Tastes

Nose: Deep and expressive cereal aromas, molasses, port wine, vanilla, oak wood. There are the baking spices and minty-menthol notes typical of rye spirit, but they are very elegant and rounded. If it were not for the presence of these spice notes the nose would be very like that of a sherry matured scotch whisky. There is a slight floral note and a faint suggestion of wet paper, but it does not spoil the nose. 9/10 Palate: A very interesting combination of rich cereal flavours and sparkling bright rye spices (clove, fennel, cardamom and most notably caraway). The palate is initially sweet then gains heat and intensity in the early development with ginger showing through, but finally turns sweeter and more sophisticated in the later palate with orchard fruit emerging. The texture is creamy and oily. 8.5/10 Finish: Medium/Long. Fruity rye spice that fades into sweet-and-sour cereal. There is a note of mint and wintergreen in the aftertaste together with a briny taste. There is just a hint of cardboard, which was the single questionable characteristic I noticed. 8/10 After the two previous Whipper Snapper whiskeys I tasted I was almost dreading this one, but in fact it turned out to not only be the best of the samples by far but a very good dram full stop. There have been several Australian rye whiskeys that have gained praise over the last few years but until now the only one that has really impressed me has been the Archie Rose Malted Rye. As luck would have it I have a bottle of that open at the moment so I was able to taste it in comparison with this whiskey. It is a close thing but I still prefer the Archie Rose. It is more balanced and complete and the profile as a whole is “deeper”, more polished and just a tad sweeter. The aromas of the Whipper Snapper are lighter and sharper but that’s just a difference in profile and not one of quality. On the whole Whipper Snapper compares very well and I’m rating it just one percentage point lower than the Archie Rose Rye. (As a comparison I rated Rittenhouse Rye at 85/100 and Bullett Rye at 80/100). Tasted from a 30ml sample. Recommended. “Very Good” : 87/100 (4.25 stars)

Nose: Apple juice, red apple peel, porridge with a tablespoon of honey on top, wash in the early stages of fermentation, fresh cut grass and sweet hay. It’s a lighter and more delicate nose than that of the distillery’s single malt. Palate: The arrival is sweet for a second then suddenly moves towards a hard, dry profile. Cereals are the most prominent note, and the foundation is particularly spicy (caraway seed, fennel seed) with a minty, menthol-like note and morello cherry. The texture is oily but there is a bright acidic quality that cuts through it, however a dash of water much improves both the flavour profile and the texture. Finish: Medium. Cereal flavours and minty spices fading to sour cherry. This is the second of the Whipper Snapper samples I recently acquired, and overall it is quite similar to a rye whisky but with more brightly toned spices. I used to have the expectation that wheat whiskies would be sweeter and softer than rye whiskies, but actually the reverse is true. This is like a rye profile but without the deeper notes (if your average rye was likened to a baritone voice then this would be a tenor). As with the distillery’s single malt I enjoyed the aromas here but was not so impressed by the palate. The nose has a light, fragrant character but the palate proclaims its youth in somewhat shrill tones. Like the single malt this is much closer to a rye profile than I would have suspected. I was initially going to give this 75/100 but after adding a dash of water I increased the rating to 77 which put it on the better side of “average”. Then on a whim I used the remaining un-watered half of the tasting sample to make a Manhattan, which seemed reasonable given how rye-like this is. The result was unexpectedly good, the drink being very refreshing and crisp, and this prompted me to add another two points to the rating. I think this whisky only shows its best side when used as a mixer, but sadly at the price that makes it a very expensive cocktail ingredient. Note: Initially I posted this in error under the listing for "Whipper Snapper Wheat Whiskey" but I found out that this is a different product with a higher abv so I've made a new listing. Thanks to @DrRHCMadden for a comment on the previous review that made me look into this and discover the error. Tasted from a 30ml sample. “Average” : 79/100 (2.75 stars)

Nose: Dusty floral and vanilla, increasing in depth as it rests in the glass. Mild beer, porridge and a tinge of honey. Water mutes the nose. Palate: Soft cereal arrival with a little vanilla and honey but everything in the palate veers towards dryness. Malt, beer, grass and some oak notes, but it’s very mild. The texture is neutral but fine, and a drop of water develops creaminess. Water also brings out sweetness which is very pleasant. Finish: Medium/Short. Grass, porridge and beer. Reduction sweetens the aftertaste. This is a Diageo workhorse malt released as part of the Flora & Fauna range and it is the only official bottling of Glen Spey that has ever been issued. I think it may be discontinued now but you can probably find it on the secondary market. This is the definition of an easy, inoffensive single malt with nothing unbalanced or uncomfortable about it. It's flawlessly made but perfectly middle-of-the-road and is the ideal filler malt for blending. As for taking it as a single malt? Hmm. It's very easy to drink, particularly when watered and would be fine as an unchallenging session whisky, but something with a little more character would be even better. If you could still buy this at a price that competed against blended whiskies then it would be a no-brainer, but at the actual price point there are more interesting single malts to explore. Tasted from a 30ml sample. “Above Average” : 80/100 (3 stars)

