Tag Archives: 1997

Craigellachie 1997/2014 (46%, Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Refill American Hoghead & Refill Bourbon Barrels, AD/JIIG, 01/07/2014)

Craigellachie is no stranger to Master Quill. Funky and meaty, with often some hints of sulphur. Seize the day people, time flies like never before! Last time I reviewed a Craigellachie was almost 10 years ago, yes you heard that right, almost TEN years ago. Just sayin’. Craigellachie is now bottled officially by John Dewar & Sons Ltd. which are part of the Bacardi – Martini drinks giant since 1998. With plenty of stock they decided to put out lots of Whiskies from their newly acquired Distilleries, all with age statements. That’s not very 21st century now isn’t it. Fun fact: this only happened in 2014, so it took them a while think up of this plan of bottling their own Whiskies.

Apart from the officially released Craigellachies, also some casks manage to find their way into the welcoming arms of independent bottlers. Nevertheless, most of the output of this distillery ends up in several blends, but primarily end up in Dewar’s White Label. The bottling for this review isn’t a blend, but a (reduced) independent Single Malt offering from Gordon & MacPhail. After the Glenallachie I reviewed last week, I thought why not, why not do another of those 46% ABV bottlings from the previous iteration of the Connoisseurs Choice range before it got revamped a few years ago.

Color: Light White Wine.

Nose: Waxy, woody and warming. Hints of paper and somewhat sweet smelling. The first thing to do is to keep an eye (or rather a nose) out for sulphur. Craigellachie is so associated with sulphur, one must be careful not to fool oneself and smell it when it’s not there. Still, I’m happy to report, at the moment there are only mere hints right at the start during the first nosing. Soft mocha and soft milk chocolate with an ever so slightly acidic fruity note, something in the vicinity of unripe pear. Next the nose turns sharper, fine by me, but yes this has a tad of sulphur, which is also somewhat peppery. A sharp, and specific deep smell. Personally I never had problems with hints of sulphur, only when it becomes more dominant I start to dislike it. Most often that kind of sulphur can be found in Whiskies matured in ex-Sherry casks. This fine example hasn’t seen Sherry and this sulphury bit that must be present in the Spirit is fine by me. In this form it suits the sprit, it’s a part of the distillery character. I believe Bacardi, who are the current owners, even mentioned sulphur when they introduced their new official offerings, like the 13yo in 2014. The nose if fine, really soft overall.

Taste: Hints of paper, some indistinct ripe fruit and some cannabis, similar to the cannabis notes I get in some older Bunnahabhains. All of this seem to fit together well, however at times it also comes across as a bit of an unbalance, here a really minor gripe, hardly worth the mention. Next sip, more of the same really, paper and cannabis, sugar water. Not complex, nor layered, yet tasty. I actually expected more after some 16 or 17 odd years this has been in a cask. Where the Glenallachie wasn’t simple, this one sort of is. More fruity sweetness comes through. This is actually a pleasant and soft Malt, where Craigellachies can be more beefy and meaty, bigger and sharper. Again, I guess that the reduction might have had something to do with this. The Cannabis note is omni-present. It defines this dram. I like it for it, I was tempted to up the score with one point for the cannabis note, but I won’t. As a daily drinker however, it might be just a tad too sweet. Medium finish, with a pleasant and friendly aftertaste.

This one is really different from the G&M Glenallachie I reviewed before. This is actually a nice Whisky from an independent bottler when you’re a novice. I actually has no off notes unless you are really allergic to sulphur and can’t even handle minute amounts. For the rest of us, the hint of sulphur is OK. Where both the Glenallachie and the Craigellachie are good, I would buy the Glenallachie if spotted in the wild, and this Craigellachie I would pass up on. The Glenallachie is also hands down better and the Craigellachie is nice, but also somewhat less challenging, therefore a Whisky more for a novice. Across the years, some cask strength Craigellachies from 1997 were bottled by G&M, maybe I’ll come across one of those to compare it to this one, one day, although I won’t be especially looking out for one.

Points: 84.

