Tastes

Nose: Full-bodied fruity and wine aromas, modulated by some excellent wood (cedarwood and sandalwood in particular). Stewed fruit compote of apples, pears and cranberries. Honey, orange water and an elusive almost-but-not-quite ashy quality which is most likely coming from what were probably very lightly toasted wine casks. There is a rich, encompassing quality to this nose that brings you back repeatedly. It’s also not a thousand miles away from the profile of Highland Park, which is never a bad thing, and adding water creates an explosion of honey and orange making the similarity even more distinct. An outstanding nose. Palate: Full but soft arrival, with some delicate spices (sweet ginger) and fragrant herbs dancing over honey and fruit flavours. The texture is voluminous, velvety and very satisfying. Porridge with salt, cream and fresh berries in the development which transitions to softly drying tannins towards the finish. The wine notes are present again contributing sweet and fractionally bitter aspects to the foundation. With water the palate gains a luxurious aspect that makes it dangerously compelling. An excellent palate. Finish: Long. Quiet and subtle spices, honey, sweet citrus notes and freshly prepared weak rose-hip tea. There is the faintest possible citric note in the aftertaste. Water does nothing to damage the finish, in fact I thought it actually made it longer and more languid. This is a re-taste, thanks to @DrRHCMadden. I initially tried this whisky six months ago but that tasting was from a 15ml virtual tasting session sample that was shipped in a plastic “juice bag” (we need to express our dissatisfaction with those gizmos - they are a wretched way to treat good spirits). If you can be bothered reading that review (it appears below) you’ll note that my comments are almost the same as before, but more enthusiastic now. This sample, which was provided in a proper 30ml glass sample jar, is clearly superior in every way. The finish in particular is significantly better and as this was my only big reservation previously I’m delighted to be able to revise my former score upwards. This time round the whisky seems much fresher, more alive and notably richer and more buttery/creamy. There is not the slightest sign of heat when it is neat (at 53.5%) and I did not feel the need to add water. However given the generous tasting dram I was able to split it into two glasses and taste them neat and diluted in comparison. Both glasses were delightful. As it sits and evolves in the glass this whisky draws more and more towards Highland Park in profile, and I would almost equate it in quality with HP18 year old, so I’m scoring it accordingly. “Excellent” : 88/100 (4.5 stars) ------------------------------------------------------------- Previous review, originally posted October 21, 2022 Nose: Fruity malt, white wine, tropical fruit, aromatic wood (cedar, sandalwood and teak), orange blossoms, cointreau and liqueur de poire. A richly enticing nose. Palate: Sweet and rounded arrival with the pears from the nose recalled and floating on a sea of gristy cereal and malt. Some tannin appears in the development, but it is not overdone, and it is balanced by a mélange of citrus, dried tropical fruit and sweet herbal tea. The texture is full, mouth-coating and satisfying. Finish: Medium/long. Some baking spices appear in the later palate and persist into the finish, accompanied by fresh and dried fruit flavours and a note of leathery honey. The citrus and tea flavors from the palate become a little over-emphasized in the aftertaste, leading to final sourness. A very pleasing single malt – I’m glad I tasted this after the Arran Bordeaux Oak expression because this is clearly the superior dram. The nose on this is worth 5 stars and is mostly composed of light fruit and malt aromas but they are given depth and interest by the excellent supporting cask notes. The palate is not far behind, well balanced at first and playing off those same light fruit notes against darker dried fruits, oak, malt and oak. However I find a fault in the late finish where it seemed to me to lose control and a sour, woody, citric note becomes overly apparent. Tasted from a 15ml sampler. “Good” : 84/100 (3.75 stars) -----------------------------------------------------------

Nose: Eucalyptus, straw, stone fruits, daisies, briny cereal, tumeric, cumin and resinous cask. It’s an unusual nose with a slightly maritime quality. A dash of water mutes the brighter herbal and oak notes and lets the dusky, almost sandalwood-scented red wine casks speak more clearly. Palate: Pears, cereal (corn flakes? wheat flakes?), a hint of red wine, sour cherries, raisins, bitter orange peel. The texture is creamy initially but it loses density and eventually seems thin when taken neat, but once again a dash of water improves the dram by re-establishing the creamy texture and providing integration. Finish: Short. Leafy, walnut skins, pine resin fading to a bitter oak note when neat, sweeter and more balanced with water. This is a somewhat odd whisky that the local whisky press are praising, but just a bit too much I think. When tasting it for the first time I noticed occasional similarities to both Limeburners and Auchentoshan and I’m not the biggest fan of either distillery, however over time it has grown on me, particularly as a whisky for mixing. In my opinion it is also significantly better with a dash of water and a short time in the glass to rest. I’ve been following Manly Spirits since they first opened their doors and there is a lot of passion and talent at the distillery. Their gins, flavoured vodkas and liqueurs are very good indeed, but David’s dream is single malt. They produced several initial expressions at the end of 2021, all of which were interesting but none really grabbed me, and then more recently this Nor’easter appeared. For me it is a step in the right direction, and although there is still a way to go I would not be at all surprised if they suddenly brought out something very good in 3-5 years time. Worth a taste, but beware the dreaded Australian 500ml bottle size. Grrr. “Above Average” : 82/100 (3.25 stars)

