeg underneath. Maybe these specials aren’t for casual sipping at all, and if you try to be patient and give it some time, these special releases might be better than I was lead to believe by the internet. Maybe you got to work them a little, and since you are reading this, you as an experienced taster, are very able to do so, so please do.

People can be so judgemental these days, living fast, judging fast, too self confident. That’s human nature in the 21th century Whisky world or maybe even the world in general. I’m actually amazed how negative some people are and how vocal about it as well, and a lot of less experienced people just run with this and claim the same, unsure about their abilities to smell and taste. I see around me that even experienced aficionados fall into this abyss. If this is you, maybe you should learn to relax a bit, sit back some more, take some more time to smell the roses, (or Ardbeg in this case). Don’t be biased that Ardbeg is trying to pull one over your eyes and dupe you, because they probably aren’t. Not from the Whisky makers perspective anyway. Marketing may be another story entirely. Bill may be a mad scientist who tries to explore, often with an idea and sometimes by trial and error. This is definitely not a bad Ardbeg and don’t believe anyone telling you this. I feel this is a decent malt if you only let it. Don’t fool yourself and don’t let yourself be fooled, make up your own mind, and if after this you don’t like it, it must be true. Only then.

Points: 87

Aberlour 8yo (50%, OB, Unblended all malt, EST. 1845, 75 cl)

So the last Aberlour review posted in October 2022 was of a modern 13yo officially bottled single cask. Modern, since it was distilled in the 21st century. This review of the 8yo was supposed to follow the 13yo right on its heels, but it didn’t. Autumn, or fall, started happening when I started to write the review, and it was suddenly time for peat. Fast forward to Spring. Winter has ended and although the time for peat still hasn’t ended, time has finally come for a nice old skool Sherried Speysider. No, it didn’t. Spring came and went and this review was again further postponed. When I picked up this review again it was summer, yet again the review remained in its draft state. Now finally when looking outside, summer is most definitely over. Maybe we’ll still get some days that look pretty good, but I guess autumn started happening. So no use any more for the desk fan and the air outside is cold. We might as well prepare ourselves, because winter is coming again, and peat already started lurking at me.

Never mind. After the Aberlour 13yo bottled in 2017, here we have an 8yo from the seventies, an oldie and hopefully a goldie, from a different century as well. There are a lot of permutations of this Aberlour bottled in the square bottle, and there can be quite some differences between the Whiskies, or so I’m told. Up ’till now I have only tried one other. Like with so many things in life, not all 8 year old Whiskies are created equal, I guess.

Color: Light orange gold.

Nose: Old skool Sherry nose. Waxy, toffeed, some fresh butter and funky. Like coal fired stills including some petrol fumes and exhaust gases from outside the still house. And like real petrol fumes and exhaust gases, they dissipate in the wind. Cola, cold motor oil and coal dust. Dusty old furniture. It seems as if some sugar sets down in the back of my throat, only from smelling it. Doesn’t smell like an 8yo Whisky at all. Initially some hints of Rhum Agricole, but this dissipates rather quickly and I also don’t pick up on it every time I smell this. We all have our better and worse days you know. Smells nothing like a modern 8yo Whisky as well. Much softer. Very mature for a standard 8yo. Things have changed since then, wasn’t everything better in the old days? Still dusty with this wonderful coal dusty Sherry nose, like we know from all the greats. Whiffs of sweet yellow fruit yoghurt and cookie dough. All is good. It smells nice and comes without any off-notes. After a while quite fresh for an old skool malt. Like a breath of fresh air (in an old earthen floor warehouse) and yet still sweet smelling.

Taste: Nutty and waxy sherry. Also some dry and active wood, slightly bitter as well. Drying my tongue and palate. Slightly spicy (cinnamon), fruity (dry bits of peach and apricot) and definitely old skool. Hints of cola and especially licorice. that wasn’t present in the nose. Besides that it is slightly prickly as well. Is this from the wood or some sort of liquid smoke? Crushed caterpillar (don’t ask). Slightly cloying Sherry,but I wouldn’t say this is all that sweet. I expected it to be way more sweet since this Whisky is so sweet smelling. All the specialness is in the beginning. It shows its age by halting its development halfway through and not being all that complex. Not in my glass nor in my mouth. It is a wonderful old skool Sherried Malt, but it is thus also a bit simple. At this age it was probably aimed at, amongst others, the Italian market, so no surprise here that it is highly and dangerously drinkable. Next some creamy and buttery notes are able to escape, albeit briefly, from the grasp of the Sherry. The bitterness shows some stamina with its staying power. It is not dominant yet quite noticeable. Well balanced though, since the taste matches the nose, and for me, it tastes slightly better than it smells, and don’t get me wrong it smells wonderful. By the way on some days I prefer the nose over the taste. On those days the taste seems a bit thin. Black coal and licorice in the finish and aftertaste. This actually works well, hiding the residual bitterness.

