Tastes

So full disclosure had 3 pours this weekend, including one today (vacation), but I don't have it in my glass as I write it. I'd never otherwise do this but multiple glasses, with or without water, and multiple pours...I think I can judge this fairly but maybe not my best review notes. Nose - So it's a fruity bomb that's unreal and has no real comp up front. It's this rich fruity sherry driven dessert bomb that transitions to mint (spearmint) and tobacco with oak smoke and spice. Taste - This comes in with a punch of unreal sweetness. It's this dark and deep fruity profile powered by waxy oils and muted vanilla. It's like a kid's candy at first and while it's unique....it isn't mind blowing yet. Then the whisky transitions to oak, spices, tobacco, mint...much like the nose really. The oak is flawless in this tannic touch with sweet oaks and flawless balance. It actually took me 45 minutes with a half dram before I fully accepted that mint was distinct and not an influence of tobacco notes. This has so much more going on, but these were the high lights. Overall - This is a standout unicorn vs the roughly 20 Lagavulin special releases I've had. I generally don't review these as I have most of these over at my friend mike's where we DO review some of these on his channel, often together, so I don't review these here, but I have a pretty sold experience with these, far more than I deserve. This and the 24 year 1991, 2015 release...which we have a review coming, are the two EPIC standouts that we've had. There are a few other stand outs but they don't leap out. So price? Well I don't want to get too into the prices paid by my friend but 1100-1800 USD is kinda the range this one is going for with better deals in the US and far worse for our UK friends. well let me rant a second.... So is this worth over a 1,000 dollars? Well....do you want a unique flavor you can't get anywhere else? If you do then this is the price of entry. That said the market says kinda yes and no. It's many years old and still on shelves but it's dwindling as lovers of this bottle are buying it up, and I'm sure for YEARS it will be on auctions as weirdo's buy whisky like an investment....that's kinda cool as it means we can get bottles down the road but it also means people just buy stuff so real buyers can't? Anyway is this better than some lag's for less? Maybe, but there's nothing else they have done that's ANYTHING like this at least in the last 5-10 years that I've had. So if you want this crazy fruity dessert lag profile, get this one. It's the ONLY choice you have. So score? Well, my 5 star isn't a PERFECT whisky, it's just an insanely high standard for the best of the best of the best I've had. It's a 5 star bottle. This is truly an epic dram, one you'll never forget.

Long story but this was bought for the purpose of buying bourbon...I'd had it, I wasn't that impressed. nose - so it's light and well interesting. Oak, vanilla, perhaps a cashew, pears, and some barn elements. taste - Now I'm getting some springbank, just this savory unami thing they do so well. Water is a MUST. Water really brings out that sweet wine and really just opens up the flavors. The end result is a fruity sweet, hazelburn that's young, spirited, and not really one that I'll go back to often. The lack of peat on these or whatever really takes away a lot of what makes springbank springbank. These wine casks just leave an almost coyingly sweet dram with just enough savory to make it a fun experience. I'm enjoying it and I'll likely enjoy this whole bottle, it might be my "no regret" springbank to drink when I want CS and the 10 just won't do. Anyway, these are STILL available in places, 10,800 bottles were made. It's a bit over 100 bucks and frankly, it's very good but not great whisky. I think they rushed these and should have left them in the bourbon casks another 3 or so years. I mean really a 9 year? I'm leaning towards a 2.5. It's above average whisky, springbank doesn't do average. But it's below their average by a lot.

This is the first of these LE's I've bought. Their core offering has been pretty meh, but with word Nancy Fraley has been working with them, I'm excited. Nose - The first thing that really jumps out is a dusty corn and nutty element, very much making me think of a younger beam, perhaps a bakers or a knob creek 9ish year (well actually those NAS ones). Or you know bookers if bookers weren't terrible :) Then comes a very pleasant sweetness that I would without knowing there's finishing associate with really well aged older bourbons. That antique food finishing and intense brown sugar and candied oak. But more nosing starts to bring out almost a fresh rain over fall leaves with baking spices and rock candy. if not clear, there's peanuts on here as well. There's a pie crust here, heavy cinnamon and brown sugar on it, but yet balanced with the dough not letting the cinnamon bite the nostrils. Taste - While the nose is really something the taste takes a bit of a step back towards 7 year old bourbon. It's sweet but not deep or rich. The mouth feel isn't much to speak of. It however is explosive in total flavor. That sweet a bit thin upfront then gets spicy and oaky and peanuty and it bites pretty nice and hard on the finish. That finish mind you is really long and lingers. It's so much of a beam or perhaps a really nutty heaven hill kind of experience, but those armagnac casks are adding depth to finish, adding more sweetness and adding more mellow fruits. The armagnac is also responsible for a sweetness up front big time. But it seems that this one needed 3 more months in the finishing casks and another year or two in the bourbon barrels. 100 bucks? I have to say, yeah this is worth about that, but you'd want it for 75. Overall I'm at a 2.5 here. But I'm debating going a lot higher. There's just something off for me. I think this just needs more age or more proof. But it's honestly pretty dang good as it is. And thus 2.5, this is about an 85-86 in my book. And at 100 bucks that's not bad.

