Tastes

It’s been a little while since I’ve opened a bottle of Japanese whiskey and I’ve had this bottle along with it’s sister companion- the cask strength version, for almost 6 months. I found these online stateside out of Pennsylvania for $54 (and $84 for the CS version). This NAS Japanese whiskey is relatively new to the scene, but it has been caught up with the Asian whisky craze that’s sweeping the whisky world. This stuff disappeared from shelves just as quickly as I had found it. I knew I should’ve bought 2 of each but I wasn’t sure of the Kaiyo name at the time. Boy, I wish I would’ve just went ahead and grabbed another pair. These are both fantastic whiskies. This pours shiny, new gold in the taster. It’s very oily and produces sparse, thin legs and watery drops when you give it a spin. The nose is hay and dried oak at first sniff, but given 10-15 minutes it opens up beautifully with tons of tropical fruits and light floral notes. The nose did suffer over a few weeks with oxidation- most of the sweetness went away and I was left with mostly banana bread and light spice. The palate really showcased the Miz oak- honey, berries, fresh cut cantaloupe melon. Nutmeg and cinnamon came across mid way through the sip and there was some youthful zip and light black pepper at the tail end. The ABV cut into the sweetness and kind of struck an unbalanced cord into the entire flavor profile. It didn’t ruin it, but it did kill the sweetness a bit too early IMO. The finish capitalized on the spicy aspect: cinnamon heat and black pepper led the charge and it was slightly harsh, warm and drying before leaving a slightly nutty aftertaste lingering on. The length was medium and the dryness closed things out quite well. Overall, this reminded me of Yamazaki a little bit (the tropical fruits and overall juiciness) and made me wish I had my bottle of Yama 18 open so I could really confirm the similarities I had swirling in my head. The harshness and youthful aspect can’t hold a candle to the Yamazaki, obviously- but this was a great value for your dollar at less than $55 and the cask strength was even better (review coming soon). If you can find this on shelves without the insane Japanese whiskey mark-up I highly recommend it. 4 stars all day long, and maybe a .25 star bump for the price point. Cheers, my friends.

The collector in me was attempting to slowly put together a nice, full set of the core range of Caol Ila malts over the last year or so. I’ve spent quite a bit of money on the higher end bottles, 25, 30 and 35 year old. I saw this 18 year online and laughted to myself when I saw the price: $84. What a solid deal, I thought. They priced this in line with Talisker. Cool. Well, I decided to open this bottle one night a few weeks ago just out of sheer curiosity. That and the fact I bought a second bottle recently- you don’t just bust up a core range set on a whim, y’know. Boy oh boy, was that a good decision... This Caol Ila should not be confused with the annual, limited release version that is made from unpeated malt. This is the true, core range peated 18: it’s bottled at 43% and has added color and filtration. This particular bottle was filled in 2008. It’s a beautiful sunset gold and appears very oily, with thin and fast running legs and heavy, watery droplets in the taster. The nose begins with a soft smoke- of the BBQ’d meat variety. There’s a heavenly blast of juicy, orchard fruits that seems to be stewing in a pan of sherry wine. There’s a hint of salty, seaside air billowing out of the glass as well. None of these notes overpower each other- in fact, they seem to be perfectly polite and allow each other their time to shine. Please sit with this whisky for awhile and let it work it’s magic because it’s very rewarding. The palate starts out very sweet. Apples, pears and the like roll across the tongue, followed by some rich peat smoke. Orange marmalade and light citrus begin to cut through the smoke and thick mouthfeel just in time to leave you tasting juicy, fresh-picked berries that have been dipped in sea salt. The smoke appears again to keep things from turning too tart and dry. This is the most pleasing aspect of this dram. It’s wonderful. The finish combines everything you’ve experienced so far: sherry sweetness, orchard fruits and smoke. The tail end shows hints of menthol before leaving behind a light, peppery bite. Overall, this malt cracked my Top 3 of all time. I went in expecting a solid dram and came away being absolutely stunned by this bottle. I even opened the Caol Ila 25 as I got towards the end of the 18, just to see if another 7 years did something even more amazing. Sadly, it didn’t advance on anything and I’ll even freely admit that the 18 is a superior dram to the 25 year old. Hell, I’ll even go so far as to say this is easily the best 18 year old whisky I’ve tried to this point. It’s better balanced than the Highland Park 18, more elegant than the Macallan 18, more subtle than the Talisker 18 and fruitier than the Lagavulin 16. It’s damn close to being the perfect dram. Factor in the sub-$90 price tag and you just can’t go wrong. Find a bottle or a bar with an open bottle (DO NOT MISTAKE THE UNPEATED VERSION FOR THIS ONE) and experience this one for yourself. It’s a perfect meld of sweet, salt and smoke. 5 perfect stars, my friends. I can’t recommend this one highly enough. Cheers.

