Tastes

For a long time, after I first tasted Elijah Craig Barrel Proof, I didn't have Elijah Craig Barrel Proof again. I was unimpressed. But that was also partially because I was a novice whisky drinker. This was maybe five or six years ago when I bought a bottle based on reputation and all I tasted was fire. I was probably going, at that time from drinking 80 proof whiskies, to whatever proof that particular batch was. Then I bought a bottle of Elijah Craig Single Barrel, a store pick from Sommers Point Jersey that was 94 proof and was watery, tepid, flavorless. I tried mixing drinks with it and those cocktails only tasted like the mixers. Actually, it tasted kind of like Rittenhouse Rye, another overrated dram that I would describe as tepid and flavorless. (Side note: my wife just bought a bottle of Rittenhouse after I told her it was flavorless and bad because her favorite YouTube bartender influencer Anders swears by it, and though I warned her she bought it anyway, and then realized I was right, but seemed surprised that I was right. "He described it as a bourbon lover's rye," she said. "Do you hear the words you just said," I replied, "Doesn't that just sound like shit to begin with?"). Anyway, back to Elijah Craig Barrel Proof, I gave it another chance starting in 2022, and though I prefer Larceny Barrel Proof by a long shot, I do buy ECBP anytime a new batch comes in. For a while it was still $65 here and now it's only $75, so even if I find it a little overrated in the way people lose their minds about it, I still think it's good enough to pay that much for. And a lot of people, since it lost the 12 year age statement, have complained that it's dropped in quality, but I find it pretty consistent from batch to batch, vanilla, oak, caramel, cherry, cinnamon. Yeah, certain batches are slightly better than others, but it's pretty consistent. Until now. Oddly, this is barrel proof bourbon that drinks like a barrel proof rye. Almost. And that's not nearly as shitty as describing Rittenhouse as a bourbon lovers rye sounds. It's actually quite good, but not as good as ECBP usually is. What I mean is this is perhaps the spiciest ECBP I've ever tasted. The spice is overwhelming. I mean this is like pumpkin spice bourbon with clove and nutmeg and cinnamon all commingling. The expert reviewer here plays up the cherry flavor, and oh, that's kind of there. But really, palate and finish is all about the spice with a tiny hint of cherry coming back at the very end to tingle your senses with like a Luden's cough drop tang. Overall, probably my least favorite of all batches in recent years, but still not bad. I've never been that guy who's going to do cartwheels about ECBP, but I'm also not that guy who's going to turn it down either. Ours is a fraught relationship with a period of estrangement last year when we didn't get C923 in our state and I was a little pissed off because it was supposed to be the best in years. Oh well. I thought both A124 and B124 were pretty decent. This one, this is the slightly above average batch. Sometimes when I like it I go back and buy a second bottle, but I won't be doing that here.

To begin this review, I had to look up what I rated Benriach The Smoky Twelve. I gave it a 4.5. I like The Smoky Twelve a lot. Over the past four years, I've purchased two bottles of it, and I've enjoyed it each time. It's a welcome departure for someone who loves Islay to get a Speyside peated scotch to add some variation to the proceedings. Thought Smoke Season lacks an age statement, it drinks much like a higher proof version of The Smoky Twelve. Billing itself as the most heavily peated of the Benriach lineup, the peat is still not overpowering, but blends well with the orchard fruit aroma underlying the smoke. I believe I described the Smoky Twelve as like a bonfire at an orchard, and again this is similar, if that orchard is a peach or apricot orchard. The bottle description gives us "citrus peel" as the flavor that I'm getting as peach/apricot, but to each their own. It also describes the smoke as "caramel smoke," and yeah, I suppose there's a bit of caramel mixed in, but of the aromas, it's the subtlest present but overall, the nose is quite pleasant. The fruit and smoke are prominent on the tongue with some vanilla and spice. It's more powerful, at 105.6 proof than its brethren The Smoky Twelve and this increases my enjoyment of it. The weather outside has entered a period of cold that makes being outdoors difficult and a little less enjoyable than it was a few weeks above in the beginning of autumn, and I would say, this is less a gather around the winter fire drink than it is an autumn fire pit kind of whisky if ambiance matters to you. For a winter dram, if I want something peated, I generally reach for Ardbeg for some reason, though this will do in a pinch. The finish is mid-length but odd in that it's not particularly spicy but transforms into a sort of tart apple pie melding of the previous caramel, orchard fruit, and smoke that's quite nice. My only complaint has to do with the fact that this isn't as available to me as The Smoky Twelve. To pick up a bottle I have to drive to Delaware, and the list price there is about $10 more than SRP, but that doesn't factor into my rating given that's not the whisky's fault nor the fault of the distiller. But I do question whether I like this better enough to justify paying $22 more for this than I'd pay for the Smoky Twelve. It's a treat really, not necessarily a regular go-to, but it makes me appreciate just how good the stuff Benriach is putting out is. I'm surprised they're not more celebrated than they are. But...hey, if it keeps the prices down, this stuff is awful (wink, wink).

