Tastes

Nose: Deep and intense nose. Burned butter, cognac, plum pudding, baked fig and orange tart, dark almost-burnt Christmas cake. There's a note that isn't smoke but it's reminiscent of something scorched - it's vaguely like a wood-fired cooking stove. Lots of warm (but not hot) spices. With water the nose opens and shows some vanilla but most prominently it showcases the quality of the casks with an aroma of fresh, crisp well-managed barrel. Palate: A no-holds-barred arrival of strong alcohol, hefty baking spices, dark fruitcake, espresso, very dark chocolate and very strong oak tannins. Again there's that phantom almost-but-not-quite smoky presence and a hefty treacle flavour. The texture is medium. With water this whisky really shows its complexity and depth. It gains sweetness, more spice, considerably more fruitiness (of a less baked quality) and changes character in a very pleasant manner. Finish: Medium/long. Baking spices, dark chocolate and prickly baked fruit that slowly subside into a mildly oaky aftertaste. There's a little puff of aromatic smoky spice right at the end. Adding water intensifies the bitter chocolate note in the finish, considerably lengthens it, and a cereal sweetness appears. This is a big, bold and assertive whisky that is also quite stylish and certainly not a simple bludgeon to the senses. The relatively high proof is not overpowering and has surprisingly little burn. It's mellow but not soft or simple. This is more a cutlass than a club, more a cutting wit than a crude tirade. Being much more used to Scottish malt whisky the profile is a little unusual to my palate, but there are similarities. The nose in particular reminds me of very high proof sherried whisky but it has a distinctive nature. That elusive smoke thing is quite individual but at its heart the nose has the dryness of malt rather than the sweetness of corn. Like all really good noses, it keeps evolving and opening in the glass. The palate is demonstrative and has some of the characteristics of rye whisky but really it is its own thing - Texas malt. I think this is relatively young (2-3 years?) and you taste that youth, but you also sense a greater maturity than would be expected. This is a kid who grew up quick. Adding water uncovers malty notes in the palate and personally I preferred it diluted (but then I always taste high-proof whisky both neat and watered). I really enjoyed this whisky and slowly nosed and sipped it for about an hour while watching a film. I don't think there was any Australian allocation for this particular expression but other Balcones whiskies are available here for around AUS$110-140 which is quite reasonable. I must obtain more of their offerings. My thanks to @Soba45 who shared a tasting dram received from @PBMichiganWolverine. Much appreciated, good sirs. "Very Good" : 86/100 (4 stars)

Nose: Rotting fruit, especially bananas, undertones of sherry and wood. There are faint diesel and brown sugar notes. Palate: Sweet, woody and tobacco on the arrival. There are strange plastic and fruit flavours as it develops, with sweetness eventually coming to the fore. There are also definite orange and apricot notes. The texture is OK but there is an overall sensation of something synthetic. Finish: Medium. It finishes a little sour and fruity, with an afterthought of sherry. I really wasn't sure what to make of this. @Soba45 sent me the tasting sample and he is certain that it is aged for a single day, but I could not find any information about it online. It's curious because to be legally sold as "whisky" in Australia the spirit must be, among other things, at least 2 years old. All the examples of Grove whisky I could find on the internet say they are aged for 2 or 3 years. Anyway, regardless of its origins it did not make a good impression and I frankly thought it has as much relationship to fine whisky as does Domestos. However, as I was nosing it and pondering its odd nature it suddenly hit me - this is much, MUCH more like rum than whisky. It has both a nose and palate that you could be forgiven for mistaking for a really funky, greasy old Jamaican rum, and if that was what I'd been told it was I'd score it much higher. However as a whisky this is just a fail. I have no idea how much this cost but the Grove 2 year old Single Malt Whisky sells for around $170, and if it is anything like this that is highway robbery. "Poor" : 60/100 (1 star)

