Springbank 14yo 1991/2006 (53.9%, Cadenhead, Sherry Butt, 654 bottles)

Here an example of an independently bottled Springbank, well, not really, since the Springbank Distillery and Cadenhead (a Scottish poet) are owned by one and the same, J & A Mitchell. J & A Mitchell bought William Cadenhead Limited already in 1969. Obviously it’s easy this way to bottle some single cask Springbank. Let’s see if they have chosen a stellar Springbank for the occasion. I case you might wonder, it’s not unusual for this to happen, a lot of Springbank got bottled this way!

Color: Copper Gold

Nose: Sweet and floral. Very easy and likeable. A hint of soapy wood and even a hint of sowing machine oil. Hard raspberry candy. Lots of vanilla from the (toasted) wood. Old, almost dried out, lavender soap. Powdery and dusty. Lot’s of fresh air, but after that, the rest is light, but balanced.

Taste: A bit anonymous really. Initially a bit hot. Sweet and floral again, A little bit of toasted wood, woodspice. Also some fruity sourness (from the wood). Not your typical Springbank. Warm apple sauce and some acetone maybe. Diluted fruit salad syrup, from which the sweet pineapple sticks out. Initially a bit hot, but with a soothing, balmy and light finish, that is also rather short and is gone before you know it. Great contrast.

I’m very curious what kind of Sherry this cask held before. For me impossible to place. Refill Fino maybe? Not a very active cask, but nevertheless the whisky has a nice color. Do I like it? By itself it is and good whisky, but without a lot of Springbank character though. It’s very quiet and laid back. ‘nuf said.

Points: 83

The Balvenie 25yo “Single Barrel” 1974/2002 (46.9%, OB, Cask #13285)

Well, actually the Balvenie 25yo I reviewed earlier, was quite a disappointment. I have another single barrel here, so let’s see if this one is any better… By the way, again I couldn’t find a picture of a Balvenie 25yo Cask #13285, so here is a picture of the similar looking cask #10139

Color: Gold.

Nose: Waxy, sweet white sherry. A nice old, dried leaves and wood combination in the nose. Again you sense this is an old bottle. Vanilla and lemon freshness. This nose is less complex than cask #13282. The vanilla that’s in here is similar to the vanilla notes I got from Angostura rum 1919. I guess cask #13282 has a more refined nose, but this is equally exciting. More raw and different from the other one. I think this one is better, it is less complex, but has more to it. Wood and almonds come out when you sniff this vigorously, still it is not bad wood. Hot butter and some funky farminess, how’s that for a Balvenie! Lovely oldness to it all.

Taste: Sweet and even slightly acidic, and no heavy wood attack like cask #13282, hurrah. Fatty and mouth coating wax. This one is immediately a lot better. The wood is here and very noticeable. The dry leaves are here too, but this doesn’t attack you with that unrelenting bitterness. This cask has also a lot of wood to it, but the bitterness is held in check. It does lack a bit of complexity though. There isn’t a lot more to it than this. Nice old Balvenie.

Great to try these Balvenies so close together. These are sister casks, but do show quite some difference. It’s not only the bitterness that is obvious. Comparing these two there is infinitely more. That goes to show, how big the differences can be between two similar bottles, and how buying without tasting is so tricky. I would also like to point out that the reduction that obviously took place here isn’t a problem, this Whisky holds the fort. Actually it’s the best Balvenie I had in a very long time. Still no 90’s score though…

Points: 88

The Balvenie 25yo “Single Barrel” 1974/2002 (46.9%, OB, Cask #13282)

A long time ago, between 2000 and 2004, The Balvenie issued a series of single barrel bottlings similar to the 15yo, these bottlings however were much older, these were matured a further 10 years to become the 25yo single casks. All from 1974 (most of them) or 1978. And all at the convenient strength of 46.9% ABV. Who came up with this number anyway? By the way, I couldn’t find a picture of a Balvenie 25yo Cask #13282, so here is a picture of the similar looking cask #10141, that was bottled two years earlier. Most of these 25yo’s were bottled in 2000.

