Johnnie Walker Red Label

Long overdue. I don’t remember the last time I had a JW Red and I don’t think I’ve ever had a JW Red neat before. JW pull together 35 malt and grain whiskies and market this as a mixer. I guess then it would be inconsiderate of me to have high expectations drinking it neat. Still though, dishwater is dishwater even if intended to be mixed, so lets hope it’s not as bad as I suspect it will be. N: A very grain forward, syrupy sweet open with rough raw spirit burn. There are some lacklustre honey and cereal notes, and if you can get past the raw spirit the faintest touch of smoke. P: Thin and watery. Sweet and a little sickly with a cereal and grain dominant character. Raw spirit is again present, forceful, and rough. Maybe there is some generic fruity and toffee to woody flavour, but I think I’m reaching. Again, the slightest bit of smoke, perhaps a wood smoke but it doesn’t really do anything, it feels disjointed. F: About the shortest finish I think I’ve experienced. Ethanol, some unidentifiable sweetness and gristy cereal. Safe to say I am not surprised. It is clearly marketed as a budget bottom shelf mixer, and indeed that is where it should remain. But, this is rough and ready which I is in its favour; so widely available it will do if thats all you can find. At least it’s better than Loch Lomond 12, and just as good as Loch Lomond 18. Theres a damming indictment for LL if ever I gave one! [Pictured here with a red rock for a red label. This is a gossan (highly oxidised non distinct rock) with a red coating of cinnabar (mercury sulphide) and brassy pyrite (fools gold). This toxic lump is from Almàden, Spain with mineralisation dated to ~360 million years ago] Distiller whisky taste #145

Weirdly fruity

Poor whisky only witch cola or other drink

Inedible

Smoky and peaty as expected, but not the most peaty whisky I've ever had. Has weird sweet note as well. Good for mixing