Kilkerran 6yo 2004/2010 ‘Work in Progress 2’ (46%, OB, 15.000 bottles)

This time a ‘new’ Campbeltown malt. Although the original Glengyle started in 1872 and closed again in 1925. The ‘new’ one started in 2004. Most of the distilling equipment come from the defunct Ben Wyvis distillery. Campbeltown used to be the center of the whisky world, but only Springbank and the intermittent Glen Scotia remain. Slowly some old names are revived. Longrow and now Glengyle. The name Glengyle was not for sale as the distillery was, so it’s called Kilkerran instead. Since 2009 an annual work in progress is released. We’ll have a look at the second WIP, that has the grey label.

Color: Light Gold.

Nose: Oily, fatty, some distant peatyness. Meaty, gunpowder and lightly smoky, so it has a firm body. Tarry and Crème Brûlée Later on even some coffee and a powdery note.  This has already got a very promising character. After nosing this you already know you’re gonna like it! Well I do. If some whiskies are elegant, this one is of the street, it’s dirty, it’s a bit naughty. Ahhh yes, we like naughty.

Taste: Yeah! Leafy and simple. It’s like dry leaves infused in some velvety light oil with licorice. It has some wood, but as a nice component of the whole. In the middle of the wood sits something sour. It’s almost a designer dirty whisky. Not overly complex, but oh so enjoyable. This is great and 46% is just right for something like this. In the finish you’ll have some black pepper first and after that a hot flash, like some red pepper powder.

We all like to say that the old stuff is better, and “they just don’t make it like that anymore”. Now just have a look of some of those new malts around. And it’s not only Kilkerran, but Kilchoman too, aren’t they making fabulous stuff? And the stuff is just seven years old to boot. Both of them. And if this as good as it is now, how will it be at the planned 12 years old? We just have to wait untill 2016 to try that. But untill then we’ll be just as happy with the annual WIP’s. Forget about cocaine and XTC, there’s a new uncolored and unchillfiltered drug in town and it’s called Kilkerran…(and Kilchoman).

A work in progress, keep on working people, you’re on the right track here.

Points: 86

To be complete:

The first work in progress had a white label, is 5yo, was issued in 2009 and yielded 12.000 bottles.

The third work in progress had a mossy green/cream label, is 7yo, was issued in 2011 and yielded 15.000 bottles.

Port Ellen 25yo 1982/2008 (50%, Douglas Laing, Old Malt Cask, Refill Butt, DL REF 4112, 589 bottles)

Its raining like crazy outside, and I have this Port Ellen on my lectern, so probably no better moment to have a go at this. Seize the day, the moment is now! There may be no tomorrow! Heed the call of the elements!

Douglas Laing sure did have a lot of Port Ellen ex-sherry casks lying around, and a lot of those casks were from 1982. Even though it wasn’t the best of years for Port Ellen (it closed just a year later), a lot of those 1982 casks turn out to be pretty fabulous. I bought this particular bottle because of the word “creosoted” on the label. I definitively want to find out what that tastes like.

Color: White Wine.

Nose: Wow, always a great peat smell, Sweet and succulent, oily, old puffer, kippers and tar. Citrussy and grassy too. Powdery? This really smells like it’s dived up from the bottom of the sea. Even if this turns out not to be the greatest Port Ellen, this nose is all worth it. Dirty and clean at the same time. Ergo very balanced! Smelling this is great but it’s also intriguing. There is more lying around the bend. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there is more to it than meets the nose…

Taste: Sweet and rubbery. Ash, liquorice and tarry rope (is this the creosote?). Definitively a fishy note from the peat, what suites this whisky well. Coffee, mocha, very appetizing. For a dead distillery, and a 25yo whisky, this is very lively. Candy with pepper in the finish and some slight bitterness (with tar), from the oak, but it has to be that way.

You might say it’s not up to par to other Port Ellen’s, since you could consider this not to be the most complex example or it’s drinkability and (virtual) lightness. But I’m having a lot of fun with this one, its lively and I’m thoroughly enjoying myself. I’m pouring myself another dram of this.

