Tastes

I guess this is the name? Nose - Super soured dickel notes with some hints of chocolate to start. As it develops I get orange citrus elements, almost an orange vitamin chew. It's now transitioning into more complex citrus with some coca powder. At the 170 I paid, lets just say this is a massive fail on the nose, but it's interesting. Taste - So I'm influenced but lets go with my first thoughts and then all I can taste. At first you get this citrus bomb with odd oak and dickel vitamins. All this is on this crazy velvety mouth feel. And then it finishes in creamy milk chocolate. The second pour is more nutty almost hazelnut coffee comes through, then citrus and chocolate. Now...after influence, my god it's heavy orange citrus bitters. I should wait longer to review this but both times I've poured this, I've had different feelings. This time the citrus is way higher, last time it was way more chocolate. I'm honestly not sure how i feel about this, but I have to give this a score. So price - this SHOULD be about 130-140, but for some reason my store wanted 170 and I bought it....I'm dumb. Watch it be on sale in a week for retail....they did the same on ferrand. This is the most unique bourbon I've ever had. Coffee, weird bourbon, and chocolate. The blending here and work done with the finishing is really interesting. This is a must try, not even for the quality but how unique it is. Score? Oh lord....lets go with a 2.5. It's enjoyable, but confusing. I can't even start to tell you if you should or shouldn't buy it. I'm glad I got it because it's crazy weird. I think many will hate it. I think many will love it. I can't imagine this won't create a lot of extreme bias among vocal people, but I think a lot of us are going to be confused lol.

They can't all be winners, right? Nose - heavy aged vanilla, youthful oak, and light mix of cherry, cola, and ok others said it but I can get the doctor pepper idea. The nose is really nice, it misses the top tier ECBP's but it's nice. Softer and lighter without some of my favorite dark notes or heavy chocolates. Taste - Earthy for the ECBP, straw and hay with a lot of barn elements for an ECBP. Overall still heavy sweet notes we expect in what I'll call a lighter more fruity ECBP (classic among the A's). Good caramel elements. And the oak is doing ok with time. Still some sour elements and just overly astringent notes come through. After maybe being the worst neck pour ever on an ECBP, even just a day later it's really opened up. This is good. It's still however not a winner. Then again, it's more ECBP than the much disliked B521 (it was off profile). This just comes off as a bit younger than the best ECBP, but after at first being ready to completely TRASH this one, and I drank a BIT too much of it the first night, helped to open it up, but I guess I wasted some pretty decent bourbon. Anyway i see my ECBP scores are all over the map, it's a hard one to score fairly. I'm doing 2.75. This is a good CS bourbon, but it lacks what you expect for 12 year old ECBP. Still in line with some other less impressive ones. I need to adjust some historical scores I think.

So as the 7 isn't on distiller yet and I hate adding whiskies, I'll be doing 4 vs 7 and reviewing both here and when I see 7 up, I'll move it on over. Full disclosure I paid for the fusion 4 but 7 was given to me by the distillery. 4 Nose - The nose is opening up as classic Barton notes. Apple, light cinnamon, touch of oak spice and then there's a bit of an earthy element that you wouldn't get on barton. Overall it's VERY barton forward up front. Taste - And while the nose is all that 13 year barton, the taste is much more funky odd young bourbons with that sweet lovely barton on the finish. I don't really have a lot to say here, it's just not that interesting, but it's pretty boring and no descriptive. Overall - I don't mind this bottle and I've been working on just killing it to free up the space. There's this savory oily malty and youthful element I just can't get into. That said I think the barton is so young...it might really explode as it gets 5-6 years old. 7 Nose - White sugar and corn is really the upfront note here. Very clean and simple sweetness followed by funky bourbon. The rye here comes off burnt and very oak forward. It's an obvious blend of some likely heaven hill/beam type bourbons. Really heavy on that corn nut forward elements. Taste - Corn, sour, bitter, very low sweetness, tannic, and yet youthful. This is NOT good lol. Now I do have to say it's layered with a lot of depth and a lot of flavors, I just don't like any of it. But if you like something funky you might dig it. At the very last this is higher proof than the batch 4 and it has a really nice mouth feel. For me the 4 is a 1.5 and the 7 is a 1.25. Both are acceptable bourbons but they should be much cheaper, more in that 40 dollar range. I know they use some expensive sourced bourbon but their distillate isn't ready for the show to me.

