Bowmore 26yo 1982/2009 (53.4%, Master of Malt, Refill Sherry Hogshead, 195 bottles)

And here is another Master of Malt bottling. Earlier I reviewed a reduced Tomatin, that was a true disappointment. I didn’t even know it’s possible to ruin a Tomatin, since usually I like Tomatins. So with this one I do worry a bit. This also is a Bowmore of the eighties, which quite often turn out to be your better hand-soap (lavender and violets come to mind). I once tried a 1989 Berry Bros. & Rudd bottling that made me physically ill. That was a first for me, so I tried that one half a year later and it happened again.

Color: Gold

Nose: Powdery and sweet. Not very Islay to be frank, hardly any peat or smoke. Lots of flowers though, soap, also some clay and thick, so it seems to have body. When freshly poured it is very closed. After a while some smoke trickles trough. Hey, waiting even longer there is peat too. All in minute quantities. Again not very Islay-ish. Is this really a Bowmore? Wet paper and a small hint of licorice. It’s not bad, but not very balanced either. Now we have sour oak. It’s fresh, fruity and floral, luckily not over the top lavender-soap eighties Bowmore.

Taste: Sweet and syrup, with ash and some wood. It actually attacks you in the beginning. The sweetness disintegrates quickly into something acidic. It’s like a syrup that shows, when stripped from your throat, some lemon. The attack is nice, and the middle is also quite nice, but bold tastes fade and leave you with a fairly dull and anonymous finish. What can this be, a strange and unusual Bowmore distillate in a Fino Sherry cask? Well, let’s leave it at that.

In the end it’s not a FWP-Bowmore from the eighties, but it also isn’t recognizable as a Bowmore either. It’s ok on the nose and when it enters your mouth is shows some promise. Halfway through though and especially the finish are a bit weak, which is a surprise after the bold body. But the most remarkable achievement is making and finding a Bowmore that has nothing to do with…Bowmore!

Points: 84

Smokehead (43%, Ian MacLeod, Circa 2012)

After the extremely rare and expensive Glenfiddich (what?) I reviewed earlier, time for a more affordable and more of a heavy hitting dram. Sitting inside, hearing the wind outside, it seems an appropriate choice. Smokehead is a Islay Single Malt Whisky marketed by Ian MacLeod, who also have their Chieftain’s series of Single Malts and also own the Glengoyne Distillery, so they know their way around Whisky.

I said marketed, since I have to admit I like the look of this bottle very much, or have a look at the special website they made for this bottle alone. Yes it’s a standard Scotch Liquor Bottle, but keep in mind it’s a very affordable Whisky, but the rest looks great. Just look at the lettering and look of it all. I don’t care much for the choice of words though 😉

Color: Light Gold.

Nose: Peat, peated malt, citrus and then smoke. Peat smoke and paper smoke. Very clean. Clay and butter, hot butter like you get from smelling popcorn. Spicy smoke, like burning off your kitchen cabinet with all your dried herbs in it, or the smell you get when walking outside in a winter evening and smelling all those wood fires coming from chimneys. Still it comes across as very honest, young and untouched. The nose is great, no doubt about it, hope it tastes as good.

Taste: Smoke and burnt wood. Dry peat, very young and un-complex, but also a bit un-balanced. Ash and a stunning absence of saltness. The best Islay Whiskies I know always have a sort of hidden sweetness to it, that this example lacks. It has some sweetness, but it comes across as diluted. Don’t get me wrong, 43% ABV is all right, but tastewise there isn’t that much happening here, which makes it a good first kiss if you’re interested in peated malts. Did I mention the rather short finish?

The bottle looks great, but I liked the nose even better. Tastewise it’s a wee bit to thin for my taste, and lacking some Islay components, you get from more aged Islay Whiskies (the sweetness and the saltness). Excellent choice for those who like peat and smoke, but also excellent for peatheads or Islay-o-philes that have lost at the stock market. At this price and this quality, it’s the Johnny Walker Red Label of the peated malts!

Points: 77

Caol Ila 16yo 1977/1993 (58.6%, Cadenhead)

Almost a month ago I reviewed one of those beautiful tall green glass Cadenheads bottles. A Dufftown to be precise. But there were more of those on these pages. I remember a Tormore and a Pulteney. In the dungeons I found another one of those! So today it is time to do another one from the same series. I guess I have a soft spot for them. This time a Caol Ila from 1977 that they already decided to bottle in 1993.

