jonwilkinson7309
Ardbeg Wee Beastie
Single Malt — Islay, Scotland
Reviewed
May 29, 2020 (edited December 26, 2021)
The other day, I happened upon a comparison of the Wee Beastie with Arbeg 10 on Eric Wait's YouTube channel. Perhaps the most telling statement in his ten minute clip (slightly paraphrased) - "You should compare these to whiskies side-by-side...you'll appreciate the 10 more than ever." An interesting observation, and one that didn't inspire me to race out to snag a bottle of the Beastie. Fortunately, I didn't have to, thanks to a sample I received this week, kindly provided by @pbmichiganwolverine.
Yes, the Beastie pumps out smoke like a huge mound of scrap tires in a backwoods junk yard after a lightning strike. There's more to it than that - some bitter dark chocolate, vanilla, pepper, salt, and a touch of fruitiness, but those notes are relatively restrained and don't offset the peat and smoke. That contrasts with the 10, which I find to be more refined and balanced. Perhaps most importantly, young heavily peated drams sometimes leave me with a note that's akin to chlorine. I get that note here. It's not awful, but it's not something I find at all in the 10, where the peat is simply beautiful. Still, the Beastie and the 10 are unmistakenly siblings; the additional five years of aging results in a nice evolution, not a transformation.
I consumed my sample over two nights, and rewrote this review no less than a half-dozen times as I pondered two questions: First, do I agree with Eric Wait? And second, would I recommend this whisky?
With respect to the first question, the additonal refinement and balance of the 10 is what I would expect for a whisky that's been aged for 10 years versus 5. But the 10 also improves on the Beastie more than the $5-10 price differential (at least currently in my market) suggests. Keeping in mind this is Ardbeg 10 we're talking about, the fact that I've twice described it as refined is telling. Perspective is everything.
To answer the second question, if you're interested in a huge smack of peat and you don't mind the youthfulness, this could be the dram for you. For me, the Beastie begins to venture past enjoyably aggressive territory to punishingly aggressive. For that reason, I'd happily spend a few extra bucks to get the 10. There are other heavily peated whiskies in the same price range in my locale that I'd also choose instead, namely, Lagavulin 8 and Talisker Storm.
Having said that, I may pick up a bottle. Drinking it alongside the 10 is a very interesting tasting experience, and one I'd like to revisit in the future. Thanks @pbmichiganwolverine for the pour!
Create Account
or
Sign in
to comment on this review
Nice one. I pondered about adding something here, but I’m well covered. Even the bit about buying it just to enjoy 10 further.
@cascode. Thank you! I really appreciate it. And thank you for the book recommendations - I've been enjoying both Iconic Whisky and Whiskypedia.
@jonwilkinson7309 Great review - I've missed a couple of your recent ones - must catch up on my reading.
Love how you likened it to a tire fire and appreciate the direct comparison with the 10. Since seeing this announced, my question has consistently been "but why bother with this when there's already the 10?" Sounds like its to try to push an Ardbeg down onto the bottom shelf and possibly please an audience that likes the most aggressive whisky they can get.
Great review! Thx for the heads-up!
Nice review! Very interested to try this one
When I first had this, it was brutal. Just pounding with peat. After 1/2 a bottle was done ( basically all from pours I sent out), then it was much more manageable. But I think you hit the nail on the head—why buy this when the 10 is much better and only $5-10 more ?