Glen Moray 22yo 1995/2018 (53.2%, Adelphi, Refill Sherry Cask #7785, 292 bottles)

Just like Deanston earlier, Glen Moray was another distillery that showed up on my radar rather late. Glenmorangie was there from the start, but I wasn’t a fan of their general output I knew up to then. Later I was reading about how Glenmorangie (Bill Lumsden) was using  Glen Moray as a testing ground for Glenmorangie, well you get why I wasn’t really interested early on, not being a fan of Glenmorangie itself. Over time I also got the chance to try a lot of official releases of Glen Moray, which are, and still are quite affordable, yet also not very exciting. This is now the fourth Glen Moray on these pages and oh dear, the tree bottles that went before this one didn’t even manage to get a score in the 80 point range. All three quite disappointing. However a wise man from Belgium once said to me, every Whisky distillery is able to make a good or great Whisky, so the fun lies in finding one of those (and when you find a good one, the challenge shifts into finding (or at least assessing) the best possible expression of said distillery. Adelphi is an independent bottler that has an above average output quality-wise. I believe I actually never had a bad one, not saying there aren’t any, but I would bu surprised of they do. When a 22yo Glen Moray bottled by Adelphi popped up on an auction, I snapped it up, curiosity eventually killed the cat, being only the second Glen Moray I ever bought, and I still haven’t bought one since. Let’s see if I should.

Color: Copper gold.

Nose: What a welcome smell after all that peat of the past reviews. Right now, I just love the possible variations of Single Malt Whisky. Funky Sherry, very fruity, nutty and waxy. Lots of nice organics ever so slightly meaty, like in cold gravy. Leather and jute, in this case a very expensive smell. Quite sweet and fruity, dried apricots mixed with a more minty aroma. Sometimes this smells like a Bourbon or even more like a Rye Whiskey, so not like a Whisky matured in a Bourbon or Rye cask. This also didn’t mature in an ex-Bourbon cask, but it probably did mature in a Sherry cask made of American oak in stead of European oak. Dry oak planks, you can almost smell the vegetal bitterness this has. It’s smooth and creamy. American oak has more vanillin and European oak has more tannin’s, which would be a hard thing to smell actually. Maybe we’ll encounter tannin’s when assessing the taste. I don’t smell sulphur per se, but the (rural) organics this nose has, definitely are based around one or more compounds containing the element of S (sulphur). However I have to say, the S-element gains in strength with some extensive breathing of this Whisky, but that is all way back, so this is not really a sulphury Whisky. The creaminess stays, and mixes a bit with a toasted (Sherry) cask aroma. You can add almonds and a little bit of cardboard to the leathery aroma mentioned earlier. Borderline dusty. Even though I believe this is from American oak, the overall the nose is well behaved, very well balanced and with an somewhat older style Sherry feel to it. Not a Sherry bomb like for instance a dark 1971 Longmorn nor like an old skool Sherried Malt. After even some more breathing, the fruit moves into the realm of apples now. Calvados. So it starts like a Rye Whiskey, with the body of a Single Malt and finishes off like a Calvados, how that for a change! Remarkable though that every time I pour this it never starts with the apple note.

Taste: Lots of fruit, but more of the overripe tropical kind. Buttery and creamy, almost custard like. Very tasty. Sweet and waxy, with only a slight bitter edge to it initially. It’s so big on fruit and its half-sweetness, that this more astringent, bitter bit integrates very well. I would day, wood and ear-wax. The wood has a bite. Nevertheless, highly drinkable and quite tasty, but also a bit hot initially. Sipping more brings out more bitterness, but it still doesn’t really hurt the Whisky, even though it does increase in intensity. Next a very nice burnt wood note that really blends in very well with the fruit. On all accounts this Malts shows its strength in balance. After sipping this, even the nose is starting to show more wood. On the palate we are now moving into the realm of toffee and caramel and right after this the wax from the nose comes back in as well. So even though it has this dry wood bitterness, the sweetness is never far away. This late in the tasting, the sweetness also shows us a tiny amount of integrated tar. I do have to mention that I do pick up more on the wood and bitterness with a tired palate, after dinner and/or late in the evening. Earlier in the day, (or even before breakfast, which is a time of day that is not uncommon for a reviewer of distilled spirits), the fruit is more prominent. Never forget that you as a taster are (highly) subjective, you change a lot during the day, or from day to day, so try to keep that in mind. If you tried a Whisky once, you may have an idea about the Whisky you tasted, but you really didn’t have the chance to really get know it, so proceed with caution with occasional tastings.

See, after all these, mediocre at best, Glen Moray’s I reviewed before, this time a very nice Glen Moray found its way into my glass and onto these pages, and I’m glad for it. Already based on the nose alone I was already very happy getting this one and even though it has this bitter edge, I’m also quite happy with the taste of it. Definitely a score into the eighties this time. Well done!

