Tastes

As far as whiskies go, I'm a peated scotch fan. It's almost always going to be my top choice when it's available. Now I like pretty much all styles of whisky when done right. But there's something about the peated scotches that floats my boat. I'd say Islay, but I love Talisker and that's a different island. In 2006, as I was discovering whiskies, my friend Peter hosted tastings at his apartment. They were invariably a success though the formula had to be tweaked over time. The first tasting was for bourbon. Everyone brought a bottle. And given there were 25 of us who showed up (less a tasting and more a full party at that point), we ended up with 25 different bottles to taste. He'd handed out slips of paper beforehand, and even though we were only taking sips of each, by about whisky number 10, the writing was slanting across the page like a sad clown. The next tasting was Irish, and he had us team up. Two or three of us got together and pitched in for one bottle, which raised the quality of the bottles involved and meant we only 10 or so to sample. The third tasting was the scotch tasting. It was more subdued. I think there were only around 10 of us showing up to that one. And one of the bottles was Ardbeg 10. My buddy Luke took a whiff and recoiled. But Peter loved it. He's a contrarian, so it made sense that he would love it, simply because everyone else there hated it. They say peated scotch is an acquired taste, and perhaps it is for most people, but when I said, "Hand it here," and poured a glass and took a sip, I knew I'd found my home. I've always loved campfire. I used to stop at this bar in South Philly called Devil's Den on my way home from work. It had a great selection of draft beers and they were half off between 4-6. Better yet, they had a woodfire in the bar, and I sat as close as I could to come home smelling like it. Don't know why that does it for me. Just does. Don’t know why Ardbeg does it for me. Just does. I tasted Laphroaig 10 not long after. And I loved that too. Whenever I tasted Laphroaig, I’d say, I’m a Laphroaig man. Then I’d taste Ardbeg and think, no, I’m an Ardbeg man. Finally, I tasted them both together, and I had to admit that perhaps I swing both ways. At this point, I hadn’t had Talisker. Lagavulin was a long way off in my future, and I’d never even heard of Bruichladdich. I’m not sure why it took me so long to taste them side-by-side (I’m not tasting them that way for this review), but it took me almost 15 years to decide to do so. Laphroaig is more medicinal. Ardbeg has a sweeter edge, but is rather saline. Those are the major differences. Ardbeg 10 has this description on the side of the bottle that I love, tarry rope. Not something I’d ever think to bother tasting, a tarry rope. I always think that’s funny, when whiskies get described as tasting like something we’d never taste. I get it, I do it, but I always think it’s funny. Because when you read, tarry rope, and you taste it, tarry rope seems to make sense. The sweetness, my own interpretation, is like this mixture of caramel and butterscotch, which is stronger and a little harsher in the Ardbeg 5 Wee Beastie and little tamer and subtler and more “grown up” here. And of course, on the nose, there’s the peat, the smokiness, that lovely sweet smokiness. It's hard for me to be objective about this or the Laphroaig 10. We go way back. They’re like that childhood friend where a lot of people can’t see why you think they’re so great, but you’re absolutely certain they’re the coolest person you’ve ever met, right? There’s also a saline quality mixed in with the smoke and the sweetness that give it a nice edge and balance. Really, all the flavors come through nicely, and though I think the Uigeadail is the best expression of Ardbeg I’ve tasted, Uigeadail is a rainy day treat, especially with prices skyrocketing, while the 10 is still pleasantly affordable to the point where I don’t feel guilty not sharing it, where I don’t feel guilty with its being a regular go-to bottle. It's a classic. That much is true. I don't ever give anything 5-stars though to some extent, this might deserve it, simply from a point of being consistently amazing, of being a first love.

I'm going to start this off with admitting I'm a huge fan of Glenmorangie in general. So I have a pro-Morangie bias. The 10 is one of the best budget/intro scotches out there. The Lasanta is a beautiful 12 year that, last I checked is still going for around the $50 mark. The 14 year, that Quinta Ruban is only $65, and I hear good things about the 18, though I have yet to partake. The Cadboll 15 was on my wishlist and I was totally willing to purchase a 15 Year at $90, but then lo and behold it appeared as part of our state's 50% of clearance so I was able to score it for $44.50. Yeah, you read that right. $44.50. So even if it didn't live up to some of the hype I've read on the nets here, it really was a no brainer. The nose is apricots and vanilla straight off with a touch of honey. There's a touch of strawberry and lemon in the background. It's a light touch. Not overwhelming. It's overall delicate, fruity and floral. The palate continues the honeyed apricots present on the nose and adds a bit of white pepper spice that lingers into the finish. There's a touch of nutiness and graham cracker mingling in there as well. Overall, I prefer it to the Quinta 14, though the Quinta 14 is solid and a deal at the price it goes for (and I'm giving them the same rating because this edges it out slightly but not enough to go 4.5). Obviously this is worlds elevated from the 10 and even the Lasanta 12, which is my go-to Glenmorangie. It's actually not a bad scotch to give someone if you were trying to cultivate in them an interest in scotch in that it builds its complexity out of the fairly standard Glenmorangie 10 profile. It's like an elevated version of that. Having nabbed this at $44.50 it's a steal. I wouldn't have minded paying $90. It lives up to that price, and I'd be interested in future expressions of this range (I know they released a Batch 2; have they released a 3rd?). With football season over, I decided to host a game night at my place to make sure family is coming together for events in the offseason, and next week, my dad and my brother-in-law will be coming over for that. Honestly, I can't wait to share this with them. I'm hoping they like it just as much as I do. Now I'm wondering, why have I never bothered with their Nectar D'Or?

