Tastes

This scotch is a cut above the usual 10-12 year Highland malts, which blur together in my mind. It has a country breakfast basket of scents: apple, malt, jasmine, honey, and vanilla. The taste is sweet pomegranate and apple, and some wheat beer, cereal grain combination. The finish is sweet but has some traces of smoke or rubber, almost as if there's a tiny bit of peat drying to the malt. It's not hugely complex, mostly just sweet, kind of a classic "session" scotch. Still, it's solidly ahead of Glenmorangie Original or others in the same weight class.

This is an airy scotch, on the easy drinking extreme of the easy drinking end of the pool. On the nose, it's malt and nothing but the malt. There may be something floral there, but it's like faded potpourri, so faint I could be imagining it. The taste is very buttery, smooth, and has shades of honey or some melon. The finish is a bit dry, a little gin-like, floral, and tinged with some berries. It's pleasant but almost too subtle. I like it but am glad I just bought a sample, if that makes sense.

I had the privilege of trying a sample of this discontinued whiskey thanks to Davie Warner. I took my time to appreciate this, and actually nosed the bottle at random times for a few days before pouring out a dram. The peat has mellowed out a lot in the additional 8 years of aging, so do not expect the standard Laphroaig full-frontal assault. It's less bonfire, more Encyclopedia Britannica -- think a shelf of aged, leather-bound tomes. There's also a healthy dose of brine and seaspray. Underneath these classic Laphroaig signatures is a much sweeter and more succulent layer of cured, salted ham, neroli, and tangerine or orange. The fruit flavors creep forward over time and eventually outshine the peat, which fades into the background. The palate almost trembles with flavor on entry, and it's quite intensely fruity. After a flood of tangerines and mandarin oranges (I almost imagine a cocktail mixing Cointreau and Laphroaig in equal measures), there are also some hints of tropical fruit and toffee. The peat provides nice balance here, in combination with some oak backbone, but it's a subtle, toasted flavor, rather than a smoke. It's also, as Gordon Ramsay would say, perfectly seasoned (meaning a healthy pinch of salt). It finishes like an Aztec chocolate bar -- dark chocolate, chili pepper flecks, some orange peel, and salt on the lips. There is almost something sherried about it, a berry-like sweetness at the end. The finish stretches forever, and has a mouth-drying sensation similar to Highland Park 18, with some pepperiness as well. A superb scotch, for occasions when a more restrained peat is appropriate. The best comparison I can draw is that it's somewhere halfway between Highland Park 18 and Laphroaig 10.

I think the current 3.5 user average is just about perfect. This is kind of the scotch I'd build in the lab if I wanted to give someone a good overview of the spectrum of scotch flavors, but turned to about a 4-5 in intensity. I get honey, malt, and a bit of musty newspaper and pencil shavings on the nose, but the 18 years that all the components aged have clearly mellowed this dram out -- it's very understated. I taste honey again, a healthy bite of apple, and some almond on the palate, which is smooth, sweet, and malty again. The finish is probably the best phase, with a tiny bit of smoke or coffee that reveals there's been some peat here all along. It's a little thin, but sweet, of decent length, and enjoyable, like a muted version of Highland Park. For the price, you could do better, you could do worse -- I'd probably vote for a Talisker or Highland Park myself, either of which features a more distinctive and punchy, but similar, profile.

There is just way too much nail polish remover or young spirit character in the nose of this blend. The better aspects are like a light Highland malt, with a tiny bit of green grape and apple, and a healthy, fibrous wood. The palate is extremely woody again but also a little sour; licorice and ginger are the only two other flavors I note here. The finish is quite bitter, ranging from green grass to fresh wood; to its credit, it is long, but it has a surprising amount of bite at this low proof. If tasted blind, I would have assumed this was a young well whiskey, so I'm not impressed. The only other Compass Box blends I've had are Great King Street and Asyla, which are a lot better and cheaper. Pass on Oak Cross.

Glenlivet's signature apple is prominent on the nose. In fact, it dominates. But I had a very hard time distinguishing this single malt from Glenfiddich 12 (tonight, my wife and I tried the "big three" side by side, so I was nosing these one after the other). Other than that, I get malt on the nose, and that's about it. The taste is sweet but there is some ineffable element in it that prevents me from loving it, and like Glenfiddich 12 it is quite watery. The finish has a little more honeyed sweetness and spiciness than Glenfiddich 12, so that's a slight plus in favor of this dram. I think of the big three, Glenmorangie Original won out for me.

