Category Archives: Whisky from Master Quills Travels

The Macallan 10yo (40%, OB, Circa 2003)

We move back a decade or so to visit one of our old friends. One of the most standard bottlings of that time, the original Macallan 10yo. It had an age statement back then and was diluted to 40% ABV. It was the time, no fan of Macallan or otherwise, was aware of the dark clouds that were forming up ahead. Finally the storm broke and we were given the Fine Oak series. So for me the downfall in quality started with bottlings issued in the newly designed bottlings like the “Fine Oak” series. However, if memory serves me well, in 2002 they started releasing some sort of NAS called the “Elegancia”, preparing us for a softer and smoother experience, moving away from the true Sherry experience of the true Macallan. Not truly a NAS by the way, since it did carry a vintage, like Elegancia 1991. Nevertheless, after the Fine Oaks I really didn’t look back. I was so disappointed. I turned my attention towards Longmorn instead. Back then a lot of it was around and at fair prices to boot. The standard 15yo was pretty good, although the introduction of the 16yo made me rise my eyebrows a bit. Better looking bottle, but the Whisky was less interesting. No, may independent released some pretty stellar Longmorns, so I needn’t look back at Macallan. Of course I did try some of the newer bottlings, but I was never convinced moving back towards the Macallan. Only the future can tell us.

Macallan 10yo (40%, OB, Circa 2003)Color: Dark orange gold.

Nose: Wow, very aromatic. Heaps of Sherry. Extremely fruity, Cherries, apples and banana. Simply wonderful. Already from the start a nice backbone of (new) Oak and a promise of toffee’d sweetness. Warm runny caramel. A lot is happening from the start and it only needs little time to reach a nice balance. This is how I remember drinking Whisky a decade ago, without even giving it much thought then. Stuff like this would be around forever, wouldn’t it? Damn, why is it so hard to make something like this today? Ice cream, vanilla, caramel, laced with apples. Sugared apples and a splash of plain and simple refined sugar-water. Fruity, but not only apples. Sugared cherries and hints of mango and passion fruit. A tropical mix that could have been an older Tomatin. Resembles Tomatin 25yo a bit. Thick and cloying at first, but give it some time to breathe and the whole gets thinner. I wouldn’t say it dies out on us, but it does get a bit more restrained. Balances out. Every time I smell this I get hints of well made Calvados. It becomes fresher. More waxy apple skin aroma’s emerge. When you look for it, there are hints of toasted cask. Hints that are more upfront in older good Ex-Sherry cask matured Whiskies.

Taste: Simpler. Starts out soft and sweet, but not as complex as the nose. Tropical fruits and runny caramel again. Is is youth? Probably not. Is it reduction? I guess so. Sweet and on entry, sometimes like someones bad breath mixed with cardboard, what? Relax, it’s not that bad actually. This time around definitely some toasted cask in the mix, which does wonders for the balance. It gives the fruity and fresh Whisky a nice backbone. Slightly bitter oak, slightly burned as well. New sappy wood aroma is also present, although it is highly unlikely new wood was used, but you never know don’t you. The wood is sappy and sometimes a bit harsh and upfront. It’s the “burned” sensation however, that stays well into the finish. Also a nice and rich nuttiness appears towards the finish, combined with the cardboard we found earlier. For a 40% ABV Whisky this has a pretty lengthy finish, but no, it’s not long.

Tasting it now, in 2016, this is high quality by todays standard. Remember this was the simplest of Macallans some ten years ago. Sure, Italy had their official 7yo, since they like young and fresh Whiskies. Hard to believe not so long ago this was entry-level stuff. Today this would have been packaged in a shiny box that costs more than the  Whisky itself did ten years ago. You don’t want to know even how much it would cost today. Looking at auction prices, I would say every time, you get a fair deal when you want to buy one like these. Go for it. They don’t make them like this anymore.

