Tastes

Scotland, September 2017. Whisky#13, distillery tasting. Nose: Earthy malt, faint honey, smoked ham, Airfix glue (!), tinned peaches, sandalwood. The cask influence is lightly aromatic rather than heavily oaky. Adding water brings forth more honey. There is some earthy peat and tobacco and a briny, maritime quality overall. Palate: Sweet cereal arrival, then a dry ginger and almost effervescent briny tang that is much nicer than it might sound. From the nose I was expecting something heavier on the palate but this is light and sprightly. A dash of water softens and melds it together beautifully (try it with a tiny splash of soda water or sparkling mineral water - so drinkable!). Finish: Long, mainly cereal with some sneaky, oily smoke threading about and a salty sweet aftertaste. Even a little licorice. Very smooth and rich but also light of touch. If Springbank 15 is an autumnal afternoon this is a brisk spring morning. "Very Good" : 85/100 (4 stars)

* Scotland, September 2017. Whisky #10. also * Sydney Balvenie whisky tasting night, 26 April 2018. Whisky #3. Nose: Sherry, caramel, vanilla, dark fruits, dusky orange, old rose, incense and apricot jam. Palate: A soft arrival with warm spices swimming in creamed honey. The development brings forth dried fruits (raisins, figs, medjool dates), sweet nuts (almonds, hazelnuts, macadamias), crème brûlée, soft oak, chocolate, and sweet milk coffee. Finish: Medium/long. Sherry, chocolate and creamy toffee. I first tasted this at a hotel bar in Scotland last year and whilst it was enjoyable it did not make a huge impression. However having re-tasted it tonight I was very pleasantly surprised. Maybe tasting it comparatively in a flight of 6 whiskies made the difference or maybe the dram at the bar was from an old opened bottle - who knows. This is very obviously the older and more poised brother of the 12 year double-wood. It is more complete and has a layered complexity that is not present in the 12 year old, but it is still cut from exactly the same cloth. The palate is similar but both spicier and smoother - very mellow and mature. It's altogether a more sophisticated dram and it is worth paying almost twice the price. Adding a little water brings out the sweet notes and puts emphasis on the vanilla aspect. A fine and satisfying representative Speysider of the sherried persuasion. "Very Good" : 85/100 (4 stars)

Scotland, September 2017. Whisky #9, distillery tasting. Nose: Smoky, oily fruit (grapefruit, peaches, lime), some brine. Palate: Smooth, rich and smoky. Fruity, but heavier than the nose - prunes and stewed fruit. Sherry, but subtle. An overall sweetness that is just right. Finish: Long. Chocolate, fruit and gentle smoke that lingers enticingly, beckoning you back for another dram. In my opinion this is the best Kilchoman expression to date and the first I've tasted that did not seem immediately too young. The citrus note can be a bit over-emphasized in their whisky for my taste, but here it is perfectly contained and balanced by the sherry cask influence. Great whisky with a masterful finish. Good value for money. "Very Good" : 86/100 (4 stars)

Scotland, 14 September 2017. Whisky #7 Distillery tasting. Nose: Lemon, vanilla, fruit and some bright oak. Palate: A continuation of the nose, and fairly similar to the 12 year old but sharper and more grippy, with a lot more spice including pepper and hot ginger. Finish: Short. Rather hot and spicy with a tannic aftertaste. Knowing this features virgin oak in the maturation you can't help but think of it as a NAS version of the 12 year old that has been force-matured by pumping up the wood influence. Too idiosyncratic for me - the spicy notes are over prominent with nothing hefty enough underneath to support them, which makes it come across as brash and young. A very "industrial" nose that made me think of what Glenrothes might be like without the sherry cask influence (shudder). I was glad to have tasted it, but I wouldn't buy it. "Average" : 75/100 (2.5 stars)

Scotland, 14 September 2017. Whisky #6. Nose: Faint cereal, citrus and a little oak. A yeasty hint. Palate: Fruity with some vanilla, but a bit thin in the body. Frankly I thought it was somewhat rough. Finish: Spicy and with an accompanying alcohol burn. Not much more to say. I tasted this at the distillery after a tour but I can't see myself ever buying it. It is generally well reviewed and popular and I wish I could support them more, but it's just not to my taste. UPDATE: January 2018. I sampled this again at a whisky shop tasting last night and took notes without referring to my previous review. My thoughts were much the same as before, but it did make a more favourable impression this time. I noticed the mild spiciness of the spirit more in the palate and did not find it so rough, but it is still far from a favourite. This whisky seems to be very popular but it just doesn't work for me, and I agree with the official Distiller rating of 79. “Average” : 79/100 (2.75 stars)

