40 - 01/07/2000 - PREJUDICED, MOI?
- Am I being unfair to 'inferior' vatted malts and blends? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 40 - July 1, 2000 In log entry #30, I wrote about my rating system. After I published the log entry, I received a lot of questions about the relation of my single malt scores to the ratings other alcoholic beverages.
Now we've arrived at log entry #40 I'd like to take the opportunity to write a few words about my feelings for blends, vatted malts, cognac, etc. - and the scores I use to express those feelings. Malt Madness focusses on single
malt whiskies, but my rating system encompasses other drinks too. 'Noblesse oblige' - it goes without saying that a single malt has to meet different standards than a blend. Fifty points may be an excellent score for a 25 guilders
blend, but for a single malt it is absolutely insufficient. To give you some idea about the scores of other whiskies; Johnnie Walker Red (blend) scores 20 points, Grant's (blend) 27 points, Dimple (blend) 40 points, Teacher's
(blend) 50 points, Johnnie Walker Black Label (blend) 60 points, etc. A couple of 'touchstone' single malts are Bowmore 12yo, Dalmore 12yo and Glen Ord 12yo - each one scores 80 points. Every malt that scores 80 or higher is very
OK in my book, and most of them are part of my ' To put things in perspective, I've started my ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 41 - July 5, 2000 I thought it would be wise to start off this session with two regular strength malts, just to get my nose and tongue into an alcoholic mood. And then I thought some more. Wouldn't it be nice to taste two different 'vintages' of the same malt? I figured it would. I selected the two Inchgowers in my collection, the oldest almost twice as old as the younger one. 1 - Inchgower 12yo - Inchgower 19yo 1977/1997 Strange..... The Inchgower 12yo
(43%, OB) is a lot darker than the very light Inchgower 19yo 1977/1997
(43%, Signatory Vintage). The colour of the 1977 suggests a bourbon wood treatment, the colour of the 12 either sherry or heavy caramel colouring. The 1977 was one of the blind 'industry' samples my liquorist surprised me with recently, so I don't know who bottled it.
Preliminary ratings: 2 - Glenkinchie 21yo 1978/1999 - Caol Ila 21yo 1975/1997 Not really a fair match, so I won't give the Glenkinchie 21yo 1978/1999 (60.8%, Signatory Vintage) a final rating yet - nor the Caol Ila 21yo 1975/1997
(61.3%, UD Rare Malts) for that matter. The Caol Ila starts to exhale from the start; the Glenkinchie needs a minute. The Caol Ila showed a lot of very interesting layers around a heart of Islay. Peaty and fresh at the same time. The Glenkinchie started to get interesting as well; spicy, becoming greasier and more aromatic altogether. Oranges?
Adding about 1/4 of water brought the Islay nose in Caol Ila forward, smoke and citrus tones in Glenkinchie became more obvious. The taste of the Caol Ila became rounder; sweeter and saltier at the same time. The
Glenkinchie got sweeter at first, with more chloride in the finish later on; still very nice, but vanished too soon. Preliminary ratings: 3 - Glenfarclas NAS '105' - Macallan 10yo '100 Proof' Over the last few weeks, I've done a few H2H's of a fresh bottle of the Glenfarclas NAS '105'
(60%, OB) against an forgotten old litre bottle that's nearly three quarters empty almost three years after opening. The fresh bottle clearly was a lot better; the tastings were definite proof that some malts deteriorate after a longer period in an opened bottle. On the other hand, quite a few malts need a couple of weeks to 'break in', as Louis puts it. And then there are just a few malts that seem to get better and better, no matter how long you take to empty the bottle...