Points: 89

The Macallan 10yo (57%, OB, Sherry Wood, 100 Proof)

And here is a very old Macallan, a Macallan from the days we all thought, this is Macallan and it’s never gonna change. They sort of promised us that on the back label: For reasons not even science can wholly explain, whisky has always matured best in oak casks that have contained sherry. Due to increasing expense and scarcity, other distillers no longer insist on sherry casks, The Macallan directors do. After this they went on to produce the Fine Oak Series, a ‘blend’ of sherry and bourbon casks. A cunning move, why? Was it to scarce? Was it too expensive? Did they think they should use their big name to uncharter a new market? Because the sales proves it, Fine Oak does well and ís hip. It just isn’t Macallan anymore…

So for my generation, The Macallan was something like the bottle you see here. Nice brown/orange whisky made from Oloroso Sherry (and who knows some PX).

Color: copper brown. (it’s not dark brown, and it doesn’t have a red tinge to it, so it’s not mahogany, as I often read).

Nose: Yeast, nuts and caramel, typical Oloroso Sherry nose. Fresh like seaspray. Strong, full and creamy (this is what we want in a cigar). Chocolate and some wood and spices. This has oomph and a lot of depth. Nicer and less harsh than the A’bunadh. It’s like comparing an Aston Martin to a Hummer. (Both have their merits though. Would you drive your Aston in a war zone?) Did I just call drinking whisky a war zone? wow!

Taste: Thick and sticky. Tar and smoke. A hint of pepper and mocha. Dust. Strong Oloroso Sherry. Oak and liquorice. Hot (it’s 57%). Even an exotic note like curry. Oak and the hint of curry are predominant in the finish. Still it’s not and old whisky. It’s only 10 years old, but so different from the Hummer mentioned before. Why are there so much sherried Glendronachs around, and why aren’t there a lot more of these types of Macallan around?

Well this is old skool whisky. This may not be very complex,  but just try to ‘get’ the steam locomotive in these kinds of whiskies. The tar, the coal and the steam. I’m very sorry these Macallans aren’t around anymore. They were very classy, and if you can find them now, they are very expensive. If you have a chance, try this, it’s a piece of history.

Points: 89 (for now)

Aberlour ‘A’bunadh’ (60.9%, OB, Batch No. 33, 2010)

There just had to be an Aberlour in one of the first posts here. Aberlour 10yo was my first single malt whisky ever! There’s no 10yo anymore in my lectern, not even a 10yo in stock. Don’t get me wrong. It’s a decent whisky, and it delivers a lot for the price it costs. But the good people at Aberlour also make this A’bunadh (of the origin), and compared to the 10yo this is really a steal. Very high quality whisky and it comes in all those neat batches. Oh, and it cask strength, and I just love cask strength.

A’bunadh, as it’s called, has no age statement (NAS) on the bottle, but is believed to be between 8 and 10 years old, and comes solely from Spanish Oloroso Sherry Butts. Well, if you could smell it now, or see it’s colour you would know this is true.

Color: Dark Copper or Orange/Brown.

Nose: Musty and meaty. Oloroso Sherry with oak. It even smells young and harsh. It misses some depth you can pick up from old sherry casks. (Just nose some 40yo+ Glenfarclas and you’ll know what I mean). Toffee, clay and some sourness (from the oak). It’s dusty and has a flowery note. Blackberry anyone?

Taste: Thick and full of flavour. Berries again, ashy and very nice. Some cardboard and a bit harsh due to its youth and strength. Hot! Lots of first fill casks in here. It smelled like a young sherried whisky and it tastes like one to and that is very nice for a change. There is nothing wrong with young whiskies, as long as they are well made, and this, this is well made, I can assure you. Great balance. Toasted wood in the finish.

Even though it’s young, strong and harsh I still like this neat. Water takes away the little sweetness it has and makes it a bit more harsh. Drinking this at cask strength, makes me happy. It’s a bit of a drug that way. Recommended. There are a lot of batches which have their differences. More than you would have thought. So it can be a lot of fun comparing different batches from different years. Some are less harsh, or more sweet or…You guessed it, come back often to A’bunadh, and you’ll be welcomed back every time by a very nice whisky. By the way, who said there weren’t any good sherry casks anymore, and who said those sherried whiskies aren’t affordable anymore?

