Talisker “Neist Point” (45.8%, OB, for Travel Retail)

Just a few weeks ago this new Talisker was released, not by Diageo, but by Diageo Global Travel and Middle East (GTME). What? I don’t know why, but why do I have the feeling I’m being more and more conned? First, lets back up a bit. Not so long ago you had Talisker’s with age statements like 10yo, 12yo, 20yo, 25yo and 30yo, I said, not so long ago. Longer ago we had a stellar 8yo as well. At a certain point, again, not so long ago, the 18yo was released. All of a sudden, the stocks were depleted and the owners saw that Whisky was fetching silly money all across the board. I get that, because you’re in business to make a lot of money, hopefully, so I get the prices that are asked today. It’s a question of simple economics, supply and demand. Supply, somewhat unknown, the demand high.

Screen-Shot-2015-04-09-at-9.59.34-AMConned I said. Now, we are getting NAS Whiskies, and I tell you why. We need a lot of stock of older Whiskies to make high-priced Whiskies with an age statement again for the future. Well the price I mention is uncertain, because you never know what we the public are willing to pay for our Talisker 18yo in ten years’ time. Thus a lot of young Whisky must be released with some added older Whiskies for taste, because Diageo found out that the traveller is mainly concerned with taste and not age.

So we saw a lot of young Whiskies enter the market place and top money is spent to convince us that it’s all about taste and not age, well, we are made to forget that age matters a lot when it comes to taste! As I said above, I understand that I have to shell out some serious money for my Talisker 18yo, 25yo and 30yo, but that’s my choice, since I do love those expressions, but I can decide myself if I want to spend that kind of money, now or in the future. Diageo doesn’t really care because if I won’t spend that money, someone else will, because we see a lot of people paying a lot of money for Whiskies these days. And it’s almost no use looking elsewhere (other distillates), since those prices are soaring as well.

So conned I feel (Yoda speak), because the latest Taliskers don’t have numbers anymore, but names. Storm, Skye, Dark Storm and now Neist Point. As I said before, there used to be a stellar 8yo, a stellar (Tomatin) 5yo, etc. Today those numbers are not wanted, not because they are low, lower than the modern standard, the 10yo, no. Those numbers are unwanted because they are still too high and still too much a restriction. And since we already made a leap in yield per field of barley, today’s young Whisky can’t be compared to the 5yo of yesteryear. The quality od Sherry cask today is also different from the old ones. So lots and lots of young Whisky is sold to us through NAS bottlings. Yes it’s about taste, but no, not that much young Whisky can be so good as is claimed, and that’s my conned feeling right there. I’m indoctrinated and I’m made feeling stupid by claiming that age doesn’t matter (never did) and hiding behind the statement that only taste matters.

Conned some more I say: Why the mystery? Making up a name, fine, give your Whisky the name of a lighthouse or a Hyundai car. It’s fine, I like the names and I like the screen printed lighthouse on the Neist Point bottle. We all know it’s mostly young Whisky, with some added older casks to meet a desired flavour profile. Diageo claims that the traveller doesn’t care for age, but does care for taste, but the traveler speaks some more, the traveller also wants smooth Whisky, the traveller wants smooth Talisker. But why? Talisker smooth? Laphroaig is also being made smooth. Why? Can’t we have anything not smooth anymore? Didn’t we like Talisker and Laphroaig rough? wasn’t Talisker called the lava of the Cuillins? Lava as in not smooth? Hot and peppery!

Even more conning: It was said that Neist Point (The Whisky, not the lighthouse) has a huge depth of flavour and showcases a wider range of Talisker characteristics. Combining precisely selected flavoured Whiskies with some of Talisker’s rarest and smoothest mature stocks. Yeah right. Will those of you that believe this raise their hand? Am I really to believe the rarest of all Talisker stock went into this and are not released as super-duper premium Whiskies now and especially in the future?

