Tastes

Makers is easy-going and enjoyable for me without ever feeling the need for much analysis. To date, I have not found much enjoyment in MM cask strength - it seems to turn the flaws to 11 without a similar boost to the enjoyable parts. I do, however, give it a solid A for cost - there are very few cask strength options available in that price range. Enter MM101… oozing potential that it could be an improved and elegant version of the flagship offering, but risking stepping over the line toward the imbalance of the cask strength. So, naturally, let’s amp the proof do some analysis! A vegetal simple syrup on the nose. Cooked bell peppers and a hint of anise. Corn. Toasted bread. Not too dynamic, it just keeps coming back with the same notes. Very easy to nose - no ethanol spice. Altogether not bad, but not captivating either. Time and oxygen mellow all this - deeper into the bottle the nose trends closer to caramel corn, but doesn’t lose its vegetal edge. The palate offers a strikingly minty pour - this might be a bottled julep. It keeps that vegetal/grassy note I find in all Makers but is amplified with proof - overwhelming in the cask strength, subtle undertone at 45%. But then maple syrup enters the chat. Caramel. Vanilla. Lactose. Hot honey. Mint creme (think Andes without chocolate). The proof is right on with this one, achieving a very nice balance of spice and sweet, but it does not obscure that vegetal DNA in any way. If it works for you, dive in - this is pretty vibrant for $30. If that gives you pause, steer clear of MM with an elevated proof. I usually find myself in the latter category but this isn’t offensive by any measure and mellows quite nicely with time and air, regressing toward more traditional bourbon flavors.

Pale yellow with a nondescript weight. Citrus, peat, and cereal malt define the nose, which carries a modest sharpness. Some chalk. An undercurrent of floral vegetation. Smoke is fairly muted on the nose in my opinion, masked into a more complicated experience. Starts sweet and mild, showcasing a malty palate dominated by vanilla and citrus, but quickly evolves into alkalinity/ash and eventually finish affirmatively on the dry side. The smoke is much more prominent on the palate than the nose. I want to say it shares a kinship with the maritime salty lemon curd styles, but takes a definite turn on its way to the alkaline finale. On the whole, this Jekyll & Hyde experience is complimentary, provides much appreciated complexity, and is pretty rewarding. Not a lot of benefit in reviewing a discontinued product, but I’ve enjoyed this bottle start to finish and think it’s a very fair value below $55.

A surprisingly dark brown “natural color”. Very oak forward and modestly sweet, which gives a strong impression of bourbon but without the bite of youth. Oak first, then sherry, then spirit. Musty. Yeasty. Vanilla, apricot, sweet corn, graham cracker. Roasted marshmallow. Cranberry, chocolate, and hazelnut. Subtle sour fruits merge with a heavily toasted creme brulee. More yeast, peaches, and loads of chocolate. Definitely a dessert dram that lacks any sort of spice to balance that all out, but the focus on richness, alkaline notes, and buttery texture over candy sweetness and fresh fruits is clearly intentional and is executed well. I don't think it stands out at $60 but if that profile sounds appealing its definitely worth a go in the low $50s or below.

Mostly malty on the nose. A splash of baked goods and mildly herbal edge. Could be some green apple, but if so, it’s hidden under layers of dry pastry. A whiff of earth. The slightest hint of smoke but hard to tell if that’s imagined - either way it tamps any remaining fruitiness from the nose. Far more savory than sweet. Nice weight for a ten year. Malt again carries the day. Unsweetened white chocolate. Oak and some astringent tannins present themselves. Classic speyside fruit is hidden somewhere under the surface but is locked away by other elements in the profile, like the flavor of apple skins without the juicy sweet flesh. Smoke is definitely there on the taste, which makes this unique, but I find it unbalances rather than interests the palate. The dryness, astringency, and phenols create a lasting finish but not one I particularly crave. Not totally objectionable, but I have a sweet tooth and this doesn’t so much of anything for me personally. Closest comparable is Aerstone Land Cask and that was $20 cheaper - can’t recommend, especially at MSRP (which is more than what I paid).

