Port Charlotte MRC:01 2010

Nose: Spices, malt, red fruits Palate: Malt, sea salt, red fruits Finish: Spices, pepper and a hint of salted butter I really don’t get much peat smoke on this. I find the nose quite muted compared to other Port Charlotte whiskies but the nose and palate open up more with a little bit of water. 7.5/10

úžasná rašelina, okamžitě se rozloží po celé puse a vydrží tam, krásně vybalancována, luxus

Nose - Dark toffee, almost burnt, dark chocolate, hint of salt, wisp of smoke, black pepper, light tannic red grape skin vibe, sweet lactic funk (w/ water) Much more vibrant, smoke is a bit more apparent, smells juicy yet dry Taste - Sweet dark toffee, light tannic red grape skins, salt, lactic "funk", buttery caramel, sweet smoke, golden raisins, red berries (w/ water) Adds much more fresh red berries, black peppercorn skins, less dark toffee vibe Finish - Lingering ginger tingle, caramel, golden raisins, gentle red grape skin tannic (w/ water) Less tingle/heat, fruity caramel, juicy red berries Score - 94/100 Final Thoughts - There's so much going on here and it's amazing. On the nose it feels like almost burnt caramel, but in a very good way. It's like a super dark toffee with dark chocolate, but at the same time, there's this very juicy grape/raisin vibe, with this tannic red grape skin tannic feel. It's all very strange, but works amazingly together. This transfers to the palate too where you get this dark sugary, buttery caramel vibe, but mixed with this tannic red grape skin, but also juicy fresh berry vibe. It feels like you took a bit of dark chocolate, dark treacle toffee, red grape skins, and fresh raspberries and somehow blended all the flavors into one cohesive drink. This is all sorts of delicious from start to finish. Would I drink it if offered? - Yes Would I specifically order it? - Yes Would I buy a bottle? - I might grab another NOTE - All reviews are done without factoring in price. Whiskey Network Review #765

Rating: 17/23 I've been wanting to try this one for a long time, so I'm thrilled to have a sample. E: I don't usually mention the eye (because it usually doens't mean much), but side by side this is perceptibly redder than Port Charlotte 10, even without holding them up to the light. I just happened to notice that with the two of them on a black tabletop. N: Of course there's peat, but what I actually notice first is the fruit. There's sort of an oily, lightly organic fruitiness to this that makes me suspect oloroso casks. It gets really earthy with some spices as well and there are some interesting fusel notes. There's also a bit of sulphur that I'm not so pleased by though. As for the fruits, I get cherry, lemon, and tangerine. The earthiness is a lush forest floor, which just skirts smelling like an outhouse. There's a bit of sweetness to the earth, so I'm trying to decide if there are also chocolate notes. Threre's dead leaves and smoke as well. A hint of barbeque. There's more going on here than in Port Charlotte 10, but it's less balanced. P: This is very interesting. There's a lot going on here. There's certainly a lot of smoke. It deftly toes the line between traditional Islay smoke and campfire, giving some charcoal character and a touch of smoked meat, but not letting them overwhelm. I unfortunately do get some kind of substantial sulphur here, which also feeds into the barbeque meat. There's some nice iodine with a touch of tar that brings the peatiness back to bear though. There's also pepper, a tad of cinnamon, and some of that oloroso oiliness leading into suggestions of the fruits from the nose, but they're faint aside from one initial, faintly syrupy hit of lemon with tangerine. There are lots of layers of smoke and earth blending together here. They give it some of that ruggedness of Laphroaig 10, but with some Ardbeg An Oa flavors (barbeque and fruit), more sulphur, and a louder volume. F: The smoke certainly lingers, with a bit of that barbeque carrying through. There's some iodine as well to balance it. Cherry, lemon, tangerine. Cinnamon and black pepper. Some sort of sweetness underneath it all that must be the malt. - Conclusion - The barbeque flavor here gets to be a little strong, but it's overall a positive in how it adds some complexity. The sulphur, on the other hand, does detract from this. I think that the core flavor profile of Laphroaig 10 (17/23) is more appealing than the one this one has because it's more traditional (though still edgy) with greater maturity and balance. That said, the higher proof here and the onslaught of flavors are both helpful. Against my highly oxidized bottle of Port Charlotte 10 (20/23), this is certainly more complex. There's more going on in the Laphroaig as well, but I like the bold flavor of the Port Charlotte 10 and its profile doesn't have the problems that this does. I get some oloroso in the Portcharlotte 10 as well and it really rounds it out and fills out its body, adding some character that helps it surpass the Laphroaig's subtlty. This is still bigger, bolder, and more complex, but I'm struggling with those off-notes. This is a really difficult one to rate. If it weren't for all of that sulphur, I think I'd be giving this a substantially higher rating. It isn't as good as Springbank 18 (2018 - all bourbon barrel aged) (22-23/23), but it could be in 20-22 territory. That sulphur though is unpleasant and it makes it takes more like barbeque too. Considering that, I found that Ardbeg Uigeadail (19/23) beat this side-by-side. Springbank 12 Cask Strength (19/23), which I think of as fairly sulphuric, is only slightly sulphuric when compared with this. The Springbank also has plenty of actively good qualities, so this isn't just a matter of finding out which is the most gag-inducing. Even with the sulphur though, this is really good. I'll save the last sip for later to make a final rating, but I think that ut to a 19 is definitely possible and considering all of the good flavors, there's no way this is less than a 16. I'm leaning toward an 18 right now, but I'm cognizant of the fact that I've tried enough peated drams side by side with this that the sulphur is harder to detect. There's actually some of that barbeque in Ardbeg 10 (16/23) as well. Not as much and none of the oloroso though. And none of the sulphur. Still, it leads me to believe that this would be heading for a much higher rating if it weren't for the sulphur dominating it so much. My final rating here is either going to be a 17 or an 18 and which it is really comes down to how I think this compares with Laphroaig 10. It's tricky because there's so much to love here, but that sulphur is just so strong. It pains me to come to this conclusion because I love this so much, but I think it isn't as good as the Laphroaig and really belongs in the 17 bucket. Thank you, @pkingmartin, for the sample of this! I loved all of the complexity on display here.

Color me not impressed. Its not without merit, but it’s too hot, the wine finish overwhelms the whiskey, it tastes overly oaky. Water did not help. Open less than a week. Maybe it will oxidize well.

Dark, smoked peat with oak, ginger and clove, vanilla and malt, salty brine, and barley. So good.