I've had several Barrell Products now. They're all well reviewed. Afficionados seems to love them, and I've enjoyed them, but they're overrated. Yes, I said it. O VER RA TED. I always feel the need to explain when I use that word that overrated does not mean bad. They're not synonyms. Overrated means people are saying it's better than it actually is. I've read 5-10 reviews that are glowing of Barrell Foundation, and again, it's not bad, but I got it for $50 on sale, $5 off, and it's not worth that price. With Knob Creek 9 on the market for around $40, with Dickel BiB around for $44, with 1792 BiB around for $40, these are all at the same proof, all more aged, and all, frankly, more dynamic, I see no need being filled by a $55 Barrell 5-Year. That said, it's not bad, but if they could price it $15 less, I might be more inclined to buy. Truth told, it's unique from what I've mentioned above. Dickel BiB is chocolate cherry. 1792 is vanilla, nuts and spice. This one is fruity in an orchard fruit type way. Pear, apple. You do get caramel and vanilla, which runs along many bourbons. There's a sweetness here that transcends the sweetness of those others, which if you're into that is great. But honestly, Old Tub, well, while I can't say it's better it's also only $20-$25. I guess what I'm saying is that the aroma and taste of Barrell Foundation is just not unique enough to justify the cost. That's the main drawback here. Why am I paying this much for a 100 proof whiskey that doesn't stand out from other 100 proof whiskies that are cheaper? I don't know. Can you tell me?

I've been gone from this platform for a bit. I notice sometimes when people I follow disappear for a time, and I do wonder where they went. For me, the break wasn't a break from whiskey, though I periodically take those. It was just a break from feeling the need to review everything I was tasting. Sometimes it gets tiring, doesn't it? Feeling like you have to file a report every time you taste something new rather than just enjoying it? Well, I have the impulse to write a review tonight, as this the Teeling Wonders of Wood Swedish Oak is one of 9 bottles my wife brought back from a trip to Ireland with her brother that she took back in July. I was doing a dry month then, and I stayed home with our 2 kids, so the 9 bottles were kind of a reward for not making a fuss about her going and leaving me saddled with our rug rats. She and her brother visited several distilleries including Teeling, Bushmills, and Middleton. She asked what I wanted and sent pictures of what they had, and my choices were all either distillery exclusives or difficult to find around our area. At that time, we had the Portuguese Oak available but not the Swedish, though I believe Swedish Oak is more widely available (I also had her pick me up the Cask Strength Black Pitts from Teeling, so there will be a review of that at some point in the not too distant futur). With that said, we had our final pours of this Swedish Oak tonight in the Waterford rocks glasses she also purchased over there (these she had shipped rather than carrying them, as she did with the 9 bottles in her luggage...one heck a feat if you ask me and proof positive that the woman loves me), and I've enjoyed the bottle thoroughly. It reminds me of Green Spot Chateau Leoville but it's a bit better (we tasted both side-by-side soon after opening this). The first word that springs to mind with this whiskey is creamy. The nose is full of bright vanilla and citrus, more orange than lemony. The palate is bright with floral honey notes, reminiscent of Dalwhinnie 15 Year scotch, but a bit heightened due to the proof here being higher, and the finish mingles the orange creamsicle profile with a bit of pepper. Overall, one of the best Irish whiskies I've had and one that makes me interested in purchasing the Portuguese Oak before supplies run out in my neck of the woods. Highly recommended.