Color: Gold

Nose: Light, buttery, and very accessible. A little old bottle waxiness, but not a lot. Let’s say it’s not a 1972 Caperdonich. Some sugared yellow fruits and hints of banana. Still it does smell like something they don’t make anymore. Also some seaside freshness to this. After some breathing, it does come around a bit, it opens up. More fruit and more dusty ol’ wood. Almost an old Alsatian Gewürztraminer. Nope, this doesn’t lack complexity. Some hints of vanilla (ice-cream). Quite good, but very restraint. This one would have been great to nose at a higher strength. I have to say, that the longer you wait, the better the nose develops and gets more and more character.

Taste: Fruity and old wood again. It has a small initial bite that comes mostly from the oak. Finish is medium body with enough saying power. Vanilla and creamy texture. The fattiness dissipates quickly and the whisky breaks down in towards the finish. Wood attack! put this in your mouth and you think is pretty good (not great alas), but the vanilla fat is stripped, and you get hit by more bitterness than expected. The palate does lack complexity and balance. Aiii.

This starts out pretty good, great nose (eventually) and a great initial taste, but it all turns on you a bit, when the bitterness hits you, and leaves you with an unbalanced finish. To be frank, let this slip and try to locate an old 15yo (50.4% ABV, you’ll get a better deal).

Points: 84

Glenfarclas 1994/2005 (46%, OB, for Switzerland, Cask #3979, 402 bottles)

First of all, the picture below is a picture of a similar bottle that was bottled at Cask Strength for Switzerland a year later. The picture is for cask #4726. Glenfarclas is great, it’s family run and most of the make is going into Single Malts, so no room for error, everything must be good. Second, it’s at its best as a Sherried Whisky and even in these times the Grants are able to make a very good Sherried Whisky. The self-proclaimed kings of the Sherried Whisky, namely The Macallan, gave up on this practice. For reasons only the marketing department will know. Good luck to them, Glenfarclas may very well be Speyside’s finest!

Color: Lively orange brown (like a Bourbon)

Nose: Nice creamy Sherry with quite some wood, of which more than half smells like new oak. Cappuccino or Tiramisu. Meaty like gravy. The longer you nose it the dryer it gets. Spicy, lavas and white pepper. Cardboard and ice cream. The wood is pretty raw as opposed to elegant. It’s new untreated wood (maybe some toast). Still I wouldn’t call this overly oaked. A sort of rural Sherried Whisky.

Taste: Initially it’s syrupy sweet that coats your mouth. When that coating is removed from your mouth by the alcohol, just as in the nose, a lot of wood emerges. Dried leaves. Apart from the wood, there is diluted licorice, with added bitterness. For the bold body this has , you could even say that the finish is rather mild. Also the wood makes the finish a bit sour and not of perfect balance. Nice coffee in here too. It does dry your mouth quite a bit, o there definitively is some wood influence. No sulphur.

Actually this is quite good. It’s not complex, but it does have character. It’s a nice young Sherried Whisky. It’s a bit on the edge considering the wood that’s in it, but I still do like it. It’s not over the top.

The best way is to drink it quickly after you pour it, since the mouth coating sweetness hides the wood a bit and makes it less dry and bitter, it gets when you take your time with it. When you are a quick sipper, than the score is even higher than mentioned below 🙂

Points: 86

Lochside 1991/2003 (43%, Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, JC/FG)

I once tasted the 2007 version of a 1991 Gordon & MacPhail Connoisseurs Choice Lochside and really wasn’t too happy about that. It was very light as opposed to the Lochsides chosen for the Gordon & MacPhail Reserve range. I don’t know if its only reduction that shows the difference, or maybe better casks are chosen for the Reserve range. I said ‘better’ as opposed to ‘different’ since I know that in both ranges Refill Bourbon Barrels were used. If you want to compare this 2003 Connoisseurs Choice bottling with a Gordon & MacPhail Reserve bottling, Please take a look at Cask #15217 I reviewed earlier. There is a difference of almost 17% in ABV between these two!