I don't think I'm all that great at distinguishing non-peated scotches, particularly compared to the peated scotches that are my true love. Tonight, my wife and I tried the "big three" -- this guy, Glenlivet 12, and Glenmorangie Original. To be honest, I could not really tell Glenfiddich 12 and Glenlivet 12 apart, particularly on the nose. It's full of malt, a bit of young spirit, and a fruity apple or apple skin scent. A hint of muskier oil is the only thing distinguishing this one from Glenlivet 12 to me. The taste has some of that sweet malt and apple, but also a bit of a medicinal, cough syrup dimension. The mouthfeel is quite watery, and that hampers the finish, which is short and a bit too herbal or grassy for my tastes. This was my least favorite of the three, just barely (found I wasn't loving the Glenlivet 12 today either).

My wife and I tried all of the "big three" single malts tonight -- Glenmorangie Original, Glenlivet 12, and Glenfiddich 12. Glenmorangie is the lightest of the bunch, kind of a 10k gold tone. The nose is the best feature of this scotch, as it has an alluring floral essence, complemented by a mixture of delicate sweet and spicy flavors. The palate is again light and delicate, with some papaya or mildly sweet fruit. The finish is richer, with a bit of barrel char that almost reads as smoke at times, and a riper sweetness than in the first two phases. Like a well-browned sweet croissant. The problem with both the palate and the finish is that it's diluted a bit too far, or perhaps the flavors just aren't highly pronounced, because some bitterness shines through, and it has a slightly watery mouthfeel. Nonetheless, Glenmorangie was our favorite of the three.

Sherry for days, a bit of sweet oak, strawberry, fruit jellies (sweeter, lighter smell than jams), cherry, and a bit of acetone define the nose. The taste is smooth and impressive for a NAS whiskey -- honey-coated almonds, a bit of Christmas season spices, cherry, and some caramel from the oak, almost like a slightly diluted bourbon flavor. The finish is well-integrated and just pleasant. I get sherry again, a bit of creaminess to balance the tartness, a quite prominent cherry, again a bourbon-like element (spice, mint, a touch of bitterness as if the cherry pits are in there too), and a final wisp of raspberry flavor as the long finish fades to black. OK, the world has been going a bit mad for Japanese whiskies for a few years now. I even remember the turning point in the DC area. Sometime back in 2014, I saw Yamazaki 12 on the shelf for $90, but opted for Hakushu 12 at $70, thinking to myself that was already a high price to pay for a 12-year whiskey. By the time I went back a few months later, both were $100. By the time I went back a year later, they weren't even on the shelf anymore. I did enjoy a few Yamazaki 12 drams at Big in Japan bar in Montreal in 2015, which was one of the cooler bars I'd been in at the time (the décor consisted of dozens of bottles of 12 and other Japanese expressions hanging from the ceiling, and patrons could buy a personal bottle that would hang up there, but would be their exclusive bottle to enjoy whenever they returned). Out of curiosity I looked at the bar's menu again this week, and it didn't even list Yamazaki 12 as an option anymore, only Suntory Toki. It may be 10-12 years until Japanese production catches up to this market so that we can once again enjoy their whiskies at reasonable cost and with reasonable availability. Such is life. Leaving that long-winded digression behind, I personally wouldn't bite the bullet and pay the $100+ that this whiskey costs (at least according to Wine Searcher). That being said, it's a worthy successor to the 12, and if I'd tasted it blind I probably would have guessed it was a 15-year old whiskey. It outshines many Highland or Speyside malts in the $60-80 range. Thanks to Davie Warner for the sample!

Thanks again to Davie Warner for this sample. Glengoyne 15 is hard to describe for me in some ways because it strikes right at the core of what I consider to be "scotch." It's a combination of malt, cereal grain, furniture polish, honey, and a bit of woodiness. It's a very pure, smooth expression of that flavor, and I think it's proofed just right, clear without feeling thin, but without the tongue burn or anesthetizing effect of higher proofs where this kind of quiet flavor profile would be nuked into oblivion. Pleasant finish, on the dry side, with some vetiver or lemongrass. To fall back on a wine analogy, this is a have-with-fish kind of scotch, and would be a recommendation for anyone who wants to get a sense of the "heart" notes in a scotch. I was surprised to see online that this scotch is aged in a mix of ex-bourbon and ex-sherry casks. I frankly have a hard time detecting much (if any) sherry influence here, except perhaps in the lightest of touches of nuttiness and spiciness in the palate and finish -- which could just as easily be the power of suggestion.