prE-pistle #19:  Y2K
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000

Hello, all,

First of all, Happy New Year.
The best part of it was the Y2K non-event. I was supposed to spend 3 days in 'sunny' upstate New York in our data center, but that got called off by Saturday night. So at long last, here is the wrap up of my year end SMS activity.

First, a little story. It goes without saying, that I try to convert anybody who will listen into SMS lovers. My father consideres himself an expert on whisky in general, to the point that he doesn't need to drink any. Since we spend an occasional weekend at my parents so they can spend more time with their grandchilderen, I keep a bottle or two over there - including a 1/3 full botttle of Dalmore 12 . When we were there back in November, I couldn't find it. When I asked my father, he said that if it was the oval bottle, then it was gone. Apparently, he had a customer in from overseas, and invited him over for a home-cooked dinner, and they 'discovered' the Dalmore. Fortunately, I had stopped by a liquor store on the way over to see if I could find anything interesting, so I didn't have to spend the weekend 'dry'. In any event, I replaced the Dalmore with some Old Pultney 12. It's OK, but not much more than that. Somewhat rich, a bit salty, but not very exciting. Perfect for this purpose, since I won't get upset if it too disappears.

Anyway, back to the yearend wrap up. Heading towards the end of the year, I really did mean to be good, and just place my W&L holiday order. But then D&M had to send me a catalog, so there went that idea. The problem is, that there is so much good stuff in their catalogs, and it is worth an order just to stay on the mailing list. Some of the info ends up on their web site, but not everything, and the site varies all the time. It's also the only place that I know of that has tasting notes on Cadenheads and the like, and the actual whisky is so darn good, of course. So I gave in to temptation, and ended up with:

Glen Albyn 17yr Glenhaven. This was their club selection earlier in the year. The current notes are different from back then (this happens on their site, sometimes). The original notes had it with honey and a bit of smoke and vanilla on the nose, initially sweet like hard candy, then a burst of heat, and settling down with chocolate on the finish. I'd say that they nailed this on dead on!! it is every bit as good as it sounds.

Glencadam 11yr Cadenhead. The notes say rich, creamy and smooth. It's a component of Ballantines. Also accurate, and worth having.

Millburn 13yr Cadenhead. Brown sugar/hard candy, with a touch of sea salt.
I didn't really detect the latter, but this one is a keeper too. It's different from the Coopers Choice Millburn, which is very rich (i.e. sort of like an unsherried Macallan 18). Speaking of which,,,,,,

And  now on the the W&L yearend order. Since I enjoyed  the Glenhaven 'plain oak cask' Macallan, I decided to round up a few more, namely the Murray McDavid 21 and Adelphi 12. Only one small problem. The MMcD is pale yellow, even more so than the Adelphi, but it says fresh shrry cask on the label. Tastewise, the MMcD and Adelphi are nearly identical, the major differences having to do with age and strength. I intend to send an e-mail to MMcD to figure out what is going on. Any number of their Macallans are nice and dark. Anyway, the taste is very different from the Glenhaven, It is on the light side, with some of the Mac components present, but I am having difficulty coming up with good verbiage to describe it. All I can say is, that it is a high quality bottle, well worth it's $90 price tag. Yes, that's a lot of money but it's my yearend treat to myself.

The other item of note is the Highland Park 10yr Glenhaven. Finally, I found the cask strength bottling that is just like the distillery 12 & 18. And a bargain to boot at $40.. Howard at W&L is really a nice guy for not marking it up. Park Ave. started out at $90, and then put it on sale for $70. There is a lot of profiteering going on in NYC with Glenhaven's. Anyway, if you are interested in trying some cask strength bottles without breaking the budget, I highly recommend the Glenhavens.

This year turned out to be a good one, SMS (and other)wise. When I took inventory, I counted 60 bottles, almost double than 1/1/99. A bit over a year ago, I started to stock up on cask strength bottles after seeing large quantities of my Aberlour 18, HP 18, and Laphroaig 15 disappear each time I touched the bottle. At CS, the alchohol takes effect must faster, and I quickly hit the point where 'just another wee dram' isn't worth it.
However, this makes the bottles last much longer so I don't need to keep on buying so many, but that last point is really a terrible thought. There are definitely relative bargains among the private bottlings, when adjusted for proof. A $60 cask strength private bottling is a better deal than an $50, 86 proof distillery offering. I have found however, that the distillery usually DOES know what they are doing, and the older distillery bottles seem to be of higher quality than their younger siblings, So maybe I'll pick up a few things like the Bruichladdich and Dalmore 21's.

Other items on the list are Bowmore 18 and Laphroaig 12 Cadenheads. SMS ADVISORY: United Distillers is cracking down on private bottlings of Laphroaig, something I found out on the Murray McDavid page (on the discussion section). Obviously, when the current supply is eventuallly bottled and sold, there won't be any more. Since you like Laphroaig, I would suggest buying now (or at least as finances permit), or drop strong hints to family for a sure to be- appreciated birthday present. At least you can buy the distillery Laphroaig Cask Strength in Europe.

Well that's it for now. The Plowed Springbank also arrived, and I'll have some notes on it and other Springers in my collection for the next communication.

Cheers.

Louis

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #20:  Bowmores & Stuff
Date:  Thu, 9 Mar 2000

Despite being in self imposed restraint mode, whisky wise, I have a few things to report. First of all, the Morrison Bowmore brands are going for fire sale prices here in NYC. So I picked up the Bowmore 17, Darkest, and Mariner for $40/33/30 respectively, instead of the usual $50-60/60+/50 that they usually go for.

The 17 is the laid back Bowmore, although I usually find the idea of a laid back Islay to be an oxymoron. A month of break in was required, as it was dull and lifeless upon opening. For those who find the Islay intensity of Lagavulin and Laphroaig too much, this one could be a nice substitute, although I am not sure I would feel the same at it's usual selling price. The Darkest is really a nice dram, though. The effects of the sherry casks are abvious, but everything is very well integrated, and the sherry has metamorphosized into other things. And finally, the Mariner is a winner as well. It reminds me of my first bottle of the 12, tons of peat, nothing held back. I am definitely going to stock up on these latter two.

Going back to January when we went out for my birthday, there were only a few things on the list that I hadn't tried, so we went for Glengoyne 17 and the current Longmorn 15. The GG was nice and smooth, and well rounded. But with the going price in the mid-$50 range, I don't really find it worth the money. The Longmorn was another story. I had previously had the miniature from the Heritage collection and was unimpressed, but there were reports that the newer releases were better. This one definitely was. Nice and rich. Raisins were the dominant component, and I think that this one goes well with deserts. For $45, it is a good choice for when Lagavulin won't do. One of these day's, I'll have to compare it with the new Macallan 15 for about the same price.

And here is one you will like, the Laphroaig 12 year Cadenhead. This is something that I've wanted, and independent Laphroaig bottlings are being stamped out under the current ownership. See Murray McDavid's web site for more information. The Cadenhead has all but disppeared, but I saw a bottle locally, so I snapped it up. Talk about central heating, this is one for those nice cold winter nights. Of course, you've got the distillery cask strength version, which hasn't been imported here yet.

One more small item, now in residence at my parent's house is a Cooper's Choice Imperial 14. It's similar in style to the Glenlivet 12, with a touch of smoke. Pretty decent like all of the CC's, but you don't really need to own them all. My favorites are the Dallas Dhu and Millburn, both of which are no longer in existance.

Oh yes, my sister went to St. Thomas again. I gave her a list of interesting items, of course none of which were there. But I did remeber that they had some Rare Malts, so I asked her to pick one up for me. Since I had no idea which ones they might have, I told her to pick one at random, and surprise me. As it turns out, the store only had two in stock, so I ended up with a North Port. This one has the distinction of getting one of the lowest scores in Michael Jackson's 2000 edition. In all honesty, he doesn't grade the aperitif style malts very highly, and it was quite pleasant.

Anyway. I am not sure if I mentioned this already, but this year I have decided to go for quality, rather than quantity. last year, I nearly doubled my collection, to 60 or so bottles. Problem is, that older bottles fizzle out if they were opened too many times, and I am running out of room as well. My company pays out bonus in mid-March (don't bother asking why, they probably could'nt tell you if they tried!), so I'll have some free
cash. High on the list are the Longrow 10, and the Highland park 1977, as well as a few other items. I'll send the update as soon as there is something to report.

Cheers.

Louis

PS: Fom now on, I will list the url's of all web sites that I mention that I didn't get from Malt Madness.
Starting with: Murray McDavid - www.murray-mcdavid.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #21:  Summer of 2000 - Part I
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000

OK, here goes:

Right now, I am a bit behind in putting together my tasting notes. Computer problems, taxes, some vacation, kids' birthdays, whatever. 1999 was a major year for me malt-wise, as my collection doubled, to about 60 bottles. This created a few problems. First, I am running out of room. Second, older bottles that were visited regularly started to change, usually for the worse. Some of the Speysides conerged to a some sort of generic malt, and others just plain fizzled out. And finally, most of my acquisitions were cask strength, so they don't get used up nearly as fast as regular bottles, which compounds problems 1 and 2. (Reply by Johannes: My collection has reached about the same proportions and I recognise the problems. A few malts improve after extensive breathing in the bottle, but most malts, especially older ones and cask strength bottlings, are best finished within six months or so. This means I have to either increase my alcohol intake or exersize more restraint when it comes to opening new bottles. See the Forum for a discussion on this subject.)