Points: 87

Strathisla 15yo (70° Proof, Gordon & MacPhail, 26⅔ fl. ozs., Pinerolo Import Torino, Circa 1982)

I’m a big fan of old Strathisla’s. When I taste some from the 60’s or 70’s, I’m in heaven. With some old sherry cask bottles around, you can’t go wrong with Strathisla (and Longmorn, and Macallan, and…). Even 60’s bourbon casks are fantastic. So for this one, I certainly had high hopes and I paid some good money to get one. When I bought it at an auction, I thought it would be older than it turned out to be. Just look at that label with its 70° Proof and 26⅔ FL. OZS. The glass code on the bottom of the bottle (SD133) makes it from circa 1990.

I brought this with me on a ‘Genietschap’ Strathisla tasting. After I opened it, and we all tasted it, we initially thought is was a fake. We expected some old bottle effect but there was none, we may have been spoiled with our experiences with those old Strathisla’s but one thing was for sure, this was a disappointment then. Let’s try it again now and see what happens.

Color: Full Gold (Caramel?).

Nose: This smells to me like something that has been coloured with caramel. It smells very rounded out and smooth like toffee. A bit like a blend without the grain. Malty and musty. Dusty and elegant. Fresh, sweet, creamy and fruity and some fresh air from the sea. Candied apricots. Cream Sherry with a smoky and sweaty touch to it. Well it almost smells…old now, maybe even meaty for a brief moment.

Taste: Sweet with bitter wood. Fruit, apricots on vodka. Almonds. It’s a lemonade with some iron in the mix. The bitter component transfers from wood to something more waxy, earwax maybe. At times it tastes thin and easy and can be quite nice, but somehow the top of the taste doesn’t gel with the finish, hence its unbalanced, and that’s a shame for such an old bottle. Definitively some E150a in here.

The nose is balanced but alas the same cannot be said for the taste and the finish. It all breaks down in the mouth.Luckily it leaves you with a warm feeling, so I would say that it’s a whisky for a book at bedtime. Also I have to say that a big gulp tasted better than a sip. If you come across this, don’t but it at a premium price. There are also older bottles around. With a white cap and bottle code SC999. that should be a better bet than this one. Still it’s not bad at all. It’s very interesting and will reward you if you’d only want to work at it. Recommended for connoisseurs I guess. It’s an experience. Still, get one of the older versions!

Points: 84

Inchgower 28yo 1982/2010 (50.7%, Bladnoch Forum, Hogshead #6966, 222 bottles)

And here is another Whisky that stands atop of my lectern. This time an Inchgower bottled by Raymond Armstrong, the owner of Bladnoch Distillery. Bladnoch was founded in 1817, and Raymond bought it in 1995 and opened it again in 2000. Well this “Raymondo” has a website, and if that’s not all, he even has a forum. Well if you think that’s it now, wait, it gets better! Raymond buys casks of other distilleries’ whisky, bottles them, and sells them to members of the Bladnoch Distillery Forum. And it has to be said, he does that at very, very reasonable prices.

Now we move on to Inchgower, since it’s Inchgower that’s inside of the bottle. If you want to see how Raymonds operation looks like, and how this particular Inchgower was bottled, here is a link to a film made by our one and only Ralfy, certified Malt Maniac. (Just for the fun of it, I have bottle number 14)

Color: Copper Gold.

Nose: Caramel, estery and oaky. Distant liquorice, tar, olive oil and maybe even petroleum. All of this combined with some warm apple sauce and gravy. The nose hints of coming sweetness. It is a great nose, but when you sniff this for some time before tasting it there is something that’s not quite right, sort of unbalanced. You know it smells great, but…

Taste: Tar again, coal, sour oak. Almost as if it were made with steam and luckily it is not the sweet monster I expected. I hate it when a whisky is sugary sweet or simply too sweet. Instant headache. But don’t worry this is nothing like that. The top of the taste is very good. You’ll like it. The middle is oak, in a nice and elegant way. The finish is more the sour part of oak and sort of unbalanced, breaks down and is not very long. The wood is never overpowering or too strong. It’s a very nice example of Inchgower.