So this is going to be unique....oranges and sherry, and 6 years old? OK. Nose - well not to shock anyone but orange spice. It actually brings me back to the one and only time I had an orange chocolate and was confused as hell with it. Like people want THAT? However on whisky I'm not sure I have such an instant dislike. In fact, I'm somewhat intrigued by the lack of an amrut oak finish on the nose. More shocked I even get some vanilla with the chocolate (sherry influence?) and well orange peels for sure. Taste - So once again orange way hard up front, but then comes spices and oak, then it softens and lets in vanilla and perhaps even honey, then back to oak and rich flavors. The finish almost even has me thinking for a second there might be some peat in here. Bitters and sours and sweet and spicy are all over this dram. This is complex and truly unique whisky so in these sense, I'm a big fan. Would this be a daily drinker for me? No. Will I buy another bottle? Nope. Am I reasonably happy with this however? Yeah, actually am pretty happy with this. It once again shows that power of amrut's finish from the oak being able to offset odd and overly sweet whiskies. Scoring a 3.25 due to the insane complexity but holding back a bit as I can't really get past the orange oddities I get. I think here again Amrut had epic potential and we got good whisky instead.

Nose - spicy, fruity, oranges and tangerines, deep oak, burned oak, some red fruits, and even a touch of orchard fruits. Sweet, oakey, balanced, but not all that exciting or enticing. Taste - I get a sweet fruity up front blast, then it turns jammy and marmaladey, then transitions to spices and oak and heat. The finish is long and lingering with intense oaks. I'm struggling to really put notes to this one. It's off. The sweetness is a bit artificial, it doesn't have amruts normal intensity of finishing. It however just kills it on the finish. There's wood smoke for sure. Overall a solid 2.75 for me. I just love how Amrut finishes and that saves a nice sweet but uneventful whisky and almost swings it into pretty special.

This one has gotten all kinds of hype and there are dozens of batches around so I jumped on the KY-3 after passing on the first 2 batches. Nose - so right off the bat I'm kinda getting Barton'd out. I like their juice and I've had some really good stuff, but it's kinda also becoming boring when everyone is releasing another 12-14 year single barrel with similar profiles. I do get a bit more oak smoke and oak than some of these. Adds a nice balance to the apples and cinnamon spices I tend to find here. Vanilla notes but a thinner less creamy vanilla. Taste - Up front a lot of classic barton, sweet, fruity, then going into spices. The mid pallet starts to get a bit funky with old bourbon notes coming through and then the finish is more rye spice, a lot more old antique oak barrels. I'm really impressed with some of these notes here. I think these barrels they're blending (3 barrels in this batch) are really finding a way to push the complexity up in a very good way. Outstanding blending and down right tasty bourbon. I'm in for another at this price point to be honest with you. I just wish some other distilleries could get some 12-14 year stuff out at under 150 bucks and at reasonable proofs. 3.25, well above average, but not exceptional. I'd have to debate this vs cream of kentucky vs down home 12 year batch 2. Not sure where I scored all those, but this would be the one to get for the weller fans as it's sweeter and seems to be going in a similar direction as WLW. Not sure why I made that connection but here we are. Cream is more generic bourbon, but exceptional at that. And downhome is more oak and spice and a bit more complex and assertive. I'm clearly in the down home camp and I think it is the better whisky of the group in scoring as there's more to it, but that doesn't mean you'll like it more than this.

Nose - sweet with hints of lagavulin's classic malt, but a bit of astringent oak and alcohol combining. A bit of vegetable notes but then turning smokey and sweet. Taste - the 2018 is best noted with a rich amount of complexity. A mix of oak, spice, some youth, and the lagavulin malt. If you and more classic lag 12, add some water and it brings the peat and smoke and aristocratic sweet lagavulin malt forward. The 2018 certainly uses some tired casks but has some nice still vanilla rich casks. Youth and some less than optimal casks leaves this one a bit short, but the high abv and quality mouth feel drive this one to a 2.75 for me. Quality quality dram for those of you looking for quality on a reasonable budget and who are ok with spirit forward whisky.

