Longmorn 17yo 1996/2013 (57.2%, The Ultimate, Sherry Butt #72319, 600 bottles)

I’m pretty amazed this Sherry Butt #72319 is still available. Here in the low countries there is a lot of discussion about these Sherry Butts released by Dutch indie bottlers The Ultimate (Van Wees). This Sherry Butt Sherry Butt #72319 is the third one in a row and earlier I already reviewed Sherry Butt #72315, which was the first one of the series. The second one was Sherry Butt #72318.

As I said, lots of discussion, since all casks are good, didn’t cost a lot and have some differences. So nice whisky to compare to each other. I still have some Sherry Butt #72315 left, so I can compare it to this Sherry Butt #72319. Word in the grapevine is that the first one (Sherry Butt #72315) is the “worst” of the three, all are very clear about that. Some consider Sherry Butt #72318 to be the best and some Sherry Butt #72319.

By the way I hosted a Cadenhead’s tasting recently and after the tasting, I passed a glass with Sherry Butt #72315 around, without telling people what it was, and it sure got a lot of thumbs up. So maybe some prejudice going around? Earlier I scored Sherry Butt #72315, 88 points, so let’s have a look at this “better one”…

Longmorn 17yo 1996/2013 (57.2%, The Ultimate, Sherry Butt #72319, 600 bottles)Color: Copper Brown (less red/orange in color than Sherry Butt #72315)

Nose: Sherry and polished wood, smallest hint of creamy acetone, soap and some mint. Definitely less raw and dirty than Sherry Butt #72315. Extremely balanced and “soft”. It does have its power, but it’s more laid back. Woody raisins are in here too, but here they show themselves quite late in the mix and more toned down and in balance with sour wood, (milk) chocolate and honey. Very thick.

Taste: Great! The first encounter in the mouth is very nice. Sherry with more than a hint of licorice and sweetness. After that the wood, albeit in a mild way, shows itself. Also some toasted cask and a wee bit of paint. These were some very good Sherry Butt’s. The finish itself seems to me to be a bit less balanced, it seems to be a bit disjointed. Probably the wood gives the finish an acidic (and ashy) touch that somehow doesn’t seem to be a perfect fit. A sourness and taste akin to oranges, (the flesh and the juice), not the oily bits out of the skin. On the plus for a lot of tasters: this one has no sulphur in the finish.

If I had to sum things up, I would say that Sherry Butt #72315 is more of a true Sherry nose, more raw and honest. Maybe also less complex. Sherry Butt #72319 is more elegant and more complex, wint small hints of all sorts of things. Both are worth the same amount of points, but are different, but is I had to pick only one I would say Sherry Butt #72315 would be my choice, since it compensates it slightly simpler profile and it’s rawness with a better finish. But I have the luxury of tasting these two head to head, which makes it a lot easier to pick up on small differences, without that possibility, both are an equally good choice (as if one still has a choice).

I don’t know Sherry Butt #72318, but the two I’ve been comparing here are definitely worth having both. They maybe examples of the same kind of Whisky (heavy Sherry), but both show enough difference to show you a bit more of the possibilities within this profile. Both demand a different mood of the taster, meaning you!  Well, now I’m very interested in Sherry Butt #72318. I hope Erik (a.k.a. Master Quills apprentice), opens his bottle soon 😉

Points: 88

Longmorn 17yo 1996/2013 (57.5%, The Ultimate, Sherry Butt #72315, 606 bottles)

Suddenly this Longmorn appeared on the market. It’s color resembling Longmorns from the early seventies that were near perfect. This Ultimate bottling gained a very quick reputation of being a very good Sherried Longmorn. This sold out very quick, so Ultimate owners van Wees decided to bottle a second cask from this series: #72318, and is said to be even better than cask #72315. Alas Cask #72318 sold out rather quickly too, so Van Wees bottled a third one: #72319. That one should still be available, but already I heard a fourth cask is being bottled. If my information is correct there still are two casks left from this series, to make six in total. Let’s have a look at the series first one, cask #72315.

Color: Deep orange brown.

Nose: Raisins, musty and dusty. Typical Oloroso I would say, but it could also be a PX Cask. It smells very balanced and nice, no off notes whatsoever. Paper and some sawdust, and a little hint of lavender soap.

Taste: Thick sherry, almost syrupy, but again, only added bonuses, without any off notes. Spicy and there is some creamy wood, but nothing you would expect from a first fill Sherry bottling. Milk Chocolate, and some toasted wood. Very rounded out and easy even with its high strength. Never really harsh. Late in the finish an unexpected kind of acidity shows itself.

Overall the roundness and creaminess is great since a lot of those first fill bottlings can get woody and harsh, but this one is not. If there is a flaw than that’s the simplicity of it all. Is that a problem? It lack a bit in the complexity department is probably a better way to put it. Lovely stuff, taste, don’t analyze. A winner also due to the price of the Whisky. (around 60 Euro’s).

Points: 88

Laphroaig 8yo 2001/2009 (57%, The Ultimate, Hogshead #2927, 324 bottles)

I needed a Laphroaig for my last Por Larrañaga post, and since the weather outside is frightful, and a whisky could be so delightful, let’s review this one properly.

The Ultimate is a Dutch bottler from Amersfoort called Han van Wees. Han handpicked this Hogshead himself (if not his son Maurice probably did). I was at his shop and Han told me personally that this Laphroaig is a must, since it reminded him of “old skool” Laphroaig. Well if this man says something like this to you, who wouldn’t buy it? So let’s see how Laphroaig tasted in the past, and if it was any good then 🙂 (please keep in mind this whisky is from 2001, you know a year we remember like it was last year).

Color: White wine.

Nose: Obviously this has the typical Islay traits. It smells like it will taste sweet. It has nice fat succulent and clean peat. The tar is there too, as well as the ash. Salty and fresh. The smoke or bonfire are very subdued in this. It’s in there but its further along the beach. I know this reads like a lot of Islay whiskies, but hey it’s from there, and we wouldn’t like our Laphroiag to smell as an Aberlour don’t we?  Sniffing this profile as a whole, I notice great balance. Everything is there and nothing overwhelms. It’s not only peat or herring or rubber for that matter. It’s immediately likeable. I like the nose very much. By the way, I know it seems strange to say you smell something sweet or salty since both are tastes and not smells, but just open a jar of sugar or a container with sea salt in it, both have a certain smell.

Taste: Sweet ‘n peat. Liquorice and tar on a rope in seawater. The fresh sea wind carries seaweed. Chewing gum? Lot’s of legs in the glass. It feels classic, but is that because of what Han said? The finish is ever so slightly bitter and ashy and slightly less balanced and less sweet than the top and the middle notes. That’s probably because of its youth.

Yeah! Laphroaig! This is stunning quality at 8 years old. Can you believe I only paid 40 Euro’s for this? That’s getting a lot for your money. It’s a bang-for-your-buck, just like the Laphroaig 10yo cask strength versions of yesteryear (green and red stripe versions). Last but not least, this whisky is uncolored and unchillfiltered.

Points: 88

The picture of the bottle is for a 6yo refill butt version, the reviewed whisky is lighter in color. Label is identical, just with some differences in the small print, you can’t read anyway.