Tastes

For me, this is where it all began. This was my whiskey gateway drug, and about the only whiskey I drank with any frequency until a couple of years ago. I have a boss and several coworkers who are huge Makers fans, who influenced my migration from mixed drinks made with clear spirits to the brown stuff. Alas, I don't drink it that much anymore...too many other mistresses to stay committed to only one - and it's hard to believe I've never written a review, but here goes. To me, the nose brings subtle vanilla, brown sugar, and a hint of creamed corn with just a dash of cinnamon. There's a soupçon of something chemical (nail polish? Magic marker?) in there sometimes. The palate is fairly sweet and not as leathery and strong as many of the bourbons I now favor, probably because of the absence of rye and presence of wheat. There's a bit of brown sugar and maple syrup in there, along with some muted oak. The medium finish is a little more woody than the palate, and with a slow exhale through the nose, the olfactory sensation is slightly spicy, although not as much as with the sister spirit, Maker's 46, which likely gains some spiciness from the added French oak staves. In all, it's a respectable spirit that I will always appreciate for its consistency and it's ability to woo novice drinkers. It's an affordable spirit, as well, with 750 mL often being available locally for less than 25 bucks. I just find myself now more attracted to higher rye bourbons, rye whiskey, and also "whisky." That doesn't leave much time for my first love. (Maker's Mark, you've been rock steady. It's not you, it's me). This is still deserving of the four stars I've given it, for all of the reasons I've stated. It will be a drink I can always go back to, as it's always available at just about any bar.

Never having had a single grain, I approached this sample from my gift set with mild interest, but reading that it is made mostly from wheat set my expectations fairly low. I knew it likely wouldn't compare well to a single malt, and it didn't. It also didn't have a character anywhere close to a wheated bourbon, despite being aged in ex-bourbon barrels. Very light and thin looking in the glass, with no legs on swirling. The nose yielded honey and apple cider with a faint hint of citrus and vanilla. On the palate, it was honey sweet with a flavor akin to eating a biscuit with a cup of black tea. Very light with a thin mouth feel. A little bitter on the finish, which was very short. In all, very light (some might say "smooth") and inoffensive. Also, just not that interesting. I looked it up and saw that it can be purchased in my area for US $59.99. I can think of much better uses for 60 bucks, as there are many good single malts, bourbons and ryes to be had for that.

I'm beginning to think I must just be a bourbon guy, because I cannot justify the price point on some of the single malts I've tried lately. This is another installment in the sample collection I received as a gift this Christmas. I jotted some notes while tasting and compared them to my review of the Balvenie Doublewood 12-year from a few months back. It definitely has some similarities. On the nose, I picked up some cherry vanilla ice cream, orange pekoe tea with lemon and a dusting of cinnamon. The palate expressed the grain in a more biscuit like fashion as opposed to the cereal notes I found in the 12. Some spice and dried fruit are there, along with that faint wisp of pipe smoke. The finish is a bit longer, with moderate burn and a slight bitter edge that isn't unpleasant. Dry glass is pipe tobacco. In all, it is good, but not great. A 750 mL bottle costs US $137.99 locally, more than double the cost of the 12-year Doublewood (at $55.99) and only $2 less than Highland Park 18. For a nice, drinkable dram, the 12 is a much better value in my opinion. Or perhaps I am missing something.

Having just enjoyed the holidays, this whisky is reminiscent of them, with aromas and flavors of good things baking: date cookies, gingerbread, dried fruits. Without question, a pleasant drinking experience. That said, this sample dram has helped me understand that at US $99 locally, this one is just too "okay" to justify a purchase. I could see this being a good drink to accompany conversation with friends or colleagues (about something other than whisky) or as one to relax with when not in the mood to contemplate complexities -- if it were sold at half the price. To me, it's not rare, unusual, challenging, or interesting enough to warrant a purchase. I will invest my whisky dollars elsewhere.

I received a sample in a gift set and was very eager to try it. Perhaps my expectations were set a bit too high, or maybe it is an off night, but I was a little disappointed. Don't misunderstand me; the dram was not bad, and was in fact somewhat enjoyable, but for me it fell a bit flat, especially given the $99 price tag locally for 750 mL. The nose was very pleasant, with notes of candied pecans, brown sugar, and trail mix fruits. Later, as it sat, notes of wine, like a good merlot, could be found. The palate was not particularly sweet, but had a nuttiness foretold by the aroma. The finish was short, dry, and a tad hot for a 15 year at a moderate ABV. Nothing really lingered on the palate. Dry glass: mixed nuts. Pleasant, and certainly inoffensive, but not interesting enough, in my opinion, to warrant the price tag. For my money, the Balvenie 12-year Double Wood is one example of a similarly drinkable whisky that does much less damage to the pocketbook.

Received a sample of this as part of a gift set. This is definitely not one I will be seeking out. It's fairly one dimensional. On the nose, it begins a little sweet, with sugary aromas and some indistinguishable tart fruit (maybe sour apple juice) followed quickly by smoke, but not so much in the campfire category unless we're talking about a fire whose embers have long since gone cold. More ash than smoke. On the palate, sweetness hits the front of the tongue, followed by that ashy quality on the mid palate. It reminds me of how my dad's pipe used to smell when he was cleaning it. Despite the relatively low ABV, the finish is pretty hot and peppery, perhaps belying its youthfulness. The finish continues with more-you guessed it-ash. Only much later, after breathing out through my nose, do I get a sense of brininess and iodine. This was not a pleasant dram for me. Far too much in the spent ash realm for my taste. Perhaps more time in the barrel for this NAS would add some dimension and complexity, and tame the ashiness and heat.

Vanilla and malty beer on the nose. A little sweet on the palate with a thin mouthfeel. Some vanilla, malt, and hay, with a touch of char smoke. Short finish and light throughout. I like the 10-year single malt better, but this is serviceable.

Drank it neat at Prime Bar in Wesley Chapel, FL. Nosing detects vanilla, candied corn, and I fancied I noted a little bit of "sour" from the sour mash. The taste is smooth and easy, with some leather and spice. Fairly short finish. Not great, but not bad, either.

Good bourbon for the price. Vanilla is prominent on the nose along with fresh cut fruit (maybe pear). Spicy, rye-influenced palate with a lot of oak. Tastes like the smell of trimming my live oak trees. Some spice, too - perhaps clove and cinnamon. Dry, slightly bitter, medium finish. Not my fave, but then again, it doesn't cost as much either. Could hold its own in an Old Fashioned, I'm sure. Dry glass smells of vanilla, wood, and leather.