Tastes

Back to NY. My last NY whiskey review was over ago. That was of the Hudson Baby Bourbon. Was not a fan by any means. Let's see if the Empire state can redeem itself with this one. Nose: Classic bourbon notes. Caramel and vanilla. Apple and black cherry. Honey and butterscotch. A touch of leather, barrel char, and oak. Maple and pecan. It's rich and vibrant, and is an exemplary classic bourbon nose. Good start. Palate: Gala apple and brown sugar out of the gate. More caramel, vanilla, and butterscotch, now accompanied by toffee. In the background I still get black cherry, with just a hint of leather. Orange peel and ginger become prominent with time. Finish: Long, especially for 45.5%. Cinnamon, clove, and nutmeg. Finally, a bit of a kick. Until now it's been perfectly easy-going. Some barrel char and oak. There's also a bit of brown sugar sweetness before baking spices and ginger carry this one to its long-drawn conclusion. New York, you are redeemed. Excellent bourbon. As I said before, it's an exemplary classic bourbon. Both in terms of notes and quality. There's also something unique about it. The folks at Widow Jane would tell you it's a product of their limestone mineral water. I'm in no position to comment, but I'll just throw it out there: there's something special going on here. Highly recommend this one. The palate is a slight letdown in comparison to the superb nose and finish. Just a half step behind. On the other hand, it boasts a 10-year age statement, repsectable proof, and a unique spin on what is, for the most part, a quintessential bourbon profile. Well done, Widow Jane.

Installment #2 of Glenfiddich's Experimental Line. I found the Fire & Cane to be decent, but I wasn't sure what to expect from this when I bought it. At any rate, I like the packaging. Nose: Fruit bomb. Plum and raisin. Apple, pear, orange, apricot. Cereals, malt, toffee, honey, vanilla. Oak and caramel. Very floral. A bit of cola. While it may not deviate from the standard Speyside profile, it is one of the more vibrant than many of its regional counterparts. Palate: Big pear and apricot. Still a bit of plum, now with dark grape. Really nice caramelized apple note. Toffee, honey, vanilla, shortbread cookie, and marshmallow. Orange zest and milk chocolate. Finish: With an unusually high ABV for a Glenfiddich (47%), this offers a medium finish. It's fruity and floral, into cinnamon, clove, nutmeg, and oak spice. It's the first time the extra 4-7% ABV becomes palpable. Dangerously drinkable, typical Speyside, nothing truly noteworthy. Those are the first things that come to mind. It's very good Scotch. It takes the average Speyside profile and amplifies it just a bit at every turn. I really like the product, whether or not the marketing is accurate. It's going to have to be a bit more eventful to break the 4-star plane at $68, but I'd be lying if I said this wasn't real nice stuff. It's edition #2, and they're up to edition #4, so availability is limited. If you're looking for a quintessential background whisky with enough character to surprise you on occasion, this is worth a grab. 4 stars and my second favorite from Glenfiddich at the moment, after the 14 year. Regardless, this is very well put to together.

Booker's Kitchen Table. Bottled in 2018; this is the fourth and final batch of the year. Aged 6 years, 8 months, 7 days. Bottled at a whopping 64% ABV. If you've read one of my previous Booker's reviews, you'd know I'm a huge fan. Let's see where this ranks among the better batches. Nose: Gala apple, toffee, brown sugar, caramel, cocoa. Peanut brittle and peanut butter. New car leather shines through. Some barrel char and some baking spices: Cinnamon, clove, and nutmeg. Big oak. In the background, there are some sweet notes of peach and carrot cake. Orange peel and apricot. Ginger, rosemary, allspice, and something akin to sun-dried tomato. Deeply complex but far from overpowering. Palate: Caramel, cocoa, brown sugar, toffee, fudge, vanilla, butterscotch, and graham cracker. Huge peanut/peanut butter note. Very oaky and maybe even a bit of grass or hay. The barrel char makes this drink like a crispy, charred steak, if that makes any sense. The carrot cake is still there, but now more subtle. Peach as well. Black pepper, cinnamon, nutmeg, and clove add spice on the back end. Finish: Spice and oak bomb. Nutmeg, clove, and cinnamon persist from nose to finish. Apricot and orange peel. More peanut/peanut butter. Caramel, cocoa, vanilla, and brown sugar. More spice resurfaces as the long finish finally dissipates. Another winner. It might not be the first or second best batch of Booker's I've had, but it's less than a step behind. And it's probably got the best nose of any I've had. It's tied for best if not the outright best. It's a beast of a whiskey, like any other Booker's batch. But it's extremely balanced and very unique, even in this line of titans. It's unfortunate the Booker's has jumped from $55 to $90 in the past 3 years. Still, with a product like this, I'm fully prepared to keep shelling out my hard-earned cash for these releases. 5/5.

