Tag Archives: 2004

Kilkerran 7yo 2004/2011 ‘Work in Progress 3′ (46%, OB, 15.000 bottles)

Last May I tasted the second work in progress (the grey one). And now have a look. Here comes my friend Erik who has the third work in progress with him. I still have the second one on my lecter so I will try both of them head to head. There are rumours there are two batches of this third Kilkerran. I have one here with 11/219 on the back of the label, but there is also word about another batch: 11/314. For the completists the 6yo has: 10/220 on the back of the label. 10 is probably the year 2010, 11 the year 2011. 219, 220 and 314 could be the 219th, the 220th and the 314th bottle runs of their consecutive years.

Color: Light gold, marginally darker than the 6yo.

Nose: Fresh, sea air. Soapy and oily. Some smoke. The 7yo seems to me to be less fatty that the 6yo. The 7yo is more refined, but definitively from the same family as the 6yo version. Also some peat and clay. More sea freshness in this one. Lemon curd. In the nose this one has more of everything when compared to the 6yo. The 6yo is more meaty and musty.

Taste: Wood, and powdery. A bit of sour oak. Oily peat. Spicy wood. A bit thin on the finish. The 6yo was definitively fattier and thicker. The finish of this 7yo has more acidity to it, and more wood.

Strange enough this almost scores one point less and the culprit is the finish. The younger expression has a more meatier finish, more body and less acidity. Dirtier, something I liked a lot when tasting the 6yo alone. I guess this is only detectable when tasted head-to-head. Both are safe bets and show a lot of potential. The 6yo is obviously slightly simpler. Both score the same, but I like the 6yo better, I hope this transition into less dirtiness doesn’t continue in the 8yo that was released earlier this year. The 6yo seems stronger too.

Points: 86

Thanks go out to Erik for bringing this bottle.

Bruichladdich 17yo 1986/2004 (55.5%, Cadenhead, Bourbon Hogshead, 270 bottles)

This Bruichladdich was my entry for the September Genietschap session. I bought this some time ago after a tasting and rather liked it then. At the Genietschap this bottle actually didn’t do so well at our Bruichladdich tasting (we tasted it outside). It was compared to another Cadenhead Bruichladdich that was from a Bourbon Hoggie as well. Also from 1986 but several years younger, a 13yo to be precise. Even though it was younger, this bottle showed more character to it. The 13yo was almost empty and maybe these Bruichladdich’s need a lot of air. Let’s have a look in my controlled environment and using my glass of choice, how this Bruichladdich really is. (This bottle, just open).

Color: White wine.

Nose: Sweet and grassy. Butter and green malts. Little hint of oak. Clean. Crushed bugs with dry black tea. Even though it’s from a Bourbon hoggie, it does have some characteristics of a Fino Sherry cask. Lemons (as in lemonade) with a hint of smoke. Not a lot of evolution in the nose. Rather easy and simple. Unoffending.

Taste: Sweet. Licorice (as in the twigs you can chew, probably something we only have here in The Netherlands). Spices from the oak. Ear wax. Green and beer like. Great half-long finish though, where the finish tends to turn sour, but luckily it doesn’t.

This may not be very complex, but it does have nice balance, and I do still like it. Still I can understand why it didn’t do well. It may be simple, and maybe a bit of a whisky lemonade. Very easy drinkable.

Points: 85

Bruichladdich 13yo 1986/2000 (57.9%, Bourbon Hogshead, Cadenhead, 270 bottles), scored 86 points

Bruichladdich 1989/2004 (57.9%, Gordon & MacPhail, Reserve, Cask #1957, 275 bottles)

On Monday, July 23 2012 it was announced that Bruichladdich of Islay was sold to Remy Cointreau for £58.000.000 to enrich their high-end portfolio of brands and to confirm their strategy in the luxury spirits segment. If I’m not mistaken it’s their first distillery, and maybe there is more to follow? We’ll see what happens next. In stead of picking one of their numerous official bottlings by the old owners, first a Sherried example from independent bottlers Gordon & MacPhail.

Color: Orange Brown.

Nose: Thick raisiny sherry, and fresh sea air (not salty). I guess some smoke, but peat? No, not yet. Mocha, coffee with tarry toffee. Strangely enough I detect some lime on this nose. Old ladies stationary. Yes, wood also. Altogether it doesn’t promise to be sweet.

Taste: Ok, half sweet. Tarry and thick. Toffee with some ash. Nice body and good balance. The nose and taste seem to match. It has the sourness of oak. There is some peat in the depth, but as with the nose, it has more smoke. Wycam’s cough drops! Very nice not over the top Sherry, but also not all to complex.