So my New Year's resolution was to go for quality over quantity, meaning fewer, more expensive bottles. One my self declared austerity period expired on 3/1, I was only partially successful. At the top of the list was the Longrow 10yr. This is a lovely dram. A very fragrant nose to start with. On the palate, it is very gently, with some sweet notes on a lightly peated underpinning. The finish is quite long. I haven't yet found everything the Michael Jackson lists in his updated guide, but I am sure that they'll emerge if I keep on trying. One note of caution though. DO NOT offer the Longrow to blend (or bourbon) loving friends to show how good an expensive single malt can be. Less assertive malts will be dismissed in this context. As my friend Islay Bob from the PLOWED page notes, this is a malt to be enjoyed, not analyzed.

But I couldn't resist just a couple of more Glenhavens. This particular line doesn't get nearly as much press as Cadenhead, Signatory and Adelphi, but they are very drinkable, and bargains to boot. Several of mine cost $40 or less, including the 23 year old Dalmore (beware though, there is also tremendous profiteering on Glenhavens in the NYC area, the Dalmore was offered for $195 at a place near my office). The two that I acquired were the Glenfarclas-Glenlivet 17, and the Highland Park 21. Both have significance for my next report, but are significant in their own right. (Comment by Johannes: Glenhavens aren't available here in Holland, which is a crying shame because a 23 yrs. Dalmore for U$ 40.- sounds like my kind of medicine.)

The GF was too tempting to pass up at the same price as the distillery 17. Coming in at an uncharateristicly low 53% (for a 17 year cask strength or a Glenhaven), it is easily drinkable without water. As such, it tastes exactly like would be expected of a 17 year Glenfarclas at higher proof. I know this is a cop out, but what can you do. It would be very interesting to do a HTH with the 105.
As for the HP, I knew about it from when I was putting together a previous order. I've collected a numer of cask strenght HP's, a Signatory 20 yr 1975, Adelphi 10yr, and  Glenhaven 10yr. The first two are a bit off the mark for an HP. The Signatory lacks the trademark honey and heather, and the Adelphi is somewhat lighter in all areas than the distillery offerrings. But the Glenhaven is dead on. Every bit as rich as the distillery 12 and 18, and it set me back a mere $40. So I really couldn't resist the Glenhaven 21 at $75. I was expecting to be blown away, but things never work out the way they are supposed to. Yet another lighter HP, so it seemed. But I have learned by now, to always allow for break in before making a final judgement. So a couple of weeks later, things had picked up a bit. Still lighter than the 10yr and the distillery offerings, the 21 was showing it's pedigree. It was much more complex than the 10yr, which seemed one-dimensional by comparison. So this one is a keeper, and well suited for it's real purpose, which I will reveal in the next update.

(Reply by Johannes: Hmmmm.... Sounds mysterious...)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #22:  Summer of 2000 - Part II
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000

As promised, here is the next installment:

After a prolific first quarter of the new millenium, I wasn't planning any new acquisitions for a while. But then I stumbled across a terrific sale, and had no choice but to stock up. At the top of the list was the Highland Park 1977 200th anniversary bottling. I really wanted a high end HP, but the distillery 25 was a bit too much for my consience at $150-175. So when I discovered the 1977 at about two thirds the price (typically $105-115) and noticed that Michael Jackson actually rated it a point higher than the 25, I went for it.

My initial impression was that it was a really nice Highland Park. Just to be sure, I pulled out my bottle of the distillery 18. Well, the 1977 made the 18 taste like dishwater. BUT, this is something that has happenned to me with my other HP's as well. Both the 12 and 18 were extra good upon opening. I suspect that the funnel shape of the HP bottles has something to do with this, perhaps allowing the vapors to gather at the top, and become absorbed by the first dram. So I gave the 1977 a couple of weeks, and things had evened out a bit. Nonetheless, the 1977 is a very fine dram, and probably worth double the price of the 18. By the way, this is why I purchased the Glenhaven HP 21 that I mentioned in the previous update. I ended up with two bottles for the price of one, and they will last a heck of a lot longer.

Next bottle was the Dram Select Speyside 21 , actually a 21yr Glenfarclas.
This one has a 'street price' of $60, a good bit less than the distillery offerring. The nose was typical of sherried Speysides. The body was a touch lighter than medium, with the spiciness that Michael Jackson found in the Glenfarclas 21. The first comparison that comes to mind is with the (duh) Macallan 18. What's left of my three year old bottle has fizzled out, but I remember it being 'extry syrupy', with a huge, peppery finish. Nowadays, the Mac 18 is severely price gouged in the US, going for $75 or more. Anyway, these aren't exactly my favorite type of malts, but Dram Select is still disapearing rather quickly. Meanwhile, there's the Glenhaven Glenfarclas-Glenlivet 17 from my previous update. This is an interesting comparison, the extra 4 years vs higher proof. I would say that the 21 gets a few extra rating points over the 17, but I definitely enjoy drams at higher proof. To solve this dilemna, I drink them shotgun, a dram of each side by side!!

Moving on, we come to (drum roll, please) the first distillery release from the Isle of Arran. There is no age statement, but it is said to be 8 years old. Also, it seems to have matured rather quickly, due to reflected heat from the surrounding granite mountains. One thing I can say, is that it isn't like anything I might have imagined. Nothing in common with any other island malt, the IoA is light bodied, smooth and creamy, with a vey warming finish. There is a bit of peat, which comes fom the water, since the whisky is otherwise unpeated. It reminds me of my Glencadam Cadenhead. This one has joined my warm weather, daytime contingent. Regarding price, it is going in the high $40's. If you are budget constrained, I really don't think that it's worth that much. But if  $10 or so of that is allocated for pride of ownership, I would say go for it. After all, how do you put a price on being first one on the block with a hot new bottling? (Comment by Johannes: The Isle of Arran has become available in Holland recently - for only 60 guilders at my favorite liquorist. The reason I didn't pick it up on sight is that I have some negative emotions about this malt. A few years back, a very agressive salesman from (if memory serves) the company John Devereaux in London tried to sell me a a cask of the stuff. His approach was so annoying that I couldn't bring myself to pick up the bottle last time I saw it, but I suppose curiosity will get the better of me soon.)

And now a couple of things to close. I have always been interested in Craigellachie , based of descriptions I have seen. The only one available in the US has been a Cadenhead, at $80+. That was a little rich for my wallet, but the sale included a Scott's Selection for somewhat less. As advertised, rich, being both fruit and oaky.  And finally, one bottle that's easy on the budget. I was at a friends, and he wanted to toast somewthing or the other. Out came a bottle of Glen Garrioch 8. Very pleasant actually. Slightly grassy with a light smoky underpinning. Perhaps it would become boring aftr a while, but perfect for guests who may not care. A steal at <=$20, and blows away blends at this price.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #23:  Summer of 2000 - Part III
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000

When summer arrives, the more intense Islay's stop working for me, especially Lagavulin and Laphroaig. So for this summer, I decided to work my way thru the lighter malts in my collection. Since almost all of these are cask strength bottlings,  I paired them off, and will compare one pair each week.

Leading off were the Miltonduff 12yr Cadenhead (60%), and the Glen Rothes 12yr Adelphi (56.5%). Both pack a lot of heat, a splash of water is mandatory with these two. The Miltonduff was my first cask strength bottle. I decided that I 'needed' one, and asked for a recommendaton at Park Ave.  Herb recommended the MD, saying that something more intense wouldn't be a good choice for a first timer. Well, once I opened the bottle, the first two sips put me into orbit. I remember eventually waking up feeling like I'd put away about half of a regular bottle, even though total consumption was barely an ounce. In another six months though, I managed to get things under control, not really being affected by the higher proof. Just as an aside, I have a friend who has a reputation as a boozer. Once when he was over, I offered him the Miltonduff. He promptly downed an ounce, and pronounced it to be really good. He than asked for doubles, which he also threw straight down. Finally, I suggested that he try the Springbank 12/92, which he liked even better. And you couldn't tell that he'd had anything!!

Back to the matter at hand, I remember the Miltonduff as being somewhat fruity. Michael Jackson says flowery, and I can go along with that. The Glen Rothes is indeed crisp and fruity, with light spice underpinnings. If you think that you'd like the Miltonduff, I would recommend a standard strength bottling, but I like the Glen Rothes. At around $60, it's reasonably priced, relative to the distillery bottlings, althought there is a Hart Brothers CS currently available that goes for even less.

Round 2: Bruichladdich 21 (distillery) and Scott's Selection 12 (55.3%).
When I got started with SMS, I didn't bother with Bruichladdich, figuring that an un-intense Islay would be a contradiction in terms. But after reading various tasting notes, it seemed like this was perhaps the ultimate summer dram. Perfect for a late afternoon near the ocean, with the sun heading for the horizon. Well, I think I got this one right. The 21 is a splendid dram, light to medium bodied, with a whiff of salt and fruit on the nose. I'll second the distillery tasting notes, vanilla, fruits (they say stewed, but I'd substitute my wife's fruit salad), more vanilla, and a hint of sea salt. The finish is long and pleasant. At $80, it is at the limit of what I would spend for a regular strength bottle without some sort of special reason, but in this case, it is definitely worth it. I had my eye on a 17yr Cadenhead, but at $85-90, that was just too much. So it was nice to find the Scott's Selection for a nice bit less, generally available in the $65-75 range. The Scott's Selection is similar to the 21, but I think that the age difference comes in to play. It definitely served it's purpose, namely preventing a large amount of the 21 from disappearing. I really like both of these. Bruichladdich doesn't get a lot of respect, but it's good stuff IMHO. Too bad the distillery has closed.