Lochside 1991/2003 (43%, G&M, CC, New Map Label, JC/FG)Color: Light Gold.

Nose: Fruity and light, maybe slightly sweet. Hints of distant smoke. Slightly waxy and more yellow fruits. Peach, apricots that sort of fruit. Not banana’s! Slightly malty, but its a young Whisky. Besides this, it also has a powdery and dusty side to it. Hardly any wood and very clean and easy. Still I can’t get rid of the image of diluted sugar in the back of my mind. Clay and a little bit of wood after a few minutes in the glass.

Taste: Well this starts with, …wood and some clay! Something I would have never guessed smelling this. It starts with wood and some character building bitterness. Than a quick brake-down and very short finish. This all happens very quickly. Let’s try again and see what else is in this. Very malty and watered down yellow fruit syrup, again in the apricot part of the garden, but not very sweet. Floral again. Do I detect some smoke in the taste of this Lochside? It isn’t a rounded out Whisky. It has some markers and that’s it really. Unbelievably short finish, with more bitterness than expected.

Your un-complex and summer malt this is. Very light and inoffensive. light, clean and fruity and dare I say, feminine? It the Whisky worlds answer to Lemonade (just without the acidity). The sour part is replaced by some fruity sweetness and a floral perfume. On the palate the wood does its magic. Spicy and a bit bitter.

For me this Whisky really did suffer from reduction. When compared to other 1991 bottled by Gordon & MacPhail (at cask strength), this can’t match up to those. Is it the reduction, or the casks chosen for use in the Connoisseurs Choice range and the Gordon & MacPhail Reserve range?

Points: 80

Glenfiddich 15yo “Solera Reserve” (40%, OB, Circa 2003)

Solera is an ageing system for Sherry (and other fortified wines), in which younger wines in upper rows of casks are used to top up casks of older wines stored below. Every time a batch is bottled, the wine is taken from the bottom row. Not everything though, usually up to 30% of the cask is bottled. After this, the casks in the bottom row are topped up with the wines from the casks in the row directly above, and that row is topped up with wines from the row directly above that, and so on. After a startup period this system gives wines of a consistent age and quality, even if one particular vintage is weaker than the others.

Color: Light copper gold.

Nose: Very malty, and immediately recognizable as a Glenfiddich. It has a lot of traits of the 12yo “Special Reserve” I reviewed earlier. Lots of vanilla. There is also a light Sherry influence. Waxy. But overall it’s quite flowery and light. When tried blind, a definite Lowlander, (which it is not). Likeable.

Taste: Creamy, and very malty. In the back there is a little bit of mint, which makes it fresh and lively. Ice cream, winegums and apples. It starts to break down late in the mouth, where it shows an added sour note. The finish is short. Where the nose was more floral, the taste is more fruity. Loveable.

I don’t know if it’s a step up from the 12yo “Special Reserve”, but it is most definitively a variation. And yes, I think it’s better, and it’s extremely drinkable. Again nothing wrong and again a perfect malt to get you into Single Malts. It’s well made. Even if it’s the only Single Malt at the hotel bar, I would still pick this over any other drink available. But when spoiled for choice, well, it’s a great malt to get you into Single Malts.

Points: 82

Tomatin 18yo (46%, OB, Oloroso Finish)

This is number three in Tomatin’s true affordable core range. If you’re new to Tomatin and don’t want to break the bank, Tomatin offers you the 12yo, 15yo and this 18yo. This 18yo is matured in Refill Bourbon Barrels and finished in Oloroso Butts (and maybe even some Puncheons and/or Hogsheads, who knows). A Oloroso Sherry cask used to be thé cask to age your whisky in, but here the whisky was only finished in Oloroso casks.

Color: Gold with a slight pinkish hue.