Glenrothes 19yo 1997/2017 (58.7%, Cadenhead’s, Sherry Butt, 528 bottles)

Glenrothes is not an unknown on these pages. I come across a lot and on occasion I do buy some. However, somehow it never really became one of my favourite Whiskies. Sure, its good and I do by them and it does the job very well and so on, but it never passed that particular epic status for me. As I said, it’s very good, but it never pops up in any top 10. This Cadenheads expression, I have tasted before at a Whisky Festival, and by accident I bought two at auction in stead of the planned one. The second time around I forgot I already had one from the previous auction. Believe it or not, this happened to me twice recently, with yet another Glenrothes, strange enough. Go figure. I will probably replace this Cadenhead’s bottling, when its empty, with the other “doubly-bought” Glenrothes. I hope both are pretty decent though since I got two of both. This particular Cadenhead’s bottling, was picked by Mark to commemorate Cadenhead’s 175th anniversary, and if Whiskybase is anything to go by (very wonky scoring there), these 175th anniversary picks are usually better than the sister casks bottled by Cadenhead.

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Soft Sherry notes. Creamy, slightly tarry and meaty. Nice soft wood, almost a bit paper-like. Quite fruity. A very well balanced dram without any flaws. Soft and smooth smelling, yet also a bit boring? Apple skins, warm apple compote. Red berry syrup with sugared lemon. Warm dishwater (a soft note), mocha and milk chocolate. Boring, because nothing really sticks out. All aroma’s flatlined, like a sleepy afternoon in warm wind. After some extensive breathing, some wood pops up. Not a lot, but just enough to make it slightly more interesting. However, this is a 19yo fully Sherry butt matured Whisky and it’s so soft, that it is in no way a Sherry bomb, it is not even a Sherry grenade. It has more colour than oomph, yet, as I stated above, it is flawless. It smells like an easily drinkable Whisky. It doesn’t even smell alcoholic, even though this has more than 58% ABV. A freshly poured dram smells better than one that sat in my glass for a while. A freshly poured dram has more notes like a Rhum Agricole, which dissipates with time.

Taste: Fruity with a white pepper kick, well, the latter came a bit as surprise. In a way it is syrupy, yet a somewhat thin syrup. The kick still lasts and stays a while to manhandle the back of my tongue. Black fruits as in very good Sherried bottlings from yesteryear. Apart from fresh fruit, also (again) the syrupy black fruits are here. If you give it more time and you keep the dram in your mouth for a while, the classic black fruit note becomes even more pronounced. I guess this is why it was picked for the 175th anniversary, because this is the note that makes this Whisky tick. On top of this, a slightly more acidic, fresh and fruity note, reminding me of sugared lemons again. Towards the finish a more tarry note, with its slight bitterness. Still not a lot of wood notes or any of its derivatives, so seemingly this wasn’t a very active cask. Hints of warm solid licorice. The chewy candy type licorice if left in the sun for a while. Vanilla powder. Just like the nose, on the palate a very well balanced Whisky. Since on my palate the Whisky is less soft and dares to show some spices, I do like the taste better than the nose, which is pretty good as well in its own right.

So, pretty good it is, with a nice, yet slightly boring nose. Tastes better than it smells, which is a big plus. Other than that, I still do like it. it’s good. ’nuff said. Moving on…

Points: 87

Arran 16yo 1997/2014 “The Un-Official almost 17th” (52.1%, OB, Private Cask, Sherry Hogshead #1997/525, 270 bottles)

Some 10 years ago, I reviewed the official 16yo (bottled at 46% ABV) and quite liked it. Back then it scored 87 points which is quite a good score. Here we have another 16yo from the distillery itself. The Un-Official almost 17th? Surely they mean The Un-Official almost 17yo? Nevermind. Since the 2013 review, I also came across some reasonable Arran’s but nothing really cached my eye and for me personally Arran slipped into the darkness of oblivion a bit. Fast forward some years and in comes this Arran Batch 3, I reviewed a year ago. That one did the trick of bringing Arran back into the (lime)light again. Batch 3 made me look into Arran again, and in stead of going to the shops, I went for some single cask versions at my favourite German auction. Sherry Hogshead #1997/525 is one of those auction lots…

Color: Copper gold, slightly hazy.

