Category Archives: 90 Points

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

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

Color: Full Gold (slightly hazy).

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

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

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

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

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

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

Color: Light orange gold.

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

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

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

Points: 90

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

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

Color: White Wine.

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

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

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

Points: 90

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

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

Color: Light gold (not pale).

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

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

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

Points: 90

Paul John (59.2%, Single Cask #777, Peated)

Yes, again in this case, I could find another Malt to accompany the previous Paul John Whisky. After last weeks Paul John, we are finishing off this rather terrible year with this Paul John. I’m sure this Whisky will be better than this horrible year was, although there were some silver linings to this year as well. Here we have an officially released single cask: Cask #777, although to truly honour this past year, this should have rather been cask #666. Which, hasn’t been released, yet, and if it exists, I’m not sure I have the nerve to buy one with the number of the beast on it! I hope 2021 will be a lot better! Not a lot is known about this Malt, no age statement, no distillation or bottling year, no cask type. It’s all a mystery.

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Medium peat, clay and nuts. Sharpish and spicy. Almonds with a whiff of bad breath which turns quickly into something wonderful, (toothpaste) mint. Warming, sweet, like smoked runny caramel and vanilla. Fresh air, toffee, perfumed wood, warm sawdust. The wood note is so soft, so good. This is already truly wonderful and very appetizing. Amazing balance. Hint of fresh citrussy zest. Warm smoke from a fire place down the street. There is a lot happening and everything is in the right place. The perfumy bit turns a bit soapy, and where this is often a problem, not here. Here there are so many aroma’s that work together with it, that it just works. In the back a plethora of fruits. Ripe red fruits, ripe yellow fruits, even some baked banana. Some funky organics emerge next, next to the clean woody profile, mixed with a perfumy bit (including some orange zest) and the smoke/peat. I have been very fond of many Amruts, I had open and reviewed earlier, as well as the Cadenheads Paul John from last week, but this one “bidens” (trumps) them all. This one clicks with me even more. Paul John is different from Amrut, but both are really good. Go India! I have to say that I prefer these Indian Malts at cask strength, for me they just work best like that. Sure the 46% ABV and 50% ABV versions are very good as well, but for me, the single cask versions of Amrut and Paul John are the best of the bunch.

Taste: Hot and woody, but not too woody, just enough I would say. A medium sugary sweetness works in tandem with the wood. Toffee and smoke. Prickly fire place smoke and toasted, salty and smoky almonds. I can feel it going down. Ripe fruit sweetness, and some more smoke (and tar). Asphalt melting on a hot street in Marseille. Warm asphalt, complete with droplets of motor oil. Warm industrial wind from a beach near an industrial estate. Light bitterness, which in part originates from smoke and from wood as well. Again, just enough bitterness. Cold ashes and some organic (farty) toffee. By now not a lot of vanilla actually, but the fruity sweetness remains, as well as some runny caramel. The taste matches the nose perfectly. It is what you would expect from the nose. Where the nose is a very complex organ that is able to pick up upon many details and nuances, the mouth is a more crude organ. Yes, the taste of this Whisky might be simpler, or less complex, than the nose is, yet sipping this whisky enhances the nose even more. At times some of the soapiness returns, this time taking away a bit from the finish. The bitter notes seem to be fond of the inner side of your cheeks, so it can be found over there. So, we have some bitterness and some soapiness but the rest is very nice. Good stuff.

I hope to welcome another single cask @ cask strength here soon. Maybe an unpeated one from Paul John’s own releases? Who knows. The peat is an added bonus on top of the quality the Cadenheads bottling already showed. Add to that the “better” sweetness of #777, since this has some more on offer. It may very well be present in the Cadenhead bottling, but maybe in a more masked way. It was more short lived in that expression to begin with, taken over by dry spicy wood. #777 has sweetness in the right amount giving it incredible balance. This is a very tasty expression. The planets aligned for this one.

A final peculiar remark. The nose needs quite some time to show all its beauty, but the liquid itself doesn’t need as much time as the nose does, simply because in this time frame it gets too much air and deteriorates a little bit. The remedy is, pour it, keep it there, warm it up in your hand, and when you are done smelling, pour some more before you start sipping. May sound strange, but for me this worked best. All in all, this is a very good Paul John, amazing stuff this #777!

