Generously_Paul
Springbank 12 Year Cask Strength
Single Malt — Campbeltown, Scotland
Reviewed
March 2, 2017 (edited September 9, 2017)
Stop number 3 on the SDT is Springbank. One of only 3 distilleries in the Campbeltown region. This 12 year old cask strength is from batch #11 and is matured in 70% sherry casks and 30% bourbon barrels. It comes in at 53.8% ABV and is non chill filtered and natural color of what I would call rusty bronze.
I had to put on my lab coat and bust out the microscope, beakers, graduated cylinders and centrifuges to analyze this enigma of a single malt. I had tasting sessions over 3 nights and contrary to my normal habits, I had one glass neat and one with water. Here is what I found...
Neat: The nose has a light but earthy peat, but no smoke. There is heat there. It's musty with a bourbony mint. Dried grass or hay. Tobacco maybe? Slightly briny with leather. There is also a sweetness to it. Dried sherried fruits, dark chocolate cherry cordials. With time in the glass a sort of caramel corn note appears and a very faint coconut. It took a lot of time to figure out what all these were.
With water: More floral with light oak. Fresh sherried fruits. Honey and toffee. Depending on how much water I added (I used different amounts each night) I would get baked pears with cinnamon. Light orange/citrusy notes.
Neat: The palate is HOT on the first taste. Once you get past the heat (if you can) there are dark sherried fruits and oak and maybe some new leather.
With water: The palate is much lighter with honey, hay and a faint citrusy note.
The mouthfeel is hot, oily and mouthwatering. The finish is long with faint peat and dark fruits like berries or cherries.
Like the Glendronach Cask Strength I tried a few months ago, this whisky really does benefit from water. Unfortunately I do not enjoy NEEDING to add water to enjoy a dram. There is complexity here for sure, but it was too much of a chore for me to decipher everything, and I'm sure I missed much on the palate. Too hot for my liking as well. I hope the 10 year old I have will treat me a little better. 3.25
Create Account
or
Sign in
to comment on this review
I know what you are saying Slainte-Mhath, but I do concede that some cask strengths need a lot less water to balance (e.g. A'bundah). This is the type of whisky I like when I am in the mood to experiment, but that mood isn't always there.
I'm with you and the author of that article when it comes to cask strength. There are very few that I find worth the trouble of titration. I wish they'd at least recommend a dilution ratio on the bottle, so you at least have a starting point from where you can tweak. As it stands, I have to reach for an online dilution calculator to work out how to get, eg, 54% down to 48%.
Nice article. Funny that the author mentioned a soapy note when adding water, I get the same sensation which is one of the reasons I don't like adding water
What a coincidence: I just read this article and pertains to this discussiuon: https://scotchwhisky.com/magazine/the-way-i-see-it/12917/why-i-dislike-cask-strength-whisky/
I would agree with you in principle, however there are some higher strength scotches that I love at bottle strength. There are a number of 48% ABV bottles that I find wonderful and easier on the tongue than some 43% bottles. Ardbeg Corryvreckan is 57%+ and I could drink that all day as is.
I know opinions differ widely here, but isn't it a bit unfair to criticize a cask strength whisky for being 'hot'? Isn't it the whole purpose of a higher ABV, to adjust that ABV with water to your personal liking, open the whisky up and release the full spectrum of flavors? Anyway, well-written review!