I was at the liquor store today because they just got in a High West Double Rye Barrel Select Rum Cask Finish. It's been a while since I've had Double Rye. In fact, the last time I had it, High West hadn't started using its own distillate in the mix and from what I understand, the regular product has gone downhill. Still, I can't resist the allure of the barrel select finished in rum. Generally speaking, I find rum finishes compliment certain types of whisky and elevate many of those I've had. While I was there I passed a display for Buffalo Trace, limit 1 per customer, because Buffalo Trace comes and goes in availability. Impulse buy: I picked up a bottle of Buffalo Trace because I've never had it. All these years drinking whisky and I've never tried one of the standard sub-$30 bottle of bourbon, mostly because by the time I started taking whisky seriously enough for Buffalo Trace to come on my radar, what it was didn't hold much interest for me. From what I understand, it's an affordable, tasty daily sipper of maybe a little better quality than other whiskies in the sub-$30 90 proof category, perhaps better than Makers Mark but not quite Eagle Rare? Anyway, when I got home, I looked up some Buffalo Trace reviews online because reading reviews gets me excited to taste and compare my thoughts with others. Not that I opened the bottle, because frankly, it was still morning, and I have other bottles opened that I have to finish. On the site Breaking Bourbon, the reviewer gave it a positive review, 3 barrels out of 5, which is "Above Average." Then I made that mistake of scrolling down to the comment thread. One comment said, "I can't believe they gave this 3 barrels and they also gave Old Forester 100 3 barrels, there's something wrong with this system." And I thought, well, I can't weigh in because I've had neither, but I do a lot of research on whisky before buying, and I'm pretty sure that Buffalo Trace and Old Forester 100 are, in fact, in a similar category. Then, one of those whisky aesthetes stated that he tasted Buffalo Trace, and he poured it down the drain it was so bad. Now I can't condone pouring whisky down the drain. Or, I can if you've poured yourself a glass and hate it and pour the rest of the glass down the drain because no one else is drinking your backwash. I can't condone it if you pour the bottle down the drain (gift it to someone, mofo!). But still, the hate! oh, the hate poured down upon this guy's comment. I was sorry to see it, and also...well, kind of amused. "Buffalo Trace is a great whisky!" "Buffalo Trace is amazing!" Is it really? I wondered. I mean, I don't expect greatness or amazingness from a $27 bourbon. I just hope it'll be above average like the reviewer rated it. I mention this because the whole experience reminded me of Louis CK's mid-to-late aughts bit in his special Hilarious about how these days, we always go top-shelf with our words. "That's hilarious!" "Really, was it, was it so funny you almost died laughing?" His argument, if we use top-shelf words for everything, they stop meaning anything. So even though I now have a bottle of Buffalo Trace that I haven't tasted, I'm going out on a limb here to say, I'm going to be staggered if it's amazing or great or fantastic. If it is, that'll be like hitting the lottery. I'm pretty sure I have a lot of bourbons in my collection that are better than Buffalo Trace, it just felt like something I had to try. So why am I giving all this room to a preamble about whether or not Buffalo Trace is amazing? Because this Highland Park Cask Strength Release 2 is not quite amazing, but it's really freaking close. I let this sit on the shelf for a long time before deciding to pop it open. Don't know why. Just other bottles I was more interested in. But a few weeks ago I decided it was time for the HP CS Release 2, and I was blown away. I mean, this is one of the most robust and flavorful scotches I've ever tasted. Although this doesn't bear an age statement, this is like the Viking Honor 12 Year on steroids. The nose is rich in heather and toffee and molasses with an orange undercurrent and it's just delightful. It's a Yankee Candle nose, if you know what I'm saying. I'd say, a late-summer Yankee Candle scent, maybe as August turns into September and you still get warm days but cool evenings. This is the whisky you want to nose on your back deck as the sun sets and you're sparking the fire pit, having put the kids to bed, sitting out with your significant other. The palate has toffee and milk chocolate and caramel with that same rich citrus edge. And it's just powerful. I mean, I feel like stringing together a number of verys, in that this is very very rich and lovely. It's like a desert, like a cake, a dense cake of all those flavors. And the finish is might and long and glorious. Honestly, this is the first Highland Park I've had where I feel like their whole Viking marketing ploy is appropriate because this is the first Highland Park I've had where I feel like a Viking might have actually enjoyed it, having vanquished his enemies, thrown down the glass to hear it smash, and called for another, all while sitting on his back deck, stoking the fire pit, having put his kids to bed, and hanging out with his significant other. Oh, and he'd be very careful not to let it leak out the sides of his mouth and let it dribble down his beard. This stuff is too valuable. Did I say this was just short of amazing? Maybe it is amazing (I tend to always want more peat, but the peat might not do this any good). It's hovering in that top shelf category for me where, even at $90 a bottle, I'd consider going out and picking up another one.

