Tastes

Revisiting a 1.75 that's been open for about 10 months and is half full. Tasted neat from a glencairn. Not my first for the night, so I'm not going to get fancy with this review as my nose is a bit off from alergies and my palate has enjoyed some EC earlier. That said... Neat this is better than my first pour. The nose still has a bit of an ethanol element, but otherwise I'm getting cherries, vanilla and wood. Love that sweet introduction on the sip. Nice mouthfeel, creamy and rich. Short finish, light pepper, fair rye influence but not out of balance at all. I MIGHT like this better than Evan Williams bottled-in-bond. I'll have to do a sbs. Its not embarrassed by the Elijah Craig, either. I did a quick SBS and I'll take this all day every day over BT. I've drunk most of this bottle as Manhattans with two shakes of Angostura and a 3:1 mix with Cocchi Americano. It's a winner in that role. A very, very good mixer. I'm seeing that it can hold its own when served neat, too. Good stuff. I wish I could find something like a steady supply here in FL...

This is a new one to me; an expression I've never tasted before. I love EW and there is usually a bottle of Bottled in Bond or Single Barrel in my rotation. I've been curious about the 1783 for a while, but never enough to pull the trigger. Well this weekend I'm doing a bacon-fat-washed bourbon experiment for some cocktails I'm dreaming up (I'm also creating a bacon washed tequila) and this is going to be the foundation. Let's see what its all about... Tasted neat from a glencairn and allowed to rest for a solid 10 minutes while my dogs wrestle and run around like little furry loonatics. The pour is a brassy color. A swirl shows thin sheeting and small, quick tears running into the bowl. The nose offers up sweet but soft notes of vanilla, creamed corn, and some slight oaky barrel notes. It's pleasant and simple. Don't expect complexity, but for a $17 bottle it presents surprisingly well. On the palate this delivers what the nose teases. Its a sweet dram, soft and easy. There is very little spice - just a touch of black pepper. There's a good dose of sweet vanilla, a touch of oak, a bit of corn and just the faintest whiff of something that reminds me of Dr. Pepper. Make no mistake, this isn't a Spinal Tap whiskey and the taste volume doesn't go to "11" - it barely makes it to "4" but what's there is easy to enjoy and not demanding at all. This is a wholly average bourbon. There's nothing special about it other than its really inexpensive and it tastes good. Exactly what I was hoping for! I rate liquor on a bell curve scale and an average whiskey should be a 2.5, with almost all of the bigger brands mainstream offerings ending up between 2 and 3. This is right there plus a quarter point for its affordability.

This isn't my first taste of this by a long shot. It's my first in several years, however. Possibly my first since this lost an age statement. I'm not sure why I haven't kept a bottle in my circulation other than to say there are a lot of tastes to be experienced in one's lifetime and distractions happen. Tonight I'll correct this oversight. Tasted neat from a glencairn poured from a fresh bottle and allowed to rest for several minutes. The pour is deep amber. A swirl shows significant sheeting and small, slow tears running down to the bowl of the glass. Based on appearance alone I expect a rich mouthfeel. The nose is cherries, carmel, clove, and a Bananas Foster like rummy note. I get the slightest touch of oak and wood. What I'm not getting is any acetone or overt ethanol alcohol elements. This is a relatively benign 47% ABV and I like that I'm not getting that telltale "young" or "brash" note. Mouthfeel is as rich as the look suggested, with a nice creaminess. Cherries and apple are up front, along with a nice wave of what reminds me of sweet tapioca pudding. There's a nice touch of pepper at the back of the tongue and a warm, relatively quick finish that leaves a nice taste "trail". The finish is really the biggest weakness here. Similar to the sour departure of BT, this hits me with a slight bitter oak note. In a better bourbon this would be a deeper char/barrel note, but here its the give-away that this is a bit less refined. It's faint and I don't find it offensive at all in this price range. Like BT, EW, and a few others the distiller has hit a really nice balance point for an affordable whiskey. This is a super approachable, easy drinking bourbon. It's nicely complex without being demanding. Elijah Craig Small Batch deserves a spot on any bar with extra space for an inexpensive and agreeable tipple.