This is a second taste of the Sanaig, but from a batch bottled in 2017. I didn’t see the need to create another entry because Kilchoman isn’t trying to capitalize on separate vintages. I also have an earlier review of the 2016 if you search this particular bottle further down in the reviews. Kilchoman is one of Islay’s newer upstarts and they are starting to have plenty of aged stock to hit the market, but they are still releasing quality NAS stuff, like this Sanaig. This gets its name from a nearby stream on the western side of Islay. This is primarily ex-sherry matured whisky, with this 2017 bottling adding a bit of ex-bourbon cask aged juice. It’s bottled at 46% and I overpaid a bit for this bottle ($78) as I bought it while on a golf trip to Myrtle Beach, SC back in February of this year. The appearance is a deep gold and there are lots of undefined, oily legs and tiny beads left behind after a thorough spin. The nose is heavily sherried smoke and stewed berries. There’s light citrus and rich caramel mingling around if you dig deep enough. The smoke, sherry and light sea notes carry the bulk of the load here. More ex-bourbon whisky would’ve easily added extra layers and depth here, but I’m not complaining. The palate brings smoke, earthy peat and toffee followed by the aforementioned vanilla and barrel notes. It’s very smooth and warming, bottled perfectly at 46% ABV in my opinion, and there’s a lingering orange and tangerine note left behind after the midsip and swallow. The finish is medium, tending towards long, with smoky BBQ’d meats. It’s oily and mouth and throat coating with a nice grape-y sherry sweetness. Overall, I had a sample of the 2016 batch awhile back and thoroughly enjoyed it- awarding it 4 stars and proclaiming big things for Kilchoman and their early NAS lines. This batch seemed a bit toned down and lacked as much depth as the 2016, but it’s still a fantastic dram. If you can find a bottle of either vintage at a reasonable price you won’t be disappointed. This one sits comfortably at 3.75-4 stars. Buy and enjoy with confidence, my friends. Cheers.

After hearing really good things about the Glengoyne distillery I noticed a 3 malt, age statement sample pack at one of the online stores I regularly make purchases from. This pack was only $17 and included 2oz pours of the 10, 15 and 18 year old. I figured now was as good of a time as any to give them a go. I reviewed the 10 and 15 year a few weeks ago, so let’s move on to the eldest sample in the taster pack- the18 year old. This one was bottled at 43% and proudly proclaims to have no added color, but I’m sure it was chill filtered. Speaking of color, this was copper gold and will reward you with small droplets and thin, watery legs after a good spin in your favorite tasting glass. The nose is heavy butterscotch and oak with underlying honey nut cereal notes. Toffee and caramel chews and light vanilla round out a well-balanced and thoroughly enjoyable nosing experience. The palate continues on with toffee and light, sweet sherry. It’s rich and oily and provides a wonderful mouth coat while turning soft at the mid-point. Oak tannins lead you into the finish. The ending is medium in length with soft, lingering caramel and light vanilla and berry sweetness. It’s a really good whisky, not too complex but not shabby either. If you sit and savor it from start to finish you will be happily entertained. It’s something I could sit and sip on for an entire lazy Sunday and be completely satisfied. I’d rate it at 3.5-3.75 stars and will certainly keep an eye out for a bottle to call my own. Cheers.

What do we have here? Ginger-infused bourbon. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t it wrong to call it bourbon if it has added flavoring or is that still okay as long as the ABV remains above 40% (but I’m thinking that only means you have to call it liqueur if it drops below 40). I dunno, I don’t drink much American bourbon these days. I love scotch, scotchy scot....err, never mind. This is Virgil Kane Ginger Bourbon and this sample was sent to my friend, Pranay. Apparently he’s like the Mikey from the old Life cereal commercials- as in, he will try anything. But I doubt he likes this. Lol, I’m rambling... This “liquid” is dark gold and makes oily, fast charging legs down the taster. The nose surely smells of ginger- too much ginger, actually. Candied sugar, overly sweet vanilla and fresh Barrel oak. Like newly, chopped oak. Giving it a few minutes for the chunks of sugar to dissolve and you’ll get some hay and grassy notes, but it’s mostly ginger and sugar. I’m joking- there were no actual chunks in my beverage. The palate is way too sweet: candied corn and ginger dominate and it’s really, really smooth and could use some bite. Artificial cinnamon or a boost from the ABV could help this stuff- I don’t think it would save it, but surely help. The finish is short and sweet with lingering, you guessed it- ginger. Overall, I’m not sure this should be classified as anything other than alcohol-infused ginger candy. I would imagine this would work better if it was turned into a gel and injected into a mint-flavored gum or chewy candy. It would even make a decent cough suppressant. If you buy this stuff I’d at least pour it over ice before consuming it. Neat is NOT the way to drink this stuff. Thanks for the pour, @PBMichiganWolverine, but I can only muster a 1.75-2 star score. Cheers.