Well, the game wasn't the outcome I was looking for, and the haters will still hate (this team has had to deal with a lot of BS talk about being pretenders), but I think it was pretty clear that my Eagles were the best team in the NFC this year, hands down, and that it's also pretty clear they missed being the best team in the NFL by a margin of 3 points. I actually don't think there's been a football season in recent memory where the NFC and AFC were this evenly matched. And although I'm a little bit heartbroken, I'm going to take a moment before I touch on whisky to extend my congratulations to Andy Reid and the Chiefs. Hard fought game. You guys showed true grit. Now I don't mean to gloat here now, but I drank some really good whisky tonight. Highland Park Cask Strength, Elijah Craig Barrel Proof, Templeton 10 Year Single Barrel, and Laphroaig Lore. I started with the Lore and now I'm ending with the Lore. I started to give my team good luck, hoping for good luck, because the bottle was green and black and white, and I stared with it because it was my best whisky, at least on paper. But paper is never that great because on paper the Eagles defense should have eaten the red and white alive. Paper doesn't always tell you the truth. But the Lore is the Truth. There was obviously a lot of care put into this whisky even if it doesn't bear an age statement, the smoke is prominent but subtle, not overpowering. The trace of ozone that I noted on Laphroaig Cask Strength Batch 015 is present in the background as is the ocean spray plus a touch of the sweetness from the sherry cask single malt that's in the mix here. Every aroma here is well balanced on the nose, and the balance continues on the palate. The sherry is mixed with the peat on the palate, such that it reminds me of the Sherry Finished 10 Year or the Talisker DE in many ways. Again, the word that comes to mind is subtle. It's Laphroaig, but it's the most tender version of Laphroaig, like the lullaby version of Laphroaig. Perhaps, what I mean, is that this is the easiest Laphroaig to drink that I've had. It's much better than the 10 Year Sherry Cask. Less complex than the Cask Strength 015 but also a lot less assaulting on the senses. I'd take this over Warehouse 1, and the only thing that really competes is the PX Pedro Ximinez Cairdeas. So, I end the evening with my family in bed, my mom and dad and sister and brother-in-law and sister-in-law having left, alone. Football season is over. I'm taking my wife to a BYOB Wednesday to celebrate Valentine's Day where we'll have a bottle of Sancerre Blanc, and then, because football season is over, it'll be time to go sober-whatever for a month until St. Patty's when I plan to open Blue Spot. Got to let the liver recover a little bit, as we all need to let our livers do from time-to-time. Again, I salute the Chiefs, but I've still got a lot of love for my Eagles. You brought us to the brink. You just couldn't get us to the top of the mountain. I love you anyway.

Despite its vaunted reputation, I've held a grudge against Elijah Craig for a while. I'm sure I used to drink the Small Batch way back in the day before I paid attention to what I was drinking primarily because it was inexpensive and readily available. But the first time I actually actively bought a bottle of Elijah Craig was one of the barrel proof releases in 2020. This was before I was keeping records, before I joined Distiller here and could capture my experience and look back on what my feelings about a particular bottle were. The bottle was fine, if not a little hot, but given the hype that surrounded it, I expected life-changing (I believe it was B520, but I could be mistaken; it might have been B521 and my memory is merging my past into a little ball). In any case, that all right bottle of Barrel Proof was followed by a single barrel store pick from Circle Liquors outside Ocean City Jersey, which might still be my lowest rated whisky on this site. Honestly, it was like water with a little alcohol mixed in. It was 94 proof same as the Small Batch, but I probably would have been better off buying the Small Batch given the quality of what I got in this case. I used it as a mixer to try and finish it, and as a mixer it was awful. It was so weak tasting that when I made Manhattans all I tasted was vermouth. I felt a little betrayed given everything I'd heard and read: Elijah Craig was supposed to be a reliable brand. That's probably the only reason I'm here, trying again. The reputation. The reliability. Am I really not an Elijah Craig fan? Or did I simply pick two expressions that didn't do it for me when there are wonderful expressions out there. Now I buy a bottle of whisky every Friday. That's sort of how I make it through the week. Don't mistake that as I drink a bottle a week. There's a ton of whisky in a cabinet in my house waiting to be tasted. Probably 60-some bottles at this point, and because I buy one a week but don't drink one a week, it grows. I try not to plan what I'm going to pick up. I peruse the state store site prior to heading to one of the nearby branches and I have ideas about what I'm looking for, but I'm always willing to change my mind in the store. Also, the site isn't always up-to-date, so when I got there, even though the online site said ECBP was cold out, what they meant was they had no more ECBP C922. They had just that day gotten in the ECBP A123. And, well, doesn't the release of a 3x/year Barrel Proof always feel like an event? Like something special just happened? Like, if the site says they're out, and the store has it in, and it just arrived that day, maybe that's the one you should get? Or is it only me? Anyway, before grabbing this, I walked around the store, eyeing up other bottles. I considered Pikesville, being the rye lover I am, but I passed. I gazed at some of the scotches with longing but the ones I wanted were above what I wanted to spend on my first bottle since my credit card turned over. They had the Knob 18, but if I'm going to spend that much on a whisky, I have my heart set on the Highland Park 18 and not the