Points: 90

Ledaig 18yo (46.3%, OB, Spanish Sherry Wood Finish, Limited Release Batch No. 03, 2016)

Ledaig, a very, very, interesting Malt. Ledaig is the peated version and the self-titled Tobermory is the unpeated Malt from the Tobermory Distillery. Both Malts can do really well in Sherry Casks, often mere finishes already do the trick. Remember the 1972’s? But also check out both sister casks bottled by G&M, #464 and #465, we reviewed earlier. Two malts I really love! But beware, Tobermory, the distillery, had a reputation for being really good, but at times also really bad, or mediocre like the two Independently bottled expressions I reviewed earlier: this young Kintra bottling and this even younger Murray McDavid bottling. So Tobermory/Ledaig used to be a you’d-better-just-try-it-first Malt. Lets be honest, it once had a bad rep altogether. I learned way back, that this was actually one to avoid. Especially the unpeated Tobermory could be really Wonkymory. When buying blind, just buy something 12 years or younger, since quality has really gone up in more recent times. I haven’t tried a lot of official releases of this distillery yet, some are quite expensive, but hurray, when this 18yo (third batch) went on sale, the price drop was amazing for this Malt, I went for it. They even threw in a good lookin’ coffin for ya hamster! So time to try this 18yo Oloroso finished Ledaig. This Malt is released in batches, so an investigation in batch variation could be nice and I will do that when given the chance. This time however we’ll only have a look at the latest batch, which at the time of writing, is No. 3.

When my friend Nico tried the freshly opened bottle, the only words that came out before going into toxic shock was “rubber”, oh dear! Thankfully he recovered and dared to try it again, on another occasion, after some breathing. It seems the Ledaig needed some breathing, and probably Nico did too. Nico thought it improved with breathing. Now, lets try for ourselves, and yes we did let it breathe for quite some time (it was a shared bottle and I got the second half), so essentially I got a pre-breathed bottle!

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Extremely funky, but not Jamaican Rum funky, that’s something different altogether. Wonderful fatty peat and fresh sea spray. Fireplace at Christmas. Warming and animalesk. Crushed insects. Very ashy and dusty. Wonderful perfumy wood. Yes, several different kinds of rubber as well; tires, and orange rubber hose come to mind. Warm motor oil. Quite steam punkish and extremely aromatic. More sweet peat and soft smoke. Fatty and broad. Already a very, very pleasant fruity Sherry note comes through. Good Oloroso, good boy! Whilst falling in love with the fine red fruity notes of black berries, and red forest fruit, I get hit over the head with ashy and fatty peat. What a nice interaction, what a nice effect. Never a dull moment with Ledaig. Cigarette smoke and some toffee, showing a slightly more sweeter side. Cookie dough. Steam, salty almonds and seaside tar. Dried or smoked fish. Licorice, salty and smoky now. The peat came first, now the smoke. Fish soup. This is a good smelling Malt for “men”. Bearded, rugged fisherman type of men. With an anchor tattooed on an oversized biceps. Not bearded metro-men, always dressed in a white tee, shopping online for moisturisers and contemplating a meaningless tattoo which will be out of fashion in a years’ time. This Whisky is rugged and boasts big aroma’s. Nakatomi tower style, be warned. Excellent. As often, this does need to break in. It really needs a lot of air to show all it’s got (and to lose the wee smells of sulphur and rubber), and when it does show all it’s got, boy, what wonderful balance! The emptier the bottle the better this is. The nose alone is already worth a 90+ score. Amazing how this brings back the wonderful Whiskies from the days before cars had seat belts and in a way, this also smells like an old car that originally never had seat belts.

Taste: Licorice comes first. Sweet licorice, nutty licorice, fruity licorice. The peat separates from the roof of my mouth into my nose. Nice! Definitely a sweet fruity note right from the start. Short burst of almond liqueur, without the lingering sweet finish. Less bitter than I thought it would be, but it does carry enough wood notes. Hints of steam locomotive and cola. Tastes very first half 20th century. Industrial and old. Stings a bit on my tongue, but not much. Less big as well and the liquid is not syrupy. It starts out promising, and shows a beer-like medium finish, which again some wood (and hops). I guess the reduction to 46.3% did it some harm. Slightly woody bitterness with mocha and milk chocolate. Not a huge aftertaste, nope, note even big, but again licorice (from Bassett’s Allsorts, the anise from this is present as well). Yup, special slightly bitter Belgian Beer. Westmalle Triple. Hops. Haagsche Hopjes as well, a coffee flavoured hard candy from the Netherlands. Where is this going I ask myself, nice complexity. The palate is slightly less magnificent than the nose was. From an almost empty bottle, the nose is stellar. The palate is slightly thin and also less balanced. I guess due to reduction. Medium finish at best (again, the reduction). The aftertaste is soft and lingering.

Do yourself an huge favour. When you buy this, open it a few days earlier and dare to put it away without a cork. If the ABV. would have been (much) higher, I would say, put it away for a few weeks without a cork. This Whisky needs a humongous amount of air to shine. The difference is really big. The harsh rubber notes, Nico was telling me about, are gone now, since my half of the bottle got a lot of air over time. When writing this review the bottle is 80% empty. Even when you do pour it, leave it in your glass for a while. Let it roll around. Keep it moving, warm it up in the palm of your hand. Be nice and gentle to this rugged Malt, and like a good boy it will jump up to you and lick your face.