But the Glenfarclas 105 clearly isn't one of those. Nevertheless, a fresh bottle provides amazing value. As long as you make sure to finish it within 6 months to a year, it's hard to beat this one in the 'bang for
your bucks' area. The 'final' rating of 76 points has to be revised; I only need one more H2H with another C/S to determine how much points will be added for the 'fresh' rating. Both malts have big noses; a lot of 'volume'. Next to the Macallan, the GF seemed almost spirity and oily, with lots of (artificial) sweets. The Macallan had a more
refined and balanced sweetness. More wood, too. Conclusion: The Macallan is the definite winner; the
GF is outclassed and outstyled in every possible aspect. Still, the GF is a powerful malt with a lot of personality. And at 70 guilders a litre it's hard to beat in the
value department. Final new rating Glenfarclas 105: 80 points (for a fresh bottle). And I'm thinking of increasing my rating for the Mac 100 Proof to 89 points. Ooh! I just took a good look at the cover of the
CD of 'The Corrs' that's playing right now. Lovely looking lasses, the three of them. Hamma.... hammmana... Wowieee! 4 - Connemara NAS - Tyrconnell NAS
Something special; two Irish single malts go head to head. The Irish seem to be shy about their age - both bottles proudly announce that they're 'pure pot still' single malt whiskey, but not a clue is given as to the age of the whiskey.
OK, the time for serious tasting is over. Uh..... Well..... That's about it for now.
- - - mAddendum 41A - 26 Free Malts The next tasting report
will take a little longer to finish, because I made an interesting deal with my liquorist. In exchange for building a website for his liquor store I will receive 26 bottles of single malt whisky I've never tasted before! Building the site will take up most of my free time for the next two months, but with the help of a few glasses of single malt the time just flies by...
Are you green
with envy yet? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 42 - July 25 & 26, 2000 On July 25 and 26, I tried the gift set of four different Bowmore miniatures (Legend, 12yo, 17yo and 21yo, all bottled at 43% in 20cl bottles) that my skiing buddy Rene Tammes bought me in a whim. The 12 has been an old favourite of mine, but I haven't tasted the other three versions yet. These quantities are not enough to produce final notes and ratings for my Black Book, but here are my sketchy impressions, based on two different 'H2H' sessions with little drams: July 25: (1)
Bowmore NAS 'Legend' vs Bowmore 12yo (2)
Bowmore 17yo vs Bowmore 21yo July 26: (1)
Bowmore NAS 'Legend' vs Bowmore 21yo (2) Bowmore 12yo vs Bowmore 17yo Preliminary ratings: Of course, these are just very preliminary results, but from the look of things none of these three new Bowmores beat the 12 in the 'bang for your bucks' department. The 17 and 21 seem to be great malts, but at the prices that these older Bowmores go for these days, I won't be buying any big bottles soon to confirm my findings. Still - I can recommend this gift set to anyone - it's a beautiful example of the ageing of a single malt whisky. To me it revealed that if you're looking for the typical Islay characteristics, you'd better go for the youngest Bowmore you can get. The 12 is a sherried malt that's still instantly recognisable as an Islay, the 17 is a very well balanced all-round malt with a softly beating Islay heart and the 21 is... well... Unique. It has lost a lot of the obvious Islay character, but has gained so much in return.... Conclusion: All in all, these Bowmores lived up to the expectations. Much like previous
experiences with Ardbeg, Laphroaig and Lagavulin, this Bowmore range shows that Islay malts tend to lose some of the more extreme Islay characteristics (peat, salt, smoke, iodine) after 10 to 12 years of ageing. As my ratings show, I'm very fond of the younger, expressive Islays. A lot of older Islays lose some of their extreme characteristics - but you get a lot of extra balance and
complexity in return, making for a better all round single malt whisky. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 43 - July 28, 2000 In June 1999, Davin De Kergommeaux (on of my 'foreign correspondents') surprised me with
a bottle of the wonderful Lagavulin 1979 Distiller's Edition. It's part of a series of 'double matured' versions of the six self-proclaimed Classic Malts by United Distillers (Lagavulin, Talisker, Cragganmore, Oban, Dalwhinnie and
Glenkinchie). Although I felt the Lagavulin 1979 wasn't as spectacular as the standard 16yo. bottling, it was certainly good enough (90 points) to make me curious about the other DE versions - particularly the Talisker and
Cragganmore. Of course, those two were exactly the ones that were sold out when I visited Ton Overmars. He did have the Oban, Dalwhinnie and Glenkinchie, though. All were priced around 100 guilders. That's around 30% more than the
standard versions. Let's find out if they are worth the extra dough... I wanted to try these three malts in the proper order, starting with the 'lightest' one. That would be the Glenkinchie 1986 DE
(43%, OB, code G/273-7-D, aged in Amontillado sherry casks). I couldn't resist putting 'Tales of Mystery and Imagination' in the CD-player; the first album of the Alan Parsons Project. The 4th number on the album is titled 'The Cask of Amontillado'.
