Category Archives: 88 Points

Paul John (57.67%, OB, Single Cask #1615, for Germany, 216 bottles, 2016)

As said in the previous review, I tend to have a pair of open bottles of Paul John on my lectern. At the moment cask #4914 (peated) as well as this unpeated #1615 are on there. Both bottled for the German market. After the peated expression, lets mow turn our attention to the unpeated expression. In the previous review I have remarked that the peated expressions seem to be better and thus score higher. Unpeated cask #1051 scored relatively low with 84 points and low and behold, now the peated cask #4914 from the previous review scores mid eighties as well. 85 points is lower than its predecessors. This is how the universe tends to work. I’m now betting on this cask #1615 getting a score, very high in the eighties, to bring balance in said universe. Not much more to add to the intro at this point, all has been said, so why not cut this intro short for once and dive right into this unpeated Paul John.

Color: Slightly orange gold.

Nose: Fruity and very appetizing. Right out of the gate a fruity, nutty and friendly dram. Malts, sweet malt actually. Lots of unexpected fruit notes, still have to wrap my head around all these fruits. All yellow fruits. Now I get hints of grapes and Alsatian über aromatic Gewurztraminer. Wow, how’s that for yet another take on a single cask Paul John. Ripe yellow fruits, bananas from Jamaican Rum. Cask #1615 turns out to be quite the funky puppy. Wet cardboard and dust. Quite a change is happening now to the body of this Malt. Dry wood with more fruit and vanilla. Fruity ice-cream. Instant gratification, not a lot of layering or complexity. This one puts all its wonderful smelling cards on the table right away.

Taste: Very tasty right out of the gate. Fruity like the nose with nice, slightly prickly oak. Nutty, somewhat vegetal and with a slightly sweet deepness. Warming. Very well balanced. Amazing actually how all these Paul John single casks can differ so much, and remember all are coming from first fill Bourbon casks. Unpeated yes, but there is something about this one. Maybe toasted oak, maybe the oak had lots of residual sugars, like a hint of smoky, sugary oak. Although the fruit dominates this Malt, the wood definitely plays a wonderful role as well. Paul John always claim to be tropical, well if you want a tropical Paul John, this is it. It’s the most tropical I’ve had to date. Very fruity but with a paper or cardboard edge to it, turning into a more bitter wood note, as well as some pencil shavings in the finish. Quite dry. This would have benefited if some of the fruity sweetness would have made it into the finish more, as well as into the aftertaste. In no way is this young smelling or unfinished. Maybe if this had aged some more, it might have gained somewhat more complexity, but it might also have picked up some more wood and bitterness and it also has more than enough of this, so maybe it is at its best as it is.

Points: 88

As a casual sipper I definitely preferred this unpeated cask #1615 to the peated cask #4914. With other sets of open Paul Johns I had in the past, it is often the other way around. Also I’d like to mention that casual sipping is much different from analyzing, because in the case of the latter, the Whisky is getting much much more attention. When analyzing, the Whisky is the focal point whereas with casual sipping the center of attention might be a film, a book or an interesting conversation, to name but a few distractions. This shift in attention also changes your perception of the Whisky at hand more than you might think.

Since this turns out to be yet another high scoring Paul John, and since I still have a wee dram of peated cask #745 left, lets compare these two for a moment. Wow, smelling cask #745 (again, the darker of the two) after cask #1615 makes it truly amazing. Holy moly what a winner cask #745 truly is on the nose. And what a nice pair to smell. The peated one has the Paul John plastic note, and this unpeated one does not. cask #745 has peat, clay, rubber and plastic, all traits cask #1615 does not have (obviously). cask #745 is a way more fuller and aromatic Whisky, more industrial and much bigger (and it has horseradish in the aftertaste). It unhinges slightly in the finish though, and that is probably why cask #777 scored a point more than cask #745. Both cask #1615 and cask #745 taste entirely different. So again, 89 points for cask #745 still stands (again) and the way cask #1615 finishes and all things considered, 88 points is correct amount of points for this one as well. Mind you, all this scoring stuff is highly personal, so I urge you all to make up your own mind if you get the chance to taste the Whiskies you read about, and don’t follow what anybody says blindly. Over and out for now!

Glenrothes 2007/2021 (64.3%, Berry Brothers & Rudd, Sherry Butt #1120, for Kirsch Import Germany, 646 bottles)

Glenrothes, I always liked the look of those bulky cannon ball bottles. Many of the highly reduced vintage offerings weren’t really all that interesting. Earlier written reviews of Glenrothes prove this. Just have a look at these vintages: 1979 (85 points), 1987 (83 points), 1989 (84 points) and 1992 (79 points), not to mention this Select Reserve (81 points), a NAS, not even a vintage. Where is the world coming to? Nope, I still somehow believe in the distilled spirit of Glenrothes, so I sometimes buy one at auction. I do prefer Independent bottlings at cask strength (and officially released cask strength versions as well). Until now, all independent offerings on these pages scored higher than their official counterparts. Although I have to admit that I tasted quite a few older vintages in my beloved cannon ball bottlings that were actually quite good (even after reduction), maybe that’s why I still believe? This time around we’re going to have a look at a Glenrothes bottled by indie bottler Berry Brothers and Rudd.