Nose: Nutty Sherry. Freshly made alcoholic toffee or runny caramel used for ice-cream. Toffee backed up by super ripe yellow fruits and still green, starting to become yellow, banana’s. So not really unripe banana’s then. Peaches also come to mind a lot. Dusty. Fresh oak. Well balanced, It may be simple (is it?), yet all these aroma’s go together quite well. Also, it smells like it will taste quite sweet and fruity. We’ll see about that later. Hints of polished furniture. Again fruity and sweet smelling. Cocktail cherries. Diluted red fruit syrup. Sometimes a whiff of a more fresh and minty aroma passes by. Come to think of it, this one does have an aura of old skool Sherried Whisky about it, which I quite like. Hmmm, I also got some old skool in Batch 4. More soft, actually very soft wood and some cardboard. Almost no cask toast, I mention this because there can be a lot of this in Sherried Whiskies. More syrup and now a fresh butter note, adding to the balance, because this is a pleasant smelling Whisky. Sometimes a whiff of sea-air and after some extensive sipping, a more friendly and nice floral detergent note pops up, not a really soapy note, which usually is somewhat more negatively perceived (by me). Yup, nice stuff. Very nice indeed.

Taste: Sweet Sherry and vanilla. Apple pastry, very much so. This surprises me a bit, since I didn’t pick up on apples in the nose (and still don’t). Apple compote. Apple beignets, including the dough. Luckily not to sweet. Nutty and waxy. Some wood in the beginning, but only the more astringent bit of it stays behind on my tongue, the rest of the woody notes are soon overpowered by the vanilla and the toffee ice-cream note, as well as the aforementioned fruit and some freshly baked cookies. After a while the astringent bit I just mentioned, turns into something somewhat bitter. Medium bitterness from wood, as well as from some licorice notes. After some proper tasting, and smelling, this does remind me of old skool (making me feel melancholic) Whisky. In the review of Arran 16yo I mentioned the potential Arran has and that I hope it would someday really show it, well here it is. What a wonderful Arran this turned out to be.

Arran seems to me to be a Malt that shows what it’s got right out of the gate. Well balanced and nice, yet less of a layered kind of malt or one with a substantial development in your glass. This one is no exception. It shows you what its got and thus lacking some development and complexity. Nevertheless, what it does have is very good. So I’m not complaining. There is definitely room for instant gratification Malts on my lectern. It might be me again, but for me, the second half of the bottle seemed better than the first half, so again one that needs to breathe a lot. Usually I review a Whisky I own myself halfway through, this is again a Whisky that went quicker than I thought, so I had to review it before it’s gone. Ain’t that a recommendation for ya!?

This Arran, in a way, seems to be a companion to the Highland Park 14yo I just reviewed. The Highland Park is almost overly complex, whereas this Arran is not. They differ a lot yet also have quite some similarities. Due to the complexity, the Highland Parks scores slightly better, but Arran isn’t any worse. The Highland Park you have to work, this one is as laid back and easy as they come. This Arran will always welcome you with open arms, where the Highland Park is essentially a grumpy git. Arran by now has gained yet another fan. I love the melancholy around this one, reminding me of Whiskies I tasted a long time ago…

Points: 89

Ledaig 15yo 1997/2013 (59.3%, Gordon & MacPhail, Reserve, for Van Wees, Refill Sherry Hogshead #464, 262 bottles, AC/JICD)

Well, this should be interesting! Fall 2015 saw me doing a review of a sistercask (#465) of this Whisky. The cask next door, so to speak. It was filled the same day with exactly the same distillate, in just another refill Sherry hogshead, but with, probably, a different result, since no two casks are really alike. Both were distilled on 23/10/1997, #464 was bottled 01/08/2013, and #465 was bottled on 30/10/2013. Bottled only three months later but making one a 15yo old and the other a 16yo. #465 is also the darker of the two, but the difference looks bigger than the aforementioned 3 months. Maybe the two casks contained different Sherries. Maybe one cask was more active, or had a deeper char. All can be true.