Nose: Full, creamy and fruity. Immediately very likeable. New oak, and the typical tropical fruit is here again! Forget about tomatoes, Tomatin is all about tropical fruits! After some breathing, notes of licorice whiff by, a little bit of toast and maybe even a slight hint of tar. Hard powdered candy is in there too.

Taste: Fruity and creamy, with mocha or milk chocolate even. The wood is in here, and it is a little bit sour. Powdered coffee creamer. A little bite from the Oloroso cask. Sweet. The Oloroso is pretty up front and reminds me a bit of A’bunadh. Long finish that tends to be dry, so maybe some hidden wood influence in there.

Again Tomatin have made a quality Whisky that is balanced and dangerously drinkable. The influence from the Oloroso Butts keep you from drinking the whole bottle when playing cards. For me, going up the range from the 12yo to the 15yo and the 18yo, it gradually gets better. Although we know the 15yo has big fans too. I’ll have to wait untill I get my hand on some of the 15yo. When I did a head to head between this 18yo and the deleted 25yo, the 18yo has some harsh tones, which isn’t the case when I taste the 18yo on its own. Again the 25yo is great and very smooth, and will be missed. Get one as long as they are still around, because soon only the 15yo will be a true Bourbon matured Tomatin. Obviously there are a lot of single Bourbon Cask Tomatin’s around. From independents, but also from the distillery itself. On its own this 18yo is a great Whisky, especially considering it’s price. Well done (again).

Points: 87

Thanks go out (again) to Erik for the sample.

Glen Keith 38yo 1967/2006 (53%, Gordon & MacPhail, Reserve, for La Maison Du Whisky, Refill Sherry Butt #3876, 215 bottles)

And then there is Glen Keith. Glen Keith lies a stone’s throw away from Strathisla. The spirit from Strathisla was pumped to Glen Keith for filling into casks, but also the boiler at Glen Keith warms water for Glen Keith’s production. Glen Keith’s production started in 1958 with three stills (triple distillation). In 1970 the first two stills in Scotland that are heated by gas were installed. Soon after that, the distillery stopped the triple distillation. In 1983 a sixth still is installed. The distillery is mothballed since 1999, but plans are to restart the distillery next month (April 2013).

Chivas Brothers (owned by Pernod Ricard) already opened two of their mothballed distilleries. Allt a-Bhainne in May 2005 and Braeval (a.k.a. Braes of Glenlivet) in July 2008. If memory serves me well, Chivas Brothers also have Imperial. Alas, Imperial was considered not economically viable for reopening. (It was “old” and had the ‘wrong’ capacity, to small for a company like Chivas), so Chivas presented plans in 2012 for a new distillery to be built at the site of the old Imperial distillery. So the demolition of Imperial started around december 2012 and is now also gone for good.

Color: Copper, cloudy.

Nose: Musty Sherry with a lot of wood. Dried oranges, and sugared orange skin. Crushed dead insects, well they really don’t make them like this anymore! Cloves which fits the orange skin perfectly. Mocha with orange cordial. A forest in the rain. Oak planks. A Whisky with character.

Taste: Old bottle effect. Very spicy oak but not over oaked. It’s heavy on the wood but that not a bad thing here. A lot of wood and paper. Along comes wood spice and some bitterness. It is so clearly a Whisky from another time, that this one needs it. Luckily the rest of the body is quite ‘heavy’ too, but not in your face. It’s a rather quiet malt. Hot butter, sugared oranges and some coal. It actually is pretty sweet, but the sweetness is hidden well behind the wood and oranges. A bottled antiques shop with a long warming finish.

This is now my favorite Christmas malt. Just smell that dried Orange in combination with the cloves. It’s not a perfect old bottle though, but it’s so clearly a time capsule. It’s impossible to not love this. I was always a big fan of Strathisla of the sixties and seventies and this Glen Keith is therefore really no surprise at all. Merry Christmas everybody!

