LouisianaLonghorn
Lagavulin Distillers Edition
Single Malt — Islay, Scotland
Reviewed
July 2, 2020 (edited August 19, 2021)
I had higher hopes for this.
I love Lag 16. I love PX sherry. Both are what one might categorize as at the extreme ends of their respective categories, one being bold, meaty, and heavily peated, the other being darkly concentrated sweetness bordering on cloying. One would be right to assume that these two extremes would complement one another - and yet, I find myself a bit let down. Let me explain.
We buy Lagavulin for the smoke. We all know what we're getting into when we buy Lagavulin, and we've all probably tormented a relative with it who's sworn off scotch for the rest of their living days because they feel we fed them a liquid ashtray. No, just me? Ok, well...
The nose on this is the best part. They pulled a Macallan on this one, where the nose has waves and waves of evolving notes, one minute meaty peat, the next raisins and dark, dark fruits ALA the PX finish. Very complex. Very enjoyable. Unfortunately, like many Macallans, this one also fails to follow up on the palate. Instead of complementing the peat, the PX finish smooths it over, thereby diminishing what makes Lagavulin, well...Lagavulin. The finish is pleasant enough, medium length, sweet and sour and savory and blah blah blah. By now I've lost interest.
So what is the final assessment? The nose is magnificent. I spent 20 minutes with the Glencairn just nosing this trying to pick out this and that. Palate is a disappointment, and the finish is meh. Given all that, I'd say a 3.75-4.0 is in order, but I paid $120 for this, which is a good $20 over the (in my opinion, much superior) Lagavulin 16. For that, it gets the 3.5 before you, and I feel that's being generous.
I've now tried the Lag 16, the Lag 8, the subpar Lag 9 from the GOT marketing push last year, and now this. My guess is that (1) Diageo directs barrels that don't make the cut for the standard Lag 16 bottling for the "Distillers Edition" line, and use the PX finish to mask rather than enhance poor maturation, and (2) this expression used to be much better, hence the 96 distiller rating from several years ago and the 4.5 average user rating, and (3) skip the "diversified portfolio" that Lagavulin has put out and stick with the Lag 16. Yes, it's gone up in price here in the states, but it's still that good. It leaves the rest of their core line dead in the dust. I'll happily drink this bottle. It'll be good desert fodder and easy to please company with (better than Ardbeg anyways...), but it's far from the best I've tried. Cheers all!
120.0
USD
per
Bottle
Create Account
or
Sign in
to comment on this review
@WhiskeyLonghorn Batches do vary quite a bit for Lagavulin DE. I bought the 2015, 2016 and 2018 release, but only after checking many reviews on Whiskybase and Whiskyfun. Ralfy's reviews are also worth to check out. A lot is going on between batches, so do not just buy any DE's. I'll review the 2018 release in December.
That does it ....back on the list
@jonwilkinson7309 it’s what keeps us chasing new bottles and flavors!
@WhiskeyLonghorn That's interesting, and one of the things that makes whiskey fascinating - same bottle, different night, and potentially a much different experience.
@cascode @LeeEvolved - I’ve rated both whiskies at 5 stars, but I’ve always given the edge to the 16 because of the extra smokiness. My last bottle of Lagavulin DE was uncharacteristically smoky. if it came through like that all the time, I would definitely prefer it over the 16, but I think it was an aberration. I’m also on a port and sherry kick lately. Growing fond of the Macallan Rare Cask and the Glen Moray 25 is superb.
@jonwilkinson7309 I had a bottle of the first release of the 8 year old when it was the limited edition anniversary expression and enjoyed it very much - it was very much the 12 year old "lite". A little less refined and polished, but the same bourbon-maturation that retains the distillery character. Those two are the best Lagavulins, IMHO, although I've not tasted the 8 year old since it became a core expression. It does seem, by what I've heard, that it is pretty much the same as the first release.
@jonwilkinson7309 I had a pour of this again tonight, this time in a rocks glass instead of a glencairn, and I swear it tasted just like the 16. The PX finish was barely present there, but that wasn’t such a bad thing in this case.
Great review! You just prompted me to check my unopened bottle - 2018. Hopefully just a bit better than the 2019. I agree with @LeeEvolved about the 16. The last time I had the 16 was a pour at a bar, and I was disappointed. So much so that I asked to see the bottle to check the year and to see if it was mostly empty and perhaps oxidized. It was neither. @Cascode, what's your opinion of the 8? The only 12 that I've had is the 2018, but my opinion is that the 8 is a reasonable approximation of the 12, albeit younger and substantially cheaper.
@LeeEvolved Lagavulin 16 started to change around 10 years ago and it now has a more contemporary, sweet, rich-but-mild “seasoned” sherry character. It’s a good whisky but not like it used to be when it had a hard-core asphalt, tar, lapsang souchong and lemon profile. The only Lagavulin where you still get the old-school character is the 12 year old expressions. Wait for me and I'll join you in the safe room to sit out the napalm.
@cascode @Rick_M - I agree with Rick, the last bottle of 16 I bought didn’t seem up to the usual standards, the Offerman 11 was decent but not worth the price, the special release 10 and game of thrones 9yo were also nothing spectacular IMO. Perhaps the DE has leapfrogged all of those bottles? For my money, though, I’d pony up for any CS 12yo you can find and bask in its greatness. Leave the rest for the masses. - LeeEvolved (puts flame suit on and slinks back into the corner to wait....) 😬
@Rick_M Say what! You prefer it to Laga 16? Who are you, and what have you done with Rick_M!
@Rick_M I haven’t given up on this one yet. My initial impression was a bit disappointing, but I’ll revisit in a month or so and see how the bottle evolves. My guess is that it’ll take air well and open up more.
I just love the LagaDE. Maybe a tad better than the 16 these days, but the jump in price has me still buying the 16 by the case. :)
@Ctrexman sorry to disappoint on this one. Save your money and buy another bottle of the Lag 16 instead.
Im saddened by your review. Was really looking forward to this but usually Im in agreement with your assessments so will wait on this
Good review - I agree completely. Great nose, shame about the palate. Lagavulin has such a nice distillate character, why mask it with a blanket of sherry? I see you've not tried the 12 year old yet - strap yourself in, you've left the best for last.
I had this one year's ago. I liked it but like you preferred the std 16 which was a third less than the cost
@Anthology thanks for the kind words. My bad for not including the vintage. This was a 2019 bottling, distilled in 2003. My guess is that the older vintages had better spirit and higher quality sherry casks.
@WhiskeyLonghorn Great review! Curious to know which vintage you reviewed. I had the 2001 vintage at the Whiskey Experience in Scotland and really enjoyed it. Prolly my highest scoring dram till date and I’m usually quite stringent with my rating. Granted it was earlier in my whiskey journey but still. Also have an unopened older vintage (1997) that I have high hopes for.