Round 3: Two light, pale malts, the Aultmore 8yr Adelphi and Northport 19yr Rare Malts. For some reason that I can't remember, I decided to get the Aultmore last year, and my sister brought me back the Northport from St. Thomas earlier this year. Both come it at 60%, and set me back $60.  The Aultmore has a nice, fragrant nose, a light, pleasant taste, and very little impression of high proof (it certainly is though!). This makes it quite pleasant in the summer, when no extra heat is required, even with the A/C on. The Northport is drier, slightly grassy on the nose, with a hint of bananas on the palate. Michael Jackson doesn't regard either of these very much, giving them 74 and 69 respectively. I think this is a little bit harsh. The Aultmore is easily the equal of Dalmore 12 which he rates a 79, but I will say that I don't find myself going back for yet another 'just another wee dram' with either of the two. If you are interested in a lighter cask strenght bottle, I certainly recommend the Aultmore. SInce Rare Malts tend to be expensive, I doubt that you'll find the Northport for only $60, and in any event, there are better bottles out there even for that price.

That's all for now. In the next two reports, I will be covering the Bowmore 20yr 1975 Signatory, Aberfeldy 17yr 1978 Cadenhead, and a whole bunch of others.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Subject: Off Topic prE-pistle: 'Public Service Announcement'
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000

If I may be allowed one off-topic indulgence, please read on.
Otherwise, feel free to click on the back arrow.

Most readers of this page listen to music, and I'm sure that many purchase cd's on at least a semi-regular basis as well. If you've been keeping up with Internet-related news (Wired News is a good place), you also know about the monopoly that that music industry holds on content, price, and distribution, and how hard it is working to maintain that monopoly. Industry consolidation has left us with four conglomerates, BMG, AOL/Time Warner/EMI, Sony, and Seagram/MCA (which just absorbed Polygram). Anybody who gets big enough to challenge the big boys gets bought out, right David Geffen? Local record shops are squeezed by wholesale prices for new releases higher than the industry-subsidized sale prices at Tower and HMV. The legal attacks against Napster and DVD de-cryption are just the beginning of what we are sure to be seeing. AOL recently disabled the MP3 search in their Winamp player, and the industry's Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI) specifications doesn't even allow future players to play MP3 files.

There is only one way to keep the monopoly from totally dictating what we are allowed to listen to, and that is by supporting small, independent labels. One such label is California based Reference Recordings. Their catalog has almost 100 recordings, spread across classical, jazz, and vocal music. Even if your listening taste doesn't cleanly fall into one of those categories, many of the pieces are offbeat enough for there to be something for just about everybody. They have an exquisite recording of John Rutter's Requiem, for example, and I know that Johannes himself is a fan of Rutter's works. And worthwhile artists as well. Two recordings by pianist Eugene Istomin, and a dozen by the Minnesota Orchestra, even though most US orchestras can't get a recording contract nowadays for a variety of reasons.

But Reference Recordings is short of cash, and may have to close it's doors once it's current supply of recordings have been released. Right now, RR is offering any 3 cd's for $39.98 including shipping. That's the same as one bottle of Lagavulin at the best US price plus tax. Since we can't be gulping down SMS all of the time, listening to good music is a very reasonable alternate, Listening to music while drinking SMS is acceptable too. And the cd's will be providing years of enjoyment long after the whisky would be gone.
Since the cd's are in inventory, each purchase is money in the bank for Reference Recordings. If enough of us purchase a few cd's, we can really make a difference. Remember too, we single malt lovers are thumbing our collective noses at the whisky establishment, namely the big name blends. Please check out their web site. For your convenience, a PDF file of the complete track list of the catalog is included right here, and the toll free order number is 1-800-336-8866 (I am sorry that I am not sure of RR's distribution outside of the United States, but cd's ordered from a third party would have been paid for already). A heartfelt thank you to anybody who places an order.

PS - If you are unfamiliar with classical music but would like to get your toes wet,
send me a note, and I'll be glad to make some recommendations.

PPS - Many of the orchestral discs are audiophile caliber.
For selections suitable for more moderate systems, check the web site.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Subject: prE-pistle #24:  How I spent my Summer
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000

With school well under way, it's time I completed my 'how I spent my summer report'.
Moving on then......

Aberfeldy 17 yr Cadenhead and Glen Ord 23yr Rare Malts. Both of these were acquired two years ago, and both are around 60% ABV. The Aberfeldy was enjoyable right from the start. It shares a lot of the overall charachter with the Glenmorangie 10 yr, but adds apples, and a bit of spiciness. The Glen Ord was absolutely vile at first. Watered down considerably, it tasted EXACTLY like the Glenmorangie. I buried it on the back of my liquor cabinet, and only came across it last summer. Much improved. So I figured that a Highland HTH with the Aberfeldy was appropriate. Both benefited from a small splash of water. The Aberfeldy was pretty much as I remember it. A nice dram, and at cask strength, a decent value at the $70 I paid for it. But the GO did very well for itself too. The extra age shows, along with the slight gingeriness noted in the enclosed literature. I got this bottle in St. Thomas for $50, which turned out to be a good deal, but I doubt you'll do as well today. The are better bottles out there once you hit the $70-80 range, so shop carefully.

Bowmore 1975 20yr Signatory 53% and 15yr Glenhaven 57.7%. The Signatory was acuired at the same time as the Aberfeldy, and was an instant hit. The family resemblence is there, but the peat attack is reigned in, making it very pleasant during the summer. It was expensive at $85, and I doubt it is available anymore.
The Glenhaven isn't really a summer dram, but I needed something for a HTH, so it got the nod. People who's opinions I respect like it very much, but my bottle has a component that I can only describe as rubber. Strange, as it is otherwise quite decent.

Benrinnes 17yr Adelphi. Most tasting notes for this distillery say earthy, peaty, etc. This one is flowery, and light and fruity. One thing to be aware of, it comes in at 64.5% ABV. I didn't notice it the first time!!! A good value in the low $60's, and keep the water close by. No suitable candidte for a HTH in my collection.

And finally, the Bruichladdich round up. Last summer, I picked up the distillery 15 and Murray McDavid 11, and added the distillery 21 and Scott's Selelction 12, the latter two covered in the last prE-pistle. Getting the entire group together was something I looked
forward to. As happens sometimes, the results were not entirely as would have been expected. First, I did a HTH with the 15 and 21. The 15 didn't do so well. It had a somewhat watery body, with less flavor developement. The 21 had a nice viscosity, and showed it's age. But this is a bit unfair, especially given the $80 vs $45 price tags. The 15 is really more of a daytime, nice day malt. The 21 is for the evening, although summer whites rather than black tie. The Scott's Selection was as previously judged, the younger age is apparent, but a bit of the higher proof preserves the more expensive, older bottles. But the big surprise of the evening was the Murray McDavid. When first opened almost a year ago, it was just like water (I also hears this about the MMD Auchroisk). Eventually, a hint of smoke and the promised passion fruit emerged.
But they were finally came into bloom, albeit in a nice, delicate way. I would rate this ahead of the 15yr, and maybe two pints behind the 21, if I were doing ratings. Once again, Bruichladdich is seriously overlooked.

And finally, a quick overview of a few standard offerings that I like for the warmer weather:
Dalwhinnie - Lightly peated, with a touch of honey, and a very long finish. Sometimes thought of as feminine, but being an Islay snob isn't so great either.
Scapa 12 - The other malt from the orkney isles. Similar to Dalwhinnie to a point, but without the peat and some vanilla. It gets a bad rap from many as being not very complex, but it's fine for what it is. A good value in the low $30's.
Littlemill 8 - I picked this one up on new Year's Eve, a few years ago. The shelves were empty, and this bottle even had dust on it. A hint perhaps? Anyway, this is a somewhat bizzare malt. Grassy, with a touch of marshmallow(!). The finish lasted forever. But after a few sips, I really don't want to be drinking something that tastes like grass. A curiosity, but nothing beyond that.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #25:  4th Quarter Acquisitions
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000

This report covers some 4th quarter acquisitions. The main point was to fill a few gaps in my collection, and also pick up some recent offerings.

First off is the Bladnoch 16yr 1980 Signatory. It arrived just too late for my summer malt roundup, where it really belonged. This is the sister cask to the one Michael Jackson reviewed, and tastes about the same. I had wanted to get some Bladnoch for some time now, as the distillery had been mothballed. United Distillers actually agreed to sell the distillery, and you can read all about it at www.bladnoch.co.uk, but I still wanted to try some. I went for the Signatory over the more common G&M due to a slightly lower price and 43% ABV vs 40%. So, how does lemon sherbert work taste as whisky? Quite well actually. We had some really nice weather in October, with the temperatures approaching 70 (20C). A dram of Bladnoch outside was a real pleasure. My rating is in the mid-80's.

