Cirka Whisky no2

Smell: Candy corn and vanilla are the first thing that hit my nose. Then, the sauternes influence shows up with notes of green grapes, pears, apricot and a strong mineral note (flint). The barrel influence is quite light with spices (cinnamon and cloves mostly) but a solid amount of brown sugar. It does smell a bit young, but it's much better now (bottle half full) then when I first opened it. Surprisingly complex when I take the time to analyze it. WITH WATER (0.75 tea spoon): Much much sweeter on the nose: it's all honey, vanilla and brown sugar. The barrel and the wine finish notes are just not there anymore it seems. Taste: Much less sweet and balanced than the nose sadly. It's a bit nondescript at first and it's pretty hard to identify the notes. It's quite waxy and has a strong brown sugar note on the get go. It's then slightly sour from the wine finish but the fruit isn't very strong (but still there). It's also surprisingly spicy considering the smell with strong cinnamon and cloves. There is a weird coffee/earthy note in there that sticks out too but it kind of works. WITH WATER: Much better balance. The candy corn is the main note now with the brown sugar and vanilla and the other notes are better integrated (much less sour, the earthy note doesn't seem there anymore). It's buttery and spicy (again cinnamon and cloves) too. Sadly the wine finish takes a back seat here and isn't as present but there are still light notes of apricot and flint. Finish: Candy corn, cinnamon, vanilla and the wine finish notes (flint and apricot mostly) are what dominate the finish. It's a medium length/medium strength finish but still quite complex. WITH WATER: pretty much the same here, a bit longer and on the more traditional corn whisky notes. Maybe an orange note that wasn't there at first. Mouthfeel: Quite light considering the 48 ABV. I expected it to have more residual oils than that considering it is non-chillfiltered but there are only a little it seems. WITH WATER: The mouthfeel got bigger somehow (never seen that before) and is much oilier. Overall: It's not a bad whisky. It's a good second effort from one of the rare craft whisky distilleries in Quebec. I suppose the entry proof might be a bit too high (not sure though). Also, 4 years for corn whisky is a bit on the low side (plenty enough for rye though) and I suppose it would benefit greatly from at least two more years of aging. BUT, adding water really changed everything, it improved the whisky on all fronts. I have never seen that before on a whisky that wasn't a single malt. It bumps the score by 0.5 to 3.75. Definitely, adding water to this whisky is borderline necessary.

Première dégustation, note au pif