Tastes

This will be relatively short, because I don't have anything particularly insightful to say.  So I'll get right to the point - THIS BOURBON INSANE.  Powerful waves of candied maple, caramel, tobacco, leather, and a hint of wood (mesquite?) smoke.  Rich and very drinkable at full proof.  Is it worth the $300 that's the current minimum buy-in?  I prefer it to the very fine GTS, and it's very close to my all time favorite bourbon, William Larue Weller.  And both of those bourbons require a much greater monetary outlay. At least that's how I'm choosing to justify it. @pbmichiganwolverine, i stuck with your Garrison Brothers purchase boycott for less than two weeks.  I'd send my regrets, but your stellar review set this chain of events in motion.  A big thank you to @pkingmartin for generously sharing a sample of this gem.

Barrell's offerings, with just a couple of exceptions, have always been somewhere between good and great for me. Rye whiskey is hit or miss. But Barrell rye finished in rhum agricole, madeira and apricot brandy barrels was not something I could pass on. Still, I wasn’t sure what to expect. I like rye when the rye itself is tempered and well balanced with barrel notes. The couple of Whistle Pigs I've had do that quite nicely. But I'm not so fond of ryes that taste like boozy versions of Pumpernickel bread (or pickle brine, but that probably goes without saying). Would the Seagrass be like it's three cask cousin, the love it or hate it Armida, where the finishing casks obscure the base spirit (I fall into the “love” camp, but tasted blind and given ten chances to guess what the Armida was, I doubt I would have correctly said “bourbon”). Or perhaps the cask strength rye would win out, overpowering the finishing casks? Or would the Seagrass achieve a harmonious balance? The answer is...harmonious balance!! This is unmistakably a rye with a very nice nice rye hit from the start carrying through to the finish. But the finishing casks add a great complementary sweetness that goes on and on. Both the rhum agricole and the apricot brandy are discernable. The madeira perhaps slightly less so, although I got some faint wine notes well into the finish. There’s tons of fruit, and the rye combined with sweet notes offered a cinnamon cookie vibe. The Seagrass clocks in at 59.2% ABV. It’s very drinkable at full proof, but I found that just a touch of water opened it up quite a bit. I also suspect the bottle will open up given some time. I expect fans of rye whiskeys will dig this, but I also think it will appeal to bourbon fans who don’t normally love rye. Great stuff from Barrell!!

Wow.  This is a K&L exclusive, blended by Douglas Liang. I don't write a lot of reviews of bespoke bottles, but this one deserves it.   Faultline is a blend of Highland and Island whiskies.  The Highlands provide a rich, fruity, creamy base, with a pleasant smoke from the Island contribution.  It works beautifully.   What other whiskies have a super rich fruity and creamy base with a nice layer of smoke? (I'm talking super fruity and creamy.  By comparison, take for Balvenie Peat Week - fantastic whisky but not in the same rich, lush category) There are only two other whiskies I'm familiar with that make for a useful comparison - Glenglassaugh Torfa and Compass Box Lost  Blend. (Feel free to let me know if I'm missing some obvious ones). So how does the Faultline compare? Fortunately, I have a bottle of the No Name on hand, along with a sample of the Torfa. The Torfa (which I very much enjoy) is frequently described as rich, buttery, and creamy.  I agree, but the Faultline is richer, creamier, and more buttery.  The Torfa has just a hint of youthful harshness; the Faultline does not.  The peat of the Torfa is slightly barbeque; the Faultline's peat note doesn't have a barbeque aspect, but it's a very nice smoke nevertheless - not at all bitter or ashy.  Two solid performances, but I give the nod to the Faultline.   The Lost Blend (excellent, IMO) is not richer or creamier (but about equal) but is more complex - more nuance in the fruit notes, a hint of wood spice, and a more distinguishable oak influence.  The Lost Blend's peat is a bit stronger, while still allowing the fruit to shine. The winner?  The Lost Blend.  But still, the Faultline keeps it respectable.   I've made both comparisons without regard to price.  The Torfa goes from $60-80 here in the U.S., while I believe I paid $99 at Binney's for the Lost Blend.  The Lost Blend is once again...lost...as a limited edition, it's mostly sold out, unless you want to pay $1600 for it at Cask Cartel (no, I'm not exaggerating).  So at $25 and with an ABV of 50%, the Faultline is a stunning accomplishment.   I don't consume enough whisky to require a "daily drinker", particularly given my stockpile of bottles that refuses to stop growing.  Nevertheless, I've already ordered a second Faultline bottle.  K&L does releases like this on a batch-by-batch basis, and this is one I'd like to have on hand indefinitely.  And since Cask Cartel is not going to get $1600 out of me, it may be as good as it gets in this niche!