Next up was the Glenrothes 1987 12 year old. I missed the legendary 1979, as it was just a bit out of my price range ($42.95 rising to $49.95, that sounds funny given what I easily spend nowadays). The 1982 was a big disappointment, but The Malt Advocate (www.whiskeypages.com - click on Buyers Guide) loved this one. Good body, nice and rich flavors, with a touch of spiciness. A truly wonderful dram. It goes for about $50, but don't let the age get you. it's well worth the asking price, IMHO. I rate this one 89.

One bottle I really wanted to try was the Glen Scotia 14, since Johannes likes it, and I wanted to see how it compares with the younger Springbanks. By itself, the body was slightly oily in a good way, which combined nicely with some maltiness and a touch of salt on the palate. Compared to the new Springbank 10 (see below) however, it fell a bit short. The Springer had firmer body, and greater complexity. however, I noticed that Johannes puts the GS in the Spring (season) category. Well, the nice October was still around when I first opened the bottle, but it was already November when I did the HTH. So I do like the Glen Scotia, and will wait until Spring to get a better measure of it. Rating is 84, possibly subject to change.

So now on to the Springbank 10. This replaces the heavily sherried 12 year old, which I love. The sherry influence has metamorphasized into other things, leaving the wonderful creamy coconut and brine combination, which I find so addictive. The new 10 is gold, rather than amber, and has coconut, toffee, and a touch of salt. I suppose that it is more honest than the 12, but my heart is with the 12. Supplies are still good, so stock up now if you also like the 12, just like I'm doing. The 12 continues to earn it's 90 rating, but I give to 10 an 88.

Late breaking news: The Ardbeg 10 walked in the door just a few days ago. It's every bit as good as Craig says it is. Look for a complete write up in the next prE-pistle.

Louis.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #26 - Links
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001

Hello Johannes, here are some links.

D & M Wine and Liquors in San Francisco. Lots of private bottlings (with tasting notes!!!), most medium to expensive. Also two SMS clubs.
http://www.dandm.com
(800) 637-0292

Wine and Liquor Depot. Tons more stuff than on the page. No e-commerce, and ask for Howard when calling.
http://www.wine-and-liquor-depot.com
1-888-622-1414

Scotchfinder. Searches multiple e-commerce whisky sites. Lots of fun, and great to dig out something like the best price on an 17yr Cadenhead Talisker.
http://www.scotchfinder.com

Towne Spirits (in Rhode Island). No web site, but call 1-888-811-MALT.
Ask for Elliot, and get on the mailing list!!!!

And one private site; Doctor Entropy's House of Single Malt Whisky.
A site on the way up by someone I met at Ardbeggeddon 2.
http://www.smwhisky.com

Cheers.

Louis

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #27 - More 4th Quarter 2000 Pickups
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001

Here are the rest of my 4th quarter 2000 pickups:

Rosebank 10yr 1989 Signatory. Another gap filled in my Silent Stills collection. While Rosebank is usually referred to as charming or romantic, this one is lemony like my Signatory Bladnoch, but just a bit less so. As such, I'll save it for warmer weather, and it wasn't too expensive at $37.

Bunnahabain 20yr 1979 Murray McDavid. After Craig gave the Bunny some praise last year, I noticed this new Murray McDavid release on their website. While it's pretty much as advertised, it hasn't captured my fancy as of yet. I seem to need either a strong dose of peat or a moderate amount of sweetness, and this one falls in between. Still, my Murray McDavid Bruichladdich and Royal Brackla opened up after almost a year, the latter, just finished off, really acquiring a nice frutiy bloom. Maybe it's something
about those 'B' distilleries.

And finally, two Port Ellen's, a Port Ellen Hart Brothers 13yr 1982 43%, and the Port Ellen Scott's Selection 22yr 1976 57%. The 13yr is straw colored, with the typical dose of peat on the nose, It starts off deceptively mild, with perhaps even a touch of sweetnes in the peat. But then look out!! The beast rears up on it's hind legs and blows you away. Since this was terrific at 43%, I figured that things would be even better at cask strength, and acquired The Scott's Selection. And my intuition was absolutely correct. This thing kicks butt and everything else in it's path. Perfect for saving on the heating bill on those cold winter nights. My next personal objective for Malt Madness a Peat Monster Bash showdown between the Port Ellen's and my Laphroaig Cadenhead, and one mystery contestant. By the way, Port Ellen's are disappearing fast. If you are at all interested in some of the most lethal Islay's ever produced, buy now.

And now a couple of quick impressions. We were out somewhere where I wasn't counting on having any decent whisky, but was pleasantly suprised to find some Glen Garrioch 15 and the Glen Rothes 1982 16yr. Needless to say, i sampled both. The GG was smooth and pleasant, some sweet notes and a touch of smoke. Not very exciting though, and I wouldn't rate it more than 79 or 80. But the bottle was half empty/full (see below), so I don't want to pass final judgement just yet.

The Glen Rothes 1982 was another story. The only previous time I tried it was in a restaurant, and wasn't impressed. But when drinking out, there is no way of knowing how long the bottle has been sitting there. This bottle was opened that night, but it was very similar to the 1987 that I like so much, just a bit less good. I'll give it an 86, giving up 2 points for quality, and another for being 4 years older and the same price as the 1987, as long as the 1982 is still around.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #28 - Ardbeggeddon 2
Date:  Thu, 29 March 2001

The second annual Ardbegeddon festival took place at the Hard Rock hotel in Las Vegas, January 5-8 of this year. The idea for the first one came about that if the real Armageddon didn't take place at the stroke of midnight on 12/31/1999, might as well celebrate the distillery that also escaped that fate. The event was eminently successful, so A2 was held a year later.

The format was simple. Anybody is welcome.
All whisky was donated by the attendees, and even a few by those unable to make it. The official list is at:
http://members.tripod.com/house_of_malt/ardbeggeddon_II.htm
Those are not misprints, and even more bottles showed up!!

The event itself was an incredible experience. It was really great to meet people who I'd only met over the internet, and a bunch more who I met there. Everybody was super friendly, and every time I turned around, somebody was hawking a bottle they had brought. Not an unkind word was heard the entire time. And most notable, despite the large quantity of whisky consumed, the evening was a model of civility.

Here is the list of the whiskies that I sampled at A2. We were in Las Vegas for barely 36 hours, so tasting was not conducted in any sort of formal manner. For that reason, there are no ratings, but I substituted the star system instead. *** are reserved for my Top 5, ** for things that would have been had those 5 not been there, and * for generally distinguished malts. I would say though, that the Springbank 32 CS and Ardbeg Committee might well have achieved 100 ratings. A word on tasting order, there was none. While it is generally better to taste in ascending order of peatiness and/or intensity, I ended up trying pretty much each bottle as I stumbled across it.

Day 1, Midnight Saturday until whenever.

 1) Balvenie Classic *
An item of high interest, as it was mentioned in the malt Advocate's Cult Whisky article. Certainly better than the standard 10, 12, and 15 (my only experience with the 21PW was inconclusive). While I didn't find the sherry casking to be fully integrated, this may have been due to the bottle having just been opened. For the $70 that this bottle supposedly cost, I'd say it's a good value, especially considering the pride of ownership factor, but I wouldn't go much higher with any sort of budgetary constraints.
 2) Longrow 25 1974 ***
A much more robust edition of the 10yr Longrow, this stuff is awesome.
 3) Springbank 32 1977 Cadenhead Chairman's Stock ***
Put simply, the best Springbank I've ever had. Nothing more to say.
 4) Springbank 40
The Malt Advocate let the cat out of bag here, saving me having to do it. Let's just say that it is now a window in time, back to what was a truly great whisky 5-10 years ago.
 5) Springbank 24 **
Just a wee bit behind the 32 above.
 5) Springbank 27 1969 Signatory **
Ditto.
 6) Mortlach 12 (mid 80's, first US distillery bottling)
This was my first exposure to any Mortlach, so I wasn't sure what to expect. Very pale, and light in body and taste. Slightly dry, with just a whiff of smoke. Interesting, but can see why Mortlach is usually sherry casked.
 7) Ardmore 18
Of interest because it got mentioned in Jim Murrays MA article on blends as bring the smoke and kippery element in Teachers. I could see that here, but nothing special otherwise.
 9) Springbank Local Barley *
A very definite resemblence to my other bourbon-casked Springers, the new distilley 10, and the 32 year old Plowed Murray McDavid. Unfortunately, the cask strength worked against me here, as it was almost 4:00 AM NYC time, so I didn't get a better impression.
10) Springbank 15 *
Somebody pointed to this bottle for some reason, which I've long since forgotten.
11) Mortlach 1961 Scott's Selection
Similar in charactor to the 12 above, but a bit more robust.
### Late flash, the malt Advocate reviwed it in the 1Q 2001 issue, and I see my own observations in their write up. So I wasn't doing so bad under the circumstances after all ###
12) Glenfarclas 1971 Christmas **
Incredibly good stuff, and similar in charactor to my 1959 Whyte and Whyte (but a bit different than the Dram Select 21)
13) Longmorn-Glenlevet 1970 Scott's Selection ***
What a dram to end the night with. Everything one would want from a classic sherried Speyside, IMHO.

