Tastes

I had this at a bar a while back and have been hunting with no luck for a while. Finally grabbed a bottle. 1910 is a double oaked whisky which gives it a bit more of a chocolate, savory, creme brulee thing and it seems to do this often. Woodford double oaked being the gold standard of this. Though my all time favorite bourbon was the jefferson 16 year double oaked (12 years then 4 years). That is one I wish I could have found a second bottle. Anyway comes in at 46.5% which is a bit light for bourbon and then oddly uses this "Old Fine Whisky" statement and then on the neck it tells us something about being the first bottled in bond (of course this isn't bottled in bond). OK so Old Forester is the worst company of respected bourbon makers when it comes to marketing. I'm not joking, had I not been told about this, I'd have never bought this with how bad this marketing really is. Nose - This is sweet. I get dusty old leather, over ripe almost rotting apple, some orchard spice, maybe even some old books, and just a never ending sweet vanilla that's shining all the way through. Taste - my first though it watered down woodford double oaked. I get a creamy note that really opens the whole whisky up. It's like a bourbon cream flavor in a bourbon vs the other way around. It seems to be almost a vanilla forward oak cream if that makes any sense. Some dusty leather and wood. The finish gives me creme brulee elements that burnt vanilla. Just a quick note on this - this is a sipper for SMALL pours. Too much and the sweetness over powers and it starts to get off putting. I don't get that same issue with woodford double oaked so perhaps this is sweeter or more heavy in flavor. I'm not sure why but I had a large pour last night and I was debating blending or just capping it for tomorrow. That shouldn't stop anyone from buying this in bulk if they can. It's outstanding bourbon and one I hope to never be without. A rare 3.5 star rating on a bourbon that retails for about 50 bucks. I'm debating a 4 but the mouth feel is too thin for that.

So it seems I was able to find a lost blend from way back in 2014 in Louisville Kentucky in a store that looked as if they'd never even bothered to add anything of value in scotch. I to be honest though perhaps I'd forgotten about a re-release but it seems not. nose - First impression is just straight up light clean sweet smoke. Now I'm getting a bit of apple, and a bit of a cider perhaps some brown sugar or hints of cinnamon. There's a pastry note. Touch of wax that is clearly there but if you'd not told me clyenlish I'd have not called it that. It's funny now that I've gotten used to the nose the smoke is completely gone. Taste - I wish I had the money to have bought every bottle of this. How to explain this one. There's a battle between fruity notes, fruit spices, some smoke, some earthy note, a bit of a waxy oily grassy note, then more spices and more fruits. There is a dance of sweet and peat going on here that I could watch forever. I want to say oily honey, touch of apple's covered in cream, light smoke like you'd get on a pizza crust that's golden but not darkened from a wood oven and then a bit of campfire but it's off about 200 feet away and it isn't blowing toward you. it's nice and aromatic vs in your face. There are spices from oak that just add a nice touch. Really want to know the age of what's in here. A part of me feels this might be younger than 18 for all but perhaps that last small amount and that might normally bother me on a 120 dollar bottle but not here. I think the lost blend tells the story of how compass box no longer can get the same quality whisky due to the whisky boom and this is sadly a reminder of what I used to love about the brand. Don't get me wrong they still make great stuff, but prices are soaring and quality isn't. This is a sweet spot! I can't believe I'm doing it but 4 stars. I've spent my whisky budget for the rest of the year and then some I think, but I might have to think about another bottle.

OK back for some more reviews. Today Glengoyne 18 year. I really do want to do this side by side with a Macallan 18 but unless someone else is buying, that's not happening. I could put in next to a few other options I have but nothing else seems just right. A vs. with this however seems needed. Anyway 43%, chill filtered, and non colored. They got 1 of those 3 right. 120 bucks puts this into the reasonable all be it not great priced whisky group. At 46% I think I'd give this one high marks on price but at 43 I don't see this as value. Just reasonable. Color - not big on color reviews but as it's non colored, you can see a nice gold with some red hues. This is heavy refilled sherry barrels without a doubt and I'd guess American oak as well. Nose - First note is just vanilla, oak, and a hint of sherry. A second pull and I'm starting to see the apple some pear and some jam. Fruity but gives me more an impression of some ex bourbon barrel influence than all sherry. If all sherry there are some tired old wood in here. Taste - A lot of vanilla, it is spicy with a lot of oak notes, and then that jam. If I didn't read this was all sherry barrels I'd assume this was slightly more sherried than the disappointing 15 year. Finishes with a lot of sherry spice notes. Finish is actually pretty long as well. Overall, I'm a bit disappointed as I wanted more of a sherry explosion. So far the sample I had of the 25 year remains the dream I have with each Glengoyne, that I just get a less mature version of that master piece. Instead I just get very different expression with the 12, 15, and 18. All a good but when people tell me these guys are sherry bombs, well I guess they're talking about the 25 and perhaps the 21 which I've yet to find a bottle of. All said I'm giving this a 3 star rating. The finish is so long and lingering that it pulls up the whole rest of the issues and brings it to a 3. Without that finish I honestly could have been close to a 2 star which I believe is what I gave the 15.