#465 was bottled for The Whisky Exchange (of London), and #464 was bottled for Van Wees (of Amersfoort). Both casks were refill Sherry hogsheads. I’m opening this #464 now, since #465 is almost empty and it’s time to “kill” it. Don’t believe for a second, since it lasted me this long, it wasn’t any good. It is actually so good, I didn’t want it to be empty soon, second it isn’t really a daily drinker type Whisky to boot. It’s a big, big Whisky. So today I still have a chance to compare the two. Just bear in kind, one has had plenty of time to breathe and the other is almost freshly opened.

Color: Full gold, with some orange.

Nose: Funky, dusty and meaty. Big and sweet-smelling. Fatty, dirty, meaty peat. Almost like an animal was turned into peat along with the plants. Nothing bad here, just very animalesk. Crushed beetle and gasses bubbling up from a pond. Expect no clean earthy peat, or just bursts of sharp smoke. Yes, smoke is here, as well as peat. Smoke from wet wood. Marshland wood. Earthy. Wet and dirty peat. Earthy sweet peat. The smoke is soft. Spicy, vegetal and highly aromatic. Hints of liquorice and dust, mixed in with toasted oak. Vanilla, mocha and more drier wood and sharper smoke. Hints of Rhum Agricole if you ask me. Hints of peppermint immersed in mud. Very organic mud. Do I detect some sulphurous compounds in the back? Wonderful balance though.

Taste: Starts sharp and quickly turns to sweet, with a peppery attack, quickly followed by peat and sharp smoke. Its like the initial sweetness coats the mouth and when that recedes, the sharper element comes to the front of the stage. Maybe fruity even, I’m sure of it actually, but that part is overwhelmed by the rest of the big aroma’s this Whisky has. Licorice power, sweet licorice wood. Ashes, even cigarette ashes. Extremely warming, I can feel it going all the way down. Never get that a lot, not even from cask #465. Sweet, lots and lots of almonds and even hints of anise, barely noticeable: acetone based nail polish remover, and the crushed beetle is here too. This may seem strange and quite off, but let me assure you, this is all positive for the whole of this Whisky. Give it some time and more fruity notes start to develop. Red and yellow fruits. Sweetish, but also slightly acidic. Nutty and waxy. Hints of burnt plastic. Lots of smoke in the taste, along with some cow dung in the finish. Very rural and farmy. Salty lips. What a wonderful Whisky again, utterly complex. There is so much happening. It’s only slightly less balanced than the nose, and cask #465 for that matter. This imperfection is best noticeable in the aftertaste.

In a direct comparison, it is obvious to me that #465 is the more civilized of the two. The same notes appear, but turned down quite a bit. It’s not as “loud” as #464. It’s fruitier, with apple notes and some more red fruits emerge as well. More elegant and less broad, less sweet. Slightly sharper and more acidic. Better balance in the taste and definitely more elegant and less dirty. So not identical twins. #464 is bigger, bolder and has a longer finish. The sulphurous bits of #464 are easier to detect in a direct comparison, since #465 seems to have much less of it, or lacks it altogether.

I love both these Ledaigs, and if you have a preference, it’s because one of the two better suits your profile )of the moment). More elegant or more rough, cases can be made for both. Personally today, I might prefer #465 (it shows coal and black fruit, which I love), however tomorrow I might prefer #464 (big and bold). It just depends. #465 will score higher because it does show a bit more quality and balance, with more of the aroma’s I like, but, who knows, maybe some more breathing will bring out even more in #464. I’m in for a treat the next months/years…

Points: 89

Highland Park Week – Day 5: Highland Park 9yo 1988/1997 (59.6%, Signatory Vintage, Sherry Butt #10700, 630 bottles)

Lets backup in time even some more. We stay in the land of the independent bottler, this time Signatory Vintage. We are going to take a look at another Highland Park matured in a Sherry cask, a butt even. This one is an even younger example at 9 years of age. The G&M/Whisky Mercenary bottling was 20yo, The Wilson & Morgan was around 14yo, and this Signatory Vintage bottling is a mere 9yo. Highly unusual back then, not so unusual today, since demand has risen dramatically. There is no time anymore to age the bulk of Whisky when there are so much of you around, dear readers. We’ll also go back in time bit since this was distilled in 1988. That is almost 30 years ago!

Color: Copper gold.