Butterscotch blast right up front. Vanilla. Pear. Hints of cotton candy. Something floral - maybe honeysuckle and a waft of jasmine. You could nose this until your lungs gave out with only the barest hint of ethanol which is surprising at 100 proof. Not mind-blowing, but overall is whimsical, sweet and pleasant. The palate is kettle corn drizzled with salted caramel and a hint of cayenne. Vanilla. Crisp red table grape that vaguely offers some fruity essence but ends up mostly just being a juicy fructose sweetness. Apple juice (but not oxidized cider). An edge of that sweet but tangy cereal/peach/apricot youthful barley distillate that is all over many American single malts, but is incorporated into the whole competently. That floral note makes its way over too, maybe some rosewater. Sweet American whiskey notes are front and center, layered over a well-executed, well-proofed, briney distillate. Youth is notable, but doesn’t detract from the experience and in my opinion this doesn’t taste “too young”. Extremely pleasant and easy to sip despite the proof - well, perhaps because of the proof, which saves it from straying toward monotone with a little rough edge. Sugar. Butter. Salt. Fruit. Floral. You could do worse. While this may come up short of many flagship age-stated Scotches, I’ve only gotten a few for $40 that I’d prefer to this. At $50 the competition is fiercer. It seems to share more kinship with American single malt and good luck finding too many that are better. A great value at $40. You do you at $50. Pass at $60.

A deep orangey amber. Oily legs. Nose is pleasant. Smells pretty sweet. Citrus rind - somewhere between orange and lemon. Cereal malt. Freshly baked scone. Almond. Cream. Good viscosity. Seems to incorporate the salted lemon curd of Old Pulteney 12 and musty sherry of Glenfarclas 12. Fig. Candied orange peel. 60% dark chocolate. Brine. Kettle corn. Finish lingers well and brings a touch of black pepper to join the saccharine notes. Definitely found in the dessert aisle and my sweet tooth could drink this anytime. The brine and weight on the palate are the features that make this a bit unique from other bottles with similar flavors. Only complaint here is the price point on the upper end for a 12 year but I may be a bit of a cheapskate. Comparable price to Glendronach 12 but I like this one better (sweet over spice). Will seek out their peated versions if the price isn’t outrageous… considering I am a Talisker fan I’d bet I will enjoy those too.

This tastes like a bottled cocktail. It essentially is a bottled cocktail. If you were to approach this expecting an old fashioned made with a silky, balanced, standout bourbon and heavy dashes of orange bitters, I think you’d be pretty pleased. At 110 proof, sipped neat at room temperature, it drinks like a diluted cocktail, which is pretty bonkers and a clear sign of quality distillate and skillful aging. The orange is heavy-handed, but I certainly don’t hate the final experience. It is prominent and trends toward candied orange or a rock & rye, but again: think cocktail. I remember a generally tepid response when this came out. If there was a problem with this release, it was conceptual: while the rabid American whiskey fanbase has come to understand they’ll get something unique from the Parker’s line, they still crave the idea of an exemplary, unadulterated, and authentic whiskey experience. This is an experimental take that is actually pretty nice (to my tastes) but stepped over an informal line for such a highly-anticipated limited release. I can understand why this had a lukewarm reception with many who felt cheated when they finally luck into the rare opportunity to get their hands on a flagship name brand allocated release, only to find that it’s such a departure from their expectations and much harder to brag about to their bourbon buddies (regardless of whether rare bottles are actually a “better” product or not). I enjoy this and it’s likely even worth MSRP (~$90), but don’t begrudge those that feel differently. I think this would have been best as a one-off limited release at $60-$70, but Heaven Hill is certainly doing just fine without my unsolicited advice and it’s possible that consensus has gradually shifted over the past couple years to accept this one as an adventurous but worthy endeavor.

Just… wow. Stays true enough to the profile to be readily identifiable as a Bookers, but clearly so much more even from the first taste. Rich spiced cherry is the most prominent to me. Corn. Caramel. Dusty chaff and barn oak. Nutmeg. Dark chocolate. Each taste starts gentle and sweet and the flavor builds slowly and steadily, evolving into a crescendo of flavor and spice. That gentle start helps it drink well below the proof without sacrificing any flavor. Even poured blind, I’d bet many more folks than usual could tell that they were tasting something pretty special. Awesome stuff.

My first Aberlour. Product styling carries a very intentional old school gravitas with the raised lettering on the bottle and oversized neck,which I am drawn to. Nice deep orange color. Nose is pretty monotone - orange rind and a licorice/anise note. A touch of oak. Perhaps dry curaçao and cola. Gentle and could nose for days, but carries a slight medicinal note that knocks it down a notch. Palate seems to favor the bourbon casks and leave sherry to such a subtle role that it skews instead of complements, which surprises me given the color and my preconceived notions of Aberlour sherry-bombs. Orange rind. Vanilla-infused sugar. Anise. Loads of honey. Cinnamon. Dark chocolate. Drambuie. A vein of cherry cough syrup. Couldn’t place it at first but there’s a strong floral component, both orange blossom and rosewater. Medium finish featuring the licorice again. Didn't notice the first time around but you may get a very prominent black coffee/tobacco note, which ain't terrible but definitely earthy and alkaline. Nothing bad… just nothing that beings me back in for more. The flavors are composed and pretty direct, just not overly enjoyable. If you have a better appreciation for anise this might be up your alley.