Those of you with a talent for reading every letter on labels, front and back, especially those that have one of those official cannonball bottlings at home, will have noticed that Berry Brothers and Rudd are also mentioned on the front label in fine print. In 1999 the Edrington Group (mainly known today for The Macallan and Highland Park) acquired Glenrothes. I have to specifically mention right now, that I mean the distillery ánd the brand by this. Since the main Single Malt focus was on the two aforementioned distilleries (and brands), and times were different back then, Edrington sold the Glenrothes brand to Berry Brothers and Rudd in 2010, yet retaining the distillery and the cooperage. Edrington acquired Cutty Sark (The Blended Whisky) from Berry Brothers in return. In 2017 Edrington bought the brand back and thus acquired a well known Speyside brand they could give the Macallan and Highland Park ultra premium treatment to. Funny then (or sad), that their old business-partner couldn’t even use the Glenrothes name (or should I say, brand) on the label…

Color: Copper Gold.

Nose: Initially milky, very a-typical and definitely not what you would expect. Vegetal and big raisins next. Modern, slightly sharp oak. Tea and old, worn down vanilla powder. The initial “strangeness” wears off quite quickly, making room for a more herbal feel. By now I would have expected more red fruits, but still not the case. This is more dusty, tobacco like with old sawdust. More black tea notes emerge. I’m quite happy with this nose, because it develops a lot in the glass, and it shows traits you don’t smell all that often. The longer you have it in your glass, the drier it gets. Cold Cuban tobacco and standing on the edge of a forest in the mist. After a while a more creamy nose emerges and dissipates again. Well I’m sure you all now feel this is a complex piece of work. Old books, dust. Very distinguished. Hints of cocktail cherries in the distance, followed by a fantastic mix of cold tobacco and herbs. Sometimes a dry smell of orange whiffs by, almost artificial orange. Definitely not from the freshly peeled fruit. Like a dried out tangerine. The dust now moves into the territory of dry grass and hay, and some more elegant wood. A truly wonderful and layered nose. A warm indoor fire in the back of the room.

Taste: Hot, yes, who would have thought at almost 65% ABV, nudge, nudge, wink, wink. Initially this reminds me a bit of Damoiseau Millesime 2009, and not only because of the ABV. Next comes the wood and I’m happy to report, it is again the lovely elegant wood from the nose. I’m already really liking this one, now that I have tasted it. Here some more red fruits. Combining quite nicely with the wood. Second sip very similar. Here it doesn’t have the complexity of the nose, nope, it’s simpler than that. However, this is still a Whisky with a high fun factor. Nothing off, and the taste in combination with the high ABV turns out to be a pleaser (for me), but not everybody copes well with Whiskies with a high ABV. The color gave it away, this is not a Sherry monster, but it did come from Sherry and it is a bit of a monster. A friendly giant. Warm (sea) sand, well I have never tasted that, but it does remind me of that. I lived near the beach once, so maybe I did taste sand, one’s subconscious works in mysterious ways. It surely reminds me of it. Next some fruity sweetness becomes noticeable. Great balance to this. Puts some color on your cheeks.

Yet another good example of a Whisky that is not an easy one. The ABV is high and you need some experience and patience to get all out of it. Come to think of it, I even never tried this one with water. Novices would be put off by the initial aromas from the nose. This is not for casual sipping, but you need to work it and give it a lot of time. I bought this at auction and probably forgot about it, because I got myself second one at auction again (both were quite affordable). Definitely not regretting it, but then again, I also hardly ever open a bottle for the second time, always more interested in the next thing than going back. But it does happen, and sometimes one gets into this melancholy mode many years later, and than it is nice to have the possibility to get back to this one.

Overall a great deal. The bottle and the label look nice. The nose is very special, the taste is very well balanced and the high ABV works well. I should get me another one, ah, yes, I already got one, nudging and winking again. On my lectern I have a Macduff of similar ABV. The Macduff is closed as I’ve never encountered before, and this Glenrothes definitely is not. Final remark. Work this one, casually sipping you will never get everything out of all that it has to offer. Final remark, a disclaimer of sorts, nowhere on the bottle of the packaging is it ever mentioned this is a Glenrothes. The label states: “A Secret Speyside Distillery”, I’ve been assured this is a Glenrothes, and it surely does taste like Glenrothes, however there is always this small chance it is not, which would surprise me a lot.

Points: 88

Damoiseau Rhum Vieux 7yo “Millesime 2009” (66.9%, OB, Recharred Bourbon Barrels, Guadeloupe)

Guadeloupe is an overseas department and region of France and it consists of threes. It has three main islands and has three Bellevue distilleries. From west to east we first have the island of Basse-Terre, easy to recognize because of its mountains and an active stratovolcano called “La Grande Soufrière”. Last eruption: 1977 (phreatic eruption, steam). The last magmatic eruption was in 1580 (give or take 50 years, sice nothing was recorded). The soil of Basse-Terre, and this probably doesn’t come as a surprise any more, is volcanic and thus fertile, very suitable to grow many variants of sugarcane. More to the east lies the island of Grande-Terre, separated from Basse-Terre by a narrow body of water called Rivière Salée. Grande-terre is flat and has a limestone soil. A bit farther away to the east and more to the south lies Marie-Galante. Also flat with a limestone soil and thus akin to Grande-Terre.

