Tag Archives: Speyside

Dailuaine 14yo 1997/2012 (46%, Van Wees, The Ultimate, Hogshead #6012, 372 bottles)

After the excellent Dailuaine by Gordon & MacPhail why not try another one. This time one by dutch Indie bottlers The Ultimate. Gordon & MacPhail are known for controlling the whole process from acquiring the cask, storing the filled cask, right untill bottling of the Whisky. With this they hope to achieve the highest quality possible. The Ultimate have a slightly different approach, a very Dutch one.

Dailuaine 14yo 1997/2012 (46%, Van Wees, The Ultimate, Hogshead #6012, 372 bottles)

First of all the final product cannot cost too much, having said that, they really try to get the highest quality they can get. No money is spent on designing a fancy label, nor on a fancy glass bottle.  A long time ago a picture of Bushmills distillery was found and placed on the label and never again was money spent on design. (By the way, Bushmills was never bottled in this series). If you want your bottle in a (simple, white) box, you’ll have to pay extra. The only money spent is on buying good Whisky. The Van Wees company has many contacts in Scotland dating back to the sixties. Most, if not all, of the recent casks are bought from Andrew Symington (Signatory Vintage). Just have a look at the casks from 1997. The Ultimate bottled #6012 and #6017, Signatory bottled #6015, #6016, #6018 and #6020. The Ultimate bottled #4229 and #4234. Signatory bottled #4228, #4230, #4231, #4232 and #4233.

Color: Light Gold

Nose: Fruity and buttery. Quite a strong aroma. Nice spicy and grassy wood. Just like it’s brother from Gordon & MacPhail, a nice sweet vanilla note. Eggnog. Lots of influence from the wood, without overpowering the distillate. Nice sappy oak and also a little bit of cardboard. With some air a more dry and powdery turn. A lot less apple, but still there. Somehow the alcohol is more upfront.

Taste: Sweeter than I imagined. Again a pretty nice aroma. Vanilla with candied apples and even some raspberry. Excellent stuff. A paper note, but also hints of burnt sugar mixes in with the toasted oak. Very nice and drinkable, with a sweet and warming, and dare I say, hoppy finish. The Whisky is pretty straightforward and nicely un-complex.

Dailuaine is a pretty nice distillate, will have to keep this one in mind and investigate further.

Points: 85

Dailuaine 14yo 1995/2010 (43%, Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Refill Sherry Hogsheads, AJ/AAFI)

Gordon & MacPhail Private Collection UltraUnlike Benrinnes, Dailuaine has been featured a few times already on Master Quill, the last one just a month ago, so it doesn’t need a big introduction, nor does Gordon & MacPhail, the big Scottish independent bottler with an even bigger reputation doing things yet even bigger. We all know Gordon & MacPhail have a lot of series like the Distillery Labels, Connoisseurs Choice, Gordon & MacPhail Reserve and Private Collection, to name but a view. Now there is even a bigger choice with four new, very old, Whiskies in the Private Collection Ultra.

Hey, what’s in a name! I was fortunate enough to have been able to try, three of the four, recently: The 61yo Linkwood (88 Points), the 62yo Glenlivet (89 Points), the 57yo Strathisla (88 Points) and finally there is also a 63yo Mortlach. Well these four are obviously very expensive and extremely rare. For us “normal” people who can’t afford those Ultra’s, here we’ll be reviewing a hopefully very good Dailuaine, one of my favorite amongst the rather unknown distilleries…

Dailuaine 14yo 1995/2010 (43%, Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Refill Sherry Hogsheads, AJ/AAFI)Color: Gold

Nose: Floral and spicy. Dusty and spicy wood. Try to imagine the cask from the outside. Hints of mint. Icing Sugar and even some dried tall grass. Malt and honey. Quite some vanilla. After the Benrinnes I reviewed last here we have another refill Sherry cask that impairs a lot of vanilla to the Whisky. Sometimes it smells a bit like a rum with oranges. More fruit with apple skins. Apple pie, yes also cookie dough and with that the spice wood note. Acidic cinnamon. Very good!

Taste: Sweet. Apples, Apple skin, warm apple sauce. Spicy wood. Extremely nice. Well balanced stuff this is. Nutty wood. Nice hint of sweetness that complements the full aroma. I really like this one. I thought the Benrinnes was good, but this is even a little bit better. Spicy wood. Hints of nutmeg and plain oak. Sugared apple. Caramel. Sweet woody caramel and a tiny hint of bitter wood (sap). Not a very long finish, but very tasty. The finish resembles the body. Well made and very tasty stuff.