This is the 2nd installment of Knappogue Castle's Cask Finish Series. It's my first but I'll be doing all three in time. I've never had a Marsala cask-finished whiskey, but I've been a huge fan of every KC product I've had to date. Let's see what a Marsala finish adds to the experience. Nose: What I'm assuming is the marsala cask really shines through. Very reminiscent of sherry. Red/purple grape, plum, and cola, raisin, date, and fig. There's also malt, toffee, shortbread cookie, vanilla, and caramel. Almond and cashew. Banana-walnut muffin. Floral and perfume-like. The traditional Knappogue Castle green apple is there, but here it is secondary to the cask influence. Finally, there's cinnamon, clove, nutmeg, and allspice. I could nose this all day. Palate: More plum and cola, date and fig. Slight Christmas pound cake. Sweet and sour raspberry jam and cranberry bitterness. More of the almond and cashew, as well as the caramel, vanilla, toffee, and malt. Maple sweetness. Not a trace of alcohol. Finish: Medium-long. Spice-bomb right off the bat. Cinnamon, clove, and nutmeg erupt as the palate turns over. Once that settles down, I can detect a strong Granny-smith apple which I generally associate with KC. There's also more plum and dry red fruit. Raspberry. Drying and oak. Surprisingly hot, though it tames with each sip. Awesome. I really wish I could distinguish between sherry and marsala; the fact that I've never had a glass of either wine probably plays into this. At any rate, 5-star nose and palate, 4.5 star finish. 12 years old, very respectable ABV of 46% and a unqiue choice of cask. A lot to like here. It's one of 1200. I'm glad I got one, even at the high asking price of $80. Well worth it. Looking forward to reviewing the other two. If you're a fan of wine cask finished single malts, buy this on sight. Bumped up from 4.75 to 5. Palate got even better to match the nose after a few months.

My first Compass Box. My first blended grain. I've long been excited to try one of the masterful blends of the former. I haven't thought much about the latter, but it's an intriguing proposal nonetheless. Here we go. Nose: Grainy, nutty, and spicy. Walnut, cinnamon, nutmeg, clove, vanilla, and shortbread cookie come to mind. Like a spicy Irish whiskey. Even a bit metallic. Hints of orange and coconut. I'd say it's decent at best, but I give it credit for being interesting. Palate: The orange zest pops to the forefront. Vanilla and toffee behind that. Some walnut and shortbread cookie. Some more coconut. Almond and walnut. Still very grainy and a bit metallic. Once again, respectable, but nothing to write home about. Finish: Vanilla and orange. Shortbread and walnut. Nutmeg and clove. Some grain, some spice, and a small bit of sweetness and citrus. Cinnamon. Soapy. Metallic. Short. Underwhelming. If you couldn't tell, I'm not particularly excited about this. Average at every turn. Young, unrefined. 97 on distiller? I don't use an x/100 scoring system, but the score I'll allot this one is far from such. It's not a bad drink. But it's definitely not an interesting one. I had to pull out the Glenlivet 14, my most recent tasting, just to confirm that my palate isn't off. Certainly is not. At $93, this is a major disappointment. Interesting idea, unsatisfying result.

New Glenlivet as of summer 2019. Interesting concept; I've never tried a cognac-aged whisky let alone a cognac-aged Scotch. Let's see if this was a worthwhile attempt by Glenlivet to diversify their portfolio. Nose: At first its a lot of the standard Glenlivet notes: apple, pear, apricot, peach, honey, vanilla, caramel, and toffee. But behind that I get some darker notes, akin to what I get in sherry cask finished-malts. Plum, raisin, and cola comprise the second layer of flavor. Beyond that it's grainy cereal, oatmeal, shortbread cookie, and marshmallow. A bit of nail polish. With time, I get some pineapple. Maybe just a hint of tobacco and black tea. It's a bit muted at first but surprisingly becomes very good given some time to open up. Palate: Malty toffee and orchard fruit. More apple, pear, apricot, honey, vanilla, and a bit of raisin. A bit of milk chocolate and walnut. Some orange and banana. Slight maple syrup. Cereals and grains. It's decent, but unspectacular following that stellar nose. The cognac influence seems to be all but gone save that one subtle raisin note. Finish: Apple and pear persist for all of two seconds, and then it's a puff of cinnamon and oak before it's all gone. Short, uneventful finish. Nosed it first, and thought it was great. Nuanced, complex, and unique. If I was just nosing this, I'd say it's up there with the best of them. I didn't expect much from this when I heard it had been released, and my initial impression as I nosed it was that this was an improbable home run. But I paid $60 for this. And the palate was as regular as they come. Not bad, but in no way memorable. I think it'd best be described as even-keeled. And then the finish.... I enjoy a little intensity in a finish. If Mott's Apple Juice is a 10/100 on the intensity scale, this is a 12/100. If they were going for "smooth"--nailed it. If they wanted this to be remotely interesting, not even close. A great nose is awesome, but I'm here to drink the whisky. And this one drinks like a tentative tea ball player. I'm sure I'm being a bit harsh. But after such a promising start, I just feel utterly let down. I've always been a big fan of Glenlivet, the 12 year was the first single malt I ever purchased, and I loved it back then. I understand what they're going for here, but I just can't appreciate it. Seems to me like they just needed a 14-year counterpart to match their Speyside rival--Glenfiddich. This scent would make for an amazing car freshener or bedroom candle. But as a whisky, I'd say pass, people.