In the end this is a well made old malt, yet also a bit simple and regularly shows some fragility. Highly drinkable, definitely old skool, and there is no reason to keep this around for a long while, just enjoy it, since you never know what oxidation will do (or already did) to such an old Malt. By the way, the roof of my mouth is slightly anaesthetized, so definitely a higher ABV. Empty glass smells very nice by the way! Don’t sip it, bigger gulps are the secret to unlock this Malt to its full potential.

Points: 87

Bimber “Virgin Cask” 2020 (57.4%, OB, American Virgin Oak Cask #94, 263 bottles)

Earlier we reviewed two Bimbers matured in American oak casks that previously held another Whiskey. One Bourbon and one Rye. Both, together with American oak casks that previously held a Tennessee Whiskey, (like Jack Daniel’s and George Dickel), should be the type of casks that showcases the Bimber spirit best, especially when they are refill casks. This will become even more clear in my next Bimber review. That review is not yet planned, but I promise, you won’t have to wait all to long for it, just not right after this one. Just bear with me on this one.

But wait a minute, what about an American oak cask that previously held nothing more than air and maybe some water? What about a freshly made American oak cask, that has only been toasted, as they all are? Yes virgin oak. Using a new cask is not very popular in the Whisky world, and for a long time it was quite unheard of. Sure there were Whiskies made that in part used new cask, but not a lot per batch. When looking at Bimber, I was quite surprised virgin oak cask editions perform really well in the secondary market. Especially in the home (UK) market people seem to dish out some serious amounts of dough for a virgin oak Bimber. Well, since Master Quill is based in mainland Europe, the secondary market for virgin oak Bimbers has not yet reached the levels like that of the UK, so, as usual I snapped some up at a German auction. Yes I did pay somewhat more than for both the Belgium and The Netherlands editions, but nowhere near the current UK prices.

Color: Full gold, almost orange.

Nose: Creamy, buttery (Werther’s Original), with Bimbers marker: Cinnamon. Very fragrant stuff this is, slightly perfumy. Early on some hints of apple aroma close to Calvados, these are gone or overpowered lateron. Bigger and fatter than the Ex-Bourbon and the Ex-Rye reviewed earlier. Very fresh, pleasant and well balanced. Wood and sawdust. Vanilla ice-cream with a leafy and green note to it. Old cardboard and some pencil shavings. Even when smelling, the Whisky becomes less fatty. It’s dryer now. Less “big”. Still some dust, more cinnamon and some indistinct wood related spices which are easy to spot yet hard to identify. To me this one seems somewhat less complex and layered than both the Ex-Bourbon and the Ex-Rye. It is almost like the fruit wants to come out, but doesn’t manage to make it through the creamy cloak, (the vanilla, the butter and the ice-cream), that stretches over it. So this a pretty straight forward expression. Good again, yet a bit simpler. Sniffing this deeply, beautiful abundant wood notes and in no way does it smell of alcohol, similar with the other two. This is wood perfume (hints of vegetal oil and an old bar of soap). Hints of sandalwood, just less intrusive than the sandalwood coming off some men’s eau de toilette. The nose develops over time, becoming more complex with added notes of licorice combined with fresh butter. So all is good. Whereas in a tasting session with both others, the complexity just seems less, it does show multiple personalities over different sessions, so maybe this is a different way of complexity after all, or is it just me that is different?

Taste: Fruity onset, somewhat sweet. Wood, wax and some bitterness cloaked by the fruit and creaminess. The slight bitter note is paired with some licorice. Next the char and some masked (fruity) sweetness. Hints of cola? I expected it to be more creamy though, but the wood does dominate. Next some cookie dough, with a (fruity?), acidic note on top. Here I notice again that the nose seems more refined and developed after taking the first sip. Strange combination of sappy oak, sweet mint candy and carbon powder (the charred oak). A dishwater like bitterness. Usually it is the florality of dishwater that can be smelled/tasted, here it is the bitterness of soap. Just a hint, just making the whole more interesting rather than disgusting, because really, dishwater? Definitely less creamy and fatty than I’ve come to expect from the nose alone yet still bigger than “the other two”. By now the nose does evolve a lot, and again becoming more than just good.

