Tag Archives: 2005

Japanese Whisky Week – Day 7: Yamazaki 1984/2005 (56%, OB)

Wow, how quickly a week passes by. Already the last day of the Japanese Whisky Week. The last entry will be another Vintage Malt Yamazaki. This time a 1985. Will this be the best? But before I start reviewing this one, first a little comment.

This Japanese Whisky Week was a little ‘narrow’ All entries were from just three distilleries. Nikka’s Yoichi (in the Taketsuru’s) and Miyagikyo, and Suntory’s Yamazaki. But there is so much more. So please have a look at the others. Hanyu is great, so is Karuizawa, and many others, like the new Chichibu that already shows great potential. So enough material for another Japanese Whisky Week I would say.

By the way, not a lot of good pictures available, so the picture is for another Yamazaki from the same series, just from other distillation and bottling years. Sorry.

Color: Dark mahogany

Nose: Sherry, probably Oloroso. Dry, powdery and woody. Nice soapy smell, that adds to the elegance of it. Typical oak. Pencil shavings. Sugar candy. Paper as in old books. The nose is very balanced.

Taste: Sweet (at first) and spicy wood. Syrupy, thick, with cough syrup and black fruits. The initial sweetness soon gives way to oak. Burnt sugar with some mint. This isn’t 25yo yet, but it’s already on the brink. This is already pretty woody, and ageing this any longer ,would have made this extremely woody. Now it’s elegant and quite bitter, but a bitterness that can still be handled. There is also some Beer, or hoppy bitterness to this. Altogether half sweet. Burnt sugar and it has a woody, hoppy, bitter finish. The other Yamazaki Vintage Malt didn’t oxidize to well, but this one can handle air with ease.

This goes into Yamazaki 25yo territory, but it isn’t there, its definitively younger, a lot younger. I guess there are much older components that go into Yamazaki 25yo, than only 25yo casks. There you have old wood that isn’t present in this Vintage Cask.

I like it. It is sort of extreme, but for me the best of the Japanese Whisky Week. Still, it’s not for the faint at heart. All in all I have to say that all seven Whiskies were pretty good. Just have a look at the amount I scored 87 points. So this is the best, but with 89 points it’s barely the best. It seems that mean quality is high and therefore Japanese Whiskies, If you choose wisely, are very good. Recommended.

Points: 89

Japanese Whisky Week – Day 5: Yamazaki 1991/2005 (56%, OB)

Lets stay with Yamazaki and Suntory for a while and have a look at a more younger version that is bottled in the vintage malt series. I would guess that it is cask strength, but both versions, the 2004 and the 2005 are precisely 56%. Coincidence or design? The version reviewed here is the 1991 bottled in 2005. The picture below is for the 2004 version, but both look the same. Now we can finally see how a cask strength japanese whisky will be, since I always claimed Japanese whiskies do need their strength, since I feel the reduced versions strike me as watery.

Color: Gold

Nose: Peaty clay. Musty, but also fresh. Radiant wood. Rotting leaves. Just the right spices. Salty grass, dry grass (not hay). Bonfire, fresh smoke. Yes it’s fruity too. Peach. Candy like sour fruityness. Very special.

Taste: Spicy, smoky and half sweet. Hardly any upfront peat here, at least not as much as expected. Licorice with clay.Fruity, just more pineapple than peach. Also the grassy notes emerge here too. Otherwise it’s clean and not overly complex. Warming. Ah, there is the peat, it comes very late in the finish. Welcome. Just a tad of imbalance in the finish though. The sour elements are fighting the sweets and they don’t go together well, because of the peat. Not an elegant Yamazaki this is, more rough around the edges. Likeable, but has it’s flaws taste-wise.

This smells like a Brora! It’s unbelievable, but in Japan they know how to make a whisky that smells like a Brora now! Isn’t this a hidden secret! Keep this in mind when going into a blind tasting… Just two big let-downs. The taste is a simple Brora at best and they charge as much for these kinds of Yamazaki as they do for a Brora. Bummer! Still, well done Suntory.

Points: 87

Royal Lochnagar 28yo 1977/2005 (58.5%, Blackadder, Raw Cask, Hogshead #310, 260 bottles)

New Lochnagar was founded in 1845. New Lochnagar? Yes. First Lochnagar was built in 1823, and burnt down by “the competition” just three years later. The distillery was rebuilt, only to burn down again in 1841. So the distillery was rebuilt again in 1845 as New Lochnagar. Lochnagar became Royal in 1848 (it lies very close to Balmoral Castle). No more fires burning down the house, but still a lot of construction going on. In 1906 the distillery was rebuilt yet again and in 1963 completely renewed.