Oh, Balvenie! You pretentious bastard, you. Your prices have always scared me a little and your whisky almost always fails to deliver at that high price point (yes, there certainly are exceptions). So, why do I keep buying your stuff? Well, because you make whisky and I am most certainly a whisky drinker. Balvenie switches over once a year, for a single week, and makes a peated expression. They then age the stuff for 14 years in ex-bourbon oak and release it as Balvenie 14 Peat Week. No need for quirky, Gaelic names here. This is the 2003 vintage and it was bottled at 48.3% ABV in 2018. It runs just shy of $70 at most sensible retailers. Hey! A reasonably priced Balvenie- who’d have thought that? Let’s delve into this one, shall we? Who was hoping I’d ask a third successive, rhetorical question? It’s a beautiful, golden yellow and very oily in the tasting glass. Undefined legs and medium-sized drops form and run slowly away from the rim when you spin it a bit. The nose is quite fruity right out of the bottle. Rich smoke and BBQ fire rise up to greet you and there’s no burn to be found. Buttery bread and vanilla sweetness round out the nosing and invite you in for a sip. The palate is BBQ brisket, sweet honeyed smoke with serious orchard fruits balancing out a wonderful mouthfeel. Luxuriously smooth and warm right where and when it counts. The oiliness coats all the corners of your mouth and linger on well into the finish. The finish has a somewhat short feel because the ABV is so well hidden. The sweetness and smoke work well enough to keep this from being too peaty (if there is such a thing) and that same smoke keeps it from being too dessert-like. I could sip this dram well into the depths of the bottle in a single sitting. I’ve had so many Balvenie offerings that I’ve decided to stop buying them and focus solely on the Peat Week vintages. These are much better than the sherry cask stuff (although I haven’t had any of the Uber-Rare Tun bottles). The $68 price I paid is beyond reasonable and there’s great value for your money here. If you like your peated whiskies a little subdued but well-balanced then this could become a go to bottle for you. Plus, you can actually brag to your friends about the Balvenie name here and pretend that you paid a lot for it, while actually not. Win/win. 4.25 stars, leaning close to 4.5. Good stuff. Cheers.

I missed the boat on these age statement Nadurra bottles. Up until 2014/2015 Glenlivet released the Nadurra (Gaelic for “natural”) line with an age statement of 16 years. Dwindling stocks have forced them to make the entire line NAS releases now. My journey into scotch didn’t kick into high gear until 2015, so I missed my chances at grabbing these bottles while they sat collecting dust on shelves locally. Thankfully, these can still be found at auction for a decent price- that’s where I landed 2 bottles, including this one from Batch #0114A (basically, filled in January 2014. I believe the “A” indicated which warehouse the cask was stored). I scored this bottle, after auction premiums and shipping, for $78. Quite the deal for a 16yo single cask in my opinion. I absolutely love the NAS Nadurra releases- so how does an age statement bottle stand up to those? It’s a crystal clear, new gold in the Glencairn. It’s very oily with sparse legs and tiny droplets left behind- very indicative of the high proof of 55.3% ABV. The nose is heavily honeyed with vanilla and beeswax dominating the initial whiffs from the taster. Apples, pears and cut oak clearly let you know these were ex-bourbon casks and the whisky spent considerable time in them. At no point did it smell hot nor abrasive in any way. We’re off to a good start. The palate again showcases sweet honey. It’s hotter than the nose lets on, but it’s still really smooth and creamy. The mid sip reveals all the wood characteristics and late in the sip there’s a wonderful cinnamon (Red Hots) candy and black pepper note. It flushes away the sweetness and vanilla with a rush of intense power. I really liked that part the most, I think. The finish is long and the heat stays well after you’ve finished swallowing the whisky. Actual cinnamon and vanilla linger on until you’re ready for another sip. In conclusion, this one still holds up well. I’m kind of shocked to say that I’m not sure this is better than the NAS Nadurra First Fill, which is good news to the powers that be at Glenlivet, because it proves they don’t need to age these casks longer and quality probably didn’t suffer by switching to younger juice. They seem to be doing a fine job at selecting which casks are worthy of the Nadurra monicker. I hope that continues. These are the only Glenlivet I think I’ll spend my money on moving forward. The entire Nadurra line just wins big in my book. If I can keep scoring bottles of the 16yo at auction for a reasonable price I’ll probably keep buying them. At $78, they are still cheaper than the NAS bottles on shelves locally ($85-90), so why not. Do not be afraid to buy any of the Nadurra stuff- it’s quality juice. This one gets a solid 4.25-4.5 stars from me. Cheers, my friends.