As said above, then there are three Bellevue distilleries. Don’t worry, there are many more distilleries on the three islands that are not called Bellevue. The first Bellevue is Bellevue au Moule better known under it’s Rum-brand name: Damoiseau, located on Grande-Terre. The second Bellevue is Bellevue Sainte Rose, better known under it’s Rum-brand name: Reimonenq, located on Basse-Terre. And finally Bellevue Marie-Galante located on…do you really want me to spell it out for you? So we have three islands and all three have their own Bellevue Rhum Distillery. How’s that for order in the universe?

As is often the case with R(h)um, some sort of estate comes into play. The Bellevue au Moule estate, sugar refinery and distillery was founded somewhere near the end of the 19th Century by the Rimbaud family, (although 1914 is also mentioned somewhere). So history is a bit unclear here. All Rhum from these early days was Molasses based. In 1942 Roger Damoiseau bought the, by then abandoned and dilapidated, estate and distillery and rebuilt it. My guess now would be leaning more towards late 19th Century, because if founded in 1914 and already dilapidated and abandoned by 1942, well that’s rather quick now doesn’t it? Also, it must have been run down rather badly since the price of rebuilding was quite steep. Nevermind, usually when a new (or extensively rebuilt) distillery sees the light of day, owners tend to make some quick money by selling unaged spirit like, Wodka and/or Gin. So Roger rebuilt the sugar estate and the distillery and he decided to make some quick bucks by selling, wait for it, candies and jam, both made at the site. Luckily Rhum quickly followed suit and of course soon became the main business. The whole output is Rhum Agricole now (based on sugarcane juice), but in the old days, in the sugarcane off-season, also Rhum Industriel (based on molasses) was produced. This was the schtick of Roger Jr, who took over from his father in 1968, to pay off the debts made by Roger Sr. when buying and rebuilding the site. Roger Jr. had to do that for a long, long time. To finish the story of Damoiseau, today the children of Roger Jr. are now running the show. Herve as chairman of the company, Jean-Luc overseeing production as master-distiller and Sandrine promoting the brand.

Last but not least, the distillery has three column stills allowing for a continuous distillation regime. The first one was bought second hand from a closed Micro-Distillery called Bonne Mere. Both others were newly bought. The distillery processes circa 30.000 tonnes of sugar cane and producing circa 1.64 million litres of absolute alcohol per annum.

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: First thing that comes to mind when smelling this is that it doesn’t remind me of a Rhum Agricole from Martinique, or any Agricole for that matter. Don’t really know right now if this is because the Agricoles from Guadeloupe are much different or because this example is very high in ABV. Light acetone (glue-like) with thin toffee and caramel aromas. Chewy. Artificial orange as in Sinaspril tablets, some wood and some more toffee. Dusty and somewhat herbal desert wind. Slightly perfumy or soapy even, yet this dissipates quickly. Licorice pencil shavings with a nice ripe yellow fruit and vanilla note on top of it. If snorted vigorously, a minty sensation settles in my nose. No, this is not because of alcohol fumes from the high ABV this time. A layer of green and leafy aroma’s emerge next, well mixed in with a more sweet and chewy licorice note now. Some cigarette smoke. The whole smells rather elegant if I may say so, especially since I imagined this might be some sort of a brute, since the number of the ABV on the label is rather impressive. Some of the emerging aroma’s remind me of a Red Italian Wine. A fruity Amarone before settling back into toffee, caramel and almonds again. This must be its natural idle state I guess. Well balanced and very pleasing. The next day the empty glass smells a bit oaky, oily and industrial.

Taste: Yup, toffee, and caramel, and licorice, and some bitter sun toasted oak are right upfront here, what a treat! More oak and definitely a bit sharper and hotter than the nose. Spicy. The taste is not far away from how this Rhum smells. No mistake now to be made, this is definitely a Rhum Agricole, yet definitely not in the style of Martinique. The high ABV is in no way a problem and I don’t feel any need to let this swim for a bit. I usually don’t use water much, even with high ABV, although there are definitely some spirits out there that really improve by adding some water. I prefer to use a hypodermic needle even, as opposed to the plastic pipette so common to tasters of spirits. The needle ensures me to have the smallest droplets I can get. I know, I’m quite strange that way. A slightly soapy feel and a floral note emerges, I didn’t pick up on when smelling it. Still don’t actually, so it most likely isn’t there. The minty bit mentioned above, emerges here as well in the finish. Nice tasty and herbal oak. For me this is a hit. It might not be highly complex, but it is very rewarding nevertheless. Towards the end though, it is less outspoken of an Agricole than most Martinique Agricoles I know (and reviewed earlier).

