Tastes

Nose: Floral perfume, musk, vanilla, jasmine, honeysuckle, caramel. Adding water does not greatly change the nose. Palate: Soft but a little hot (ginger, chilli) on the arrival. Barley sugar, barley grist, sour fruit candy. Water greatly enlarges the sweetness, producing a butterscotch note and deepening the texture to an oilier, heavier style. Finish: Short. Fruit, particularly grassy lemon, fading to a bittersweet aftertaste. Water refines and sweetens the finish. This is a young, well-crafted malt that does not try to be an over-achiever, which is very welcome. It has an attractive floral/sweet and grassy lowland character that is not unlike that of Bruichladdich Classic Laddie (a quality that is almost certainly coming from the red wine barrel contribution). On the negative side it’s a little un-coordinated right now and will benefit greatly from longer maturation. If the distillery can resist the urge to mess up their very pleasant new-make spirit with fancy finishes and just let it rest quietly for a few years more this could become a really nice single malt. I liked it but was not inclined to buy a bottle until I tasted it with a dash of water, which improved every aspect of the dram. Initially I was going to rate it at 78/100 but after tasting how much it develops with dilution I’m increasing the score to 80. I look forward to trying more Lindores whiskies in the future. Tasted from a distillery sample. “Above Average” : 80/100 (3 stars)

Holyrood Distillery new-make tasting tour, Edinburgh, 27 November 2022 Nose: Green apple skins, oily malt, dough, faint hints of thyme, cider vinegar and toasted white bread. Palate: A warm, sweet arrival with orchard fruits and mild vanilla. Roasted hazelnuts and cereal appear in the development with a little cocoa and mild supporting butterscotch. The texture is gently oily and slick. Finish: Short: cereal flavours are the lingering impression, together with a gently toasty-smoky flavour. Holyrood Distillery is taking its first baby steps. Founded in 2019, their initial whisky has matured but it will not be available to taste until next year and it was created using their initial spirit recipes. At the moment the distillery is giving tastings of four more evolved new-make spirit formulations that are respectively called Chocolate Malt, Brewers x Distillers Yeast, Crystal Malt and Made By Edinburgh, and all of which are being sold in miniatures and half-litre bottles. Made By Edinburgh is the only one I’m reviewing here as in my opinion it is their most complete and balanced new-make so far and best represents the distillery’s potential. The Chocolate Malt seemed to me oily and hot and Brewers x Distillers Yeast was just uninteresting. Mrs Cascode enjoyed Crystal Malt most and I agreed with her until we tasted this one. It had the most satisfying, complex and well-balanced profile and a crisp, fragrant lightness that was refreshing, but there is also supporting weight. The character is fruity and mild but there is a wisp of roasted cereal that is almost like smokiness. This is not made with peated malt, but if they had told us it was peated to 2 ppm I would have believed them. This character is coming from about 2% chocolate malt in the recipe (chocolate malt has nothing to do with cocoa, it is malted barley that has been roasted rather than dried in the malting process and consequently has a dark chocolate colour). The distillery has selected this particular new make for long-term maturation and it will be released as a single malt in 10 years. I can clearly imagine what it will be like then as the heart of the whisky is all there and now it just needs time in good casks to fulfill its destiny. The casking they have chosen is exclusively in a variety of sherry woods which I thought was a pity as I can imagine this spirit could really shine if given 100% refill bourbon maturation, but meh - what do I know. “Above Average” : 82/100 (3.25 stars)

