Tastes

N: sweetness led by toasted cereals, a little vanilla, apple/cider and some grassy spirit. P: surprisingly full but the short-lived fudgey biscuit notes and fruity crisp juiciness get cut straight through by some ethanol burn. F: medium finish that is all about the burn, with an undercurrent of fairly uninspiring honey and creaminess. I wasn’t looking forward to coming back to update my notes on this. At 48.95 a bottle you really can’t have high expectations. I guess this is the Irish version of Johnnie Walker Red; mass produced and cheap to keep the generic masses happy. This has ended up, not in my cabinet, but in the kitchen pantry. My wife made a faux-baileys with it. I am mindful of not letting things go to waste. I was going to say that there is nothing inherently wrong with this whiskey. I was. But I’m not going to. There is a lot wrong. Mass production (11 million cases in 2020) has done no favours. Generic, lifeless, and insipid. The burn is prominent. The only redeeming quality in my mind is the nose, thats passable I suppose. High praise indeed. I also assume there would be consistency across the millions of cases. How hard is it to be consistently the bottom end of passable though? Do people actually drink this stuff neat, for enjoyment? If so why? I get good whisky is “the whisky you like to drink, the way you like to drink it” and all, but; seriously, why this? If anyone wants to chime in and reeducate me please do. I’m going to cut my rant short now. Distiller whisky taste #59

The Sydney Sandstone is the common name for the Sydney Basin Hawkesbury Sandstone… one particular variety is historically, locally, known as ‘yellow gold’. I find it particularly fitting that the team at Archie Rose in Sydney have produced a liquid gold from what I assume is locally drawn water that in all likelihood would have filtered (at some point) through the Hawkesbury Sandstone. Yellow gold makes liquid gold. For all you geology fans out there, the rock pictured here is Hawkesbury Sandstone, famous as a landform defining, building creating, natural work of art stretching back in time some 247 million years to the ancient rivers that deposited it. I don’t know what effect the geology has on the Archie Rose water source but these rocks are porous natural filters with small amounts of iron carbonate and clays, that surely must impart something of note to what is considered one of the best rye whisky’s in the world. N: Apricot, vanilla, oakiness, a little honey. There is a brilliant herbal spice note through everything, I’m torn between fennel and thyme to put my finger on it. It does have a strong almost menthol or peppermint quality to the way it fills and clears the sinuses. P: Star anise, soft cinnamon and ginger with lashings of butter and creamy peaches. Both bright and refreshing whilst also warming and deep. Desert like vanilla custard. F: Long and delicately balanced with ginger and star anise, a walnut like oiliness. Sweet desert palate dries out to a fruity almost perfumed final note. The more whisky I try the more I find myself wanting to discover nuance, uniqueness and impactful bottles that offer a story or allow deep contemplation of the world; as wanky as that may be. I’ve also found that whisky awards, accolades and the endless opinions that describe a whisky as ’smooth’ or worse still ‘smoooooooth’ are just not to be trusted and are possibly just full of BS. I don’t know a lot about rye, I think I can count on one hand with fingers to spare the ryes I have tried, but my word this is something special. The list of ‘worlds best’ is almost ridiculous but this IS probably, deserving of the highest praise. Here is a whisky that was truly unexpected. It has a depth of character that is remarkable, nuanced and delicate; yet deep, thick, and seriously moreish. I am not contemplating the depths of deep time or the worlds greatest mysteries, but I am wondering why this is not impossible to get a hold of, and how it only costs $120 for what is probably the best rye whisky in the world. For what ever this mere amateurs opinion is worth; go out and find this to try. Archi Rose Malted Rye is anything but ‘smooooooooth’ but it is an awesome winning powerhouse that has to be tasted. Batch No. 13 Bottle 1148/3000 Distiller whisky taste #58

N: vanilla, toffee, ripe peaches and pears. Banana! Soft sweetness trending towards a liqueur type nose. P: Sweetness brilliantly balanced by an upfront oak note with cereal-malt, vanilla, and a brown sugar caramel. Fresh juicy melon. Ever so slightly sticky and oily. F: medium. Silky and decadent, slightly sweet vanilla and warm pepper. Everything lasts in equal measure with no real dominant note. Not that it needs it, but a splash of water brings some toffee to the surface whilst pulling a softer melon sweetness through everything. Personally though I think it makes things a little flatter and removes some of the vibrancy. Take the biscuity, shortbread flavours of Irish pot still whisky and mix it with the mouth filling vanilla sweetness of bourbon and sticky flavours of dark rum and you might have something approaching this. Everything is nicely balanced with sufficient heft from the fresh vibrant flavours to cut through the sticky sweetness. This is a light, fresh and playful liquid that seems to be a consistent delivery of quality. This juice definitely wakens me to the possibility of grain being more than just a bland background for blends. Well done Nikka, well done. Distiller whisky taste #57