There you have it. A young and reduced Dailuaine, which when looking at scores is almost as good as the new Ultra’s. This is a new kid on the block, a teenager, and doesn’t have the experience and sophistication of the old Ultra’s. Although the price difference is staggering, there is something to say for both. (If you have the cash).

Points: 86

Benrinnes 18yo 1993/2011 (43%, Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Refill Sherry Hogsheads, AA/ABJG)

This time I’ll have a look at a bottling from a distillery which “works for me”. I tend to like Benrinnes, so I’m absolutely flabbergasted that this distillery never featured before on these pages!

Benrinnes was founded way back in 1826 by Peter McKenzie, but destroyed within three years. Most distilleries that are destroyed somewhere in their history, are destroyed by fire, but Benrinnes was destroyed by water (flood), but don’t forget about fire just yet. Five years after the flood, a new farm distillery was built a few miles away and was called Lyne of Rutherie. This distillery changed hands a few times eventually David Edward became the owner. He renamed the distillery Benrinnes in 1864. In 1896 the distillery was almost completely wiped away by…yes, a fire. When David passed away, his son Alexander takes over. Alexander also founds Craigellachie (1891), Aultmore (1896) and Dallas Dhu (1898). Alexander also purchased Oban in 1898. Quite a busy decade for Alexander.

Benrinnes 18yo 1993/2011 (43%, Gordon & MacPhail, Connoisseurs Choice, Refill Sherry Hogsheads, AAABJG)From 1955 through 1956, the distillery is again completely rebuilt, this time because of economics, not disaster. In 1966 the distillery is equipped with six stills, but are not configured in the expected three pairs which a normal double distilling distillery would have. Benrinnes have two groups of three stills which makes for a partial triple distilling configuration (sounds a bit like Springbank doesn’t it?).

Color: Gold

Nose: Full on aroma, flowery and perfumy Sherry. This leaps out of the glass and grabs you by the…nose, in a non-agressive way. Fruity sweet, dusty toffee. Tiny hint of roofing tar. Oxidized Sherry. Fino Sherry probably. Grassy and still floral. Horseradish. A promise of sweetness. There is some wood in here but it comes across as virgin oak, which also gives off some vanilla notes, so it seems to me this is from a Fino Sherry American oak hogshead.

Taste: Again lots of aroma. Sweet hops, Beer. Yes! Creamy sweet toffee and a hint of cardboard. Nutty, which again makes me think of an oxidized Sherry. When this is from refill Fino Hogsheads it picked up a lot of color, without it being reddish from Oloroso and such. Since this is from multiple casks, I’m wondering now if they would mix casks from different types of Sherries for this series, I’ll have to ask). The hoppy beer note stays well into the finish and that may be considered unusual and light, Late in the finish I also get some tangerine, with quite some vanilla. Interesting bottling. By the way, this one needs air and time.

The back label states this has a light body, but I sure beg to differ. Pretty special stuff if you ask me. The profile of this Whisky leaves me with some questions, so I’m not quite done with it yet. With bottlings like this I always wonder how the Whisky was before reduction, especially the finish. Benrinnes suits Gordon & MacPhail, would be a nice Whisky next to Benromach.

Points: 85

The Macallan ‘Sienna’ (43%, OB, 1824 Series)

Just recently I reviewed a Macallan 10yo ‘Fine Oak’ which I found to be quite anonymous. The Fine Oak was Macallan’s first series that was essentially a U-turn from Macallan’s previous theme off first fill (Oloroso) Sherry casks, which lasted for many decades. One of the commenters on that aforementioned review, mentioned that the 1824 series is even worse than the Fine Oak series. As luck would have it I just received a sample of the Sienna so why wait, lets put this baby to the test!

The Macallan 1824 seriesSienna is part of the 1824 family. The other members being Gold, Amber and Ruby. The names are derived from the color of the Whiskies. Yes no age statements but now we get colors! I’m just speculating here but it seems to me that with increasing color, more (Oloroso) Sherry casks were used. Obviously other Sherries might be used as well.

The Macallan SiennaColor: Deep orange gold.