Points: 85

Tomatin 12yo 2002/2014 “Pedro Ximénez Sherry” (46%, OB, Cuatro Series #4, 3 years Pedro Ximénez Sherry Finish, 1.500 bottles)

The fourth and final installment of the Cuatro series is the one finished in Pedro Ximénez (PX) Sherry casks. Understandably the last one of the series, since PX is a very dark and sweet dessert Sherry. The grape variety itself is white, getting its color of drying in the sun. We started out light (in color, not aromatics) with the Fino and Manzanilla expressions. Examples of Sherries that age under flor (which keeps oxygen at bay). The third expression was the Oloroso one. Oloroso is a Sherry that ages without flor and thus prone to react with oxygen. So finally the PX. Even darker than Oloroso and also very sweet as opposed to most other kinds of Sherry. Historically, Oloroso casks were always the most popular casks for ageing Whisky. Back in the day, one was sure the Oloroso butt (or puncheon) was made of european oak, giving off some more tannins than the American oak that is so popular with Sherry Bodega’s today. American oak gives off a more vanilla like and creamy aroma. Today, PX has become quite fashionable as well, for ageing Whisky, since it gives off a lot of color and a sweetish aroma. However, the sweetness does not always come through though.

Tomatin Cuatro Pedro XiménezColor: Gold, more or less the same as the Oloroso expression, ever so slightly darker.

Nose: Thick and a very rich nose. Hints of burned wood and even some tar and coal. Nice, and right from the start a better balanced nose than the Oloroso expression. Underneath, thick, creamy and chewy, like crème brûlée. If you smell it vigorously, you can recognize the PX. On top lies a nice acidic winey note as well, adding to the complexity of the Whisky. All well-balanced here. A nice grassy note emerges, aided by some fruits. Nice overripe red and yellow fruits, but also a very distinct aroma of unripe bananas, biscuits and vitamin C pills (another acidic note). An Autumn Whisky, just for the moment the leaves start to fall. Wonderfully rich and elegant nose, better than the nose of the Oloroso expression. I hope it tastes better too!

Taste: Big. A lot from the nose comes back in the taste. Slightly tarry, burnt wood again, with hints of vanilla and butter. Burnt sugar, yet not sweet sugar. All of the (acidic) fruity notes are there, but here, even some hints of white grapes show themselves. Add to that a typically Dutch coffee bon-bon called Haagsche Hopjes, and you’ll get the picture. Nutty. Hazelnuts and even fatty peanuts. The body and the finish are not thick, chewy and cloying like a true PX Sherry, but the aroma’s are there. A somewhat Beer-like finish. The different “burnt” notes; the tar, the wood and the sugar, are on the rise, so if you don’t like that, don’t get this one. It starts out elegant, but ends a bit raw and bold.

And there you have it. The whole Cuatro range explored. Was it worth it? Yes! A very nice learing experience. Do you, and I, as consumers need the whole set of four? Yes, we do if you want to share the experience with lots of others. Four bottles of study material from the Tomatin University Distillery. Do you need a whole box to drink by yourself? No, not really.

For this end piece I did a proper H2H2H2H. Yes, that means I have four drams in front of me. Comparing the Fino to the Manzanilla is interesting, but for a drinking Whisky both are too similar. Especially on the nose. If you only want one, I would opt for the Fino expression, since it tastes slightly better. Oloroso, supposedly the best Sherry cask for Whisky, was in this case a bit disappointing. Smelled less aromatic than the first two, but otherwise surprisingly similar. Not the same but certainly very well related. On the taste it is somewhat unbalanced especially toward the finish. I would pass on that one. Finally the PX does show poise, and yes it does start a bit sweeter on entry compared to the other three. It’s well-balanced, and definitely the one to pick over the Oloroso expression. But, and there is a but, the PX does show a lot of burnt notes you’ll have to like, although those notes are more and more obvious in the Oloroso expression as well. In the end, I would take two, The Fino and the PX, Both are very tasty and somewhat different from each other, but not as much as expected beforehand. If I had to pick one, I would definitely go for the Fino, which for me is the best of the bunch.

Points: 85

Tomatin 12yo 2002/2014 “Oloroso Sherry” (46%, OB, Cuatro Series #3, 3 years Oloroso Sherry Finish, 1.500 bottles)

Number three is the Oloroso finished one. Hands down the most popular Sherry in the Whisky industry. Somehow casks that once held Oloroso Sherries produce the best Whiskies that (once) graced the face of the earth, even though the Sherry itself isn’t seen as the best there is in the (fortified) Wine world. Oloroso Sherry is produced by oxidative ageing, meaning, there is more contact with air than the previous two expressions that age under flor. The forming of flor is suppressed by adding alcohol from distilled Wine, thus prohibiting flor to form. This oxidative ageing produces a darker more nutty Sherry which is not sweet. Dark sweet Sherry will be the topic of the next Sherry finished Tomatin. Let’s see if our precious Oloroso finish also manages to fetch the best results in the cuatro series. Up untill now the “Fino” expression managed to get the highest score so, 85 is the score to beat.

