Tag Archives: Sherry

Glenrothes 2007/2021 (64.3%, Berry Brothers & Rudd, Sherry Butt #1120, for Kirsch Import Germany, 646 bottles)

Glenrothes, I always liked the look of those bulky cannon ball bottles. Many of the highly reduced vintage offerings weren’t really all that interesting. Earlier written reviews of Glenrothes prove this. Just have a look at these vintages: 1979 (85 points), 1987 (83 points), 1989 (84 points) and 1992 (79 points), not to mention this Select Reserve (81 points), a NAS, not even a vintage. Where is the world coming to? Nope, I still somehow believe in the distilled spirit of Glenrothes, so I sometimes buy one at auction. I do prefer Independent bottlings at cask strength (and officially released cask strength versions as well). Until now, all independent offerings on these pages scored higher than their official counterparts. Although I have to admit that I tasted quite a few older vintages in my beloved cannon ball bottlings that were actually quite good (even after reduction), maybe that’s why I still believe? This time around we’re going to have a look at a Glenrothes bottled by indie bottler Berry Brothers and Rudd.

Those of you with a talent for reading every letter on labels, front and back, especially those that have one of those official cannonball bottlings at home, will have noticed that Berry Brothers and Rudd are also mentioned on the front label in fine print. In 1999 the Edrington Group (mainly known today for The Macallan and Highland Park) acquired Glenrothes. I have to specifically mention right now, that I mean the distillery ánd the brand by this. Since the main Single Malt focus was on the two aforementioned distilleries (and brands), and times were different back then, Edrington sold the Glenrothes brand to Berry Brothers and Rudd in 2010, yet retaining the distillery and the cooperage. Edrington acquired Cutty Sark (The Blended Whisky) from Berry Brothers in return. In 2017 Edrington bought the brand back and thus acquired a well known Speyside brand they could give the Macallan and Highland Park ultra premium treatment to. Funny then (or sad), that their old business-partner couldn’t even use the Glenrothes name (or should I say, brand) on the label…

Color: Copper Gold.

Nose: Initially milky, very a-typical and definitely not what you would expect. Vegetal and big raisins next. Modern, slightly sharp oak. Tea and old, worn down vanilla powder. The initial “strangeness” wears off quite quickly, making room for a more herbal feel. By now I would have expected more red fruits, but still not the case. This is more dusty, tobacco like with old sawdust. More black tea notes emerge. I’m quite happy with this nose, because it develops a lot in the glass, and it shows traits you don’t smell all that often. The longer you have it in your glass, the drier it gets. Cold Cuban tobacco and standing on the edge of a forest in the mist. After a while a more creamy nose emerges and dissipates again. Well I’m sure you all now feel this is a complex piece of work. Old books, dust. Very distinguished. Hints of cocktail cherries in the distance, followed by a fantastic mix of cold tobacco and herbs. Sometimes a dry smell of orange whiffs by, almost artificial orange. Definitely not from the freshly peeled fruit. Like a dried out tangerine. The dust now moves into the territory of dry grass and hay, and some more elegant wood. A truly wonderful and layered nose. A warm indoor fire in the back of the room.

Taste: Hot, yes, who would have thought at almost 65% ABV, nudge, nudge, wink, wink. Initially this reminds me a bit of Damoiseau Millesime 2009, and not only because of the ABV. Next comes the wood and I’m happy to report, it is again the lovely elegant wood from the nose. I’m already really liking this one, now that I have tasted it. Here some more red fruits. Combining quite nicely with the wood. Second sip very similar. Here it doesn’t have the complexity of the nose, nope, it’s simpler than that. However, this is still a Whisky with a high fun factor. Nothing off, and the taste in combination with the high ABV turns out to be a pleaser (for me), but not everybody copes well with Whiskies with a high ABV. The color gave it away, this is not a Sherry monster, but it did come from Sherry and it is a bit of a monster. A friendly giant. Warm (sea) sand, well I have never tasted that, but it does remind me of that. I lived near the beach once, so maybe I did taste sand, one’s subconscious works in mysterious ways. It surely reminds me of it. Next some fruity sweetness becomes noticeable. Great balance to this. Puts some color on your cheeks.

Yet another good example of a Whisky that is not an easy one. The ABV is high and you need some experience and patience to get all out of it. Come to think of it, I even never tried this one with water. Novices would be put off by the initial aromas from the nose. This is not for casual sipping, but you need to work it and give it a lot of time. I bought this at auction and probably forgot about it, because I got myself second one at auction again (both were quite affordable). Definitely not regretting it, but then again, I also hardly ever open a bottle for the second time, always more interested in the next thing than going back. But it does happen, and sometimes one gets into this melancholy mode many years later, and than it is nice to have the possibility to get back to this one.

Overall a great deal. The bottle and the label look nice. The nose is very special, the taste is very well balanced and the high ABV works well. I should get me another one, ah, yes, I already got one, nudging and winking again. On my lectern I have a Macduff of similar ABV. The Macduff is closed as I’ve never encountered before, and this Glenrothes definitely is not. Final remark. Work this one, casually sipping you will never get everything out of all that it has to offer. Final remark, a disclaimer of sorts, nowhere on the bottle of the packaging is it ever mentioned this is a Glenrothes. The label states: “A Secret Speyside Distillery”, I’ve been assured this is a Glenrothes, and it surely does taste like Glenrothes, however there is always this small chance it is not, which would surprise me a lot.