This is my second time enjoying this whisky. I just purchased a bottle at Gaspar's Liquor Shoppe in Tampa for retail price ($38.99). It is a Tampa Bay Whisky Society barrel pick. Tasted neat from a glencairn. Let's get into it. The pour is very pale golden yellow, reminiscent of Mellow Corn. A swirl shows significant sheeting with small, slow tears forming along the glass. The nose is honeysuckle, dry grass, ripe orchard fruit, a bit of sweet sugar, a touch of vanilla. Its not complex, but there's a bit more going on there than the typical blend. Mouthfeel is creamy and sophisticated. This is easy to drink neat or with a drop. I really need to get into this on ice and this might make a very good highball with club soda. This particular expression from Compass Box is a 49% ABV, 98 proof. It's bigger than virtually any blend I've ever had. On the tongue the Compass Box is all honey, sweet vanilla, almost a Juicy Fruit note in there.... It's very easy to enjoy up front, but the finish is a bit different. Because of the proof, this has a bit of pepper and a long, glorious finish. It coats the mouth with a sweet film and after the swallow the capsacin comes out to play, warming the palate all the way to the chest. LOVELY! In comparison the Dewar's Ancestor is smokier, dirtier, and has more elements I associate with grain alcohol. There's no trace of grain, no notes of acetone in the Compass Box. I really didn't think there was any in the Dewars, but in comparison its there. In comparison the Dewar's 12y.o. ($25 on sale) has a more briny, oceanic nose with a touch more smoke and a bit less of the candy. A drop of distilled water opens the nose even a bit more on the CB. The Dewar's get a bit more briny with a drop, but the CB gets a better separation of fragrant floral elements. I think a drop of water brings the CB together quite nicely. It might even enjoy a cube. It certainly is a great summertime whisky! This Compass Box is a better whisky than the Dewars, full stop. It's bigger, richer, more complex and higher proof. Its not quite a smoky/peaty as the Dewars, but the two are otherwise similar qualitatively. That said, this isn't even close to perfect. The sweet is overdone and the pepper is out of balance. It's good, not great. The Dewars was on sale for $25, but MSRP is $30. CB seems to be around $40 to $45. Is it worth a 33% premium? Should you buy the Compass Box over the Dewar's 12? Yes if you're drinking it neat. Yes if you want something a bit more complex and sweet. Not necessarily if you're drinking it on ice or in a highball. And maybe if you're building cocktails, but it depends on the cocktail. They may be somewhat similar in profile, but they are not equal nor are they substitutes. So my rating... I rate on a bell curve where the typical mass market will hit a 2.5 star leve. To make it to 4 stars a whisky has to be very good indeed. This expression doesn't make it quite that far, but its a step ahead of the blended competition. This is a solid 3.5 and its a good value. Great job and I am definitely going to be checking out some of the other CB expressions!

I started drinking Dewar's White Label sometime in the early 80's and it was my regular drink for many, many years. By the early 90's I'd been pulled into single malts and I've enjoyed many dozens and dozens of that style since. But Dewar's has always been in my rotation and has become something of my airline/airport/business restaurant dinner kind of whiskey when I'm faced with a limited selection (or if I just want the comfort of something that's a known entity). I had Ancestor when it first hit the market (I think - early 90s) but I dont recall if I liked it or just wasn't impressed enough to buy any after the first couple bottles. Again, I was on my way into single malts so its entirely possible that I just didn't buy it because its a blend. Here we are today. I'm revisiting a lot of my old friend brands and tasting anew some of those I haven't had in years and years. This taste of Ancestor is from a new bottle. Tasted neat in a glencairn and allowed to rest about 5 minutes before beginning the evaluation. The pour is a vibrant brass. The nose offers up a pallete of warm vanilla, toffee, butterscotch and orchard fruits. The signature touch of smoke is there, but unlike the White Label, that astringent ethanol and acetone note of yound, mass produced whisky is conspicuous by its absense. Dewar's White Label might be the best selling scotch in the US, but this is a better tasting version of it! In terms of flavor, this ticks a lot of positive boxes. First is that this is completely approachable, relaxed and easy to like. At the $25 sale price I scored this bottle for, that's a hell of an achievment. This is competitive with my now-regular JW Black, but it's definitely better in nearly every way by small increments. Nothing about this dram is dramatic or sensational. It's the low rider of scotch whiskey, going slow and not using much gas, but still holding onto a unique and entertaining personality. This is a solid blend that needs to make absolutely no excuses. At its MSRP of $29, this is very competitive with Monkey Shoulder! I might even like it better, but I'll wait until I can do a SBS to say that definitively. Great value, easy drinking, sweet and soft, complex enough and lacking in any obvious defects. My scale holds that a mass market drink should hit the peak of the bell curve at 2.5 points. Most compentent whiskies will fall between 2 and 3, with a range of 3 to 4 putting the liquor ahead of the pack. That's where this belongs. Recommended.