OK so I didn't buy the PX finished bottle (wasn't at the store I bought these at) and I'll get into as I go through this. Otherwise I'll focus on the Manzanilla but this will be a side by side review. Nose - Manzanilla has the vanilla notes but not the butter scotch. It's sweeter and there's a lot more just overall to smell here, much more intense. The Oloroso is drier more sherry dark fruits and less of the grape/wine element. There's a lot less butter scotch and vanilla here. Fino - butter scotch, vanilla, a bit of dark fruits, perhaps some grape/wine elements. Swirling I start to get some oak, almost buttered toast. The Fino might be the most complex but the Oloroso is the most powerful and frankly by far my favorite. Manzanilla is the sweetest. Taste - Manzanilla - sweet and oily, fruity, but no distinct finishing. I could believe this was just a speyside though it's a bit too fruit forward and sweet imo to not have some finishing. Oloroso - more spice, perhaps spicier. chocolate, dark fruits (waxy). There's more influence from the finishing I believe. Fino - Spicy, it has a good vanilla note, some nice fino notes (I know). Some fruity elements, light fruits, but spicy. My first comment is that these have incredibly improved from when i first opened them and I got nearly no finishing. That said these are still fairly bourbon forward, likely some fairly well used casks for the secondary fill. Manzanilla- overall this is an interesting drinker. It's however not really for me. 12 years is a bit young for this one. I think heavier finishing would really help if they were going for 12 years old. That said I'm still really happy with this. At 60+ I'd not recommend this unless you want to do a side by side comp like this. This is a bottle that isn't getting killed this year and maybe not next. You'll note I wrote the same thing on the Fino and Oloroso. I somewhat like the more vanilla and sweet notes here. I like the finishing on the other two but they took on a spice character I don't associate with wine casking. That said it's coy and waxy and vanilla heavy. It's not my jam and it comes off the youngest. As a result, slightly lower score.

OK so I didn't buy the PX finished bottle (wasn't at the store I bought these at) and I'll get into as I go through this. Otherwise I'll focus on the Oloroso but this will be a side by side review. Nose - The Oloroso is drier more sherry dark fruits and less of the grape/wine element. There's a lot less butter scotch and vanilla here. Fino - butter scotch, vanilla, a bit of dark fruits, perhaps some grape/wine elements. Swirling I start to get some oak, almost buttered toast. Manzanilla has the vanilla notes but not the butter scotch. It's sweeter and there's a lot more just overall to smell here, much more intense. The Fino might be the most complex but the Oloroso is the most powerful and frankly by far my favorite. Taste - Oloroso - more spice, perhaps spicier. chocolate, dark fruits (waxy). There's more influence from the finishing I believe. Fino - Spicy, it has a good vanilla note, some nice fino notes (I know). Some fruity elements, light fruits, but spicy. Manzanilla - sweet and oily, fruity, but no distinct finishing. I could believe this was just a speyside though it's a bit too fruit forward and sweet imo to not have some finishing. My first comment is that these have incredibly improved from when i first opened them and I got nearly no finishing. That said these are still fairly bourbon forward, likely some fairly well used casks for the secondary fill. Oloroso- overall this is an interesting drinker. It's however not really for me. 12 years is a bit young for this one. I think heavier finishing would really help if they were going for 12 years old. That said I'm still really happy with this. At 60+ I'd not recommend this unless you want to do a side by side comp like this. This is a bottle that isn't getting killed this year and maybe not next. You'll note I wrote the same thing on the Fino. It's a bit too spicy and bitter for my normal profile.