Knob, and I think most of y'all would send up an Amen at that. So, I circled back and picked up the Elijah Craig, a bottle that just felt good in my hand, its shape, its weight, like pulling Excalibur from the stone. Plus, even though EC just raised the SRP of this to $70, our stores are charging $65, so it felt like a discount. The reviews I've read have said that this is in keeping with the tradition of solid releases, but it's not the best in recent memory. But they also say that this favors the wood and spice, which I tend to prefer to the sweet when it comes to bourbon. And so the nose on this is beautiful to me. There's a lumberyard quality of fresh cut wood to the nose coupled with a trace of caramel and vanilla. This is exactly what I mean when recently reviewing a host of bottled-in-bonds where I say I prefer something as inexpensive as Old Tub to Jack Daniel's Bonded: it's got a summery feel of the ballpark, of the carnival rather than a cloying sweetness. It's not necessarily a nose I'd like to get as a scented candle, as I've mentioned before with certain scotches like Dalwhinnie or Talisker DE, but it makes me nostalgic in that a spiced and oaky nose reminds me of days in my 20s, when the springtime came and I'd pick up a bottle on my way home from work, rest my feet up on the sill of an open window and stare out at the evening sun as it was just about to go down, maybe a cool breeze blowing in, preparing to head out into the night for whatever adventures might await. The palate itself continues the spice. At 125 proof, this is a hot one, but it's not unpleasant. Added to the oak and caramel on the tongue is a sweetness that's also not cloying, maybe dates or figs with a slightly minty touch of ethanol that's also pleasant in the way it coats your mouth and comes out in a minty rush through your nose. The finish here is long, lasts forever, and it's tannic, but again not offputting. Overall, I'm glad this is what I picked up for myself this week. I'm having my dad and brother-in-law over tomorrow for the Super Bowl, and while I plan to open the Laphroaig Lore as my big surprise to them, I'm also thinking I might serve this at some point over the course of the evening. Generally when they're here I don't just stick to one bottle but try to mix it up to give a host of flavors and examples of what whisky can be. The only question is, where do I put this in the sequence of servings? Generally, I tend to go from more delicate to more extreme. For example, I was also going to serve Highland Park Cask Strength Release No. 2. So do I start with the Lore, switch to the Highland Park, and finish with the ECBP A123? Then give them the option for their fourth dram to choose what they want of the three? I don't know, that sounds like a plan to me. But maybe I'll just have to improvise as I go. I haven't tasted the Lore yet. The Highland Park Cask Strength is better than this one. So I'd be amping it up and coming down in terms of my own personal preferences. But it strikes me as the Highland Park would compliment the Laphroaig better. What would say? How do you guys plan your sequences when having a tasting. Do you have theories? I'd say that it's like putting together a good mixtape, only nobody makes mixtapes anymore so that reference is out-of-date. Thoughts? Opinions?

It's a situation I find myself in from time to time: I want to order a bottle that's online only from the PA Fine Wine & Good Spirits site. The bottle is $65 and shipping is about $12. If I order $99 of whisky, I get free shipping, and since I'm probably going to buy more whisky later in the month anyway, why essentially give away $12 when I can just add $35 and put the whole sum toward whisky. Sure I'm spending an extra $23, but it's all going toward something I want rather than a portion going toward something I want and another portion going toward transporting that thing toward me. So what do I do? I search the site for bottles that get me excited starting the filtering at $35 and working upward from there. I'm not going to tack on something I don't want just to get the free shipping. No, I'm going to buy a bottle I want. I'm just going to start with the lowest cost possible options. I can't remember what I ordered that this was the add-on for. It was probably about six months ago, and it's likely I drank whatever it was I ordered that I really wanted first and saved this for a time when I was in the mood for a New Riff. After all, I've had the New Riff Single Barrel Barrel Proof Rye and the Barrel Proof Bourbon and both were excellent sips for the value. I also had the Bottled-in-Bond Rye and that was quite nice as well. To reach the Bottled-in-Bond Bourbon might have actually been working backward, since of these four, it's the least expensive as well as has the lowest community rating here, but it should be noted, that community rating is still a 3.8, which isn't too shabby for a $40 bottle. I have to admit that I haven't had many bottled-in-bond bourbons, so this is an area in which I have further explorations ahead of me. I've had Evan Williams BiB, which is touted as a best value, but I wasn't particularly a fan. It was all right and the price tag was fantastic, but to me, it was more a mixer and I don't make a lot of cocktails (unless my wife wants a cocktail, that's usually when I'll mix two and join her). I've also had the new Jack Bonded, which is similarly priced to this New Riff BiB and which was good though not as mind-blowing as its press would have you think. I always wanted to try the Henry McKenna back when it was $50 but it was always unavailable then, and now it's been hiked to $68 and from the reviews of people I trust on this site, it sounds like that's priced beyond the reward of its quality. Old Granddad is still on the list and it's widely available and affordably priced, but I haven't gotten around to it yet. And my go-to, given that it was $17 in PA was either Jim Beam Bonded or Old Tub, which struck me as pretty much the same whisky with Beam Bonded being chill-filtered and the Old Tub non-chill-filtered. Both of these