Nose: Apples, pears, oatmeal, a waft of honeyed-vanilla, basil, thyme, a tiny hint of chimney soot and some weak black tea. There is a prickly alcohol nip and a definite, but quiet, sherry component. Over time the honey and sherry notes enlarge, but overall this nose left me feeling unsatisfied. It’s good, but very shy and more like that of an average blended scotch than a single malt. In fact, the older age statement Dewars scotches are better. Palate: Soft arrival, with orchard fruits and some red berries but the foundation is quite malty and dark with an earthy quality. I guess that’s the sherry casks (oloroso for sure) coming through with a leafy, vegetative, umami quality. Gentle notes of powdered ginger and pepper show up in the later development together with just a little tannin, bitter black coffee and walnuts. The texture is nice, but nothing to make a fuss about. Finish: Medium/short. Leafy. Cereal grist with a mild bitter spice flourish in the finish. Much ado about nothing, really. It’s certainly a capable malt and there are no flaws to speak of, but … exceptional? Nah. Maybe they meant the casks were exceptionally safe and ordinary? Adding even just a few drops of water kills the nose. It makes the palate less intense but that does allow the sherry casks to show through more clearly. I’m struggling to find something else positive to say about this malt and frankly I’m struggling to finish the dram. It’s just so … boring. This was a fairly limited release (4,800 bottles 4 years ago) so you probably won’t find a lot of it around. I certainly won’t be searching out a bottle. Originally it sold for AUD$140 which was steep at the time, and currently the few bottles I could track down online are selling for $200 and over. It's just not worth that much. “Average” : 79/100 (2.75 stars)

Nose: Luscious sherried dark fruits, brown sugar, dark honey, old oak, orange liqueur, strawberry jam, baked apple tart with spices (cinnamon and allspice), fresh raisin scones. With time it gains a lighter, sweeter quality (milk chocolate, butterscotch and caramel) and the aromas integrate while some light peppermint and anise aromas waft in. Very, very satisfying. Palate: An excellent arrival – exquisitely poised between sweet, earthy, deeply fruity and oaky. Christmas cake and Christmas pudding galore in the development. Butterscotch, chocolate, caramel, toffee, cherry and almond liqueurs and just a suggestion of salmiak (wow!). Lots of oak in the background but the tannins are superbly soft and the texture is luscious, opulent, chewy and chocolaty. Finish: Long. Dark fruit and chocolate float out of sight on a wave of sherry. Some busy spices in the aftertaste and a dry finale. After the last whisky I tasted (the slightly disappointing Craggenmore 1999/2020 special edition) I though I’d turn to a trusty old campaigner, and Tamdhu did not let me down. The official Distiller tasting notes nail it and there’s not much more I can add. Tasted from a 30ml sampler [bottle ordered]. "Very Good" : 87/100 (4.25 stars)