Points: 88

Deanston 24yo 1996/2020 (50%, Hunter Laing, Old Malt Cask, Sherry Butt HL 17661, 452 bottles)

Deanston is not a Whisky or distillery I was interested in for a long time, no Deanston came much later. I obviously knew Deanston existed, but I felt it didn’t get much love, and you hardly read about Deanston back in the day, so I didn’t bother even to buy it and others didn’t bring it to tastings I attended. So it flew a long time under everybody’s radar until… In 2015 Deanston released their 20yo matured in Oloroso casks. All of a sudden Deanston found itself on the Whisky map, and people started to like it. Today Deanston is seen as distillery that puts out great honest stuff, a bit of a go-to Malt if your local watering hole hasn’t much stock of Springbank, a distillery with a similar “feel”. I liked the 20yo as well (someone brought it to a tasting), but never got to buy one, instead I went for several expressions of their Organic Whiskies. I suspected these might be maybe a bit of their take on a similar series from Bruichladdich, only those are much younger, or even the recent Springbank Local Barley’s. However the first bottle I opened and reviewed here was a Bordeaux Finish I probably got a great deal on, since I am usually very careful with Wine finished Whiskies. This Independently bottled Deanston is only the second review of a Deanston on these pages, but certainly not the last, since Deanston turned on their transponder and Deanston is now on everybody’s radar.

Color: Orange Gold.

Nose: Elegant with nice clean oak notes. Fresh smelling, almost floral even, but at the same time also old and distinguished. A deep fruity, partly waxy and well aged smell (that’s the old style). This also might have to do with the glass and the Whisky warming up when holding the glass in my hand. Creamy vanilla dust with sweet barley. Excellent balance. The Sherry adds some red fruit, but not a lot, also a fresh sense of acidity pops up, next to a paper-note (paper without ink). Bigger role than expected is played by a sweet and minty aroma. I may have mentioned Menthos before. But it’s like eating those. Hints of citrussy dishwater liquid cut through the waxy fruitiness. Next more freshly shaven American oak, mixed in with some toffee and/or caramel. On occasion it smells slightly too dry, because of the fresh oak notes, to be a true dessert Whisky. Now it’s closer to an aperitif because of the lack of “bigness”, or is it? Remarkable nose, it seems like it phases in and out of different aromas and notes, phasing out and phasing back in again over time. It smells complex, but also like it won’t be big on the palate. We’ll see. Nice smell of red fruits like a good old Sherry cask would impair back in the day. Herbal and vegetal as well. Licorice with horseradish. Can’t really put my finger on it now, what this herbal bit precisely is, although there is some lavas in there, but wait there is more. Cumin with gravy, yet still more. I remember the smell of this wood from casks that held Red Wines. Creamy, so American oak ones. This Deanston has a lovely depth to it. Smell it with a low flow of air, but smell it for a longer while (in one go, without passing out that is) to unlock all the underlying beauty this nose has. More of this minty acidity, which seems to be not fully integrated. Its definitely there, this slight unbalance, but on the nose its a minor gripe. The back of the smell feels like rain on earth on a dull day.

Taste: On entry, fruity, less sweet than I thought. Nutty toffee with hints of cannabis, and yes a bit thin, but also very tasty, well balanced stuff. Quite waxy and fruity, again old style and warming. Watered down toffee. Good balance, especially if you let it breathe for a while. Definitely let it breathe! The start is very tasty indeed. It matches the nose. Wood has a soft, yet big presence, but not only. There is a sense of fresh oak as well. Somewhat prickly and spicy, wet wood yet also toasted cask, giving it structure. More than in other Whiskies, the wood plays quite a big role in this one. A lot of shades of wood are passing by, and most surprisingly, woody bitterness isn’t one of them. A lot of great stuff is going on. Pecan ice cream, with a tad of warm honey and the taste of perfumed wood. This Whisky would make for a fantastic ice cream flavour. A kind of wet bitterness to the wood. Toffee here as well. This is a very, very interesting Whisky, tasty as well, not for novices though, since you need to be somewhat experienced and open minded to fully “get” it and it would be a waste of money if you’re not there yet. It’s not cheap, nor is it an easy Whisky as well. Again one that works well now when analyzing, yet somewhat less so when casually sipping. I like it better now than when I try it when watching a movie.

This one you have to work a bit, most of the nice bits aren’t well noticed when casually sipped. This really needs your full attention. A few years back I tried a wonderful 25yo Deanston from Hunter Laing that was much easier (Thanks Paul!), Bigger, right out of the gate, and one that did not need work from the taster at all. I might have expected more of the same buying this one, but its different, is it worse? No probably not, this one is beautiful as well, maybe even more complex, it only needs your attention some more. To sum this one up: toffee, (red) fruit, and wood. By the way, this one definitely needs a lot of air, the second half of the bottle was most definitely better than the first.

Points: 89.

Bladnoch Vinaya (46.7%, OB, Classic Collection, 1st Fill Sherry & 1st Fill Bourbon casks, 2021)

Only the third review of a Bladnoch on these pages, I actually thought there would be more. I guess the first review of the 8yo Beltie Label was a true learning experience to get to know Bladnoch. Bladnoch had a bit of a reputation and that particular bottle when freshly opened just confirmed this reputation. If I’m not mistaken the 8yo fully came out of the production when Raymond Armstrong was the owner. He produced mostly between 2000 and 2009. However, the more I tried it and the more air went into the bottle, that’s when the magic started happening.

Fast forward all these years (since 2012) and now Bladnoch is one of those “obscure” Malts that I really like. Between that review and the next, Bladnoch Distillery changed hands, and the second review (in 2021) was the official 10yo bottled in 2018 by the new owner David Prior. David’s Bladnoch started production in 2017. Comparing both reviews you can clearly see I warmed up completely to Bladnoch. When I finished the 10yo I replaced it with the Vinaya, which is a NAS Bladnoch, again from the new owners, to see how I would feel about another young Bladnoch like the 8yo, now that I’ve become fond of Bladnoch. Would the Vinaya have a similar false start like the 8yo Beltie, or is it more like a NAS version of the 10yo I mentioned earlier. First of all the difference, apart from the age statement, is that Vinaya has in part matured in Oloroso Sherry casks, where the 10yo matured solely in Bourbon casks. Vinaya uses older casks from Raymond’s Bladnoch blended together with (probably 4yo) Whisky from David’s Bladnoch.