reminded me a lot of summer carnivals after baseball games in that they combined caramel corn and peanuts with oak, sawdust and leather. They're probably not as good as the Jack Bonded, but much better than Evan Williams, and priced accordingly. As for this New Riff, I'd put it on par with the Jack Bonded, only the New Riff has a much different flavor profile. While the Jack Bonded was cherry syrup sweetness and bananas and and overall fruity sweetness, New Riff Bonded, much like other New Riff products, amps up the spice. One thing I like about New Riff, in fact, is that regardless of whether you have a rye or a bourbon, they all have a spicy rye edge, and favoring the spicy to the sweet, that's right up my alley. The nose on this one, the New Riff Bonded, is a combination of spice and caramel, quite peppery with the caramel adding a trace of sweetness and a little bit of leather mixed in. The palate keeps that going, upping the caramel and adding a hint of cherry, not to the extent that you find in the JD Bonded, but subtler, and a very nice touch. The finish is particularly interesting in that, as it fades, you get a combination of spice, mint, and tobacco, almost like a menthol cigarette without the nastiness of having to inhale smoke. Overall, even if this is better than the Beam Bonded or Old Tub, it's better only by degrees. While I'm much more likely to repurchase this than the JD Bonded because of the spice over the fruit, I'm not sure either is a run out and buy another straightaway, and might not actually ever be repurchases, but that's okay. Now, if only they could get more New Riff in my area beyond these four. I'm always reading about some new New Riff being released, whether it's Balboa Rye or Winter Whisky or Malted Wheat or Malted Rye, but they never seem to reach Pennsylvania or Jersey. Oh well. I'll keep an eye out whenever I travel. I always do.

I've mentioned this before here, but it bears repeating: I don't like it when people don't factor price into their assessment of whisky. The whole "This review was done without factoring in the price of the whisky" thing really grinds my gears because I pay for my whisky. The quality of the whisky cross referenced with the price greatly affects my enjoyment of it. Case-in-point: these Method & Madness Irish Whiskies. I got the Single Grain, this Single Malt, and the Single Pot Still for 50% off SRP. When I rated the Single Grain, I was surprised at how much I liked it and gave it a 3.5 based on getting it for $32.50 rather than $65. I even went out and picked up a second $32.50 bottle right after to keep in the coffers. Strange thing about it though, despite the 3.5 and the fact I bought a second bottle, I couldn't recommend rushing out to grab one at $65. So what would my rating have been if I'd had to pay $65 for it? I'd probably have docked it half-a-point and let it stand at a straight 3.0. I didn't think about this at the time I rated that. I'm thinking about it more now because the Method & Madness Single Malt is $85 at SRP and frankly, it isn't as good as the Single Grain. So even though I nabbed this one for $42.50, I didn't jump at the chance to get a second bottle at that price and I could have. The one that went quickest, surprise surprise, is also the one generally better rated, the Single Pot Still, which lands also between the two price-wise for an SRP of $75 (for me it was $37.50). Thus I'm in that conundrum zone when it comes to the star rating at least: at the price I paid, I might give it a 3.0. At SRP, I can't really recommend anyone rush out and pick this up, not that it's bad. It's simply overpriced. It's the type of whisky where, if a friend were to pour you a glass at their house and hand it to you, you'd gladly drink it. Depending on how you feel about Irish whisky and how well you know the friend, you might ask for another. Or, if you friend offers another, you might simply say, what else you got? My first ever distiller review was for Writer's Tears Copper Pot. I gave it a 2.75. It would make for a wonderful intro Irish Whisky, but after 20 years of tastings, it's not my speed, and honestly, I think the Copper Pot might be better than this M&M Single Malt. This is also odd given, from what I've read, there's some 14 year old stock in here. Is it all 14 year old? How much younger stock is mixed in? Dunno. Thing is, the aroma here is so faint. I poured the glass ten minutes ago and I've decided to let it sit to see if I can tease something out, because I've had pours on other nights where I've just gone to sipping and the nose was faint then too. As I've let it sit, I'm getting a stronger aroma of a combination of orange and shortbread, sort of a citrus cookie aroma that's pleasant enough. There's maybe a slight edge of vanilla, but if a whisky doesn't smell like chocolate, there's usually a trace of vanilla in there, isn't there? Is it $85 pleasant? Not at all. I'm not sure it's $42.50 pleasant. For $42.50, you can get Knappogue Castle, which also had a faint nose and is on par with this. I'd probably rate them about the same (though it's been a year or two since I had Knappogue). I've also seen Tullamore 12 on sale around here for $43, and if memory serves, I preferred that, though again, I'm basing that on memories of a year or two ago. But that's just the nose. The palate is better and might actually be worth the clearance price. The citrus is strong with the orange note on the nose remaining but evolving toward marmalade and into pineapple in the back end toward the finish. The cookie quality is there with a slight trace of butteriness. And of course, there's a little bit of vanilla, but you know, see my note about vanilla above. There's also a little apple, which is odd because apple and orange are fabled to not go together, but then again, they don't hit at the same time. It has a longer finish that a lot of the Irish whisky I've had, and with its strong citrus creamy edge, I'd say this reminds me of Green Spot Chateau Leoville Barton, but the Green Spot has a creamier fuller mouthfeel that I'd favor if you can get that for $65, which is what it goes for in my neck of the woods. Speaking of wood, that was actually what I liked about the M&M Single Grain, the pencil shavings coupled with the sweetness. It's what made me buy a second bottle. This Single Malt certainly is not a bad whisky, but when you consider that it goes for $84 a bottle at SRP which is the same price as Talisker Distiller's Edition or Laphroaig Cask Strength or the Templeton 10 Year Single Barrel Rye I just reviewed, it's hard to think that this is the bottle you're going to choose unless you favor Irish above scotch or rye, and maybe that's your bag. It's not mine, and I didn't opt for a second bottle of this. Still, I'm going to stick with a 3.0 on this one. Quality wise, it is a touch above that Writer's Tears of my first distiller review (and of course, I'd be remiss if I don't say I also prefer their Double Oak to this, though at $60 that's now madly overpriced). I don't know, I guess I'm getting to that point where price matters and everything seemed to expensive. It's possible we're just getting to that point where I feel like Danny Glover: "I'm getting too old for this shit." The prices these days are starting to make me cranky. Give me the best value column so I know where I'm getting the bang for my buck, people. That's all I ask.

Best value. These two words ring out loud and clear to me when I’m tasting this whisky. This is a new bottle I’m reviewing, but there’s history here. Pre-pandemic, I’m commuting to the office. I just got one kid out of daycare and into public elementary school so things aren’t quite as tight, but I’ve still got a second kid in daycare. Monthly I’m paying $175 for a train pass into the city and the daycare thing, well, if you have kids you know how tight it can get with a kid in there. Budget was the word when it came to whisky. I spent a lot of time cross referencing scores on sites with prices online and when I came across this, it seemed a no brainer. Everything I read about it sounded up my alley, and it was going for $35 a bottle. Thing was, there wasn’t much of it left. I guess the first run of this stuff was limited, because I managed to nab one of the last bottles in my sector before it disappeared for another 2 years. I cracked that first bottle while watching the 49er play the Chiefs in the Super Bowl in 2020, right before the caca hit the windmill. I’d invited my dad over and he’d brought a bottle of Aberlour A’Bunadh my mom had gifted him for Christmas. We’re talking here the difference between an 86 proof Irish Rye and a 120-proof sherry matured scotch. There should have been a clear winner hands down. And I’m not going to lie, the Aberlour was superior. Things was, this Kilbeggan Small Batch Rye held its own. It wasn’t like we tasted the rye and then tasted the scotch and thought, oh my god, that scotch is SO MUCH BETTER. Nope. It was degrees. It was like Rocky fighting Apollo Creed to a draw and then losing by split decision. Or maybe it wasn’t quite THAT close, but it was close enough that when the Kilbeggan reappeared early in 2022, right before St. Patty’s Day, I picked up a bottle for myself and a bottle for my dad because, why not? It was on sale at that point for $30 a bottle, and any Irish that could hold its own against a scotch is a winner in my book, because frankly, I’m not that into Irish whisky anymore. Which is a funny thing. I feel like a lot of us who enjoy whisky cut our teeth on Irish and then go on to realize that other styles are superior. Don’t get me wrong: I’ve enjoyed Redbreast 21 and Cask Strength. I’ve enjoyed Green Spot Montalena and Yellow Spot. I like me some Teeling Blackpitts and the Dark Silkie wasn’t too bad either. It’s just when it comes to dropping the cash, I tend to prefer equivalently priced scotches or ryes. I don’t particularly like the Kilbeggan Single Pot Still nor has Writer’s Tears impressed me much. But this Small Batch Rye is a different beast entirely. It’s got the apple/pear sweetness on the nose that you’d expect from Tully or Jameson with just a touch of pie spice that gives it an edge over those. The spice is a mixture of cinnamon and rye giving it a candied quality, and there’s no metallic tincture as there is with Tully. Honestly, you could confuse the nose here with a younger Speyside scotch. The palate continues the journey with the fruit more prominent and the spiced edge on the finish. Look, this isn’t going to change your life or rock your world, but what it is going to do is give you probably your best option in the Irish category if you’ve only got a Jackson and a Hamilton in your wallet, and with whisky prices rising every day, I went out just yesterday and picked up another bottle figuring why not stock up. After all, sometimes, when you have people over and you’re doing a tasting where you’re trying to build to a crescendo, you need a place to start and this is a great starting point, great first dram of the evening. Last week, it went this, and then the Bruichladdich Islay 2013 and then the Highland Park Cask Strength No. 2 and then a diversion to the Templeton 10 Year Single Barrel Rye and finishing off with Laphroaig 10 Cask Strength. And I think when you look at that list, it’s evident that this was the weakest of that bunch, but it was a lovely gateway to the Bruichladdich, just as the Bruichladdich was a lovely gateway to the Highland Park Cask Strength (notes on that coming soon: spoiler: it was probably my favorite of the bunch). And while we did the tasting, we got to watch a great football game (if by great you mean your defense knocked their starting quarterback out in the first quarter and they rolled to victory without stressing the shit out of me and my dad and my brother-in-law). A lot has changed since that 2020 Super Bowl. My kids are no longer in daycare. I now work from home and don’t have to drop almost $200 a month of transportation costs nor am I paying for daycare, which means I get to spend a little more on whisky and buy better bottles. One of the main things is, while I was rooting for the Chiefs that year because of my love for Andy