Whiskali
Highland Park 12 Year
Single Malt — Islands, Scotland
Reviewed
July 17, 2019 (edited November 19, 2020)
This is life-less sherry water. Strong pass.
I really have no idea how this has a 91 distiller score. I can only assume that there has been a sharp drop-off in quality since 2013, when that review was published.
When I first opened this, there were a couple of interesting drams but, as I continued through the bottle, it became one-note and incredibly boring. The fact that HP waters this down to 43% doesn’t do it any favors; it leaves nothing to play with. I tried giving it air and water and it did very little. Like a cat batting around a dead mouse, I kept hoping it would wake up but alas it did not. I ended up dumping the rest of it into an infinity bottle.
Create Account
or
Sign in
to comment on this review
@Scott_E @Soba45 Yeah, I agree, all of the different bottlings makes it confusing/distracting. Especially with their ridiculous naming architecture. I had the 18 (new version) last month and thought it was good but flatter than I remember. The most interesting HP that I’ve had recently is the Full Volume. I just opened it but my first couple of drams remind me of Tomatin’s Cu Bocan line. It’s not sherried so you get to taste more of the distillate and it has nice hints of smoke.
@LeeEvolved @PBMichiganWolverine This bottle was the Viking 12 version. I didn’t realize that there was a separate distiller profile. I’ve been under the impression that HP didn’t change the recipe, just the bottle/packaging. But I haven’t tasted them side by side so can’t speak to it.
@Scott_E Yeah I rated it highly for the price a few years ago as well, I think I only had the 40% version. Still have a bottle of the older 18 I'm keen to bust out sometime.
@PBMichiganWolverine possibly. I keep hearing/thinking of that expression: “Jack of all trades, master of nothing” and how it may apply with
@Scott_E they somehow think if they produce a lot of variants, that’ll mean more shelf space?
@PBMichiganWolverine @LeeEvolved ...or maybe worse. I like HP, though I haven’t had one in quite some time. Even enjoyed the “old” 12. I fear that HP has lost sight of quality over volume. The last I checked, out of curiosity, about a year ago, they had 50+ active versions of their product. Too much noise?
@LeeEvolved totally agree. If I had the old 12, would be interesting to do a side by side
@PBMichiganWolverine - this makes me kind of interested in trying the Viking 12 version then. If the old 12 isn’t much to write home about then maybe it’s gotten a little better with the Viking one. Surely a pour couldn’t hurt- definitely don’t need a bottle, though.
@LeeEvolved @Whiskali. Likewise...I had it at 3 stars years ago. The 18 is a whole other ball game
Looking back to my quick review from 3 years ago, I can see I wasn’t much of a fan either- even before the Viking re-theme. I believe I have another bottle of the old style because I put a set of the HP core range together once they started switching to the Viking stuff. It looks like there’s no rush to revisit it. Great review. Cheers.
Their 18 makes a significant jump up. At least the older bottlings from a few years ago did...recent ones, who knows
"incredibly boring", "lifeless sherry water" .
Nice review even if I do have a slightly higher opinion of it.
someone had to say it.