This profile suits me, I have to get me some more Guadeloupe Rhum, if only to find out for myself how Guadeloupe Rhum differs from the Martinique ones and if I prefer, in general, one over the other.

Points: 88

Springbank 12yo 2003/2015 (58.3%, OB, Port Pipe, for UK Customers, 696 bottles, 15/177)

When the fifth release of Springbank Local Barley 10yo (2019) hit the shelf, I was offered a generous sample by Nico. In stead of money exchanging hands, it is always nicer and more adventurous to exchange it for a sample that hopefully can stand up to the Local Barley. Looking through my stock, I decided upon this single cask bottling for UK customers. I opened it, filled a sample bottle for Nico and when he got it, we had contact whilst he was trying it. Sort of an online tasting. I poured myself a wee dram as well. Well, what can I say, we both liked it. At first Nico liked it big time and appreciated it even more than I did, and I already did like it. Some time has passed since then, and with some air, and maybe even some more balance to it, it is time to have this more “official” look at this full time Port cask matured Whisky from the stills of Springbank Distillery.

Color: Orange gold. No red hue.

Nose: Funky Wine. Fresh and fruity smelling. Cherries (fresh and sour ones), sweet licorice, waxy and oily. Traces of peat, hints of dust and cardboard. Warm electricity cable and sometimes a whiff of hospital (ether). Funky organics and animalesk. Fruity and slightly sweet smelling. Nice warm wood notes with almonds and after a while a soapy note emerges, at times more resembling a lemon based dishwater soap. Sounds bad, I know, but it’s not, giving it a fresher, more zesty phase. If this soapy note comes back in the taste though, than it’ll be a problem! The winey bit is very present and almost overpowering, and it doesn’t remind me necessarily of Port. It was bottled just in time for it be be nice smelling and balanced in the nose as well. At times floral and perfumy. This is a nice smelling and highly complex Springbank, showing its provenance because of the oils and fats, not dissimilar to a (very) good batch of the 10yo. I see this as a Springbank “+”. It still is clearly a Springbank with just another layer added. Some light and subdued mixture of kitchen spices and sometimes some notes of hay and dry grass. Amazing balance and complexity in the nose. After a while a more fresh oak note emerges, and more grass, especially after sipping it. The nose becomes even better and more balanced after sipping.

Taste: Nice big entry. Again fatty, fruity and nutty, yet much less so than on the nose. Waxy and ever so slightly peaty, with a peppery and spicy attack (not yet from the wood it was aged in). Deep note of peat and red ripe fruit (and some plastic?). Big, big, big, yet somewhat less complex than the nose is. Black coal, maybe some tar and warm machine oil. More hints of wood, just like smelling fresh dried staves. Dried grass and definitely licorice. Honey-licorice with a slight bitterness and spiciness to it. Definitely more wood in here (eventually) than in the nose. Where the nose was almost overpowered by the fruity Port cask, here it is the other way ’round. The Springbank spirit overpowers the Port. Unmistakable Springbank here. Still enough fruit and sweetness now. You can’t call this sweet in any way, but there is some of it giving it even more balance, although I feel this is also less balanced than the nose was. More fruity wax, and the tiniest hint of clay. Fruity Port and some black coal in the finish. For this particular Malt, balance is very important. If the balance of the taste and the mouthfeel were just as good as the nose, than this would have scored (close to) 90 points.

A very good expression, yet not in the style of a daily drinker. A bit too demanding for that. Complex and big. In a way this doesn’t resemble a modern Malt. It has a rarely seen profile, that oozes the times of yesteryear. Also, to finish things off, if you want to catch some annoying fruit flies in your home, than this is your liquid of choice, even now that we’re well into autumn/fall.

Points: 88

Bimber “Netherlands Edition” 2021 (58.2%, OB, Rye Cask #224, for Bresser & Timmer, 271 bottles)

Geographically, the transit from The Netherlands to Belgium is a short one. The Belgians, when compared to the Dutch, are known to be more into the taste and smell of food and drink, and thus spend more money on it. So, as the human I am, (I’m no T-1000, although I do love my liquids, nudge nudge, wink wink), I would say, and I know this is a big assumption now, that the Belgian version should be better than the Netherlands one. Also, one doesn’t hear a lot about ex-Rye Whisky casks. However, I do know that in general the Whisky industry in general doesn’t discern between casks that previously held a Bourbon or those that held a Tennessee Whiskey. All are called ex-Bourbon casks, since the two are common in the US of A. I guess the same maybe true for casks that previously held a Rye Whiskey. All three forms of Whiskey are different especially the Rye Whiskey and now we have a chance to find out if Bimber from an ex-Bourbon cask is different from one that matured in an ex-Rye Whiskey cask.