The second malt of the evening was the Dalwhinnie 1981 DE
(43%, OB, code D.SD.312, finished in Oloroso sherry casks). After the Glenkinchie 10, the Dalwhinnie 15 is my least favourite classic malt. It's just a little too smooth and friendly for my tastes. And what about the DE? Moving swiftly along, I turned to the Oban 1984 DE (43%, OB, Montilla Fino finish). In fact, this final observation goes for all three bottles. 100 guilders is just too much money for a malt that doesn't manage to break the 80 points quality barrier. There are just so many alternatives available that offer much more 'Bang-For-Your-Buck'. This concludes tonight's tasting, but read on for some extra notes. - - -
mAddendum 43A - Switching Standards I've tried the latest new bottles of Longmorn 15yo (45%, OB) and Glenmorangie 10yo
(43%, OB) a few times over the last four months. The Longmorn is slightly better than last year's version, so it receives an extra point (= from 81 to 82 points). The new Glenmorangie 10yo seemed a little less good than before, so the original rating of 82 is decreased to 81 points. This means they've effectively switched places on my
best-to-worst list. The last 'non wine' litre bottlings of
Glen Moray 12yo (43%, OB) are better than ever. 75 to 76 points. I've also added the notes and ratings on Connemara and Tyrconnell (Irish single malts; scoring 77 and 72 points respectively) to my - - - mAddendum 43B - First Bottles for Reserve Stock I've told you about 'the list of 26 free malts' in mAddendum #41A. These are the relatively rare and 'unusual' bottles to be opened on a special occasion sometime in the future; I've also picked up a few more 'mundane' bottles to fill up the gaps on my middle shelf (unrated, opened
bottles) as soon as they appear.
Hopefully this new 'Reserve Stock' will help me better manage the flow between the top shelf, middle shelf and bottom shelf of my single malts cabinet. As soon as a bottle from the middle shelf has been rated, it moves to either the top or bottom shelf. According to the new edition of Michael Jackson's Malt Whisky Companion, there are only around 30 'undiscovered' distilleries
left in Scotland - meaning I haven't tasted at least 1 bottle of the product of the distillery, or have a bottle on my shelves to make that happen soon. When the 'list of 26' arrives, that number will have dropped to around 20.
Considering that about half of these distilleries have been closed over the last 20 years, I'm hoping I will be able to make the own 'claim to fame' soon - Having tasted at least 1 bottle from each Scottish distillery that's active
in the third millennium. That's it for now, folks. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 44 - July 30, 2000 I always try to find a certain 'theme' for my tastings sessions.
Some 'Glen' statistics first: From the +/- 110 Scotch single malt whiskies in my Little Black Book, 27 have the word 'Glen' in their name. None of the malts in my Top 10 have 'Glen' in them, though.... On the other hand, there's no 'Glen' malt that scores below my minimum single malt
quality requirement of 60 points - yet... 18:35 - The Glentromie 12yo
(40%, OB) was a relatively new acquisition, so this bottle hadn't been opened yet. Time to remedy that. When I wanted to start my first dram, I examined the bottle, and saw that this stuff was distilled at the same distillery as Drumguish. The Speyside distillery, on the banks of the river Tromie, only started production in 1991, so how can this be a SINGLE malt? Nevertheless, that's what it said on the label. Bummer. I've had a Drumguish NAS from this distillery a few years back which was pretty bad (40 points), so this new Glentromie 12 may just be an inventive way to circumvent a bad image. Based on my experiences with Drumguish, I feared the most.
Not too much reason for that, as it transpired. A reasonably nice nose; fresh with hints of coffee on a solid but distant sherry sweet base. Chemical toy goo. The taste was not spectacular, but interesting. Starts
with a decent menthol and malt character; very little sweetness but a decent burn. Then bread. Falls apart after a few minutes, though. The finish is rather unpleasant too. The Glenkinchie 21yo 1978/1999
(60.8%, Signatory Vintage) certainly has improved my opinion of the Glenkinchie distillery over the last few months. The ordinary 10yo. is one of the six 'Classic Malts' from United Distillers, but it doesn't seem al that 'classic'
to me. Maybe it's just too subtle for my crude tastes. It isn't so much that I LIKE the Glen Mhor 20yo 1977/1998
(43%, Signatory Vintage) very much, but it certainly is an interesting malt. It has some new nasal surprises every time you try it - but you really have to look for them. The nose seemed to start off sweeter then I remembered, this time.