Another revised set of notes. This time for the only bourbon I keep in permanent supply. N: vanilla, milk chocolate, warm spices like cloves and nutmeg. Over time dark toffee and caramel come through with some leather. Every now and again there are crisp orchard fruits. P: thick mouth coating fullness. Dark, dark cherries, rich chocolate, woody tannins, sticky dark caramel and creamy richness. A little more bakery spice. F: moderately long, toasted oak, warm but gentle cinnamon, creamy fullness. More caramel and a lingering cherry chewiness. Can a texture be a smell? If it can, then this bourbon smells soft. Such a rich, oozing thickness. This nose is absolute decadence. I get vibes of a little antique shop, dimly lit by flickering lights and filled with rich woods and old books. There is depth here that is, again, decadent and rich. Yum. The nose follows through to a fantastic palate. There are layers of darkness and personality but the rich powerful notes are balanced by sweet fruity and cherry freshness and a general savoury nuttiness with warming cinnamon spice. This stuff makes my mouth salivate. I keep wanting more. This expression is aged in the same way as the classic Woodford Reserve with additional maturation in barrels which have been heavily toasted and lightly charred. This has masterfully imparted an added depth of oak characteristics whilst also developing the fruit, vanilla and caramel notes. I find myself more and more asking what makes a good whisky? Is it the nuanced flavours? Is it the unique profiles? The long list of medals and rosettes? The number of years on the label? No. It’s the whisk(e)y you enjoy drinking the way you enjoy drinking it. This bourbon is something I want to drink. This is good whiskey. Distiller whisky taste #56

N: crisp apple, honey and cereal. Look hard enough and there is something like strawberries and citrus. P: creamy full body, wood tannins, fruity sweetness and dark toffee. A very slight hint of smoke. There’s a dry bitterness that is vaguely reminiscent of burnt coffee. F: crisp, lemon/citrus, light pepper and tannins. All wrapped up in burnt brown sugar. Single malts going into this blend allegedly come from Yamazaki and Hakushu distilleries and grain from Chita. I get elements of these individuals, but there is (as is the point of blends) a different direction and enhancement that happens: strawberries, tannins, and brown sugar are all different directions to the single malts that I find here. A complexity to this bottle is here that will reward you if you work for it. I wouldn’t necessarily say that this is an easy whisky though, and I’m not convinced I fully appreciate or understand it either, the bitter note especially isn’t bad, but it challenges me in a way that I can’t fully decide if I’m a fan of. I suppose I’ll need to have more…. Distiller whisky taste #55 Bottle kill update 06/09/2022 As this has aged a little has changed. There is the slightest oak spice on the nose along with a slight acidity. Some of the florals (strawberries) have faded away. The palate remains the same creamy oaked texture and malty bitter coffee-mocha with dark toffee. Still very good at being minimalist and very to the point in its flavour profile. The finish, medium and tending towards short. Tannic spices l, burnt malty sugar and perhaps a gingeryness that I missed before or recognised as citrus. Perfectly enjoyable, and as I kill this bottle I am also saving myself a 30 ml sample just Incase I need to remind myself why I won’t buy this again. It’s just not memorable enough to be >AUD $210