Points: 88

Glen Moray 15yo 1998/2013 (46%, Cadenhead, Bourbon Hogsheads, 684 bottles)

This is the third Glen Moray on these pages. Although I use a 100 points scare for scoring drinks, and in my opinion Whisky is one of the best drinks around. Whisky usually scores in the upper ranges of that scale. So any good Whisky scores at least 80 points. Both Glen Moray’s I reviewed before, one 13yo Dun Bheagan, and one official 8yo, didn’t make it across the 80 points-line and are therefore considered bu connoisseurs to be “mediocre” at best. However, if you read my reviews carefully, they still have enough going for them, and are still pretty good drinks, or pretty good Whiskies for that matter. It’s just that a lot of Whiskies score higher than these Glen Moray’s. But here is another Glen Moray, one by Cadenhead, so lets see if this will score in the 80’s or even higher?

Glen Moray 15yo 1998/2013 (46%, Cadenhead, Bourbon Hogsheads, 684 bottles)Color: White wine.

Nose: Quite closed, or isn’t there much happening. Alcohol, hints of sweet yellow fruits. Even though it isn’t a white wine finish were Glen Moray are almost famous for, it does remind me of a white wine finished Glen Moray. Hints of margarine and vanilla. Soft touch of oak. Very restrained, it just smells like fresh air.

Taste: Yes typical thin Glen Moray again. A crumb of old dark chocolate. A little bit of oak, and an acidity resembling a wine finish. Usually Glen Moray tends to get overly sweet after a wine finish, and I can’t say that’s the case here. Lots of maltiness and a little bit of paper and bitter oak in the finish. Good, it gives it character. Anything better than that strange acidity.

Extremely light color, again casks (probably two) that weren’t very active any more. I am not completely sure this isn’t a white wine finish. A very clean expression, and that’s me being positive, because not a lot seems to be happening here… (Mind you, this is still a damn good drink!)

Points: 76

Glen Moray 8yo (40%, OB, Circa 2013)

After almost two years’ time another Glen Moray graces these pages. Glen Moray used to be the poor Whisky that was used as a guinea pig for Whisky experiments by Dr. Lumsden. Sounds like a horror story doesn’t it? Bill probably is a nice guy and poor old Glen Moray was sold off in 2008 to stand on it’s own. The Glen Moray we’ll be focussing on this time is a Glen Moray 8yo. This Whsiky is a very cheap Single Malt Whisky. Cheap sounds a bit harsh, so lets say this Glen Moray costs next to nothing or is inexpensive. Can it still be good?

Glen  Moray 8 yoColor: White wine

Nose: Malty! Yes lots of malted barley on its nose, and like the Macallan 10yo I reviewed earlier, this is pretty sweet. It even has some spices. Dried grass and crushed beetles. Cardboard and very young smelling. It’s barley spirit with a little bit of vanilla and some sugar.

Taste: Barley again and even a little bit peppery. Also the sweetness comes through. Obviously un-complex, but very honest tasting. This Whisky probably hasn’t seen the inside of a Sherry cask, but compared to the aforementioned Macallan, that’s no problem. Even the finish seems longer than the Macallan had, but it’s still short.

Nothing to brag about. This is an extremely simple Single Malt Whisky, but it does come with an extremely simple price-tag. Barley, sweet and typical refill Bourbon cask matured young Whisky, nothing more. What you expect is what you get, the only thing not expected was the hint of pepper in the taste.

Points: 77

Glen Moray 13yo 1996/2009 (43%, Ian MacLeod, Dun Bheagan, Sauternes Barrel Finish, Cask #91981/91984, 1419 bottles)

Second Dun Bhaegan on these pages, after the Brora 1981. But the first Glen Moray. For a while Glen Moray was owned by the people behind Glenmorangie, you know the distillery with the long-necked stills and the 16 men of Tain? In that period Glenmorangie saw the shortage is good casks and started to experiment a lot with wine-finishes. The ones they did not dare to use, they bestowed onto Glen Moray. So there are quite a lot of official Wine finishes by Glen Moray themselves. Now Ian MacLeod decided to add their wine finish of their own, or maybe bought it straight from the distillery.

Color: Light Gold.

Nose: Malty and sweet. Vanilla and quite spirity. A slightly winy smell comes in, along with some glue, cardboard and sawdust. Toffee adds to the vanilla. Gypsum. I cannot say this is very balanced. The longer you keep this the more is smells of a combination of solvents. Wait, now some plants come into the mix, just hard to say which ones. Given even some more time, the nose keeps developing. I like that in a malt, just the things you smell aren’t so special in this one. Clean wood and lavas now, and an overpowering kind of toffee.

Taste: Wood, paper, cardboard, but mostly wood. Spicy wood with some detached sweetness. (so not very balanced again). Quite hard and a bit bitter. Urine? After this straight into a finish of almost stale beer, cream and wood again. Sour.

Very simple, not a lot going on, and what is going on is not great for a whisky. It would have a lot of character if it were a Wodka. Still this very nice Wodka scores into the seventies. In a few words: Bitter-sweet wood toffee.

Points: 76