20:35 - The Glen Garioch 15yo (43%, OB) is a bit strange as well.
The Glendronach 9yo 1987/1997 (43%, Signatory Vintage) has been on my
After my recent fortunate acquisition of the Glen Grant 10yo (40%, OB) I picked up a bottle of the 'ordinary' Glen Grant NAS
(40%, OB) as well. At less than 40 guilders a bottle, I must've sloshed away at least 10 bottles over the last few years (it's Holland's cheapest malt), but I've never given it enough attention to enable me to properly rate it. What better way than an old-fashioned Head-to-Head tasting to find out? The 10yo old had a decent cork - the NAS one of those cheap tin screwcaps. The 10 is a tad more coloured, too.
23:15 - The last 'Glen' on my Conclusion: Oh - all right then. Phew.... I still have to taste bottlings of Glencadam, Glenesk, Glenglassaugh, Glenlochy, Glenlossie,
Glentauchers, Glenugie, Glenury Royal and Glen Spey to see if my 'Glen' theory holds up. And let's not forget the Glenfiddich 15 Solera and 15 Cask Strength in my reserve stock - they should be able to improve my opinion of the
distillery. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 45 - August 1, 2000 I had to make some more room on my middle shelf, so I selected the bottle of
Loch Lomond NAS
(40%, OB) for a final rating. Loch Lomond is just one of the single malts (and blends!) produced by the distillery of the same name. Old Rhosdhu and Inchmurrin are two of the other single malts distilled at the same distillery. So why not pour a glass of the
Inchmurrin 10yo
(40%, OB, also on my middle shelf) next to it? Previous tastings indicated that neither one would score over 60 points; the Inchmurrin seemed slightly better than the Loch Lomond. Nothing to get excited about. Loch Lomond NAS (40%, OB) Inchmurrin 10yo (40%, OB) Conclusion: When you give them enough time, these malts develop interesting aroma's. However, they have little to offer on the taste
front, especially the Loch Lomond. Although both are more to my liking than the utterly disappointing Old Rhosdhu 5yo., both malts end up in the nether regions of my Well - that
sucked! Don't get me wrong - compared to most blends these ratings are still OK. It's just that I expect single malt whiskies to meet higher standards. After tasting three different malts from the Loch Lomond distillery, I've had
more than my fill. Fortunately, there are plenty of good malts on my shelves to soothe my nose and palate. How about The Glenlivet 21yo (43%, OB)? If the price would have been just a little friendlier, this bottle might have wound up on my top shelf. Now it moves to the
bottom shelf, despite the fine rating. Given the fact that it's a pretty good summer malt, it'll probably be a fast mover - especially because it's an inoffensive, all round malt that seems to work well for everybody.
- - - mAddendum 45A - New & Improved Shelf System I'm in the process of reorganising my collection. I used to keep some 20 bottles
containing old favourites like Talisker 10 and Longmorn 15 on my top shelf. I replaced these bottles as soon as they were emptied. This way, I made sure I had plenty of single malts I knew I liked available at any given moment. Due
to the greatly increased flow of new malts, I will have to change the system - at least temporarily. This effectively means I will stop replacing top-scoring favourites automatically for a while and shift my focus towards
undiscovered malts. One of the reasons for changing my system is a rather shallow one. With the arrival (and subsequent sampling) of my next shipment of single malts, the number of active distilleries unknown to me
will have dropped to around 20. With some luck, I'll be able to make the claim that I've sampled the product from each active distillery in Scotland within the foreseeable future. Now that's a claim with some snob appeal! The new system works like this; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 46 - August 6, 2000 Tonight, I decided to mix 'business' with pleasure. I had to make some room on my
middle shelf for a few new acquisitions, so I decided to go for a couple of head-to-head tastings of Glen Grant. Previous reports had indicated that the 'ordinary' Glen Grant NAS (40%, OB) would rate around 60 points and the
Glen Grant 10yo
(40%, OB) would end up somewhere in the upper sixties. Now I didn't have any suitable H2H candidates in my collection, but Astrid (one of the few women I know who likes single malts) came over with her bottles of Glenfiddich and Glenkinchie to provide the necessary material - and some pleasant company. Lets see what the 'definitive' ratings look like...
