Tastes

Ah, the vaunted Macallan Rare Cask. This was on my bucket list since my early days of reviewing whisky. Now that I’ve learned more about the genre, I’m less excited than I was back then, but after trying this at a tasting event 4 years ago, I felt I owed it to myself to try this. So here we are. Side note: This is an older bottling from when these had the lighter, scarlet-colored packaging. There is no year-release indicated, so it’s clearly an older bottling, just impossible to pinpoint. Nose: Very much Macallan. All kinds of red fruit. Plum, cranberry, date, fig, raisin. Dried apricot and gala apple. New car leather. Vanilla, caramel, butterscotch, and toffee. Pound cake. Macadamia, pecan, and almond. Orange citrus. 1.25 Palate: A powerful pop of raisin, date, fig, plum, apple, and apricot. Plenty of vanilla, butterscotch, caramel, and toffee. Milk chocolate and orange citrus. Pound cake and more gala apple. So much of that. Cinnamon and oak. 1 Finish: Almond and macadamia. Orange and milk chocolate. Vanilla, toffee, butterscotch, and caramel. Some of the plum, now with golden raisin. Moderate length. 1 You’d be hard-pressed to find a cleaner whisky. Classic Macallan profile. It’s really likable and easy-going. But let’s skip right to the price. Was this worth $425? Absolutely not. Now I’m fully aware that overpaid for this one. Doesn’t matter. I often feel that the whiskies write these reviews, and I’m just a conduit. Unfortunately, every now and again, there is an element of the experience that is so powerful that it steals the forefront of the review from the whisky itself, which would normally be the sole focus of every review. 3.0/5. I’m sure I can find this cheaper—significantly cheaper. So I may return and improve the score. I had this at a 3.75 before considering VFM, but I docked 3/4 of a star for the absurd price tag for something that is sold vaguely as a blend of their top 1% of casks. Well, it’s a perfectly tasty and pleasant whisky, but for their amount of money, I need an age statement, or a more respectable ABV, or some distinguishing quality that separates this from their more common products.

I loved The Dark; otherwise I would not be writing this, because this cost a pretty penny. I was given The Dark in a tasting by a liquor rep that I know, so I knew what I was getting into when I bought it. And I was referred to this one by my positive experience with its sister bottle. Let’s see if I the other side of coin measures up. Nose: Peat and sulfur. Caramel, saltwater taffy, and vanilla. Floral notes. Apple, pear, and grape. Almond macadamia, and walnut. Light black bean, red pepper chili. Clove, nutmeg, white pepper, cinnamon, and oak. Palate: Salwater taffy and caramel. Pineapple, coconut, gala apple, pear, and apricot. Peanut/almond butter. Marshmallow, vanilla, toffee, and malt. A bit of custard. Very light peat presence. Clementine and orange. Finish: Plenty of heat. Clove, nutmeg, cinnamon, and white pepper. Earthy peat. Some of the apple, pear, pineapple, and apricot as well. Almond, macadamia, and walnut. Oak. What to say about this one? It’s an amazingly clean whisky. Perhaps too clean. The nose was practically non-existent, I had to really concentrate just to pull enough notes have a description. The body and finish were much better and had more character. Not a bad foil to The Dark, but definitely not the better option of the two, either. At $300, expectations were high. So while it may sound like I’m beating this one up, a lot of my disappointment is just a derivative of the high bar—especially when it’s impossible to separate this from its counterpart in my mind. It lives up to its moniker “The Light” and does enough to avoid being dubbed “The Lightweight.” Remarkably refreshing at 52.9%. Well-balanced. 3.5/5.

Today I’ve got a staple whiskey that I’m surprised I haven’t gotten around to yet. I like the Michter’s bourbon, and I like the rye even better. Here we’ve got a bourbon-rye hybrid, so if all goes well, this should be solid. Nose: Heavy on the vanilla, caramel, gala apple, toffee, and brown sugar. Some maple pecan and toasted almond. Cocoa, nutmeg, sawdust, black pepper, clove, a smidge of pipe smoke, and a powerful hit of oak. Palate: Plenty of toasted almond. Gala apple. Spicy black pepper. Milk chocolate, caramel, brown sugar, toffee, and vanilla. High viscosity. A little leathery. Some cherry, Vick’s Vapor Rub. Clove, nutmeg, and oak. Finish: Gala apple and caramel. Some menthol, spearmint. Cinnamon, black pepper, clove, and nutmeg. Red hot tamale. Plenty of oak. Moderate, maybe moderate-long finish. Surprisingly hot on the way out. What an amazing deal I got for this one. It’s a beautiful blend of the best attributes of both the Michter’s Bourbon and their rye. 4.5/5. VFM is certainly achieved here. $40 is no price at all to pay for a bottle of this ilk. It’s the best offering between this, their rye, and their bourbon—in that order. Very much looking forward to trying the American Oak after this excellent showing.

