Tomatin 12yo (40%, OB, Bourbon and Sherry Casks)

Not so long ago, this was the new-look entry-level malt from Tomatin, but in the quickly changing Whisky-world and especially the trend of releasing Whiskies without an Age Statement (NAS), Tomatin issued Legacy and they priced thát one even lower than this already inexpensive 12yo. Names hardly add something to whisky and I would have loved to see Legacy being released as a 10yo or a 8yo. Now that would have been exciting! Together with the wind of naming Whiskies, I sense a wind that loves young whiskies!

Legacy was made with new oak casks mixed with Bourbon casks. This 12yo is a mixture of Bourbon and Sherry casks, so there should be a lot of difference between the two. Besides this, the 12yo is bottled at 40% ABV, and Legacy gets three points more, 43% ABV.

Color: Ochreous gold (Chewbacca golden hairdo).

Nose: Creamy and alcoholic. Leafy and quite woody. Hints of Sherry mustiness and just a little bit of soap. Estery and thick. It smells chewy (how is thát possible), as if you could sink your teeth into this one, (do I detect a meaty touch?). Lots of vanillin from the cask, toasted cask and toast (bread). Behind the creamy vanilla a lot of sweetness (anticipated).

Taste: Thick and actually pretty good. Woody and spicy, but noting like wood in an old Whisky. To me the wood part is pretty similar to that of the Legacy and especially in the taste both are not worlds apart. The difference being some Sherry casks, that were used for the 12yo. It’s more “dirty”, more spicy and a has a different kind of sweetness to it. Leafy. I can’t imagine the Sherry part being more than 20 to 30% of all the casks used. For a sweeter malt, it is pretty drinkable and certainly well made and it has good balance to boot.

The 40% ABV is all right, it really doesn’t need more than that for the market it targets, but the Whisky doesn’t need it too. I tasted this 12yo a few times at festivals (Thanks Alistair), but never at home in my “controlled” environment. The score didn’t change, but it is nice to concentrate on this for a bit. Again bang for your buck from Tomatin!

Points: 83

Thanks Jennifer for the sample!

Aultmore 36yo 1974/2010 (46%, Mo Òr, Bourbon Hogshead #3740, 264 bottles, 500ml)

Here we have an Aultmore from 1974. The one official bottling in the Rare Malts range was also from 1974. Three years ago Douglas Laing bottled a 1974, and even more recently, two bottlings from The Whisky Agency saw the light of day. There is one more by Adelphi, but more about that one later.

Aultmore was founded in 1896 by Alexander Edward who also founded the Craigellachie distillery with Peter Machie in 1891. In 1896, Mr. Edward also owned the Benrinnes distillery. Mr. Edward sold Aultmore to John Dewar’s and Sons in 1923. John Dewar’s and Sons naturally became part of what is today Diageo, but Diageo sold the whole of John Dewar’s and Sons to Bacardi in 1998. Aultmore was built with two stills and two more stills were added in 1971, so this 1974 Aultmore was already made with four stills.

Color: Full gold

Nose: Estery and full. Seems sweet and has a perfect woody touch. Powdery with vanilla, but also some vegetal sourness creeps in, but only in whiffs, it’s not always there. Malty freshness, and the slightest hint of cow-dung, great! This kind of organics in Whisky is the best, look at all those fantastic Brora’s. I really like the complete profile this nose shows me. A great, but toned down or laid back Whisky. It doesn’t shout from rooftops it’s great, but whispers. People who know, will hear it’s call.

Taste: Woody cannabis, and in this case that’s very nice. Sugary sweet, but the “wood” is the taste giver of this malt. Mind you this is not a woody malt. It’s like somehow there is some fruit in here but it isn’t allowed to get out. Medium, slightly disappointing finish, and probably the reduction could have been skipped, since the Whisky shows some laziness. Could have been fuller, if so I’m shure it would have scored in the 90’s. Nevertheless a great Whisky!