Color: Gold

Nose: Ahhhh, nice creamy peat. Very vegetal and coastal and slightly fishy. Salty fish. It is sea spray in heavy winds. Very clean and warming. Not very animalesk as they (and I) tend to say. It does have a lot of peat but still I wouldn’t say that it is in your face peat. Tar, not so much, but I do get some rubber. Some cold dry smoked tea leaves (Lapsang Souchong). Lots of smoke actually and extremely nice salty driftwood that finishes off in toned down Coleman’s mustard powder. Classic Islay.

Taste: Very smoky attack and half sweet (perfect sweetness). Meaty, roasted pork maybe. It comes across as powdery and slightly soapy. Fruity, hints of peach and banana. Here the sweetness seems to me to be a little wild, animalesk. The taste is very typical for a Caol Ila. This was recognizable blind. This has a nice full body with a perfect sweetness (slightly acidic) that matches the toned down peat a lot, combined with the smoke…a winner. Macaroons (made with almonds) and a slightly bitter finish (from the wood) and overall a tad too simple for a score into the 90’s.

Well if you like your Islay Whisky smoky, that this is for you. It may look like something different but actually this is very smoky, very very smoky. The smoke is able to push the peat to the background. Last piece of advice, give it some time to breathe…

Points: 88

Port Ellen 24yo 1978/2002 “Second Annual Release” (59,35%, OB, 12000 bottles)

Two weeks ago I had a Talisker tasting and unofficially a Port Ellen aftertasting. Somehow one bottle got left behind by its owner. It’s leash bound to a great oak tree, and you can see its sad, not being surrounded by its usual brothers and sisters. I asked its owner if I could play a little with this lost bottle, and he said it was OK. Just to be sure I will bring it back in January. So yes, Master Quill is giving this stray puppy a refuge in Master Quills castle. Nice and comfy near the fire-place.

How nice it is to have another Port Ellen on these pages. This one in particular plays a strange role in the Port Ellen annual release series. First of al this strange ABV. 59,35%. New Japanese measuring equipment on loan? No it’s not that. This one is known to be a little closed. Very closed in fact. I had the chance to try this expression when it was freshly opened and it was really hard to taste this. Very hard to tell what is in there. It was nice, but nothing you’ve come to expect from such a Port Ellen. This time around the bottle is open for a while and less than half full. Is this, one of those whiskies that has to be put on the shelf without its cork, to maximize its breathing? Lets see…

Color: Light gold.

Nose: Leafy, nice liquorice laden peat. And the peat is not very bold mind you. Creamy ashes and some dust. Still it’s closed. I’m trying really hard, even warming the stuff in my hands, with a lid on my glass and without. Yes it does work a little. Doing this trick, brings out a big nice bonfire. Even though it is unbelievably closed it shows a lot of balance. Sniff hard on this one (and you’ll get a new layer of spicy sweetness).

Taste: Yeah! Leafy again, strong, and slightly bitter. Black tea with almonds. Rather sweet and seaside peat. Not completely balanced due to some sourness, from the wood, that takes over the palate straight into the beerlike finish, but the effect doesn’t last. there is a fruityness about it. Like pineapple (sour and sweet), with dried apricot and banana. The finish breaks apart a bit, but you’ll still see the quality. Long finish though.

Well it does demand of you that you’ll work on it since it doesn’t give away its treasures easily, especially on the nose. Probably not the best from the series, but still it oozes Port Ellenness. It is an experience. Freshly opened bottle scored 87 Points, but after extensive breathing I’ll score this:

Points: 87 (sorry no change)

Heartfelt thanks go out to Jos for leaving this bottle behind!

Ardbeg 1999/2012 ‘Galileo’ (49%, OB, ex-Marsala and ex-Bourbon Casks, 15.000 bottles)

And here is Ardbeg. Last of the Islay whiskies to feature on Master Quill. The first Ardbeg is also the last one being released. Ardbeg Galileo. A Whisky that in part was matured in Marsala Casks.

Ok, two difficult words. Marsala? Galileo?

Marsala is a Sicilian red wine which mostly is sold for export as an fortified wine. Port and Sherry are also fortified wines. By the way, the Sicilians themselves drink it as… well a normal wine. We all know the Whisky market is booming, but the Sherry market isn’t. We also know that Sherry Butts and Puncheons made of european oak, are the best casks for maturing Whisky, and that good cask are getting scarse, because we, the consumer, don’t like Sherry too much. Sherry casks made of American wood, but foremost other casks, like Marsala, are used to see if they work.