Here we will try an independent Lochnagar, again a Blackadder Raw Cask with cask sediment in the bottle. This time no powdered char, but only small chunks of charred wood.

Color: Full Gold

Nose: Fresh, sea spray wich changes quickly into a damp wine cellar. Very spicy wood and vanilla. Resembles the sweet smell of a bourbon, high on rye. Mocha with a hint of ground coffee. Varnish and fresh mint leaves (not bruised). This smells like it will be very sweet. Very nice nose.

Taste: Strong and sweet, but luckily not as sweet the nose predicted. Butter caramels and the varnish is here again. The whole is very full bodied. Wood with Aspirin (wow, that’s a first). Nutty and ashy. The finish is drier than in the beginning, but still sweet enough to mask a lot of the wood. It doesn’t taste like it, but underneath it’s pretty woody. The dry finish ends in a little bitterness that reveals this woodyness.

In the end a quite nice Lochnagar. The finish is dryer and has some bitterness that seems a bit off compared with the sweetness from the beginning. Maybe not a 90+ scoring malt, but definitively a very interesting Lochnagar if you want a complete collection. Still, with these flaws in the finish I have a little soft spot for this Lochnagar, since the nose and the initial taste are really great.

Points: 88

p.s. This one is at the time of writing still available in Russia for 534 Euro’s

Port Ellen 26yo 1979/2005 (56.9%, Blackadder, Raw Cask, Sherry Butt #2015, 497 bottles)

Again rummaging through my box with trophies collected on my travels, I found another Port Ellen. I like Port Ellen, so please forgive me, for yet another review. Port Ellen is the closed distillery from the immensely popular island of Islay, known for its peated whiskies. Always around in abundance, prices were ‘moderate’ for a closed distillery from Islay. Today stocks are depleting, and prices tend to rise sky-high, and it won’t be long untill there’s nothing left. Even if casks still lie around, Port Ellen isn’t getting better by ageing even longer. Maybe casks will be transferred into stainless steel holding tanks to stop ageing and fetching a lot of money when bottled is a few years’ time. Who knows. Since 2001 Diageo releases Port Ellen annually in their special release series. The first release fetching at least a 1000 Euro’s at auctions…

Port Ellen was founded in 1825, and was sadly closed like many others in 1983. Although the distillery is dismantled, the site is still there. Today it’s home to Port Ellen Maltings. Where barley is malted and all the other distilleries of the island are customers…

Color: Gold (with black cask sediments, floating around).

Nose: Thick and elegant or is it? Dry Fino Sherry and crushed beetle. Peat and kumquats. It smells like a bush, very vegetal. Black tea and flowery perfume. The citrussy wood is great in this one. When left to breathe for a while it’s wonderful altogether, and a mixture of hot tea, with dry black tea leaves comes even more to the fore. Stunning!

Taste: Thick, spicy, sweaty and sweet. Black and white powder. Very balanced. Alas no Port Ellen rubber. Again Fino Sherry. Bold, round body with distant peat and milk chocolate. Clean at first, and dry,with a very nice gritty and dirty bonfire finish that tends to be sweet and sour (green apples), but not bitter. Every sip is like a chameleon, different every time.

Ahhh, the Raw Cask series, a series where filtration got a new meaning. This is a series where the whisky is certainly not chill-filtered. It is probably filtered through a chicken wire fence. Some people even suggest, the stuff floating in these whiskies have sediment thrown in from anywhere and is not even from the original cask. Well I’d like to believe… It looks original and rustic and I don’t have a clue what it does for the taste. If you drink it all, you can imagine what it does for the mouthfeel, well not much really, the flakes just tend to cling to your palate and tickle. This is a very good Port Ellen and it deserves a well-earned…

Points: 91

Cardhu 22yo 1982/2005 (57.8%, OB, 3600 bottles)

Cardhu is a very special distillery in the portfolio of Diageo, since it is their biggest selling malt (Spain and France mainly), but when talking to other enthusiasts the response isn’t all that…well enthousiastic. There is only talk of old bottles of Cardhu. Since 2006 a special cask reserve is issued, which isn’t welcomed with open arms, but since it sells so well, it must be the ultimate entry-level whisky. Personally I don’t like it.

Founded in 1811 by the illicit distiller John Cumming, who became legal in 1824. In 1884 the old distillery is replaced. Purchased by John Walker & Sons in 1893. Then in 2002 a small revolution took place. Cardhu, the whisky was silently changed into a vatted malt. (Several single malts blended together). The bottle and the label stayed the same, just the word ‘single’ changed into ‘pure’. Well this didn’t last long,  in 2004 the ‘pure malt’ was withdrawn. Luckily in 2005 this 22yo was issued.

Color: Gold.