Color: Pale White Wine

Nose: Floral, perfumy. Old worn out dried flower pouch, pot-pourri would be to much, to describe the florality. Maybe it’s even slightly soapy, like an old bar of grandma’s soap in a closet full of linen. Malty and soft. Smells also ever so slightly sweet combined with some pencil shavings and cinnamon. Again a wonderful, friendly nose. Fresh and zesty now. Sometimes slightly farmy yet also clean. Warm mocha and creamy, with a hint of peanut and almonds. occasional whiff (a mere hint) of tea tree oil. Candied warm apple and a mixture of soft kitchen spices. Great balance again. Smells very tasty. Rye Whisky itself is in general more floral than Bourbon, and the same is applicable here as well. All of a sudden a whiff of fresher, almost virgin, oak. Again, when this gets some time to breathe, this one has a killer nose as well. It is slightly closed at first, so it does need some air. I pick up on some licorice notes out of the freshly emptied glass. The nose of the Bourbon expression is bigger, yet this one is similarly complex and wonderful as well, Even with this one being “thinner” it is equally as good. Again here we have yet another example of a Malt that needs to breathe. When it gets this time, it is an amazing nose. The nose of both belong to Whiskies that score in the 90 points range, an amazing feat for such a young Malt.

Taste: Short sweet onset, somewhat thin texture. Less sweet and creamy than the Bourbon expression for Belgium. Right out of the gate this seems to have been a less active cask, somewhat introvert so to speak. It gets leafy, green, paper-like and woody quickly. A bit dryer, spicier and more raw than the Bourbon expression, yet the fruity sweet bit clings on for dear life as well. After the first sip (quite hot going down), the nose shows a lot more cinnamon. Mocha as well, which pairs nicely with the cinnamon notes. After trying quite a few Bimbers over the last year, cinnamon seems to be a marker you can recognize it with. After the wood, fruity lemonade pops up. I’m sure that the nice play on wood masks the fruit a bit, but is it quite fruity (underneath). Even if the Bourbon-expression for Belgium turns out to be “better” than this Netherlands one, I feel this one is more unique. I welcome the different experience the Rye expression offers, and I’m having al lot of fun with this one as well. The finish is yet again a bit thin yet ever so slightly better balanced than the Bourbon one, and it is of medium length. The aftertaste is somewhat sweet and lacks a bit of staying power. No off notes, no bitterness.

I know Hans (Bresser) and Auke (Timmer) and these guys wouldn’t accept a “lesser” cask for a Whisky in their name. But I also know these guys enjoy their live better than the average Belgian, who most definitely enjoy the good things in life better than the average Dutch. Even though initially I found the Bourbon version to be slightly better, this Rye version differs a bit and as such is also a bit more adventurous. The Bourbon is more creamy, the Rye more floral and slightly more special if you ask me. It is nice though to have the two side by side and compare the two. Never ever did I regret to have them both open at the same time. It was definitely worth it. Now that they are nearly gone, I find myself leaning a bit more towards the Rye, yet on other occasions more to the Bourbon. Go figure. Both are actually equally good, so they get the same score. It was a good thing to have them both open at the same time, easier to pick up on the difference. Good stuff.

Points: 88

Bimber “Belgium Edition” 2021 (58.4%, OB, Bourbon Cask #194, for Top Malts, 257 bottles)

Bimber means Moonshine in Polish. You know, alcohol distilled by amateurs under amateuristic conditions. Home distilling is not a strange thing in (rural) Poland, and most distillates are fruit-based. The founders of Bimber, Darius and Ewelina, moved from Poland to London and started distilling. The first casks with Whisky were filled on the 26th of May, 2016. The apple often doesn’t fall far from the tree, so no surprise here that somewhere down Darius’ family tree there were men distilling alcohol under amateuristic conditions. Bimber tries to do as much as they can themselves, with traditional methods and always with the highest quality in mind. They have an on-site cooperage and they have their own yeast. Apart from that, they have a seven day fermentation period which is much longer than is usually the case. This long fermentation produces a light and fruity spirit.

As with any Whisky, I feel you get to know it best when it’s matured in an ex-Bourbon cask, preferably a refill one. So no surprise here that the first Bimber on these pages is matured in a cask like that. I only don’t know if this is from a first fill or a refill cask, although the amount of bottles produced seem to suggest it came from a hogshead, which makes it a refill cask. When the first cask has been filled in 2016 and this was bottled in 2021, this can be no more than five years old, and probably less than that. I came across Bimber for the first time at the Whisky Show in London and liked it very much, and after that, the first purchases, (five in total), were just a formality. This Belgium one is one of those first five.

Color: Pale White Wine

Nose: Holy moly what a wonderful nose. Soft, spicy (also soft), mineral and creamy. Slightly farmy with fresh rain water or water in a fast running stream. Barley, barley sugar, sweet fruits (in candy form) and more cream, clotted cream, powdered pudding. Candied cinnamon, fresh almonds, soft sawdust and somewhat leafy. It’s like being in a dusty mill where spices are being ground on a sunny day. Potent and light at the same time. Full on aroma’s. Hard candy raspberry stick, the ones you buy at a fun fair. More soft spices. Greenish and leafy again, almost like candied sawdust this time around (that’s a first). Sometimes hints of creamy horseradish (Chrzan cremowy). Already this Malt oozes utter quality. What a perfectly balanced blend of aroma’s, and at this age! Nothing short of amazing. I’m an instant fan of Bimber after Whiskies like this. Look, I believe this can’t be more than four years old and it has already nothing to do with new make spirit. Well sparsely the smell of Gin, but we do like the smell of Gin now don’t we? However, when sipping this, I often don’t smell the Gin to be honest, but sometimes I do. Today even Lagavulin, and for some years, some other bottlings from other distilleries in Diageo’s special releases, like the ever so popular smoky Cragganmore, still taste a bit of milky new make. What is that? And why do different Diageo distillates show the same markers. Markers I’m not really fond of, by the way. Point is, that this young Bimber seems to be more mature than some other Whiskies more than twice its age.