Nose - smoked meat, pineapple, and perhaps lemon. Lightly smoked oak as well. Alcohol is certainly here but it's mellow and at 56.5% it's very approachable on the nose. Taste - there's a weird umami taste off profile but wonderful. Sweet lagavulin malt. I always get a touch of a bannana but not in a young and youthful way. Smoked fruits and meats, perhaps a pig roast and pinapple but there's that umami note. I really am enjoying this 2017 for a 12 year and reasonably priced bottle. Back when it came out at least. 3.0 and I'd buy it again.

What in god's name? Nose - alcohol is heavy here. You get traditional lag sweetness, but really it's that sweetness and alcohol. Something is already going off in my head "what's wrong". No depth no oak, no richness, and it's just thin while alcohol driven. Taste - yep Houston we have a problem. Sour, bitter, alcohol driven. The finish starts back into some quality lag malt character. The oak on this is just terrible. it reminds me of what lag 8 (I hate) at CS. I don't need a higher alcohol expression of a bad whisky. So my fear is after months of the only lags I have drank have all been special limited releases and I've had nearly all of the releases over the last 5-6 years thanks to friends. So I poured the 2018 which I've always felt was a pretty traditional lag 12. OK, I HAVE become a bit more of a snob, but I get all kinds of quality in this 2018 bottling. There's better oak, sweetness is balancing, no sharp bitters, and it's just richer and fuller of flavors. Back to the 19, there's a hint of menthol at the end, I am at least finding some complexity but it's so biting and alcohol driven. I'd never believe you if you blinded me and said this was a 12 year. If this is the new standard for lag 12, they can keep it out of the US. 1.5 just a massive disappointment, but I must admit, I'm getting to where I just don't dig 12 years whisky like I used to.

The 2019 King of Kentucky I an many others are on record for stating it is truly the greatest Bourbon ever made. Tonight I bring you my fist bottle review of the 2020 which pulls the age statement back to 14 years from 15 and sadly while they made about the same number of bottles, these are going to be much more heavily sold at the distillery and as a result they'll be far harder to get and likely much more price prohibitive for those of us who loved last years to get it. Lets just say my cost to get this was insane. The nose starts sweet and I'd argue a bubble gum like note. Brown sugar and rich french vanilla is coming through. Oak and leather are here. The biggest problem with this is that it's overly sweet and somewhat youthful. At least youthful in the sense that WLW is a bit young, not young like an evan williams. Water is bringing out apple cinnamon. It brings down that "WLW" bubble gum sweetness and creates a more integrated and balanced over all profile. Complex, rich and well integrated spices, oak and sweetness now. Taste - Upfront I'm once again getting a huge sweet bubble gum. Then a transition to vanilla, rich oak, huge spice bomb driven by cinnamon and tobacco, and then finishes with burnt oak. Once again I'm getting something just off here. It's good, it's extremely good, but it's not ready. You can just tell this bottling is too young. Water - once again well more spice and oak tannins and just huge oak spice. Crème brûlée with a richly overly sweet oak. The spice really went to 11. Well folks, I'd really wanted to find out tonight I was off on my first tasting but this is by far the worst of the 5 king of kentuck bottles I've had, 4 being last years release. I think the 1 less year, especially with that heat sync where a year is more than a year really did do this a disservice. If you pay over 400, god I hope you find a better barrel than this. Barrel 16 and this is one of 75 bottles and at 64.55%. I'm sorry guys, but the king is dead. I hope to find at least one more barrel just to confirm that the age drop really did hurt it. I will however just note, I paid basically retail (store cost was a touch high so I paid 270), but I did buy 3 HP 30's to cover my "right to buy"...which has me close to the right on a second. A last note is that while I get some youth, I also get some over oaked notes. I think this needed MORE oak to fix the off oak notes. But it just needs more sweetness that was what put the 2019's on a whole other level. The intensity of sweetness is what made King of Kentucky 2019 perfectly balance with what they claim is the oak character of a 21 year old bourbon. Anyway 3.75 vs a 5.0 on last year's bottle. The difference in perfection and outstanding is really narrow sometimes as you simply can't have flaws like I'm getting here to be a 4 let alone a 5.