Color: Gold.

Nose: Malty, pleasant, with slight notes of diluted Red Wine, which is also noticeable as an added acidic note. Also candied lemon seems present. Fruity overall. Fruit syrup. Since we know that this has some young Whisky in the fold, I’m happy to report that there is no sign of new make spirit or anything that resembles that. Creamy notes from American oak also some notes of toasted oak. It has a slight “bite” to it, which is very nice in combination with the thick fruity aromas. Yet again a big smelling Lowland style Malt from Bladnoch. Lowlanders are often grassy and hay like (and so they should, its their heritage), yet Bladnoch in general are pretty creamy and Vanilla-like, and all of this in a big way. Maybe that’s why I always liked St. Magdalene (Closed) en thus Bladnoch (Very much alive again). So the nose is big, big on the traits of a Whisky matured in Bourbon casks. Bourbon definitely plays a larger part in the profile of this Whisky than the Sherry does. Quite surprising, since the Sherry casks are first fill as well. Candied pineapple, (yellow) fruity aroma’s emerge. Hints of paper as well as traces of burning paper, Wine again and warm butter. Dust and the wood of an old dried out cask. Pretty mature smelling for a NAS-Whisky. Very good nose this NAS-er has. Hints of old style Malt, which is a surprise considering the composition of this NAS. I foresee great potential in Bladnoch’s new production, which as mentioned above, started just in 2017.

Taste: Just like the nose this starts Malty. Warm super-ripe fruit mixed in with a lot of cardboard (Malt) and some young wood. Here the wood provides a “bite”. Warm apple compote in a soggy cardboard box. Yes, definitely a fruity Malt, just with this wood/cardboard edge to it, probably from the Malt of the younger production. Next sip, more of the cream and vanilla, as well as some sweetness, astringent wood and distant nuttiness. In a way dull, in a sort of basic Malt kind of way that is. Simple, without a lot of development (by the way, the nose does develop more than you would expect). Present also, luckily, this acidic note from the nose, only less so. The whole is definitely a lot simpler than the nose promised. Not very expressive to be honest, yet what you do get is nice. Dull is a fitting word, not to be confused with boring, although I can imagine some of you aficionados that are not (yet) into “back-to-basics” (again) would call this boring. Still, it is fatty, creamy. Not entirely sure this Whisky is 100% balanced though. I get the Sherry influence, but it doesn’t seem to be perfectly integrated. Medium to short finish (hey, it’s a NAS), again with this slight unbalance to it, somewhat paper-like. The aftertaste is slightly creamy with wood and warming, with something new: hints of gout de petrol. I wonder how much of the new production is in this and how it is on its own. By the way, don’t let this sit in your glass for too long, a fresh pour tastes the best.

An excellent nose for an NAS-Whisky, yet somewhat less thrilling to taste. It’s good, yet not spectacular. But hey, it isn’t very expensive now isn’t it? Definitely worth a go, I would say. Daily drinker kind of stuff. Personally I’m not a daily drinker, far from it, but if I would be, this will definitely be on the list, especially amongst others with a different profile. Sometimes one doesn’t feel like getting a peated Whisky or a Sherry-bomb, but something like this (lets call this a Bourbon+ profile, “+” for the added Sherry influence), is always good. I never grow tired of this back-to basics profile. I’m not sure the 10yo and 11yo Bourbon versions still are available, but I would recommend both over this one. The score might not reflect it entirely, but this is a fun Whisky nevertheless, so no regrets, worth the price of admission for sure.

Points: 84

“An Islay Distillery” 9yo 2008/2018 (54.9%, Cadenhead’s, Small Batch, One Bourbon Barrel & One Sherry Hogshead, 330 bottles)

Let’s kick in the open door: this is a Lagavulin (supposedly). It’s not on the label, but I have been assured this is a Lagavulin. However, we still can’t be a 100% certain now can we! Lagavulin used to be, and probably still is, my highest overall scoring Distillery from Scotland. There were hardly any bad or mediocre Lagavulins around. Even the affordable standard 16yo (The White Horse version) was stellar, the newer “Port Ellen version” is still very good. When the 12yo returned as an annual special release at cask strength, again very, very good. Right about the time, lets say 2021, maybe even earlier, signaled a noticeable downfall in quality. Picking up notes of a milky almost new-make spirit. Around 2019 with the release of the 10yo, the 9yo Game of Thrones and the 11yo Offerman Edition came the time that made me look elsewhere. Especially because of the 10yo (and the 8yo, come to think of it). The 9yo and the 11yo were still decent. So, in come the independents! Thank god for them! An indispensable lot. Diageo protects the Lagavulin name with their life, so that’s why companies like Cadenhead’s can’t put the Lagavulin name on the label without being shot, or worse. Hence “An Islay Distillery”. Some others at least think of a resounding name from which the public might or might not guess that it is a Lagavulin, or leave some subtle hits on the front and/or back label. I am buying some of these anonymous Lagavulins just to see if all these younger Lagavulins have the same milky taste I dislike like the 10yo and the latest batches of the 12yo’s have. I hope not. Here is an example from Cadenhead’s, but there will be more in due course.

Color: Orange Gold.