One of my favorite Aultmore’s is also from 1974, a bottling by Adelphi, Cask #3739, yes a sister cask! That one yielded only 101 bottles @ 49.6% ABV. Cask #3740 yielded 264 bottles reduced to 46%, so I’m guessing this was a lot higher in ABV (I can’t imagine Adelphi doing a cask share, but you never know). If memory serves me well, this sister cask also has a lot of yellow fruits, cask #3740 lacks. I have a bottle of Adelphi’s 1974 Aultmore, so in the future, that one will be reviewed on these pages too…

Points: 88

Thanks go out to Dirk for handing me this sample some time ago…

Ben Nevis 1986/2012 (58.2%, The House of MacDuff, The Golden Cask, CM 188, 111 bottles)

Here are a few firsts, and on paper a quite interesting one to boot. This is the first Ben Nevis on these pages. It’s also the first time I’m reviewing a Whisky that was bottled by The House of MacDuff. Now for the interesting part. Some of you might have read “Wort, worms & washbacks” The memoirs of John McDougall written by Gavin D. Smith. By the way, Gavin was “reviewed” once before, so he’s no first. The House of MacDuff is a venture of Jane MacDuff ánd John McDougall. John also picks the casks for bottling under the Golden Cask brand. For those of you who haven’t read this book, well it’s utterly entertaining and very funny. Recommended. John has worked at a lot of very interesting distilleries in all Scottish regions, so I’m assuming that all picks by John just have to be great. I got a few samples from the series, and I’ll start with this Ben Nevis from 1986.

Color: Pinkish gold

Nose: Fresh, sharp and fruity sweet. Black tea (dry leaves). Nice bourbon cask not dissimilar from the Cadenhead offerings (Bourbon Barrels). Warm apple sauce and quite thick. Condensed sweet apple. Not a lot of wood, but there seems to be enough vanillin going around in this. Sawdust. Slightly vegetal too. Hints only of ethanol.

Taste: Sweet, vegetal and slightly woody (multiplex). Quite full and round (sweet) mouthfeel. This is not bad, not very complex but very likeable. Taste is pretty balanced, for me it just goes a bit wrong in the finish. Slightly acidic and the vegetal part (fern) starts to play a larger role. Also, but very late, comes in some bitterness from the wood. Fern with the sweetness, and the slight bitterness, is maybe a strange combination, but hey it’s only part of the finish, so don’t worry.

The Golden Cask don’t disclose all the facts of the cask, but this is probably a Bourbon Barrel. This bottling has yielded 111 bottles, so I’m guessing the cask was shared and this is only half the output from the cask. The second half was probably bottled for the Whiskymesse Rüsselsheim. That bottling yielded 100 bottles. 100 bottles of whisky on the wall, was probably the original order with The Golden Cask buying the rest of barrel #133. Therefore this Ben Nevis should also be 26yo.

Points: 84

Glen Keith 19yo 1992/2012 (53.8%, Kintra, Bourbon Hogshead #120587, 156 bottles)

Recently I reviewed a Glen Keith by Malts of Scotland (a german bottler) that one was also 19yo (1990) and was quite the surprise. This time another Glen Keith that is 19yo old (1992) and this time by the Dutch bottler Kintra. Glen Keith itself was mothballed for more than a decade (1999-2013), but has restarted recently, Probably the last one of the mothballed distilleries that could have been revived. The rest of the closed distilleries are demolished or used for warehousing or have been turned into apartments or warehouses. It is very unlikely that any other of the closed distilleries will reopen. As of now probably only new distilleries will see the light of day.

Color: Gold

Nose: The nose starts out rather sweetish and slightly soapy. Next up some fresh air and latex paint. This changes seamlessly into a perfect woody touch, that gets spicier with time. Vanilla and ice-cream with cherry bon-bon liquor (without the chocolate). Sometimes it even smells a bit as new wood. Those of you that think that something’s wrong because of the hints of soap and latex paint are mistaken. Pretty neat nose, one to be taken in vigorously, Smelled like this I also get a hint of sweetened yoghurt and some toffee. Later on some hints of dark chocolate and red fruit gello. In no way does is smell like a cask strength Whisky. No, this is a very laid back Glen Keith.