Virgin oak casks are made of charred American oak, and since no other liquid has been interacting with the (charred) wood, a cask like this will always properly colour the Whisky. Virgin oak is often looked at with some concern, and thus it was never a common practice when it came to producing Single Malt Whisky. But after the Wine casks, the Port casks, the Rum casks and so on, it was just a matter of time to broaden the wood palette, and start experimenting with virgin oak. Why not? The market demands it, it wants choice! It is yet another marriage between spirit and “a wood” which is essentially what Whisky is. Is it better than the others, no it’s not, it’s different and it is yet another take, and often the results are mediocre at best, just like the early Wine casked Whiskies. Sgtill a lot to learn here I guess. For Bimber though, virgin oak seems to work pretty well, the quality and the character of the liquid just work with the virgin oak. Bimber aficionado’s know this, as I said earlier, because virgin oak Bimbers do very well in the secondary market, much better than its Bourbon and Rye counterparts. Is it better than those, no it is not, I say it again, but it is a welcome variant, but for a lot less you can purchase an Ex-Bourbon Bimber or an Ex-Rye one which are also much less scarce and offer at least the same amount of quality, just with a different overall feel.

Final remark. I’ve come to find that to get all out of a Bimber, you need to give it peace and quiet and also give it some time. Comparing the three: Virgin has the more straightforward nose, yet very chewy and likeable. Rye is the most complex, distinct and fragile. The Bourbon is somewhere in between the two, less fragile but much closer to the Rye than the virgin oak, so no surprises there really. The Virgin oak is actually a different puppy, and a big puppy at that. Based on the taste, the Virgin is again a different puppy, way more creamy and sweeter, and more about the cask than the other two, which show more of the (quality of the) spirit. And tasting all three back and forth, it seems to me the Rye seems to have the best balance of the three, as well as its delicate complexity. So If I had to buy just one: The Rye. If I could pick two: The Rye + The Virgin. They are not created equal, where the Rye and the Bourbon almost are. If I could only get the Bourbon, no problem whatsoever. Both the Bourbon and the Rye are quite similar, with enough to set them apart in the details, today I prefer the Rye, but tomorrow might be different. The virgin, however, is a welcome “distraction” or better: a variation on the Bimber theme. Especially after trying the Bourbon and the Rye back an forth to pick a favourite (emptying both bottles in the process), and actually, the Virgin is also a very good dram. All three are definitely worthy of their spot under the sun, and on my lectern.

Points: 87

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

Lagavulin 12yo (56.5%, OB, Special Release, Refill Casks, 2021)

All of a sudden summer is over (on my side of the planet anyway) and now we are in this, still sunny, yet colder autumn season. After the 13yo Aberlour, I was planning to do another Aberlour review, yet a human can be very predictable. A change of season and the body started to crave some…peat! All of a sudden I found myself reaching for peated Malts. So no Aberlour, let’s do a Lagavulin in stead. Don’t worry, the Aberlour will surface eventually. Back to the Lagavulin at hand. More than ten years ago… wait a minute, I have to let that sink in for a while… ten years. Wow! Well in 2012 I did the last review of a Lagavulin 12yo Special Release, in that case the 2007 edition. These special releases continue to be very good, so I have no reason whatsoever to believe this might be any different. Well, Master Quill is still around and the 12yo Lagavulin is still around as well. So without further ado, let’s dip into this Lagavulin straight away.

Color: Pale White Wine.

Nose: Sweet and soft peat and delicate smoke. This is somewhere between rough and elegant. Fruity with citrus, apple (Calvados), very soft vanilla, some iodine and a somewhat milky acidity I got from the 8yo and the 10yo as well as, to a lesser extent, in the 9yo GoT and the 11yo Offerman editions (all three of them actually). Initially this resembles new make a bit and gives this Malt a youthful edge. However, luckily I might add, in here this milky note is much less pronounced than in the other two/four/six Lagavulin’s I mentioned. Yes this one is again slightly older, but also bottled at cask strength, and this probably makes a difference as well. I don’t like this milky characteristic in Lagavulin. For me Lagavulin is dropping the ball with these newer expressions, and unfortunately this element is now becoming apparent in this 12yo Special Release as well. I hear some rumours of Lagavulin overcooking for a higher yield if that makes any sense? Maybe 2008/2009 is some sort of pivotal point for Lagavulin, trying too hard to meet demand? After some breathing this milky note, dissipates or maybe my nose gets used to it and doesn’t smell it any more. (I tried it again later and the milky bit is gone. Pouring me a new one brings it back, so nothing wrong with my nose after all). A short while later, the nose (of the Whisky, not my nose) becomes more balanced. Still fruity and sweet (and youthful), with added dishwater and warm plastic (both fitting the whole). Quite prickly clean smoke and tarry licorice. A slightly spicy smoke maybe, crushed beetle and the tiniest hint of oak, late saltiness and iodine again. It smells refined and this is definitely not your hard hitting peated Whisky. I will have to compare this one to a Laphroaig 10yo Cask Strength in the future, as well as to the previous version of the 12yo Special Release.