Nose: As expected, peaty and smoky, not even all that heavy, even though there is a lot to take in right from the start. This leaps out of my glass. Some nice wood, although quite masked. Menthos with floral vanilla and quite dusty. Perfumy kippers, salty and smoky. More notes of fresh oak. Vegetal wood, mature and appetizing, so not sappy wood which is more fresh. Hints of textile, melting plastic and wet dog. Silent yet deep dark peat. Smouldering (I love that word, have to use it more often if applicable) embers. Funky organics. There is quite a lot going on, that’s for sure. Something does remind me of matches a bit, but to be honest, I don’t really pick up on any sulfur right now. It has a fresh feel to it as well, like walking in the woods on a sunny and somewhat cool day. A temperature just right for walking. Next a sweeter, yet organic note, like smelling the left over stones from eating really ripe cherries (just before they go soft). Combine this with some light beech wood smoke and maybe a more smoked meat note. This smells entirely different from an officially released Lagavulin 9yo (The Game of Thrones version). The nose keeps developing in my glass showing more traits of red and black ripe fruits and vanilla in a thin coat of peat. Maybe I do pick up on some sulfur now (a fart?). Still in a minute quantity then. Some Iodine, now that’s detectable. Sea-spray? Nevermind. Bonfire on a good day. Big nose, slightly creamy and sweet if you let it breathe. I do like it quite a bit and can’t stop smelling it for the layers it shows.

Taste: Yes, holy moly. Big peat but also big on the warm plastic I also found in the nose. Just enough wood, nice. Also sweeter than expected. Licorice. Definitely not a weak Whisky like the 10yo, much bigger and bolder. The 10yo seems unfinished, milky, nothing of that here. This is 9 years old and it is done and dusted, it’s ready. Very big for a Lagavulin. Iodine and warming. You can think of Lagavulin as an elegant Islay Whisky in general, but mainly because of the 16yo, this 9yo is not, it is raw and unpolished, a different take if you will. You can even see some resemblance to the boldness of the 16yo, at least the 16yo from a while back. The Whisky is so big that the plastic bit, that usually is a big off note, killing even, only plays its part in the whole. It is in no way overpowering nor bad. Still the whole is in your face! Sweet, (burnt) wood, toast, peat, licorice and warm plastic. That’s it, those are the main markers. Luckily more is happening in this one, especially on the nose. You can pick up on the American oak, I’m pretty sure both casks are American oak. The sherry bit is similar to the Sherry you get from a good batch of the 16yo. Cow dung in the finish. Aftertaste is sweet, peaty and plastic-y and very low on bitterness, lets say soft tannins.

Well, this is a small batch and in this case combining two casks, a Bourbon barrel and a Sherry hogshead, together normally good for some 600 bottles at cask strength. However only 330 bottles have been bottled, why is that? Not all has been bottled, leaky casks? I wonder…

I took this bottle to Nico, who seemed to really dislike it, claiming it was too much and over the top. For him this was just wrong, so be warned, this might not be for everyone. Of the two, I am definitely the one who likes extremes more. I’m still actually amazed he feels this strongly about this Whisky he claims is wrong, since I do really like it. I wonder, is my palate shot? Luckily no, since most other Whiskies we both still tend to score pretty similarly, but sometimes something like this happens. For instance, I really like the Palo Cortado Springbank 10yo, I also got pretty enthusiastic about it on a Springbank society tasting (in public). Nico did not (he didn’t even order it). In the end, I feel this 9yo is some sort of a 16yo on steroids and after that even some more steroids. It also seems to have some off notes the 16yo doesn’t have, which in this case works for me just fine, but it might not work for you, as it did for Nico. It is definitely a big Whisky, I’ll say that, very big.

Points: 87

Edradour 9yo 2010/2020 (58.6%, Van Wees, The Ultimate, 1st Fill Sherry Butt #393, 614 bottles)

Seems to be some sort of a recurring theme on these pages to review a Whisky from a distillery I haven’t reviewed for a looooong time. This time around a Whisky from Edradour, which was last featured here in 2015. Edradour is a bit of a difficult Whisky. You don’t hear very often that someone calls it their favorite Whisky. Edradour is a picturesque distillery. As mentioned before, Edradour is owned by Andrew Symington, of Signatory Vintage Fame, since 2002. The distillery itself was founded by farmers in 1825 and who called it Glenforres. In 1837 the name Edradour is used for the first time. The distillery changed hands quite a few times. In a more recent history, 1982, the distillery is bought by Campbell Distilleries (Pernod Ricard), before being bought by Mr. Symington. Since Andrew is used to bottle quite a lot of Whiskies, quite a lot of Edradour Single Malts have been released since.

In 2018 Andrew commissioned a second distillery on site, So essentially Edradour isn’t just one distillery anymore. Interesting, interesting indeed. The Independent bottling at hand has been released by Van Wees of the Netherlands in their Ultimate range. Han van Wees himself has been a Whisky-icon since the sixties. The Ultimate range consists of Whiskies sourced from…yes you might have guessed it, from Signatory Vintage. The ultimate is bottled with almost always the same label, almost never in a box to keep prices reasonable. Because of this, (and the quality obviously), The Ultimate is a very popular range in The Netherlands. What did they always say about the Dutch, and the Scottish as well for that matter?…

Color: Orange brown.

Nose: Lets start by saying that initially this smells a bit metallic, a somewhat similar feel you get when tasting blood. Lots of warm, herbal and sometimes soapy wood. Dusty, dry dead leaves in the sun. Definitely somewhat vegetal, with sawdust and leather. Some raisins, honey and some indistinct red fruit aromas. Sometimes some whiffs of berry-like acidity are apparent. Coffee candy and mocha. Hints of water-based paint with some dish water, complete with some lemon-aroma. Sawdust again. Overall not really fruity, or it is masked by other stronger aromas. Some smoke and some rubber (orange air hose). Lots of fresh oak. Not really complex and not a lot of development over time, not in the bottle, nor in my glass. Overall pretty nice smelling though. For some maybe a bit to harsh, but the balance is unmistakably good.

Taste: Lots of wood, shrinking my oral cavity (a drying sensation). Right from the start, unbalanced and quite harsh. Sawdust from plywood. The nose left a way better first impression. Wood first and foremost, getting spicy and waxy with some licorice and tar next. It’s a bit punishing, but some of us like that. It’s like a Yorkie biting you in the ankles. It still hurts but you love it anyway, unless it’s not yours. Every sip starts very nice, but than the muscle comes in. A bit of a Jekyll and Hyde affair. The middle of the body fits the nose better, which is probably its true identity, yet the finish can be strangely acidic. Strange stuff this sometimes is. I’m actually amazed that for the amount of wood this shows, it isn’t bitter. The aftertaste is not the best part of the experience, yet acceptable and at times depending on the taster, it can be quite nice. Could have fooled me this is not molasses based, which obviously it isn’t.