Taste: A perfect balance between the wood and the sweetness. There is a nice caramel like sweetness that underlies the whole experience. Nice and warming, and never bitter. Luckily it is not quite clean. Again some ice-cream, but after the sweet and the vanilla, the wood returns, which makes for nice balance. They play together well. Small hints of lemongrass and some lemon skins, but don’t get the wrong picture, these are only in here in hints, and make the whole even more interesting. It does develop a bit in the glass, more to the woody side and late in the taste a little bitterness does emerge, like walnut skin. That’s no problem.

Compared to the Glen Keith by Malts of Scotland, this is even a better example of a Bourbon matured Glen Keith. Again a bottle that will be finished rather quickly. Nice Pick by Erik Molenaar.

Points: 86

Thanks to Andre and Erik for providing the sample.

Tomatin Legacy (43%, OB, Bourbon & Virgin Oak Casks)

There is a new Tomatin in town, and they’ve called it Legacy. No age statement on this one. First of all what does legacy exactly mean? Searching on-line I find this: anything handed down from the past, as from an ancestor or predecessor. We know this “Legacy” is aged in Bourbon and Virgin oak casks, so is this the way Whisky was made in the past? I will have to ask, but surely my interest in this Legacy has been aroused. maybe it’s not about the casks, but the way the distillate shines through?

Second thing i noticed is that it’s 43% ABV, making the 12yo the only one in the standard range this is 40% ABV. The rest is higher with 43% and 46%. Having said that, Tomatin placed this Legacy before the 12yo, simply by making it cheaper. Pretty neat.

Recently The Glenlivet released the Alpha, of which in a weeks time the true contents will be released. The Glenlivet used a huge social media ad campaign to aid its sale, whereas Tomatin did not. By now we do know that is also is made using Bourbon casks (first fill) and new wood (second fill). Alpha is 50% ABV. and costs 4 times as much as this Legacy. Let’s have a look…

Color: Light gold.

Nose: Clean and youthful, hints of mocha, caramel, toffee, but the hints don’t smell sweet. Wet new wood, freshly cut-down tree. tree sap (not resin!) and some nuttiness. Very toned down, no sharpness and only some spiciness from the wood but no burning alcohol of very young distillate. Very honest. Some vanilla and warm butter. Not bad!

Taste: Malty and half sweet. Wood and cardboard. Again wet fresh wood and tree sap, and again a very toned down profile, laid back. A hint of licorice and even an even smaller hint of tar. Not a very long finish. The virgin oak isn’t omni-present in this one so it doesn’t dominate. It’s not very sweet, but the sweetness is sugary. Good balance.

In the nose very different and younger from the Alpha. Extremely drinkable. This would be the lemonade in my lectern. The last bottle opened, but also the first one finished.

Alpha has the same color and is higher in ABV, smells spicier (older) and definitely more mature, the wood on the Legacy smells like a freshly cut down tree. Tastewise the Alpha comes across as older, spicier and bigger bodied, aided by the ABV. Conclusion: incomparable, the Whiskies are quite different and aimed at different people. Legacy is one to give some time to and feel what and aged whisky distillate really is. One to analyze, but also the easiest drinkable malt around. And it costs next to nothing to boot!

Points: 82

Thanks go out to Jennifer for providing me with this sample!

The Glenlivet Alpha (50%, OB, First Fill Bourbon & Second Fill New Wood, 3350 bottles)

Returning from my vacation, a blank white box was waiting for me. Inside this rather large sample (70cl !), wrapped in a black velvety cloth, of the new Glenlivet Alpha or α (being the first letter of the greek alphabet). Alpha is also used as a synonym for first (of a series) or simply meaning “the beginning”. If this Glenlivet is the first of a series, then there are 23 more letters in the greek alphabet. Bring on The Glenlivet Iota and Omega! (The 9th and the 24th letter of the greek alphabet).

One thing is clear though, the (Single Malt) Whisky world is rapidly changing. For starters new Whisky countries (like Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) are quickly becoming a sort of black hole for Whisky. Not a lot went there before and demand is now soaring, so anything still available is flowing there. Most older whiskies are therefore quickly sold out or offered at a premium price, and maybe there are not enough casks lying around to meet the demand. It therefore has become more common practice to bottle Whisky without an age statement (or NAS), and give it a name. Just have a look at a lot of recent Ardbeg’s or some of the newest Macallan’s, but also Tomatin Legacy and Talisker Storm to name but a few, almost all with extensive add-campaigns to explain what kind of Whisky it is and what’s inside the bottle.