Nose: Fruity and floral with apricot, strawberries and cherries. Cinnamon and brown sugar dusted apple Danish. There's just enough spicy but fragrant oak to give the nose good structure. [The dry glass aroma is all brown sugar and spicy oak]. Palate: The entry is spicy but not hot, and quickly softens in the development. It's a friendly but well-defined arrival with dill, clove and caraway flavours and the development has real progression with little wavelets of spice rolling through it. Vanilla, berries, some ashy treacle and a little licorice appear as it evolves. The texture is good - reasonably full but there is a very light astringent touch that I like a lot. Finish: Medium/short. The spicy oak notes are the last to fade and there is a mild minty/menthol note and some oily dill from the rye component that lasts into the aftertaste. I quite enjoyed this bourbon but sadly my sample bottle had leaked and there was only about 10 ml left to taste, so I had to really search for aromas and could not taste it with water. There is supposed to be an allocation coming to Australia soon but the anticipated price is $199 and I'm not paying that much. I would pay around $100, but no more. Thanks to @Soba45 for the tasting sample. "Good" : 83/100 ( 3.5 stars)

Nose: Sweet corn, orange zest, sweet mild vanilla, freshly mown hay, cherry flavoured sweets, a mild note of good oak cask. It's a friendly nose (did I mention it's sweet?) with just enough heft. [The dry-glass smells of sandalwood and sweat]. Palate: Sweet arrival, some extremely well behaved mild spices (cinnamon, nutmeg, caraway) which persist through the development, gaining further sweetness in the process. The development brings out orange notes and a nutty quality together with vanilla, caramel and brown sugar. The texture is good and you certainly don't notice that this is 100 proof. Finish: Medium. A little sweet spiced vanilla on the aftertaste. A nice bourbon, very drinkable and there are no off-notes anywhere but it's a bit generic. It starts off with just the right amount of oak, progresses through mild spiciness and finishes on a sweet note. Good stuff - not much more I can say, it's just "average-good". I did notice, however, that in Australia this is $160, which is absurd beyond all reasoning and if I had paid that much I'd be very annoyed because it's just not *that* good. I'd pay half that but to charge the same for this as for Springbank 12 year old? I think not. Thanks to @Soba45 for the tasting sample. "Average" : 79/100 (2.75 stars)

Nose (neat): Rye spice, leather, tobacco, very fine oak notes, cedarwood, salt-water taffy and roasted peanuts. Over time the nose fills out further as vanilla, caramel, mint and menthol notes emerge. Nose (watered): A pleasant marriage of the notes that are apparent when neat, but a great deal of the bold character is lost. It tends to become merely a very nice example of the Jim Beam house nose. Palate (neat): Big, spicy and dry arrival with a fair amount of heat. There are certainly identifiable notes such as cinnamon, dill, clove and sour cherry, but any nuance is throttled by the overly busy oak tannins. This palate is so dry, bitter and hot it is almost a caricature. Palate (watered): Much softer arrival, still spicy and dry but the heat is tamed and the whisky is considerably more welcoming. Most importantly, the palate opens and develops to clearly display dark fruit, brown sugar, toffee, espresso and an excellent chewy woodiness. Overall water provides desperately needed balance and allows the whiskey's undeniable qualities to shine, and I thought the texture was also greatly improved. Finish (neat): Long. Dominated by hot and bitter spices that eventually just wear off. Finish (watered): Still long, but the bitter notes are now balanced by just the right degree of sweetness. A dark cherry and chestnut wood flavour is distinct in the aftertaste. When first poured neat there is a blast of ethanol on the nose - let it rest for 10 minutes and this blows away leaving the whiskey more approachable. It's authoritative but a little austere and it reminded me slightly of some dry cask-strength Speysiders I've nosed. On the whole, however, I thought it was a very good nose. The palate, on the other hand, leaves a great deal to be desired. The arrival was promising but it quickly took a wrong turn in the development, which to me seemed more like a collapse of the arrival into a melange of bitterness. To be quite honest I thought it bordered on undrinkable. However generous dilution completely transformed the palate, and the spirit is certainly bold enough to take water with no effort at all. I'm sure there are more seasoned bourbon drinkers than I who would love the neat palate, but for me it was just out of control and needed the discipline of water, which I thought rendered it far more elegant. If I rated this as neat I'd give it 2 stars and consider it a failure, however with water it's a 4-star dram, so I'm splitting the difference and rating it at 3. Many thanks to @Soba45 for the tasting sample. "Above Average" : 80/100 (3 stars)