Day 2, Sunday 7:00-10:30 PM

14) Balvenie Classic *
Tried it again, just to be sure. Same results as the night before.
15) Ardbeg Provenance **
Ah, now here is a winner. Cask strength provides a welcome kick. A bit laid back, as seems to be the case with the older Ardbegs. Would have gotten the third *, but got edged out of my Top 5 by the.....
16) Ardbeg Committee ***
A single cask picked by, you guessed it, a committe at the distillery, and sold only in the distillery shop (and long gone, by now). Amazingly, at 40% it actually topped the Provenance.
17) Brora 18
Another Malt Advocate cult item. I can see the overall charactor, but this particular bottling isn't quite cult-worthy.
18) Brora 1975 Rare Malts *
OK, now we're getting somewhere. But this bottle probably needed break-in and/or water, and I didn't have time to experiment.
19) Highland Park 1974 *
My 1977 really needs higher proof, and the 1974 confirmed that. But following 2 Ardbegs and 2 Brora's, I wasn't able to be any more conclusive.
20) Glenlivet 22 1973 Signatory *
'Craig's Glenlivet', as it was being referred to.
My notes say: tasted a bit Springbank-ish.
21) Glen Grant Millenial 1964 36 Cadenhead
22) Bunnahabain 21 1969 Whyte & Whyte
For both of these 2 sherry monsters, the cask and it's previous contents by far overwhelemed anything left of the whisky's character. Whether this is good or not is strictly a matter of taste.
23) Lochside 18 1981 Murray McDavid
Pretty much as advertised on Murray McDavid's website.
24) Royal Brackla 24 Murray McDavid
As above. A bit drier than my MMcD RB 17 was.
25) Longmore Adelphi 30 1969 Adelphi (port wood) *
Quite good, but at cask strength, I couldn't discern too much. Pretty much what could be expected of a typical 'mere mortal' $150 bottle.
26) Glen Rothes 1972 %%incomplete%%
Supposedly the best Glen Rothes ever, and the few remaining bottles are highly sought after. Unfortunately, my taste buds registered absolutely nothing. Darn.
27) Benromach 27 1965 Murray McDavid (portwood, 53%)
Same as #21 & 22 above. This is said to be Murray Mcdavid's first release ever.
28) Highland Park 27 1972 Adelphi *
See #25 above.
29) Tactical (Talisker) 20 Old Malt Cask **
A real surprise here, not at all like the distillery 10. Tons of peat, and very warming, but in a pleasant way. I would have thought it was an Islay.
30) Brora 28 1971 Old Malt Cask ***
At last, the real deal. Those Douglas Laing folks sure know how to bottle whisky.
31) Cambus (single grain) 31 Cadenhead *
Something totally different, Pina-Colada being the overall theme. Lot's of fun, if nothing else.
32) Brora 18 1981 Old Malt Cask **
If I hadn't had the OMC 28 Brora first, I probably would have thought that this one is 'good enough'.
33) Aberlour Abunadh %%incomplete%%
Same problem as with the Glen Rothes 1972 above, but at least I can buy this one.
34) Clynelish 22 Rare Malts *
One perhaps wouldn't have thought the somewhat light Clynelish would stand up to extra aging, but that wasn't the case. This once was similar to my 13yr Glenhaven, but more robust. One of the Rare Malt's worth looking out for.
35) Port Ellen 22 Hart Brothers *
My Hart Brothers Port Ellen 13 is quite intense, and my Scott's Selection 22 is extremely intense at cask strength, so the HB 22 at 43% should split the difference, right? Of course not. It was actually rather mellow, and more civilized.
36) Bowmore 30 Sea Dragon **
Another mellow Islay, but an incredibly good Bowmore. Worth the $200 if you're shopping in that price range, and you get the fancy ceramic bottle with the Sea Dragon design. Not a whiff of FWP.
37) Ardbeg 30 G&M
The G&M 1974 22yr was the standard in the USA for a few years. The 30yr was also available, but commanded a 'hefty' $120 price tag. However, the 30 seems to have lost something during the extra 8 years in the cask.
38) Very Old Ardbeg 30 **
Not this one though. A bit mellow, but plenty of Ardbeg charactor. ## Note on ratings, I'd put this at the bottom of the ** bracket, and the Provenance at the top ##
39) Longhrow 28 1974 ***
40) Springbank 32 1977 Cadenhead Chairman's Stock ***
41) Longmorn-Glenlevet 1970 Scott's Selection ***
My decision to re-sample my favorites on the way out (the Ardbeg Committe was finished).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #29 - Winter Peat Monster Bash
Date:  Mon, 21 May 2001

When the cold weather is around, there is nothing like a good dose of peat for internal central heating. Now I don't mind cold and snow, just dress properly. But it's those days when it's just above freezing, damp and rainy and throw in some bone chilling wind, that demand an exra blast of warmth. Under those circumstances, the standard Islay's aren't enough.
That's when it's time to break out the Peat Monsters.
As the Battlebot season was up to the championship rounds, I was into weight classes, so the Peat Monster finalists competed in the light heavyweight, heavyweight, and super heavyweight classes (Battlebots are fighting robots, check them out at www.battlebots.com, Extra Cool).

A couple of disclaimers before going any further.
First, the contestants were selected from my stock on hand, and are not necessarily representative of what is commercially available today, or back in Junuary for that matter. If you've got a worthy entry of your own, please do let me know. Second, although Battlebots does not have a light heavy weight division, I added one here to preserve two degrees of separation below the whiskies discussed here. I would put the likes of the current Ardbeg 10, Laphroaig 15, and Bowmore Mariner in the middle weight class, still leaving room below.
And finally, the purpose of this comparison is to focus on the aggressive character of the malts, with regard to peat, smoke, tar, etc. Something like Lagavulin probably rates higher than any of the contestants and is certainly better balanced, but Malt Madness did ratings already. Now it's time for fun!!

So without any further ado.......

Light Heavyweights: The Port Ellen 13yr/1982 Hart Brothers at 43% ABV vs the Murray McDavid Laphroaig 9yr/1987 at 46% ABV. The Port Ellen does an amazing job at just 43%. As I mentioned in an earlier prE-pistle, it starts out with just a moment of calm, and then explodes on the tongue. This Laphroaig is the last Murray McDavid bottling prior to the Leapfrog designation, but I am not aware of any major change in character across the various bottlings. There is an initial explosion of peat, followed by an even stronger volcanic eruption. However, Murray McDavids are very refined, and this one is no exception. While the pyrotechnics are impressive, they are still sort of like seeing them on a large screen TV set, as opposed to real life. That's why the MMcD can't get beyond the light heavyweight class, IMHO. As for availability, the world supply of Port Ellen is dwindling rapidly, and the HB 13 is probaly sold out by now. But I would definitely advise any Islay lover to keep a Murray McDavid Laphroaig in the cabinet. This match is a draw.

The heavyweight finals reminded me of the Biohazard vs Vlad the Impaler finals, but with the opposite result. Here we have a private bottling of a 9 year old Ardbeg , distilled in 1991 and bottled at 53.8% and the distillery Cask Strength Laphroaig. It's available in the US, but I took home a 50ml souveneir from A2 back in January. The Ardbeg uses its high proof to good advantage, effortlessly propelling home the basic (recent) Ardbeg character. The Laphroaig on the other hand, has a full frontal attack. The body is slightly coarse, which works to its advantage here. I am going to declare the Cask Strength the winner here.
Maybe the CS is nothing more than an undiluted standard 10yr, but so what. More important, the usual price in Europe is about half of what I paid for the Ardbeg, which was just a single cask. Let's hear it for value.

And finally, the main event, the Super Heavyweights.
The finalists here are the Port Ellen Scott's Selection 22yr/1976 at 57% ABV, and the Laphroaig Cadenhead 12yr/1984 at 58.9% ABV. The Port Ellen act's like a true heavyweight. It retains all of its aggressiveness, unlike pretty much all of the older Islay's I sampled in Las Vegas. The high proof is put to good use, without being overtly 'spirity'. I would have put my money on this one, except that the Laphroaig went even further. It throws around great swirls of peat and iodine with wild abandon. The overall character is more similar to the 15 than the 10, but that's just an aside. So there you have it, the Ultimate Peat Monster. One small problem though, availability for either contestant is near zero, but if you're a die hard Islay fan, the reward will be well worth the effort if you can get you hands on either or both of them.

One closing thought.
Laphroaig went 2-0-1 in 3 matches. I also acquired a Blackadder 12yr bottling, but too late for the competition, so I'm saving it for the fall. Also worth getting is the Douglas Laing Old Malt Cask Laudable, which Klaus has been lucky enough to sample. Keep in mind that Laphroaig is not a big fan of private bottling, so be prepared to grab them when you get the chance.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #30 - MM Inter-continental tasting event
Date:  Thu, 12 Jul 2001

Last night, I had the honor of having Roman Parparov over for the first ever malt Madness Inter-continental tasting event. The evening got under way shortly after 7:30 PM. I am going to let Roman provide the commentary, and I'll just list the malts that we sampled.