Nose: Tangerine sugar-water. Toned down Sherry. Predominantly Oloroso if you ask me. Tiny, tiny hint of smoke, probably from toasted cask. A lot of typical Bourbon cask notes too. It brings vanilla, oak and some lemon sherbet. Fruity notes emerge later. Sugared apricots. Actually this smells very nice dusty and balanced. Although it smells like sugar(water), the overall sense I get is dry, it doesn’t smell sweet. The oak itself picks up some spiciness when its left to breathe, a bit like pencil shavings.

Taste: Syrupy texture and very toffeed. Didn’t expect that. Burnt cask again. Not very sweet, but the sweetness that’s there is covering up a strange, and hidden, acidity. Very nutty, hazelnut cream, which calls for a more oxidized type of Sherry. Dark chocolate and oak. Small hint of coal and burnt wood. Overall very “simple” and young and not very balanced. Short finish filled with Sugar water again. Strange experience this.

The first three examples from this series are pretty affordable. I have previously tasted the ‘Amber’ from this series (no review) and scored that 76. Decent Whisky, but still disappointing, especially considering it’s a Macallan. and I’m sorry, but I found this Sienna to be equally disappointing, even though it scores a little bit higher…

Points: 79

Glenfiddich 15yo “Distillery Edition” (51%, OB, Litre)

Glenfiddich is still the mother of all Single Malts and deserves our respect, even when snuffed about by connoisseurs. That in fact would be very unfair, since a lot of (older) Glenfiddichs have proven themselves to be more than great. It has been more than a year and a half when I reviewed the 15yo Solera Reserve and now comes the time I’ll review another 15yo. This time the 15yo distillery edition.

Glenfiddich 15yo Distillery EditionSome time ago there used to be a 15yo Cask Strength, which was exactly 51% ABV too, just like this one, so I can’t help but feel this is it’s replacement. Who else in their right mind would think that all Glenfiddichs at Cask Strength come out at precisely at 51% ABV? The 15yo is also a pretty special age statement for Glenfiddich, since all hand bottled Glenfiddichs were released as 15yo’s.

Color: Copper gold

Nose: Spicy and creamy sweet. Hints of, slightly soapy wood and quite heavy on the caramel. Damp earth, fresh-cut grass and quite some Sherry influence. Typical sugared vanilla note from ex-Bourbon casks. Vegetal but also dried meat combined with wood-spice. Sawdust and dry. Whiffs of fresh air drift by. Not bad at all…

Taste: Starts with sweet wood and a spicy and slightly acidic red wine note, although this probably hasn’t seen a wine cask. Sherry must have “done” that. The sweetness sticks and stays right through the finish. Licorice and vanilla. Full and nutty body. Nice fruitiness shows up in the finish.

A nice Glenfiddich aided by higher strength, showing this has more potential than the usual 40% ABV Glenfiddichs. I know Glenfiddich is seen by many as an easy and simple entry-level Single Malt, but if you are able to look past that there is a lot of potential here. Definitely a mixture od ex-Bourbon and ex-Sherry casks (which is also stated on the label). Like so many Glenfiddichs this is decently priced, and considering this is 15yo, comes in a litre bottle, has 51% ABV and still doesn’t cost much, this would be a stong contender for any bang-for-you-buck award. Recommended.

Points: 83

Glen Moray 8yo (40%, OB, Circa 2013)

After almost two years’ time another Glen Moray graces these pages. Glen Moray used to be the poor Whisky that was used as a guinea pig for Whisky experiments by Dr. Lumsden. Sounds like a horror story doesn’t it? Bill probably is a nice guy and poor old Glen Moray was sold off in 2008 to stand on it’s own. The Glen Moray we’ll be focussing on this time is a Glen Moray 8yo. This Whsiky is a very cheap Single Malt Whisky. Cheap sounds a bit harsh, so lets say this Glen Moray costs next to nothing or is inexpensive. Can it still be good?

Glen Moray 8 yoColor: White wine

Nose: Malty! Yes lots of malted barley on its nose, and like the Macallan 10yo I reviewed earlier, this is pretty sweet. It even has some spices. Dried grass and crushed beetles. Cardboard and very young smelling. It’s barley spirit with a little bit of vanilla and some sugar.

Taste: Barley again and even a little bit peppery. Also the sweetness comes through. Obviously un-complex, but very honest tasting. This Whisky probably hasn’t seen the inside of a Sherry cask, but compared to the aforementioned Macallan, that’s no problem. Even the finish seems longer than the Macallan had, but it’s still short.

