Springbank 23 year Calvert Woodley Single Cask

Quite artificially floral and sugary on the nose, reminds me of SweeTart’s candies mixed with scratch and sniff stickers, there’s a little farm yard muskiness too. Palate is…interesting, it’s weirdly saccharine yet bitter, SweeTarts again, I kinda dig it, but it would get old fast. Short finish is more of the same. Thanks to @ctbeck11 for the sample.

Nose - lemon, tangerine, pineapple, flinty peat, vanilla cream, cinnamon, hay, green apple, grape, mild to moderate ethanol burn. Taste - lemon zest, pineapple, sour apple, bitter walnut, cinnamon, vanilla, brine, pear, mild peat, honey, moderate alcohol bite, finishing medium short with lemon, sour apple, and light peat flavors. In my haste to review the delicious 8 Year Society bottling which I thought was my last in the series, I forgot about this 23 Year single cask from Calvert Woodley and bottled at 42.5%. Honestly though, this one is the easiest to forgot. But at less than $200 for the bottle, I couldn’t pass it up. It seemed too good to be true. And it was. The nose is rather fruity and aromatic. The bottle doesn’t indicate which type of cask was used, but I’d wager it was bourbon, as there are some strong similarities between this and my core range 18 Year from 2018. There’s lemon, a tropical quality, and a milder version of the classic barnyard funk. The palate takes a turn for the worse. It’s not bad, but some of the nice aromas on the nose turn sour and bitter with the taste. The mouthfeel is thin and the finish is lacking. Overall, this is better than average but that’s really not acceptable at close to $200 a bottle. The mouthfeel and finish would likely be improved at a higher proof, but I doubt the sourness and bitterness would subside. In the end, this is probably just a dud of a single cask, or at least as close to one as Springbank can produce.

It’s officially 2022 and I’ve decided to “Spring”bank into it with a series of samples. Continuing on my Springbank series, I have a 23-year single barrel release by Calvert Woodley from @ctbeck11 that was bottled at 42.5%. The nose is very soft and starts with a light farm funk, hay and combination of lemon, lime and orchard fruit followed by ocean brine and burning incense that fades to the background of fruits of star fruit, baked apple, Bosc pear and charred orange peel that transitions to a wet cavernous minerality, pickled ginger, suede and polished oak with light ethanol burn. The taste is a thin mouthfeel starting with a light farm funk, hay and light citrus followed by a moderate and drying bitter spice that fades to fruits of baked apple, Bosc pear and red grapefruit that transition to a wet cavernous minerality, black pepper, pickled ginger, and light ashy oak with light ethanol burn. The finish is short with apple chips, poached pears, salted red grapefruit, dark chocolate and light ashy oak. This is an enjoyable pour that brings in a balance of barnyard funk, citrus, moderate smoke and ocean brine, but the flavors are very light and the palate is thin with a moderate bitter spice that overpowers much of those light citrus notes with a short fruity and ashy finish. Side by side with the 10, for me, the 10 is richer with bolder flavors and a better balance. Sadly this is a case where older is not necessarily better, but I’m very thankful to @ctbeck11 for the opportunity to try a 23 year old Springbank.

Rating: 16/23 Bottled at 42.5% ABV? That's odd. I can't decide whether I should interpret that as a sign that this was proofed down or an indication that it lost alcohol much faster than water. I'm a bit wary either way, but it's 23 year old Springbank, so that doesn't seem like anything to be particularly worried about. N: Heathery grassiness with some light malty sweetness that's supported by lightly toasted grain, a waft of floral vanilla, possibly a hint of tangerine, and a little buckwheat. I definitely get that farmy character, but not a lot of smoke. Also a little mineral with sweet water. It's surprisingly light and not incredibly complex, but I do find that the flavors churn nicely, giving it depth. P: Hmm. It's not that full and there's also this distinctly wrong bitter layer. My initial observation about the low ABV may have been right on the mark. It's that same bitter flavor that I get when I add say too much water (not highball levels, but too much) to my whisk(e)y or leave 10ml out in a glass for several hours. It's that watery barrel dregs flavor. To be clear, this isn't just watery barrel dregs, but there's no escaping that that flavor is here. It isn't as strong as pure watery barrel dregs, but I don't think I've had another dram that had anywhere near as high of a level of that character. There is still some nice toasty grain mixed with earthy, heathery, dry grass, lightly meaty (a tiny bit of smoke, I guess) farminess. There's a touch of astringent waxiness too that leads into some nice cinnamon with hint of clove and starts to bring in the barrel flavor. A hint of rich, bitter mint with herbal and vegetal characters. That bitter layer is really a problem, but once I get past it, there's a nice core profile here. It's classic Springbank 10 with some added maturity. Some of the funky flavors seem to have mostly vanished, so that's unfortunate, but it still has a satisfying Springbank core. F: Fairly rich. That bitterness persists, along with some toasty grain, dry grass, a hint of buckwheat, and a little bit of sweet cinnamon. Not a bad finish seeing as there is often a lingering bitterness in them, but it's not great. - Conclusion - This was very interesting to try and it wasn't a bad dram overall, but I would have taken any Springbank distillery release over this (though the 15 is not tremendously better). The aging here just did not work out, unfortunately. This is a classic case of one bad flavor messing up the whole dram. The flavors here are also too muted. It's OK to be restrained a bit, but this is too much. Following something like Springbank 15, it's mainly the bitterness that stands out here while the other flavors swirl in a muddled ball. It's still not bad, but not what I'd expect from 23 year old Springbank. The way Springbank 18 really grows the depth and complexity while smoothing out the rough edges is completely missed here. Lismore 21 (19) has much more definition, which really accentuates how muddled this is. Considering all of this so far, I think a 17 is the high end of the range I'm looking at. This might be competitive with Highland Park 16 Wings Of The Eagle (17). The Highland Park is less complex, but it's flavors are better and more pronounced. Loch Lomond 12 (16) is definitely in range of this too though. It really is going to come down to how upsetting I find that bitter flavor. I could go as low as a 15 because of it, I think, but I think this still surpasses a 14 with its nice complex maturity hiding inside. I came back a few days later and thought that the bitterness here might be less offensive and the dram might be more balanced and complex, but I rescinded that opinion after trying this side by side with Highland Park 16 Wings Of The Eagle and Loch Lomond 12 (16). I think I'm landing on a 16 here, though I could be convinced it's a 17. It's a shame because the age is quite present here and it's apparent that there are some great flavors buried underneath that one problematic note. Thanks for sharing this @ctbeck11 . I feel like you undersold it, but I unfortunately must agree that it's nowhere near as good as I'd expect just from reading '23 year old Springbank'. Regardless, it was a privilege to to try it.