Another difficult Edradour, which is definitely not for everybody. Works really well though right after robusto coffee. After a strong black coffee, the start is sweeter (toffee, caramel), more fruity (ripe red fruits), more tarry. Still an emphasis on wood, fresh oak, making for a very dry Whisky, somewhat peculiar after the initial sweetness.

Points: 84

The bottle was gifted to me by Auke, who thought it was just too much and is not a coffee drinker.

Glen Elgin 13yo 2008/2021 (54.1%, Meadowside Blending, The Maltman, Sherry Hogshead #90744, 297 bottles)

Seven years between the first review of Glen Elgin and the second one. That has to change, so what about two weeks between the second and the third review? Now, that’s a lot better now, isn’t it? Third review and again it is an offering by an independent bottler. The company’s name is Meadowside Blending, based in Glasgow, and specializing in Single Malt Whiskies, and run by the Hart Family. I don’t know why, but initially I thought this was a German outfit, probably because a lot of their bottlings are imported into Germany. My bad. This is a Scottish firm and they have several ranges on the market. Foremost is the range called The Maltman. These are all single cask releases. Next interesting range is The Grainman. Yes, you guessed it, all single cask, Single Grains. Other brands carried by the firm are The Granary (Blended Grain) and Royal Thistle. The bottle at hand, and this is no surprise if you are a regular on these pages, comes from The Maltman, yes a single cask, Single Malt Whisky from Glen Elgin. And yes imported into Germany by Alba Import, not sure if all of it went to the German market though…

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Spicy sherry. Wood-spice and rather fresh and appealing, yet also some black coal with tar and right after that a more sharp and acidic fresh note. I have to say, all fits together quite well, so nothing wrong in the balance department. Lovely oak. The nose as a whole is thus rather appealing, fruity with half ripe sour cherries and maybe somewhere in there a more yellow fruit-note (indistinct). Breaths of fresh air run through the Sherry bits as well as some gravy? This is not a Sherry monster in the style you now often get with all these 10yo first fill Oloroso Sherry monsters. No, this is way more refined and still has quite a lot of colour to it. Tiniest hint of sulphur which I don’t even pick up on every time I nose this. Right after that some honey and maybe even some cigarette smoke. Warming and actually helping the whole of the nose. This has some fresh wood right from the start, but it’s not overpowering and actually very nice. Reminds me a bit of being outside near a sweet water lake on a nice and sunny day. Fresh winds, and the sherry bit could almost be some nice floral aromas blooming in nature. I guess this will not be a bad weather Whisky.

Taste: Half sweet yet also spicy (wood). Runny caramel or warm toffee. The coal, the tar and the wood are present right from the beginning. Sweetness seems building already. Quite some toffee now. All of this right before some fruit sets in. Warm apple compote? Nutty (yet different than in other Sherry bottlings), soft and supple leather. Leather as in belts and trousers, not thick saddle leather. Aftertaste is toffee and caramel again. Hints of plastic and warm wood. Again well balanced. I wouldn’t call the nose better than the taste of the other way around. No, this is one nice complete package indeed. Yet if I had to… yeah the nose is slightly better.

This one differs obviously from the Bourbon hogshead one by the Sherry influence. Apart from that, the Sherry influence didn’t actually overpower the traits of Glen Elgin, so there is still a family resemblance to be noticed between the two. I have to say, I like both Glen Elgins a lot, and both have their own moments. This one scores slightly higher (one point), because it is just a little bit more appealing and definitely better suited for a larger audience than the Bourbon hogshead one, which is more of an anorak-y Whisky. This one is also a little bit lower in ABV, which helps the drinkability. I like this one a lot, and would definitely it pick up again if I weren’t that adventurous and prefer to see what else is out there!

Points: 87

Mortlach 10yo 2011/2021 (57.3%, Signatory Vintage, Finished in 2nd fill Sherry Butt #3, A Farewell Dram bottled for Walter Schoberts Final Tastings, 527 bottles)

What can I say, Mortlach is a special distillate with a special profile. First of all, Mortlach is known for its unique distilling regime where the spirit has been distilled 2.6 times. Mortlach is also known for its big and meaty Sherry profile, like the 16yo Flora & Fauna bottling or this 10yo Wilson & Morgan bottling. But even the lighter (ex-Bourbon) versions of Mortlach always bring something special to the table, like this 11yo Provenance bottling, not a high scorer, yet very interesting indeed, or this small batch 12yo Signatory bottling from 3 Bourbon Barrels. This time around however, we’ll have a look at a Mortlach that has its initial maturation in, most likely, American oak Bourbon casks and a finish in a second fill Sherry butt. As usual, no info about the type of Sherry, and we all know there are a lot of different types of Sherry around. Oloroso is no Palo Cortado, ain’t it! Nevertheless, this Whisky seems to be more on the light side, so at this point I don’t expect a meaty Sherry expression.

Color: Light gold.