Nothing to brag about. This is an extremely simple Single Malt Whisky, but it does come with an extremely simple price-tag. Barley, sweet and typical refill Bourbon cask matured young Whisky, nothing more. What you expect is what you get, the only thing not expected was the hint of pepper in the taste.

Points: 77

The Macallan ‘Fine Oak’ 10yo (40%, OB, Circa 2010)

To be honest, I’d rather review a Macallan from the times of the old 10yo 100 proof I reviewed earlier, but instead I’m having a 10yo from the Fine Oak series. When the Fine Oak series was released some ten years ago, it was the time the real Macallan was killed off by the owners. Macallan was then a Whisky for aficionado’s and people with taste and the Fine Oak Macallan is marketed more to be hip. Maybe the change happened because there was a shortage of Sherry casks, or maybe it was a pure marketing move. Who knows, and who cares. For those of you who don’t remember, The Macallan used to be the finest Speyside Whisky around, known for heavy use of Sherry. Something Glendronach is known for now. Glendronach didn’t sell well and even closed because of the Sherry success of Macallan. So here we have a entry-level Macallan with an age statement. So let’s have a look what the legend has become.

Macallan Fine Oak 10yoColor: Light gold, with a pink hue.

Nose: Sweet and malty, hints of creamy Sherry in the distance. Cream, vanilla, lemon and sugar with that typical sherried wine-note. Hints of oak, yet very light. If you want to, you can still smell a bit of the original distillate which still is excellent. Ear-wax again, with mocha and a nutty component. Something like almond-cream. After some time, the sugary sweetness gets some help from honey. Also a powdery note enters the mix as does some cardboard.

Taste: Malty and sometimes close to new make spirit. Sweet with lots of toffee and caramel notes. A little back-bone from the oak. I taste a lot of Bourbon cask in this 10yo, and it does get some character from Sherry casks, which in my opinion aren’t all Oloroso, since typical Fino notes are here too. Maybe a plethora of different Sherry casks went into this. The sweetness is definitely a sugary sweetness. This Macallan would make an excellent filling for bonbons. It somehow would complement the taste of chocolate for me. The finish somehow is a bit unbalanced, with wood and cardboard. It splits like a hair, and is rather short to boot. After 10 years it should have been better, it still says Macallan on the label you know…

When reviewing this, should I forget about the old Macallan? Sure, this has nothing to do with The Macallan that used to be, but on the other hand, the name is still on the label and on the back label Macallan is still considered a legend. If I were to get this blind, this could have been anything.

Points: 77

Dailuaine 1999/2012 (59.3%, The House of MacDuff, The Golden Cask, Cask #CM172, 270 bottles)

Almost another year has passed since reviewing my last Dailuaine, bottled by Jürgen a.k.a. The Whisky Mercenary. This time a younger version, distilled in 1999, with a fairly light color, so probably not a very active cask.

Dailuaine 199920/12 (59.3%, The House of MacDuff, The Golden Cask, Cask #CM172, 270 bottles)Jürgen’s version was quite strong and with a cask picked by John McDougall I again have some high hopes for this Dailuaine. Let’s see if this light Dailuaine packs some punch, and does it also have some cannabis I picked up in several other Dailuaines?

Color: Light citrussy gold.

Nose: Vegetal, fern and high on malt. High alcohol too, sweet. Thin honey, toffee and hard caramel. Pretty anonymous. This cask didn’t do a lot for the spirit. One use too many I guess. Tine hint of soapy foam. A very “green” Malt, and actually not very interesting. Dull.

Taste: Malty and powdery and yes, some wood. Pretty powerful and sweet. Rustic. A Malt from the country so to speak. Lots of marzipan and very fresh and likeable. Strangely enough there is a citrussy soury note that only shows itself in the finish. I know it s the oil from orange skins! Although likeable, something is not quite right here. (The strange soury note?).

Typical high strength Whisky where the cask didn’t impair a lot, or so it seems. There maybe something wrong with this one, but nothing to worry about too much, yet this one doesn’t speak to me. Good enough for bottling it is as single cask, but personally I wouldn’t have. Tasted blind I would have thought this was a Cadenheads bottling, since they have released lots of Whiskies like this in the recent past, but they bottle a lot. The House of MacDuff bottle considerably less, so you could expect only nice picks in their range. If so, why was this one picked? Probably for its malty sweetness I guess (or the orange?). No cannabis this time though.

