Tastes

The nose is nice and rounded. There are sweet dried fruit notes with a hint of raspberry syrup. Rich toffee, some wood, a hint of chocolate. The flavors don't hit you in the face, but they balance nicely. It smells sweet and tasty. The palate has more of a dry mineral rye note than expected that comes right out, but it fits nicely with the fruitiness. Some nice sweet fruit makes its way out in short order - the raspberry playing a starting role without tasting particularly tart. The balance is nice with the wood coming in with an earthy clover presence that brings in soft tannins without being too numbing. It's always sweet on the finish and there's just enough heat to keep up the cinnamon profile and keep it from tasting flat. The mouthfeel is moderate and helps to make up for some of the light flavor. There's a nice balance in here, though it isn't terribly interesting. It's a bit like watered-down Booker's, though perhaps with a little more cohesion and subtlety. A little tobacco and eucalyptus come in at points, but they are quite mild. I just wish it had a bit more distinction to its flavors and some more robustness to its flavor. It definitely tastes like a blended whiskey. That nice low burn keeps it alive though. When I come back to it after a dip of water though, I realize that I'm really grasping for those complexities. It's quite flat and disappointingly weak. It definitely reminds me of somewhat sweeter (and better) Evan Williams. It's definitely sippable, but not a big success. It's too light for sure - it definitely doesn't taste 6 years old.

It smells fairly light with some wet wood, vanilla, and light butterscotch notes. The nose has a floral element. The palate is super light and grassy with less of a punch than expected at the proof. It's kind of viscous in a good way. The wet wood unfortunately comes through and the bright light flavors of mild citrus, chamomile, and vanilla don't resolve the problem. With added water, there is more wet wood and spice, as well as a mild bit of dried apricot and some vanilla. It tastes unbalanced and underaged. It's not miserable to drink, but it's really not good. There's some amount going on and the high proof is nice, but this is not enjoyable to drink. The spices get harsher with more water and it ends up being quite numbing. There is something a little nutty that eventually comes out, but the bad elements never disappear.

The juicy herbal flavor with licorice is really nice actually. The sweetness sis smooth and balanced with a nice toffee and juicy, fruity, licorice element. It kind of pops and although there is plenty of spice, that part still comes through. This tastes a bit more sophisticated than Booker's, with the rawness reduced. Either the blending of barrels or the additional age shows itself in giving this such a rich roundness. This is really a superb drink that takes some time to appreciate. The wood is there, some coffee and tobacco are there, spices come in. It's all there, but it's rich, delicious, and complex. The tannins are a bit harsh but relatively few, causing an eventual aggressive numbing, but this is still a really good drink. At the moment, although this has substantial vanilla, it has less than Booker's Shiny Barrel, but it also has less aggressiveness. This is a more mature drink to be sure, but it does take some effort to observe the flavors. The two are quite comparable in quality (both being very good), but their styles are different. In direct comparison with Booker's Kitchen Table, this is clearly better. It's smoother with more fullness and richness and a nicer balance. It certainly tatstes more aged. Booker's country ham is harsher, but has some nice flavors with a tad of complexity, so it is more comparable. It's fairly comparable to Booker's Shiny Barrel, but it's more balanced with a bit more richness. I would probabaly take this over any of the Booker's. It's very good. The balance seems better than that of McKenna 10, though the overall profile has less pizazz. I think I'd take this still.

It smells really sweet, like Balcones Baby Blue. There some malt on the nose, but it seems like at 49% malted barley the balance is out of whack. The palate initially tastes like young malt with its sweetness, but then some viscous corn sweetness comes out and a surprisingly fierce burn ensues. I'm not a big fan of the young flavor (not a fan at all actually), but the complex actually does increase a fair bit. This is substantially better than Balcones Baby Blue with its fruity flavors the come out toward the finish, adding richness. Still. I would have guessed that this was a young malt-heavy whiskey (which I guess it is actually) and placed it in the bargain bin. I have mixed feelings about this one: it's better than the Barrel Raider II with its added complexity, but it still tastes young and reminds me of stuff like Shieldaig Class (a.k.a. the bottom shelf stuff). The execution is better than for bottom shelf scotch, but I wish it didn't remind me of it at all. The nauseating Sherry sweetness is minimized here, but not eradicates. This definitely tastes like young bourbon, which is a shame because it isn't terribly young. Still, there is more complexity here than in young bourbon and the balance is better despite its flaws. The flavor here is also on the light side. I'll be intrigued to try a more mature version of this at some point, but for now it's not that great and very expensive. The complexity seems good, so it definitely has potential. At 12 years, this could be quite good.

This is a really surprising whiskey. It starts off fruity, but quickly develops some peat and smoke flavors that pervade the drink. It's still definitely sweet. This drink is amazingly rich and balanced at its reasonable price. It's on the sweet side for sure, but its balance of incredible. I recommend this whiskey above most others on the ground that it hits most targets with success. Beyond the peat, smoke, and sweetness, there is richness (which is in part due to the other categories) and a surprising amount of variety. Some fruity notes like banana come through, but they can't overwhelm the honest and true representative flavors here. This is proof that the regular order can be disrupted. At its price this whiskey is a tremendous bargain. It's like a sweeter and fruitier Highland Park 18 with a bit less unification of character. So maybe an Oban? The mineral notes are very strong here. They come with some fruity sweetness and are backed by peaty smoke. There isn't enough sweetness though and the flavors are not sufficiently balanced. There is a lot going on here, but the flavors are less then brilliant. There isn't any gross alcohol flavor that causes problems, but the mineral and floral flavors combine with a celery-like vegetal flavor in a way that makes it taste a bit like Scotch mixed with gin and tequila. I don't love this wiskey, but it isn't bad; it just is confusing. Floral, mineral, and fruit are strong in this. It's sweet, but does have some depth and richness to it. It's good if you drink gin or tequila first, but compared to almost any Scotch, it tastes young and ill-conceived despite its balance of Highland Scotch flavors. There are some notable flaws here, but for $25 you could do so, so much worse. In the right context, there is actually a supreme amount of balance here, either with sweetness when compared with a rich Scotch or with smoke when compared with a mild gin. What's weird about this drink is that when it tastes good, all of the flavors taste good. When it tastes bad, there is just mineral flavor everywhere. There is some depth here and there are also some good flavors, but all that can be confirmed is that in some cases the net flavor of this drink is quite good. When the net flavor is good, this drink is quite good.