Now The Glenlivet have their own NAS bottling and an even more elaborate marketing campaign to boot! Al lot is happening on the internet with extensive use of social media to promote this new α. Just have a look at the “Master your Senses” campaign on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube, all to help you decide for yourself what Alpha really is. Well, aficionado’s already know that blind tasting is fun, and sometimes pretty revealing about our (or the tasters) abilities. We have to wait for June 6th when all will be revealed. By then I fear that all bottles will be long gone. It’s already almost sold out, and prices are getting higher and higher already on Ebay. I guess we can already call this one a success. It looks great and it got people to part with quite some hard-earned money, without even knowing what’s inside. How about that!

So what dó we know? Already we know that it has distillates from at least two different kinds of casks. First fill Bourbon casks and second fill new wood casks were used. But what is second fill new wood? If it has been filled a second time, is it still new wood? What has been in there the first time around then? How old are the different components of the Whisky? Questions, questions, questions, but is that all? Maybe besides the two different kinds of casks, a subtle finish was done? Well, again the campaign works, after all this, who isn’t curious what will be revealed on june the 6th! The most important question of them all cán be answered right now: Is it any good?

Color: Light gold with tiny hints of sediment.

Nose: Fresh and soft dusty wood. Grass from Grasse, malt, hay and small hints of green apple skin at first, but quickly turns into something more like sweet vanilla ice-cream, more toffee than caramel and hints of “Haagsche Hopjes” (Dutch sweet coffee bon-bon). Sweet vanilla. Definitely (in part) “new” wood was used, due to the light wooded or sawdusty smell. Also some kitchen herbs (basil) and anise (from the wood) were thrown in. Smallest hint of toast, licorice and moss. Fruity it is, but all in small amounts, all the things mentioned above is where it’s about. Hints of unripe pear skins, banana and pineapple can be found. The nose is very nice and quite complex.

Taste: Sweet and fruity. Slightly tarry and slightly bitter (new and/or toasted)wood. Quite a full body. Again with some toast. Sweet like burned sugar, sweet with an edge. Also quite floral. Mocha and caramel. In part some young alcohol. For me the finish is slightly unbalanced (less sweet, more woody), the best part  for me is the more sweeter full body (and the nose). The taste is definitely less complex and more youthful than the nose.

Although up untill now only Bourbon and New wood casks were mentioned, I have a feeling there maybe more happening than only this. Still I guess some older or boulder Bourbon casks were used and the second fill new wood are there to give the Whisky an edge and might be younger (or the other way around). Not sure if any finish was used though. If any, it was done sparsely.

Thanks go out to Jacob-Jan for providing the rather large sample!

Points: 86

Clynelish 32yo 1974/2006 (58.6%, The Whisky Fair, Bourbon Hogshead, 266 bottles)

After the 1994 Clynelish I reviewed last summer, it took me a lot of months to return to Clynelish. As we all know, Brora 1972 (from the old Clynelish distillery) might be the closest thing to whisky heaven, I know there are more, but bear with me. The distillery built next to the old Clynelish distillery is the current (new) Clynelish distillery, so in fact what we heave here is a whisky made very close to heaven, close in space and close in time. Luckily to keep the legend sort of burning, Clynelish managed to keep up the quality and still makes a pretty decent Whisky. The 1994 reviewed earlier, was above average, now let’s have a look at this 1974 Clynelish.