Tomatin Cuatro OlorosoColor: Gold, but slightly darker than the previous two.

Nose: Funky and dusty. Slightly acidic. New wood and raisins. Yes its nutty. Quite complex and lovely. New wood and toasted wood, slightly tarry. Spicy wood and slightly herbal. Vanilla, creamy and fruity, although new, fresh oak is always right up front. Very aromatic. Loose, unlit cigarette tobacco mixed in with the new wood aroma and licorice. Actually this smells like coming from a red wine cask. It’s sharply defined, fresh and slightly acidic. Tannins and spicy. Slightly dusty and smoky. Very nice stuff if you give it time to develop in your glass. Mocha and tar (again). Nice.

Taste: Sweet and funky on entry. Nutty with a fruity acidity, and very aromatic. If you ask me, easily recognizable as a true Oloroso. Tasting the nuttiness brings out the nuttiness in the nose as well. Milk chocolate and a sharp spiciness. Wait a minute. Where is the Tomatin in this? Where are my tropical fruits? Quite the finish ‘eh? Yup, a bit overpowering. Heaps of fruity acidity now. Red wine (finish). The new (peppery) wood from the nose comes to the fore right before the finish. Luckily it doesn’t dominate it. Breaks down a bit in the finish, which is a shame really. A hot sensation stays behind, with wood and the acidity with the longest staying power. Big and raw, but also lacking a bit in complexity as well as in elegance both the Fino and the Manzanilla expressions showed.

This one is big, but not the best balanced one. This one has its moments, but also has its flaws. Its nice, but not the best one up ’till now. Maybe the Oloroso Sherries and/or the casks they were matured in aren’t what they used to be? On the other hand, what still is…

Points: 83

Tomatin 12yo 2002/2014 “Manzanilla Sherry” (46%, OB, Cuatro Series #2, 3 years Manzanilla Sherry Finish, 1.500 bottles)

On with #2. The second installment is the Manzanilla Finished one. Quite the logical #2, since Manzanilla is also a type of Fino Sherry. Manzanilla is made in the town of Sanlúcar de Barrameda in Andalusia. Just like Fino, it is a very dry and pale kind of Sherry. The region is less hot and more humid, so the flor here is even thicker, giving an even better protection against oxygen. Manzanilla’s are therefore even fresher than their Fino-brothers. Manzanilla’s also have a somewhat salty feel to them. The Sherry ages near the sea, but should that allow for a more salty liquid? In Spain, Manzanilla means camomile tea. The Sherry is named as such, since the aroma’s are thought of resembling camomile. So salt and camomile are the things to look for in a Manzanilla Sherry, but are they also the things to look for in this Whisky?

Tomatin Cuatro II - ManzanillaColor: Gold.

Nose: Starts immediately less funky than the Fino. It also doesn’t need a lot of time to breathe, to settle, its ready for consumption right of the bat. Subtler and more restrained. Hints of burning wood and toasted cask. Dry grass, vegetal and dry warm barley. Easier than the Fino and seems less complex as well. Sweetish and again full on aromatics. Just not as thick and cloying. Smells nice. Fruity, and quite similar to the Fino expression. Tropical, ripe, sweet and aromatic fruit, which is typical for the Tomatin spirit. Dried apricots, but also a hint of bicycle tire. If you ask me, no traces of camomile in the nose. Salty? Nope again.

Taste: Sweet and boasts a fruity start. Chewy toffee. Fruity, yes, but this time slightly fresher and more acidic. Fresh green apple skin and white pepper. Not (as) hoppy as the Fino, but there are some fruity Beer aroma’s to be found towards the end of the body. The wood moves into the realm of pencil shavings. I don’t get the camomile one might expect, nor do I find it salty, although I do have slightly salty lips. Quite a simple expression. Likable, but simple. Maybe next time they should finish this for a while longer, although this finish carries just enough bitterness for me.

