Haig Gold Label

Blended

Haig // Scotland

    Filter
    Sort
  1. ( NOTE: my review is specifically for the Haig Gold Label Late George V, which was bottled in 1940. ) , After 10 days of vacation in Oregon and having nothing but Willamette valley Pinot Noirs, I was looking forward to coming back to whisky. I finally opened this up tonight: a bottle gifted to me ( or rather left behind unknowingly) by my in-laws---a Haig blended malt from 1940. My father in law was a big fan of this back in the 50s when he was at Cambridge. Not sure the age or even which region. It's interesting to try something this old, gives an indication of what folks liked back then ( and now I clearly understand why the Brora, Rosebank, and Karuizawa never had a chance---they were too ahead of their time.) This was quite popular then...and showcases a taste profile from 80 years ago. This needs to sit out in the glass a while. It's been stagnant way too long. It needs a bit of oxidation to open up. Nose is faint, like varnish almost. Taste: a bit too sweet for my preferences, like candy corn dipped in corn syrup. Coffee. Blanched almonds--some off putting notes like it's been stale just way too long. No finish. Definately not my style---but I'm really grateful for trying something this old, and this rare---I don't think the George V version is available anymore. For at least decades. I don't feel it's fair to give something like this any stars, but to simply enjoy a piece of history (and appreciate the times we currently live in as well ). I could've kept it as a collector item...but what the heck---we live only once.
  2. cascode

    Tasted
    2.5
    2.5 out of 5 stars
    Bottle number 5 from the batch of 12 blends I'm currently reviewing. Nose: Sherry and oak, slightly burnt brown sugar, dried fruit peel, raisins, sultanas, leather, pipe tobacco (unburnt). A little woody and earthy but very clean. A funky note that's hard to pin down but it's a very understated nose. Palate: Soft arrival, sweet but not dense or syrupy. Quite light in fact. Some malt and cereal notes - toasted grains and a hint of coconut, barley sugar and sweet juicy lemon. Finish: The developed palate flows into a sweet, soft finish with everything that has gone beforehand gracefully fading. No bitterness, no sour notes. The very faintest possible suggestion of smoke. This is a very understated old-fashioned style of blend that focuses on being smooth and easy to drink neat or with a dash of soda water. It will taste odd to most modern palates as contemporary blends, whether cheap or boutique, have stronger and more focused profiles. In comparison this seems vague, weak and poorly structured. The texture is lean and it's not a characterful blend. This is a whisky made for slow and constant sipping all afternoon while listening to the radio. It’s not meant to grab your attention or be challenging – quite the opposite. It’s the whisky equivalent of an old sweater you love wearing and can’t bear to part with even though it's tatty and out of fashion. It's in the same price band as Dewar's 12 year and cheaper malts like Glen Moray, and many people would understandably prefer those alternatives. It's certainly worth 2 stars, but I have something of a fondness for it so I'm ramping it up a little bit to 2.5. “Average” : 2.5 stars
    47.0 AUD per Bottle
  3. DavidCeulemans

    Tasted
    1.0
    1.0 out of 5 stars
    My mom gave me this bottle. Being bottled in '79, she had it in the cupboard for almost 38 (!) years. Since I got into whisky lately, she thought I might like checking it out. It had been opened for exactly one time, but hadn't been touched ever since. Surprisingly the quality didn't seem to have suffered, but damn... 38 years... why doesn't whisky age in the bottle... :) I taste some peanut and raisins, and some mild peppery notes. The finish seems to reveal some idea of almonds and coconut and lingers long enough. Al considered, not bad at all, but not as good as I anticipated. Bottle will get empty over time though :).
  4. whiskey_explorer

    Tasted
    3.0
    3.0 out of 5 stars
  5. Konstantinos

    Tasted
    3.0
    3.0 out of 5 stars
  6. mikeeyes

    Tasted
    4.0
    4.0 out of 5 stars
  7. Results 11-16 of 16