I loved the 2019, really liked but was disappointed by the 2020, and now we get into the 2021. Nose - Somewhat light and balanced. Toasted more than heavy oak or heavy char. Classic woodford vanilla with this roasted chocolate meets french vanilla meet some powdered sugar and yes spice. Then some interesting fruity notes I can't place. Taste - Spicy vanilla and chocolate, classic woodford through and through. Honestly it's just non descriptive oak smoke and spice that is medium spiced and medium charred. While last year's had some kind of burnt croissant, this doesn't have that middle of the road bready sweetness. Finish/mouth - good spice lingers but the mouth feel is SOOOOOOOO bad! So thin. Gosh that sucks. So I'm scoring this 1.75 like the 2020 one. That said side by side the 2020 was a bit richer and better. It had more going on. Sadly just not a fan of this one. It's good but it isn't what I want from that extra double.

KY Batch 06. Nose - This is what bourbon is supposed to smell like. Smoked oak notes followed by bubble gum, rye spice, vanilla, rich dirty caramel. Just wonderful with some nice fruits scattered in. Taste - This is really just a wonderful example of bourbon. The age is so well done. They've really crafted about the perfect bourbon for today's market. Balanced spice, oak, and sweetness. This reminds me of an off profile older MGP with more focus on the spice and the finish is starting to really improve. I loved batch 1 and I love this batch 6. Really impressed with where they're going with these. 3.75 I think is fair.

Nose - plumbs and raisins with oak spice and layers of dark fruity elements over a caramel base. Make ZERO mistake, alcohol is here and it's NOT subtle. There's an element of pretty young heaven hill based bourbon to me. Still it's pretty darn fruity and very nice. Taste - BIG, really bold bourbon with huge layers of vanilla and dark fruits, light chocolates, and all kinds of sweet sweet elements here. But then we get all this really aggressive pure bourbon elements. I have to say, this has really improved since opening and drinking about 40% of it. It's really nicely done and I have to give credit here, the younger bourbons have with time become less prevalent and I'm digging this one a lot more. Surprisingly strong score here at 3.0. Even the smallest drop of water really mellows some of bitter oak notes and pushes more sweetness and creamy mouthfeel out.

So there's this rumor that the 2021 springbank 10 was special, unique, different. OK....lets get one! I finally found this one and then I looked it up....there are like 5 2021 batches of the 10 year. What in the hell? How am I supposed to know I got this really cool special springbank 10 if they do 3-5 batches a year? And why do reviewers I REALLY like, respect, and follow talk about YEAR batches when they do multiple a year? I'm calling you out liquor hound and sipper social club. You're both too darn good and too freaking awesome to have confused me! Also if you're reading, you're both awesome! 21/51 is the batch so now you know and don't have to wonder. Nose - Just classic springbank 10. A bit more on the grape fruit acidic oak than a few I've had, a bit low on salt or coastal notes. But it's just classic springbank 10. Old batches sometimes give me more red fruit while this is more white and acidic on the fruit side. Still that classic slightly salty/peaty/sugar cookie malt. Even gives me slight reminders of play doh. Taste - Again classic springbank 10. I do get more grape fruit here too, especially on the finish than some. Salty and nicely peated up front. And it's just BOLD and BIG by any normal 10 year standard but this one might be milder than some 10's. All that said guys, I don't see any real change here. Just a different batch that unlike some springbanks I think is trying to stay pretty close to form. An absolutely amazing 10 year old whisky but it's now 90 bucks or more. Price sucks but honestly, I'm still buying at 100 on these. It's the best 10 year old regular release on the planet and it's still likely the best under 100 dollar scotch there is. 2.75 is my score and if value were a thing this used to be a 4.5 and now days maybe it's just a 4. And in terms of levels of 2.75's, this is really closer to a 3.0. If there were just a bit more mouth feel it would be there. It's sadly at 46% just not rich enough and you CAN get that on 46% whiskies.