Taste: The onset is sweet, but already there are some nice amounts of sweetish wood spices and cardboard to be found. A minty and cola-like sparkle. So some wood, ever so slightly bitter and quite fruity, as well as some acidic lemony notes, which makes the whole more vibrant and less heavy (as in syrupy peaches). Mind you, it isn’t a really sweet Whisky this, but the sweetness does play its role. Mocha with brownie dough. Instant coffee granules. Taste-wise the youth of this Malt is easier to pick up on, because of the lack of complexity when compared to the wonderful nose. Even at this strength this is highly drinkable. I should try it before its gone, but I never found the urge to add water to this. Finally, in the finish some woody bitterness arrives, which, in moderate amounts, is needed by a Whisky, since it is aged in wood, so we want to notice the wood. We don’t like the bitterness to be overpowering though, and here it certainly isn’t. Nevertheless, the nose is better than the taste, but the whole is really good. I wonder what will happen when this becomes of age, I’m not even sure right now if that is going to be a good thing, since this youngster managed to pick up already quite a bit from the cask it was in. We’ll see.

Points: 88

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

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

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

Color: Copper brown.

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

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

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

Points: 88 points (again)

Mortlach 12yo 2008/2020 (56.8%, Signatory Vintage, Cask Strength Collection, Bourbon Barrels #800110, #800126 & #800127, 710 bottles)

After the wonderful and very interesting Loch Lomond, let’s try another Whisky fully matured in ex-Bourbon casks. This time one that was distilled at Mortlach. Mortlach has quite the reputation with Whisky Aficionado’s and rightly so. For instance, Mortlach 16yo was arguably the best offering in Diageo’s once extensive Flora and Fauna Range. Having this niche popularity, Diageo decided to do something more with the brand that is Mortlach and discontinued the 16yo around 2012 in favour of a Rare Old (NAS, not rare nor old, 80 points), an 18yo and a 25yo (84 points). All in 500 ml bottles! These three were released in 2014 and replaced in 2018 by more common age statement versions: 12yo, 16yo (a magic age statement for Mortlach) and 20yo. All three now in 700 ml/750 ml bottles. Mortlach is known for its Whiskies matured in Sherry casks. The 16yo Flora and Fauna is an example of this, and I thought an offering by Wilson & Morgan was even better than that. No surprise then, this has matured in a Sherry cask as well. I also reviewed a Provenance Mortlach earlier, I suppose was matured in Ex-Bourbon wood, which was not so interesting, so let’s see if this Signatory Mortlach is any good, or we should stick to Sherried versions of Mortlach altogether.

Color: Light gold.

Nose: Winey, clear glue, creamy and slightly acidic. Not your usual creamy vanillin kind of smell though. A moment later some more fruits emerge, as well as the creamy vanilla powder notes. Dusty and slightly smoky (probably from toasted oak, not peat). Hints of gravy and cold dishwater, and some soft sugared fruit notes. This is a big Malt, which already shows amazing complexity. Not a cloying smell, since a nice fruity acidity keeps playing its part. This is a Mortlach and Mortlach is a special distillate, and boy, does this smell special. For some this may be a simple kind of Whisky, just pour new make into Bourbon Barrels, mind you, they didn’t even turn those into hogsheads, lazy buggers, and job done, easy, simple, no hassle. Yet Mortlach in a Bourbon Barrel, comes out slightly different from Whiskies from other distilleries matured like this, there is always something different about Mortlach, richer, beefier, meatier, just bigger, special. It’s almost like the fatty acid chains are just longer with Mortlach (without becoming soapy). Hints of raspberry hard candy, next to the half-ripe yellow fruits. Just not as exotic as it can be in well matured Tomatin’s. However, keep in mind that this is only 12yo, and not 30yo like the Tomatin’s I just mentioned. I don’t even know why I brought that up, since Mortlach and Tomatin are very different from each other. So fruity it is, just not all that tropical.

Taste: Sweet and very, very nutty and fruity at the same time, much more fruity than expected actually. Some wood, more akin to pencil shavings than oak, to be honest. Including a slight harmless bitter note. Again, not cloying since the big body also has enough fruity acidity to help it along. Nice. What a wonderful start. Signatory have recently issued some Mortlach Sherry Monsters from the 2010 vintage, which are more or less the same age, but I can’t imagine those ones beating something like this. Licorice powder, some paper and some spices as well as a peppery backbone. Sometimes a sweet minty note pops up. Mocha, milk chocolate. Tastes like a dessert Malt now. Hints of hay, more paper and overall still quite complex. Nice finish and a long warm aftertaste, including the glue again, which you pick up on initially when smelling a freshly poured dram of this.