Clynelish 32yo 1974/2006 (58.6%, The Whisky Fair, Bourbon Hogshead, 266 bottles)Color: Gold

Nose: Slightly farmy, leafy, clean and fruity. Old wax, but more wax off, than wax on. Rather fresh and lively. Dried apricots. Dusty paper, and  powdery. Vanilla. Bold (sour) wood, which is not up front. Naked oak, hence the sourness that sticks to it. It’s not particularly woody, but it ís the wood that keeps it together. Some grounded coffee. Cold cigar tobacco (Havana naturally). Musty clay and late vanilla. It’s not a Banff but I do ‘get’ some mustard here…

Taste: Wow! A nice attack of smoke, cannabis and hops. Creamy sweetness. Like true vanilla ice-cream with an apricot/mango syrup on top. Definitely a nice bite from the wood to accompany it all. The longer I keep it in my mouth the woodier it gets. It’s never too woody though. Quite strong, but it is almost 60% ABV. The finish lacks a bit of sweetness to round it all out. The wood makes it ‘pointier’ and dries out the lips. It does remind me a bit of the 1974 Rare Malts version, which was (also) no punishment to drink, but I liked that one a bit better.

This is one of many bottlings that are dedicated to one of earths finest Whisky festivals, or fairs, of all times. The Whisky Fair in Limburg Am Lahn in Germany that will be held at the end of this month. Of course this is long sold out, but new festival bottlings keep emerging as mushrooms on a wet forest floor, most of them pretty good, to say the least. It’s a very good Clynelish but the last part of the experience keeps it out of the 90 points range.

Points: 89

Lochside 18yo 1991/2009 (56.7%, Gordon & MacPhail, Reserve, Refill Bourbon Barrel #15220, 106 bottles)

Yet again we have one of the many 1991 Lochsides, and one of the many that were issued as a Gordon & MacPhail Reserve. This one was picked by Dutch retailer Van Wees. Gordon & MacPhail code for this one is JI/ACAC. The spirit was distilled on September 18th, 1991 and eventually bottled on October 15th, 2009. Picked by Van Wees in July 2009. Those of you that meticulously read this blog probably had a Deja Vu experience. We know this bottle, we know this lay-out. Well yes and no. February 4th 2013, I published a review of quite a similar Lochside, opened by Master Quill’s Apprentice (like this one). That was Cask #15217, here we have sister cask #15220, distilled and filled on the same day. This one was bottled some five months earlier, so here we have a chance to compare the two, to see what the effects are of another, but similar cask, and almost half a year of maturation…

Color: Gold (ever so slightly fuller in color)

Nose: Clean and fruity. Distant wood. Clay and organic. Dusty with smoked ham. All in good balance, but nothing pops out. A very quiet Lochside. The esters I remember from the “other” Barrel, are here too. Vanilla from the wood. The yeast is way down in this one, and there is no peat, rubber or petrol. It’s easier on the nose (more balanced), more rounded out, but also less complex. When nosing this a long time, slightly more (sour) oak comes along, but still not a lot, and it gets fresher, but in a mint and menthol kind of way. Also cherry liquor bonbons. The chocolate from them are in this Whisky too.

Taste: Sweet and farmy, with a great sweetish attack. Definitely less woody, at first, than the other Barrel. A nice peppery bite, next to the sweetness and the fruity, farmy notes. Again a nice big body, aided by the ABV. Honey and a great balance. Here too a chocolate liqueur bon-bon. Big body with a matching long and balanced finish. The wood is a lot more contained within this Lochside. Less vanilla though, so the wood reacted differently, it gave slightly more color, but less wood and vanilla. If you let it breathe for some time, the wood does play a larger role, and overall this is less “deep”.

You can’t go wrong with these kinds of Lochsides. There are a lot of 1991 bottles around, but they all are slightly different. sure the family resemblance is there, but I’ve tasted more of the 1991 G&M Reserve, and they all are variations of a theme. I feel it’s safe to say that some four or five months of extra maturation has a smaller effect on the maturation of a whisky, than te particular staves that were used making the barrel. Maybe I’m wrong. I just can’t imagine that the differences between cask #15217 and #15220, come from the small difference in maturation time. Here the “younger” one is more balanced but also less complex. For me I prefer the nose of barrel #15220 over #15217. Considering the taste, this one is easier, and less complex, but it has a better balance. All in all it’s definitely the same family, but the easiness, better balance and containment of the wood, the added farmyness and the difference in fruityness, makes me score this even two points higher. I just like this one better!