Nose: Funky Sherry, but this time with some quality behind it. Meaty and buttery as well, with some nice distant fruit going on. Dusty mocha and milk-chocolate. Dark chocolate as well. Steam, sowing-machine oil. Clean toilet notes, not to be mistaken by a freshly cleaned toilet odour. I know this sounds pretty peculiar, but I get it in this, so I couldn’t help myself and had to write it down. Deeper and more brooding. Probably Oloroso. Cedar wood with an oriental spice-mix and pencil shavings. Even though it is a young Whisky, it already smells like something from another era. Christmas spices. Christmas cake. Dusty and very thick. luxury and velvety, just like the box. The more it breathes the better is gets, give it lots of room for development. A much better Sherry cask than the one, the 1992 Wilson & Morgan expression matured in. After this, forget about that one.

Taste: Well this is almost 60% ABV and that shows. Its big, thick and a bit hot, but also very fruity (meaty blueberries), and amazingly pretty woody as well, but not too much. Luckily it also has some toffee sweetness to it, to balance it all out. Steam and coal. You are conned, by the initial sip, this is going to be sweet, but the sweetness is shoved aside by bullying tannins and Italian laurel licorice. I’m guessing this came from a first fill Oloroso butt, which impaired enough onto this Whisky, so it could be used as a very nice refill cask the second time around. Long oaky finish, with an even longer aftertaste full of black fruits and (cedar) wood. It isn’t all that complex, but when a Whisky is as tasty as this, it doesn’t need to be. It’s only 9yo, but it is bottled at the right time, believe me. Probably Oloroso, but Cream Sherry or PX might be possible as well.

Ohhh, I want one of these. 1988, wow, 9yo, wow-wow. This in my glass and some 80’s music, and I’d have a great day.

Points: 90

Springbank 17yo 1997/2015 “Sherry Wood” (52.3%, OB, Fresh and Refill Sherry Butts and Hogsheads, 9.120 bottles, 15/24)

When attending the Whisky Show in London last year I absolutely loved this one at the Springbank stand. Sure there were better Whiskies at the show, but also you’d almost have to take out another mortgage on your house to buy those. Nope, I mean, this was definitely one of the best Whiskies at a fair price. Still, over here in Europe this sells for well over a hundred euros. Despite this, it was really a no brainer to buy, and remember, why get only one, when you gen get two for twice the price. When I just recently finished another Springbank, (more about that next time), it was time to finally break out this one. Distilled in 1997 and fully matured in fresh and refill Sherry butts and hogsheads. Possibly, but not necessarily, a combination of european and american oak.

Springbank 17yo SherryColor: Gold.

Nose: Nice, waxy and fresh, powdered vitamin C or should we call it vitamin W from now on? Dusty and dry and definitely lots of Sherry mustiness. Hints of apples (Calvados). Slightly wet forest floor with mushrooms growing. Unripe cold banana, some sweet malts, vanilla and quite vegetal as well. Ashy and slightly smoky (more so than peat). Hints of tar and charred cask and even some new wood, although that isn’t used for this expression. Even though this is 100% Sherry, this smells like a typical Springbank, minus the big sweet creamy vanilla that is, the Bourbon part always brings. Remember, Springbank usually is a blend of Bourbon and Sherry casks. Luckily the Springbank distillate does well in every kind of cask. However, all types of casks used, bring their own flavor to the Springbank spectrum. So there is no better Whisky to try different expressions from. This one reminds me of old Springbank in a way. Coconut and quite fruity as well. Very well made and extremely balanced smell. They are definitely doing everything right. The Sherry smells unbelievably fresh and defined. It must have some casks (if not all) that contained Sherries matured under flor. Fino and Manzanilla that is. I doesn’t smell like typical Oloroso matured Whisky to me, (although very dry Oloroso could be possible). The Sherry notes also smell a bit different from the Sherry in the 12yo Cask Strength. Lovely expression, which would have been nice to compare to the 18yo I reviewed earlier. Alas, that one is already gone, so that is not possible anymore. Bugger.