Galileo Galilei was born on February 15th, 1564 and departed from this earth on the 8th of January, 1642. Galileo was an Italian physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher who played a major role in the Scientific Revolution [Wikipedia]. In the case of Ardbeg, Galileo was best known as an astronomer.

This bottling also commemorates the fact that Ardbeg is part of an Whisky experiment in space. On ISS some Ardbeg (and I guess it’s not the Galileo Whisky) in MixStixs are subject to experimentation on the topic of molecular maturation. (Can we mature whisky more quickly and thus make more money, by maturing it in space or at zero gravity? Or am I just being negative?)

Color: Reddish Gold

Nose: Obviously Peat and a lot of smoke. Non fishy, yet clean and almost industial smelling peat. Winey and wine related ash. Flowery and fresh wall paint. Sweet caramels, dried apricots and a hint of peaches on syrup.

Taste: Sweet. Ashy again. Wood and winey and a quick sour note. A little bit of liquorice and foffee. It actually tastes the same as it smells. Strange unbalanced soury finish with the cold contents of an ashtray and some mint lateron. There is not a lot happening in the finish. Astonishingly simple and short. The wine brings a sort of sourness that is all over the palate and isn’t doing the probably standard bourbon casked Ardbeg any good.

I hate to say it, but aren’t “Ardbeg” putting more money into marketing than in the actual Whisky? Don’t get me wrong, I love Ardbeg, just look at my top 25. Alas, this isn’t my Ardbeg anymore. It became some kind of hype, a brand, a handbag. It’s not bad, but I’m gonna pass on this. It makes my head spin.

I haven’t had any Marsala on it’s own yet, but tasting this Ardbeg, Marsala should be closer to Port than it is to Sherry. When using Marsala casks, don’t overdo it please!

Points: 82

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

Bunnahabhain 9yo 2001/2010 (46%, Daily Dram, for Bresser & Timmer and The Nectar Belgium)

Bunnahabhain was founded in 1881 and the first spirit trickled from the stills two years later. The distillery was closed two times. The first time in 1930 (for seven years) and the second time in 1982 (for two years). In 2003 the distillery was bought by Burn Steward Distilleries, and they really started to market Bunnahabhain. First of all a series of new bottlings saw the light of day, and in 2010 they started to upgrade the core range with the 12yo and the 18yo. The ABV was raised to 46.3% ánd the new versions are unchillfiltered and no coloring is added. Way to go!

Bunnahabhain is known for being the least peated of the island, still like a lot of others, raising to the occasion by answering the call of the public for more ppm’s. Burn Steward therefore started to bottle a “Moine” expression, with more peat, mimicking pre sixties Bunnahabhain.

Color: Warm Orange, slightly hazy.

Nose: Rubber like bicycle tyres, but also a floral note. Very strange. Almost a strangely burnt Cognac? It smells like a grape distillate. Burnt sugar and toffee. Skins of hazelnuts. First whiffs were ehhhh, lets say, very atypical. I can only hope this will not be one of those harsh tasting rubbery fresh Sherry bombs. Luckily it does get a lot better when aired for a while. I would say, leave the cork off for a short while, a week or two maybe 🙂

Taste: Ash and toasted wood. Burnt sugar again, with its bitterness. This must be a somewhat mistreated or bad cask. And/or very poor Sherry. Sweet grains and caramel. Burnt sugar and rubber. Hint of soap. Thick and chewy. Simple and rather unbalanced. Dark chocolate with burnt bitterness. Quite woody in fact, something you could miss by the overwhelming Sherry influence. Was the cask really empty, when the Bunnahabhain spirit entered the cask?

Little if any distillery character. This could have been any spirit, from any distillery. No merits at all for Bunnahabhain, because this is a Sherry influenced grape thing. This is all fresh Sherry cask. And for me not even one of the nicest casks around. Is this nice? I don’t know. There shall be fans of this, but I’m not one of them. If you like Loch Dhu, then please give this a try.

Points: 76

Thanks go out to Nico for handing me this sample.

Kilchoman 3yo 2006/2010 “Summer 2010” (46%, OB, Fresh and Refill Bourbon Barrels, Circa 17.500 bottles)

Who said Islay Whiskies are only for the Winter? I tasted a lot of Islay whiskies at un winterly temperatures on nice summer evenings and it all tasted very well. Think out of the box. Although Kilchoman are hinting at the season in which the spirit was distilled, This one especially seems to tell us that Islay and summer goes together very well.