Nose: (neat) Cereals, dusty malt and an ethanol hit that tweaks the nose on first nosing. Vanilla, oak and pears in the back but it’s hard to get past the alcohol. It’s not tight, just intense. After a few minutes resting in the glass it calms down a bit and a deeper nosing is possible, at which point you get a lot of oak aromas. Nose: (watered) Dilution does not change the profile a great deal, but it does ease the alcohol intensity. The cereals are baked now rather than raw, and there are some banana aromas, but that’s the only significant change. Even with 30 minutes rest after dilution this did not present much that was new. Palate: (neat) Sweet cereals, oatmeal, vanilla pudding with sultanas and tinned fruit. Some pineapple chunks in milk chocolate in the development. The texture is full and oily but there is that heat again. It builds but it’s not exactly what I’d call spicy – it's just plain alcohol heat biting the tongue. Palate: (watered) Like the nose the palate is not significantly different when diluted. The arrival is a touch softer and more rounded, the mouth-feel is creamier and for a second or two you expect the heat of the neat nose to have been conquered. However suddenly it roars forward again and the mid to late development is exactly as before. Finish: (neat) Medium. Cereal and green apples fading into a slightly drying and astringent metallic aftertaste (cold overbrewed black tea?). You sense the tin that held the fruit pieces that were on the palate. Finish: (watered). Not a great deal of difference. The metallic quality is still there but it's more muted, and there is a lingering taste like oatmeal. The official Distiller review sums this up pretty well but I take issue with one specific point. For me this is not a balanced whisky, in fact I’d call it thin, unbalanced and showing poor integration, which for me are all big faults. My overall sensation is that that this expression was too soft and demure for the alcohol content. 55.8% abv is not that high and I’ve tasted many whiskies in the 60%+ abv range that have great balance. The problem here is that the alcohol dominates and there is not enough character of aroma or flavour to support it. I don't think this would have worked that well at a lower abv either - it's just not a great vatting, IMHO. Tasted from a 30ml sample. "Good" : 83/100 (3.5 stars)

Nose: (neat) Beautiful oak - supple, voluptuous and intense. Toasted muesli bar, dark fruits, blood orange peel, cinnamon, oloroso sherry and a bat-squeak of peat that doesn’t quite get to the front of the stage. Nose: (watered) It becomes more rounded and subdued with water and a little time, but don’t add too much as you can easily overdo it (surprisingly). Longer term it develops menthol and peppermint notes over a floor of herbal honey. Palate: (neat) Sweet for a moment then it blasts with a peppery hit that is spiced with green peppers and gherkins. Dried figs and dates in the development, with maraschino cherries and just a drop of mezcal (!). Bitter coffee, bitter chocolate, sulphurous treacle. The texture is greasy but the spice is so intense it overtakes the texture. Leather, dry sherry and a solid foundation of smoke. Palate: (watered) A whole new ball game. Soft, sweet and supple but balanced by the forceful oak and spices that are now properly integrated. Honey is more prominent, or at least not obscured, and the whisky is joiking instead of yelling. The smoke is clearer now and more fragrant, and the mixed fruit more composed. The texture is rich, creamier and much more rounded – without a doubt this whisky benefits from water. Finish: Medium. Oaky, spicy, sour and a touch bitter (old walnuts). Oak and spice in the aftertaste with just a hint of honey. With water the finish is more gradual, mild and elegant. I took the advice of @DrRHCMadden (who generously provided this tasting sample) and let the dram sit for a while, nosing it cautiously all the while. About 20 minutes in, and with frequent rolling in the glass, it seemed to change and lose its initial rambunctiousness. It’s about this point where I started taking notes. After a taste, which was frankly too prickly for my liking, I added a half teaspoon of water and let it sit for another 20 minutes. This is when it started to blossom. IMHO this should have been released at 46%, not 56.5%. Some cask strength whiskies carry the abv easily and you hardly notice it but then there are those like this one that hit like … well, like a hammer 😄 It’s all down to the force of the European casks in the maturation (the oak is strong with this one, padawan). It’s borderline too intense for enjoyment initially, and to be honest I hated it at first, but time and a dash of water improve it out of sight, and by the time I was finishing the dram I wished I had more. Neat I’d only rate this about 3.5, but with water it is a no-brainer 4-star whisky … maybe even 4.25 .. but I would not pay the asking price for a bottle. Add just a few bucks and you can get the 18 year old which is hands-down better. Tasted from a 30 ml sample. “Very Good” : 85/100 (4 stars [when watered])