So instead of a nice rambling about the new Talisker I started ranting, sorry for that, it never happened to me before. Critical yes, ranting, nope. Why not try this new expression of Talisker and see if it still has some lava in it. By the way, in the past Douglas Laing bottled some smooth Talisker’s. Back then, these casks didn’t match the Talisker profile and were sold off to be used in blends, now they are especially sought out and used for Talisker Neist Point… [fanfare music is playing and curtain rises…]

Talisker Neist Point (45.8%, OB, for Travel Retail)Color: Gold.

Nose: Some light smoke. Barley sweetness, and some old Sherry wood. Tiny hint of cask toast, but very mellow altogether. Hints of citrus. There is some sweetish freshness in the back, lemon and unripe tangerines. Crushed fresh almonds, mixed with some sweet and fatty peat. Mind you not a lot. When you close your eyes and someone pulls the glass away, a more fruity note stays behind and not a peaty one. Slightly warming.

Taste: Sweet, barley and nutty, again lots of almonds. Sweet lovely peat. (Springbank style). Extremely drinkable, but even after the first sip it is lacking some power and doesn’t hang around in the mouth for too long. Fruity, but more about yellow fruits. Dried apricots and pineapple. A little bit of toasted wood. Thick clay in the finish, which is nice, but the rest of the finish is about immature and young Whisky. Young can be mature, immature just isn’t mature. No pepper attack, so how’s this a Talisker? Short and a bit unbalanced finish, with a beer like note and fresh barley as the last of the aroma’s.

After the rant above, some of you maybe expected I would hate this Talisker, but in fact I wrote the piece above before even tasting Neist Point. It is how I feel, maybe I’m wrong, who knows. Neist Point is what I thought it would be, nice, smooth, extremely drinkable, but also a bit immature, and the rarest of Talisker casks didn’t hide that. Maybe more of those casks should have gone in?

In the end it’s not bad, but not spectacular either. If they really want to sell this for 150 euro’s, pounds or dollars, I feel it’s too expensive. I paid half of that for my bottle and that would seem more than enough. Sometimes it reminds me of Springbank 18yo and obviously the smooth 1980 Tactical from Douglas Laing. Both are better Whiskies with much longer finishes. Spend your money on that I would say, although the Tactical is hard to get these days.

Points: 85

Cognac Week – Day 1: A. de Fussigny Superieur (40%, Fine Champagne)

Cognac Week LogoHappy new year! Most of you will not read this post, right from the first second of 2016, but probably a bit later. I hope you all got through the fatty stuff you stuffed in your mouth over the past few days, and are ready for a wonderful and healthy 2016. For Master Quill this new year will start with the Cognac Week! A new year, the fourth year for Master Quill, so its time for a new distillate on these pages. A worthy distillate and maybe long overdue. Up untill now we have already covered some wonderful distillates. Obviously Whisky in many forms as well as a growing number of Rums and there has been some Grappa. Wines and Beers have not been so prominent on these pages the last year as in the beginning, but I’m sure they will get their share of attention again someday, although I feel Master Quill is for the time being more about distillates, so that will remain the main focal point in the future. Let’s start with Cognac. The first one is made by A. de Fussigny, which just might taste as modern as the bottle looks.

A. de Fussigny SuperieurColor: Orange gold.

Nose: Fruity and dusty. Sappy oak sawdust. Italian licorice. Warm and sweet licorice juice, warm in your mouth. Tiny hint of Apple Brandy and powdered mint candy. Small hints of (new) wood and a tiny hint of unripe banana giving it a more Caribbean feel. Cocktail cherries. This particular Cognac does have some notes of vanilla and has a creaminess that leads me to believe also American oak is used for maturation. Smells young, light, fresh and hip, although some more organic notes appear when the Cognac is warmed in my hand.

Taste: Fruity and quite sweet for a Cognac. Sugar water and sweet cherries. Apples are in here too. Calvados and some caramel. Not a lot of wood (only noticeable under my tongue), and chewing on it, sweet and salty licorice emerges. Quite a simple Cognac though. It has a few markers but overall lacks complexity and has hardly any finish or aftertaste. It shows not a lot of evolution.