Taste: Again sweet and fruity on entry, but also quite creamy and right out of the gate again quite youthful. A very friendly rendition this time. Not a hard in your face Malt, lacking even any bitterness from the wood. Some well integrated smoke, licorice and ashes. Tarry rope, sweet mint (Menthos) and salty. After all that fruit I didn’t expect all these Islay notes any more, but it’s still here. Lacks a bit of development and complexity, although un-complex it is not. The whole is more a banks of the Thames kind of Whisky than shores of Islay, and that probably isn’t a coincidence, but probably by design. Ashes, some iodine and wet marshland wood. Nope, not a lot of wood in this one. Part of these casks must have been at least second refills or otherwise somewhat inactive. The colour seems to suggest that as well, because it is quite pale for a Diageo bottling, a company know for their love for chill filtering and caramel colouring. Still very balanced and equally tasty though. The quality is on a slippery slope, but I still do like it, yet in a different way than I used to with these 12yo’s. It’s tasty and highly drinkable. Every aroma is neatly stacked upon another, like blocks of Lego. And every block is clear of a different colour and easily discernable. This Lagavulin is definitely more minty and modern. Still a nice expression though, just different. No need for water, but feel free to do so. The finish is of medium length and balanced throughout. No bad markers at all, apart from the milky youth bit mentioned above. The finish is sweet and smoky, the aftertaste is medium at best, warming, fruity and ever so slightly smoky. A good way to remember it, because the finish as well as the aftertaste don’t contain the questionable bits.

This is a friendly and tasty Malt, yet not exactly the high quality we are used to for the 12yo Special Release. It doesn’t even feel like a 12yo (it feels younger). Maybe lacks some strength, but in part it makes up for this with its accessibility and likeability throughout. Still good stuff but comparing it, from memory, to the 2007, it definitely is a different puppy altogether, which can be good, since it gives us another choice, and a way to match the Lagavulin 12yo Special Release to your mood. A good reason to have several editions open at the same time, if you needed one. However it unfortunately is also a bad thing, since I feel the quality is also a bit less. I worry about the future (in general as well as for the 12yo Special Release). Nevertheless, this one will split opinions. People who know the Lagavulin 12yo’s from the past will not be impressed by this one whereas others might like the new friendlier direction, and will have no clue why I’m on about sliding quality. For me, even though I do recognize its faults, I also do quite like it (to a certain extent). I’m curious about how the next few editions will be.

Points: 87

Port Askaig 10yo “10th Anniversary” (55.85%, Elixir Distillers, P/000247, 2019)

As far as I know there is no distillery called Elixir nor is there a Port Askaig distillery. Maybe there will be in the future? Nope, this Elixir distillers is a brand of the people behind The Whisky Exchange (London, UK). When creating an Single Malt Islay brand, you have some more room than a single distillery, because you have the opportunity to use the output from more than one distillery, as long as you keep it a Single Malt. So one distillery at a time in a particular bottling. I haven’t got any other Port Askaig’s lying around at the moment, but on the back label of this particular bottle it is mentioned that this comes from a distillery on the north-east coast of Islay. Historically Bunnahabhain and Caol Ila, and more recently also Ardnahoe is situated there. The back label also mentions that the distillery is close to Port Askaig, so geographically it is most likely this Whisky was distilled by Caol Ila. This Whisky was blended from just 33 casks (distilled in 2008). 20 refill American hogsheads, 8 first fill Bourbon barrels and 5 ex-solera Sherry butts. If these are true solera casks, then the casks could have been used for Sherry for quite some time. Last but not least, this hasn’t been chill-filtered and no caramel colouring has been added. Why should they when the glass bottle is this dark. So why 55.85% ABV I hear you ask. Well, The latitude of Port Askaig is 55.85º N. The longitude is -6.11º W, and to be honest, -6.11% is quite useless for an ABV.