Currently attempting to add some more commentary to old notes where I have liquid left in the bottle. Next on the list I’m going back to one of my staple favourites, Limeburners American Oak. I don’t think Limeburners are particularly well known outside of Western Australia, let alone Australia. The Great Southern Distillery is located on the harbours edge in Albany, southern Western Australia where their spirits are distilled in traditional small batch copper pot stills from local barley and water drawn from the Nanarup aquifer that lies beneath Albany. For all those rock fans out there, the aquifer is formed from the ~40 million year old Nanarup Limestone, which I am sure must contribute a wonderful mineral quality to the water. All the standard releases are bottled at 43%, brought down from the cask strength by filtered rain water. The American Oak bottling is matured in refill American Oak and is probably the best representative of the core Limeburners range and spirit. Great Southern Distillery uses a Solera System in their bottling process, whereby several casks are emptied to a large holding tank and left to marry. Half of the blended batch is then sent for filtering and bottling, and the remaining half is retained and the blending tank is topped up with new barrels. I believe Limeburners have been criticised for inconsistency in the past, but for the last three years or so that I have been enjoying the American Oak offering, I haven’t recognised any notable variability, so I’d suggest the early inconsistencies have been ironed out and the Solera System is doing what it’s supposed to; providing consistency from batch to batch.  N: Refreshing and juicy melon, rich barley, orchard fruit crispness, caramel cream. P: Juicy stone fruit, vanilla and some ever so slightly sour citrus. Light honey and a really bright ginger spice. Lots of rich malted barely and woody tannin notes. All around full and somewhat creamy mouth-feel. F: A little short. Vanilla and a nutty creaminess gives way to honey sweetness and then a ginger zing. This is a punchy whisky, summery and bright. Whilst I think quite unique, this is still very approachable and readily appreciable. I can mull it over but not much work is needed to find what it has to offer. I like that. The nose perhaps is a little better than the palate. The nose reminds me of the overly glamourised tv commercials of fresh apples being misted and beads of water rolling down the side and cutting to summer flows with busy bees collecting pollen. If you could eat a smell then this smell would likely follow through with a brilliant fresh green apple crunch. I don’t know if a bright sunny orchard garden can be bottled, but I think this whisky may be close to it. I think this expression may have been my gateway into bourbons for the caramel and vanilla flavours and whilst those are undeniably here, the presence of the spirit is available and thats a great outcome to not have been completely overprinted. My only criticism I think would be that the ginger note is a bit overpowering at times but it’s not a major detriment really. Distiller whisky taste #54

Ahhh, the purpose of the mass production machine of Glenfiddich, to go into the underpriced (hooray) magic that is Monkey Shoulder. Three Speyside liquids go into this blend: Glenfiddich, Balvenie, and Kinivie, and dare I say it, I suspect what ever the parts are that go in, the sum is probably greater. N: Malt, vanilla and toffee, some more vanilla, bakery spices (nutmeg, cinnamon). Crisp citrus freshness. I love this nose, in one hyphenated word, malty-funk. P: malt malt malt (so good), buttery fullness, honey, soft woody notes, vanilla, i think banana (maybe like those dried/fried banana chips). Theres a crunchy burnt brown sugar, like a creme brûlée. Its a sweetness that just balances off the malty cereal tones. F: medium. Cinnamon warmth, a little oaky, and maybe something fresh like peppermint or menthol. I just got through writing down my thoughts on both OP12 and Glenfiddich 12. Those thoughts, in short were: I’d rather be drinking Monkey Shoulder. Admittedly I am sat here still drinking Glenfiddich of sorts, but the brilliance lies in the blend here. Three malts, three monkeys, one winner. If egg custard tarts were a liquid I think this would be it. And I for one think egg custard tarts are delicious, ergo, monkeys shoulder is delicious. At

N: toasty malty cereal, vanilla, slightly spicy apple juice and an almost sherried sultana like note. P: clean and crisp acidity with a cinnamon warmth that layers over a reflection of the nose: malty, vanilla and orchard fruit. F: short to medium. maybe an oily salty note, but mostly cinnamon warmth and a little oak. Rumour has it that Glenfiddich 12 is the worlds best selling single malt. There is an expectation then that this would live up to some degree of hype. Surely a classic is a classic for a reason? In this case I suspect the reason is two fold: (1) unparalleled market reach and advertising and (2) a really simple uncomplicated drinker that can be found everywhere and causes no offence. And thats the problem. By not causing offence, by being so universally acceptable, this whisky is bewilderingly average. The nose and palate are more or less one and the same. The finish is kind of bland, and overall its just a bit forgettable. I’d rather drink Monkeys Shoulder, that has a bit of funk and play to it that is just more interesting. Don’t get me wrong, I categorically do not dislike Glenfiddich 12. Its fine. I’d just rather drink something else given the choice. Distiller whisky taste #52

