Tastes

OK a few house cleaning notes here. First, this is a release of about 55k bottle so this wasn't one batch or even two and there's going to be variation because it's Beam and their quality control is borderline pathetic. So please keep this in mind as I expect we'll see some very different notes because of it being beam. Nose - Apples and caramel with baking spices. Hands down the sweetest nose I've had one a beam to date. At the very finish there's a touch of oak, very much that beam oak which is somewhat gritty and dusty. It's however very faint. Water amps up the apples and spices but in a wonderfully pleasant way. Taste - The bottle mentioned caramelized oak and I couldn't explain it better. It's this sweet and wonderful upfront pour and then it lightly and gently starts to heat up as spices and oaks build up. The finish then gives way to more oak and some really nice and fun peanut butter elements. Water does up the spice and the oak bite but also brings more sweetness up front. It really adds an element of intensity which is unusual with water. Overall, one of the best beam products to date. Sure a bookers fan will be upset this isn't a kick in the balls and they might hate that there's complexity and nuance to it. A knob single barrel fan is going to also be missing the higher proof notes. That said there's a complexity to the whisky that's really something else. This will be subjective as to if you like this more or less than a store pick, but I can safely say this drinks unlike any pick I've had. Well, I put my money where my mouth is and I bought a second bottle of this. 105 bucks makes this a value bourbon in 2020 and with a HUGE production run, this won't be a bottle you have to chase like some idiot running after the girl who's cheated on you, but you just can't get over. I'm at a very solid 3.5. This is a showcase of aged beam...but again I know there are bottles out there that aren't going to be this sweet and I've even had some people say their bottles were over oaked. Sadly, I can't speak to that, but I know enough people who've had this and LOVED the sweetness that I know these sweet bottles are by no means some "honey barrels" that aren't out there or normal either.

So as with all other reviews so far...I haven't spent enough time for a proper review but lets go. I've had this now 3 times (not just 3 pours). I've compared it side by side with decades and a 10 year pick of spirit. I've also put it next to Knob creek 15 year which I'll be getting to sooner than later. So I think I have at least the general notes on this one. Nose - Instantly the funky turkey notes come out, I don't like the words dusty as that implies a decades old bottling and this is nothing like that. I'm fairly certain that this is camp nelson which is kinda the turkey boy lover's rickhouse and likely one that will upset non turkey lovers. I'm a bit agnostic with wild turkey...I like them but I don't think their "off" notes are some kind of magical dream land. With that funk however is an amazingly sweet nose. Each swirl gives me something new, from vanilla, creme brulee, shoe polish, wood finish, deep old oak (good sweet oak) and deep old funky oak. There's a lot to unwind and it never seems to come at you the same way twice in a row. Water teases out more spice which is a surprisingly big part of this bottle. Taste - So the first pour today and what strikes me is not any one flavor, but how many layers there are here. Up front just non descriptive sweetness, almost a corn sugar like note. Then there's a level of richness and more vanilla and light hints of oak. Then you think you're going into a finish, but you're not there yet. You get darker sweets, perhaps some chocolate, some oak, and a sharp and shocking spicy note. FINALLY, we're onto a finish where you get oak funky oak and well aged vanillas. Water mutes a lot of the transitions and brings the whisky together more. Here there's a bit more bitterness and sourness to the oak and the spice comes in earlier and then fades. Water does this whisky ZERO favors. Overall I think wild turkey has done a really nice job with this bottling. They've managed to bring us a high oak and high sweet expression of wild turkey and not dumbed it down for the masses like a Buffalo Trace offering would have done. I think this will please huge turkey fans, but I don't see this being a wow bottle to those who aren't in the turkey camp already. This is a niche bottling that show cases a profile I don't believe the average bourbon drinker, experienced or not will want to pay huge premiums for. And with that I'm left with a challenging score to give. 175 MSRP but a great many stores are asking over 200 (which is sadly what I paid). Price not considered in the scoring here, but it's worth noting it. If you really are a hardcore Turkey fan this might be a 90 or about a 4.0 but for the rest of the world that's about an 85 or a 3.25. Lets call it a day at a 3.5. Review done after about 5-6 pours of this over the course of 4 days. There's been no noticeable change with the bottle being open but this is one that may take upwards of 6 months to change.