Nose: Nice entry. This immediately reminds me of good Whiskies I tried in the early noughties (if you let it breathe for a minute or so), definitely brings back memories. A slightly mineral and somewhat Sherried barley note. Wow, really old-skool nose. Quite organic at first with hints of sugary sweetness, cardboard and white bread. Slightly biscuity. Fresh and vibrant nevertheless, since bread is not a vibrant aroma. Very classy and well balanced for a 10 year old dram. Some fruity notes emerge next. Initially some unripe cherries. More fruits in general, more syrupy yellow fruits actually. Peach syrup and candied pineapple. Sweet peachy yoghurt. Together with this a fresh and warm barley wind bringing a Gin-like freshness. Warm old wood in the sun. Slightly dusty and powdery. Not floral at all although it is slightly perfumy. It has quite a lot of different aroma’s going for it. For me personally Mortlach often has this meaty quality to it (especially when aged in a Sherry cask), but I’m struggling to find that here. It is definitely more fruity than meaty. Don’t think the fruit is masking it, I feel the meatiness just isn’t here. The longer this breathes, the fruitier and sweeter it becomes. Very appetizing fruity fresh and vibrant Mortlach this time. After some time a more soapy note emerges as well as some more freshness. Not in a bad way though. Definitely a quality nose. Maybe a little bit light, and this might have been ruined (a bit) if it would have been reduced. All in all definitely a quality and classy nose.

Taste: Nutty first, almonds, hazelnuts and fruity second yet not far behind. Big, sweetish and balanced. Did I mention that its nutty? Notes of burnt or toasted oak, and some cold dishwater to be honest. Big aroma initially which quickly becomes somewhat thinner. Definitely a fruity Whisky with lots of ripe yellow fruits and some red berry acidity. After the layered and complex nose, the taste is simpler and more straightforward. Notes of a yellow fruity beer and ever so slightly soapy. Even though the nose is way more complex, the nose and the taste of this Whisky are well balanced and suit each other well. Since this was finished in a Sherry butt, I guess this initially aged in probably two or three ex-Bourbon casks (barrels and/or hogsheads), and where I struggled to pick up on the Mortlach meatiness, I also struggle to pick up on vanillin from the American oak, so, probably not first fill. A vanilla note or ice-cream note, yeah, maybe, gets lost a bit in the slight thin-ness of the body. And maybe somewhat overpowered by the fruity acidity. Let’s say this is a summer expression of Mortlach. The aroma’s are transported well, so 57.3% ABV, yes indeed, but it doesn’t really show this much alcohol. More woody towards the finish, warming, with a bonfire like toastiness, as well as some paper and cardboard notes. Dirty and fruity, yet not meaty.

A Good summery Mortlach. The nose is really good. Sometimes the taste seems thin, but that also depends a bit on you yourself. For this review I tasted it twice on different days, and the second time around it wasn’t as thin as the first time. Very good Mortlach again, and this particular expression has some similarities to Bimber that has matured in Bourbon casks, Like this cask #194.

Points: 87

P.S:(I). This one is very nice after a cup of coffee…

P.S:(II). In case you are not German and you want to know who Walter Schobert is:

Walter Schobert (* 1943 in Erlangen) is a German museum director and author. Schobert studied Protestant theology and theatre studies. He then worked as a priest and as a film speaker for three years each. From 1974 to 1985 he was chairman of the working group for community film work. From 1979 to 2003 he was the founding director of the German Film Museum in Frankfurt am Main. He is the author and editor of numerous writings on film and film history and has taught film history at various universities. Since 1994 he has been an honorary professor at the Institute for European Art History at the University of Heidelberg. In 1995 he was awarded an honorary doctorate from the University of Edinburgh. In addition to his work on film history, he has published numerous publications on the subject of Scottish whiskey and regularly conducts tastings. He is a member of the “Keepers of the Quaich”, an association that looks after the whisky culture in Scotland [Source: Wikipedia].

Amrut Naarangi (50%, OB, Batch No. 05, August 2018)

This is a very a-typical Amrut, no I’ll correct myself, this is a very a-typical Whisky! Amrut claims this is another first of its kind, (which are the others?), and yes sir indeed is this a first one of its kind, I’ll say. This is a Single Malt Whisky finished in an orange Sherry cask. No they didn’t paint the cask orange, they didn’t, didn’t they? No, Amrut got them some Oloroso Sherry (from Spain, nonetheless) and infused the Sherry with fresh orange peels for over two years. Two whole years of infusion! After this, the cask was filled with some great three year old Amrut Whisky and they let that mature further for another three years or so, resulting in multiple batches of Naarangi (orange in Hindi).

After the reviews of some experimental special releases of Ardbeg concocted by Mad Professor Bill Lumsden, I guess Bill finally met his match, because I guess even Bill didn’t come up with an experiment as bold as this! I’m not entirely sure if this is entirely legal by SWA standards though, so maybe Bill wasn’t allowed to do such a thing and passed the idea on to Amrut? Or more likely, Amrut have even madder professors (12 Monkeys-style, too crazy even to get hired by SPECTRE). I hope for the latter! Bring it on! The bottle I’m about to review is now half full and was opened quite a while back. I remember that it oozed with orange so much when freshly opened, even so much so, that I left it alone for quite a while. I wasn’t really fond of it.

Color: Copper gold, yes, let’s just say orange gold!

Nose: Hints of orange (in the deep, yet definitely present). Smells like orange flavoured dark chocolate. Creamy, spicy wood, and very nice smelling actually. Orange liqueur bonbon, with a vodka-like alcoholic aroma, all of this kept in check and well balanced. Big ‘n bold. Dusty, like a dusty old door mat. Sometimes even slightly meaty. Vanilla cream, more soft wood notes and the nose becomes quite vegetal by now. My imagination makes green vanilla out of this. I wonder how those pods smell before turning brown. Hints of a soft licorice tarry note and more dust and some pencil shavings (especially after sipping, so the oral cavity does its work amplifying certain notes). Next come some notes of Sinaspril (orange flavoured paracetamol for children). So there are real orange-oil notes as well as artificial orange notes in this, both coming from the natural source I guess. The orange bit in the nose dissipates first from my glass, letting other aroma’s come forward. Through all this, yes, the orange notes are more than present, although not (anymore) in an overpowering way. I’m quite amazed actually, that it became more toned down, considering my experiences with a freshly opened bottle.

