Tastes

Nose: Rich, oily and malty mainly due to a hefty and obvious proportion of Clynelish. We're off to a good start. Citrus fruits and a touch of smoke. Palate: Sweet light honey, citrus flavours, beeswax, red fruits and cereal. A very clean and fresh delivery that is just slightly maritime (again, Clynelish). A delicious mouthfeel that becomes sweeter in the development. Juicy & zesty. Finish: Medium long, satisfying and sweet but the late finish tails off into a waxy, resinous place that has some sourness in attendance. This was the only real negative aspect. The grain whisky component is very good. Overall it compares well to single malts and blends in this price bracket. It is quite delicious and yes not as good as the old 18 year Gold Label, but really not that far short. The difference is mainly a lack of some authority from very good oak in the 18 year old and some complex spiciness that is missing. The dry glass is smoky with a touch of fragrant, floral honey. Water is not needed but a couple of drops does not hurt - the profile remains intact but is fractionally softer and it blooms slightly. "Good" : 84/100 (3.75 stars)

Nose: Lightly fruity with soft peach, pear, apple, citrus and a little vanilla. You can certainly smell good oak at work and there is that distinctive ethanol nose from grain whisky. Palate: Featuring exactly the same elements as the nose, the arrival is soft and fruity then turning mildly spicy in the development as a little ginger shows up. Finish: Short, but there are some lingering oak notes. The spicy/peppery kick from the development flows through into the finish. This was the first Compass Box whisky I tried and to begin with I was not much impressed. It seemed thin and lacking in both the nose and palate at first, however over time I came to appreciate it. I didn't like this so much neat but when used as a mixer the spicyness and oak notes give the spirit body and stop it being overpowered. In a highball this is not unlike some Japanese blended whiskies, with a subtle but slightly spicy character that is refreshing and enjoyable. There is also a floral note that emerges when it is diluted. It's very classy and different to most traditional "old-school" blended scotch in that it has a fresh and uncomplicated character. It reminded me of a cleaner and more zesty Ballantine's Finest. The only issue is the price, which puts it in the same league as some good middle-shelf single malts. If you are looking for an impressive and sophisticated whisky to use primarily or exclusively as a mixer this would be a good choice, but don't expect it to be heavy or richly flavoured - quality, refinement and elegance are the keywords. "Good" : 83/100 (3.5 stars)

Nose: Orchard fruits, vanilla, light honey, faint notes of violets and rose, but very gentle, soft and understated. The dry-glass aroma is of sweet honey and is surprisingly reminiscent of Highland Park 12, but without that whisky's subtle smoke or complexity - a sort of "Highland Park lite". Palate: Vanilla, malt, cereal and honey. Very sweet and juicy but quite light in character. Some nuttiness. Finish: Medium-short. It trails off into faint woody notes. There is a pleasant warming aspect to the finish as well. Overall this is a very soft and shy whisky bottled at the minimum ABV. Water is not required to enjoy it, but it does bring out a touch more depth in the palate. If adding water only a few drops are required. As a mixer with soda it makes a refreshing and light aperatif, but with anything else it is a little understated. Interestingly, its sweetness makes it reminiscent of bourbon when mixed with coke or in coffee. This is not a challenging or deep whisky, but it is a light, pleasant everyday dram that is comparable to the better blends in this price bracket. If I had to choose between a bottle of this or the Compass Box Great King St Artists Blend it would be a tough call. A solid three stars and good value at the price. UPDATE - As this whisky oxidises it gains richness and depth in the fruit flavours. The array of orchard fruits turns into a whole market stall of tropical fruits - banana, guava, mango, pineapple ... quite delicious, but not subtle and very sweet. If you have a sweet tooth this is a great value inexpensive malt, however if you don't it will seem much too sickly-sweet and cloying. "Above Average" : 80/100 (3 stars)

