Tastes

No complaints and enjoyable enough moderately sherried malt. Creamy is the primary descriptor that comes to mind. Unobtrusive but pretty basic, this one is for having a pour or 3 without thinking much about it. Affordable and sessionable, but also forgettable. Price point and proof are about right for that experience, so a lukewarm recommendation, but a recommendation nonetheless if that’s what you’re after. I won’t be buying a bottle but certainly wouldn’t turn down a pour if offered or when the selection was limited.

Alright, I’m out here starting fights tonight. I am not a distiller or blender, and acknowledge the murky waters which comprise my credentials… but I have emptied more than a few bottles over the years and did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so I feel righteous and qualified in making the the following claims: This is not re-seasoned sherry finished. This is not first fill sherry casked. This is not “oops a little sherry was left in the bottom of the barrel” dosed. This has to be just straight up blended with sherry. As in, I’d accept it easily if I were told it was 50/50. My bottle is looks purple brown and 3x darker than the Distiller picture (maybe some hyperbole), yet claims to be “natural color”. Perhaps they are being clever, since caramel colorant is indeed naturally derived… but this stuff might be darker than Goslings. Okay, rant over. Regarding the experience, I don’t find a lot on the nose and the palate doesn't quite "zing", but it is creamy and pleasantly malty, then brings orange, prune and fig. Marzipan and black walnut. Currant. Over-the-top rich, but the sweetness is well-moderated. Seems to have more kinship with well-aged and decadent rums (say Diplomatico with the sweetness cut in half) than other Scotches I am used to. There is a “bourbon-y” essence to it that surprises me - corn, oak, caramel, and vanilla. Is it legal to sneak a portion into new charred oak? Ultimately enjoyable to drink, inoffensive (beyond the suspicious opaque appearance), and a couple channels turned up to 11, I’ve enjoyed the bottle. I’m just not sure it’s worth a repurchase at > $60 given my penchant for musty and sulfuric sherry rather than lush and velvety Christmas pudding sherry. A decent drop, and I'd buy more if I could find it in the low $50s.

A deep straw that looks surprisingly oily with a swirl. Pedestrian nose, nothing jumps out. Gentle simple syrup, a freshly snapped green bean, hay - maybe a hint of orange. A burning grassland smoke makes a slow and subtle takeover toward the end. Some loam and chalk. Appreciating the nose a bit more than I did at first, but still ok at best. Starts very unassertive without much sweetness. Builds into a gentle vegetal spice which lingers pleasantly while the peat slowly rolls in like fog in the valley. Lemon oil. Earth. Some sips flash a bit sweeter, but only noticeable given the usual absence. This one is a bit perplexing. Mild and unassuming but competently crafted. Unremarkable yet lacks defects. I find myself reaching for this more than expected: a sessionable peated dram. The lack of sweetness without being “dry” or “tannic” is both the biggest oddity and most compelling facet because it feels like a rarity. 80 proof feels correct - it hasn’t got the DNA to be a complex flavor bomb… just a really decent option for an any-day sipper. At $30 MSRP it’s a reasonable value - I don’t think there is any competition that does peat this well. I saw this on sale at Total Wine for $23 and should have bought a case in hindsight - it’s just nice to have on hand.

Pretty bottle - I like the packaging. Nose is a little sharp, but has a delicious ripe banana and light brown sugar note. Edges toward butterscotch occasionally. On the palate, this sh*t is bananas. Loads of bananas. Actually dried banana chips - where the taste builds as they rehydrate and is super-concentrated, but not quite "pure" banana flavor as one would expect. Definitely some caramel notes evoke bananas foster. A pronounced sharp, tart, and tangy apricot never lets go. Replicates the experience of some of the more musky and sulphuric Scotches without replicating the actual flavors. Honey and some floral influences. A pinch of mace. Quite creamy, but not viscous. Pours near the end of the bottle have tempered the banana to a degree, but have introduced a subtle milk chocolate note that adds some roundness, alkalinity, and a much needed additional layer to the flavor. The finish lingers for minutes. Slowly softening into something halfway between juicy fruit and bubble gum, and a thin but resonant vein of barrel char paying its respects. I really enjoy this and will definitely purchase again. Extremely fruity and creamy, but not bashful and gives the taste buds a hard slap. Carries a pleasantly challenging semi-saccharine tang and spice. Is unambiguously different than anything else I’ve had to date. Has a clear note that screams “American Single Malt” and actually has been a bit of an "a-ha moment" for me finally identifying a characteristic young malt note common to many ASMs and malted ryes. I’m presuming that this is universal and that longer aging subdues this (thus I don’t find it much in typical single malt Scotches), but perhaps it is more an outcome of a style than duration in a barrel.

Side note: somewhat gratifying when you compile your tasting notes without reading any others on this site and when you go to post you see some similar flavors mentioned. Go taste buds! Neat. Glencairn. The nose is a close cousin to Knob Creek single barrel. The proof comes screaming out as cayenne-dusted corn. Lots of hay and musty barn wood, peanut brittle and bit of oak and barrel char. Appropriate for a bourbon like this but doesn’t quite stoke my fire. Palate is weighty. Definitely zippy but enjoyable neat. Initial wave is super dusty peanut shells, then sweetens nicely into honey water with cinnamon and char iodine. A bit of vegetal capsaicin and mint. Tingles and lingers nicely like an oak flavored cinnamon red hot. Seems to enhance the sweetness when left to air for a spell. Overall not terribly complex but pretty enjoyable corn syrup for grownups. Attempting to characterize this as an experience, it’s like the bougie high proof bourbon version of wandering into a Texas Roadhouse, skipping the steak and instead licking the peanut shells off a wood floor, biting a jalapeño, and then pounding the whole ramekin of that cinnamon honey butter and a scorching hot yeast roll. If that sounds like your kind of party I’d say grab a pour if you can still find one! Biggest knock is the significant price inflation for a bottle of bookers.