Taste: Yup, Sherry (from under flor) and typical Springbank. If you love Springbank like I do, it feels like coming home again. Waxy, vanilla and lots and lots of coconut again. Sometimes a bit soapy even. Welcome back: coconut! Peat (more so than smoke) and quite vegetal and fruity. Coconut mixed with almond cookies. Cookie dough and a nice friendly sweetness to it. Toffee. It also has a bite as well. Burnt wood and some peat. On top, as with many modern Sherry casked Whiskies, a slightly acidic red fruitiness that stands out a bit, less integrated so to say. It’s this aroma that dominates the finish as well. Thus the finish is less about the cookies, coconut, toffee and dough. Nevertheless, this one has it all. Super stuff with utter balance. Springbank works very well in Bourbon casks, and although you know what some Bourbon casks would have done to this Whisky, this time I don’t miss them. Nice Sherry expression this is. Well done Springbank!

I’d like to mention, that this review is written just a few minutes after opening the bottle. Springbank is never at its best right after opening the bottle. It’s a big Whisky that needs time to breathe. If you are patient with it and it has time to breathe, wow!

Points: 90

Clynelish 15yo 1997/2012 (51.5%, The Whisky Mercenary, Bourbon Cask, 59 bottles)

A few days ago I reviewed another Clynelish from 1997, and I just stumbled across this one, bottled by the Whisky Mercenary a.k.a. Jürgen Vromans. Since this is bottled in 2012, I guess Jurgen sent it to me a few years back as well. Only 59 bottles did once exist, but we know the Belgians to be enjoying life quite a bit, so I don’t think a lot of bottles of this have survived. I guess its will be even harder to find one of these today. I’ve reviewed quite a lot of Jürgen’s bottlings, and I have to give it to him, he has quite the nose for picking them, as well as being allowed to pick “dem Whiskies!” You might not know, but it’s not easy to be an independent bottler. You just don’t go into a warehouse trying all of the casks lying around and picking the best you can find, unless you have a bit of a reputation…

Clynelish TWMColor: White wine.

Nose: Buttery and malty. Fresh. Like a breath of fresh air, yet also citrus fresh. Creamy toffee barley. The cask seemed to be quite inactive, maybe the color also gives that away a bit already, but the sweetness is more like toffee and not big on vanilla you get from more first fill and more active casks. Another hint is the lack of a pronounced wood aroma. Cold apple compote with a bit of warm apple sauce, laced with a splash of calvados. All those apply associations are noticeable, but in no way overpowering. The fruity sweetness gets more and more dusty and dry, with a tiny bit of surface wood, oak obviously, with a little bit of mint. Apple pie, after some breathing the apple is joined by some freshly made dough. Nice balance with more than usual distillery character. Typical example where the wood did less to make the Whisky. It shows its other side. Fruity fresh, with shallow depth, dough aroma instead of wood, but at the same time lacking real depth and complexity. This isn’t a fault. It’s just different, and with this it shows another side of Single Malt Whisky in general.

Taste: Well, what a surprise. Sure it is fruity, but way more wood in here than in the nose. It starts with wood and paper as well as quite the peppery note. Sugary sweetness and creamy. I didn’t expect that at all. Toffee and bread. Caramel. The aroma’s grow a bit bigger with more breathing, so don’t be to hasty with this one. The lack of activity from the cask is noticeable by the weakness of the finish. It starts with a little attack, for a brief moment shows a nice body, but then it comes down very quick and leaves you a bit with a light, short and unremarkable aftertaste, which at some point in time even gets a bit bitter. Cedar wood bitterness. This bitterness even grows bigger, if you drink this Whisky after a prolonged time of breathing.

In my opinion, not the best of Clynelishes around, but there are many other who like it even better. This is from 2012, right at the start of his career as The Whisky Mercenary. Its hard then to get to pick the very best of casks, and it is a shared cask as well. Only 59 bottles was his share, but I guess at this ABV there was more Whisky in the cask, bottled or blended by others. Nevertheless educational, because here you can see that it’s more about the spirit, than it is about the wood.

Compared to the 1997 Wemyss Clynelish I reviewed a few days ago, the family resemblance is quite remarkable, but the Wemyss is definitely the more aromatic and polished expression of the two.