Scotland, September 2017. Whisky #4, distillery tasting. Nose: Clean barley malt, cider vinegar, fresh oak (virgin?), mild smoke. The nose is gentle and crisp with a cereal aromas taking the centre starge. Palate: Smoky, oily citrus, sourdough bread. Salted nuts, A little astringent with some burn if undiluted. With water considerable sweetness emerges and the texture gains body. Finish: Long. Ashy smoke and licorice. Water opens up the nose and unleashes the smoke and some waxy peat. With dilution the palate is tamed and some sweetness appears. A brisk up-front whisky that lets you know exactly what it's about from the first sniff. For me, Kilchoman expressions have yet to achieve the balance and depth of the older established Islay whiskies but they are very well made and always interesting. I do prefer their more overtly smoky whiskies, however, and even a little time in sherry casks seems to work wonders with this distillate. It is good when aged completely in bourbon, as here, but it can tend to be a little austere and brittle. "Good" : 84/100 (3.75 stars)

Scotland, September 2017. Whisky #1, distillery tasting. Nose: Barley sugar, fresh baked white bread rolls, and a crisp oak presence are the outstanding characteristics. Light and sweet fruity notes of apple, pear, peach and apricot. Palate: The arrival follows the nose quite closely, orchard fruit and cereal flavours. The development is limited to with grassy herbal notes emerging together with a creamier, oaty cereal flavour. The texture is OK. Finish: Short. Grassy sweet but with a mild sour tang, like a herbal tea. "Pleasant" is the best word to describe this whisky. There's nothing at all bad about it and plenty to enjoy, but on the other hand nothing about it is particularly impressive. It would be a good session whisky. The house character of Glengoyne is fruity sweet, but not as thickly layered as, say, Glen Moray. There is an elegant first-fill sherry strength in the older expressions, but not here. The 12 year old is much more about the influence of Heaven Hill bourbon casks. It's a good whisky at a reasonable price point and hard not to recommend, particularly for a novice who wants to try something slightly different to the "usual suspect" Speysiders. "Good" : 83/100 (3.5 stars)

Scotland, September 2017. Whisky #2, distillery tasting. Nose: A robust but elegant nose that features good sherry, vanilla, raisins, coffee, chocolate and dried mixed peel. There are also oak and spice notes but they form a more subtle backbone. There is complexity and the nose develops with time to rest and a drop or two of water. Palate: Full and large arrival with raisins, sultanas, figs, morello cherries, walnut skins and vine leaves. It’s a classic oloroso sherry palate. Spicy notes of ginger and cinnamon appear in the development with orange marmalade, toffee and cocoa. The texture is good. Finish: Medium/long. The big sherried palate morphs slowly into an herbal finale that is dry and slightly tannic. This is a rich, full bodied dram that has good heft and mouthfeel. It tasted to me very much like the big brother of Glengoyne 12 with all the same features present but rounded out and completed by an extra 6 years in quality sherry casks. I thought it had less in common with the Glengoyle 15 year. ADDENDUM - The above notes were based on a dram tasted at the distillery a week ago. Having just finished a miniature of it my opinion is still positive and has maybe even increased. It’s a poised, "classic" whisky that I'd particularly recommend to novice whisky drinkers who are ready to move on from introductory drams. However as much as I enjoyed it both times I have no desire to buy a bottle. "Very Good" : 85/100 (4 stars)

Whisky number 12 from the batch of 12 affordable blends I've been rating recently. End of the line, but we're finishing on a good note. Nose: Similar to Ballantine's Finest, its younger brother, but with a little more of everything. Malty, caramel and vanilla toffee (Jersey caramels), mellow buttery notes, fruity. Clean but sweet and with a hint of oak - very pleasant. Palate: Creamy sweet and rich honey/caramel arrival, fruity (stone fruits, stewed prunes, oranges), no smoke to speak of, except perhaps in the background of the grain component. Finish: Short. Sweet grains but a touch of oak tannin towards the end. All in all it's a value purchase and perfectly enjoyable neat or with a dash of water. I'd put this in the same league as Dewar's 12 year old. If I was being completely objective I'd probably rate this as 78-79/100, but I have a particular liking for this blend and I buy it a lot, so I'm increasing the score a little to put it in 3 star territory. For the money it really is good value. "Above Average" : 80/100 (3 stars)

Nose: Satisfying and integrated. Sweet and floral, but with an underpinning oily oakiness that is very appealing. At first it might seem too laid-back but I'd recommend allowing it to rest in the glass for at least 15 minutes. It will repay your patience with a nose that is akin to Green Label, but lower in intensity and with an admixture of very good grain. It's a more sophisticated nose than the Gold Label, which in comparison seems overly sweet. Palate: Rich and sweet, fruity, malty, some sherry. Quite complex with a foundation of some nice oily grain. A lovely mouthfeel. It seems to combine most everything that is in the Johnnie Walker catalogue of flavours. Finish: Soft and medium with lingering oak, honey and a touch of smoke, but also some sour/bitter notes - these seem to be characteristic of all Johnnie Walker blends. This is a little bit like Black Label, Blue Label and Gold Label blended together and turned up in intensity to produce a "blend that has everything". It does have a lot more going for it than the Gold Label Reserve, but the price is hard to justify as there are a number of malts that are the same price or cheaper. For the same price I can buy a bottle of Kilkerran 12 or Lagavulin 16. This and Blue Label are the show ponies of the JW grain blend range, but they do what they do in quite different ways. "Very Good" : 86/100 (4 stars)