Nose: Barely perceptible - lighter than either Cutty Sark or J&B. Nothing but ethanol with the faintest wisps of generic "whisky" aroma. Palate: Hah! You call this a palate? I call it the taste of regret. Once again it's just ethanol with some faint whisky-ish flavour. It's like someone took a bottom shelf scotch and watered it down with industrial alcohol to the point where you can hardly taste anything. Finish: Mercifully fleeting. Faintly sour, metallic and bitter with no discernible character at all. This stuff may have 3 year old grain whisky at the heart (well, it has to, doesn't it?) but its personality has devolved into nothing more than "essence of dead cask". It is a huge disappointment and a mere shadow of its once powerful self. There was a time when this had a bold and assertive smoky character from start to finish and it was my affordable mixer of choice, but sadly those days are gone. A few years ago the brand was purchased, along with several other properties, by Beam Suntory who immediately changed the blend, the packaging and the character of the whisky. The words "Distilled, blended and bottled in Scotland" once appeared proudly on the label. Now it just says "Product of Scotland" which infers that it is shipped in bulk and bottled at the market destination. I'm giving it half a star on the assumption that it doesn't contain methanol. UPDATE: Re-reviewed 11May18. I took the risk and bought a bottle of this a year after my initial review to see if it had improved at all. It has not, in fact it has deteriorated. In comparison to this, Johnnie Walker Red is nectar. One last note: I know from experience that there are blends that are much worse here in Australia than overseas - presumably we don't actually get the real McCoy in these cases. Grant's, Black Bottle and others are like this so it's possible that Teacher's might be alright in the UK but appalling over here. "Very Poor" : 59/100 (0.75 stars)

Nose: Sweetly fruity, but not overbearing – fresh and clean. Oranges and lemons and very faint pineapple with a whiff of boiled sweets, all held together by some very sophisticated oak which is also quite crisp. It's not a dense or particularly complex nose but it has the authority of maturity while still retaining the sprightliness of youth. Palate: A fruity, juicy citrus and apple arrival with some spice (ginger, mild cinnamon). As it develops the juicy citrus turns into mandarin, orange and apricot flavours with light honey. Like the nose it’s not particularly complex or robust but it is elegantly simple in the best way and has a pleasant creamy texture. Finish: Medium. It fades into light honey sweetness, but it isn't syrupy. The aftertaste has fresh, clean oak. A very smooth and enjoyable whisky with adroit handling of the sherry maturation. Certainly not a sherry bomb, but a showcase of good casks. Not at all a difficult whisky to appreciate but neither is it bland and there are hidden depths to explore. It develops very nicely in the glass where over time the nose blooms with pleasant oak aromas and the smooth juicy palate gains authority. There is a similarity in many ways to Glenfiddich 18 year old, but this is definitely superior. It is arguably the best, and most affordable, of the mild fruity style 18-year Speyside expressions. Recommended, particularly for newcomers who you want to encourage, but not challenge. Do not add water to this whisky. It does not need it, and water simply dilutes the experience without bringing out anything extra. "Very Good" : 85/100 (4 stars)

Nose: Vanilla, toffee, fruits and spice - all enjoyable but a tad too generic. Palate: Vanilla, toffee,fruit and spice again. Finish: Short, but smooth and refined. This is very much a whisky cut from the same cloth as the cheaper Johnnie Walker Blenders' Batch Red Rye Finish blend. That whisky has a strong bourbon/rye character, particularly on the palate, but although the story is essentially the same here everything is elevated to a higher level and the result is more subtle. The cheaper Blender's Batch Rye is more obviously bourbon/rye influenced, particularly in the palate, and is priced at a point where it is a valid alternative to many bourbon, rye and scotch blends that will primarily or exclusively be used as mixers. However this whisky is up against the likes of Compass Box blends, Johnnie Walker Double Black, Glen Grant 10 year old, etc. It's a tough market point and at that price there is not actually a lot to recommend it. For a few bucks more you can buy JW Green Label, and that's the real issue - who would buy it in preference to the alternatives? Nice enough stuff but overpriced as a mixer, and lacking the finesse of a whisky you'd want to drink neat. "Good" : 83/100 (3.5 stars)