This is an excellent Mortlach that was not matured in a Sherry cask. Very big and tasty, with complexity and length. The quality is unmistakeable and this will please a lot of Whisky aficionado’s. Its a good example of the spirit of Mortlach and a good example of what “simple” American oak can do. The quality is right upfront, and easy to see for everyone. I scored the Loch Lomond from the previous review slightly higher than this Mortlach, but I also believe, that one might not be for everyone, and you can only find the true beauty of the Loch Lomond when you work it a bit. The Mortlach is more suitable for casual drinking, its always good. the Loch Lomond needs your full attention, otherwise it can be a grumpy old git and will Will-slap you across the face.

Points: 88

Hampden Estate Overproof (60%, OB, LM191, Jamaica)

What can we say about Hampden Estate. First of all, I don’t want to be a completist here and write down a full-blown history. On one hand there is much better information online than I can write down here by myself, and on the other hand, there actually is also not a lot to be found. There are a few great sources for information, but there is still way less information available on Rum than there is on Whisky. Much less. If you have some time then Matt’s visit of Hampden is an excellent read.

Hampden started out somewhere in the 18th century already, and the distillery today still operates more or less in the same way today. Old skool. The first mention of Hampden was in 1684. However, Hampden’s own website starts history in 1753 (as a sugar plantation), but no clear year is mentioned for the start of Hampden as a Rum distillery, only 1779 is coupled with Hampden Great House where the ground floor was a Rum store. What we do know is that somewhere Hampden started distilling Rum, as did many sugar plantations, when exports of sugar from sugarcane started dwindling, when in Europe sugar was made from sugar beets in stead of cane. What we also know is that Hampden, after all there years, still looks more or less unchanged, and looking at Matt’s pictures, steam-punk comes to mind as well as the pictures from fans of abandoned places. Time definitely stood still here big time.

Hampden is also known for its Jamaican funk, and of all the Jamaican funk that can be had, Hampden is probably the mother of Jamaican funk. The funk is partially there because of a very long fermentation, somewhere between 8 and 15 days, fermentation with wild yeasts that just come flying in with the wind. No yeast is added. Also, Hampden produces a sugar cane vinegar (muck) that is added during the fermentation, helping the funky aroma along. Hampden currently has four stills they call the heart of the distillery, and rightly so, but I guess that is true for most, of not all, distilleries: A 1960 John Dore (7.560 litres) from Forsyths, Scotland, a 1994 Vendome from Kentucky (18.900 litres), a 2010 Forsyth still (18.900 litres) and the most recent addition is a Pot still made by T&T from South Africa (18.900 litres). All stills are heated with coils on the inside.

Hampden’s core range consists of Hampden 46 (8 years of tropical ageing) and Hampden 60 (or Overproof, 7yo and older, a mix of different marks). I have yet to try the 46% ABV. I never got around to it because, up ’till now, I always believed it is the reduced version of the Overproof, but that might not be true. The Hampden I’m about to try must be one of the early bottles, where the front label mentions 8yo and the back label 7 yo, whereas newer versions have a more prominent 8 on the front label. To add to the confusion. The website mentions 7 years again. However I still believe the 46% is nothing more than the reduced version of the Overproof.

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Highly aromatic. Big, fatty, sweet and nutty. Fruity with bath/shower cosmetics florality. No, you cannot even call this big, no, this has an humongous aroma, so high level of esters indeed. Fruity and fresh. Acidic and lively. Fatty nuts, almonds. High ester Rums like this are used for their aroma’s for baking and yes, that’s where you know this aroma from. After the initial wave of bigness passes, a little bit of wood starts to become noticeable, grows bigger over time and is here to stay. Some oak and some pencil shavings and an indistinct herbal quality, as well as a tiny hint of car exhaust. It is remarkable how the big, fatty and syrupy start does move back to leave some room for more astringent notes like the woody notes. It doesn’t even carry this promise for a sweet toffee’d Rum any more. I have to say excellent balance after some air. A sort of instant classic. Unique. A must-have.

Taste: Where the wood is somewhat laid back in the nose, it is most definitely present here on the palate. The wood opens the ball. Modern wood, but that probably won’t make any sense to you. hint of plastics, otherwise it smells of tropical ageing, you just sense the heat that surrounded the cask. Acidic. Big fruit and quite a lot of fresh acidity as well, with this underlying woody backbone. Acidity bordering on very, very (over)ripe fruit, the pre-rot phase almost. The wood becomes more dark chocolaty in style, and more spicy. Less herbal though, but more leathery in stead. Wood and ear wax. In fact the ear-wax was here right from the beginning, just in the plethora of things I didn’t recognize it immediately. The bitterness moves forward now, especially noticeable in the back of your mouth. The wood is upfront but luckily, in this case, its not over the top bitter. At this point, the pencil shaving note on the note grows stronger. On the palate it shows some similarities with Demerara Rum and a specific Port Mourant comes to mind. This is not something I get all the time. When trying this late at night, with a tired and fulfilled palate, the Demerara association isn’t there. So this has some bitterness and it certainly shows wood which now picks up a slight soapiness, reminding me of the bath/shower cosmetics from the nose. The aftertaste is long and warming with a key role for the woody bitterness, but again, it is kept in check sufficiently not to bother you.