To get things going, I started with a Bruichladdich round-up, which included the distillery 15 & 21, and the Murray McDavid 11. Bruichladdich is generally not what most people try early in their SMS life, and it seemed like a good choice to lead off, since it would be obliterated by the heavier malts that were going to be sampled later.

Next up were the Isle of Arran and Glenmorangie Cellar 13 (which someone just brought me back from England). The former was in front of the Bruichladdich's in my cabinet, and I figured that I might as well leave it out. Roman mentined to me that he had recently sampled the GM 10, 12PW and 18, so the Cellar 13 was a natural choice.

Having coverd the lighter fare, we hit the Springbanks. First the new distillery 10 and my favorite 12 year old (not being bottled anymore, but still a good supply available). I couldn't resit having some fun, and brought out the 12/100 Double Dark. This was the hit of the evening, even if I am violating my self imposed editorial blackout by saying so. And to finish up this round, the Scott Selelction Longmorn 1970/30yr (57.1% ABV). Since Roman wanted to end the evening with Ardbeg, we took a break for a while. I got on the the internet and showed him the Ardbegddon pictures (on www.single-malt.com and go to the Events page). Then we discussed a wide range of important topics that included sports, (smoking) pipes, robots, music, chess, and probably other things.

And finally, it was time for the Ardbegs. There was specific interest in the distillery 17, but I couldn't leave well enough alone, so I brought out the Signatory 8 as well. And to close the evening out, the Old malt Cask 1973/27.

It was getting close to midnight, so things came to an end. It was a wonderful night, and also many thanks to my wife Shari for preparing dinner and cleaning up afterwards, while all of this was going on.

Cheers.

Louis

Comment by Johannes: Jolly good show! I'm not quite sure that this was the very first inter-continental tasting session of the Malt Madness Team, though. Although I agree Australia hardly counts as a 'proper' continent, Craig would propably argue otherwise. And in that case, the session we had in Amsterdam on August 28 1998 would be the first ever inter-continental tasting. Anyway - I hope many more will follow.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #31 - A trip to Speyside thru rose colored glasses
Date:  Sun, 9 Sep 2001

Alright, it's the whisky that's red, not the glass.
But after a few drams, it doesn't really matter.

One of my first bottles of 'real' SMS was a duty free bottle of Macallan 18 that my sister brought me back from St. Martin. While I couldn't deny it was a quality malt, indeed I rated it 90, I still found it overly rich, and ultimately came to prefer the 12. From that point onward, heavily sherried became synonymous in my mind to extra syrupy, and I went on to develop my appreciation for Islays and Springbank.

It's hard though to overlook a significant sector of the SMS world, and at Ardbegeddon 2 last January, I was fortunate to have sampled some excellent examples. So upon returning, one of the objectives of my next few purchases was to fill in the Speyside gaps in my SMS collection. Thus, I came up with the following group of whiskies:

Signatory Glenlivet 1973/22 yr. 56%, and
Braes of Glenlivet 1979/16 yr. 60.4%.

First a consumer advisory for both of these Signatories.
Michael Jackson has entries for the same distillery, bottler, year, and age. Both sound like upscale versions of the standard Glenlivet style, which is what originally caught my interest. But the alcohol contest is slightly different, and so is the color. Craig tipped me off about the Glenlivet, but I only found out about the Braes when I had the bottle in hand. Not that it matters much, because both are quite wonderful.

It only took one sip to see why Craig is so fond of the Glenlivet. At first, I couldn't figure out exactly what was so wonderful, but after a couple of months, the underlying Glenlivet character became apparent. It is fine without water, and an excellent value at  around $80. No need to feel sorry for yourself if that's the upper limit of your price range. The Braes of Glenlivet tastes exactly like a turbocharged Macallan 12, which is just fine with me. Also a good value at $65. Both of these bottles seem to still be available in the US, and are still listed on the D&M site (www.dandm.com).

Aberlour Abunadh

Aberlour is a very SMS-lover friendly distillery.
First of all, their standard bottlings are very reasonably priced, be it the 10, 15 or 21 year olds. The Aberlour web site freely discloses the nature of each expression, no mystery vattings here. There are also all sorts of duty free only bottlings, which allow you to one-up your local drinking buddies when you manage to get hold of them. And finally, there is the Abunadh. Vatted of 10-12 year old whiskies, at cask strength, not chill filtered, and sold in an old style bottle sealed with wax instead of chintzy tin foil. If the Abunadh sold for $100 and was only available in Scotland, whisky lovers would be jumping thru hoops of fire to get hold of some. But instead, the street price is in the $55-65 range, and it can be easily found in any well stocked neighborhood liquor store.

The Abunadh represents a change in Aberlour's taste profile. Past offerings were light-medium bodied, with a slightly spice underpinning. For the Abunadh, there is more red berries (Michael Jackson says cherries, but that's close enough). It took me a while to lock in on the Abunadh, and it turned out that the exact amount of water is critical, at least for my tastes.

At full strength, the high proof is overpowering, but with too much water, it becomes rather ordinary. This is still rather young whisky, after all. By using a precision scientific instrument, the plastic measuring cup from a bottle of cold medicine, I was able to determine that 1 part water to 5 parts whisky was the magic formula. Anyway, this is great stuff, and belongs in every whisky lover's working set of malts. Also, it has displaced the Signatory Ardbeg 8 as my favorite nightcap for the summer.

Blackadder Mortlach 1990/10 years old, 59.5% ABV

Back in Las Vegas, I got to try Mortlach for the first time. Both of the expressions were bourbon casked, and I surmised that the usual sherry casking would be for good purpose, to fill out the slightly dry and lightly smokey profile. The usual G&M bottlings are only bottled at 40% and not that cheap, so they never made it too far up on my want list. But when this one appeared in the group of Blackadders (www.rawcask.com) released in the US back in the spring, I had my chance to find out for myself. The cask strength was $54 vs $42 for the 43%, so it was a good value as well.

As it turned out, my intuition was correct. Consider a painting of a tree on a blank canvas, and then fill in the field and the sky, and that's the general idea.
Some water was needed, but the amount was nowhere as critical as with the Abuhadh. Although I detect a slight lack of complexity, the consistency of character among the three bottlings from three different decades is amazing.

Macallan 15

The Mac 18 is very popular among the Wall Street crowd (except for the really big  spenders, who go for the 25) as well being the single malt standard for non-SMS scotch drinkers. So it was hardly a surprise that the priced was raised by a good 50% or so, from around $50 to $75-80 a couple of years ago. To fill the gap between the 12 and the price-gouged 18, the new 15 was introduced, and it typically sells in the low-forties range. And when the folks at Remy Amerique sent me a $5 rebate offer on any Macallan, I decided to try the 15, seeing as the 1946 needed a slightly larger rebate than $5 to fit into my budget.

The 15 started out OK. There was the typical Macallan nose, and also taste, on the tip of my tongue. But then it became watery, and slid down my throat pretty much like water.  Tried a second sip, same result. Worse yet, I went back to the Mortlach (the intent was to produce an M&M prE-pistle).
This was a total disaster for the Mac. Very similar to what happened to Slam Job when it went up against Nightmare in the match that opened the Battlebots Season 3.
(Check it out at http://www.robotcombat.com/nightmare_sf01.html)
Just to be sure, I asked my wife for a second opinion. She took a sip of each, pointed to the Mac, and said something to the effect of 'get that stuff out of here'!!

Then it hit me. Although I prefer drinking at higher proof than 43%, that alone could not account for the differences I was observing, witness the Abuhadh above. But Blackadder makes it very clear that they don't chill filter their offerings. Could that be the reason?

Further research was clearly called for. After allowing plenty of time for break-in, which did nothing to change the previous results, I dug out my bottle on Mac 12. The 12 is one of my all time favorites, and quite possibly the best all around single malt, IMHO. This was something I was going to do eventually, but the need became rather imperative. As it turned out, the 15 was almost identical to the 12. No more than a few minor, inconsequential differences, although the 15 remained a bit watery.
Then I tried the Mortlach, but this time watered down to around 43%. Ah hah, things were different now. At 43%, the Mortlach's lighter character returned, and I actually slightly preferred the Mac, either one.

So it comes down to both strength and filtration, or the lack of it thereof. When the Mortlach had both factors in its favor, it was the clear winner, and by a rather large margin. True, this is an oranges vs apples comparison, but both bottles are in the same price range when adjusted for ABV, so I think that the comparison is a fair one. And I'm going with the Mortlach orange over the Macallan apple. The 15 is hardly a bad whisky, but I can't see paying nearly 50% more than the 12. BTW, I'd love to see if even Craig's advanced prowess in blind tasting could reliably differentiate between two. Meanwhile, I'm going to keep my eye out for an older Mortlach for my next round of acquisitions. As for rating, the 15 gets the same 86 as the 12. WRT chill filtering, another similar experience is responsible for a a standalone prE-pistle on the subject.

Longmorn Scott's Selection 1970/30yr 57.1% ABV.

As I was heading back to my room on Saturday night in Las Vegas, a good friend insisted that I try this Longmorn. It didn't take much convincing, and boy am I glad that I accepted. Since this is the only one of my Top 5 that I had any chance of acquiring, I bit the budgetary bullet and managed to snag a bottle.

