Ardbeg 10yo 1993/2004 (57.3%, Cadenhead, Refill Bourbon Hogshead, 252 bottles)

Wow, unbelievable, this is just my second Ardbeg review on these pages! I have this distillery up there with the greats, so what happened? This is an Ardbeg from 1993 bottled by independent bottlers Cadenhead’s. This is most definitely not the first Cadenhead’s on these pages, no it’s actually already the tenth, so for more information about Cadenhead’s, please have a look at all the other reviews of Cadenhead’s bottlings.

Color: White wine.

Nose: Sweet and mellow peat. Smells older than it actually is. Very nice, refined and balanced. Vegetal. Lemon sherbet. Fatty and smoky. Definitely citrus fruits this one, and some tropical fruits too. Not an in-your-face Islay monster, but with a lot of Islay character. Freshly cut peat. After a wee bit of breathing, some butter emerges, and it picks up a bit in oomph. More oily and smoky, ans even the citrus (lemon) is more dominant. The peat on the other hand recedes even more. Breathing adds something fishy and some vanilla to the mix. Somewhat more sea influence.

Taste: Sweet, sweet and light young peat. The smoke comes later. Nice effect. Hardly any wood. Whereas the nose showed me some light (old) peat, on the palate this Whisky does show its youth. Just as in the nose, very restrained lively and fruity Ardbeg, again not a kick in the head. With some air and time, it even gets a wee bit floral and ashy and slightly more pungent.

The offset and the body are nice and full, or round, if you prefer. The tastes fit together and show a more elegant side of Ardbeg. Towards the finish it does start to break down a bit. I said a bit. For an Ardbeg the finish is rather short and again light at first, but breathing lengthens the finish (and adds a little woody bitterness, finally). Typical Islay, not typical Ardbeg is you ask me. Probably not a very active cask, since there isn’t any wood detectable, nor has it picked up a lot op color.  It reminds me of an Ardbeg Bond Reserve I still have, so I’ll review that shortly (also from Cadenhead’s).

Summa summarum, nice Ardbeg that needs to breathe!

Points: 86

Dunedin “Double Wood” 10yo (40%, OB, 6y American Oak, 4y French Oak, ex-New Zealand Red Wine barrels, Blended Whisky)

Here at Master Quill, when writing about whisky, we foremost are keeping up busy with the Scottish version of the tipple. However in the early 19th century lots of Scots moved across the world and settled in New Zealand. Finding a lot of Scottish (Whisky) heritage in New Zealand is not all that unusual. Even today a lot of small or micro-distilleries do pop up in the country. (like Southern, Hokonui and Thomson, to name but a few).

This time we’ll concentrate on the biggest and best known of the New Zealand Whisky producers, al be it under a lot of different names, and also under quite some different management.

In December 1969 the Baker family started distillation in Dunedin (on the south Island, to the south of Oamaru). They named their distillery “Willowbank”. The Whisky was released under their Wilson’s brand name since 1974. By 1974 The distillery was named after it’s Whisky “Wilson Distillery”. In 1981 the giant Seagram’s bought the distillery. Seagrams made a “minor” contribution by replacing the copper necked stainless steel stills for more traditional whole copper stills. Seagram’s released their Whisky as Lammerlaw. Lammerlaw being a nearby mountain range, but also the source of water for Whisky production. The distillery was mothballed in 1995 and Seagram’s sold the distillery to Foster’s in 1997, who had it untill 2002. The two copper stills and the four column grain still were eventually sold to Fiji to distill rum, but the gin still remained in New Zealand. It is now located in pieces at the McCashin’s Brewery in Nelson, and may be used again in the future.

First Warren Preston bought the Distillery and some 600 ageing casks of amongst others Lammerlaw Malt Whisky and starting a firm called The New Zealand Malt Whisky Company (NZMWC). The Casks were laid down in Oamaru. Some 150 of those casks were bottled (under the Milfort brand name, but also Blended Whisky under the Preston’s brand name). Alas NZMWC went bankrupt and in 2010 the Forward looking entrepreneur Greg Ramsay (leading a consortium of investors) took over and renamed the firm The New Zealand Whisky Company (NZWC). Mr. Ramsay bought the last 450 casks of Whisky of which half were Lammerlaw Malt Whisky (18 to 24yo) and the other half Wilson’s Whisky (at least 12yo). By 2012 some 90 casks were bottled for the current range, so by now only 360 casks are left. In the grand scheme of things and the good promotion for the Whisky being carried out, I guess that the whole stock will be sold by the end of 2016. So be quick, because, this New Zealand whisky is rapidly becoming extinct!