For me, this is marketed for young people who just start with Cognac, although I wonder if Cognac appeals to young people these days. Nevertheless we thought the public viewed Whisky as dad’s drink and see how the younger generation have embraced (Single Malt) Whisky with full force. Today it’s one of the factors it’s almost impossible or unaffordable to buy a well aged Whisky anymore.

Points: 79

Four Roses “Single Barrel” (43%, OB, H294D, 2003, 70 cl)

After the Four Roses in disguise, called Bulleit, let’s compare it to a true Four Roses (with a similar profile). In 2012 I reviewed the current 50% ABV version of the Four Roses Single Barrel and I refered to this discontinued 43% ABV. version, calling it: “Too weak, very light and too floral and girlie for my taste”. At the time of writing I thought I finished the bottle, but as luck would have it, I found a box of archive sample bottles filled with different Bourbons I used to have. I guess it pays to save something for later! So many years later, let’s find out if this 43% ABV version is as hideous as I seem to remember it! By the way, this one is said to be 8yo and was bottled on 12 April 2003.

Four Roses Single BarrelColor: Orange gold.

Nose: Yup it’s the floral rye again. Lilac and Lily of the valley. Easily recognizable and even more pronounced than the new 50% ABV version, the only bottle I had, I forgot to fill up an archive sample of, so no direct comparison is possible, only from memory and notes. Fruity and floral, it’s almost a perfume. Powdered vanilla and coffee creamer. Almonds and fresh cookie dough. With air dusty wood comes into the fold. Elegant and perfumy. Not a lot of wood actually. Well integrated. A lot of honey is starting to emerge too as well as some turkish Delight and licorice, and anise. Don’t like how the honey and floral aroma’s turn out together. Add to that a slightly acidic fruit note, and you’ve lost me a bit. No notes of toasted cask. It comes across as a designed Bourbon. A Four Roses for people who wear a bow-tie, not for rugged lumberjacks. It is actually a Bourbon for the metro man. Although it’s not quite clear what I am, this is my least favorite Four Roses expression to date, but wait, I still have to taste it again after all those years. The nose is something I don’t always like, although I do recognize the quality.

Taste: Paper and wood, pencils (cedar). Quite a lot of waxy notes. Lightly sweet, but the sweetness washes away with the added water to be replaced with some sour, and slightly bitter oak. Honey and creamy sweetness, but here these two do a better job at integrating with each other. A bit weak on entry and not so long a finish, built around the paper and weak woody note, especially when compared to its stronger brother. Good aftertaste though, nice aroma’s return and a great creaminess is added to the aftertaste. Nice delayed effect. The aftertaste even seems stronger than the finish itself, nicer too. The move to 50% ABV was a good move. Alright, this isn’t my least favorite Four Roses anymore. Now it is the “Yellow Label”…

Even though I prefer the 50% ABV “Single Barrel”over this one. Both are well made and do resemble each other. This 43% ABV has some exaggerated floral Rye and doesn’t combine all that good with the honey and fruity notes. The 50% ABV is the same, but for me is better balanced. Having said that, this may be a tad more special, more unique, so it is definitely worth seeking out.

Points: 83

Jameson (40%, OB, Circa 2012)

Today if anyone mentions an Irish Coffee, you say Jameson. If you say Irish Whiskey, you still say Jameson, unless you’re an anorak, than you might say something different, like Connemara, if you like it peated, or Teeling, or Middleton. Enough to choose from and Irish Whiskey is on the rise again, and that is really great! It’s the ancient battle between the Scottish and the Irish, where Whiskey originated from, so why then is the Scottish Whisky so big and why was the Irish Whisky nearly dead in the recent past? There are enough examples of fabulous Irish Whiskeys and there is this Jameson. The oldest and best known of all Irish Whiskeys. Again a bottle you see in all the hotel bars and restaurant and in many homes as well.

When I started getting interested in Whisky in general, a long, long time ago, it started with Jim Beam White, the obvious Jack Daniels, Scottish blends like Teachers and Grant’s, and this Jameson. I hated Jack Daniels and Jameson actually, so I moved quickly into Single Malts and was immediately sold on Aberlour and Laphroaig. The rest is history.