Nose: Phenols, tar, brine, ash and light wafts of citrus. A really wonderful nose of clear, uncluttered peaty smokiness underpinned by subtle fruit complexity. Palate: The peat appears first and has a very fresh coastal character - brine, seaweed, smoked herring and driftwood. The peat-reek is complimented and balanced by fruity, nutty and cereal flavours and some really excellent oak. there is never a hint of bitterness, sourness or plasticy peat. Finish: Long. Smoky, salty and finally sweet and gentle in the aftertaste. This masterful blended malt is the equal of many smokey single malts, and in all honesty I prefer it to some of the iconic expressions. John Glaser is a skilled blender and this is one of his best creations. I get why they named it The Peat Monster for marketing reasons but it's actually a misleading name - there is certainly heaps of peat but it's by no means a monster, it's far too elegant. NOTE: After having a bottle of this open for several months, and now about half-full, I have noticed a slight waxy sour tinge develop on the palate. This expression contains about 13% Caol Ila (of unspecified age) and it's interesting that a tendency towards waxy sourness is something I have noticed with several Caol Ila expressions as they oxidize, so maybe that is the cause here as well? It doesn't spoil the whisky, and is somewhat corrected by adding a dash of water, but it is definitely noticeable. "Very Good" : 85/100 (4 stars)

Nose: Very typical "workhorse" blended scotch - a strong ethanol aroma from the youthful grain whisky plus some slight notes of interest from a small percentage of malt. Vanilla and a definite baked cereal aroma (that's the rye influence). There is a hint of oak on the nose, but it lacks depth. Palate: Dominated by a flavour rather like ginger-nut cookies and very strong sweetness. This sweet character is it's undoing, as it's not a soft honey sweetness, but rather like straight-up sugar which becomes a bit cloying after a couple of drams. In the same way that Double Black is like Black Label engineered with a liberal dose of smoke on top, this is like Red Label blinged-up with a lot of rather safe rye aromas & flavours. Finish: Very short. Not much happens at all. Having run out of mixing whisky I picked up a bottle of this at the local liquor shop today. I'd noticed it on the shelves for a while but never got around to trying it before. In a nutshell, it's a different spin on Red Label. I can see what the blenders were aiming for, but to me it lacks the simple honesty of Red Label (which I don't mind at all as a mixer) and tries to gain complexity from the sweetness. It also sacrifices the fruity and slightly smoky notes of Red Label. IMHO they would have been better off giving it some hot spice in the finish instead of so much sweetness. This is probably a good mixing whisky for introducing bourbon drinkers to scotch. The nose is scotch with hints of bourbon, and the palate is bourbon with hints of scotch. "Adequate" : 74/100 (2.25 stars)

Nose: Rich, fruity, sherry-laden and nuanced. An oily and fruity aroma and some good oaky notes. Palate: Honey, fruit, wafts of smoke, and an underpinning oiliness. Very balanced. You can genuinely taste the interplay of Talisker and Caol Ila that is the defining character of this whisky. Finish: Medium long, the developed character fades away with no surprises. A great and dependable blended malt that is a perfect example of what a blended malt should be - a stage to show off the best aspects of all the contributing malts, whilst simultaneously making a statement by melding those contributors into a whole that has its own character. What a great dram. This is a shining star of the JW range. Black Label is the benchmark affordable blend, but here they really get down to business. Buy with confidence - it is realistically priced at a similar point to the lower-tier Compass Box range, and is just a little more than Monkey Shoulder & Naked Grouse. In Australia the recommended retail price is $85, but it's regularly available for around $65. ADDENDUM - I continue to be impressed by the most recent expressions of Green Label. The recipe has changed in comparison to what it was a decade ago, but there is nothing at all wrong with the current style. If you are traveling and want to know a sure, safe and reliable bet for your duty-free allowance I couldn't think of anything to top it. "Very Good" : 85/100 (4 stars)

Nose: Sweet malt with a hint of oak and citrus notes - sweet orange? Honey notes as well. The nose does not develop much at all. Palate: The arrival is soft with sweet malt, honey and fruit. It's somewhat reserved and shy but very pleasant and the development sees vanilla spongecake with butterscotch cream filling emerge, and there are some peach slices and cream on the side. Finish: Medium. Cereal sweetness. A perfectly acceptable, if not hugely characterful whisky. I believe this is, or was, the top selling malt in Scotland for a long time and I can see why. It is a great session whisky and also a good one to serve to a novice because it is eminently approachable but not bland or dull. The friendly fruity and cereal profile is well crafted and it represents value. More experienced palates will, however, find this malt unsatisfying. It is obviously well made and faultlessly clean, but there is nothing for the enthusiast to discover below the surface. The price is reasonable but it is up against some tough competition including Highland park 10 and Glen Grant 10. "Above Average" : 80/100 (3 stars)