I really enjoyed the 10 year old...lets see if my memory was right and if this at 140 bucks is justified. OK - so this alabama style stuff would mean they are flavoring it with apples. So lets see Nose - very alcohol forward, the 120 proof under sells this. I'm getting butter scotch, vanilla, and yeah that might be an orchard fruit. A lot of alcohol notes on a toasted oak note as well. My first thought it perhaps a bit sweeter than some but more or less classic light whisky notes. Maybe there's some apple notes here but it's not much. Taste - my first and really instant thought was "MGP light whisky". That's really all I'm thinking. Vanilla, custard, butter scotch, and a very sweet fruity upfront note. But really, blind I'm just assuming 11-13 year old MGP light whisky and I'd generally say this is a bit more on the buttery, sweet, viscous side vs some that are a bit thinner and more spirit forward. Overall I really am into this one. But I like light whisky. That said 140 bucks was WAY too much for this and it doesn't remind me of the 10 year which I really enjoyed. I'd pass on this one. 2.5 stars. It'll be on my shelves for years to come, but I'm not THAT upset with having it around.

I bought this right when it came out so this has been open a few months and I've had it about 60% down for while (haven't had a pour in at least 2 if not 3 months). Hoping to give this one a really proper review. Full disclosure I suck at explaining "funk" and peat for that matter. Nose - I get this metallic and rusty like note that moves into savory like a soy sauce or some kind of reduction sauce with wine elements. Almost a cooking sherry, not one you'd drink. Alcohol comes off pretty strong here. Now once I get past all that I do get some figs, chocolate, and maybe even a faint pepper mint. Taste - The flavor is a bit more traditional sherry finishing than the nose. This is clearly from the color which is dark as hell to the flavor a sherry bomb, but done so with that killkerran dirty funky malt. There's a salt savory dirty bouillon cube like element here mixed in with chocolates, figs, raisins, and rich malts. I still do get some elements of what I'd considered a cooking sherry vs a drinking one. I've had a sample of the 8 year sherry which I found unrefined to a point of failure and just flatly I don't want to work that hard to find a perfect spot with water to drink a whisky. I had similar issues with the bourbon cask 8 as well. This is the MUCH more refined big brother, but at 15 years, we're not yet refined. It's been to prep school, it knows which fork to use, but you gotta remind it of those rules (not an issue I have in my life as I'm pretty happy with uber eats bringing me my food) from time to time. I'd add it comes off spicy from the oak and alcohol but it's not overly thick of oily either. It's actually a hair thin given the abv and age. A completely unique and different whisky from anything else I can really think of right now. Far more savory than sweet. This is nothing like a springbank 15. I like my whisky more sweet than this, especially sherry forward ones, but I can really really appreciate this one. So much so I bought a backup just in case, and with these going for 450 secondary back when I could still find them in stores, I don't want to think about what a replacement would cost now. I'm at a 3.5. This isn't my wheelhouse but it's next door to it. I don't know who this whisky is for, you have to be a huge fan of off profile unique stuff. I know there are a lot of whisky geeks who are in that camp so I'm sure there's a huge market. For me, a wonderfully unique and different experience, but not a wow bottle. 88 out of 100 I think is where I'd be with this one. 86 on enjoyment but +2 for unique and interesting elements. I'm glad I have a backup but I doubt i get into it for a few years.

So word on the street is 12 year old bourbon, but they listed 11 year on batch 1, no mention here so I'm skeptical. For those unaware this is independent bottling (sourced) with specialty cask finishing done. No real details on where they got the bourbon, but I'd guess kentucky bourbon. Nose - Sweet, buttery, distinct alcohol kick, chocolately, caramel, and just rich sweetness. XO casks are playing a very distinct role here. A huge amount of brown sugar as well. Taste - Rich sugary and dark. Toffee, spices, oak, rich brown sugar that's been in a sauce pan with butter. The finish is more favor as you get that XO thing, I can't put my finger on it. It's that oak and just aged wine/beer like thing where umami type notes come out. I'm a self proclaimed XO fan boy, but I can't say that this is better than the first batch. A great complement to the first one and while here I think the XO casks are a bit more over powering than the sherry casks, and that's not a good thing there. Then again maybe these bourbon casks needed to be over shadowed? I can't speak to the original flavors of the bourbons here. I'm going with a very solid 3.25 and I'm saving the right to bump this up to a 3.5. A good bourbon with good casks, but for the 200 price point it is a rough sell. I kinda wish they'd found some older casks that had started to get over oaked and then used the XO casks to balance them back out. edit - bumped this to 3.5. It opened up nicely after about 45 minutes in the glass and got super sweet and a bit more bourbon forward. Yeah this is really good, but again not exceptional. But saving the option to go back if this opens up more.

nose - Sweet corn, faint dust, oak, clay putty. Nothing interesting. You know that horrible candy corn stuff? This smells a bit like that. Taste - Starts sweet but quickly goes to funk, dirt, clay, putty, and harash alcohol (it's 100 proof only). This is horrible. Run from this crap. I don't know how they found such bad whisky to blend but my lord they did it. on sale for 40 for a 375 ml bottle!