The first 2 editions of this Offerman line were solid, gimmick aside. I’m here for the Lagavulin. Adding the element of charred oak to an already fiery profile is an appealing prospect. I would’ve purchased this regardless, because once I find a limited release line that I enjoy, I stay true to it. It helps that the concept is intriguing. Let’s dive in. Nose: Campfire smoke, sulfur, sea salt. There’s also a heavy grapefruit and lemon citrus kick. Bandaid. Soft pretzel. Black bean, red pepper chili, though less than I expected. Sun-dried tomato. Black pepper, cinnamon, and oak. Palate: Custard out of the gate, followed by grapefruit and lemon. Caramel, vanilla, butterscotch, and toffee. Honeydew, green apple, and apricot. Vegetal peat, moss. Milk chocolate. Something akin to a coffee ice cream flavor. Some red berry mixed in there. Plenty of cinnamon, black pepper, and charred oak. Finish: Plenty of cinnamon heat and barrel char. The caramel, milk chocolate, vanilla, and toffee persists from the palate. A burst of grapefruit, lemon, lime, green apple, pear, and some floral notes. Moderate length finish. This is shockingly tame. I’ll admit, I did some projecting onto this one ahead of time, but this tame for an iteration Lagavulin. At least until the finish, which I’d consider assertive at the most. With that being said, it is tasty. Easy-going. Far more of an earthy profile as opposed to the maritime beastliness I’ve come to expect or Lagavulin. It drinks like a peated Highlander. Nothing wrong with that. I’d rather be surprised by these annual releases than feel like I’m buying the same thing over and over with fresh packaging. I had this at 4.0, but decided it deserved the quarter star bump for VFM. It’s the cheapest of the 11-Offerman-Lags—which is a rarity considering how overpriced these lines end up being once they catch public attention. Solid pour. 4.25/5.

Jack Daniel’s Single Barrel was solid. A welcome surprise after sort of writing off the brand after old No. 7 and Gentleman Jack. So I’m very much looking forward to the uncut, barrel proof expression. This is from Barrel No. 22-07766, bottled 9.21.22. Nose: Banana, walnut, dark chocolate. It’s like a banana walnut muffin. Toasted almond. Vanilla, caramel, and toffee. Maple sweetness. Nougat. Cookies and cream ice cream. Heaps of cinnamon, black pepper, clove, nutmeg, and oak. Palate: More of the banana and walnut. Heavy cocoa. Brown sugar, caramel, and vanilla. Maple pecan. A touch of cherry and gala apple. Powerful pipe smoke and barrel char. Red hot tamale. Cinnamon, black pepper, clove, nutmeg, and oak. Finish: Dried apricot. Brown sugar, vanilla, caramel, milk chocolate. Pipe smoke. Sawdust. Cocoa. Red hot tamales. Cinnamon, black pepper, clove, nutmeg, and oak. Long finish. And very much so, as expected of a 63.30% ABV behemoth. This is a hell of a whiskey. It may not be the whiskey that puts Jack Daniel’s on the map for the casual drinker, but it’s definitely the one to keep you interested once you start exploring the genre. This is comparable to the single barrel in terms profile. There is the added element of barrel proof heat that causes this to range from intriguing to volatile depending on the night. My final impression is that it hits all the right notes, and it hits hard enough to leave a lasting impression. Well worth the $70 price of admission. 4.5/5.