Pretty decent independent Bruichladdich. Although the Sherry isn’t too overpowering, the distillery character got lost here. Still it’s a very nice dram, with no obvious flaws but low complexity. Recommended

Points: 87

Glenmorangie 30yo 1972/2004 (44.3%, OB, Oloroso Cask Finish, 4548 bottles)

Founded in 1843 by William Mathesen, but whisky was distilled on site as early as 1703 (or 1738). Glenmorangie is now known for their stills with very tall necks that ensure a very light and clean spirit that had to reach incredible heights. Glenmorangie are also known for their Dr. Bill Lumsden, a man who doesn’t fear innovation and experimentation with his grains and woods.

This particular bottling consists of whisky that aged from 1972 to 1989 in Bourbon Barrels and was finished from 1989 to 2004 in Oloroso Casks. We only don’t know what casks they were. Butts or Puncheons, American of European oak.

Color: Orange Gold.

Nose: Waxy and cherry liqueur and black fruits. Nice old whisky smell, old wood. The combination of casks worked quite well for the nose. Perfumy. Butter on toast. Bakery shop. Hints of mint. Fades into something plant like, sweet rhubarb with raisins. Great nose.

Taste: Wood and spice, with clay and chocolate. The taste of clean white sugar. Sourness from the oak. Tastes thin. cappuccino, mocha with cream. Toast from the cask in the finish, and again some light esters and sourness. Pastry, hint of tar and dry altogether. Red lemonade and almonds.

The whole is pretty balanced. It’s easy noticeable that this is from light spirit. The nose is great, and the taste is very nice. The only two things that let this down is its lightness. And a Glenmorangie should be light, that’s one of their pillars. Personally I like a bit of body to it, like yesterdays Glenkinchie which also has a higher proof. The second thing that lets this whisky down is it’s slightly unbalanced finish. It breaks down a bit.

Points: 86

P.S. This comes in a very nice wooden box.

Brora 30yo (56.6%, OB, 2004, 3000 bottles)

This one is Priceless. I remember the times these came onto the market since 2002, and I heard people boycotting these bottles for their price, then around 250 Euro’s. Well in the mean time, these are still around but only just. When the moment comes these are really sold out, those boycotters will shoot themselves in the foot, especially when looking at whiskies issued today and what you can get these days for 250 Euro’s.

Unlike Talisker, Brora was a frequent visitor of the Rare Malt series, and we all know the 1972’s to be spectacular. People are starting to pay almost 2000 Euro’s for a 1972 Brora from The Douglas Laing Platinum Series. And just have a look at the 1972 Rare Malts. yes these Brora’s are that good. But I will never pay such money for Whisky, but I did pay 250 Euro’s for this one. I tasted a few of these 1972’s and most of the 30yo’s from Diageo. I even did head to head tastings with Platinum 72’s and 30yo’s. This version from 2004 must be filled with a lot, if not all of 1972 casks! And it is unbelievable. Anyone telling you that the Platinums are way better, well its a matter of taste isn’t it, but you catch my drift. I’ll stop the rambling now, and let the Whisky do the talking…

Color: Full gold

Nose: Very good,no, perfect nose. Perfect elegant peat. Gravy, clay, tea and mint. This nose isn’t actually that far away from the equally legendary Brora 29yo 1972/2002 (59.5%, Douglas Laing, Platinum, 240 bottles), just more subtle and rounded out (and that could be the difference between a single cask and a whisky made up of multiple casks). Yes, the nose is (near) perfect.

Taste: Sweet and ashy and endless depth. Great latent sweetness. Burnt toast. Very nice peat. Clay and milk chocolate. Cow dung (Yummie). Licorice, black and white powder. Just fantastic. Slightly sour wood in the finish but that fazes out, and the fantastic Brora returns to keep on lingering in your mouth. The taste it leaves in your mouth is very nice. Long finish.

Well, if there is any perfection possible, than in the top ten of those whiskies will be absolutely some Brora’s. It seems to me that there’s (and never will be) anything like it. It’s just that you think there must be the odd bottle of even better whisky around. A Springbank maybe, or a Port Ellen. Only this thought doesn’t allow you to give a 100 points score. So, the nose is perfect and yes there is some room for a better taste, therefore I score this Brora a measly…

Points: 97

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

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

Color: Light Gold.

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

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

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

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

Points: 86

To be complete:

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

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

Glen Ord 25yo (58.3%, OB, 2004)

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

Color: Full Gold with a hint of copper.

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

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

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

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

Points: 90