An appealing sienna color. Nose is middling - cherry cola and orange rind, but thrown off by a strong undercurrent of oat. Huge cherry on the palate. Caramel. Orange bitters. Oaky barrel notes are a tad heavy. Proof is nicely calibrated - just a twinge of spice. Well clear of the craft pack - no obvious flaws. Critiques are preferential only. I’d sip this anytime for a reasonable price.

A1 (Effingham IL) store pick. 106 proof. Finished in bourbon barrels that previously aged maple syrup. Pleasant and unmistakeable bourbon nose. No ethanol but unremarkable. A net positive. Sharp palate right off the bat and doesn’t ever settle down. Maple syrup is front and center, but nothing about the source bourbon stands out as enjoyable. A clear cut above bottom shelf stuff, so respectable for a craft distillery, but isn’t aided by the elevated proof or relative youth. Some promise here but I wouldn’t buy this bottle or order a pour on purpose.

A pleasantly deep honeyed color with an orange hue. Not much viscosity – thin and generally lacking legs. Orange juice, medicinal smoke, clover honey, watercress, raw barley, and a hint of mushroom. A clear sweetness that pulls things together. Nosing stays sharp regardless of how much you return to it, but definitely still pulls you back in. Some petrichor brings familiarity and comfort. Opens with sweetness building back into the orange juice, followed by bitter rind. Honestly getting sweet orange bitters (Fee Brothers?) before the underlying phenols blossom. A touch of cooked carrot and coriander, but generally a persistent, tangy sweetness. Bell pepper. A bit like burning grassland. Some playful floral notes and honey show themselves throughout. Honestly the freshly-cracked bottle started a little too sharp, but that settled out in pretty short order after a quarter of the bottle was gone. Can’t say this was explicitly worth $100, but it is a quality dram – well made and pretty tasty, and I'd say it is unique vs. Islay peat albeit in subtle ways. I know I won’t see this edition again, but I also won’t be afraid to take the plunge on future releases given what this one offered.

Dank bottle aesthetic - keep it coming. Flips the bird to the run of the mill corporate marketing department. A pale straw in the glass. Weak legs but a smidge of oil to the liquid. A bit of a floral+chemical nose with a muted vanilla undercurrent. It doesn’t nose harshly, but nevertheless usually forces me out after a solid huff, confirming the youth. Hint of prune, but hard to place overall. A bit of paint thinner. Not a killer, but surely not a selling point. Thin, but retains a tease of oily texture. A light vanilla opening reminiscent of recent experiences with Toki or Hatozaki. Those prune notes eventually return as the spice and saccharides gradually build. Carries a pervasive mustiness that I like to characterize as “oat” but clearly is young barley and has this creamy starch to it that’s hard to embrace. The floral character often roars like a dragon, then disappears. And every now and then you can catch a distinct vein of smoke, but it is impish and only shows itself every seventh sip. The plum liqueur finish definitely sets this apart and creates a reason for the palate to be intrigued, but tragically doesn’t seem to ever quite arrive at desirable. While this is drinkable, it isn’t really up my alley. I’m all for supporting American single malt but I think this bottling has been overbilled. It is serviceable and I’d have a pour on a whim, but I’m not sure why I’d ever purchase another bottle. There are more than enough established and composed single malt options around this price range that ultimately just provide a more enjoyable experience.

Batch 5. 112.3 proof. 100% rye mash, a low 110 entry proof, NCF, locally-sourced barrel wood, and an 18-month age statement. Quite an unusual combination brought to you exclusively by the craft distilling movement. A deep chestnut brown, despite the age. The venerable @robertwayne64024 notes undersized casks were used and that would almost have to be the case given the color and flavor. Current listings from the distillery note 5+ years, so I’m speculating that my bottle predates the switch to fully-aged stock (which is likely matured in standard casks). Despite bottling at cask strength, the low barrel entry point leaves the final proof quite modest by today’s standards, but I’m still wary of youth+proof. It is, however, surprisingly nose-able and it really can’t drive me out. Vanilla and maple come right out of the gate to cross-check your olfactory holes like Kris Letang. Butterscotch and char. A quick line change brings lacquer, oak, and cinnamon spice. Clean, bright, and young. It dances around a vegetal spicy chili influence, but ultimately sticks closest to the sweet baking notes supplied by the barrel. Pleasant. The opening is quite gentle and ancillary to sweet desserts but lacks the actual sugars, then settles pleasantly into a thin but lasting caramel. Abruptly, the rather demure opening falls away, and rye spice rushes in to bloom on the palate, bringing a drying astringency, vanilla again, an approachable cooked serrano, simple syrup, more char, and morphs into a finish defined by that astringency and a lingering medicinal note somewhere between licorice, gentian, and anise. Correction - it is definitively fennel, which is actually pleasant enough but I’d expect to land a bit out of mainstream preferences. Calls to mind my dad’s “Tom’s of Maine” fennel toothpaste from my childhood. Honestly… this is really dang good. It is assertive and memorable and not mainstream, and 90% of that is a good thing. Pretty mind-blowing the amount of flavor, barrel, and character they captured for something so young. Low entry proof, small casks, NCF and cask strength is really a great concept to let quality distillate and the unaltered rye shine, resulting in a respectable body and mouthfeel that belie its youth, and show off the distinctive and appealing features of rye that other common whisky grains can’t replicate. This is pretty impressive for the price paid - not sure what MSRP is for the updated version. Ultimately I’d still lean toward an affordable stalwart with a touch more centrist appeal, like Pikesville, but would recommend this to about anybody. I hope the fully-aged replacement is even better, and I will purchase to find out.