I recently reviewed the Balvenie 17, which was an effort to complete the old core line following the recent discontinuation of some of the expressions. This is another one of those expressions. The 17 was well worth the purchase, so I’m hoping this one delivers as well. Nose: Plum, red grape, date, fig, and raisin. Classic Olorosso sherry notes. Cranberry, apple, orange, and apricot. Pound cake.Toffee, vanilla, butterscotch, caramel, and malt. Toasted almond and macadamia. Plenty of oak Creamy custard. Cinnamon, clove, nutmeg add some spice. Palate: Cranberry, apple, orange citrus, and apricot. Plum, red grape, raisin, date, and fig. Very plush. Vanilla, caramel, toffee, and butterscotch hit heavy. Toasted almond and macadamia. It’s quite floral, and the orange is now accompanied by some melon. Finish: Apple, pear, apricot, and orange citrus. Plum, date, fig, raisin. Honey, caramel, vanilla, toffee, butterscotch. Cinnamon and white pepper. Custard on the way out. Plenty of oak. Moderate-to-long. Solid whisky. Very standard Balvenie, Speyside profile. The notes don’t really vary much from nose to palate to finish, but they’re about what I was looking for. The fact that it’s a bit too standard keeps this clean, quality malt from scoring above a 4.25, which is a respectable score as it is. I wish I had taken the opportunity to get one or two more of these before they got discontinued. Oh well. The 17 and the Peat Week releases still rate as my favorite Balvenie expressions, with this, and maybe the 12 Single Barrel, clocking in closely behind. Solid stuff, Balvenie, that overpriced 16 year better be earth-shattering if it means parting ways with this and the 17.

I’m a big fan of Rowan’s Creek. I’ve always considered this to be its very slightly older brother. I know they both used to have age statements, so that statement was probably true at one point. But this now, and this is the Noah’s Mill we’ve got. Here’s to hoping it delivers another victory for Willett. This is from Batch 22-25. Nose: Toasted almond and pecan, as well as the unique pistachio note that I get in some ryes (including Willett’s.) Cocoa, fudge, and caramel. Some dried apricot. Vick’s Vapor Rub. Black cherry. A touch of vanilla and toffee. Pipe smoke and orange peel. Lots of spice. Cinnamon, nutmeg, clove, allspice, and heavy oak. Palate: The pistachio hits heavy, accompanied my toasted almond, pecan, and walnut. Vick’s Vapor Rub. Black cherry. Some Apple cider. Cocoa, fudge, milk chocolate, and caramel. VanillaPipe smoke and orange peel. Barrel smoke, and a fistful of black pepper, with some clove, nutmeg, allspice, and an overhand right from the oak. Finish: Hot as hell. Cocoa. Fudge and caramel. Vanilla. Pipe smoke and orange peel. Dried apricot. Black pepper, clove, nutmeg, allspice, and of course, oak. Long finish. This is a very interesting bourbon. The profile finds itself to be “off the beaten path” in the best way possible. It’s a powerful beast of a whiskey that has few comparables; especially at this price point. A bitter, smokey, spicy affair for certain. But it boasts dark fruit, rich sweetness, and high-octane goodness that should impress even an experienced bourbon drinker. When considering VFM, you’d be hard-pressed to find a better bourbon. This only ran me $60, and this can compete with the Booker’s and Elijah Craig BPs. 4.5/5 for this under-appreciated gem.

The Glengoyne 10 and 12 year old releases are solid clean, but unremarkable Highland malts. They exemplify the spirit of the region as well as anything out there, but fail to stand out in any way. I’m hoping that Glengoyne can set themselves apart from the herd in some way with a few extra years in the barrel. Let’s see how they did. Nose: Green grape, gala apple, pear, and apricot. Plum, raspberry, blackberry, and raisin/dried cranberry. Honey dew. Milk and white chocolate, caramel, and vanilla. Fresh-baked brownie. Coconut, pineapple, and orange. Cocoa. A jammy/molasses note. Almond and macadamia. Heavy oak with white pepper, clove, and nutmeg. Palate: Vanilla, toffee, milk chocolate, malt, brownie. and butterscotch. Marshmallow. A cherry pie note with more of the plum and raisin, now with date and fig. Dried cranberry. Orange citrus/orange peel. Cocoa. Almond. Apple, pear, apricot fall into the background but are still present. Heavy oak, clove, nutmeg, and white pepper. Finish: More of the heavy malt chocolate, with vanilla, caramel, and brown sugar. Dried cranberry. Peanut butter and almond. White grape, gala apple, and pear. Plenty of cinnamon, clove, nutmeg, white pepper, and of course, oak. Glengoyne really hit their mark with this one. This is a sherry-heavy malt that doesn’t fall into the category of over-sherried flamboyance that often plagues the genre. Glengoyne is methodical in their approach here. The result is a balanced effort that presents a nice merger of fruit-forward notes and a healthy dose dessert; this is absolutely the best iteration of the Glengoyne profile I’ve had to date. 4.25/5. Well worth the $129 price of entry. I’m glad to have ventured far enough into the Glengoyne line to experience a properly-matured expression. Next, I think I’ll take a half step back and go for the 15 year. Glengoyne has certainly earned my interest with this one.

