- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subject: Earls of Zetland Malt 2000 Well, well, at last, they cried, "the 'Earls' is finally getting into gear for the year 2000". For those of you blissfully unaware that I have
recently returned from the madlands, the badlands and the maltlands of America I must advise of contact and valuable intellectual discourse with like malted souls in that both prosaic and phantasmagoric place. And the malts at
Ardbeggeddon (A2K) weren't bad either. MOK, map, FX, Foaf, Mark K, Bushido, Tom B you know who you are and thank-you for a truly great time! Sense of place is a weird commodity in Las Vegas, believe me, especially when you're
shoehorned into the back of a Mercedes with two other 19 stone maltsters and carted around Las Vegas on a malt raiding party. I managed to withstand the feeding frenzy until I saw a Glen Moray 16 replete with (airline baggage
handler defeating) tin packaging that I couldn't in all conscience leave on the shelf, having been well and truly versed and primed in malt acquisition behaviour by this stage of the game and eager to display newly acquired skills.
However, the further chronicling of my adventures in La La land must await another occasion. Regards Craig Daniels
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
prE-pistle #22: Earls of Zetland / Februari 2000 Report Hi everyone, A bit later to press than usual, but better late than
never? March is going to be great. Can't wait to see if i can pick any divergence between the 1967 and the 1980, especially as they'll be tasted 'masked'. it will be extremelt interesting to see which one is voted
'best'. Can't wait; it's gonna be great. Craig February 23rd "Laird's Choice" - Report Card Benriach-Glenlivet 13
(William Cadenhead) - One of Bob's stash remaining from the Earl of Zetland auction in 1995 and another of those Cadenhead sports bottled in the late 1970's. It was different:: an interesting and intriguing malt. Quite spiritty early with a hint of dry wood, chalk and flint plus some wood extracts like camphor and something faintly like liniment. Gets better in the glass with tropical fruity notes; guava and a hint of pineapple sherbet. The nose gets a dry mintiness suggesting 100% bourbon wood. The palate was light and clean with pleasant lifted fruit characters and a slightly bitter finish and a metallic/steely aftertaste almost like a good Coonawarra riesling. Being a bit left field didn't hurt it in my books. Best of the night for me. Score 8.1
Glenfiddich Solera 15
- Bob is nothing if not brave to spend the clubs' precious treasure chest on product from a distillery that most of us don't have a lot of time for, but it's always good policy to give them another chance. It was a case of good news and not so good news. The Solera 15 was the good news. Early on I got custard and honey with nice yeast bun notes. After a while the sweet bread dough maltiness typical of a lot of lighter Speysides came to the fore. A medium dry sherry was obvious on the palate but funnily enough didn't show in the nose. The finish showed drying wood and some sour sherry notes. After a very long time the nose showed a hint of grapiness and a whiff of pyrethrum, but not offensive in any way. This whisky had both solidity and grunt; characteristics not normally associated with Glenfiddich. Well worth the asking price of ~$72. I might even buy a bottle myself. Can't say fairer than that!! Score 7.9
Glenfiddich Ancient Reserve 18
- I was expecting the age to reveal itself in a high quality and rounded malt. Sad to say it didn't. The nose was very subdued and slightly musty (mushroom and old barns) early on. Showed some yeast and sourish sherrywood after a while, but never developed any real depth. Unfortunately after 10 minutes or so the nose went steadily downhill; became oily with overtones of cardboard and soap flakes and after a long time had a whiff of lavender water and even a hint of brillantine hair oil. It was smooth with a pleasant malty nuttiness on the palate and the sourish sherry wood reprised in the finish. There were too many similarities to both the Special Reserve and the 50% CS 15 than I thought healthy for the market prospects of a whisky they want to sell for $100. I mean its not as if they can't make a decent malt as the Excellence 18 attests. Save the money and drink the Solera 15.. Score 7.4
The Blind Oban 14
- Selected by an absent Keith Dobson, henceforth to be known by the sobriquet "the legend" (as christened by John Roberts) who has achieved a double unique in the annals of club history. Not only did he get the blind right at his very first meeting, BUT he also was sneaky enough to choose a blind that NO-ONE managed to get right. Now, Bronte, being a crafty and devious bastard from way back has contrived to achieve this feat at least twice that I can remember, but a new chum??? Unheard of! And Oban, bloody Oban!!! Those who know me well, know that Oban 14 is the cause of many wince making memories, especially at the Streah. I reckon it's been a blind at Earls and Streah meetings about 12 times in the last decade and I think I managed to get it right just once. On this occasion I didn't get close. I'd narrowed it down to 4, all Speysides,and settled on Strathisla 12, not for any better reason than I thought I found a little bit of peat, a good whack of sherry and a hint of chocolate in it. I usually like Oban 14 and rate it higher than this. Score 7.3
- - - Next Meeting: March IS Macallan Month - 3 Vintage Mac 18's on 22 March 2000. The March meeting is one not to be missed.