Points: 81

Clynelish 1997/2014 “Cayenne Cocoa Bean” (46%, Wemyss Malts, Hogshead, 373 bottles)

You get only one chance to make a first impression, and that is what he did, William Wemyss. Carrying around my bottle of Strathisla I ran into William in London and I offered him a dram. Talking about the Whisky Business in general and Wemyss in particular, he sniffed it for a while, and sniffed it some more, talked a bit, and then…chucked the whole stuff in a spittoon claiming that it was great stuff. He probably had to drive home later or was late for a meeting or something. People around me were shocked a bit, but I know this is how memories are made. Maybe just not right away!

Wemyss is known for naming their Whiskies. The Clynelish I’ll be reviewing today is called Cayenne Cocoa Bean, since it reveals bittersweet cocoa beans mingled with cayenne pepper.

Cayenne Cocoa BeanColor: Somewhere in between white Wine and light gold.

Nose: Sweetish and fruity. Definitely some barley, but also a dry grassy note. The color gave it away a bit, this is from a refill hogshead, so it lacks the in your face vanilla and toasted cask aroma’s. It’s more refined. It has a creamy and fatty element. Vanilla pudding, but it is all very restrained and well-balanced. Fatty not waxy, what it usually the marker for Clynelish. Dusty oak. Dry old vanilla powder. Dried peach and pineapple. Semi sweet black tea. Leavy and hints of a dying out small garden bonfire. Burning off old branches. The sweetness throughout is toffee not sugar. Lovely stuff.

Taste: Nice thick fruit with toffee. The toffee substituting the wax you’d expect to find in a Clynelish. It starts out almost chewy. The whole it held up by a toasted wood note, with the faintest hint of bitterness and tree sap. On entry very good, from the start a lot is happening. After that a mixture of mint, sugar and a small amount of licorice. It is big and holds up. Finish starts prickly, and swiftly whiffs away, only the toffee stays behind as well as some warmth. Medium finish with a warming aftertaste. A good Clynelish and I’m guessing for those of you who didn’t like it as much, the leafy quality is a bit off, and the finish is a bit too short. So it has its flaws and weaknesses. But it has its big aroma and the start is almost spectacular. The body starts well, but breaks down too soon. The finish should be better and the aftertaste has some pineapple but not much more. It is reduced to 46%, and maybe that’s the culprit for the finish and aftertaste. The beginning is great, and for that part of the experience the 46% ABV seems just about right.

I’ve encountered quite a lot of people on festivals who say they don’t like these names. They say it creates a certain expectation and with that they can’t taste it objectively anymore. A very anorak-y statement from people lacking humor? I for one, like the names, it gives them an identity, even though I might not encounter the aroma’s from the name in the Whisky. Everyone tastes differently, depending on time of day, upbringing and associations with tastes. Clynelish is an excellent example. I like Clynelishes just as the next guy, but I always seem to like different Clynelishes. When I was a member of the Malt Maniacs, I really liked a 12yo Clynelish bottled by Adelphi. I didn’t know it was a Clynelish, since it was part of a blind competition we know as the Malt Maniacs Awards. At another blind tasting session, at least a year later, I tasted another wonderful Clynelish, which turned out to be the sister cask of the first Adelphi Clynelish. I mention those since, a lot of people didn’t care for those two Clynelishes. Same with this Wemyss expression. I first encountered it at a Wemyss tasting, led by Ginny, and I absolutely loved it, where most of the public preferred other Wemyss expressions. So never take anyone’s word for it, make up your own mind, although I have to say that all the Clynelishes I mentioned above, were casks picked by Charles MacLean, even this Wemyss one…

I managed to forget the name during the writing process. I did get the bittersweet part, but couldn’t say if it’s from cocoa beans. Definitely didn’t get the cayenne though, but I still like the name. It’s only a name, nothing more.