Points: 81

Linkwood 21yo 1985/2007 (43%, The Secret Treasures, Bourbon Cask #4548, 348 bottles)

Linkwood 21yo 1985/2007 (43%, The Secret Treasures, Bourbon Cask #4548, 348 bottles)Here we have a Linkwood bottled by a Swiss outfit bottling under the name of The Secret Treasures. Their website is quite amateurish and uninformative. Some basic information is there, but seems a bit outdated. The firm is known for some great rums, like Demarara and Guadeloupe, and apart from Whisky also bottles a Bitter (Els from herbs only found in the Eiffel region), a Gin and some fruit distillates. Their Whiskies are bottled at 43% ABV, a strength that also seems a bit outdated where single cask bottlings are concerned. Bottle looks nice though!

Color: Gold

Nose: Spicy wood, sweet with some vanilla notes. The typical smell of a Whisky coming from a Ex-Bourbon Cask, but with quite a lot of aroma. It smells big and fruity. Das pronto clay, I remember from my childhood. Nutty as well, with some flowery notes but also some candy sweetness. Mocha, tiny hint of mocha coffee. Small hint of cask toast mingled with some dry old spices. Creamy and powdery. I think you get the picture. Very balanced (after extensive breathing) and slightly salty even (dry lips). It doesn’t smell reduced, and this has hints of cannabis in the aftertaste. A big plus for this Linkwood.

Taste: Vanilla and oak. Big and slightly toasty. Small hint of cannabis (again), which is not quite unusual for this type of oak. Wax, maybe ear wax. Perfect fruity sweetness. Vanilla ice-cream with some pencil shavings and fresh almonds. Even though this is reduced to 43% it is quite hot at times, and the hotness stays around for a while. The finish itself, tastewise, is much shorter. Hints of fermentation (yeast, cow dung?) and then a bit sour. However, don’t get me wrong. This is very appetizing. Big and just nice even at this lower ABV.

Quite sweet and in part light. Nice sweet body with a hot finish that stays longer than the taste itself. To me this Whisky shows some small faults in distillation, but has way more good things to it. Initially it seems a nice Malt, with a nice smell and so forth, but the taste already shows some unbalance, nevertheless it needs some air to settle and reaches a higher balance. Nice entry, than heavy on the sweet part, and full body, but sometimes a bit hot and a medium finish at best finish. Not bad! A word of caution. This isn’t as good when freshly opened, it really needs a lot of air and patience to really shine, even this reduced Whisky, needs time.

Points: 84

Strathmill 17yo 1992/2010 (43%, Signatory Vintage, Refill Butt #40711, 873 bottles)

Strathmill 17yo 1992/2010 (43%, Signatory Vintage, Refill Butt #40711, 873 bottles)Strathmill was founded in 1891 in an old mill, that dates back to 1823. At first is was called Glenisla but when the distillery was sold to W&A Gilbey in 1895 they changed its name to Strathmill. Through some mergers along the way finally Strathmill becomes one of many distilleries in the Diageo portfolio. Strathmill is a big component in the J&B Blended Whisky. Not a lot of Strathmill was officially bottled by its owners. Best known of course, are the 12yo Flora & Fauna bottling, The Managers’ Dram and the Managers’ Choice that was released in 2009. This year Strathmill features in the highly priced annual releases from Diageo. A 25yo was released just recently…

Color: Full gold

Nose: Musty Sherry. Peanut oil and stale water. A little bit of old wood and almonds. Not sure this smells pleasant. Citrus oil from warm and soft tangerines. When the mustiness dissipates, a fresher apple skin note appears. Light apple compote. Still a sort of sidewalk after the rain smell stays. Maybe a trace of sulphur.

Taste: Sweet with a strange kind of sourness added to it. Pencil shavings, cardboard and dabs of licorice. Slightly waxy. Not quite balanced, but the sourness works refreshing and quite nice in its strangeness. Very malty later on with sugary sweetness and grassy and hay like notes. Not heavy on the sweets but it definitely tastes like sugar. Uncomplex.

Funky stuff, but its strangeness is interesting. Probably full of faults and to sweet to make it your daily drinker. I’m guessing this is a bottle that will stay open for a long time, but once in a while you take a sip and it becomes surprising and nice (for one glass only). To be enjoyed for a long time, although not the best stuff around. As I said, interesting.

Points: 80