Jameson (40%, OB, Circa 2012)Color: Gold.

Nose: Toffee and caramel. Grainy, fruity and quite fresh. The fruity note is quite lovely. Actually it reminds me of Gin a bit. The fresh, juniper like smell with some well hidden clean alcohol. Definitely grainy and seems to me in part like a sweet Dutch Jenever. It also has a paper like quality. This really smells nice, and I don’t recognize the nose from the first bottle of Jameson’s I had. Is that saying something about me, or is that saying something about Jameson? When the Gin aroma’s dissipate a bit, it at least smells like a Whiskey. And a very pleasant one too. Hints of spicy wood, paper and light wax.

Taste: Paper soaked in sweet apricot water. Definitely a bigger and sweeter body, than I remember from my first encounter with this Whiskey. Yes, slightly fruity sugar-water, with a hint of Whiskey. This sounds pretty negative, but let me tell you it is tasty (in a way). It is nice, very light and extremely simple stuff, but tasty nevertheless. No real off notes, not even the paper notes. but also hardly a Whiskey I guess. Short warming finish, with a short but nice aftertaste. Should work well in Irish Coffee! Otherwise, this is only suitable as an aperitif. If you use this as an after dinner dram, you’ll lose a lot of the subtleties.

This actually smells quite nice, I’m surprised. It is something you could drink easily. How is easy. Anything goes. Mix it, drink it straight out of the bottle, use a straw, you name it. It’s the Whisk(e)y-worlds lemonade, and not as horrible as I remember it. Compared to the “Select Reserve” this is more vibrant and a tad more fruity and playful which suits this destillate. I prefer this one, but the 18yo is way better, way more special, and costs more. If you’re interested in the Jameson 18yo, you’d probably do better with a Redbreast 15yo, but I think I mentioned that before.

Points: 72

Compass Box “Asyla” (40%, OB, Circa 2006)

After the Chivas Regal 12yo, a Blended Whisky from a big company, let’s see what the little, more independent, guy can do. A guy with a passion for blending. Obviously I’m talking about John Glaser, and his Compass Box Whisky Company. A company that all Single Malt aficionado’s seem to love. We’ll have a look at an early “Asyla” here. Asyla is part of Compass Box’s signature range, or core range for us normal folks. A quick look at the website of Compass Box learns us that Asyla is the lightest of the signature range, calling it delicate and sweet.

Only Whiskies from first fill used American oak casks were used, for vanilla purposes obviously. The Malt’s used are Linkwood (30%), Glen Elgin (10%) and Teaninich (10%) and the Grain comes from Cameronbridge (50%). Sometimes Longmorn is also named as an “ingredient” for this blend, because the Compass Box website mentions that the Malts for this blend hail from the towns of Longmorn and Alness. Looking at the map you can say that Linkwood and Glen Elgin come form the town of Longmorn, so I’m not sure that there is any Longmorn in this blend. Since Asyla is around for quite some time, maybe the Malts that go into this blend differ from time to time. For now I’ll stick to Linkwood, Glen Elgin and Teaninich though. Before I forget, the other four offerings from the signature range are: “Oak Cross”, “The Spice Tree”, “The Peat Monster” and “Hedonism”. Of course outside of the signature range, a plethora of other bottlings exist.

Compass Box AsylaColor: Light gold.

Nose: Grainy, light, yet perfumed. Floral at first but also fruity, with a tiny hint of pineapple and green sour apple skin. Sometimes I even get a trace of lavas. Heaps of vanilla shoveled on top, and given some time even some spicy wood. More than a hint of Calvados, an Apple Cider distillate from Normandy or Brittany. Dry and powdery. Sweetness is mentioned by Compass Box themselves, but for me the nose doesn’t carry a promise of sweetness, in any way or form. Elegant and light, but alas also a bit thin and anonymous.

Taste: Paper and grain come first, after that a blend of sweetness and (virgin) oak, although no virgin oak was used for this one. The vanilla presents itself after the paper and grain, and a slight bitter note, fade out. Not a lot of development going on, and you’re probably not surprised this doesn’t have a long finish as well. The finish itself seems to be a bit unbalanced, due to some acidity from the oak. The oak seems a bit fresh, as in not used for a long time when it contained Bourbon (or Tennessee Whiskey).