(1) Glen Grant NAS vs Glenfiddich NAS 'Special Old Reserve' Nose: A close match. Both malts are relatively 'fresh' and spirity -
not really my type of malt. I tend to go for the big, 'smelly' ones myself. The Glen Grant was more playful in the nose, with a wider range of aroma's. The Glenfiddich seemed a bit 'grainy' in comparison and had little to offer -
nasally speaking.... (2) Glen Grant 10yo vs Glenkinchie 10yo Nose: The Glenkinchie seems especially fresh next to the 'malty' Glen Grant, which also showed some peat later on. And this is where I stopped taking notes to prepare some snacks. OK, Let's get the final ratings for the two Glen Grants over with by a H2H-confrontation. The last few tastings showed that both (especially the 'no age statement' version) had improved considerably after some breathing in the bottle. One final Head-To-Head to catch these elusive malts in the act. (3) Glen Grant NAS vs Glen Grant 10yo
Both noses took a few seconds to open up. The NAS appeared oilier and grainier than the 10, which was sweeter and
more complex. The NAS had some pepper later on, the 10 acquired some sour elements. Conclusion: So - this forces me to empty two other bottles on my bottom shelf in the next few weeks to make room for the Glen Grants. Let's go for the (lovely) Bladnoch
and (yuegh) Loch Dhu 10 - these bottles are nearly empty anyway. See the Black Book
for tasting notes. This latest tasting also makes room for two new bottles on my middle shelf. First impressions after opening the bottles: Dallas Dhu 10yo (40%, Gordon & MacPhail) Strathmill 10yo (43%, Scottish Wildlife) That's it and goodnight... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 47 - August 19, 2000 Before the main event (a H2H of two Inchgowers), I sampled a dram of the
Glendronach 9yo 1987/1997 (43%, Signatory Vintage) that had mellowed out quite a bit over the last few months. The nose had lost a little of the overwhelming sherry, but gained some mysterious elements that reminded me of the
Bowmore 21yo. A hint of smoke? In contrast, the taste seemed to have become even more sherried. So overwhelming that the malt loses points over it. Preliminary rating: 71 points. OK - now for tonight's main attraction:
The 1977 Signatory Vintage bottling was a gift from my
favourite liquorist, Ton Overmars in Amsterdam. Let's see how it performs against the official 12yo. old bottling. A previous H2H on July 1 (see log entry #40) suggested
that the 12 beats the 1977. This may be the result of different wood treatments, which would also explain why the 12yo. old is much darker in colour than the 1977. Then again, it could be just caramel colouring. The
nose of the 12 was certainly more sherried. Both needed a minute to develop; the 12 reached its nasal azimuth before the 77 did. The 12 is altogether more complex, the sherry accompanied by sweetness, chocolate and lots of other
interesting fragrances. Conclusion: These malts are very different. Hard to imagine they are from the same distillery. The 12 is
the clear winner on the nose front. Taste? Hmmm. A tie.
All these sensory shenanigans have made some more room on my middle shelf. - - -
mAddendum 47A - My First Liquid Payment I've just picked up the first six bottles of my 'liquid payment' for building a website for my liquorist. The other 20 bottles should arrive somewhere in September. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 48 - August 23, 2000 I have received some alarming reports that some of my
favourite commercial malts were changing. Because there are a lot of bottles in my reserve stock (and 20 more to come), I was reluctant to buy fresh bottles to check. I went to whiskybar 'De Still' instead and tried 2 glasses of
each malt with it's reputation at stake. Bowmore 12yo (43%, OB) goes from 81 to 80 points Even though the tasting quantities were rather small, I felt pretty woozy afterwards. I almost felt sorry for the Bowmore, especially after Mr. Gilchrist was kind enough to give one
of our foreign correspondents an interview. But I have to be strict. And let's not forget that 80 points is still (just) within 'highly recommendable' territory. When I came home, I emptied the bottle of
Lammerlaw 10yo
(43%, OB) from New Zealand - it tasted more perfumy than I remembered. Some menthol perhaps. After 10 minutes of breathing distinctly sherryish. All in all, time hadn't been very kind to it. Original rating was 70, but the last glass clocked in at around 65 points. It was an old bottle, so the original rating stands. Still a nice bottle to pick up for a few interesting H2H sessions with scotch single malts.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 49 - August 26, 2000 Klaus Everding, the Malt Madness correspondent in Hamburg, came over with
his girlfriend Marlou and fellow malt aficionado Michael to sample some of the single malts in my collection. Sadly, Klaus & friends hadn't picked the perfect day to visit Amsterdam. The city was extremely busy with some major
tourist events going on at the same time. It took a while before we managed to reach my apartment for the nosing and tasting. They surprised me with a bottle of the Macleod's 8yo. old single malt - which isn't available in Holland.