Slightly more approachable than the Fino, but with that also slightly less “special”. Sure, you have to work the Fino a bit, and its start can be a bit of a scare, but when it opens up, lots is happening, especially on the nose. Yes the Fino has definitely the better and more complex nose of the two. In the taste both are closer to each other. The Manzanilla expression actually doesn’t show as much development in the glass as the Fino. It is immediately clear what you have in your glass. This one is more of a daily drinker. No faults, but also no ooohs and ahhhs as well. Good, but not as special as the Fino. However, I do feel that these casks that once held Sherries that aged under flor, show a lot of potential for ageing and finishing Whiskies, and especially the tropical fruit spirit of Tomatin.

Points: 84

Tomatin 12yo 2002/2014 “Fino Sherry” (46%, OB, Cuatro Series #1, 3 years Fino Sherry Finish, 1.500 bottles)

It’s Monday, vacation is over, September is already visible at the horizon, so back to “work”. Time to pick up again with a nice box of four Tomatin’s, the highland distillery known for it’s Whisky with tropical aroma’s…

In 2014 Tomatin released a box with four full-sized bottles called the “Cuatro Series”. All four Whiskies were distilled on Tuesday the 15th of January 2002. All four were matured for 9 years in American oak, however, all received a final maturation of three years in four casks that previously held different kinds of Sherry. An excellent way to show the adventurous public the differences between finishing with four different Sherries. A novel idea and the pricing was reasonable as well. Just releasing it as four full-sized bottles in one box made for slow sales. Who wants to buy four more or less similar bottles of Tomatin where the difference lies in the details? Learing from the experience, Tomatin released several similar ideas since, but always in half sized bottles. Nevertheless, the “Cuatro Series” did sell out eventually, although the odd single bottle seem to be still available.

The four Sherries used in this series are, Fino, Manzanilla, Oloroso and Pedro Ximénez. The first expression, as numbered by the distillery, is the Fino expression. Fino Sherries are very dry and very pale. What makes Fino stand out, is the fact that maturation in the cask happens under flor. Flor is a layer of the Saccharomyces yeast strain, that lies on top of the liquid. The layer of yeast prevents the ageing fortified wine from oxidizing too much, making for a fresher Sherry. In the Wine-world Sherries like this are considered the cream of the crop, as opposed to Scotland’s favorite, Oloroso.

Tomatin Cuatro I - FinoColor: Gold.

Nose: Very musty on entry, which is not very pleasant. Luckily the mustiness dissipates rather quickly. So you really need a glass for this one. Underneath a nice note of olives, burning coal, some charcoal and lots of fruit. Yellow fruit, overripe or sometimes even candied. Some pineapple, mango and maybe even some nectarines. This nose is exploding with aroma. Dusty and creamy vanilla and nice soft oak, so the original cask did it’s work well. The Fino cask also seems to be of high quality, since it did impair some wonderful aroma’s to the Whisky. This one is wonderfully balanced and eventually smells rather nice. The fresh oak bit turns floral. More vanilla but this time with a touch of jasmine and, dare I say it, a hint of paracetamol. Wonderful nose for a 12yo. It has the tropical fruit traits Tomatin is known for. Reminds me a bit of a Fino Glenfarclas I once had.

Taste: Sweet and spicy. Beer-like hops, and again lots of fruits carried by the beer-like bitterness. Is it the yeast from the flor that does this? Again, like the nose, wonderfully balanced, but not as complex as the nose. Here the Fino impairs a nice nutty flavour as well as some italian laurel licorice (sweet). Creamy with a note of buttery vanilla. Strange enough there is an acidic top-note now. Finish has some length, with again some bitterness that carries it. And beyond that a nice lingering and fruity/nutty aftertaste. This may not turn out as the easiest of the four, but if you have mastered tasting Fino (finished) Whiskies, this is certainly no dud.

For those of you who also read my Rum-reviews, you’ll know, that I found Rhum Agricole to be wonderful stuff as long as you give yourself the time to grow into. More or less the same goes for finishing in Fino Sherry. There are examples of Whiskies with a Fino finish that work exceptionally well, but I also found Fino finishes, something I had to get used to.

Points: 85

Glenfiddich 21yo “Havana Reserve” (40%, OB, Circa 2003)

And here we have an old, and somewhat controversial, Glenfiddich that was totally matured in boxes that once held cigars. Oops, I mean, casks that once held Cuban Rum. Cuban Rums is a light Spanish style Rum which doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a lot of aroma. Rum casks weren’t used much for finishing Whisky, and even today distillers and bottlers tend to prefer the obvious Bourbon and Sherry casks. Especially today, other casks are used as well, from fortified wines like Port and Madeira and red and white, sweet and dry Wines. So a Rum cask you say? Yes, we have had more of those on these pages. A fairly recent Benriach comes to mind, to name but one. Controversial? Yes. Problems arose when Whisky like this was sent to the US of A. They still had an Cuban Embargo, so more cigars for us, as can be read on these pages as well, oops I slipped up again. There still was an Cuban Embargo back then, so no Whisky with the word “Havana” on the label was allowed into the country.