134.6. That's the proof. That's a real proof there. That one. I think the highest proof rye I've ever had before this was 132 with Alberta Premium Cask Strength. And I love the Alberta. I like this more. Yes, I have tasted them side-by-side, and as has been noted, the 100% Rye of Alberta may give it less dimensionality than when you mix up the mash bill. When you taste them next to each other, you realize just how robust the JD is. It's full of flavor. Rounded. More complex. I should note that usually I only do one tasting a night. Tonight I've done three. Heading into Dry July, I'm trying to review all the bottles I have open that are right next door to done. So I missed out on the Barrel Proof Rye JD released during COVID. The special release. They get like 10 bottles for the whole state of Pennsylvania, sell them at SRP but you know, there's like 12 million people in PA. A lot are children. But a lot are adults and whisky drinkers. In other words, you're winning the lotto if you're getting a special release bottle. Which is why it warmed my heart that they were releasing a standard Single Barrel Barrel Proof Rye at $75. I picked up this one, opened it, loved it, went out and bought a second for posterity. Old age. When whiskies are just too expensive to buy anymore. When only the 1% can afford them. So the actual whisky here is great. One of the best ryes I've ever had, and I've had a lot of good ones. I mean, I love rye, more than bourbon, less than scotch. In between zone. The nose on this is candied, fruity, I sort of get a skittles vibe, taste the rainbow of fruit flavors. There is JD's signature banana, but there's also cherry red, and orange and lemon lime. It's kind of crazy to me why it's got this aroma, this is a rye, right? I've never even had a bourbon with such a sweet profile. This is pure desert whisky in a lot of ways. The palate has this crazy thing where it kind of tastes like, well, you ever get one of those swirling lollipops at the zoo that are...well, I've already mentioned it, a rainbow. All the colors. And the flavor isn't real fruit, it is artificial. Honestly, because of that, I could see this whisky turning some people off. The finish is long and that's the first place you get anything different from fruit flavors, a little added spice. I don't know. I have to be honest. I'm not always in the mood for this, so this bottle has lasted a lot longer than bottles usually last for me. I bought it and cracked it in late-January. I'm not one to open all my bottles and leave them for when I'm in the mood. I usually have a bottle of bourbon, a bottle of rye, a bottle of scotch and a bottle of Irish open and when I finish one, I crack another of that variety. The fact that I opened this in January and it's lasted until now is kind of a record for me. But this is my last pour. And I'm enjoying it. But I'm also not fretting. I have another in the basement shelving unit where I keep my whiskies. But I'll likely give it a few years. And if they release another batch this year, I'm all in. Love this stuff. Though I have to say their standard Single Barrel Barrel Proof is also amazing. Solid whisky through and through.

Is it possible to both think something is overrated and also enjoy it? That's often how I feel about Elijah Craig Barrel Proof. People seem to lose their minds about this stuff, and it's good, but is it lose your mind over it good? I suppose some batches might be. Since the end of 2022, I've been buying it when I see it, so I've had C922, A123, B523, A124, and now B524. Do you see a gap there? Yep, for some reason, we didn't get C923, the Whisky of the Year batch, here in Pennsylvania. At least not in my corner. Around the time our usual allocation would come in, we got one, but it was a double-dip of B523. They don't specify batches on our site, so I drove over and was fairly disappointed when I saw that it was a repeat instead of what's supposed to be the be-all-end-all of ECBP batches. And maybe I'm changing my tune now about overrated with B524. The others I've mentioned were all pretty good in their own ways, but B524 to me is, as the kids these days say, fire, and not in the sense that it's burning my nostrils and tongue. It's just fantastic. If C923 was considered the height of ECBP, I can only imagine how good it is given how much I love B524. Yesterday, I reviewed New Riff Single Malt, which came in at about 114 proof and burned the hairs out of my nose, even with a half hour in the glass for some of those fumes to evaporate. This is exactly the opposite, about 130 proof and lovely to the nose. It's rich with caramel, nutmeg, vanilla and oak with a particular emphasis on the caramel, which has always been one of my favorite notes in a bourbon. The palate is a bit spicier and shows its proof but comes off with a cinnamon red-hots flavor, creamy vanilla, butterscotch, and oak. And this finish continues the cinnamon/nutmeg spice and just goes on for days. Honestly, given that we always get our ECBP at SRP, this might be a repeat purchase for me, though I've tapped my whisky budget this month buying two bottles of Larceny Barrel Proof (my preferred barrel proof, maybe up until now) A124, which is also just delectable and which we also get at SRP. These bourbons are really knocking it out of the park this year (though ECBP A124 wasn't necessarily a rebuy, though I liked it).