If a distiller doesn't bother to water down a whisky, is it on steroids? The quick and simple answer is no...it's the same whisky just without water. Sometimes this comes with non chill filtration which DOES give it a steroid like effect. Sometimes they pick honey barrels which does that tool. Or with ECBP you get older whisky. Woodford has elected to be woodford with less water, a fancy bottle, and a 100 dollar markup. Before we get to the whisky, warning. DO NOT ADD WATER! Nose - its' woodford. That dark chocolate, brown sugar, sweet and completely unrefined and entry level bourbon. Great brown foreman notes with a lesser expression of them behind it. A consistent as they come kinda of feel showing a great level of quality assurance, a big corporate feel, and yet an exceptional master distillery and blender involved to make this work. I can't express how much this smells like a higher proof woodford and just that. Taste - Here we deviate a bit in that the youth and unrefined nature of woodford comes out here and you can tell you're drinking spirit forward and younger whisky. You can tell they didn't take the time to find anything but regular woodford barrels for this. Sweet, chocolate, a touch of bannana, a bit of a dr pepper like note, and overall like woodford a good bourbon for us sweet lovers. The alcohol is harsh and over the top. I tried water and even a drop washes this away, the chill filtration just ruins the CS effort. I try and score whisky for what's in the glass and not more than that, but this one begs me to comment on the price and frankly the disgusting and just horrible choice for what I firmly believe is a chill filtered product, but I'll try and avoid that. Woodford is a highly enjoyable bourbon and I'm a huge fan of the double oaked. This is far inferior to the double oaked, it's not remotely close to that league. Instead this is the most boring and dull over the top high proof bourbon I've ever had. But it's got great bones for a young bourbon. 1.75 and I'm sure that's too high but I like woodford and I like higher proof. Even when it's ruined by stupid. The real shame is this just showcases what could happen if they aged this longer, picked honey barrels, and didn't chill filter. Woodford could put out not a world class bourbon but a world class whisky that could rival anyone. Instead that settle for mediocrity.