Kilchoman releases are abundant and which is what is quite clear. First there were the new make spirit bottles. Next in 2009 they released the Inaugural Release to be the first of the core range. Also from 2009 the second release became “Autumn 2009” next up was “Spring 2010” and after that the fourth release was this “Summer 2010”. Also in 2009 the first Single Cask releases were released at cask strength. From 2011 the Single Cask bottles were released with red labels. In 2012 a Sherry Cask release at 46% ABV was released with a black label. Also from 2012 a new addition to the core range was released called “Manchir Bay”. Last but not least there are a few releases of 100% Islay at 50% ABV, where all ingredients of the whisky were sourced form the island itself. Now it’s time for “Summer 2010” solely from Bourbon Barrels from Buffalo Trace.

Color: White Wine.

Nose: Fresh young peat, lots of peat, but it isn’t so in your face type of peat. Licorice and black and white powder. Citrus, lemon and whiffs of meat, less stak, more gravy. The whole is very nice. The smoke in this goes very well with the citrus part. Who said Islay Whiskies are not suitable for Summer?

Taste: Sweet. Licorice. A sour element which to me isn’t neccesarily citrussy or lemony. This has a little wood with a little bitter touch to it. Hints of paper. Very uncomplex and a beerlike, maybe hoppy finish.

The nose has more balance than the taste, still the potential is obvious. Again I can’t wait for older Kilchomans.

Points: 82

Thanks go out to Erik for sharing the Whisky.

Kilchoman 3yo 2006/2010 “Spring 2010” (46%, OB, Oloroso Butt Finish, Circa 8.500 bottles)

Kilchoman then. The newest addition to the immensely popular Islay Whisky family. This new small farm distillery was built in 2004 near Kilchoman in the west of Islay, and therefore named Kilchoman. Operations started in 2005 and their first disaster struck in 2005 also. No distillery can call themselves a real Scottish distillery without a big fire. Well history was in the making so let’s do the fire thing quickly, they might have thought. Not hinting at any foul play of course. In 2005 the kiln burned down. Rebuild in 2006 and operations recommenced. As of 2009 but foremost 2010, Whisky started to be released. In 2009 the first release in the new core range was the “Inaugural Release”. Next up was “Autumn 2009” Let’s try our “Spring 2010” that was the third release.

Color: Light Gold

Nose: Spicy butter and fatty. Peat and the smoke is distant. Soapy. Very nice wood. Meaty (steak) and full-bodied smell.

Taste: Licorice, black and white powder. Chewy, Sherried yet clean. Half sweet. Strange enough it also has something “thin”, maybe the ABV seems low (although it is 46% ABV). Again a little hint of soap, but nothing disturbing. Having tasted Bourbon only Kilchoman’s, the soapy element is probably from the Oloroso Butt.

Fair is fair. The Oloroso finish does add some character to the whole. I know the Barrels they source from Buffalo Trace are very good. I don’t know where Kilchoman sources the Sherry Butts and if they are American or European oak. Good spirit and good casks and look at this 3yo Whisky, reduced to 46% and already very nice. Can’t wait to see Kilchoman age!

Points: 84

Bowmore 16yo 1989/2006 (45%, Gordon & MacPhail, Secret Stills 4.1, Sherry Hogsheads #7049 & 7050, 650 bottles)

To be honest, there is no Bowmore on the label, but it’s somewhat like the SMWS bottles with codes, everyone knows that in this case, distillery number four is Bowmore and this is the first Bowmore released in this series. Probably a way to market the Whisky or as usual, they weren’t allowed to use the distillery name. This year, the seventeenth Bowmore was released in this series.

Like with many Gordon & MacPhail bottlings, it is reduced, this time to 45% ABV. I am a fan of cask strength Whiskies, but I learned to appreciate these reduced Whiskies more. Is it age? I’m a bit held back only by the fact that not every Whisky likes to be reduced. Let’s hope it’s not the case with this one.

Color: Full Gold

Nose: Nice peat. Spicy and rather perfumy. Malty and fresh. Almonds and clay, and for such a ‘young’ whisky, the peat smells rather old. Hints of smoke. There’s also some strange ‘smelly meaty sweetness’ happening here, I can’t quite put my finger on. Not bad actually.

Taste: Sweet with cardboard and some peat. No smoke? Tar, sweet licorice and some sour wood. Anis seeds and ash. Not in your face and even milder than the nose predicted. It’s quite sweet actually. It lacks a bit of complexity, that would have fitted the nose.

A decent sherried Islay Whisky, that probably suffered from reduction. Again one I would have loved to taste before reduction, because it is always interesting to try the combination of an Islay Whisky from Sherry casks. It’s also a bit too sweet

Points: 86