Taste: Wood with a chewy sweetness. Spicy and a bit prickly. Bit of cayenne pepper and again some licorice. Ashes from toasted oak. Vanilla-orange-wood fusion. Slightly more acidic than expected from the nose alone, kept in check by some honey/sugar sweetness. Initially a thin texture, where I expected it to be more oily or fatty (but this sorts itself out later in the process). The thin feel is a bit of a let down, as if the Whisky isn’t fully up to transporting all the aromas. Definitely not cloying. Surprisingly well balanced though. The wood gives off a more bitter note now, but that’s not bad. It doesn’t say so on the label, but sometimes I do find some peat in this, although I’m sure this isn’t a peated Whisky. Slightly soapy mouthfeel now. In the taste all is more upfront and less complex than the nose is. The body, and the especially the aftertaste, becomes quite creamy and very friendly to drink, with obviously hints of orange-skin oil. Very drinkable now (half full bottle that was open for quite a bit). The nose and the taste have great balance to them (again, because of the half full bottle that was open for quite a bit), and I feel this is because of the way the orange and the wood behave themselves in this expression, they work well together.

After opening this for the first time, I disliked it, I thought the orange was over the top and overpowering. Just too much. I couldn’t get past the orange, but as a flawed human I am, and I hate to break it to you, so are you, (unless you have green skin and read this from another galaxy, then you are perfect and all that we humans ever wanted is peace!) I also expected something like this, the overpowering aroma’s of orange, and maybe therefore I already disliked it before opening? You wonder why I bought it then? Well, it is an Amrut after all, isn’t it? I have yet to taste a bad or mediocre Whisky from them. I tasted a lot of Amruts by now, and they were all good or better than good. But at first the Orangey-idea was a bit to bold, even for me, and I do like extremes in Whisky!

If any Whisky in the world, or the universe if you are green, needed breathing to get the most out of it, than this is the one, boy did this one improve over time. I have to say, this Naarangi was a bit of an experience. Disliked it at first, gave it a lot of time to gather itself, and when it did, it came up trumps. I really thought this would be a negative review, and surprised myself sitting down with it and analysing it. I like it (now). The down side is that this Whisky needs a lot of time to get there, to show its strengths, so not really recommended if your collection of open bottles is rather small, because it still is a niche Whisky.

Points: 85

This review is dedicated to Surrinder Kumar, a truly wonderful, passionate and patient man, who I may have slightly offended in London last year, with my initial thoughts about Naarangi, calling it borderline illegal. I’m sooooory (from Ted 2).

Ledaig 9yo 2005/2015 (56.8%, Signatory Vintage, Cask Strength Collection, 1st Fill Sherry Butt #900146, 664 bottles)

After Caol Ila and two cask strength Laphroaig’s, lets stay with peat for a while (winter is coming) and check out this peated offering from Ledaig. Yes I know, Ledaig isn’t from Islay. Why should it? You can distil with peat anywhere on the planet, or in this case, Scotland. There is already a lot happening on Islay, lots of distilleries, and isn’t Mull more unique? Not a lot of distilleries on Mull. Ledaig as we all know by now, is the peated Whisky made at Tobermory Distillery. You did read all my previous reviews on Ledaig, in preparation to this one, now did you? So you should know by now, yes? Tobermory distillery also releases unpeated Whisky, calling it…well…Tobermory, how did they come up with that! You could fool me sometimes with this statement though. Seems to me some Tobermory’s are peated as well, maybe less so than Ledaig, yet peated. Maybe they’re just not as good at line clearance as they are in making Whisky? Who knows, and who cares if the output can be this good. By the way, not even that long ago Tobermory did have some sort of a wonky reputation concerning the quality of their Whisky.

Earlier I reviewed a fantastic 11yo Cadenheads offering distilled in 2005 which has matured in a Sherry Butt. This time around I went for this 9yo 2005 Signatory Vintage offering, that also matured in a Sherry Butt, expecting and hoping for more of the same and wanting that all 2005’s are somewhat created equal. I just wonder why Cadenheads only managed to draw 450 bottles at cask strength from a Butt and Signatory 664 bottles. That’s quite a considerable difference. By the way, Cadenheads bottled two other casks from 2005, yielding 510 and 516 bottles. Still no 664 bottles though. Different oak with more evaporation or different warehousing conditions? Who knows.

Color: Orange gold.

Nose: Fatty, fragrant and delicious peat. Slightly Sherry sweetness. Full on sweet smoke with some toffee. A little dirty yet sexy. Licorice smoke. Salty and smoked licorice candy. Prickly smoke, with a minty side to it. Smoked menthos. Nom, nom, nom. I have to say, a peated spirit like this, aged in a Sherry butt, what a combination. The start was peat which morphs slowly into smoke. Hints of anise seeds and cumin. In the background dried beef, gravy and salty smoked fish. This has also an underlying fruity side to it, but again, just as in the Caol Ila I just reviewed, this is masked by the usual suspects of peat and smoke. What a wonderful smelling Ledaig again. Utterly amazing smelling Malt and it’s only 9 years old. Glowing embers, warm glowing charred wood. Hot barbecue before anything is put on it, burning off the last spots of fat left behind from the previous session, right before putting something on it again. Or imagine sipping this near the fireplace high up in the mountains. This nose never stops giving. Warm oil emanating from a steam locomotive (a fresh experience from two months ago in Quedlinburg, Germany).

Taste: Starts sweet and peaty, yet also somewhat unbalanced. The peat and the smoke have a bitter edge here right from the start, but also something fresh like a cola has. Nutty and some burnt fat from the barbecue. This note smells better than it tastes, by the way. Very warming and hot going down. Now I do notice quite some dry wood underneath, tucked away neatly between the peat and the smoke. So it might be a bit hidden, but the cask is quite active as well. More towards burning plastic now and again the minty note. The peat note is more bitter and together with the smoke, also less dominant. The Sherry comes trough some more. Dried salty fish. This one needs some time to breathe, but not too much. When standing around in my glass for a long time, the taste deteriorates a bit (the bottle is also nearly empty by the way, so I notice the air did play its part). This will be of no concern with a freshly opened bottle, because then, this Malt still does need a lot of air. Crushed beetle in the finish, and overall still warming. Also some caramel comes forth.