Color: White Wine.

Nose: Soft fruity and tea-like peat. Elegant indeed. A special mix of fruitiness and florality (and dust). Citrus mix and a wee note of sweet red fruits. Friendly and elegant. For some, this might be slightly too perfumy and the fruity bit slightly too fruity (sweet), but personally this all sets it apart from other modern Islay Malts, making it rather unique in that respect. Very interesting blending result. Even though this mostly has been in contact with American oak, something did overpower the vanilla note one would expect. I wonder what the 5 Solera casks could do to this Whisky. The peat is soft and elegant as well, without smelling salty or tarry. Extremely well balanced. This bottle is now almost 90% empty and since it didn’t get the attention it clearly needs (more about that below), I couldn’t even tell you how it compares to a freshly opened bottle. After pouring, the nose still develops over time, getting better (as in, it shows more of itself). The development becomes apparent when re-pouring this dram. The freshly poured Whisky seems a quite different from the Whisky after breathing for a while and constantly sipping it. So it has a lot to give. Slight notes of burnt herbs, warm dry earth and freshly peeled almonds. Hints of old Malt, so for a 10yo, quite a feat. A worthy anniversary bottle. After a long while and after extensive tasting, the nose produces an iodine note combined with soft oak. The next day, the empty glass simply oozes with Iodine, and when cleaning with only water, even more Iodine notes come to the fore. Amazing.

Taste: Less fatty and fruity than the nose, so quite a surprise here. Seems thinner and sharper yet still soft. Prickly (sweet) smoke, slightly sweet chocolate powder and plenty of warm tar. Chewy and sweetish licorice in many guises. Warming. Less complex and quite different from the nose. Here the vanilla is present. Even though it seems less fruity at first, there still is a lot of nice fruits to behold. Acidic fruits well integrated with the smoke and peat. Again nicely balanced. The finish seems medium to short initially, but there is a lot that stays behind, and comes back for a nice and lingering, warm aftertaste. All in all a very interesting and well made Malt. Good job, showing a different side to an Islay Malt.

Again a Whisky that needs your attention to get the most out of it. I had a lot more fun and picked up on a lot more now when analysing it for this review, than I had when carelessly and randomly pouring it for a dram in the evening. It has a lot to offer, so make sure you focus a bit on it. Just give it the attention it needs and deserves. However, in this also lies its fault. If you don’t give it this attention, and you do carelessly sip it (as we usually do), this might pass a bit anonymously. This has probably to do with its softness and elegance, so maybe a bit too much of that?

Points: 87

Royal Brackla 14yo 2006/2020 (59.5%, Gordon & MacPhail, Cask Strength Connoisseurs Choice, Refill Hogshead #310821, Batch 20/110, 281 bottles)

Wow, on it for a long time, and still I manage to review a Scottish Single Malt Whisky that has never been featured on these pages before. How nice, and it’s not a new distillery either. This distillery was founded back in 1812 and called itself Royal since 1835, a title awarded by King William IV. Today Royal Brackla is part of the Dewar’s portfolio, owned by Bacardi-Martini since 1998. Other Scottish Single Malts in this portfolio are Aberfeldy, Aultmore, Craigellachie and Macduff (marketed as Glen Deveron). Apart from Macduff that was owned by William Lawson Distillers as well as the William Lawson’s Brand, the other four distilleries, as well as the Dewar’s Brand, were bought from the newly formed Diageo to avoid a monopoly position. Of the five Single Malt Whiskies, Royal Brackla was the only one absent from these pages until now. As said, the company also owns two blends: Dewar’s and William Lawson’s, both big sellers, and since both are big sellers, Bacardi didn’t do a lot to market the five Single Malts at first. Only since 2014/2015 a big relaunch of the Single Malt portfolio was carried out. They called them The Last Great Malts, a bit of an ominous or sad name to be frank.