OK so I didn't buy the PX finished bottle (wasn't at the store I bought these at) and I'll get into as I go through this. Otherwise I'll focus on the FINO but this will be a side by side review. Nose - butter scotch, vanilla, a bit of dark fruits, perhaps some grape/wine elements. Swirling I start to get some oak, almost buttered toast. The Oloroso is drier more sherry dark fruits and less of the grape/wine element. There's a lot less butter scotch and vanilla here. Manzanilla has the vanilla notes but not the butter scotch. It's sweeter and there's a lot more just overall to smell here, much more intense. The Fino is somewhat muted. Taste - Spicy, it has a good vanilla note, some nice fino notes (I know). Some fruity elements, light fruits, but spicy. Oloroso - more spice, perhaps spicier. chocolate, dark fruits (waxy). There's more influence from the finishing I believe. Manzanilla - sweet and oily, fruity, but no distinct finishing. I could believe this was just a speyside though it's a bit too fruit forward and sweet imo to not have some finishing. My first comment is that these have incredibly improved from when i first opened them and I got nearly no finishing. That said these are still fairly bourbon forward, likely some fairly well used casks for the secondary fill. Fino - overall this is an interesting drinker. It's however not really for me. 12 years is a bit young for this one. I think heavier finishing would really help if they were going for 12 years old. That said I'm still really happy with this. At 60+ I'd not recommend this unless you want to do a side by side comp like this. This is a bottle that isn't getting killed this year and maybe not next.

Quick review nose - vanilla and wax. taste - waxy, vanilla, and grainy notes. This is not a 100 dollar whisky. I paid 75 for this 2014 bottling and I wouldn't consider doing it again. Avoiding long - it's not offensive it's not bad. I just can't see this being a good buy.

17 year old scotch bottled at 55.9% Nose - classic fruity bourbon barrel finished scotch. Heavy citrus, light grassy notes, aged oak (though a bit of a wet barn like note). Taste - super sweet. A bit surprisingly so. I didn't get any of this sweetness on the nose at all. Layers of oak, vanilla, and then some light apple at the end. Teaninich has reached the point of being over oaked and is really giving me some off notes here. Great overall body, bold flavor, surprisingly sweet and strong flavored. Heavy water just brings out the bitter notes and starts to hide the sweetness. Bad whisky. Avoid.

Is it wrong to drink whisky for the texture and not the flavor? Nadurra is a rare whisky that challenges us with that question. Nose - Vanilla bomb! Floral notes. Toasted oak. Perhaps a hint of pear. Taste - more vanilla and oak. Take a malt whisky, give it all the notes of a bourbon with that fresh charred barrel and we're here. However this is soft, gentle malt. Giving off some honey and again really faint touches of fruits. So to that question - mouth feel. This is the richest and creamiest whisky I can think off outside of a few bourbons. It's soft alcohol that doesn't over power. I did find the flavor is a bit better with a few drops but it does hurt the mouth feel a bit so a balancing act. 80 bucks after tax. If I find more I will buy more. This is really really good stuff guys. It's a shame they stopped doing age statements. it is however pretty much a one trick pony. It's not a wow bottle or one to save for special occasions. Add in it's about 20 bucks more than most would like for a daily drinking scotch. So 2.5 stars. I can't say you have to have this if you're into bourbon finished scotch, but I think you get a bottle.

Nose - smokey under tone. I get a deep earthy peat here, like the ground a few days after a camp fire. Followed by a lot of sherry - they claim subtle sherry, this ain't subtle. I do however still get some vanilla and bourbon oak as well. I'm forgetting the blend but I'm pretty sure we're looking at talisker and caol ila (sure about some of that one) for the peat. I get some talisker spice (I know I'll be called out as wrong for that but I'm risking it) and there's just a nature of Caol Ila I can't place but gives me this note. Maybe a bit of grassy oily waxy elements at the sweetness as well (I'll likely be wrong on that whisky in the mix too so I won't mention it, lol). Taste - Wow the flavor isn't what I expected. The bottle has been open since launch and been near half a bottle since launch (I hit this one hard to start). I get a berry, then a distinct vinegar based BBQ, touch of smoke, vanilla, some older oak, some leather, tobacco. I've never gotten this vinegar BBQ ever, i get a very "springbank" BBQ note, but NOTHING like this. This is sweet honey BBQ. As it tames that BBQ goes and I get a bit of a Caragiale like notes. The finish is pretty unique, bitter, touch of citrus, oak, vanilla, touch of sulfur, and a bit stale. I was going to give this one some fine notes for the nose but the flavor has dropped off. There's a lot of interesting flavor here, but none of it goes well together. I just can't give a compass box with peat a 1.5. 1.75 and only because of my bias. 150 bucks - just pass.