To be honest other bottlings of Compass Box made me expect more from this. Something in the order of a variant of Delilah’s. It should have been more creamy and even more towards the vanilla note so vehemently advertised.

Sure. Whisky is the product of spirit and wood (amongst others), but the bitterness it could do without, and as I said, it should have been more creamy. If you can find it, get a Delilah’s by the same bottler, and you’ll know what I mean.

I do like a lot of Compass Box Whiskies, but this one is not entirely for me, and that’s a surprise, because I expected this would be better than the Chivas Regal 12yo. Maybe age does matter?

Score: 72

Four Roses (40%, OB, 2011)

After the highly specialized Octomore, let’s get back to basics with this Four Roses Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey aka Four Roses Yellow, since it has, and you’ve guessed it, a yellow label, although with every revamp of the look, the yellow label gets less yellow. The one I’m about to review, is one that was released a few years ago, but since this is the entry-level best known product of the distillery, I expect a lot of consistency exists between different batches. Four Roses is a bit of a tricky Bourbon for me. Four Roses have their ten recipes and it depends of the usage of these recipes in blending the Bourbons if I like them or not. For instance, if you have read my review of the Single Barrel expression, you know I found the new 50% ABV version quite good, whereas I didn’t like the older 43% ABV version as much. For me it was too floral. Don’t get me wrong. It’s about the taste, not the amount of alcohol in the finished product. I understand that this yellow labelled Bourbon I’m about to review is around 6 years old and can contain any of the ten recipes Four Roses makes, although most of it is OBSK and OESK. If this means nothing to you, please have a look at my other Single Barrel review.

Four Roses YellowColor: Orange gold.

Nose: Smells young, and slightly alcoholic. Light and creamy. Even some yeast and quite some honey. Dusty, with charred oak and whiffs of the new oak underneath. It has more to do with oak than the florality of the old single barrel expression. It seems a bit closed to me, since it is a bit hard to get all of the aroma’s out of my glass from the start. Maybe it’s reduced a bit too much. Another layer shows us some cardboard and a leafy, grassy note. Dry grass mixed with the slightly spicy note that has to do with the toasted oak. The honey note quickly disappears, making it less sweet and somewhat more spicy. Otherwise quite light and yes, simple. Bourbon tea.

Taste: Cardboard, wood and sugary sweet. Waxy paper. Sugar water sweetness and a very nice oaky note. New oak, with again a grassy, spicy and soapy note. There are some good flavours in this and even has enough character for an entry-level Bourbon. The wood and cream give it its initial likeability and backbone. It maybe a bit simple, but it’s very nice as an unoffensive entry-level bourbon should be. Nice body, medium finish.

Start with something like this, share a bottle with mates, get to know it. Compare it to several other entry-level Bourbons, like Jim Beam (white), Evan Williams (black), Buffalo trace and others. Quickly move on from there, if you’re an adventurous person. My review may seem a bit harsh, but it’s actually not that bad at all. This Bourbon is pretty decent, has some nice aroma’s and is very drinkable and buying this, won’t scare your wallet at all. With the age comes also a rather simple body with a not too long finish. I hope it’s strong enough for mixing, but I couldn’t say. I’m no mixologist.

Compared to the aforementioned single barrel expression, the single barrel has more depth to it, seems better balanced and benefits greatly of its higher strength (50% ABV), although it has a tad more of the feared florality. Luckily it’s not enough to spoil it for me.

Points: 78

Limeburners Peated Single Malt (48%, Great Southern Distilling Company, Bourbon Barrel M209, 294 bottles)

After the funky mushroom Whisky from France, let’s try another ‘World Whisky”. This time we will look at a peated Limeburners single cask Single Malt Whisky. Limeburners is the brand name for the Single Malt Whisky from The Great Southern Distilling Company from Western Australia. They call themselves a boutique distillery with a focus is on quality. The plan is to source all ingredients locally. Nice touch is that the distillery is powered by the Albany wind farm and the Whisky is reduced with filtered rain water. How’s that for sustainability?