Nose: Acacia blossom honey, stewed pears in sauternes, a distant smoldering grass-fire, cold fireplace ash, thyme, sage, seaweed, vanilla, a little lemon. The casks are barely visible and there is good weight to the nose – it’s earthy, herbal and the peat-reek builds with repeated nosing. Water reduces the intensity of the nose but does not change the profile. I think it’s just knocking down an ethanol intrusion. Palate: Sweet-and-sour, grippy and full-bodied arrival on spice (pepper), green fruit, citrus, peat smoke and oak. The development is narrow, thin and does not bring out a great deal more, but it does amplify the arrival. The texture is oily but it’s also surprisingly light. There are some big, hot notes here that dominate but don’t contribute much. There are also some more subtle tones, but I think they are all just facets of peat smoke. Water has an unusual effect (see below). Finish: Medium. Unripe apple, raisins, sooty mineral and almost metallic smoke. A dry finish. This is apparently highly peated but you don’t notice it immediately. It creeps up on you with repeated nosing and tasting and there is more peat smoke than you initially think. However this is a mixed blessing because for me this is pretty much a one-note whisky focused on peat. The profile is fairly simple – grassy, peaty, herbal with the signature Highland Park honey notes well represented, but sort of dulled and shadowed while being sharp. Kind of like an ash-pan and a bottle of vodka accidentally tipped over into a honeypot. The nose was by far the best part for me. The palate is noisy and boisterous and it changes curiously with a little dilution. I expected it to gain sweetness and for the spices to be muted, but instead the ashen smoke billowed up and overpowered everything else. On the whole this behaves like very young whisky. When it was first opened it was harsh and gritty, with everything being loud. Time and air has mellowed the profile, but that has just served to showcase its limitations. It’s a good Highland Park, but not anywhere near my top selection. The core-range 10 year old is almost half the price of this and I’d have two bottles of that in preference any day of the week. “Good” : 83/100 (3.5 stars) ----------------------------------------------------- Rating Adjusted 14 March 2023 I've almost finished this bottle and it has improved since it hit the half-way point, with oxidisation softening the tannins and modulating the intensity. It is not nearly as hot as it was at first and a leathery quality has developed. The honey notes common to all Highland Park have intensified and with just a dash of water it is now a very pleasant dram that seems to be less brash and young than it did at first. Still not quite 4 stars for me, but only missing that mark by a single percentage point. "Good" : 84/100 (3.75 stars)

Springbank Tasting at The Oak Barrel, Sydney, 15 February 2023. Whisky #5. Unidentified batch (importer’s label over the number, grrr!) probably 2022. Nose: Mild, sweet peat smoke with a resinous quality – like peat smoke and fresh-cut pine combined. Olive oil, sunflower oil, green capsicum. Briny, like the smell of a pebble seashore when the tide is coming in (i.e. fresh, not like drying seaweed). Adding water amplifies the resinous and brine aromas. Palate: Sweet phenols, grilled citrus fruits, mustard and cress, gristy cereal and fresh sweet citrus fruit towards the finish. The texture is slightly oily but crisp. Finish: Medium/long. Grain, brine, lemons with paprika and a touch of vanilla smoke. There is a lingering bitter/sour aftertaste. A good whisky that is often overlooked, I think, as being just a generic NAS, but it has a lot more to offer than that. This comprises peated, double-distilled whiskies aged from 7-14 years and matured in a variety of barrels, but with the majority being refill bourbon barrels. It has a subtle complexity that takes a while to appreciate, but it is also batch variable, and I don’t think this particular bottling was as good as the one I tasted a few years ago at Springbank. That one took water a little better and I’d actually recommend this expression as a neat pour. I have a 2018 bottle of this from batch 25.04.18 18/210 in the stash and I’ll be interested to see how it compares (whenever I get around to opening it). There was a single bottle of this available for sale by ballot on the night, but at the asking price I probably would have passed if my name had come up. It used to be a bargain at AUD$120, but at $189? Nah. “Good” : 84/100 (3.75 stars) --------------------------------------------------- [Previous review, from September 25, 2017] Scotland, September 2017. Whisky #11, distillery sample. Nose: Gentle smoke, citrus and tropical fruit, vegetable water, brine, farmyard, vanilla, caramel, petrichor. Palate: Clean and crisp but full, with subtle smoke in the arrival. The development brings ginger, earthy lemon zest, brine, developing smoke and flinty minerals. The texture is lean but creamy. Finish: Long. Smoky, briny and citric fading to a semi-sweet aftertaste. Adding water mutes the nose but does not change the aromas very much. On the palate it brings out more sweetness and smoke whilst restraining the alcohol. I’d recommend just a couple of drops. Longrow is double distilled (as opposed to Springbank’s other whiskies that are either 2.5 or 3 times distilled) and the malt receives much longer smoke contact during kilning. The peat used is Islay peat (other mainland distilleries use highland peat) but its use is restrained and gentle. This creates a subtle, well integrated smoke character that allows the iconic maritime, farmyard and citrus qualities of Springbank distillate to shine through. This NAS expression may be the baby of the Longrow line-up, but it is by no means an inferior or budget malt. “Very Good” : 86/100 (4 stars) [AUD$120.0 per Bottle in 2018] ---------------------------------------------------