Even the packaging is impressive. A vinyl leatherette box, with a plastic glass window, and silk polyester lining. I remarked to my wife that it would make a nice casket once the whisky is finished!!

The whisky is as dark as cola. It has a nice rich nose, and a voluptuous body. Water isn't necessary, and indeed, the whisky is somewhat fragile at this age. The cask and it's previous contents are very much in evidence, but there is still some distillery character present. Unless you are allergic to this type of whisky, any complaints are like saying that a cashmere sweater is too soft. If you've got enough cash to treat yourself at the end of the year, something like this is the perfect way to go.

As for price and availability, I paid $125 for my bottle, but it was the last one in the store. D&M still has it for $133, but they probably don't have too many left, as several other stores that once carried it are long sold out. Also available for the time being are older Longmorn's from Vintage Hallmark of St. James and Signatory. The former is from of line of offerings selected by writer Wallace Milroy. One Signatory I've seen is 24 years old, so it should have more of the original character, and cost a bit less as well.

This concludes what has been the longest project in my Malt Madness career. When I started back in February, I didn't quite figure that it would take a full seven months. But I really wanted to get everything right, so I went back and double checked previous impressions as often as necessary. After all, the journalistic integrity of Malt Madness must be upheld.

Anyway, by now it's not too early to start thinking about your holiday shopping. All of the bottles mentioned are still available in the US, so if something strikes your fancy, might as well pick it up now than be shut out in a month or two, as there may only be a few bottles left of some of them.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #32 - How I Spent This Past Summer
Date:  Tue, 25 Sep 2001

For the last two summers, I have been enjoying a number of Bruichladdich expressions, including the distillery 15 and 21 year olds. I hadn't bothered with the 10, since it didn't gather too much praise anywhere, and its price is between the Macallan 12 and Lagavulin. So when the Blackadder Bruichladdich 7 appeared back in the spring, I decided to give it a chance. What a delightful malt! It's very lightly peated, with just a touch of salt. A perfect summer dram, just like being on the beach when it's not too hot.

Back in June, the planets must have been properly aligned and the gods in a good mood, because I finally found someone who was willing to bring me back some duty free whisky from England. My co-worker was only passing thru London on the way to and from Russia so I couldn't place a Loch Fyne order, but I gave him a list of things that are not available in the US, and he brought back a bottle each of Glenmorangie Cellar 13 and Traditional, and Laphroaig Cask Strength.

The Glenmorangie Cellar 13 was excellent from the first sip. Clearly an improved GM 10, with a pleasant background of pineapple. The Glenmorangie Traditional, bottled at 57.% with no chill filtering, had a nice oiliness with a little bit of water, but less flavor development and no pineapple. But after two months of break-in, it improved dramatically. It now had pretty much exactly the same flavor profile as the Cellar 13. The oiliness wasn't very pronounced, but the body had a nice firmness, appreciably more than the Cellar 13. For ratings, I'll agree with Michael Jackson on both of them, 81 for the Cellar 13, and 83 for the Traditional. But the best part was what I ended up paying for these bottles. The total tab for all three was 97 Pounds, which American Express converted to $140. But these were liter bottles, so the prices must be normalized down 750ml. The Traditional was a bit more expensive than the other two, but I ended up spending $30.45, $41.33, and $32.63 respectively.
Talk about value!!!

One last thing, the Cellar 13 and Bruichladdich quickly become my two favorite general purpose summer drams.

- - - - -

A word about short term plans.
My cabinet had about 70 open bottles at the beginning of the summer, way too many. There is no question that whisky can change its character if the bottle is opened frequently, or if left for too long less than half full. While not every one of those bottles had suffered with time, enough of them have. Also, my main cabinet was full, spilling over into two annexes, and that doesn't count bottles kept as stock. My wife even has this silly notion that our good china belongs in the breakfront, while I maintain that if it stays in the boxes, our kids won't be able to break any of it.

And finally, the demands of parenthood and home ownership do not allow me to accumulate whisky at the rate I was doing in 1998 and 1999. Those were my SMS formative years, and I don't need to sample 30 new expressions each year, if it means purchasing entire bottles. My current goal is first to drink down about 20 or so older bottles, and then to replace them strategically. If I have two or more of the same type of whisky (i.e. age, style), I will only pick up one to replace the group. I'll try to time things so the replacement will overlap the older one in the best shape, to allow for proper research. This applies at all price levels. There are still enough interesting bottles I have my eye on, so the self discipline shouldn't induce too much hardship. We'll see how things work out in practice, but it's not very smart to spend a lot of money on stuff if I'm not going to get to enjoy the entire bottle.

- - -

And now for some ratings.
I was fortunate enough to be invited to two parties, two weeks apart, in the same place, where the caterer understands what decent whisky is. So I got to try a few new whiskys, and I took the time to rate some of my other gaps in the MMM from my own collection. So from the former group:

Glenlivet 12 French Oak - An improved version of the standard GL 12, and it gets an 82. I would definitely keep a bottle around, and not worry about snobbishness (Glenlivet?!? I thought you had the good stuff. No, no. This is the French Oak version, costs much more. Oh, I see, much better indeed).

Knockando 15, 1979 - The first time, it tasted like a typical Highland, with a does of sherry on the side, but in a pleasant way. The bottle had just been opened, but two weeks later it was much improved. I give it an 83. One problem with rating Knockando's, they release each batch when they think it is ready, rather than bottle at set ages. This one represents the second from the bottom of what is usually available.

Johnny Walker 15 Green, Pure Malt - Stakes out the middle ground between the sweeter JW Gold 15 year, and the more intense 12 year old Black Label. While good for a blend, I still preferred the Balvenie 10 which was on hand for comparison, so I rate the Green a point less at 79. For about the same money, my limited experience with the better JW's points to the Gold when you need something to impress blend loving friends.

Chivas Regal Century of Malts - The bottle was a bit less than half empty, so I have no idea how long it was sitting around. I wasn't very impressed, as there seemed to be the often made observation of too many components fighting for attention. Rating is 73.

And from my own cabinet:

Dalmore 12 - Downgraded one point to 78, since I think that there are two points separating it from the Balvenie 10.

Aberlour Abunadh - Forgot to put the rating in my Speyside report, 88 it is.

Ardbeg 10 - For a while, I thought it would make it into the low nineties, but I'm going with an even 90. While definitely more complex that the Signatory 8 which I rated 88, the 10 seems to have room for a bit more maturity, IMHO. The Sig 8 is a one trick pony, but its the kind of trick you can keep on watching over and over again. The 10, it seems to me, is caught between the unbridled enthusiasm of the 8, and the wonderful complexity and pedigree of the older Ardbegs. My rating is the same as for the Springbank 12, which is my absolute favorite for the time being. Others will disagree, so my 90 lets me go either way. Meanwhile, in just another year, there should be a 12 year old Ardbeg, assuming that there was sufficient stock to allow withholding enough for a second release.

Balvenie 15 - I still prefer the 10, but I'll rate the 15 82.

Glenfarclas 21 - It's the Dram Select 21, but is said to be identical to the distillery 21. 88 is the number.

Isle of Arran - A lot of excitement when it was introduced, but can't be more than 5 years old. OK at 79, we'll have to see what happens in a few years.

Ledaig 15 - Dug it out from the back of my cabinet a few months ago. Nice malty sweetness, with a touch of island salt. Not that easy to find, but still out there, since not too many people know about it. Gets an 80.

Macallan 15 - 86 as per Speyside prE-pistle.

Old Pulteney 12 - This is the bottle that has been sitting at my parents house for a while, pleasant enough, but nothing inspiring, so 79 it is.

Scapa 12 - A past summer favorite, with a nice combination of vanilla and a touch of honey, and maybe a hint of peat. Rating 79.

Tomatin 10 or 12 (can't remember) - A previous budget favorite, as long as I didn't have it too often. Rating 78, same as the Dalmore 12, to which the same caution applies.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #33 - How I Spent This Past Summer
Date:  Thu, 25 Oct 2001

Hello Everybody,

We've had some really quirky weather over the last two weeks, with temperatures ranging from the high forties to the mid seventies (6-25c). So I've been sampling a strange cross section of malts, the highlights being:

Glen Scotia 14 and Bladnoch 16 Signatory on the nicer days. The latter is really a very pleasant nice day-daytime dram. Worth picking up if the price in the high forties isn't off your value scale.

Caol Ila Signatory 1990 9yr 43% and Caol Ila 1976 19yr 56.7%.
It wasn't cold enough for the Ardbegs or Laphroaigs, and the CI's are just perfect for the cool, as opposed to cold, weather. A bit less instense than the Bowmore Mariner, so my wife enjoyed them too, under the circumstances.

Springbank Murray McDavid 1989 9yr and Longrow 10, both 46%ABV and bourbon casked. Somewhat of an odd couple here, but they turned out to be a nice pairing. The Springer is much lighter bodied than the various 12 year olds, and was always overwhelmed in HTH's. But it has a nice dose of fruit along with the Campbletown brine nicely of the background. The Longrow had it's 15 minutes in the sun in my whisky world right when Johannes solicited the Top 3 e-ssignment, and it made my #2. Since than, I have been a bit less enamored with it, due in no small part to discovering that there is a >100% markup crossing the Atlantic, far more than for Springbanks (it is a great $50 bottle, IMHO). But on a cool night, the peat was more pronounced, which was certainly welcome. For whatever reason, I really enjoyed this pair.