Glenfiddich and The Balvenie have the same owners, William Grant & Sons. Yup, those from Hendrick’s Gin as well. Bad boys down there! Bad boys since they also decided to sue our beloved New Zealand Whisky Company for blatantly stealing the “Double Wood” words and misguiding the poor public, who now must believe that Balvenie Double Wood is the same as the NZWC’s Doublewood, and New Zealand is somewhere in the Speyside region…

William Grant was looking for the perfect Rum casks for their Glenfiddich and considered casks that once held Rums from Venezuela (Spanish style), Guyana (Demerara Rum a heavy English style Rum) and some others. Finally Rum from Sancti Spiritus was chosen to fill up the casks for two years, After two years the Rum was replaced with Whisky for a six month finish.

If I’m not mistaken, the first release was called Havana Reserve and the second was called Gran Reserva. Rumour has it, that for this second release the same casks were re-used, thus explaining reports of the Gran Reserva being lighter than the initial release. A third version was released. Just to be absolutely sure, this Whisky was not finished in Cuban Rum casks, but in casks that once held Dominican Rum. The label now mentions Carribean Rum finish in stead of Cuban Rum finish. Later, subsequent batches simply were called Rum cask finish, so absolutely nothing could be misunderstood and when changing Rums the label can stay the same.

Glenfiddich 21yo Havana ReserveColor: Full gold.

Nose: Very aromatic. Creamy, toffee, nutty, thick and chewy. Next a floral layer which at times is quite perfumy, with great earthy undertones (given by the Rum cask). Vanilla and restrained wood. Half dried grass is noticeable, but covered under a thick semi-sweet layer of aromatics. Fruity, baked banana and dried sweet apricot. In the distance there is even a hint of licorice. But the Rum, is the Rum noticeable? Yes If you know the style of Rum the Cubans make, and you know this Whisky is finished in Cuban Rum cask, than yes, its noticeable, otherwise you must have some experience in tasting to smell and taste it. The Rum upped the aromatics and the chewyness a bit, as well as the sweetness. Great nose.

Taste: Sweet with lots of toffee. Earthy and “green”. Broken off branch and fresh tree sap. The baked banana returns. It’s a big Malt. It is overwhelming in fruit and floral notes. Has some bitter wood and slightly burned edges to it. Wood obviously. Oak, fresh oak and even some pencil. The body of the Whisky already shows it will not be as complex as the nose. However the biggest problem, relatively speaking of course, is the partial disintegration towards the finish. It’s like a band just before breaking up. Some aroma’s don’t want to work with each other anymore, and get separated from each other. Still in the fold though, but more apart. Underneath the woody bitter note and on top some acidity. Short finish, which surprised me since it’s a bigger Glenfiddich than usual, and this has aged for a whopping 21 years, you know. Not a lot happening in the aftertaste. So on entry I was quite happy with the performance of the 40% ABV. but the finish needed some more.

This is a beauty. Excellent smelling Glenfiddich. Tastewise, well, not at the same level of greatness as the nose, then again, it was (since it was bottled some time ago, and since has been discontinued) a mass-produced Whisky aiming at the public already gained by the rest of the Glenfiddich bottlings, without scaring them away. With this in mind, they did what they could, to keep this public and at the same time be a bit more adventurous.

Points: 84

The New Zealand Whisky Collection 18yo 1993/2012 (51.9%, The New Zealand Whisky Company, Cask #21)

After one blend and three reduced bottlings from their standard range, here is finally the first example of an “untouched” New Zealand Whisky. A 1993 expression bottled at cask strength and from single cask #21. That’s more like it. This way we can finally find out what the distiller intended. How did the spirit interact with the wood from the cask. No information about the cask itself has been given so we aren’t handicapped with information this time, and can just dig in…

The New Zealand Whisky Collection 18yo 19932012 (51.9%, The New Zealand Whisky Company, Cask #21)Color: Light gold.