Highland Park 25 Year Old Spring 2019 Release has been created from fewer than 20 sherry seasoned European oak casks, first-fill ex-bourbon casks and refill casks, hand-selected by their Master Whisky Maker, Gordon Motion, from a small treasure of suitable casks.  Half way through now, with many drams shared to family, but a moment of contemplation this evening to update these tasting notes with a solid pour. N: Bright and warming with citrus, wafts of herbaceous floral smoke, maltiness and a fruit juice sweetness and a softening vanilla-fudge note. P: Dried fruits from the sherry cask, but balanced with toffee, gingerbread, vanilla. All underpinned by charry BBQ steak. F: Medium. Slightly sweet smoke with floral savoury flavour. Briny sea-spray. This a whisky that brings complexity, depth of flavour and delicate refinement. The softness of the toffee-vanilla profile is expertly measured against the wonderful BBQ char, floral-herbal smoke and sea spray brine. It’s almost a chewy mouthful, like biting into meat straight from the grill. But, this still demands respect and time to consider and discover. I’d say its time well spent. Sadly though, this isn’t a five stars for me. It’s unquestionably good, to me, but it lacks something. Perhaps I expected something more for 25 years from the esteemed Highland Park, but the magic is missing. When this bottle is gone, I don’t think it’s something I’ll pine for to replace, and so it just isn’t 5 stars. Highland Park heralds as a whisky shaped by wild climate, stormy seas and Viking exploration dating back over 1000 years. But, this whisky dates back further. The Orkney Islands are dominated by the Devonian Old Red Sandstone. These rocks are the 400 million year old natural aquifers responsible for filtering the water used by the distillery that is drawn from Cattie Maggie’s spring. Distiller whisky taste #51 Bottle kill pour 03/11/2022 After pouring 60 ml into a mini bottle to save for later I emptied the last drops to enjoy for the last time in what I suspect will be a very long time. This time around after leaving the pour in a glass for twenty minutes I start nosing… N: honey becomes apparent, I missed that last time. Still bright and warming but now the citrus is slightly more bitter like marmalade. The smoke adds a slightly leathery or tobacco note. Perhaps this is the oxidation at work. Well, it works very well. The previously noted vanilla, and juicy malt are here still and backed by the same delicious floral peat smoke. P: Same as last time. Rich dried fruit, gingerbread, some vanilla. There is lovely sweetness and maybe some newly discovered creaminess, not chocolate per se but a mouthfeel reminiscent of it. The smoke is so restrained, so gentle and so deliciously sticky like BBQ meat glaze. I find this a little more prickly now, similar to really crisp rocket leaves. F: Still medium. Slightly salty with gentle smoke and savoury feel. The new rocket leaves are slightly present still. The addition of a splash of water given yet more time brings out the orange on the nose with less bitterness and more of a fresh orange being squeezed. The most notable development though is the smoke which just gets bigger, more weighty and forceful. The smoke does this without diminishing anything else. Wonderful stuff. This really is excellent. It is, you can’t deny it. But its still not filling me with the excitement I would want for $999! So its not perfect to me. What I remember of the 18, or perhaps even some of the cask strength 01 or 02 bottles I’ve heard good things about, would serve as admirable alternatives at a 1/4 of the cost.

N: Opens on gentle woodiness and maltiness underlain by a toffee like richness and honey sweetness. Every so slight fresh sea spray. A fruitiness develops after the first few sips which is a pleasant development. P: A rich rounded honey with a fruity soft sweetness are first and foremost. A little pepper mixes in well with a definite salt presence and savour biscuity or bready mouthfeel and flavour bringing up the back end. F: Medium-long. Salty, slightly oily and warming with smooth chocolate and fresh lemon peel. Apparently this version of OP 12, that I believe was released in 2018, is not what it used to be. I don’t know what it used to be though and I ultimately don’t care as a result. What it is now is really pleasant. The profile becomes more fruity with every sip but manages to stay on the correct side of sweet. As a kid in the UK, my Dad would often by a big white bloomer bread loaf on the weekends and eating thick slices of this warm and slathered in honey is as close to a comparison as I can give to this whisky. It’s a happy memory invocation if nothing else. The honey is on the side of malty and the richness of the soft toffee notes are really quite lovely. The salt though is probably the most interesting thing here to me. It’s not a harsh salt like cooking salt and its not a briny or cured flavour like in a Talisker. Rather, the salt here (to me at least; and I really don’t know much about this whisky tasting business) is something more refined and gentle. I’d suggest the salt is like Maldon Salt Flakes, the kind you see as crystals in pinch bowls at hipster brunch cafés. I near the end of my bottle, and for the price, I think it was good on the shelf but I don’t think I’ll replace it. As enjoyable as it was, I actually think I’d rather drink monkeys shoulder. Although MS lacks the salt it possibly wins out on the rest of the comparable malty flavours at an even lower price. Distiller whisky taste #50