Nose: Hmmmm, smooth. Sweet mocha. Fatty milk chocolate. Very elegant wood. Noses sweet and yes, smooth. It doesn’t seem overly complex, but is does smell very balanced. Everything fits and is instantly likeable. Hint of mens cologne, and an even smaller hint of sweat. Great!

Taste: Sweet and malty, with a sweet/spicy kick, and a peppery, warming, yet still sweet finish, with some butter and cream. A combination to die for. Very good. The wood profile is great, it’s there, but some components aren’t. Not a lot of bitterness, some sourness, but still it’s there with its spiciness. Again not overly complex, but all that’s there is great! Apricots on syrup are presented very late in the finish, excellent vegetal and green finish. Even though the fight between the sweet and sour seems a bit unbalanced, it is very interesting.

Points: 91

Macduff 38yo 1967/2005 (50.8%, Jack Wiebers Whisky World, Old Train Line Collection, Sherry Cask #619, 204 bottles)

The Old Train Line series is probably the series with the most beautiful labels I know. The series is bottled by German bottler Jack Wieber based in Berlin.

Macduff itself is not thát old, just founded in 1962, with production starting just one year later. Macduff started out with only two stills. Sometimes a still was added, and today, Macduff has five. Since Martini was once an owner of Macduff, the malt is popular in Italy and the rest of southern Europe.

Color: Brown

Nose: Meaty and minty. Gravy with tar and old wood. Very perfumy too. It’s a meaty tea, that shifts a bit into coffee territory. Hard pressed powder candies. Very distinct, not to say unique. Also the wood plays a very unique role here. Mens cologne.

Taste: Minty wood. laurel licorice combined with the powder from the candies. Not sweet, but there is a lot of sourness from the oak. Mocha coffee with honeylike wood spice and black coal. Wow, this has a very heavy beerlike finish. After giving it some time, some black fruits emerge in the finish. Dry.

Try to imagine a Macduff with a lot of color from a sherry cask. Now try to imagine how it would smell and taste like. Do you have it? Well, this is nothing like that! This will surprise you. That’s nice. Still the balance isn’t quite there. And the finish is strange, soap, spice and a lot of beer, and rather short too. It’s definitively not a big sherry monster, but it does come across as a very old whisky. Dying to know what kind of Sherry this cask held before.

It does need a lot of time to open up, tastewise, for the nose the oxidations does nothing. Give it time and you’ll be rewarded.

Points: 88

Clynelish 11yo 1994/2005 (58.9%, The Single Malts of Scotland, Sherry Butt #4011, 367 bottles)

Clynelish is a very popular dram. There are several reasons why. First of all it’s a sister of Brora, which maybe the best malt of all. Second. Clynelish has a unique waxy personality and it’s spirit is always of high quality. It’s very hard to find one that is not up to par.

Color: Full Gold, almost Orange.

Nose: Clean. Paper and wood. Spice and white pepper. Oranges with almonds and toffee. Leafy, waxy and coastal fresh with some added sherry mustiness. Later on some vanilla ice cream, cardboard and dust. It stays spicy throughout. Perfumy and a beautiful balance.

Taste: Spicy and definitively from a sherry cask. Wood, beer and spice again. Sweet and tarry. Shortbread and gingerlike. Turkish delight and has some traits of a Riesling wine. Full bodied. Slight sour wood and licorice on the finish.

I think it’s a bit of a shame this got bottled so soon. It’s good now, but what would this have been when it wood be several years older. Nothing here suggests its over the top or even near the full potential it could have reached. Nice Clynelish, always worth checking out.

Points: 86

Convalmore 28yo 1977/2005 (57.9%, OB, 3900 bottles)

Convalmore is one of those distilleries that is no more. Thinking of closed distilleries I alway think about Monty Pythons dead parrot sketch:  It’s not pinin’! It’s passed on! This distillery is no more! It has ceased to be! It’s expired and gone to meet ‘its maker! It’s a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn’t nailed it to the perch it’d be pushing up the daisies! ‘Its chemical processes are now ‘istory! It’s off the twig! It’s kicked the bucket, it’s shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-DISTILLERY! Or something down those lines.

Convalmore was founded in 1893. A large part of the distillery was destroyed in a fire in 1909. It was rebuilt with an added continuous still to make whisky at a lower cost. This didn’t work so the stills were discontinued in 1916. In 1962 the stills were heated indirectly with steam. Convalmore was mothballed in 1985 and the buildings were sold to William Grant & Sons in 1990, who use them for storing their own malts.