The bottle is almost full, but was opened last november (how time flies). I’ve tried small drams since then, and it got absolutely more balanced since the day of opening. Initial score was 85, but it will go higher now.

Points: 88

In fact it tastes more like an 89, but I had to take a point off for the slightly unbalanced finish.

Laphroaig 8yo 2001/2009 (57%, The Ultimate, Hogshead #2927, 324 bottles)

I needed a Laphroaig for my last Por Larrañaga post, and since the weather outside is frightful, and a whisky could be so delightful, let’s review this one properly.

The Ultimate is a Dutch bottler from Amersfoort called Han van Wees. Han handpicked this Hogshead himself (if not his son Maurice probably did). I was at his shop and Han told me personally that this Laphroaig is a must, since it reminded him of “old skool” Laphroaig. Well if this man says something like this to you, who wouldn’t buy it? So let’s see how Laphroaig tasted in the past, and if it was any good then 🙂 (please keep in mind this whisky is from 2001, you know a year we remember like it was last year).

Color: White wine.

Nose: Obviously this has the typical Islay traits. It smells like it will taste sweet. It has nice fat succulent and clean peat. The tar is there too, as well as the ash. Salty and fresh. The smoke or bonfire are very subdued in this. It’s in there but its further along the beach. I know this reads like a lot of Islay whiskies, but hey it’s from there, and we wouldn’t like our Laphroiag to smell as an Aberlour don’t we?  Sniffing this profile as a whole, I notice great balance. Everything is there and nothing overwhelms. It’s not only peat or herring or rubber for that matter. It’s immediately likeable. I like the nose very much. By the way, I know it seems strange to say you smell something sweet or salty since both are tastes and not smells, but just open a jar of sugar or a container with sea salt in it, both have a certain smell.

Taste: Sweet ‘n peat. Liquorice and tar on a rope in seawater. The fresh sea wind carries seaweed. Chewing gum? Lot’s of legs in the glass. It feels classic, but is that because of what Han said? The finish is ever so slightly bitter and ashy and slightly less balanced and less sweet than the top and the middle notes. That’s probably because of its youth.

Yeah! Laphroaig! This is stunning quality at 8 years old. Can you believe I only paid 40 Euro’s for this? That’s getting a lot for your money. It’s a bang-for-your-buck, just like the Laphroaig 10yo cask strength versions of yesteryear (green and red stripe versions). Last but not least, this whisky is uncolored and unchillfiltered.

Points: 88

The picture of the bottle is for a 6yo refill butt version, the reviewed whisky is lighter in color. Label is identical, just with some differences in the small print, you can’t read anyway.

Glen Ord 25yo (58.3%, OB, 2004)

Now a Special Release from Diageo. After the Rare Malts releases, came three annual releases. The first was a 28yo in 2003. The 25yo was the second in 2004, and was followed by a 30yo in 2005. As I’m writing this I don’t have a clue what to score this. The bottle is almost half empty (or half full?) and I have no clue yet. I remember the night vividly when I opened the bottle at a tasting of ‘The Genietschap‘ and we all didn’t like it that much. It was very closed and hard to score. After a while I tried it again and really loved it! It was full bodied and so very full of life. Never a dull moment with this one. It’s not that closed now, but still is hard to score (or is it?). I’ve never encountered a whisky that was so dependent on the mood of the taster. Well let’s see how I’m feeling today.

Color: Full Gold with a hint of copper.

Nose: Farmy ánd elegant, wow, how’s that possible? Sherried and dusty. Hey, again a hint of lemon grass, but this is no Balvenie! Now some clay and cream. The clay merges with some old furniture wood, let’s say mahogany. Well there you have it: Clay (farmy), and a mahogany cabinet (elegance). Well this nose is fabulous. I adore this. I can only hope this nose is in balance with an equally great taste.

Taste: Hot and spicy. Nutty. The wood comes through in a sour way (that’s “old” oak). This definitively needs water. Now it gives way to the sweetness, honey, not sugar. The nutty part reveals itself as being almond. Do I detect some paint? (don’t be alarmed). Wood is still here and gives just the right amount of bitterness. I don’t like bitter finishes, but this is something different. A 25yo whisky should have a woody part, for it’s balance and the balance is great here. Yes I feel good, better than James Brown! This shure is a great Ord. Nice half-sweet amber in combination with the wood makes for a great finish. This time it’s in top form. Gave this a lot of time to develop and you’ll be rewarded. It needs a lot of air and the whisky will benefit a lot from oxidation.