Color: Pale White Wine

Nose: Very appetizing, barley, barley sugar and yellow fruits. Very nice perfumed wood, hay, American oak, very elegant. I already love the nose. It reminds me of Whiskies like this that were bottled twenty years ago. Floral and fruity and both go together well. Soft, yet this still manages to leap out of my glass. Mocha and barley. Since the fruit is the dominant aroma, this also smells a bit fruity/sweet. Red fruit (raspberry) candy (again a sweet smell) mixed with some wet wood. The wet wood is a softer (greenish) wood aroma, setting it apart from more spicy dry oak. This is an extremely balanced smelling Whisky for a sunny day and a happy mood. This is not a melancholic drop, but in a way it also is, when it reminds me of Whisky from a while back. For a simple ex-Bourbon cask matured Whisky, this is really likeable and nice. Well made, aged in a good cask. Well done USA! Nice aroma’s and quite some complexity to it as well. There is a lot happening between the sprit and the active cask. Lots of organic and green notes. I would love to have this, when lying on a blanket in some quiet field on a hot, yet slightly windy, summers day. Far from everybody and everything. Yup, melancholic mood Whisky it is. After a while, slightly more oak, with a hoppy note, still green and wet though. Hints of vanilla and some indistinct dry kitchen spices. Hot butter and wax. Good stuff. The more air this gets, and time obviously, the fruitier it becomes. Definitely melancholic, or is it just me?

Taste: Sweet on entry. Very fruity, right from the start. A nice slight white pepper attack, with waxy and quite some wonderful woody and nutty aroma’s following suit. After the first sip, the nose even gets better than it already was. The Whisky evaporating inside your oral cavity, helps the smell further along. The fatty sweetness does dissipate quite quickly for a short acidic burst, leaving room for another yet shorter peppery attack and a somewhat thinner feel. The wood, still green and vegetal, now also shows an austere bitter note. Sappy, as in tree sap. After this happens, the balance can’t really match up with the wonderful balance of the nose. When the bitter note appears in the taste, aroma’s come to the fore, that aren’t really in harmony with each other. The nose itself remains wonderful though, maybe even better than before. Still a kind of bitterness in the finish that doesn’t match the whole, and even for an almost 60% Whisky, a light and shortish aftertaste. Whiskies like this need to be sipped in a high frequency.

So it comes apart a bit in the finish, but the nose is very good en even grows over time, so give it time. I will have fond memories of this one, even though it has this slight “defect” towards the end. Its a defect that can be sorted by upping your sipping speed. So at first you have to be slow, to let it breathe and after that the “race” begins. Like a stage in the Tour de France that ends in a sprint.

Points: 87

Cardhu 11 (56%, OB, Special Release, 2020, L0120CM004)

When I think of Cardhu, or Cardow as it was used to be called, I always remember the fond memories first. The official 22yo, a special release from 2005 was really good. So Cardhu is indeed able to make a Whisky worth noting. Sure, a lot of Cardhu is sold around the world, which doesn’t automatically mean it is very good. It can be, but often it is not. In the core range we have a 12yo, a 15yo and a 18yo, as well as “Amber Rock” and “Gold Reserve”. The Game of Thrones is a variant of the Gold reserve, and let’s not forget the Special Cask reserves which ran somewhere between 2007 and 2012. Most of these I have tried and none of them scored 80 points or higher. (I have yet to try the 18yo and the GoT edition, and surely the 18yo should be able to score in the 80 point range, don’t you think?). For Master Quill, I tried the 2010 Special Cask Reserve and that was a rather disappointing experience. I have tried some Cardhu from the 70’s, and even at 8yo and 43% ABV Cardhu could really rock. So even with this wonky reputation, I was really pleased to see a cask strength 14yo pop up as a special reserve in 2019 (and again in 2021), as well as this 11yo in 2020. This 11yo, was offered at a special price for a short while, and not having bought a Cardhu in a long long time, (and really digging the label), I went for it…

Color: White Wine

Nose: Malty, bread-like (toast), a bit waxy and with some yeast. Clean and fresh otherwise. Citrussy. Quite fruity actually, slightly sweet, with more of the (sugary) barley notes. Slightly milky, which to me is a note of underdevelopment. Luckily this note seems to dissipate after a while. Yellow fruit jam. Very friendly. Soft hints of wet wood, toasted oak and wet earth, combined with some mocha. Leafy and green. This is a lively and friendly Whisky. Floral perfume and slightly soapy. You’d imagine your grandmother liking this (if she drinks anything else beyond tea). Slightly dusty, with a tiny hint of heavily diluted apricot and peach syrup,as well as some (new) cardboard. Sometimes faint notes of a sweet White Wine crop up. As said above, this Malt has a (milky) youth to its nose, which is somewhat masked when you have it by itself (it is noticeable right before the fruity bit kicks in, and definitely more noticeable when the bottle was freshly opened). If you pour yourself another dram before or after this, this milky youth becomes apparent still. So, in the end, this Malt is fruity and floral and the two go together quite well in this Cardhu. This promises to be a highly drinkable Malt, lets see if that is the case here.