Color: Full Gold

Nose: Sweet caramels, more brown sugar and leafy. Promises a full body, gravy. Fresh. Tea with spicy wood, calcium (a sort of powdery dryness) and sea-spray. Definitively meaty at first. Unbelievable, but this has hints of raspberry. Sawdust, Mocha with milk chocolate and orange juice. Vanilla and a touch of banana. Based on the nose alone, a very classy distillate. Great balance. Maybe not the most complex of malts at first, but give this nose some time and you’ll be rewarded. I like this a lot.

Taste: Spicy and sugary, fruity sweet with a turning point into wood and beer. Also some Worcester sauce and almonds. The transition from the toffee sweetness that turns quickly into the dry wood is quite interesting. Again some orange-juice. The beer returns, with the wood, in the finish. Well its safe to say that this one is all about the wood. you don’t hear me say that it’s too much of overpowering. No. it is a woody whisky, but it is one of those that really should be woody. Wood is its strength. The rest of the body is firm enough to counterpart the wood. Again very interesting, but no easy dram. I hate the word, but this may be for connoisseurs only.

I don’t hear this a lot, but I ám very intrigued by the special releases of Diageo (and the rare Malts of course). I’d really want to meet the people who make these releases. To know what they have in mind, what they use from their warehouses, and why. Intrigued. And give it some time to breathe. By the way, it worked well with water too.

Points: 87

Glen Grant 49yo 1956/2005 (46%, Gordon & MacPhail for La Maison du Whisky, Refill Sherry Butt, 459 bottles)

I just had to write another one about Glen Grant. Do I really have to revert to Gordon & MacPhail to find me a good Glen Grant? There are a lot of great Glen Grants around, but are they bottles of the past maybe? Here I have another Glen Grant that as it turns out ís from Gordon & MacPhail. Will it be good or do Gordon & MacPhail also have some mediocre casks? This one is bottled for La Maison du Whisky who usually pick good casks, so no need to worry, this probably will turn out all right. Besides, this is no 70’s Glen Grant, but a 1956. The year Alfred Hitchcock became American and made “The man who knew too much”.

Color: Copper Brown

Nose: Wow, this I like. This is the old sherry, with tar, licorice, clay and coal nose that I like so much! It’s farmy (which is not elegant) and has elegant wood. Spicy and winey-sweet. Dark fruits lemonade all over this. Raisins in the finish after leaving it to breathe a little. It’s a nose like this that make me live up to my blues-name: Fat Killer Jenkins, because I wouldn’t mind having a few cases of whisky that smell like this.

Taste: Very balanced because it’s the nose in diluted form. Sherry, tar and asphalt, Black fruits with a lot of wood and a hint of cardboard. Luckily the main character is so powerful, that it is capable of masking a lot of the wood. You just know it’s there on your tongue and you’ll notice it in the finish. But then again, it’s so old, that it should be there and it fits the profile. It has a lot of wood but it doesn’t make the finish overly bitter nor harsh. Not overly complex though, like a nice old cognac.

The not so sound statistical and scientific conclusion might be that you’ll have to get yourself a Gordon & MacPhail bottling of Glen Grant if you want a good one. Well as I said there are a lot of other good Glen Grants around. We’ll have to keep searchin’ to find us one, but for the time being we’ll have this Gordon & MacPhail 1956, and that’s no punishment! The nose is to die for, that alone is worth almost a 100 points. But the whole I will score…

Points: 91

There is also a second one for LMdW. Also a 1956/2005, only this one is from a First Fill Sherry Hogshead that yielded 105 bottles.

Many thanks also go to Christian Lauper of World of Whisky who sent me the picture of the back-label. As far as I know, this shop is the only one in Europe who still has this bottle on stock (CHF 509.00).

Short Stories: Tokara Stellenbosch Chardonnay 2005

Again a wine I had with dinner yesterday. This time a copious swiss cheese fondue in classic style. Into the fondue went a very nice Alsatian Vorburger Pinot Gris 2008. The Vorburger is a biological wine with a great combination of acidity (needed for the fondue) and sweetness.

After the Vorburger I opened the South African Tokara which was a very different type of wine. The Tokara is aged 11 months French oak barrel, with 40% new oak barrels. The taste is completely different, less sweet than the Vorburger. Color was typical white wine, with a slight green hue to it. Nose was crisp, clean, fruity. Lychee maybe? After that the nose became flinty and sour-fresh. The taste was industrial, again flinty, buttery, toasty and meaty. Lots of meat in fact. Meatballs! For me the nose was very atypical, yet very nice, or maybe I should say “interesting”? For me this wine had nice citrus like acidity with lots of meat to it. I found it better with food than on its own afterwards. As an after dinner wine it’s simply to acidic, which cancels out the sweet bit. This will do better as an aperitif. All in all still recommended (and this one is not expensive), just use it well. By the way, ABV was 14%.