Reid, this year, that love is gone and he’s a sworn enemy. At least for the next week (I can’t hate on him forever; he was probably the most consistently best coach the Eagles ever had). But I’m an Eagles fan, and next Sunday I want my team to win. As you’d want yours to win if they were in the big game (and I’d be behind you and sympathetic when your team is there because IT’S A GAME AND IT’S NOT REAL LIFE!...I'm kind of tired of the toxicity online that goes way beyond gentle ribbing and trash talking. Our fans have a reputation for it, but look around, it's not just us). And I have a bottle waiting to crack for the game, a big tall green bottle with the words LAPHROAIG and LORE on the outside. And I’m excited about that. But for tonight, I’m pre-partying for a concert I’m going to (Big Thief…if you haven’t listened to them and you like folk rock Americana/alt-country check ‘em out). Anyway, until the next round, cheers! P.S. I just saw that Powers is releasing their own Irish rye at $32 a bottle. This could have some competition soon. Here’s to hoping!

I made the mistake of opening this one a three weeks ago, after I’d already had two pours of Maker’s Mark BRT-01 and a pour of Laphroaig 10 Cask Strength. My wife had been out to a friend’s birthday party and I had spent the evening watching the terrible adaptation of A Wrinkle in Time with my kids. We had recently finished the book, which they loved. And honestly, the loved the movie, and I thought the book was subpar and didn’t live up to its reputation and the movie was abysmal. She got home as we turned toward watching the Netflix adaptation of Lemony Snicket, which we’d also read, and once the kids were in bed, I started to pour and watch. Now, the movie I chose for myself was called Possession. And that’s strange-ass 1980s movie that’s difficult to find on either DVD or Blu-ray and it was showing on the horror streaming service Shudder. The movie was about a marriage in dissolution for the first hour. Then the second, it becomes this creature feature, and there’s some weird undertone of East/West Berlin and spies, and it had that feeling of a David Lynch movie before David Lynch was big where you need to examine it closer and rewatch it to really get it, and it’s compelling, but you’re kind of trying to hold onto the plot and lost at the same time your first time through. All of that is my long way of saying, one of my favorite things in the world is to put on a horror movie and pour some whisky, but I can’t say that while the horror movie is playing, I’m making good choices about my pours or even paying too much attention to them. The Templeton 10 is an early whisky—in retrospect. It’s a first whisky of the night. I shouldn’t be a later whisky or a last whisky. This in large part is owing to how soft it is. Now soft here should not be confused with lightweight. I’ve been out of the game for a week and a half here because I’ve had a cold. Took a COVID test, it was negative, but for the first three nights, it was like little devils were poking tiny knives in the back of my throat. I couldn’t sleep. I don’t really get chest colds. I get throat colds. I don’t lose my sense of smell. I lose the ability to swallow. I lose the ability to speak. It’s a downer, and during that time the only alcohol I consume is 10% and goes by the name of NyQuil baby, can you dig? Big N, small y, big fu@king Q for all you Denis Leary fans. But now I’m back, and tonight, I polished off my Bruichladdich Barley Islay 2013 first, threw on 2016’s Terrifier, and followed the big Bru up with a doe of Templeton 10 Year Single Barrel Rye 104 Proof. The 104 Proof there is important to mention because when you crack this, it doesn’t drink like 104 proofer. It’s more like an 86er, which again doesn’t mean bad. Recovering from the cold, I’m not sure how much I trust my nose, but there’s this soft mixture of minty caramel. I get the sensation of skiing down the slopes of Zermatt to arrive at the lodge and throw back a few salted caramel Toblerone, if you know what I mean and on the palate these aromas become flavors with the addition of Toffee and bergamot. This is the whisky you want if you find Alberta Premium Cask Strength both alluring but too strong and too harsh, the whisky you want if even Wild Turkey Rare Breed Rye is a little too much, the whisky you’d like if you’re thinking while you drink Knob Creek Single Barrel Rye, there’s something here but it’s still a bit too much. It’s like adding an ice cube to those and letting it melt only it’s still room temperature after the ice cube melts. It is essentially a long deep French kiss of a rye, the kind of gentle lullaby put me to sleep draught you would like from a lover’s lips. Oh this is good and it’s strong, but it’s not so strong it overwhelms you. It’s the rye version of water lapping at a sharp stone until it smooths off the rough edges. Get what I’m saying? The most recent strong proof rye I’ve had was the Stellum, and this is better, though it’s subtler and a little more expensive and the finish here isn’t as lingering, but I’m not sure that matters. I think the subtlety here over the others I’ve mentioned results from the aging, since the others I’ve mentioned don’t bear age statements. I’m not sure I’d tell you to seek this out, but if you come across it don’t pass it up. At $85, it’s a little steep and I’ve got to level with you, with price increases these days, I’m about to tap out at this price point and retreat to known quantities that go for around $60. I’m tired of paying top dollar for whiskies that are good but not quite as good as the price tag indicates and I can’t guarantee that this won’t be that for you. However, if you’re in for a penny and in for a pound, this may come with its own surprises. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to unpause the movie and see how Terrifier ends. My suspicion an hour in is that it’s not going to end well. But hey, I’ve had my dram and for better or worse, all road will lead, soon enough, to the land of slumber, aided and abetted by this, entirely cool and nicely minty customer.