Taste: Sweet and peppery. Waxy, very, very fruity, fatty and nutty. Appetizing. Sometimes, this reminds me a bit of Bladnoch, but the fruit sets it apart. The nose does have this greenish note to it, lacking though on the palate. Dry compressed fruit powder candy, as well as canned syrupy yellow fruits. Peaches in sweet yoghurt. Again in the vicinity of the fruity aroma, this Malt also shows its youth here. Showing some slightly underdeveloped notes. The wet wood from the nose is here as well, complete with a slight bitter edge. This is not a problem at all, since the syrupy sweetness quickly takes care of any bitterness, although the feeling of a woody backbone remains. The wood morphs a bit into cold dishwater. Sounds worse than it actually is. Interesting combination of yellow fruits, (stingy) white pepper and the tiniest hint of sweet licorice. Chalk and fruit. Supple juicy fruit aroma’s with quite some alcohol, yet with a dry and chalky feel to it. Fruity sweetness and licorice in the finish and a tasty and warming aftertaste with quite some length.

This is a morning Malt to be had by itself. It is at its best by itself, because it is quite a good Malt, when it’s not compared to anything that might follow. Nevertheless be warned that this doesn’t have a morning ABV to match the feel of this Malt. Apart from that, this is quite a nice Cardhu to boot, with quite some balance to it as well. However, for me personally, it also shows a sort of underdeveloped side of itself, keeping me from scoring it even higher than I did. It is very good and very nice, just has some minor flaws to it. Still, one of the best official Cardhu’s I have tasted. A good buy and it went pretty fast, always a good sign.

Points: 87

Arran “Batch 3” (51.5%, That Boutique-y Whisky Company, 728 bottles, 50 cl)

As a volume, 50 cl should be just enough, or some would say, barely enough. I do the occasional bottleshare with friends, and half of a full bottle (35 cl), well that’s actually not enough for me, I believe that 50 cl is the bare minimum of acceptability. Earlier, way back in 2015, I actually reviewed Batch 4 of Arran from the same bottler. I have to admit, I totally forgot about that one. When backtracking a bit on my own website, I just found my review of Batch 4, which gave me quite the scare, since in this case the review for Batch 3 came first, an this introduction was the last bit to write. Both Batch 3 and Batch 4 have the same label, and for a moment there I though I’d written a review of the same Whisky again. Fortunately I didn’t, even though it would have been quite interesting to compare both reviews. That would have been a happy accident. Just to be clear, I would have posted this review anyway. Since I don’t remember Batch 4 any more, I can’t compare both to each other, which is quite unusual for me, since I usually do remember almost all Whiskies I’ve tried.

Color: White Wine, quite pale.

Nose: This has it all, tropical fruits, barley, bread, barley sugar, milk chocolate, hint of vanilla and very soft wood. Leafy. Lively. Fresh and also sweet smelling. Toffee and wine gums, and sometimes a bit like a Rum, but also a nice fresh golden Beer and Gin. What a remarkable combination of smells. Also a tiny flinty and smoky note, coming from, I guess, the toasted oak. It’s not very woody though, although over time, some more soft (virgin) oak moves in. Besides the big fruitiness, it is also somewhat perfumy and somewhat sweaty. Not soapy, mind you, it just smells so friendly and nice. Hints of fresh air, cow pasture and paper, only adding to the complexity. It may hardly have a colour, and yet it is a NAS bottling, but in no way does it smell like a young or under-matured Whisky. Amazing how much is going on in this one. No off-notes whatsoever. Wonderful smelling Malt.

Taste: Sweeter than expected and fruity. Vanilla, toffee and mango ice cream. Much simpler than the nose was. Fresh and lemony. Cold dishwater with lemon detergent and almonds. Wood shavings and sawdust. Fresh oak playing a larger role here than it did on the nose. I can feel the bitterness on the back of my tongue already. Very tasty and well balanced yet less complex. In a way this is a winter warmer. Despite all the fruit it isn’t a sunny Malt. Nice warmth when descending down the pipe. After the fruit moves away, the aftertaste also has this slight bitter lingering note, and present as well (finally it’s there, I’ve been expecting it for quite some time now) a slight soapy feel. The finish itself is medium at best, it doesn’t have a great length, and even the aftertaste leaves quite quickly, hinting at some youth. Still, what this Malt is able to offer, despite its supposed youth, it is amazing. If only the taste was as good as the nose was, than you’d be amazed what I would have scored this.