Maybe the hardest bottle ever to come up with a name for to even search. So story on this for me was I knew someone who wanted it, saw it...figured I'd grab it and share. I guess i was lucky on the price and point bs. 120-130 bucks. I'm not sure I'll get around to reviewing this with mike...we might, but there's just so much american whisky I have to review and rye isn't mike's thing. It's just hard to bring something like this up to review. Nose - To be honest it's not that bold. You get a nice minty wintery rye element with a nice amount of very soft oak. Combine that with some cherry cough drops and really I think you've more or less got this one down. It's like they took the 4 year rye, turned it down to 80% and then added oak. It's both what you'd expect with a blend of bourbon and rye and kinda disappointing because the bourbon isn't doing much, but Willet purple top bourbon isn't really to my knowledge all that bold on the nose generally. Taste - Earthy mossy oak with layers of spice from the rye and low sweetness caramel and oak dust. Unique without a doubt. And with each sip you really can find new elements here. I get a sweetness up front sometimes and other times the earthy almost vegetal elements come through instead. The more you sip this the more bourbon notes come through up front through more traditional sweet caramel and vanilla notes and the rye moves more towards the middle and finish. One thing is for sure, this wasn't a great bourbon, but it wasn't a bad one either. It was likely a very dull and middle of the road bourbon that they felt needed something else and MGP rye came to save the day. Yeah starting to get red cough drops at the end of a bourbon now. Finish - LONG! Really this is an impressive finish as it really coats the mouth and lingers forever. Mostly just good rye spice and quality oak casks are linger here. Honestly this is a winner and a loser. If you're excited by 6 year willet bourbon and 10 year mgp rye blended...I think you'll be disappointed. I don't think 6 year willet bourbon is any good. Sorry purple top fans. And while the sum of the parts don't resemble either part individually, I think we wasted some epic MGP rye to give life to boring bourbon. That said I know this is rare and I know it's expensive, but you really want 2-3 glasses of this in a sitting because it grows on you as you acclimate to it. And in that regard that's why I'm scoring this higher and why I think there's a winner here, it's just hard to get to. There's so much complexity and depth here to a whisky that seems to come on like a freight train. It's really bold and full of all kinds of crazy fun flavors. But it's not a 130 dollar flavor experience even if the parts kinda would normally justify that level of spend. I'm also note sure this bourbon is actually the same bourbon they put in purple top. There's a part of me thinking it's sourced barton at 6 years old (is that a thing?) Water add some more classic bourbon spice and some funky butter scotch notes fyi. Oh even some dark chocolate with perhaps some kinda cayenne pepper combo. OK so score...I'm really all over the map. So my system under a 1 is basically trash. 1 star is a quality whisky worth drinking for the right price. 2 star is average. 3 star is really good stuff that you really want unless it's crazy expensive. 4 star is wow 400 dollar kinda level stuff. 5 stars are unicorns and the things dreams are made of. 2.5 on this one. I can't think of a comp to try and set my score against. But lets see I gave the 4 year rye a 3 star. That is a whisky I just like more, but it's not as complex. I also might have overrated that one...but I'm also buying another bottle of that when mine is gone. I see some good stuff like the four gate batch 11 ruby rye springs which I bought a second of at 2.5...I might need to get better at scoring and buying lol. So for this one I'd want to give it a 2.65 so I guess 2.7 stars. I honestly think this is a winner at the price point, it's a bit disappointing when you dream of what it COULD be from the label. But overall there's so much good here and even the bad isn't so bad.

So my first lagvulin rare buy....I've had so many and I know these are so hit and miss. So I've had this actually a few times so far...not my normal neck pour thought...Also mezcal? WTF? Nose - A bit of a sour herbal/vegetal and yet lagavulin nose. I know many would want more notes here but I think this is enough for anyone. Smoke and hints of weird peppers with oak and mint with that classic lavaulin malt that brings vanilla and cream and just accretional quality. Taste - I'm not sure if the goal of a tasting is to review it or in this context explain why it's different. The opening is lagavulin 12, but then it turns vegetal and a bit different. And then we get to this insane finish. It's smoke and smoke but not the same. It's got elements of smoked oak but also just I dunno...we smoked something without oak character and it's here too. I think this is where I don't get mezcal but that's the flavor here. I even on a few pours get some buttery elements here. Bottom line it's pretty good but insanely complex. And where I'm sitting is this isn't a whisky I'm in love with or I love. I however I'm fascinated in what we have here. My god, how to score this....finish length and quality is a 5. The upfront is a 2 or 3 range. Good mouth feel. The nose doesn't do me much at all. So 3.5. I'm thinking 87-89 when I review it with mike. I paid just under 400 with fees and shipping to get this into the states. FOr that price it wasn't worth it but it's not a terrible price for a lagavulin this good.

What do you know....I knew I didn't review this. Nose - ginger, malt, cake, barely, oak....complex, confusing....and not very good. There' honey and tea and all kinds of weird notes but ultimately. It's young oak and malt doing god knows what. It's fun to nose and I don't dislike it, but it's nothing special. Taste - Sweet upfront malts. I want to say this is honey comb cereal meets alcohol and young oak over tones. But there's more here. Some mint and some herbal notes. Caramel for sure. A lot of odd oaks Ok so this is complex stuff but it's not that good. It's not bad. I like it but I'm just not sure how to explain all these flavors as not being better than they are. I'm giving it a 2.25 which is higher than my enjoyment but I think the complexity needs to be respected. If you can try this....it's an interesting american single malt choice. But get the sherry or peated first....imo they're better.