Tastes

Glenfiddich doesn't move me the way Ardbeg or Laphroaig do, but I came away from this drink with warm feelings. The stated purpose of this scotch was to merge some bourbon flavors with Glenfiddich, and it's exactly as advertised. It would be a strong gateway or transitional drink for a bourbon drinker trying to get into scotch, or vice versa. It has a much lighter and maltier character than any bourbon, but the top notes are honey, toffee, and vanilla, more so than any of the usual fruit notes from Glenfiddich. It may be an unfortunate consequence of having this after the intensity of a cask strength Booker's, but I didn't detect a lot of unique notes here. The additional two years of age does help smooth this out compared to Glenfiddich 12, and it's not much of a price bump at a reasonable $50 a bottle. If Glenfiddich 12 and 14 were the only two bottles on the shelf, I'd opt for this one for the extra $10-15.

Knob Creek and Evan Williams Single Barrel strike me as very similar bourbons. They are great value picks in that $30-35 range, but they're both falling in age compared to a few years back, and may be losing a little depth of flavor as a result. I've had Knob Creek a few times over the years, including getting a bottle as a groomsman gift at a friend's wedding, and have always enjoyed it. Even without the age statement, I might still give the edge to Knob Creek because at 50%, it hits higher notes and maintains a strong harmony between its brown sugar, molasses sweetness and its peppery oakiness. The stronger proof also allows the layers beneath, including a nice mellow corn scent, to manifest over time. I'll add a major caveat to this blurb: I had a 2 oz pour of Booker's before this one, which really impacted by ability to taste subtler notes, so take all of the above with a grain of salt.

I'll be the first to insist that there is a quantum leap from college-level rotgut to the Jameson level of liquor. Unfortunately, there's then another quantum leap between that level and entry-level single malts or bottles in that $40 price range. Jameson is kind of a downhill drink. The nose started off well with a huge note of stewed apples, but then layered in a whiff of paint thinner and light cream. The palate was light and airy, with little flavor development aside from nondescript sweetness. Innocuous is the best word for the first two phases. The finish was more than a little unpleasant, however. It didn't burn, but it just had a sour, bitter taste almost like a leaf, a twig, or tree sap -- and it built up as I kept drinking it. In the future, Jameson is going to be exclusively a shot or a mixer for me or, very possibly, something I never try again.

The great thing about 12 is I could transpose most of the tasting notes from my Highland Park 15 review exactly, but then this is a much cheaper bottle!  The nose is fruity, giving off hints of some sherry finishing, but not too heavy on the raisins.  There's almost a sweet oily quality to the nose, a bit of honey, and a smokey or grilled fruit note.  Of the three Highland Parks, the 12 has the smokiest nose, although still a soft, earthier smokiness than in an Islay scotch.  My hastily scribbled tasting note on the palate is simply, "Wow."  There's not much more to say, it is a great combination of sweet (honey, grilled pineapple), smoky (that's the grilled part), and oily, and I'm again grateful that the American rendition of this expression is 43% rather than thinned down to 40% like elsewhere.  Not complex, but pleasant in every dimension.  The finish is almost identical to 15 for me.  It feels like the aftertaste of chocolate milk, with a bit of cappuccino, and that earthy peat as well.

Another bourbon where I'm completely off the Distiller notes -- I wonder if I was having a weird taste day yesterday. The nose almost seems sherried to me, as the strongest scents I got were raisins, dates, and figs.  Relative to the average bourbon, Prairie Reserve has a spicier nose.  The palate also struck me as spicier than average (and after looking it up online, I've seen some sites reporting that one of the bourbons in the mix is Four Roses, which would make sense given that distillery's high-rye mashbills).  The classic bourbon flavors are also there, along with a bit of Cherry Coca Cola.  The finish, consistent with the palate and nose, is peppery; that sherry sensation returns, and then it mellows out to an herbal and slightly bitter grassiness.  Since the flavor profile hits so many of the same spice notes as Four Roses, and the superlative Four Roses Single Barrel is around the same price, I'd recommend just going straight to the source.