Points: 90

Highland Park Week – Day 5: Highland Park 9yo 1988/1997 (59.6%, Signatory Vintage, Sherry Butt #10700, 630 bottles)

Lets backup in time even some more. We stay in the land of the independent bottler, this time Signatory Vintage. We are going to take a look at another Highland Park matured in a Sherry cask, a butt even. This one is an even younger example at 9 years of age. The G&M/Whisky Mercenary bottling was 20yo, The Wilson & Morgan was around 14yo, and this Signatory Vintage bottling is a mere 9yo. Highly unusual back then, not so unusual today, since demand has risen dramatically. There is no time anymore to age the bulk of Whisky when there are so much of you around, dear readers. We’ll also go back in time bit since this was distilled in 1988. That is almost 30 years ago!

Color: Copper gold.

Nose: Funky Sherry, but this time with some quality behind it. Meaty and buttery as well, with some nice distant fruit going on. Dusty mocha and milk-chocolate. Dark chocolate as well. Steam, sowing-machine oil. Clean toilet notes, not to be mistaken by a freshly cleaned toilet odour. I know this sounds pretty peculiar, but I get it in this, so I couldn’t help myself and had to write it down. Deeper and more brooding. Probably Oloroso. Cedar wood with an oriental spice-mix and pencil shavings. Even though it is a young Whisky, it already smells like something from another era. Christmas spices. Christmas cake. Dusty and very thick. luxury and velvety, just like the box. The more it breathes the better is gets, give it lots of room for development. A much better Sherry cask than the one, the 1992 Wilson & Morgan expression matured in. After this, forget about that one.

Taste: Well this is almost 60% ABV and that shows. Its big, thick and a bit hot, but also very fruity (meaty blueberries), and amazingly pretty woody as well, but not too much. Luckily it also has some toffee sweetness to it, to balance it all out. Steam and coal. You are conned, by the initial sip, this is going to be sweet, but the sweetness is shoved aside by bullying tannins and Italian laurel licorice. I’m guessing this came from a first fill Oloroso butt, which impaired enough onto this Whisky, so it could be used as a very nice refill cask the second time around. Long oaky finish, with an even longer aftertaste full of black fruits and (cedar) wood. It isn’t all that complex, but when a Whisky is as tasty as this, it doesn’t need to be. It’s only 9yo, but it is bottled at the right time, believe me. Probably Oloroso, but Cream Sherry or PX might be possible as well.

Ohhh, I want one of these. 1988, wow, 9yo, wow-wow. This in my glass and some 80’s music, and I’d have a great day.

Points: 90

Springbank 17yo 1997/2015 “Sherry Wood” (52.3%, OB, Fresh and Refill Sherry Butts and Hogsheads, 9.120 bottles, 15/24)

When attending the Whisky Show in London last year I absolutely loved this one at the Springbank stand. Sure there were better Whiskies at the show, but also you’d almost have to take out another mortgage on your house to buy those. Nope, I mean, this was definitely one of the best Whiskies at a fair price. Still, over here in Europe this sells for well over a hundred euros. Despite this, it was really a no brainer to buy, and remember, why get only one, when you gen get two for twice the price. When I just recently finished another Springbank, (more about that next time), it was time to finally break out this one. Distilled in 1997 and fully matured in fresh and refill Sherry butts and hogsheads. Possibly, but not necessarily, a combination of european and american oak.

Springbank 17yo SherryColor: Gold.

Nose: Nice, waxy and fresh, powdered vitamin C or should we call it vitamin W from now on? Dusty and dry and definitely lots of Sherry mustiness. Hints of apples (Calvados). Slightly wet forest floor with mushrooms growing. Unripe cold banana, some sweet malts, vanilla and quite vegetal as well. Ashy and slightly smoky (more so than peat). Hints of tar and charred cask and even some new wood, although that isn’t used for this expression. Even though this is 100% Sherry, this smells like a typical Springbank, minus the big sweet creamy vanilla that is, the Bourbon part always brings. Remember, Springbank usually is a blend of Bourbon and Sherry casks. Luckily the Springbank distillate does well in every kind of cask. However, all types of casks used, bring their own flavor to the Springbank spectrum. So there is no better Whisky to try different expressions from. This one reminds me of old Springbank in a way. Coconut and quite fruity as well. Very well made and extremely balanced smell. They are definitely doing everything right. The Sherry smells unbelievably fresh and defined. It must have some casks (if not all) that contained Sherries matured under flor. Fino and Manzanilla that is. I doesn’t smell like typical Oloroso matured Whisky to me, (although very dry Oloroso could be possible). The Sherry notes also smell a bit different from the Sherry in the 12yo Cask Strength. Lovely expression, which would have been nice to compare to the 18yo I reviewed earlier. Alas, that one is already gone, so that is not possible anymore. Bugger.