This was a dream bottle for me, so I don't know if I'm giving it a 3.75 because it failed to live up to my expectations, or if I'm giving it a 3.75 because I'm being objective and honest with myself that it's simply not as good a whisky as I might have expected. I hope it's clear from what I just wrote that I'm a fan of Laphroaig and peated whiskies in general. You know how sometimes you're a peat fan and you read a 2-star review of one of your favorite whiskies and the comment is, "I don't like peat!" and you're thinking, then why the fuck did you chime in in the first place you rank amateur? Well, to each their own. All I'm saying is, I'm the intended audience for Laphroaig Cask Strength. I love peat. I love Laphroaig 10. I love the last two Carideas bottles, the PX and the Warehouse 1. I love the standard Ardbeg bottlings. I love the Lagavulin Distiller's Edition. I suppose you can say I haven't had them all, but I've had enough to know it's my favorite style whisky. So why, you might ask, do I rate this 3.75? Let me begin by telling you about McGlinchey's. You see, there's a bar by that name in Philadelphia. It's a dive bar. And when the city passed an ordinance intended to ban smoking inside bars and restaurants, McGlinchey's found a way around that, some kind of dispensation, I don't know the technicalities of it. All I know is that in the early aughts, my friends were smokers and they liked to convene there. Now I'm not a smoker myself and wasn't then, but I'd go for the sake of camaraderie and I'd come home smelling like the bottom of an ashtray. And that's the problem with a straight pour of this without any water: the nose is lovely, the palate is lovely, and the finish is like licking the bottom of an ashtray. In other words, 3.75 as a straight pour without adding water and maybe even grading on a curve when it comes to that finish. So, in short, to make the finish work, this needs water. Without it, the nose is tar, ash and leather. The usual iodine and band-aid aroma I expect from Laphroaig 10 simply isn't there. And I like the nose without water. Without water, the palate adds the slightest edge of caramel sweetness to the tar, leather and ash, and that's nice as well. But it's just that final note, the ashtray note, that without water, ends up detracting from the whole experience. Now I opened this on New Year's Eve last week after tasting several other whiskies, and I wondered if that tainted the experience, and I have to say, to some extent it did. This ashy finish was worse after an evening sampling sweeter whiskies. When I drink this straight as the first whisky of the evening, the ash isn't as prominent and I'm grateful for that, but it's still present and biting, and simply put, I don't appreciate it. So, you add a splash of water and what happens. Well, the nose I like becomes a nose I like less but still find interesting. Tasting this with my brother-in-law over the weekend, he put his finger right on the button of adding water to the nose: "Smells like shorted out electronics." And he's right. And also, he should know because he's an electrical engineer. My dad was with us and he offered up, ozone before a lightning storm. Which is about as poetic as my dad gets, bless him. Is that better than tar, leather, and ash? I leave it to you to decide, but I've got to be honest, I've never smelled ozone or shorted-out electronics in a whisky so that was a first, and Laphroaig 10 CS deserves points just for that. With water, the caramel note pushes the leather and tar to the background of the palate, and the ash is all but gone on the finish, leaving it more peppery. So overall, if I could merge the nose of the straight version of this, with the palate and finish of this with a water splash, that would likely push this up to 4.25. As is, I'm sticking with a 3.75, but that's a 3.75 against other Islay whiskies. If I'm going against all other whiskies I've tasted, it's closer to a 4-star rating. Three years ago I had my eye on this, but at the time, it was beyond my budget. Now, it's right in the budget and though there was a limited release near me, I was all over it. Am I glad I got my hands on this? Definitely. Would I buy it again? You bet your ass. Do I prefer the Warehouse 1 despite the fact that that one seemed divisive among fans? Yes, I do. And I may buy another bottle of that if it's still around next month. Nevertheless, I wouldn't pass this up either. It's 100% unique. Ozone, my friends. Burnt electronics. Have you ever heard the like?