Nose: Fruity and dusty, carried with an undertone of fresh wood. I would say this came from a Bourbon cask. Not hard to tell since the wood impaired quite a lot of vanilla-flavours. One with green fingers too, since it has more traits from the kingdom of plants, than the wood alone. It’s easy to admit, this one is driven by wood. Even the spices are wood related, and what about the whiff of pencil-shavings and the aroma of freshly broken off twig? Does this mean this one is dominated by wood? Not at all. The wood gave of various elements of itself, without overpowering it. All in good measure. It has a promise of sweetness (toffee) and the big wood-vanilla synergy makes this a fruity and creamy nose with some backbone and character given by the wood. Slightly oriental (Indian) and floral. Restrained, elegant and wonderful.

Taste: Nice spicy, prickly and woody entry. It starts out with fresh oak and a quite big, nice vegetal sweetness. Tiny hint of bitterness. Right from the start it is obvious this one is carried by the cask strength. Good this wasn’t reduced. It doesn’t seem to have as many woody traits as the nose. Definitely simpler in design than the nose. The fruity bit I taste is a bit peculiar. To me it seems, the mixture of yellow and red fruits don’t combine perfectly here. More cereals and bread tones towards the end. The finish is shorter than expected and it’s the grainy, bread-like and slightly bitter bit that has the biggest influence on the finish.

The strength of this malt is the wonderful nose, as well as well on entry in the mouth. From there it goes a bit downhill. The body sort of disintegrated in my mouth and although the cask strength is noticeable, it doesn’t carry the aroma’s into the finish in a big way. This is a Malt that needs to be tasted, taking big sips. Good stuff nevertheless, easy drinking Whisky, but probably not the best single cask bottled by the NZWC. We’ll see because I have two more hidden away somewhere.

Points: 85

Longrow 10yo 1993 (46%, OB, 2003)

Another peated whisky in the summer? Has Master Quill gone completely crazy? Yes, because who wants to be “normal”! If you feel like it, just do it… By the way, it’s raining like crazy outside, so it only seems fitting.

2001 saw the first release of a 10 year old, with a vintage. Remember the classic brown paper Longrow label on the tall bottle? The first two releases, both in 2001 and both distilled in 1991 were a “normal one” said to be only from Bourbon, but also, for one time only, a Sherrywood. The series was short-lived, and was discontinued in 2006 after the 1996 vintage, in favour of the 10yo without a vintage statement. Throughout the series I don’t believe all normal ones were from Bourbon casks only, if any. You know Springbank, they tend not to repeat themselves. Just compare the last two releases of the Longrow 18yo (with the white labels), since the 2016 release contains Rum casks. Never a dull moment with Springbank and all of their other brands. Today we’ll have a look at the 1993 vintage of the 10yo, that was released in 2003.

Longrow 10yo 1993Color: Light gold.

Nose: Nice fresh peat. Fatty and smoky. The peat is smelling three-dimensional. It’s not only just there, it goes deep, and seems without end in complexity. Peat mixed with hints of lemon, waxy apple skins and vanilla. Cookie dough. Whiffs of warm apple pie. Burning leaves, sugared yellow fruits and even hints of sweet-smelling sweat, crushed beetle and slightly burned herbs and even has a quaint nuttiness about it. Very balanced stuff, with only a mere hint of wood. All seems to fit in together nicely. This is the best peat I’ve smelled in quite some time. I must admit, it had plenty of air to work with. Love it.

Taste: Quite sweet on entry. Heavy on licorice and the peat is shoved into the background, by the sweetness. The sweetness dissipates and leaves more room for a sort of herbal fruitiness. Prickly licorice and the nuttiness from the nose. Alas the peat never really makes it to the top and the wonderful depth it has on the nose doesn’t really blossom tasting it. Long finish, built around the caramel sweetness and with a larger role for sour oak. Coffee and chocolate in the aftertaste. It still is a wonderful Malt. Just if the complexity of the nose would have shone through in the taste, it would have been a truly exceptional Whisky.

Well this might not be a Whisky from the seventies, but it does remind me of the quality of that decade. I’m actually amazed a bit that many of the vintages are still available, although somewhat more expensive than the new 10yo.