A dear friend brought this bottle by during a visit. Until I tasted it, I'd never even heard of it. Tasted neat in a glencairn after a few minutes rest. The pour is an apple juice clear pale amber. the nose is vanilla, ethanol, and slight oak. My nose says young and thin on this distillate. Since the bottle does not have the word straight or an age statement, there's no real knowing what's in this 90 proof juice. On the tongue this is light, sweet and simple. Simple as in "not complex". It's not bad. Enjoyable even. It tastes better than the nose suggests. It is inoffensive in every way. Kind of like the Wonder Bread of rye whiskies. This is actually a good choice for someone who's new to rye and whiskey, or whose palate isn't compatible with the often spicy and big "traditional" rye whiskey. In fact, when I think of this as a Canadian whiskey it all seems to make more sense. I think it's more in line with a Lot 40 than an Old Overholt bottled-in-bond. For what it's worth, I think I like the fruitcake of Lot 40 more than the vanilla of John Drew. I definitely like the price a lot more. At the $50 MSRP this is a hard pass. At a $35 sale price its worth tasting if you're adventurous. It faces extremely stiff competition from Old Forester, Templeton, WT, or Rittenhouse. In fact the list of competitive rye for $35 is pretty long. This is definitely not in the class of a Pikeville and really isn't competitive at MSRP. Low marks on the value scale, but if soft, sweet and approachable is the target then this will find the bullseye. I haven't tried it yet, but I don't think this is a candidate for a traditional Manhattan. Maybe better in a sweet Old Fashioned. I'll experiment a little. As I understand it this is distilled in Canada and shipped to Florida where it is branded and bottled. The story of this 90 proof whiskey is on the back of the bottle, but I'm not sure how much of it is marketing or how much of it is relevant to the flavor profile which is what I'm focusing on. There probably won't be another bottle of John Drew on my bar. It's worth tasting if you are in an establishment that carries it. If you are turned off by big, spicy, bold rye and want something simple, sweet, and dessert-like then maybe it will be a fit for you. Average in taste, behind on value, but interesting in origin. Like Templeton The Good Stuff, John Drew is going to end up being my liquor candy fix... until its gone.

A follow up from my first taste of this glorious nectar just 9 days ago. This is the first pour from a fresh bottle. Tasted neat in a glencairn. The pour is a very pale apple juice color. There is some sheeting on a swirl with small, slow tears. The nose is floral and peaty at the same time. Cloves and vanilla, honey and fresh lumber, peat smoke and brine all come through. This has great mouthfeel. It's sweet, rich, and svelte. I'm tasting great floral bouquets and delicate seaside elements over a honeyed drizzle that's topped with just the right amount of pepper. Springbank is a great counterpoint to Ardbeg Uigeadail, tame and refined where the Oogie is bold and forward. As complex as Lagavulin 16, this is a full step softer. This might be the best value in peated scotch whiskey on the planet. Buy this before the price goes up.

I am sitting at a barbecue restaurant with my lovely wife of four decades. I am drinking this very very good scotch. For the sake of my marriage this review will be brief. A bottle of this will be on my bar next week.

Honey sweet & just very slightly smoky. Enjoyed neat from a glencairn at a restaurant. This is our first time sitting at a bar in 3 months. For the sake of my marriage I'll keep this short, if I could find a bottle and it was priced at MSRP I would buy it without hesitation.