I was having a bad nose day, and because my guests already knew this malt I put it into my reserve stock for opening on a later date. Klaus took out his almost scientific tasting forms, and we were ready to start.
Around 21:00, Klaus and Michael wanted to start with a 'light' malt. Now you probably know that I like the 'heavier' malts myself, so the number of options was limited. I suggested the Glenturret 19yo 1978/1998 (43%,
Ultimate), and my guests agreed. I was having a very bad nose night, so I didn't even bother to make notes on this one. It didn't seem quite as good as I remembered. I didn't get the impression my guests were very impressed either.
Best I can say that it was inoffensive. Next up: The last few glasses of the Balvenie 21yo Port Wood Finish (40%, OB).
Klaus and Michael (and Marlou, who restricted herself to only sniffing the malts) seemed to like the 'Speyside' turn of events, because they went for the Singleton of Auchroisk 1981
(43%, OB) after that. Good choice. Very unique because of the heavy liquorice in the nose. Sherry too. The liquorice is obvious in the taste as well. This is another 'old' bottle as well; the taste had lost some of it's balance but it's still very drinkable.
And then came the Caol Ila 21yo 1975/1997 (61.3%, UD Rare Malts); another malt I didn't want my guests to miss. Marlou remarked that 'the angels had been modest' - This malt has a very high alcohol percentage
considering it has been in the cask for over twenty years. Oh, man. This malt has got it all. Nose: Peaty, flowery, smoky, oily, salty. Changed quite a bit when adding water. The sweetness became more obvious and more like molasses
- both in nose and in taste. Quite drinkable after two drops of water (to maybe 45 Vol% alc.), but still numbing. Great stuff, though... As long as we were drinking cask strengths... And then (around 12:00) it was time for what I had expected to be the high point of the evening: opening the Bowmore Sherry Darkest
(43%, OB) from my Reserve Stock. I figured tonight qualified as a 'special occasion'. Plop! Hmmm... The nose is quite nice, with sherry, smoke and some peat as the most obvious components. Nothing wrong there. The taste is quite another tale. Just after opening, it tastes pretty awful. Sickly cloying chemical sickness. Astringent aftertaste. A major disappointment, especially given the steep price. Right now, I'd take the 17 or 21 anytime - or even the 'ordinary' 12yo. for that matter.
Next one: the Arran NAS
(43%, OB) that Klaus was curious about. To me, it seemed very oily in the nose - like the Isle of Jura I don't like. Banana's and some peppery elements as well. It picks up slightly after a while. And that's where my
notes end. As usual, this international tasting session got out of hand and lasted until the wee hours of the night. Spirits were rising, and we tasted a lot of different stuff. From what I can remember: Glenfarclas 105, Laphroaig
15, Ardbeg 17 and the Connemara (from Ireland). The guests agreed that Loch Lomond sucked big time (it just took Klaus a little longer than the rest ;-). They also disliked the Suntory Kakubin - a Japanese blend I
rather like. And we tasted three 'vatted malts' I composed myself and one I made right there on the spot. This one (40% Glen Grant 10, 20% Highland Park 12, 15% Ardmore 1981, 10% Strathisla 12, 10% Rosebank 1983 and 5% Laphroaig
10) was no success. I gotta wrap up this report. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <<< Previous 10 entries - Next 10 entries >>> (Or check out the overview of all log entries) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
40 - 49