Ah, the Ardbeg Uigeadail. Is there a harder name to pronounce in the world of whiskey? The blurb on the bottle provides a pronunciation key, and I'm still not sure I'm saying it correctly. As for spelling it, well, that's what the copy and past function is for. Wanna mess with some elementary schoolers, put this one in their spelling bee. For its flavor profile, the bottle states, Treacle, Bacon, Bonfires, on the label. Seems pretty accurate, though I've never tasted treacle to my knowledge. A syrup made of refined sugar I'm seeing, tarry, like molasses. So I have the idea. I ordered a bottle of this during COVID, popped it open back when my dad, my brother-in-law and I were watching Eagles games by moving the TV out to my driveway and sitting six feet apart, when Carson Wentz was still the quarterback and we were still having trouble admitting that he was never coming back from the injured ACL he got that season he brought our team to the Super Bowl, back when Uigeadail was about $10 cheaper (we're only talking 3 years ago, but might as well be a lifetime the way prices are skyrocketing). Anyway, I cracked the bottle for the Baltimore game and it helped take the sting off the fact the Eagles lost. It was my first high-proof Islay, and it was everything I dreamed, all those flavors amped up to 11. When the price went up, I wasn't sure I'd buy another. Seemed kind of hefty for an NAS, even if it was cask strength, even if it was an Islay, but it was my favorite of the Ardbeg core range, so here we are a few years later, and I buy a second bottle. Of course, I've found an Ardbeg I like more in the BizarreBQ, but that's limited edition, and though I purchased two of those before they went out of stock, I'm probably not getting access to any more, so those are treasures in my collection, bottles to break out when the asteroid is heading to earth. Or, you know, maybe I'll open something better. Splurge. Buy that Laphroaig 25 I've had my eye on that's way out of my price range. The nose here has a touch of sweetness underlying the smoke, is that what they mean by treacle? Is that what treacle tastes like? Sorry, smells like. The smoke is a dry smoke, great aroma. There is the slight hint on the back end of band-aid. Maybe a hint of dark chocolate. The palate adds a meatiness to the smoke. I suppose you could call it bacon, but it could be a number of cured meats because it has that trace of salinity. The finish brings back the hint of sweetness that again, I can't define. The reviewer here notes that it's a bit of sherried scotch in the mix, which could very well be the case. Overall, it's got a nice rich mouthfeel and was worth the asking price three years ago. Now I'm not sure I can justify paying that despite how much I like it. I'd rather buy a Laphroaig 10 Cask Strength or Talisker's Distillers Edition, which are both in the same ballpark.