Points: 88

Glenrothes 1987/2002 (43%, OB)

Here is another vintage Glenrothes. After the 1992,  the 1989 and the 1979, this 1987 is the fourth of these vintage bottlings on Master Quill. All were nice, but never scoring very high. All were nice, with enough difference to warrant buying more than one, but also none of them blew me out of the water. Just look at both other Glenrothes I reviewed earlier. One bottled by Wilson & Morgan and one by Douglas Laing. Both managed to score higher than the official bottlings. By now I can say that I expect this one to be nice, but again I don’t think it will blow me out of the water.

Glenrothes 1987/2002 (43%, OB)Color: Gold.

Nose: Dusty, definitely Sherried. Spicy and tickles the nose. Also some burnt elements. Next some aroma’s you get from an old (dry) cellar or attic. Funky but not the funky damp notes you sometimes get from cellars. More like the odours of stored old stuff. Old paper, old cardboard and old wood. Old, worn out vanilla pods. Later a breath of rural fresh air, coming to you over water. Let it breathe some more, and it becomes more like a “normal” Whisky. Vanilla, wood, fruity Sherry notes and spicy oak and cask toast. Hints of butter and dry grass (not hay), and even some toffee.

Taste: Short attack of (fresh) oak and a more waxy note, quickly succeeded by cherries and sugared yellow fruits. Fruity sweet toffee, alas a bit diluted. Über-fruity sugar-water. Warming. Apart from the initial wood, this is quite a fruity expression of Glenrothes. Hints of soap and paper from the nose and a growing aroma of burnt wood. At best a medium finish with a note of Beer and burnt wood. Yes, a bit bitter, which adds to the character of the Whisky after the initial sweetness and fruitiness. The aftertaste matches the nose exactly.

Although the nose isn’t one of the most balanced expressions of Glenrothes, the taste is way better that way, helped along by the sweetness it has. It’s all right this one. It may be a bit simple, diluted and lacking complexity. It does some across as balanced and tastes nice. Maybe it’s time to up the strength a bit?

Points: 83

Glencadam 30yo 1975/2006 (54.4%, Dewar Rattray, Cask Collection, Bourbon Cask #7588, 216 bottles)

Why not make it a double bill, and review our third Glencadam. Both Glencadam’s I reviewed earlier managed to score a nice 85 Points, so let’s see if this one does better. This particular on is 30 years old, and by itself it’s older than both previous examples put together. This is another one from the attic, since it was released back in 2006. The difference couldn’t be greater when comparing it to the Glencadam I just reviewed. It is twice the age and this one comes from a Bourbon cask, surely it will do better?

Glencadam 30yo DRColor: Full gold, and only slightly lighter than the 15yo.

Nose: Half sweet and nice biscuity barley. Slightly spicy and reminds me of old Dutch Jenever. Definitely some Bourbon influences. Some waxy elements, but not much. In fact the Whisky smells quite young and vibrant and not at all would you expect it to be 30 years old. Fresh, hints of citrus and only mere hints of vanilla. Dusty wood completes the nose. That’s it, not much more is happening. After a while more fruit comes to the fore. Sweetish yellow fruits. Some unripe banana skin. Adding to the structure of banana comes powdered coffee-creamer, in the smell a creamy variant of vanilla. Dusty and slightly dried out ice-cream after you spilled it and didn’t clean it right away. Given some time the freshness takes a back seat and the whole is nice but also rather dull. Not a very active cask I’m afraid. Having said that, it does smell like something from the past.

Taste: Wood, paper and cardboard and after that a short, sharp attack, quickly followed by a short sweet note. After the sweetness comes some woody bitterness. Distant dull vanilla. Waxy again. Cold candle wax. So the body is present and almost chewy, yet surrounded by dry paper and woody notes. A nice old Bourbon matured Whisky, but not a stellar one like 1972 Caperdonich or 1976 Tomatin, to name but a few. Here also some fruit emerges, but again a bit dull. Dried bits of pineapple and some old broken almond bits, you sometimes find in the couch. Luckily the sweetish and fruity note dominate the body, not leaving much room for the woody bitterness. The finish has medium length, but there isn’t much happening afterwards. What stays around for the longest, apart from general (cardboardy) creaminess, is a sour note you get from (new) oak.

Not bad, quite nice, but also not spectacular as well. No real off notes and nothing (bad) overpowering the whole. Still a nice one to pick up when all of its distant relatives are sold out. Definitely a lot better than most of the modern Whiskies though. I’ll have fond memories of this nevertheless.

Points: 85