I'm not sure I can come up with anything that hasn't been said already, but here goes... Based on some of reviews I've seen both here and elsewhere, I expected this to be a very different Balcones offering, albeit a good one. Having tried it, I'd now say it's unmistakenly a Balcones, with a twist. What's new (at least in my experience with Balcones)? The fruitiness - a great peach note on the front palate, followed by honey. There's also a malty cereal note that's a bit more typical in Scotch. What's the same? The Balcones rich, malty mocha. Like its home state, big and bold. Anyone who is familiar with Balcones would be able to guess that it's Balcones in a blind tasting. The final verdict? A winner. And at $40, a notably great value. Balcones is big enough that I'm hesitant to call it a craft distiller, despite it being independent of the big conglomerates. But I can't think of any American single malt that comes close at this price, craft or otherwise, and I'd take it over a number of other American single malts that cost twice as much.

I learned about Lost Lantern a few weeks ago through Distiller's Friday Wrap Up (have I missed previous news?).  What a lineup! A Sante Fe Distilling, mesquite smoked, cask strength, single barrel?  Sign me up.  A Cask Strength Ironroot corn whiskey?  I've been unsuccessfully hunting Ironroot Hubris for a while.  Score!  A cask strength vatted American malt incorporating whiskeys from seven of my favorite U.S. single malt producers?  I NEED THIS NOW. I placed an order immediately.  I was able to get this gem of a vatted malt, along with the Sante Fe and an apple brandy finished rye from New York Distilling Company.  Sadly, the Ironroot was already sold out. My shipment arrived late last week, and I opened the Vatted Malt without hesitation.  We all know that anticipation and high expectations can lead to disappointment, but not here. The nose is not at all what I expected.  It's sweet, fruity and perhaps a touch floral.  But powerful.  More reminiscent of a Speyside or unpeated Japanese whisky at full volume than a typical American malt whiskey.  Overall, the palate was more in line with my expectations, but it also presented some nice surprises.   It starts as a full, rich, mocha and malt.  Fans of Balcones will find themselves in very friendly territory.  But as the palate develops, there's fruitiness - apples and grapes, as well as a slightly spicy vegetal note (maybe fennel?) that mixes in quite nicely.   The finish brings notes of citrus and ginger with more maltiness, finally fading to an oaky vanilla.    It's a unique and complex ride. I found it just a bit hot straight out of the newly opened bottle, but the heat was tamed by about 15 minutes of resting in a glencairn.   I suspect I'll find a similar transformation after the bottle has been open for at least a few weeks. I have an open bottle of the first addition of Barrell's Vatted Malt, and a side-by-side comparison was inevitable.  The Barrell also uses only American malts, but tastes decidedly more Scotch-like in comparison.  The Lost Lantern came across as distinctly American - with a flair.  Which is better?  That will certainly be a matter of personal choice; I find both to be exceptional. Expect to see reviews of my other two Lost Lantern bottles soon. I simply cannot wait to see what else is in store. 

Had I tasted Armida blind, I would have been completely befuddled if I had to guess what it was. Cognac? Armagnac??  I'm not ashamed to say bourbon might never have occurred to me.  It's unlike any whiskey I've ever had. The reason it didn't offer even a hint of its bourbon provenance is the finishes, which dominate.  The pear brandy hits up front - sweet, rich and fruity.  The Jamaican rum steadily underpins the palate, while the spicy and slightly bitter amaro crescendos to the finish. There's a rich thickness that is slightly reminiscent of a liqueur.  It's sweet, but the Jamaican funk and the amaro bitterness are a great offset.   The only comparison I can think of is Barrell's Dovetail.  The profiles are very different, but both are finish driven, complex, and highly unique.  Also like the Dovetail, Armida is very drinkable at full proof.  In fact, I can't think of any other 110+ proof spirit that drinks easier. I find it a bit harder to numerically rate a spirit that doesn't have obvious peers, and I'll be interested to see where others reviewers land.  I won't be surprised if Armida ends up as a polarizing dram.  For me, the 4.5 simply speaks to the sheer enjoyment I had drinking it.  

This is barrel 15B2820C; bottle 257 of 257. I got this bottle in late July and opened it promptly, anxious to see if was worthy of the high praise Wilderness Trail has been receiving from the likes of Fred Minnick and many others. I tried it on several different evenings within the first 10 days it was open.  Had I rated it then, I would have composed a screed about an utterly over-hyped bottle of distilled pablum.   In short, I found that it drank a lot hotter than 100 proof and lacked any distinctive taste or character.  Heat, spice and muddled...mud, I suppose. But life intervened and I never got around to my review.  About seven weeks later, I decided to give it one more shot.  I've had many a dram that's better a few weeks after the neck pour, but...wow.  This was a transformation that elevated my bottle of WT to the lofty level of the hype the brand has been receiving.  This is a solid wheated bourbon - caramel and vanilla, oak and a touch of wood spice.  Left to rest for almost two months, the excessive alcohol heat is gone.  It's not complex and presents no surprises.  But it's balanced, with the sweetness offset by a lovely oakiness that adds a nice touch of dryness to the finish.  I'm still marveling at the transformation, the degree of which is unparalleled in my whiskey experience.  This is a very solid effort, one that doesn't warrant the "I'll be interested to see what it's like in a few years" statement that concludes all too many craft whiskey reviews.  This dram is solid right now.