Nose: Orange liqueur, malt, mild banana, vanilla, apple cider, moist earth. As it rests in the glass the aromas of oak casks start to emerge. With water some floral and sherry notes come to the front, and although the nose loses a little definition the melded aromas are very pleasant. [After watering, the dry glass has an aroma of milk chocolate!]. Palate: A sweet arrival with mild baking spices and lemon zest. Hard caramel toffee, a faint hint of licorice (or maybe anise), stewed apples and more spicy notes are noticed as it develops. There is a faintly metallic barley note but it's not objectionable. The texture is full but just short of either creamy or oily. Adding water develops more caramel toffee characteristics but does not mute the spicy notes too much. Finish: Medium. Spices and cereal that gradually fade. You definitely taste barley grist at one point and it lingers into the aftertaste. Adding water breaks the finish - it becomes much shorter and less interesting. An enjoyable single malt if not an outstanding one. At AUS$72 it's very fairly priced for a 15 year old expression, but keep in mind it's not one of the greats. The Distiller official score is pretty much on target but I didn't get some of the tasting notes - in particular I didn't notice any smoke on the nose and neither did I think the palate was over-oaked (however bear in mind I tasted this right after the Method & Madness Single Grain which indeed has a madness degree of wood influence). Certainly worth a taste. At the price point it is a no-brainer experiment for enthusiasts and if you're on a tight budget and want to try a proper 15 year old scotch that is easy to drink, has a pleasant profile and a balanced character you could do far worse than this Glen Moray. "Above Average" : 82/100 (3.25 stars)

Nose: Oak, vanilla, something crisply floral (lemon peel?) and a resinous note (pencil shavings). The nose is completely dominated by the barrels. Palate: A rather spirity arrival with some bitter oak and grapefruit, but there is a little sweetness as well. There are also buttery notes but these are accompanied by an acidic quality like sour citrus peel. The texture is silky but modulated by sharp tannic notes. Finish: Medium. Hot spiciness that eventually trails off into a subtle, sweet minty aftertaste. This whisky is unusual compared to most single grains. Typically the better ones (particularly Scottish single grain) are matured for a long time in first-fill bourbon barrels and wind up with a buttery, toasty vanilla profile. This is completely alien to that, instead featuring brisk, almost harsh and spiky European oak tannin which gives it a woody and citric character. It's like a barrel full of bitter grapefruit. This makes it an interesting whiskey but it's not one you easily love. The Single Malt and Single Pot Still expressions I've tasted from this producer have been very good and instantly approachable for any whiskey enthusiast, but this one is brittle and more of a challenge. The nose is unremittingly woody in character and although some supporting aromas arise over time it is steadfast in its acerbic oakiness. It takes forever to open up and demands time and patience. I'll be interested to see if it mellows a little once there is some air in the bottle. The palate is similarly cantankerous with a bitter/sour quality coming from some highly active oak tannin. Well, yes, it IS aged in virgin Spanish oak so what do you expect, but I can't help but wonder if this was such a terrific experiment. A touch more refill bourbon softness would not have gone astray. As I said, an interesting whiskey, but certainly not one I'd recommend to a novice (N.B. the official Distiller notes are from an experienced critic and novices should be wary - this is not as approachable as it might seem from the description). You need time, patience and experience to really enjoy this. I'm not disappointed in it and I'm looking forward to the journey of exploring it as it oxidises, but if the choice was between this and the chestnut-barrel finished single pot still expression I'd choose the latter any time, even if it was twice the price, and as much as it is an "interesting" whisky there is no way I'd ever buy a second bottle of this. "Good (but not easy)" : 83/100 (3.5 stars)