I have to say it: this is the first New Riff I've had that isn't coming off for me. I seem to be in the minority here, or am I? I do wonder sometimes if the goodwill a decent distillery generates will find people willing to give them the benefit of the doubt when they release something that doesn't quite meet expectations, especially if they're swinging for the fences. And I should also frame this by saying that I still haven't had a bad New Riff. Everything I've read about this makes it sound ambitious and had me excited for it, but it's just not that enlivening. This is the kind of whisky where, when I taste it, and I see good reviews, I feel like I have to look them up to see what are other people getting that I'm not? Though it's a lower proof than a lot of other barrel/cask strength whiskies I drink, it's hot all around, the nose has an ethanol burn to it that prevents the whisky from offering any aromas other than oak and sweetness, but the sweetness is indistinct. It could be vanilla, could be cherry, I'm having trouble parsing that out against the heat. As I sit with it more, there might even be a bit of cocoa powder coming through, but none of them are strong enough to make me feel like I could sit here all day nosing it like I do with some whiskies. It's only about 114 proof, but I can't keep my nose near the glass long enough not to wince back after a few seconds, and the glass has been sitting for a while now. (To compare, earlier tonight, I had a glass of Larceny BP A124 and that's 124 proof and I had no such trouble enjoying the aroma of the bourbon). The palate has an herbal tea quality, the bergamot often found in certain ryes, with an underlying sweetness. Oak again with tobacco and maybe a hint of darker fruits, plum or blackberries. The palate is definitely stronger in terms of presentation than the nose, and though you can still feel the heat, the influence of the ethanol has been toned down considerably, though by the time it hits the back of your throat, the heat reasserts itself in a spicy finish. It's the kind of thing that they might refine for future releases, but I don't think they quite hit what they were going for here, and if I were going to buy it again, I'd wait for a future iteration rather than seeking out another bottle of the Fall 2023 bottling. Not quite enough to turn me away from New Riff, but it was pretty expensive for a bottle I didn't much enjoy. I kept hoping that with time and air, it might improve, but it's remained consistently slightly above average throughout the experience and certainly doesn't hold up in a lineup of better whiskies (I served this on Father's day right after Highland Park Cask Strength Batch 4, and let's just say, that while my dad drank it, he didn't look at me after his first sip and say, "Oh, that's really good" as he'll often do with most of the whiskies I serve him). Oh well.

This one is a bit strange for a 100% rye. For example, Alberta Premium Cask Strength is a 100% rye, and though there's a bit of caramel and mint mixed in, what's prominent with APCS is the spice, the rye, the cinnamon, little bit of nutmeg. The Whistlepig Piggyback Single Barrel has a little bit of spice, but what predominates here is are aromas of cherry and cola, reminiscent in some ways of Sazerac, which is decidedly not a 100% rye (the mashbill is undisclosed, but naturally if it were 100% rye, there wouldn't be any mashbill to not disclose). Rye spice takes over the nose as it sits in the glass with a little ethanol, but if you're used to Barrel Strength whiskies, it's not overwhelming (I've noticed that people who don't do high proof always find things I believe are perfectly palatable to be extremely hot). On the palate, it's not amazingly complex, but it's creamy and there's vanilla and caramel and spice with the cherry returning during the long finish. Overall, not necessarily a rebuy, but at $60, I can't regret it either. In the future I'd rather splurge the extra $10 to get a Knob Creek Single Barrel Rye or even pay the same price and get Wild Turkey Rare Breed Rye. But it also wasn't a bottle I was about to turn my nose up at either. I waited until the last pour to review it hoping it would reveal itself a bit more to me, but it was essentially a one-trick pony all the way through. Still, sometimes one trick pony's can be tasty enough to enjoy on their own. This was one. But that also means, it's a one-buy whisky and I have no problems with that. P. S. I realize upon further reflection that when I say cherry here, it sometimes tastes like cherry cola and at other times Robitussin cherry. Kind of goes back and forth. For what it's worth, the Robitussin might sound bad, but it's kicks in a certain nostalgia of my mom taking care of me when I was a child and had a cold.

Reading through the other tastings here, I see some love, I see some hate, and I have to say, I really don't understand the hate. 1792 Full Proof carries a quintessential bourbon profile. The nose is oak, vanilla and cinnamon spice, this last perhaps emerging from the fact it's 125 proof. The palate has a creamy mouthfeel with caramel emerging to accompany the vanilla, oak, and spice, and the finish is long and lingers, leaving me wanting more. In fact, I had lucked into this online, since it's allocated in my area and was almost hesitant to buy it with the way people were lukewarm about it, but it's $45, which puts it in the same ballpark as Maker's Mark Cask Strength, and having tasted both, I'd say they punch the same weight with the Maker's having a few notes of chocolate and cherries to perhaps push it a bit over the edge. But although I prefer the Maker's CS, it's also widely available in my neck of the woods, so when I stepped into the store last week and saw 1792 Full Proof on the shelf, I nabbed myself another bottle and might pick up a third this week if it's still there, you know, just for good measure. A lot of higher priced Cask Strength and Full Proof bottles are more complex, I'll grant you that, but they're also selling for anywhere from $20-$50 more than this. So for my money, I'll take 1792 FP anytime I see it on the shelf and bring it home and enjoy it. For all of you who dislike it, well, more for me, right?