This was my first, and probably my only, GlenDronach single cask offering. I went ahead and splurged for a 20 year old that was distilled in 1994. It was cask number 1079 and was bottled at 54.4% ABV. There are lots and lots of GlenDronach single barrel offerings each and every year- from 8-9 years old up to 40+ years old. They all vary wildly in price, ABV and availability. I paid $300 for this 20 year old. Was it worth it? Let’s try and decide... It was a beautiful dark amber/dirty copper in color. Obviously it isn’t chill filtered and certainly doesn’t need any added coloring. The high ABV left tiny drops behind and made very thin legs when you spin and admire it in your tasting glass. The nose is all sherry- rich and luxurious. Raisins, figs and even some maple wood notes greet you warmly. There’s sharp toffee and caramel with chocolate covered orange wedges and a slight hint of alcohol. It’s very deep and satisfying and you could sit there for hours just sniffing away- completely satisfied. The palate revealed dark fruits and berries, grape must and sun-dried raisins. The heat is there as well, it’s super oily but velvety smooth like any two decade old whisky should be. Rolling it across the tongue rewarded me with sweet sherry, orange citrus and chocolate bitters. ABV and chocolate compliment each other in a way that almost indescribable. I remember eating chocolate liqueur candies around the Christmas holidays when I was a kid (too young to drink) and thinking about how wonderful the heat and chocolate felt as I swallowed them. This brings those memories flooding back. The finish is long and luscious. It’s a typical GlenDronach sherry bomb and that chocolate just stays around forever. I think I still tasted it the next morning. So good. So, back to my initial query- is this worth $300? I kept this bottle around for several months (because I just didn’t want it to be gone). There was no hint of any change from the day I opened it until I poured the last drops- no oxidation, no fouling of any kind. It was as magical from day one to day 200-ish. It was still pretty lively for being 20, as well. I’d say it’s worth a try at least once- drop the serious money and revel in the single cask majesty that GlenDronach offers, but after that I think you can get 80% of the way there for less money. As is, this is still close to perfection and I highly recommend trying it at some point- especially if you adore sherry cask whisky. 4.75 stars. Cheers.

Oh, Octomore...it’s been too long. I’ve always considered Octomore as THE love song to peatheads, like myself. I’ve skipped a few vintages since I didn’t necessarily feel the need to try them all. However, when Bruichladdich said the 8.3 Masterclass was the heaviest of them all, well I had to bite. They knew I would- and I hate them for it. This is just like your favorite Octomore- 5 years old and finished in multiple wine casks. This one boasts Islay barley exclusivity (terroir, bitches) and comes in at 309ppm. Can the human tongue even detect an amount that high? I doubt it. It looks good in print and on the packaging, though. It’s standard yellow gold with thin droplets and skinny legs- thanks to the hearty 61.2% ABV. You’ll think your local Dept of Transportation is paving your front yard as soon as the cork is popped. Ah, fresh tar... The nose is...(surprise!) fresh tar, burning tires and smoky alcohol. Pepper burn stings a bit if you get too friendly too early. Give it the time and distance it commands and you’ll pick up some nice, chocolate depth and rich, berry and plum sweetness- provided your nose works like it should. The palate is smoked peppers and a heavy, malt burn. Sugary toffee cremes really balance this out better than any Octomore I can remember. It’s oily and super rich- grasping your tastebuds and attempting to pull them from your tongue. Chocolate-dipped raspberries find their way into the corners of your mouth and do their best to counter the smoke and chili spices. It works. Really, really well. The depth is amazing. The finish is a bit rushed, as more chili and red pepper spice and heavy smoke coat everything. The youthful juice finally reveals some harsh aspects, but you’ll be so focused on how to get the burn to subside you may not notice it. The first few sips I had to restrain myself from reaching for some water to calm the fires. So, my first 2-3 drams were quite amazing here. I was ready to proclaim this the best Octomore I’ve ever had. Ready to score it a 6 on a scale to 5. Then, the oxidation took hold and really deadened this bottle for me. The final few drams seemed flat. Still smoky, still warming, but the fire was out. I started getting cola notes and soft, milky vanilla- which is something I don’t associate with Octomore. It didn’t kill the score, per se, but it was no longer a 6- hell, no longer a perfect 5. Like most Octomore I was sad to see the last few drops fall from the bottle, but my excitement fell with those drops. Maybe I don’t need Octomore anymore. I’m jaded. At $192, I’m not sure it’s a great deal anymore. Jesus, what’s wrong with me? What have I become? 4.25 stars. I’m sad to say that. Cheers, my friends.