Points: 88

Thanks go out to Erik for providing yet another Lochside sample.

Glen Keith 19yo 1990/2010 (52.1%, Malts of Scotland, Bourbon Barrel #13678, 232 bottles)

Last time around we had a stellar but also antique 1967 Glen Keith bottled by Gordon & MacPhail. This time around we have a more modern expression distilled in 1990 bottled in 2010 by german outfit Malts of Scotland, in a more modern type bottle. Let’s see if a more modern Glen Keith is up to par. We’re now in April 2013 and this should be the month the distillery would be reopened. I have looked around in the media but haven’t found a word about it, so I guess the distillery hasn’t opened yet. I hope I can inform you on the reopening in the next Glen Keith review.

Color: Straw

Nose: Clean wood, overall clean, spicy naked wood or virgin oak as they like to call it. Not a lot of character for something that was 19 years in a barrel. Definitely a refill. a slight hint of vanilla, which can’t be a surprise. Cloves, not very ripe pears and a little bit creamy. Well considering all, clean is the word here, you could almost call this sterile, but I won’t because it isn’t. No faults too. I guess the spirit’s great, but the barrel didn’t do a lot for this Whisky. When warmed up a little, some grassy or hay-like notes appear and it gets slightly perfumy (like soap), mind you it’s not soapy! Maybe we should call this profile ‘honest’.

Taste: Sweet and creamy and actually very drinkable, Small hints of wood which gives the whole some character. Overall creamy, with vanilla and mocha and some ice-cream and clotted cream as well. It has a very confectionery feel to it. The sweetness is sugary, but again there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. It’s quite nice, it’s very simple because there isn’t much to it, but easy drinkable likeable. An easy sipper, and I can imagine people having a lot of fun with this.

Let it breathe to open up. Well its incomparable to the oldies from the sixties and seventies. Those were mostly sherry bottlings to boot. Still this is from a cheap Bourbon Barrel, but it shows us that the spirit is rather good. For a simple refill cask. still it did nothing wrong and makes this a nice sippin’ Whisky. Nice.

Points: 84

Glengoyne week – Day 1: Glengoyne 12yo (43%, OB, Bourbon Casks, 2012)

Hurray, we have another ‘week’ at Master Quills! No April fools! As you all know this sort of event is very nice to do. This is already the fourth time we’re doing a ‘week’. We started out with the Bourbon week, that was not all about Bourbon. The second time around we had a go at the tipple of Japan, and I’m not yet talking about Saké. The last one, up ’till now, was Rum. Now we’ll do the first about a Single Malt Whisky, Glengoyne in particular. Glengoyne is famous for not using peat at all. They are so proud of it they even mention such a thing on their labels, or used to. Second, Glengoyne is also one of the distilleries that uses (or used) the Golden Promise Barley variety, one of the best tasting barley’s around. Glengoyne is owned by Ian MacLeod, we all know as the independent bottler of the Chieftains range and Dun Bhaegan.

Last year the core range, the 10yo, 12yo, 15yo, 18yo, 21yo and the cask strength version got a new look. This 12yo is a few points up in ABV from the 10yo and cost only a fraction more.

Color: Gold

Nose: Malty and quite stuffy at first. The stuffiness dissipates very quickly. After that, very clean, which doesn’t exclude the initial stuffiness. This is the way to find out how the Spirit of Glengoyne ages, without being obscured. Fresh seaside air. Sweetish and clean oak. Going by the smell alone I would say mostly refill casks were used. Toffee and a little bit of wood and vanilla. Slightly floral. Undemanding and unobtrusive.

Taste: Sweetish (corn?) and quite simple. Malty, slightly bitter, fruity (pineapple) and sweet. A little bit of toast. It’s quite nice and dangerously drinkable. Slightly warming. All in all quite simple. Short finish, that leaves a trace of sugar in the mouth. Slight imbalance towards the finish (sour beer).

A very easy, simple and inoffensive entry-level malt, without faults, but also nothing special. A good inexpensive choice for a novice, and if you don’t like this, stay away from single malts altogether! Still when compared to the cask strength version, well that is quite another story…

Points: 81