Nose: Fruit (apple peel), cereal (fresh wort), unctious notes (oily barley? fortified wine?) and crisp oak barrel. There’s a wintergreen note as well. Overall it’s a fresh, lifted nose but its obviously young. Palate: Soft, creamy arrival that seethes with barley oils. It’s like a pot-still Irish whiskey taken to almost absurd levels. It quickly develops a lot of awkward spice notes (caraway, nutmeg, fennel) and a good deal of simple heat with an undertone of ethanol. The texture is heavy and oily but lacks refinement. Finish: Medium. Gristy cereal with wood and spice notes. I just received three Whipper Snapper samples and decided to examine this single malt first, as in his recent review of the same three whiskies @DrRHCMadden rated this lowest. This malt shows facets that are more typical of a rye whisky, in fact if I had tasted this blind its braying chorus of bready spices and minty wintergreen would have led me to think it was a barley-heavy rye rather than a single malt. The nose is warming and seductive and although there is obvious evidence of youth its crisp freshness makes it work. However the palate was where it really let me down. It's here that its juvenile character is on full display, and it’s a display of brash flavours that have not even started to meld into anything approaching maturity. This is apparently four years old and if that’s so it needs several more years in a refill bourbon cask in a very stable environment to calm it down. Right now it’s a squalling infant, and honestly I could not finish the tasting sample. It’s also wildly overpriced. Comparing this to any Scottish single malt in the same price bracket would be an exercise in embarrassment. Tasted from a 30ml sample. “Adequate” : 73/100 (2.25 stars)

Nose: Warming and round with a peaty character that is softened by a huge blanket of sherry cask aromas. Raisins, seaweed, eucalyptus oil and sweet composted soil. Hints of apple skins and baked ham lurk in the background and become apparent once it has rested. Reduction flattens the nose and frankly ruins it. 87/100 Palate: Sweet arrival full of dark fruit that quickly segues into spicy (mild ginger) and mentholated smoke. The development brings licorice, pine nuts, walnuts, cigar smoke, saltwater and surprisingly dry sherry. The texture is good but not remarkable ... the glass coats well but the legs form quickly and run fast, betraying its lack of viscosity. Adding water amplifies the salt notes while flattening everything else. 83/100 Finish: Short/Long. 90% of the palate disappears quickly but the other 10% (leafy sherry, brine and big peat smoke) keeps rolling along, although it does gain a sour note in the aftertaste. Just when you think everything has faded you take a breath and both smell and taste peat smoke again. It’s like the way in which cigar smoke lingers on the palate. As with the nose and palate, water spoils the finish. 82/100 Tasted from a sample I bought a few years ago, this is the first Lagavulin Distillers Edition I’ve had for probably a decade. It’s not a whisky style I adore because although it has its standout positive features it also lacks crispness and I keep wishing the sherry cask influence was less prominent. The nose here is very good but the palate, whilst above average, was not as good. The big peat reek grabs you but there is not a lot of depth below that and there is a thread of sour/bitter brackish saline throughout the palate that I did not like. I get why this is a favourite for many people as it has some outstanding facets, but for me it lacks balance through the progression. Comparison to the regular 12 year old releases (even the average ones) reveals just how much the distillery character is obscured by heavy PX finishing. One important note - do not reduce this whisky. Even a drop or two of water throws it completely out of balance. I don’t take cost into consideration when scoring a whisky but, for me anyway, there are many peated whiskies that outperform the Distillers Expressions at around half the price. “Good” : 84/100 (3.75 stars)

Nose: Ripe berries, rosewater and hyacinth at first. It was a very fruity profile to start with but on further nosing I got more maritime qualities (seaspray, tarry ropes, perique tobacco), salted caramel and soft smoke with a warm and rounded quality like smoked ham. Palate: The arrival was creamy and like the nose it had a fruity sweetness to it (fig jam, sultanas, stewed apricot). In the development this progressed to smoked, glazed pork ribs with a spicy salt and pepper rub. The brine note builds and seems set to dominate but then falls back as Szechuan pepper and mild smoky paprika take charge. The texture is creamy and has very good weight. Finish: Medium/Long. Fruit stewed with spices, aromatic peat smoke and a little pepper. This whisky is unusually fruity for a Talisker, but it's not a crisp orchard fruit style of malt. Instead the fruit notes here are deep and full-bodied with a leathery, tobacco and cocoa foundation. It’s a very agreeable profile and it shows a different side of Talisker that is reminiscent of their Distiller’s Edition, but not quite the same. It's an immediately approachable and easy-to-drink malt that I think would appeal to most palates, but those who like their Talisker to be bone-dry and peppery might find this to be too sweet and maybe a little genteel. It’s certainly not the raging tempest of Dark Storm or 57 Degrees North, but neither is it the refined dignity of the 18 year or 25 year old. This is more a lovable rogue with style. Jack Sparrow, mayhap? I liked this best without reduction, as it seemed most balanced that way. Tasted from a sample generously provided by @DrRHCMadden “Very Good” : 86/100 (4 stars)