Points: 92

Highland Park 19yo 1984/2003 (50%, Douglas Laing, Old Malt Cask, Sherry, DL REF 406, 636 bottles)

I saw some prices for official Highland Parks the other day, and I just had to try this one. It wanted to be picked. It’s and eighties Highland Park by Douglas Laing. A sherried one that was released almost ten years ago, and the cost then was next to nothing. (around 50 Euro’s). Well a lot has changed in the Whiskyworld the last decade. So Highland Park 19yo. Alas I wasn’t able to recover a picture for this bottle so I will show here a brother of the 19yo, the 17yo that was released two years earlier (Also a 1984). The 19yo I’ll review here will more or less look the same.

Color: White wine.

Nose: Apple sauce, very clean, a little bit of wood and a little bit of spice. Dusty but overall fruity. Lot’s of toffee and again warm sweet apple sauce. Although pleasant, it doesn’t seem quite right. There is something like coal smoke in the distance, maybe even some sulphur. A slight hint of burnt wood and paper and cardboard. The longer this breathes the better it gets. The apple bit wears off.

Taste: Short attack that dissipates quickly and falls again into a fruity sweetness. Alongside the apple there also is some blackcurrant. It’s nice, it’s a lemonade at first, that drinks nicely away. Prickly smoke in the back of your mouth. The 50% ABV delivers good oomph.  Licorice and a hint of wood with a lighter acidic and slightly bitter finish, after the ‘full’ body. The finish is the weakest part.

Likeable, but nothing special. It has its merits, but if I had tasted this blind, I would have never guessed this was a Highland Park. It’s quite far from the official Highland Park’s. I’m guessing Fino Sherry, but also a tired cask. In almost 20 years the Whisky hardly picked up any color, a not a lot of character from the wood itself. No use to compare, but the other Whisky from Orkney, Scapa, I reviewed for Master Quill’s 1st Anniversary was a lot better!

Points: 86

By the way. The depicted 17yo scored 85 Points.

Bowmore 12yo 1988/2000 (50%, Douglas Laing, Old Malt Cask, Sherry, 702 bottles)

The Master of Malt version of an eighties Bowmore did not turn out to be a FWP-Bowmore after all. Looking though the whiskies that have accumulated at Master Quill’s castle, I found another eighties Bowmore. This time an oldie by Douglas Laing. At one point in time, the Laing Brothers thought they would have to show the public what are the ‘young’ whiskies in their Old Malt Cask range, so decided on red lettering and a red tube. Somehow this ‘experiment’ didn’t last for very long, so this look is rather scarce. Lets see if this time we have a genuine FWP-Bowmore on our hands? Is it lavender & violets or peat & smoke?

Color: Light Copper Gold.

Nose: Butter, popcorn, quite some hints of flowers, but not like a FWP. Peat and a decent amount of smoke. Deep almost brooding kind of licorice. Clay, smelly pond in summer, probably a sulphur compound. This organic smell is actually great in this Whisky. Ashes and gravy, meaty.

Taste: Nice elegant Islay. Soft tasty peat, with smoke on top. Lots of caramel, toffee. Nothing is over the top. Perfect non-sugary sweetness in the background. But as with the Master of Malt version, it breaks down a bit towards the end, and has a sweet yet ‘light’ finish. There is something else that is pretty similar with the Master of Malt bottling. Again, the acidity quickly follows the sweetness. They somehow are linked. Do I detect some soap at the end of the finish? If it’s there it doesn’t hurt the whisky much. On occasions it takes the properties of a rum.

Not a perfect Whisky. Has some distillation faults (butter) and some issues with the finish and stability (with air), but overall it’s a very drinkable and likeable Whisky. Again not a victim of FWP.

Beware, this whisky doesn’t take air very well, let this breathe and you’ll see how it breaks down in your glass. Break open a new deck of cards, invite some (lady) friends over for a nice and friendly game and drink the whole bottle in one evening, you’ll do yourself and the Laing Brothers a big favour.

Points: 88