This is effectively the true older sibling of the flagship 12-year. Or it was at least. They discontinued this—and the 15 sherry SB, in favor of a 16-year in between compromise. The discontinuation of this expression motivated the purchase. Let’s see if this was worth a try before it was too late. Nose: Gala apple, pear, apricot, and orange citrus. Malt, vanilla, caramel, toffee, butterscotch, and honey. Fairly standard Speyside affair. Some peanut brittle, toasted almond, and walnut. Sugar cookie. Milk chocolate and marshmallow. Praline pecan. Rich refined oak. No spice, it’s more like a mahogany desk. Palate: More of the gala apple, pear, apricot, and orange citrus. Golden raisin. Malt, toffee, vanilla, caramel, milk chocolate, honey, and butterscotch. Brown sugar. A touch floral and then it’s powerful oak. Again, mahogany, but this time with a touch of cinnamon, clove, and nutmeg. Finish: Gala apple, pear, apricot, golden raisin, and orange citrus. Honey, vanilla, toffee, malt, milk chocolate, butterscotch. Plenty of oak, with some cinnamon, clove, and nutmeg. Moderate length. This is one of the “cleanest” whiskies I’ve ever had. It isn’t the most exciting, but it is an absolutely beautiful representation of Speyside Scotch. You could say this one “sticks to the script.” Maybe this could’ve earned a higher score if it did just a tad more to set itself apart. But it’s a phenomenal offering as is. It’s a shame to see it go, but I’m very glad I made the purchase before it was all gone. 4.25/5.

This release is a departure from Glendronach’s signature sherry-cask aging. They are one of the best in that regard, but it’s nice to try something different. Port-aged Scotch tends be in a similar wheelhouse to its sherry counterparts, so Glendronach and Rachel Barrie should pull this one off nicely. Nose: Blackbery jam, fig, date, and raisin. Black currant. Toffee, vanilla, and honey. A vanilla custard sweetness. Butterscotch. Biscotti as well. Some white grape. Unripe banana and malt. Orchard fruit and floral notes. Cola. Oak wood but virtually no spice. It’s fruit and sweets for dessert. Palate: White grape, date, fig, and raisin. Blackberry and raspberry. Plum, prune, and cola. A cranberry/crossing note. Butterscotch, vanilla, and toffee. Almond. Cinnamon, clove, nutmeg, and oak spice. It’s a bit of spicy and prickly than the nose suggests. Finish: Blackberry, fig, date, raisin, and plum. Chestnut. Graham cracker. Hey Malt, toffee, and. vanilla, Cinnamon, black pepper, clove, nutmeg, and oak. Moderate-long; impressive for 46%. Glendronach and Rachel Barrie nailed this. It’s very good. Reminds me a lot of Dalmore Port on paper. Port-aged whisky from a sherried-Scotch powerhouse. Dalmore was $100, this was $90 (I thought they were both $100 when I started writing this.) NAS. Even the ABV is only .5% different. The profile here is lighter. Not that it’s less full or rich, just that the dark fruit notes are more pronounced in the Dalmore. I think this can be said of Dalmore and Glendronach’s flavor profile in general. So while they’re similar in many ways, Glendronach’s effort here successfully carves out its own niche in the market. I mentioned that this was $90. I think it achieves its aim as far as VFM goes. $100 isn’t cheap, especially for an NAS malt. But it’s bottled at a respectable 46%, clearly has a good amount of aged juice in it—Glendronach is generally good about that—and uses some high quality port barrels. It’d be a hard sell for me if it cost $10 or $20 more, put it hits the mark at a C-Note. 4.25/5. The same score I gave the Dalmore Port if I remember correctly. A job well done. Hopefully the positive response to this one, assuming most reviewers agree with me that is, encourages Glendronach to try more experimental bottlings. As for this, it’s a damn good product.