Taste: Yup, Sherry (from under flor) and typical Springbank. If you love Springbank like I do, it feels like coming home again. Waxy, vanilla and lots and lots of coconut again. Sometimes a bit soapy even. Welcome back: coconut! Peat (more so than smoke) and quite vegetal and fruity. Coconut mixed with almond cookies. Cookie dough and a nice friendly sweetness to it. Toffee. It also has a bite as well. Burnt wood and some peat. On top, as with many modern Sherry casked Whiskies, a slightly acidic red fruitiness that stands out a bit, less integrated so to say. It’s this aroma that dominates the finish as well. Thus the finish is less about the cookies, coconut, toffee and dough. Nevertheless, this one has it all. Super stuff with utter balance. Springbank works very well in Bourbon casks, and although you know what some Bourbon casks would have done to this Whisky, this time I don’t miss them. Nice Sherry expression this is. Well done Springbank!

I’d like to mention, that this review is written just a few minutes after opening the bottle. Springbank is never at its best right after opening the bottle. It’s a big Whisky that needs time to breathe. If you are patient with it and it has time to breathe, wow!

Points: 90

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

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

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

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

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

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

Color: Full gold.

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

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

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

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

Points: 90

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

Bushmills Irish Single Malt 1991/2015 (52.2%, The Whisky Mercenary, for Whiskysite.nl and The Single Malt Whisky Shop)

Usually, independently released Irish Malts are sourced from Cooley, especially the peated ones. This time it’s not. Many 1991 peated Irish Malts that were released independently in 2015 were from a batch of peated Bushmills, although you won’t find the name Bushmills anywhere on the label. This particular bottling was done for the Dutch Whisky-shop Whiskysite.nl and Belgian outfit The Single Malt Whisky Shop. let’s see what Jürgen offers us now…

The Whisky Mercenary IrishColor: Gold.

Nose: Nice elegant peat, which rules out Cooley right of the bat. Cooley has a more fatty and rough kind of peat. This smells more refined and a bit sweet. Fruity (yellow). Sure there is this clay element in the peat, that is also present in Cooley, but it still is different. Hardly any smoke although the first sniff was quite sharp. If it’s there it’s already gone. This is a wonderful smelling Malt. The wood shows itself next and it reminds me of pencil-shavings combined with some fresh oak. Again, all kept very much in check. Vanilla is present but again, not in a big way. Deep underneath the hints of red fruit, is also a sweaty element. Animalesk and organic, which only adds to the complexity of this Malt. Well integrated. On top a more heavy aroma emerges, fresh butter. So we have some peat, some wood, some vanilla and some butter and all is nicely held together with a very appetizing fruitiness. If this will taste anything like it smells we’ll have a winner here.

Taste: Ahh my favorite red berry flavour is there. I also find it, and love it, in the 2005 batches of Redbreast. Quite funny since Redbreast isn’t produced at Bushmills, but rather at Midleton. Maybe its Irish. The fruit combines really well with a warming, but still fresh peat. Creamy and with some vanilla, but also a slight hint of burned kerosene, mixed it with the toffee. Pencil-shavings are in here as well. The peat is again light and elegant. Great. Almonds and some wax are next. Almond-milk, mixed with latex,quickly followed by red fruit juice. What a wonderful Malt this is. It smells great, tastes great, up ’till now this is so good that I would even forgive a short finish. Short it is not, but it is of medium length. The aroma’s leave my mouth one by one. The aftertaste is about fruity wax and, a little bit of peat and the memory of red fruit and a light bitter edge to hold it all up.

This is wonderful stuff and yes, Jürgen has done it again. What a wonderful selection. By now long gone, but can be found at different auctions across Europe. Just be ready to dish out quite some money for this, since most aficionado’s know this is excellent. It was quite expensive to boot, and even more now, but it also is quite excellent, so this time you will get what you pay for, and in today’s market, notwithstanding the origin of the Malt, you get more quality out of this for this kind of money, than most other Malts. So a no brainer for me (and I don’t sit on heaps of money)…

Points: 90

I had to do a H2H with a 2005 batch of Redbreast. The Redbreast smells oilier and somewhat less fresh. I would almost say, more Rum-like. It seems to smell a bit of petrol and exhaust and overall seems less complex. Caroni anyone? Don’t underestimate the power of H2H’s. The Bushmills smells more organic and definitely fruitier. Although the difference in ABV is only slightly more than 6%, it makes the Redbreast much softer than it actually is. Again in comparison, the Redbreast has some gout de petrol (like you can find in excellent Rieslings). I scored the excellent Redbreast, 86 points, but today I would score it higher…(but not 90).