Nose: Light dried fruits, sherry and a bat’s fart of peat smoke. There is a sweet note that is probably Cardhu. Palate: Thin, dried fruit and barley sugar, and then a rush of hard, hot brittle pepper. I cannot taste any peat in the palate at all. Finish: Medium/short. A mixture of thin, grainy sweetness and buzzy tannic pepper. The aftertaste is sour and bitter. Horrible. I’ve been drinking Johnnie Walker Black Label since the mid 1970s and it has never before tasted this bad. Once it was a go-to blended scotch perfect for mixing and long drinks and just good enough to be a sipping whisky. When non-whisky folk asked me what was a good everyday scotch, or what was my favourite blended scotch this is the one I’d name. However a few years ago I noticed it was starting to become weak and flavourless. My last bottle (review appears below) was not that long ago, in November 2022 but this most recent bottle is notably inferior. In case anyone is interested it is from batch L2165 CA 002, so maybe check that if you feel you must buy a bottle of Black Label (the number is etched at the base of the rear side). However I’d strongly urge you to buy something else. This is awful stuff, and it’s not cheap. The nose is still worth 2 or maybe 2.25 stars, but the palate and finish are barely worth 1 star. “Inferior” : 65/100 (1.5 stars) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Previous review: November 23, 2022 Nose: Apple, pear, vanilla, malt, orange marmalade, sandalwood, and a buttery oak quality with a mild ashy/smoky background. It’s always a very familiar and reminiscent aroma but it seems to be getting a little more restrained every time I try it. Palate: Sweet, light malt and caramel entry. Very appealing. However, after the solid start it stalls and there is little happening in the mid-palate. Some weak black tea, faint red berries, notes of anise or liquorice and a little ashy cigarette smoke. There is also a tinge of sour flatness coming from the grain whisky. The texture is a little waxy but also a bit weak and hard. Finish: Medium/short. Sweet, but with a slightly metallic bitterness in the aftertaste. I’m deleting some of my old reviews here so I took the opportunity to revisit Johnnie Black and taste a current batch. In summary, this blend has a light fruit and cereal character with a vague hint of oak, some trace peatiness and a lightly oily/waxy mouthfeel. The profile is relatively consistent, but it does drift a little, and I’m certain that over the last 40 years it has slowly diminished from being one of the outstanding blended scotches to just another average contender. If you are familiar with the major blend components they stand out quite distinctly. Sweetness from Cardhu, waxiness from Clynelish, a hint of spice and maritime body from Talisker and some smoke and citrus from Caol Ila (along with a host of supporting notes from many other Diageo-owned malts). It's a well composed and balanced blend that is only really let down by some rather average grain whisky. It's still an acceptable sipping scotch, although increasingly better used as a mixer, and nowadays it is being crowded out by an ever-expanding selection of very good competing blends. However considering how much of this is produced it's a miracle that the quality is as high as it is. Over the last 10 years Diageo has sold around 2.5 billion bottles of whisky. Probably 90% of that was Red and Black Label. Astonishing. “Average” : 78/100 (2.75 stars) ----------------------------------------------------------- “Inferior” : 65/100 (1.5 stars)

Nose: Musky red berries, dusky oak cask, sandalwood sawdust and peach tea are the immediate impression. With time to rest you notice dark cherries, dark chocolate and an ever-evolving oloroso sherry aroma. A touch of maritime brine appears after more time. Water brings out the fragrant wood notes and “blooms” the nose very well. Palate: Soft, warming arrival of berries, black cherry and malt, but the flavours are quiet and reserved. The development finds a gentle spiced orange note reminiscent of Amaro Montenegro, tea-cake with sultanas and orange peel, dried dates and figs, and some walnut skin bitterness. The texture is good and is improved by a drop of water, which also highlights a peppery flavour and develops a brown-sugar and treacle quality. Finish: Medium. Malt extract and mixed berry muesli bar. It trails to bittersweet cocoa powder and dry sherry notes in the aftertaste. Water extends the length. A very good whisky, but lacking a certain “wow” factor and eye-wateringly overpriced. I can buy literally nine bottles of any of the Arran cask-finished expressions for the same money as one bottle of this, and I would enjoy each of those other bottles more. The nose is a textbook old sherry cask affair, and for me the best part of the story. It has progression and evolves with time and dilution (but take care not to over-dilute). The palate was good, but less impressive. It also has layers and develops nicely but there is an evolving tannic note that unbalances it just a bit. Fortunately, it regains its composure in the finish, which is very good. I’m a fan of Arran whiskies but having now tasted some of the older expressions I have to say that I think they reach their apex (as age statement whiskies anyway) with the 18 year old. Looking at my tasting journal I've rated both the 21 and 25 year olds lower than the old 14 year expression, The Bothy, and all of the cask finished expressions. This is interesting because almost all these Arrans I like better are at least 50% abv, so it may just be that for my palate it’s a whisky that needs a certain intensity and vibrancy of youth in order to shine. (Oh, and before someone calls me out by saying that this 25 year old is 51.2% abv, no it's not. That is a mistake on the Distiller listing. The core range 25 has always been 46% but there have been Single Cask 25 year olds that were over 50%. Interestingly, there has never been an Arran 25 with a strength of 51.2%, as far as I'm aware). I should also note that all the samples of older age statement whiskies I've recently tried were from a virtual tasting set and were packed in small plastic bags (see photo) that held mingy 15ml samples. 15ml is not enough to allow you to really get into a whisky, and certainly not enough to taste it both neat and watered to various dilutions. I don’t like these plastic packs one bit and I wonder if that affected my tasting impressions? I also can’t help but wonder whether they do not preserve the whisky as well as glass sample bottles. Initially I was going to give this the same rating as the 21 year old, but I think it’s a fraction superior so I’m taking it up one percentage point which just pushes it across the 4 star line, but I would never consider buying a bottle at the price. “Very Good” : 85/100 (4 stars)