I love the Laphroaig Cairdeas series. I love Ardbeg 10, Corry, and Ugi. So it only makes sense that I'd venture into the Ardbeg annual-release series, which is their Cairdeas equivalent. I jumped at this one because it's a 2015 release; naturally it's become quite exclusive and thus worth an immediate buy. Let's check it out. Nose: Heavy brine and campfire smoke and ash. Iodine and sea salt. Brine and peat smoke dominate this one. There's a sweet custard note. Beyond that are heavy lemon and grapefruit citrus notes. Vanilla, honey, and butterscotch, and black pepper. A nice combination of peat, brine, citrus, sweetness, and just a little spice. Liking it so far. Palate: Nice campfire smoke, iodine, band-aid, briny sea salt, seaweed, and ash. Citrus bomb: Lemon and grapefruit, again, now with lime. Meaty ham/pork note. Vanilla, butterscotch, honey, and toffee. Some milk chocolate. Not a hint of spice or ABV. Finish: More of the smoke and salt. A spice kick of oak, cinnamon, and black pepper hits hard once the smoke passes. As the spice fades, I pick up milk chocolate and hazelnut. Then, as the moderate-long finish fades, I'm hit with one last puff of tobacco smoke. Interesting finish. 4.0 stars. Well above average, not quite enough to be considered a standout. For the $85 I paid, it's worthwhile change of pace from the standard Ardbeg releases.If you're thinking about paying secondary prices to get this one, well, stop thinking about it. The nose is great, the rest is very good. I cut this one some slack since it's not egregiously overpriced like many of the other one-off releases. There's a lot to like here, and I think this is a great embodiment of both Ardbeg and Islay character. At any rate, I'm glad I was able to nab one of these so late in the game.

2017 release. Which means its in the classic purple box for those of you keeping score. The vaunted Macallan 18. I'd say its the second most recognizable top-shelf Scotch only after Johnnie Walker Blue Label. Of the two, I'd say this one is much more deserving of that status. Nose: Leather and chestnut. Big sherry, of course. Dark plum, raspberry, blackberry, raisin, date, fig, and dark grape. Jam and maple. A bit of pound cake in the background. Toffee and orange peel. Big oak note, as one would expect after 18 years in the barrel. A bit of heat, suprising at 43%. It's all cinnamon and clove. Not a trace of ethanol. I could nose this all day. Palate: The pound cake note jumps right up to the forefront. The date, fig, raisin, and dark grape are more pronounced, though the plum, blackberry, raspberry are still there. Orange, apple, pear, and apricot. Toffee, vanilla, milk chocolate, and caramel. Leather and oak. Top notch. Finish: Classic Macallan vanilla and milk chocolate. As usual, it hits like chocolate cake with vanilla ice cream. Chestnut and almond take over, followed by the highest quality oak note. Some orange peel and a tinge of cinnamon spice. Moderate length. Dark, rich, deep, complex, fruity, oaky. The ideal iteration of a sherried-single malt Scotch. Generally, when I award something 5 stars, its a high-octane cask strength bourbon or scotch. In this case, I give the Mac 18 my highest praise for its combination of unrivaled drinkability and deep complexity. Truly a rare combination. This ran me $260. I could've gotten the new, black-box Mac 18 for a good deal cheaper, but I coughed up the extra cash to buy a dust-covered purple box version that I first fell in love with. Maybe I'm biased, because this has been a part of a couple major celebrations in my life. At the same time, I think that this is one of those whiskies that has shaped my drinking preferences--for the better. Therefore, I've got no problem admitting bias. And trust me, the whisky is damn good. Even factoring the ludicrous $260 price tag into my score, I still felt this to be worthy of 5 stars. Absolute must try for any whisky fan. Top shelf.