Can you imagine this was dumped on the market in 2010/2011 for almost half price? The package is great. Nice box with an even better decanter bottle. Feel’s nice in the hand.

To finish off, here is a link to Whiskybase, where you can find another take on this whisky by my “mate” alectron.

Points: 90

The Balvenie 15yo 1983/1999 ‘Single Barrel’ (50.4%, OB, Bourbon Barrel #1300, 311 bottles)

Time for some more whisky then…

Let’s have a look at this old Balvenie. I have to say I don’t usually like Balvenie that much. I think that for me it lacks character and body. It’s usually a light whisky that is bottled at a relatively low ABV compared to other whiskies. This older 15yo is bottled at 50.4%, but more recent versions are bottled at a mere 47.8%. That having said. This 15yo and the original 21yo Portwood can be respectable whiskies, depending on the version you find. Still, I encounter the 15yo a lot, so I have the opportunity to try them on a regular basis and to me they don’t seem to get better, so if you want one, my tip to you would be: try to find an older one.

The Balvenie 15yo "Single Barrel" but not #1300Color: Light Gold

Nose: Vegetal, comes across as a very light and clean whisky. It’s powdery and the malt shines through. Dry wood. The cask didn’t give the whisky a lot of color, but is evident on the nose. After a while I get some lemony notes or maybe some lemon grass in combination with hot coco. Again I would use words like clean or fresh for this one.

Taste: Sweet and estery. Again the wood is there. It’s there from the start and I guess it will play a role for some time to come. Even the taste is clean, so if you like clean whiskies, this one is for you. Wow this one is very fruity now and does have some body. Prickly wood (not overpowering though), yellow fruits like dried apricots and peaches. Some bitter wood in the finish.

I would say this is a nice place to start drinking good malts. It’s decent and very easy to “analyze”. It’s clean and elegant and has some nice woody notes to show you what a cask can do. If you’re a connoisseur, well maybe this one’s a tad to easy. A friend of mine would say: “drinks well playing cards” Again, try to find an older one (50.4%). By the way, this is not cask strength. It is reduced to 50.4% to get more bottles out of a cask, or maybe the Balvenie drinkers like their 15yo a little lower than 57%. I’m not judging.

Points: 86

Lagavulin 12yo ‘Special Release’ (56.4%, OB, 2007)

And now for something completely different: Lagavulin. Well, we all know Lagavulin is pretty great. It’s virtually impossible to find a bad expression. So big thumbs up to the people at Lagavulin! A long time ago there was a 12yo already. Cream label, pretty good. After that they made a pretty fantastic 16yo, which was great, had a little lapse some years ago (but still good). Luckily, more recent bottlings are doing well again. Still, in 2002 the people at Diageo thought is was time to revive the 12yo as a ‘Special Release’ at cask strength this time. A release that is up ’till now, annual. Let’s try one, shall we.

Color: White Wine

Nose: At first, peat obviously, then a bit sour. Kippers, diesel and salty like the Pibroch at sea. Gravy combined with tar (from the ship’s hull), smoked fish (from the galley). This needs some air, and we’re not in a hurry. It’s rough but not unrefined, and doesn’t taste young. It smells like a whisky for an upper class fisherman.

Taste: It’s sweet, and has the obvious peat, but warm peat this time. It has a dirty edge to it, animalesque is the word that comes to mind, but does this word exist, or is it already the whisky talking? Now some ash and sweat, well it’s hard work on a boat like this. After some time it’s still sweet and some ‘black & white powder’. This is a taste that resembles liquorice (if you’re not from Holland or Finland)

Well isn’t this great stuff again! If you look at prices asked for this kind of whisky, well you’ll have trouble finding something better for your money. This should be a standard on your whisky lectern. Assuming you like whiskies from Islay that is.

Sells for 65 Euro’s

Points: 90