Limeburners M209 aColor: White wine.

Nose: Softly smoky and peaty. Fatty with lots of vanilla. Creamy. Leafy, vegetal and the oak almost smells freshly cut. The peat quickly takes the back-seat and lets the cask drive. The wood drives slowly listening to Lana Del Rey on the car radio. Hints of new make. Judging by the nose alone I would say, bottled slightly too soon and not as peaty as I expected. Given some time to breathe it seems like all of the aromas introduced themselves one by one, and now work together for a more balanced feel. More citrussy too, distinct aroma’s of soft (sugared) lemon. Am I still objective when I pair the soft lemon with lemongrass. Nice, but where has the peat gone? It’s almost a lowlander in style.

Taste: First entry is definitely new make, with its distinct alcoholic and sweet taste. Beer, hops, lots of paper, woody bitterness and again very green, leafy and vegetal. Fresh tree sap. Virgin oak cask? I also get some raspberry hard candy and creamy vanilla. Typical american oak vanillin. The peat only shows itself in some sort of spicy pepperiness. Not bad but nothing special yet too.

The nose already gave it away, but especially in the taste it is noticeable, this is a bit too young. Also the notes of virgin oak are quite “there” so I think at least this cask has some more to give to the next distillate that will enter it.

Points: 75

Amrut Portonova (62.1%, OB, Batch 5, 2014)

Ahhh, another Amrut. Nice. I had the pleasure to try some Amruts in the past and was very nicely surprised by the Intermediate Sherry (which I then bought) a Single PX Sherry Cask #2699 (which I then bought) and the Kadhambam (which I have yet to buy). I also tried the “plain” cask strength version, and although pretty nice, I preferred the former ones. Now this Portonova crosses my path. This time a Port finished Amrut, and yes, I have high hopes for this one too…

Amrut Portonova Batch 5Color: Light orange gold. No typical Port pinkishness.

Nose: Although this has a huge ABV, this doesn’t leap out of the glass. Give it some time and some dust and cinnamon emerges. Wow. Cookie spices, dried plums and raisins. Exotic and Christmas in a bottle. Fresh air after rain. Creamy and soft oak. Hot metal. Barley, but different from barley you get from (young) Scottish Whisky. Sweet milk chocolate and red fruit juice. Apart from this all, it has a sweet and deep feel. Exotic spices, curry, cardamom, but where is the Port? I already missed the pink hue, but I also miss its smell. Complex stuff this because there is even a lot more happening in the nose than what I noted here.

Taste: Condensed red fruits. Thick, but initially simpler than the complex nose promised. Obviously quite hot with this high ABV. The wood tastes more like paper and cardboard, than any kind of wood. Not a lot of the wealth of spices shine through on the palate, and that’s a shame. Its more a fruity Whisky with maybe some faint hints of Port. Vanilla comes next. With time if becomes more outspoken and creamy. Nice evolution though. Hints of banana in the aftertaste. Lovely.

First I have to air a disappointment. This would be a stellar malt if the spices from the nose were noticeable so more in the taste as well, without being overpowering of course. Missing the spices on the palate makes the taste of this Whisky a bit simpler than it could have been. Now that we have that out-of-the-way. The whole is still an utterly good Whisky. Very much recommended. An excellent winter warmer I would say. I will have to get me one of these soon.

Points: 88

Buffalo Trace (45%, OB, Circa 2013)

A new month, and maybe it just is time for something different. Different from Single Malt Whisky that is. More than three years ago, I reviewed a Single Barrel version of Buffalo Trace, selected by Binny’s. A barrel that otherwise would have been used for the standard bottling of Buffalo Trace. Up untill now, I even haven’t tried the standard Buffalo Trace bottling, so here it is, maybe long overdue on these pages, so without further ado, straight from Frankfort, Kentucky, USA, here is Buffalo Trace.

Buffalo Trace 45%Color: Orange Gold.