There will be a time when marketing schools will offer a class called "Don't be Highland Park". A brand that has exceptional respect among whisky drinkers, but seems hell bent on ruining their brand equity with what can only be seen as the worst marketing perhaps ever. Highland Park The Dark takes this to all time extremes, offering a highly sherried whisky in a black opaque bottle, throwing it in an expensive yet cheaply finished "wooden" display box, throwing a CHEAP black bag over it, and then putting some god awful horrible looking snake or something on the bottle...ok honestly I don't even know that I've looked at the thing on the bottle, it's just too stupid. Then the best part is they mention "only" 28,000 bottles as if we're supposed to see that this is mass produced and think "oh it's rare". No...28,000 bottles that retail for about 300 USD aren't rare and will ultimately be sold at a discount (which is why I am bringing this to you, I didn't pay 300). OK marketing aside, heavily sherried highland park is one of my favorite things out there. I'm a fan boy and while I don't believe this is CS, it's over 50% which is another win. I'd also assume non chill filtered and natural color. I'd try and find out but the only information on this bottle from HP is on this packet in the box where I'm only assuming a summer intern wrote it up and then had an 8 year old proof read and frankly I'm not going back through the incoherent ramblings to see if they mentioned it. My incoherent ramblings here are free! Nose - I let this one sit out for about 40 minutes to let it open up and it's really changed from my first few nosings. When I have nosed this in the past it was sweet and to the point I thought a more dessert/waxy type wine cask was used. Now I do get distinct sherry notes though I'm not sure what kind (and I don't believe we know more than European oak casks). I wouldn't be surprised to hear PX, but I hesitate for one reason. This isn't a classic HP malt back, this is dark and charcoal smoke influenced. There isn't a touch of HP peat here but a good couple of a dashes of a very assertive peat. It's almost off putting at first but quickly becomes the highlight of this one. The sweetness seems to generally win out on what dominates the nose but that smoke back there is different and it's playing with everything. I can't compare it really to any other peat out there and I like that. Sweet and dirty charcoal smoke, if that doesn't scream scotch lovers scotch nose I don't know what does. Taste - when i first poured this a friend commented that my eyes watered. I was in bliss with the depths of complexity. I'm no less excited by this one today. A classic aged but not OLD sherry influenced malt opens this one up, sweet, almost bubble gum like, very PXy to me (watch this be oloros). Then the whisky takes on transitions and depth. Tannins give way cinnamon that bites, then burnt smoked meat, and charcoal, and next day grill notes come out. This all explodes in richness, power, and depth. HP often is a good mix of sweet and peat, but this different. This is sweet THEN peat and both have been turned up to 11. I can totally see drinking this on a bitter cold night outside by a campfire and it just taking me to a special place and frankly I can't think of a better dram for that having had this. The peat here I can't stress enough is just charcoal and smoke, not earthy clay, not medicinal, just charcoal smoke and perhaps complemented by some hot cinnamon (this isn't red hots cinnamon). Overall for me the spice levels and bite on the finish are a bit more than I find truly enjoyable. I know I raved on and on about it and for good reason. It's both a unique experience and truly special. I just you know, would rather get to explore and enjoy that sweet sherry with a bit more classic HP malt/peat. That said I also can't stop going back to this glass. 4.25 a completely wow level whisky and if you can get this at a discount, get it. At 300, lets be real, those stores are going to discount or you can ask for one. That said it's well worth the 300, it's a unique experience and a really good one. There's still plenty of it to go around and I expect these will still be on shelves in a few years.

Well shoot, missed being the first review and I'm SURE this is an old bottling. Sunday on a holiday weekend and ohio is kinda opening but not open. What else to do but drink all day and write up some reviews on my recent purchases? Nose - this is a fairly light and delicate nose backed by a decent abv and some thicker malt. Apples, vanilla, some slightly more sour fruity notes, light but very distinct oak, some light cinnamon/baking spices, and as I get more into it more and more spices come out. At first nosing it was a bit of a sour apple pie, but those notes have shifted into a day old cinnamon role. Each time I go back I get something similar but different in terms of these nice desserts. That said again it's delicate with some body, but it isn't rich at all. I'm not finding any distinct impact on the nose from the 6 month maturation in sherry casks but I suspect it's blending in nicely with the speyside sweet fruity character and hiding a bit in the oak. Taste - A wonderfully complex and nuanced whisky with a full spectrum of flavors and a range of experiences. At first it's somewhat sweet but muted, the older whisky is trying to come out and show itself off but it's a bit closed off, perhaps this one will open up with more time and oxidation, but it's been open a few weeks so it's had some time. Then it transitions to a bit more oak spice with cinnamon and toasted oak notes. But we're not done, the cinnamon deepends and bites down as the sweetness turns more dark fruits, perhaps hints now of the sherry as I get a light chocolate note, and then the finish is a touch sour really focusing on the back of the tongue as it creates a really different flavor, but make no mistake the oak and sweet are all still coating the rest of the mouth leaving you with a complex and highly enjoyable whisky. I do find this one a bit more spicy, drying, and perhaps heavy on oak for some drinkers. I'm not one of these, but I have had this a few times and there have been nights where I was a bit sensitive to oak bitterness and this came off pretty poor. It's a challenging dram for what I generally see as tamer malts. I'd be in the 90-91 range on this one and for me that's 4 stars. This is a great dram and well well worth the price of admission. if you see this and you're digging the bourbon maturation and oak notes with a bit of sweetness added for balance, I think this will be one for you.

How do you rate a whisky when youth defines the complexity. It's an issue oddly on all my reviews tonight. Nose - YOUNG, spices, citrus, and yes earthy. Taste - So this is spices, citrus, vanilla. Then we got some oak, light earth, darker vanilla. A toasted barrel oak even. A really nicely made whisky, doesn't offer the value of the 12 or 18 tomatin but it's unique. Would I buy it again? no. Would I buy it again for 20 bucks? No. Am I glad to have tried it? I'm not upset. 1.25 score - I don't get it. It's and there's quality to this, but I'd never push anyone to waste money on this one.