For me this is a good Rum with a good ABV, sold at a very fair (good) price and with good availability as well. In hindsight it also has a remarkable simplicity uncommon for a high ester Rum. This is the overproof version and I hear some good stories about the reduced versions as well. I may have to look into those as well, since by now there are some more expressions to choose from than the 46% ABV version alone. Hampden LROK, and Hampden LROK the younger, both bottled at 47% ABV have become available just recently. LROK is a mark given by Hampden. LROK stands for Light Rum Owen Kelly and by this, it tells you that is has 250-350 g/hlaa of esters. By the way, this Overproof version is made with several marks: OWH (Outram Warmold Hussey, 40-80 g/hlaa), LROK and DOK (Dermot Owen Kelly, 1500-1600 g/hlaa). I don’t think a lot of DOK went into this blend to be honest. More about “Mark and Ester” in the next Hampden review.

Points: 88

The empty glass, the next day, smells of warm electrical cable and the dusty insides of an old transistor radio. How odd…

Tomatin “Water” (46%, OB, Five Virtues #5, Sherry Butts & Second Fill Bourbon Barrels, 6.000 bottles, 2018)

Alas, we’ve come to the last of the five virtues. The four previous editions were all good, for me personally, especially “Metal” was very nice, but I love well aged seemingly simple ex-Bourbon casked Whiskies. All four are definitely interesting and different from one another. No duds between them. So now the time has come to put the series to bed with “Water”. Water is made with distillate from the winter of 2005, which doesn’t make things any clearer, since the year starts and ends in winter… Half of the Whisky was matured in second fill Bourbon Barrels and the other half in Sherry Butts. Although in some communications, Tomatin does mention Sherry Hogsheads as well (just not on the packaging). If memory serves me correctly, I really liked this one as well in London, and after the very nice Metal I have high hopes for this Water as well.

Color: Copper gold, like a Bourbon, definitely not the colour of water.

Nose: Spicy wood right upfront, with sweet smelling red fruits, hints of tar, an old warehouse with a stone floor, and toasted oak. Notes of wood and fresh air. Nutty, dusty and somewhat sharp and spicy. A take on modern Sherry casks, somewhat similar to the Sherry notes, (not the peat notes), of Benromach Peat Smoke 2010 I reviewed just recently. Old warehouse with old paper and pepper with hints of a more (smelly) organic note. Wet earth and a wee bit of virgin oak. Again a quiet and balanced expression from Tomatin with lavas and gravy and some more indistinct organics. Leafy with hints of old dried out leather and a garden bonfire. Nice (dried) kitchen herbs. The Sherry makes this smell “chewy”. More whiffs of paper are flying by. A Whisky for a sunny day.

Taste: Sweet and syrupy. Fruity. Jam-like. Red fruits. Thick. The Whisky sticks to my glass. This thick, fruity, (half) sweetness, somewhat masks the big note of wood this has as well, including the also masked bitterness. Paper again. Slightly tarry, as if tarry toffee was used for this one. Well balanced as expected. Raisins and ever so slightly soapy and definitely a bit smoky, must be the toasted oak. Vanilla and pudding are here as well, so these second fill barrels still worked their expected magic too, even though the Sherry bit turned out stronger in the mix. I noticed it in Metal, but Water is also a (designed or constructed) Malt which shows what its got, right from the start, lacking a bit in complexity and evolution. This is a minor gripe however, since the balance is there and it is a delicious (red) fruit-driven Whisky with enough back-bone to it. This is not a Sherry monster, but it still is all about the Sherry in this one. Classy stuff.

This is a great companion to Metal. Both are very good and quite different from one-another, but somehow fit together. Both are fruity, but with the Bourbon casks alone that were used for Metal, that shows us an entirely different yet classic Tomatin tropical fruitiness, whereas this Water edition shows us more the Sherry-linked red fruits, in this case, the thick jam-like red fruits. Amazing contrast. At first I thought, well lets review these last two samples I have, so I can open something else, but both are so nice I’m now wondering if I shouldn’t be opening both full bottles at once, after finishing off Earth. With the Metal-edition I was wondering how it would compare to the 15yo American oak. Here with Water I’m wondering how it would compare to the 18yo Oloroso version. Both the 15yo and the 18yo are from the standard range and widely available. “Wood”, “Fire” and “Earth” are all Whiskies which are good, but you have to work them a bit, all three aren’t really for careless sipping, or you’ll miss out on the best bits they have on offer. Metal and Water are good right from the start, more like instant gratification Malts, and in my opinion the best of the bunch.

Points: 88