Points: 85

Ledaig 16yo 1997/2013 (56.8%, Gordon & MacPhail, Cask Strength, for The Whisky Exchange, Refill Sherry Hogshead #465, AC/AEHI)

Third of October and right now the doors are opening for the 2015 Whisky Show in London, England. As many years before I’m attending this wonderful Whisky fest, the best few days of the year. Maybe not even the Whisky, but the people. I really can’t wait for it to begin. For those of you that are not there I’ll have a go here at a Ledaig (a.k.a. peated Tobermory) that was picked by The Whisky Exchange. This was a Whisky that was bottled a few weeks after the Whisky Show 2013, but luckily I got a chance to try from Gordon & MacPhail, before it was bottled. People from the Netherlands will know its sister cask #464 which was also excellent but much lighter in color.

Ledaig 16yo 1997/2013 (56.8%, Gordon & MacPhail, Cask Strength, for The Whisky Exchange, Refill Sherry Hogshead #465)Color: Copper orange gold.

Nose: Fatty peat and candy sweetness. Animalesk and organic. Wild stuff. Hints of burnt cable. Unlit tobacco and dark chocolate powder. Very vegetal. Thick and full of itself. Big. Hints of vanilla and cream. Some dried grass and yes some wet grass from a muddy field in October as well. Funky fresh fungi. This never stops giving. Great peat that is balanced out nicely by the Sherry, but the former is the more dominant in this bottling.

Taste: Excellent entry. Sweet, mixed perfectly with licorice and lots of almonds. Even the wood is almondy. Utter and perfect balance. What a great integration of flavours. Red fruits and berries and hints of Gin. Fresh at times. Sea spray and hints of blobs of fresh fatty tar. Remember Lightning McQueen? Hints of stable (cow) and a bit of wood, but not much. Strange enough, with this amount of aroma and at almost 57% ABV., this only  has a medium finish, it gone sooner that you would want. Great aftertaste though. Almonds and red fruit. Salty lips!

If this would be older (tasting), had a longer finish and had even more added depth it would score well into the nineties. If it had more notes of curry and red peppers you could eat this dram. What a near-perfect modern dram this is. Excellent stuff can still be made. I’m happy I had some prior knowledge to snap this up when it was released.

Points: 90

Dailuaine 14yo 1997/2012 (46%, Van Wees, The Ultimate, Hogshead #6012, 372 bottles)

After the excellent Dailuaine by Gordon & MacPhail why not try another one. This time one by dutch Indie bottlers The Ultimate. Gordon & MacPhail are known for controlling the whole process from acquiring the cask, storing the filled cask, right untill bottling of the Whisky. With this they hope to achieve the highest quality possible. The Ultimate have a slightly different approach, a very Dutch one.

Dailuaine 14yo 1997/2012 (46%, Van Wees, The Ultimate, Hogshead #6012, 372 bottles)

First of all the final product cannot cost too much, having said that, they really try to get the highest quality they can get. No money is spent on designing a fancy label, nor on a fancy glass bottle.  A long time ago a picture of Bushmills distillery was found and placed on the label and never again was money spent on design. (By the way, Bushmills was never bottled in this series). If you want your bottle in a (simple, white) box, you’ll have to pay extra. The only money spent is on buying good Whisky. The Van Wees company has many contacts in Scotland dating back to the sixties. Most, if not all, of the recent casks are bought from Andrew Symington (Signatory Vintage). Just have a look at the casks from 1997. The Ultimate bottled #6012 and #6017, Signatory bottled #6015, #6016, #6018 and #6020. The Ultimate bottled #4229 and #4234. Signatory bottled #4228, #4230, #4231, #4232 and #4233.

Color: Light Gold

Nose: Fruity and buttery. Quite a strong aroma. Nice spicy and grassy wood. Just like it’s brother from Gordon & MacPhail, a nice sweet vanilla note. Eggnog. Lots of influence from the wood, without overpowering the distillate. Nice sappy oak and also a little bit of cardboard. With some air a more dry and powdery turn. A lot less apple, but still there. Somehow the alcohol is more upfront.

Taste: Sweeter than I imagined. Again a pretty nice aroma. Vanilla with candied apples and even some raspberry. Excellent stuff. A paper note, but also hints of burnt sugar mixes in with the toasted oak. Very nice and drinkable, with a sweet and warming, and dare I say, hoppy finish. The Whisky is pretty straightforward and nicely un-complex.

Dailuaine is a pretty nice distillate, will have to keep this one in mind and investigate further.

Points: 85