As a follow-up to my HP Valknut review, I've got here a review of its predecessor, the Valkyrie. My experience with the Valknut was interesting. Loved it when I cracked it. Disliked it when I reviewed it initially, though I was sick. Re-reviewed and found out it was above average. Interesting. Now I've got entry #1 in what I'm calling the "Valk series." I've had a much more consistent experience with them. I have no idea how much of the bottle I've worked through thanks to the opaque black bottle, but judging by the weight I'd say I'm about midway through. Nose: Creamy custard and sherry notes like cranberry, orange, raisin, fig, date, and apricot. Caramel and vanilla, with a bit of sulfur. Some toffee and a bit of sea salt. Low on the smoke and peat, though there is a slight maritime quality. Palate: Plenty of sulfur, cranberry, apricot, and orange. Toffee, caramel, vanilla, and milk chocolate. Once again, a bit of sea salt. Background peat. HP claims this is above average ppm, and while I detect a bit, I'd have guessed the opposite. Instead I get a cross between dry red fruit, citrus fruit, and a bit of dessert sweetness. A bit of cinnamon and baking spice heat. Finish: A touch of smoke followed some dry fruit and milk chocolate. All cinnamon and pepper for the duration of a short-moderate finish. *I'm back roughly a half a year later. Toward the bottom of the bottle. The notes are similar but the length of the finish is much greater. Adds some orange, apricot, and peach notes. Moderate-to-long. Much more exaggerated notes and punch, in a good way. Overall, I'd say it's a solid NAS Scotch. Worth $80? Eh. Not really. But it's well-balanced, and plenty interesting. HP played it straight with this one unlike the risky and somewhat volatile Valknut. This one made less of an impact than the latter, but I give it points for consistency. I think the two expressions are, ultimately, equal, for very different reasons. I'll be buying the Valkfather to compare. The "Valk Series" is in no way exceptional but I do find it compelling for some reason. Not exactly a glowing review, I know. But there is a lot to like here. HP gets a lot of flack for the Viking theme and the prolific of output of subpar NAS products. This one does not fall into that category. This one was hard to review. I may have to come back to this one. Conclusion? My rating perfectly matches the Distiller user average of 3.75. Good but not great. Glad we're in agreement on this one. *Bumped up to 4 flat roughly a half a year later due to the improvement to the finish. Strong nose, dips a bit on the palate, and comes roaring back on the finish.

With my review of the Lasanta, I've now reviewed entire lineup of the original Glenmorangie 12 year bottlings. Interestingly, this is the only of the three that has remained untouched after the revamp. This one is in the old packaging (the maroon one). Nose: Sherry is immediately prominent. Red berry, date, fig, raisin, and plum. Also some more generic Highland notes such as caramel, toffee, honey, and apple. Sweet and floral. Some cereal and perfume. Over time, a jam note appears. Rich in flavor but very approachable. Clove, nutmeg, and oak. Sweet and very interesting. Palate: Sherry-rich once again. Leather, white grape, date, fig, raisin, and plum. Vanilla, caramel, and toffee. A bit of clementine-esque citrus. Some apple and jam. A very slight milk chocolate note, but far less than I get on other well-aged sherry-influenced malts. Similar to the palate, it's easy-going but complex enough to hold my attention. Finish: Much like with the Quinta Ruban, there is a bit of drop-off here. It makes more sense with this one, considering it's the lowest of the 3 12 year olds at 43% ABV. Plum and the other dry-red fruit notes persist from the palate. Then, for the first time, I get some cinnamon and oak kick. A bit of clove, nutmeg, and pepper as well. It's short-to-moderate in length. Doesn't really add much to the experience. Overall: Great bang for buck here. This one ran me $53, and it's a damn good value at that price point. Nothing out of the ordinary, but at the same time, this one hits all the right notes. The nose, if anything, is worthy of significant praise. Glad to see it's being kept in tact as Glenmorangie transitions its portfolio to a new format. And that's my stamp on the 12-year line from GlenMo. It had a good run, and once the scavengers pick the scraps from the shelves, it'll be all but gone. This is significant to me because the Glenmorangie core 4 were some of the first single malts I've ever tried. My analysis? These three Scotches did exactly what they were supposed to. Three role players. Glenmorangie took zero risks with these expressions, but also took no shortcuts. The result were rich, balanced whiskies that could be enjoyed by the masses and dissected by the experts. And at the very least, I'm glad this one made the cut for the new generation of the GlenMo standard lineup. 4/5.