Nose: Yeasty with lots of honey. Hints of bread and some great fresh and sappy oak. Glue and corn. Toasted cask, sweet and spicy and slightly soapy. Hints of red fruits and dried apricots in white chocolate and a tiny hint of cherry liqueur. Next some dried leaves on the pavement (in November). Glue and soap don’t sound very nice, but I can assure you, it all fits together quite nicely. It smells quite modern and fresh, although some old planks from an old grocery shop are there.

Taste: Sweet and toffee. Creamy vanilla. Yes, toffee and caramel, with some prickling wood spice, soon to be countered by the initial sweetness of the Bourbon. However, this sweetness seems to come and go, switching places with a dry oak sensation. Hints of acidic red fruits, and some light candied oranges. It is quite mellow and much simpler than the nose was. I no way would I have guessed this to be 45% ABV. It seems lower, mellower. In the taste there isn’t a lot of evolution and there isn’t a lengthy finish, but it does leave a nice aftertaste. Don’t get me wrong. This is a nice Bourbon, that is easily drinkable. Definitely a very good entry-level Bourbon.

Here I will compare this Buffalo Trace to the Binny’s Single Barrel version I reviewed earlier. On the nose, The Binny’s version seems to me to have more depth and has an addition of florality to it (Lavender, fresh, not lavender soap). It also has more caramel and smells sweeter. Heavier on the fruit too. It simply has more aroma. Much less virgin oak but it does have some paper in stead. The rest of the nose overlaps with the standard version. In the taste it seems more similar to the standard version. Not a lot of difference in age or “thickness”. Just a little bit more added depth and slightly sweeter. The wood has a tiny hint of pine that is quite nice. The wood itself is less of the virgin type, and more of the old grocery shop plank type. It seems to be mellower and it doesn’t have the attack and the glue of the standard version. In the end, the Binny’s version offers a different take on the standard Buffalo Trace, but the quality is there in both.

Points: 82

Port Charlotte “An Turas Mor” (46%, OB, American Oak Casks)

In 2000 Murray McDavid bought Bruichladdich for £6.500.000 (from Jim Beam, current owners of Bowmore and Laphroaig). After acquiring the distillery guess what was the first distillate made? Yes! Port Charlotte, not the unpeated Bruichladdich itself. The guys behind Murray McDavid are no fools. We all know Mark and Jim to be very shrewd guys. So the first stuff they wanted to make with their new distillery was peated Whisky. On the 29th of May 2001, the first Port Charlotte was made. The first Bruichladdich under new ownership was somewhat later distilled in July. (2001 which was also the year the first newly bottled Bruichladdich was released; the 10yo I just reviewed, the 15yo and the 20yo). Finally on the 23rd of October 2002 the first Octomore was distilled.

Port Charlotte "An Turas Mor" (46%, OB, American Oak Casks)Color: Pale gold.

Nose: Mild, fatty vegetal peat, with butter and vanilla, pepper and salt. It smells like lavas was one of the plants that makes up the peat. Quite soft and unobtrusive. Some smoke and a tiny hint of burnt plastic and traces of soap. Sappy licorice twig. Wood lying around in the forest. Fresh (air) and un-complex. Dry kippers with hints of tar. Dusty vanilla and some paper. Nice to smell. The nose is worth the price of admission.

Taste: Sweet and peat. Sugar water with slightly bitter peat. Sweet licorice and black and white powder (yes, licorice again). Slightly warming. Licorice and licorice twig. Very tasty (the sweetness helps it along), but not very complex, but who cares when it’s so drinkable. Reduced, brooding peat that resembles coffee a bit. After a decent body, comes alas a sort of weak finish. A finish full of paper, barley, hints of soap and sweet licorice, but I guess we can blame its youth for that.

Lots of young Whisky is noticeable in An Turas Mor, but it shows a lot of potential though. This will become a great peated Islay Whisky when it becomes of age. I feel that Port Charlotte is a sweet Whisky that can be high on aroma, but struggles a bit with its length when it’s young. Highly drinkable, likeable and definitely worth its money. Get it, it’s not as expensive as the PC’s.

Points: 84