Perhaps most famous for its unique and striking bottle, which is shaped like the stills used to produce spirit, Willett Pot Still's also worth trying for the liquid inside.  The nose has aromas of chocolate malt, a bit of dried wood and tobacco, and is a good deal mustier than the average bourbon.  The flavor profile is classic bourbon, though:  vanilla, caramel, wood tannins, and a bit of bite.  That musty, pipe tobacco in an old library sensation remains as well.  I don't get as much spiciness from this bourbon, so however much rye there is in it doesn't express itself strongly.  The finish is pleasantly long and ends with a bit of spearmint tingle.  At $50 a bottle, it's not the best value in bourbon, but the bottle alone would make it fun to bring out and drink with company.

For such a famous dram, it's actually quite unconventional to my taste buds, and I get very different notes than most reviews that I've read here.  The initial scents are in the fruit and berry realm, starting with cherry, evolving to nectarine, and then landing on a combination of sweet citrus and strawberry.  At the very end, the vanilla characteristic of bourbon peeks through.  The palate is also very distinctive, with a strong pear juice flavor, the most I've experienced in any bourbon.  The mid-palate and finish, however, are a little thin and generically sweet, and a bit of a fall of the cliff.  I'd like some more oak notes here. The Double Oak, while a lot more expensive, is also significantly better.

Did I just step into a bakery? And by bakery, I mean a real, bread bakery, not a pastry bakery. The nose of this rye smells like multi-grain bread, with a dollop of flaxseed and oats. The background is a little dash of sweet butterscotch and honey. The first sip is watery, but perhaps that's the aftereffect of following a 2 oz pour of the more robust Russell's Reserve. The taste also has some bread-like characteristics and is a little medicinal. The palate is the weak suit of this whiskey, because there really is not much there. The finish is medium length, still bready, a little tart, and very spicy -- as if all that rye spice pops up in the finish. It's very smooth, and at $20 a bottle, a pretty strong value play, which probably could be a good cocktail mixer because of that nice finish (and in a cocktail, its thin body will be bolstered by the other ingredients). The empty glass has an aroma of caramel and vanilla, as if it was a bourbon rather than a rye, which is unexpected. I wonder why those flavors didn't show up to the party earlier!

Whatever barrel I tried has some great characteristics, and it's clear they pick exemplars of classic bourbon flavors. That being said, the one I had exhibited a slight (and interesting) twist! The very first whiff off the nose was reminiscent of balsamic vinaigrette, which immediately intrigued me. The subsequent scents were pure vanilla, caramel, and another unexpected note: strawberry shortcake. A first-rate nose. The palate falls more in line with the quintessential bourbon profile: honey, caramel, butter, a bit of bite from the high proof, and a strong swirl of wood tannins (maybe a hint too much). Then, right as I swallow, a flourishing of apples. The high proof makes this one a bit of a tongue burner, which is its only flaw, as it is a little tricky to spot all the flavors before the alcohol dulls the senses. The finish is warm, a tiny bit tart, and is where the wood fully expresses itself. It's a rich, vibrant wood, almost like young wood chips. The finish also is quite spicy, so much so that there's no detectable vanilla at the end, and only a little caramel. The empty glass smells like an antique piece of well-kept furniture. A very solid 4 out of 5.

This note is from distant memory, so take it with a grain of salt. I enjoyed a pour of this whiskey at a work function last summer, and recall thinking it was quite pricey at $28 a pour (which is a great price now that a bottle costs $400+). The world's gone a little insane for Japanese whiskies, perhaps in excess of what they deserve. They are every bit the equal of Scotch whiskies, but they're now priced at a tremendous premium (probably have to pay twice the price or more for comparable quality). I recall being impressed by the rich, honeyed malt character of this dram, along with its smooth and lingering finish. The Japanese whiskies are some of the best at capturing the core malty flavor at the heart of a 100% barley distillate. There's a bit of smoke here, but less than in a Johnnie Walker Black or a Talisker 10. I would not recommending adding water, as it seemed well composed, and I don't see a dip below 40% ABV being to its benefit. I'm somewhat amused to see that reviews of Japanese whiskies tend to impute flavors to the whiskey that are Asian in origin (e.g., ginger, five-spice). I'm not sure I get those myself, but the power of suggestion is a wonderful thing. I'll give this a 4 while giving minimal consideration to price, since I didn't end up covering the tab, but it's not a noticeable step up from lots of scotches in the $75-100 price range. Nikka Whisky from the Barrel, which remains easily accessible whenever in the UK or EU, is better regardless of price (and, at $40 for 500ml, I'd opt for it every time). Note: Apologies for any confusion caused by my earlier mistake of posting this to the Taketsuru 12.