That's it for now.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #34 - Chill Filtering
Date:  Thu, 22 Nov 2001

Sometimes, you hear something that makes a lot of sense, so you file it away and go on with life. But then one day, it jump up and bites you in the nose, and then you say 'Oh, that's what it is'. And that was pretty much how I had not one, but two, jarring encounters with chill filtering.

For the uninitiated, chill filtering is when whisky is cooled down to around freezing (for water that is, as alcohol doesn't freeze), at which point the whisky becomes cloudy. Then, those horrible oils are filtered out, leaving the whisky pure and transparent. This process is necessary because the average consumer would never purchase a bottle that looked cloudy in the store, and would return a bottle that clouded up once at home. Purity is next to godliness, or something like that.

The only problem is, that those dreaded cloudiness-producing oils have an awful lot of flavor in them. Of course, flavor means character, and that can also be challenging to the average consumer. After all, he/she might actually not like a whisky with one flavor profile instead of another, and wouldn't buy any more.
Better to offer a dumb-ed down product, and let the advertising department convince the public that this is what whisky is 'supposed to taste like'. For years, this is exactly what the standard Glenfiddich was, although the distillery seems to be making a better effort nowadays with their current product line.

The problem with realizing the effects of chill filtering is that it is all but impossible to do with/without comparisons. You just can't purchase malts from your favorite distillery in both versions.
Sometimes independent bottlings can be found at an age that the distillery offers, but it will likely be of a single cask, while the distillery offerings are vatted from hundreds or thousands of casks, often combining bourbon and sherry casks, and often with some whisky older than the age statement. But in the case of the Blackadder Morltach 10 and Macallan 15 HTH that I conducted in my Speyside prE-pistle, I was able to eliminate other factors, realizing that it was chill filtering that was responsible for the great disparity between the perceived differences between the two whiskies.

Now if this had been a one time occurrence, I may not have come to this conclusion. But when lighting struck a second time, I knew that I was onto something. This time is was with my assortment of Bruichladdich bottlings. Last summer, I concluded that there was too much of a gap between the distillery 15, and the Murray McDavid 11 and distillery 21 to include the 15 the vertical tastings with the other two. Also last summer, I had just opened my Scott's Selection 1986 12 year old, which was OK, but not beyond that. Well, I never got to the Scott's Selection a second time last year, but took it out this year to replace the 15, as I like the idea of 'three's company' for my prime time dramming.

And what a difference a year made (although I'll never know exactly when it did break in, my guess is 1-2 months based on past experience). The SS had a nice dose of fruit on both the nose and palate, over a slightly salty underpinning. What a marvelous summer dram, and it absolutely blew away the distillery 21, which seemed a bit lifeless. Given that observation, the Murray McDavid seemed closer to the SS than the 21, even though I rated the 21 two points higher a year ago. But when I went back to last year's lineup, the 15 now seemed like an appropriate partner for the 21.

The bottom line, it seems to me, is that un-chill filtered and filtered scotch whisky can/should almost be regarded as being as different from each other as they are to bourbon or Irish whiskey. OK, maybe an exaggeration, but not by much. Yes, I have enjoyed many fine distillery bottles that are chill filtered, but most my great SMS moments were with private bottles that were not.  This might also explain why I have enjoyed many private bottlings from distilleries that Michael Jackson does not rate well in general.

The good news is, that we may be seeing more distilleries offering non-chill filtered whisky. And that also means bottling at 46% ABV, since that is lowest percentage that the whisky will not automatically cloud up at. All future Ardbeg's will be offered as such, and perhaps parent company Glenmorangie will be equally inspired. So too for the new Bruichladdich line, as the Murray McDavid influence is very much in evidence. In fact, somewhere on the Bruichladdich website is a quote (although I can't seem to find it, right now) from one of the distillery veterans that he couldn't believe how much of the taste was being lost as a result of the filtration!!

Enough said.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #35 - Laphroaig JOLT Follow-Up
Date:  Sat, 29 Dec 2001

While the Blackadder 12 got the short shift in my part of the Laphroaig JOLT, I didn't think it was fair to judge a brand new bottle solely on a larger comparison. So I have sampled it again a few times since, and come up with a totally different impression. The only thing I can hold against the Blackadder is that it is somewhat dissimilar to the distillery 10 and CS. Taken by itself, it is quite an enjoyable dram.

What is missing is the total frontal attack, and any of the tar. There is initial calm, and then the peat takes over. Nice and warming. It seems closer to Ardbeg than Laphroaig, IMHO. In a second comparison to the Murray McDavid, and also the Ardbeg 10, the Blackadder was the winner. I do believe that both of those have faded a bit, even thought my Ardbeg 10 is barely a year old (my just finished Ardbeg Signatory 8 was alive and kicking down to the last dram, but the 10 has been uneven from when I opened the bottle).

So if you have a chance to pick up the Blackadder 12, it gets my recommendation, as long as you don't mind if it doesn't have much family resemblance with the standard distillery bottlings.

Comment by Johannes:  My experiences with the Douglas Laing OMC Laphroaig 15 yrs. 1985 50% are very similar. It seemed a little lost between the big ODB's but tasted in neutral surroundings it performed very well indeed.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

prE-pistle #36 - Ratings Explanation
Date:  Sun, 30 Dec 2001

My ratings scale is similar to Michael Jackson's, but my criteria differ a bit. I treat the scores as thought they are grades in school, at least without grade inflation that often occurs nowadays. With that in mind, 96-100 is reserved for the truly magnificent malts. 80-95 are the merely excellent. 85-89 are quite good, with nothing to be embarrased about. 80-84 are better than average. And 75-79 are decent, but with a flaw or two, or perhaps the dreaded 'one dimensional' designation.

There a couple of considerations that either help or hurt the ratings. Although price isn't supposed to be a factor, an overachieving malt is likely to pick up a point or two (i.e. the Macallan 12). Also a malt that works well only in warmer or colder weather will lose a point or two. The better Islay's are exempt, after all, it doesn't get that hot in Scotland in the summer. While I haven't kept a rating log over the years, I plugged in certain malts at various ratings levels, and filled in the rest based on how I liked them more or less relative to the first group. Still, I haven't had a number of the 'standards' in quite a while, so there are a few noticeable omissions is my submitted numbers. With that in mind, here are my thoughts on some of my key rated malts.

Springbank 21. This one got my 'favorite malt' designation so it got my highest rating, 95. That leaves room for things like the 1959 Whyte and Whyte Glenfarclas, not to mention the older Springbanks.

Lagavulin 16. There are two notches between it and the Springbank 21, IMHO. So that means that I like Lagavulin just a tiny bit less than Johannes, but I have gone thru more bottles of it than any other malt. The DE gets downgraded by 2 points, since I don't feel that the loss of Islay intensity is necessarily a plus, especially when it involves doubling the price.

Highland Park 1977, 18, 12. The 1977 is a good bit better than the 18, but it really needs to be bottled at higher proof. So it falls below Lagavulin, but I doubt that I would rate it even with the Springbank 21 even if both were bottled at 46% (the 1977 at 50% might be another story). The 12, and to a lesser extent the 18, were highly variable. One time it would be spectacular, but was missing something the next time. The time afterwards the magic was back, and so it went. So the 12 gets 3 fewer points than the 18.

Bowmore has a soft spot in my heart, since the 12 was my first 'real' SMS. I really like the Darkest, even though Klaus doesn't, and the Mariner is also a favorite of mine. These are good examples of malts that don't need to be ashamed of a rating 'only' in the high eighties. The one Bowmore I didn't care for was the cask strength. At about the same price as the 12 (at the time), it was a bit coarse. A fair tradeoff, but the bottle got worse quickly, becoming totally undrinkable after a year or so. I saw another report of this happening, so beware, or finish off your bottle quickly!!

At 80 points are two of my all time general purpose malts, the Balvenie and Glenmorangie 10's. Perfect for company. Just a bit better in my estimation is Dalwhinnie. A gentle malt, honeyed and lightly peated, with a very long finish. Not for cold weather, and I know that it is usually rated lower than I do. Just below those three is the Dalmore 12. it is quite pleasant at first, but having it too often reveals an overall lack of complexity.

And finally, one malt that never really excited me was Oban.
I really wanted to like it, having seen many glowing reports, but whatever magic that was allegedly there seemed to elude me.
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 

Also available: Louis's prE-pistles from 1998 and 1999.
Check out
Louis's Personal Profile for an overview of all E-pistles or Click HERE to jump to the latest issue of Malt Maniacs.
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Copyright © Johannes van den Heuvel & the Malt Maniacs
Malt Maniacs is hosted by those friendly people at
Scotchwhisky.com
 

Malt Maniacs - Latest Issue

Author:  Louis Perlman

prE-pistles #19 - #36

Covering: 2000 - 2001

Also available: prE-pistles over 1998 and 1999

Go backContactIntroductionHomepageSitemapHelpSearchBig Black BookMalt Maniacs - the single malt Scotch whisky E-zine
RECT ALT="Help" COORDS="836,44,883,60" HREF="../2003/help.html#">SearchBig Black BookMalt Maniacs - the single malt Scotch whisky E-zine