Plans are to build a new distillery (or two). Obvious choices for new sites are Oamaru, but also Dunedin. Less obvious choices would be Auckland and Nelson, both Auckland and Nelson showed more interest than Oamaru and Dunedin in being the home of a new New Zealand Whisky distillery.

Color: Red copper.

Nose: Fresh and woody at first, and a little bit winey, well that’s a surprise! Spicy and a little bit of sweet, toffee-like wood. It does have a sweet side to it, but overall pretty dark, with already hints of grain whisky. Maybe some cask toast and influences (tannins) from the wine. Spicy Syrah? Next, the grain whisky starts to play its part. This is spicy and definitely smells like a volcanic red wine, so I got even some terroir in this (Syrah again). That’s not completely strange since the Red Wine finish was done for a whopping 4 years, whereas others finish their whiskies for mere months. (I understand that there also is, or was, a 15yo Double Wood that was finished for 10 whole years in Wine casks!) This one is dark and brooding after the initial freshness right out of the bottle. Very appetizing.

Taste: Less woody than one might think, half-sweet cookie dough and nicely fruity. Slightly acidic at first, but quickly taken over by the sweet red fruits. Not even a lot of Wine to this, so the 4 years in Wine barrels didn’t do the Whisky any harm. Maybe the grain balances the Whisky out? That said, it doesn’t mean the wine didn’t impair a lot of taste onto the Whisky, because it did (sweet fruits, red fruits, plums, Merlot?), especially after some breathing. The Whisky just doesn’t taste like Wine, although some markers are definitely there. Seems to me that the 70/30 ratio of malt and grain is pretty much spot on. Nice and half-long, warming and sweetish finish, with some hints of oak. Very well made, likeable and drinkable blend.

Yes, this is a blended Whisky, the NZWC itself calls it a Master Blended Whisky. With 70% Single Malt this really is a sort of super premium luxury blend. Stuff that the Scots these days put into expensive crystal decanters. Nice aroma’s and pretty different and bold. For the Whisky it is, this is bottled at the right ABV. Recommended!

Points: 84 Points

Thanks go out to Cyril and Greg for the Whiskies and the additional info!

The Balvenie 10yo “Founder’s Reserve” (40%, OB, Circa 2003)

And here is another entry-level whisky by the same owners as Glenfiddich. I guess Glenfiddich was (not anymore) the poor man’s Single Malt Whisky and The Balvenie is the more posh one. Even Glenfiddich started to churn out Vintage Releases from the seventies, that have a heft price tag. Balvenie makes about half the amount of Whisky Glenfiddich makes and with that still is a top ten seller. So William Grant & Sons have two golden goose’s on hand.

When looking around. and being new to Single Malts I almost fell in love by the shape of the bottle and really liked the way their labels looked. Not a lot to choose then. There was this 10yo (Founders Reserve), a 12yo (Double Wood), a 15yo (Single Cask), a 21yo (Port Wood) and a 25yo (Single Cask). And there was one limited oddity, the 17yo (Islay Cask). Nothing more. Today like with others there is more choice than ever. Lets have a look at the cheapest Balvenie, the 10yo “Founders Reserve”…

Color: Gold

Nose: Perfumy and powdery. Almonds and lemons. Apple pie. Hint of wood. Creamy. banana and cookie dough. Syrupy. Sweet and light.

Taste: Sweet and very fruity. Cardboard. Very short finish. Sweet but very light. Hints of smoke? Hints of wood and wood-shavings that give it just a little bit of character. Vanilla ice-cream.

First of all I have to admit it was a very long time since I’ve had those standards like this one and Glenfiddich 12yo. I almost never have a whisky that’s 40% ABV, or it has to be a very old Gordon & MacPhail bottling. So I’ve become very much detached of these standards. With that I may become a bit decadent and in memory unappreciative of these whiskies. Having said that I have to admit that these two whiskies surprised me a lot with their quality and taste. Nice stuff. There is one big if. These type of malts seems to me are so easily drinkable, that you would drink them the way you drank lemonade when you were a kid. These types of malts make alcoholics out of us 😉

Compared to Glenfiddich 12yo “Special Reserve”, both are different styles. This is sweet and fruity. Nothing more. Glenfiddich is more honest in style, more of a Lowlander I would say. I thought Glenfiddich was better.

Points: 77

Mortlach 10yo 1989/2000 (57.2%, Wilson & Morgan, Barrel Selection)

…and here is my second entry for our Genietschap gathering. Yesterday I reviewed an older expression of the ‘standard’ 16yo Flora and Fauna, and that was pretty good!

This Wilson & Morgan bottle was the opener of the day. Chosen for that reason because it was the youngest one.

Color: Copper Brown.