Are all Sherry Butt matured Ledaig’s from 2005 created equal? Nope they aren’t. The Cadenheads rose to the occasion much more than this Signatory initially, but, oh boy, when this got enough time to breathe in an open bottle, yeah man! The nose is up to par with the Cadenheads, alas on the palate, the Signatory falls apart a bit and the Cadenhead is the clear winner. Sure it’s different from the Cadenheads offering as well. That one was tasty from the first poured dram until the last, and this Signatory one did need some time to find its place, which luckily it did, although it never reached those highs of the Cadenheads, and deteriorated a bit when nearly empty. Nevertheless two big peated hits in a row from Tobermory. I’m suspecting an album of greatest hits now, so for the time being, I will be replacing every emptied Ledaig with another one. Can’t wait to open up the next one now. I have to look in my stash for one matured in a Bourbon cask after these two Sherried ones.

Points: 86

Pulteney 15yo 2004/2020 (63.3% Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Cask Strength, Refill Sherry Butt No. 629, 20/092, 507 bottles)

Pulteney is the most northerly Distillery on the mainland of Scotland, just 30km shy of John O’ Groats. The distillery is situated in Wick and lies in a part of Wick that used to be called Pultney Town named after its founder Sir William Pultney. The distillery itself was built by James Henderson in 1826 and was initially called Pultney Town. I don’t think James built the entire distillery with his own two hands though. The distillery was owned by the family of James for nearly a decade, but the family had to sell off the distillery in 1920 due to financial hardship caused by WW I. The distillery was sold to James Watson & Co, owners of Ord and Parkmore. In 1923 James Watson & Co. dissolved into John Dewar & Sons (D.C.L.), which closed the distillery in 1925. The distillery in its closed state changed hands several times, and several owners were busy rebuilding the distillery. In 1951 production resumed and in 1959 new stills were installed. In 1995 Pulteney, together with Balblair (part of the same portfolio by then) were sold to Inver House Distillers, the current owners. The last review of an official (Old) Pulteney on these pages, was distilled in 1982, and must have been one of the early releases by said owner. This time however, we are going to have a look at a 2004 distillate bottled by good old Gordon & MacPhail in their new Connoisseurs Choice Cask Strength range.

Color: Light orange gold.

Nose: Very malty and lightly Sherried. Slightly sweet smelling, soapy and dull (and I don’t mean boring). Right from the start a classic smell. I would have never guessed this was distilled in the 21st century. Slightly off-balanced acidic fruity smell. (This is the Sherry influence). Old paper, hints of pencil shavings and spices (part of the “classic” smell). It doesn’t have perfect balance, but still I do like the nose of this dram a lot. Who cares about perfection? Old, dusty, at times waxy, yet fresh and vibrant. It has been a while, analysing something like this. I have to say, based on the nose alone, this was a very welcome buy. Just lay back and sip it, clear your mind and let everything go away for a while. No children, no work, just you, Norah Jones, and your dram with its classic feeling. Wonderful wood spices. Fruity and some distant meaty notes as well. Aromas of an old court yard, of old buildings. An usually busy place, but now quiet on a Sunday. More nice wood spices, yet now helped along with some old honey (which has some nice staying power), soft mocha and whipped cream. Soft licorice added to the spices already present. The balance regains itself after some breathing, and it doesn’t need a lot of time to get there. Occasionally more whiffs of old paper, toasted cask and breaths of fresh air. Yes very special, what this is able to bring up from my memory of old places I visited and classic drams I had before. Keep it moving around in your glass. Keep Matilda waltzing so to speak. After some more extensive breathing the (sweet) licorice note gains in strength. Yes, this has a wonderful nose. A fresh pour is definitely more closed, so there is quite some nice evolution going on in my glass.

Taste: Prickly and again initially somewhat unbalanced (or is it?), yet so tasty. Quite sweet now, perfectly balanced by the woody notes and cigarette ashes, so it doesn’t feel sweet overall. After the first sip, the nose of this Whisky is really excellent more. Right out of the gate, a lot of different things are happening. Different tastes shoot off in many different directions. Pepper, Peppermint, bamboo, cold dishwater, licorice and fruit to name but a few I just caught in the moment. I’m sure I’ll catch some more going forward. Second sip starts again somewhat sweet, yet less so than the first sip. It shows almonds and more creamy notes, as well as more dry wood. A medium Talisker-like white pepper attack, paired with the licorice and cigarette ashes I mentioned earlier, and some sweetness. All of this also paired with the almonds, wood and its medium bitterness, which is hidden well by the medium sweetness. I guess all these paired notes constitute a very good balance. The fruits here seem somewhat different, more acidic and lemony than the nose showed. The balance is good and the palette of tastes and aroma’s is just great. Give it enough time to breathe. I’m stopping writing notes now, but rest assured, this still has even more to give, it just keeps evolving like mad. Wonderful tasty and fruity finish, with some nice oak, just not a lot of it. Aftertaste is perfectly balanced and friendly. Amazing drinkablity at this ABV. This never needed any water.

Even though this might have some minor flaws across the board, it is also a very good and tasty Malt. I don’t even know why I’m pointing out these minor flaws all the time, because by now we also know this is an excellent malt. Both the nose and the taste of this Pulteney are complex, the layering (the evolution over time in my glass) is impressive. We’re definitely in the in the “you-should-have-bought-a-second-bottle” territory with this one. But as is always the case on these pages, this is only my personal opinion, and as we all know, tastes can differ a lot. Keep in mind that ones taste can shift over time and are highly dependent of the moment as well. Tasting is a subjective science. So for me this is really great stuff, and it might, it just might not be entirely true for you. It is for me!

Points: 90