I didn’t buy Arran for a very long time, after a plethora of very young and initial releases, some of which already were very good. (Remember the Champagne finishes?) Not by choice or prejudice though, it just fell under the radar somehow. I bought this Arran at auction by chance. I wanted to buy a Boutique-y bottle, placed several lowish bids on some of them, and this was the only only one nobody seemed to care for and I was never overbid. So after a while is was Arran time on my lectern, and I opened this one, and it is great. Unexpected. NAS, very pale, so I didn’t expect all that much to be honest, yet this is a very good Arran. So after having tried this one, I immediately scored me some more Arran’s at auction. After this Arran, I’m not so sure 50 cl is acceptable to me any more. I fear this will be gone too soon.

Points: 87

Paul John (59.5%, Single Cask #1906, 210 bottles, 2015)

In the previous review we delved into Paul John single cask #1051, although that particular one turned out to be a tad wonky. So I just had to compare it to another Paul John unpeated single cask. I still have some samples lying around from the golden Shilton Almeida era, probably the most passionate brand ambassador out there, and amongst others, certainly one of the best. Still baffled Paul John let him go, and since Shilton left the company, I don’t see a lot happening on-line yet at Paul John headquarters. Shilton moved on from the Goan sun to the sun that bakes Tel Aviv. One of Shilton’s samples is of cask #1906, like #1051, hailing from the same glorious year that was 2015. For most people certainly a better year than the virus infested, war ridden years we are living through these days.

Color: Gold.

Nose: Super fruity at first, and different from cask #1051. This just leaps out of my glass, with a nice sweet, fruity and surprisingly, flinty toasted cask notes, reminding me a bit of Pouilly Fumé. This cask also has more complexity to it, with a nice floral note as well as some lemon detergent, giving it more cleanliness, dûh, and freshness, even though it might sound horrible to some. Waxy and paper-like, meaty even, dry meat, beef jerky. No, this one is definitely more appetizing than #1051. More complex as well. The pencil shavings are here too, but much more toned down. The pencil shavings are overshadowed by the fruitiness, which is nice. Very nice spicy wood, just the right amount. Fresh butter. Well balanced stuff. This is from a 75% full sample, so this had a lot of time to interact with some air. To be honest, the cold dishwater is also recognizable, just less heavy handed and it has less of it than cask #1051 had. After some more air in my glass, the pencil shavings component does become more apparent, but it never gets to the same level as it does in #1051. The woody bit is more spicy, and evolves a little. More herbal and green. With this one, all seems to fall right in its place, much more balanced. Nice fruity nose, something that is lacking from #1051. A pleasant experience, as well as a pleasant surprise (after #1051). The Pouilly Fumé bit in the nose, makes this one extra special, since that flinty note works so well for this Malt.

Taste: sweet and waxy, (including a distinct paper or cardboard note), with an even bigger (red pepper?) sting to it. Distant mocha and milk chocolate. Quite some ripe yellow fruits. Wow, excellent. #1051 seems gloomy compared to this. #1051 is more like a winter Whisky, and shows nothing of the tropical shores of Goa. Quite some wax in this one again, as well as some soapy detergent. More wax than I expected and the woody bitterness is helped along by the wax. Less bitter than #1051. Appetizing stuff this one, with again quite a lot of influence from the wood. Next some more fruit, fresh, not over-ripe yellow fruit and some fresh citrus for zestiness and likeability. Also the acidity of red berries. Giving it an extra layer over #1051. In the finish some soft notes of anise and sweet licorice. Again not a big aftertaste, more like a lingering warmth, with a wee soft bitterness.

Well, in this review I compared this #1906 all the time to #1051 which I reviewed right before this one, so there isn’t a lot more to comment about here really. To sum things up: #1906 is a way more friendly example, more fruity, and the gloomy bits that overpower #1051 are here as well, just less of it. #1906 is also better balanced, and just better overall. Having tasted quite some Paul John single cask offerings, I would recommend you to pass on #1051, because there are a lot of better examples around, #1906 is just one of them, and #1906 isn’t even one of the very best, close, but not quite. Final observation: personally, I like the peated single cask offerings of Paul John even more than the unpeated ones. The peating levels are not very high, but highly effective and very tasty.

Points: 87