Nose: Yeah Baby! Heavy thick Sherry, meaty, but without the harshness and without the Sulphur! What a character and that at only 10yo. Raisins. Tarry and dry. Nice and you can even call this fresh and perfumy.

Taste: oh yeah (again!). Dry Sherry (at first) with tar and coal, than sweeter with a peppery attack. The coal, fabulous, just an old steam locomotive in here, and warm asphalt. Again there is nothing off here, not much wood, no sulphur and not harsh.

Very nice play between a sour and sweet note in the finish (amongst others some orange peel). It’s not only very good, but very interesting as well.

Would I have known it then, this would have been bought by the case! I’ll do something bold here, and score this young one at least…

Points: 90

Springbank 10yo ‘100 Proof’ (57%, OB, Circa 2004)

Springbank, the strongest survivor of Campbeltown, and one of the few family owned distilleries. Once a great center for whisky, and once a region of its own, it still is, but barely. The people behind Springbank do their utmost best to let Campbeltown survive as a region. Glen Scotia is intermittently operated by the crew of Springbank, and of course Springbank themselves are responsible for Longrow, Hazelburn and Kilkerran (Glengyle Distillery). All names from a distant Campbeltown past. Founded in 1828 by the Reid family, who were married into the Mitchells. In 1837 the Mitchell’s bought the distillery. In 1897 J. & A. Mitchell Company Ltd. is founded, the company that is still on the label today. Since 1969 J. & A. Mitchell is also owner of Cadenhead’s. Between 1979 and 1987, Springbank was closed. And since 1989, production is again as it should be. Almost nobody malts themselves these days, but Springbank take the remarkable step to reopen the maltings in 1992. Springbank is a cult malt has a great following, and is by far the most popular malt on Wall Street.

Color: Gold.

Nose: Strong, buttery, oily. Sparkling lemon curd. Clean and a bit closed at first. Grassy and smells of wet plants and earth. Cow dung in wet grass, and some “young” peat. Coastal fresh, malty and spicy, but not from wood. It has hints of popcorn and milk chocolate. Very rural, gritty and bold.

Taste: Sweet like toffee. Creamy and spicy, this time definitively from wood, and seems a bit winey, although no wine casks, even sherry, were used. It is supposed to be all Bourbon. Mocha, chocolate and peanuts. Yes it’s “Snickers” in a bottle. Slightly unbalanced by the soury woody, and peaty, finish. The finish also leaves a minty sensation on the tongue. Sweet mint as in “After Eight”.

Long live Springbank, very nice and drinkable, with a fine full body. This version is quite peaty and oily, when you think of it. Now I’m curious how a more recent bottle would taste like…

Points: 86

Talisker 10yo (45.8%, OB, Map Label, Circa 2002)

By special request a Talisker 10yo. Alas I don’t have a recent one open, so I’ll have to review an older expression that was bottled some ten years ago. I think this was from 2002 (L15R00029697), but it could be even some years older than that. Lot’s of names to distinguish the looks of the bottle, but this one should be the Map label (in Cream map box and a Brown glass bottle). Just have a look at the picture.

For those of you who have read my review of the 25yo from 2006, I don’t have to mention again how great I think Talisker is and how they are keeping the usual suspects on a high level of quality. Also consider the amount of Talisker they make these days!

Talisker saw the light of day in 1830. For a long time even, Talisker was triple distilled, but they stopped doing that in 1928. Like any good distillery they also had a big fire (1960). Talisker returned to form just two years later with exact copies of the destroyed equipment, mainly the five stills. In 1972 the malting closes. After that once in a while some equipment is replaced, but nothing major.

Color: Gold

Nose: Yeah, this is the good peat! Very elegant and classy! After that creamy and toffeelike. Fern, clay, plants on wet soil. Hints of orange skin, no tangerine skin. Warming nose and given some time it even gets salty which really is rather silly in a description of the nose. This really is what I like.

Taste: Sweet, pepper attack, pepper as in black-and-white power or licorice. Hint of apple instead of citrus. Again elegant and balanced, and really no wood to speak of. The pepper attack stays on the tongue for a while and get some toffee in. So nice. This really shows you it’s the base of the 25yo’s to be. Its nice, but shows you the potential in growth. Such a shame there isn’t a cask strength version of this. That really would have been something.

This profile is great and if you want this, you’ll have to pay some serious cash to buy yourself an old Islay whisky or even Brora. I know, an older expression of the standard 10yo Talisker is getting more pricey lately, but still nowhere near to the prices asked for the aforementioned bottles. Do yourself a favour and get it while you can, and beware, this is dangerously drinkable. This will be empty before you know it. I left myself a 125 ml sample of this, but I almost drank it all writing this! Stay away, just drink milk instead, its good for you, unless you are lactose intolerant I guess.

Points: 88

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)