Nose: Berries, almond honey-nut cluster muesli, sweet malt, orange liqueur, peach brandy, Turkish delight, the barest hint of sawdusty oak and a zephyr of fortified wine in the background. Palate: Very soft, sweet arrival – a bowl of ripe red berries smothered in raspberry coulis, mascarpone, vanilla custard and honey. A little ginger in sweet syrup in the development together with sweet cinnamon, milk chocolate and unroasted cashew nuts. The texture is almost syrupy. Finish: Medium. Apricots, sultanas and a little mild spice on a sweet caramel base. A soft and easily approachable whisky that will please any palate but for me it lacks character and I don’t think it is good value. It’s very pleasant, for sure, but also limited in range and no better than many whiskies at a third the price. If I were to sum this one up in one word it would be "meh". I don’t mind a straightforward sweet profile focused on fruit, even if it lacks complexity, but to me this was more akin to an easy-drinking 12 year old than a 21 year old. However, I can see why some palates would be very receptive to this subtle dram and rate it more highly. Maybe I'm just jaded and my palate is too old and battered to appreciate the nuances in this sort of whisky. Tasted from a 15ml sample “Good” : 84/100 (3.75 stars)

Nose: Initially sandalwood, honeysuckle, frangipani, and malt extract. Later, as it settles and opens, rich Christmas cake and plum pudding aromas come forward together with tobacco, leather and a very subtle, fleeting note of smoke. Later still, deep earthy lemon and orange fragrances appear. This nose is a 5-star delight that showcases masterful 100% PX cask maturation. Palate: Warming arrival with soft tannin and honeyed malt. The development sees a little crisp oak spice emerge but it is just enough to provide foundation and balance to the otherwise soft and fruity profile. Roasted nuts, caramel toffee. The texture is oily, woody and chewy but with a soft, sweet quality. The balance is excellent and adding a dash of water makes the mouthfeel creamy and luscious. Finish: Long. Raisins, apricots and an extended oaken honey note in the aftertaste – sweet and full but dry. Tomintoul has the slogan "the gentle dram" and in most of their core-range this gentle quality is almost problematic due to their tendency to bottle at 40%. I'm not of the opinion that all whisky must be bottled at high proof just "because", but in the case of Tomintoul there is an argument to be made in support of this, as their expressions can often seem too laid back for their own good. However there is absolutely none of that here (and I've also never had any complaints regarding weakness of profile regarding other cask-strength Tomintouls I've tasted). It is a full-bodied, characterful whisky that shows the distillery style in its very best form. This is spirity and sharp when first poured, and it needs 5 minutes for the immediate alcohol to dissipate before the rich and plummy heart of this whisky is revealed, and it just keeps gaining complexity and depth the longer you let it breathe. Water does not harm the nose in any way but instead brings out honey-cured ham and just a touch of “green” notes – menthol, eucalyptus - but very mild. The palate also responds well to dilution with the malty tannins morphing into a more ginger-nut biscuit character. The warming quality on the arrival turns just a shade hotter with some Szechuan pepper emerging but the foundational honeys and caramel-nougat notes never fade away. The palate is very good either neat or diluted, and it can stand being watered down to the low 40s. After it has recomposed following dilution the PX sherry wood is much more noticeable as a specific flavour and aroma component. This was casked into a PX sherry butt in April 2001 and then left to slumber unmolested for 17 years before being bottled in September 2018. That's the way to make whisky. This is almost certainly only available via the secondaries now and if I could find one I'd buy it. Tasted from a 30ml sampler. “Excellent” : 88/100 (4.5 stars)

Nose: Bright cereal, green apple, white grape juice, honeydew melon, a little citrus and a briny maritime character. After the first sip you notice smoky notes that were previously hiding. Water broadens and unites the nose very pleasantly but the cereal and maritime aromas dominate. Over time, vanilla is noticed. There is an elusive facet to the nose that is very familiar but I can’t quite place it. Palate: Slightly grippy, maritime arrival with green fruit and lemon peel but followed very quickly by a breath of peat smoke. This enlarges in the development as savory/sweet malty flavours come forward. Dark ale, pumpernickel, oatmeal and a little bit of liquorice. The texture is good but it is improved by a dash of water, which adds depth. This does, however, also highlight the brine. Finish: Medium. Mainly salty cereal-malt flavours with a little smoky barley sugar. The palate has a briny presence right from the arrival. On the first sip it seems to border on astringency, but subsequent tastes identify this firmness of palate as salt. Immediately after adding water the arrival is softened but peppery spice then develops in the later palate and this highlights the saltiness even more. Personally I preferred this one neat, as dilution can make it seem bitter and sour. However, that said, over time you become accustomed to it and sweetness comes through. When the bottle was first opened I was not that impressed but over time I’ve come to like this whisky. It’s not an easy-sipping crowd pleaser and may be a little too maritime for some palates, but it has a fresh, youthful verve and there is something about it that is vaguely reminiscent of Old Pulteney 12 year old from about a decade ago (but not the current expressions). I was initially going to rate this at 81 but after trying it several times I’m increasing the rating to 83. I found it on special and I think I’ll go back for a couple more bottles. “Good” : 83/100 (3.5 stars)