Three vintage 18 year old Macallans will be fair reward for those who manage to turn up. Due to assiduous purchasing over the last four years and the exercise of tremendous self-discipline (many a time I was sorely tempted to
crack the 1967 I bought in 1995) the club has the opportunity to try three different vintages of one of the world's truly great malts. Macallan 18 has been one of the club's regular high scorers. Most memorably it was
the blind at one of our highest ever scoring meetings, the Black Bowmore night in August 1994, where it managed to rank second in very august company indeed. The 1967 has been sampled at least twice, (last in December 1993)
as has the 1977 (Oct 1997 & Mar 1998). I don't recall the club ever having programmed the 1980, so that'll be a first. This month we are going to test the proposition that, with the passing of the years, the
flavour profile of standard-bearer malts such as Macallan 18 has shifted. There has been a widely held belief in malt circles that older is often better. This is a contention that the Earls have enjoyed exploring over the last
few years with the ''Old Vs New'' evenings. Probably more importantly in the grander scheme of things is that it is a belief that those with extensive cellars and the auction houses of the world delight in furthering as it
improves the provenance and margins on "older" material, boosting prices etc. Also more recently there has been an argument raging over the internet about flavour shifts in revered single malts. While I think
that some of the doom and gloom is the product of a reactionary tendency to regard older bottlings as better (feathering the nest of Christies et al), our previous experiments have at least demonstrated that the proposition has a
modicum of truth, at least for some malts. I think the argument surrounding Macallan is at once both more technical and also much more contentious. Macallan 18 makes excellent experimental material for at least two
reasons. Firstly it is a mighty fine dram in its own right as both international opinion and club scores verify. Secondly, the folk at Macallan go to great pains and have invested a lot of cash and credibility in
promoting the position that each vintage of the 18 is as close to the previous ones as it is humanly possible to make it. I take them at their word and accept that they try their hardest, but I also understand that
distillers, even as fastidious as Macallan, are not immune to the impact of fashion, market research and production costs. I suspect the effects of the steeply rising cost of sherry wood may be evident in the diminution of
first fill oloroso barrels in maturation. Are the three Macallan 18s discernibly different? Probably not as much as we might suppose but probably more than the owners would care to admit. So the first comment here is
that I don't expect people to have a go at saying which one is which, unless they particularly want, but to actually have everyone work out which one they like most, next and least and record the answers. Once we've done that
we can work out which one those assembled thought was the 'best', ie. the highest scoring. I figure there might be the odd surprise on the night. As those of us who have been lucky enough to compete in malt competitions all
acknowledge, that faced with a dozen unknowns, discerning 'distillery' character is fraught with dangers, but actually being able to distinguish between vintages of the same malt is a stratospheric leap harder. I expect the
1967 to be marginally peatier and to show more of the big oloroso sherry notes (dried fruit, raisins, sour cherries, choc-mint icecream, bees/floor wax) than the latter vintages. Of course I could be wrong, but it's going to
be a real blast finding out! Come along and find out for yourself whether Macallan 18 has withstood the rigours of fashion & economics. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subject: Australian National Malt Tasting Championship Hi fellow enthusiasts, I remember promising some of you that I would keep you informed on this topic and for those of you who are
interested and those of you who might be tempted to have a go, here's the latest on the Australian National Malt Tasting Championship. It's being organised by the Rob Roy Malt Club and the chief sponsor will be
Glenfiddich. This will guarantee some international press coverage, hopefully and maybe even a few profiles of local tasters might find their way into UK papers, (especially if we win).
Malt Whisky Competition - Adelaide South Australia 2000 Craig
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
prE-pistle #23: Earls of Zetland / March 2000 Report G'day FELLOW MALTSTERS, Firstly, I must apologise for the lateness of
this Round-up. The Easter break loomed up rather too quickly and a few chores got in the way of getting it out any earlier. On top of this Anzac Day being adjacent to Easter probably means that some of you won't get the
reminder until Wednesday, the day of the tasting. Anzac Day is probably one of our most significant national days with more meaning for a lot of us who had relatives who fought in either or both world wars than many of the
other public holidays we have off during the year. Anzac Day, being immediately prior to our tasting, gives us the opportunity to try some coastal malts from distilleries located on or very adjacent to beaches in solidarity
with the memory of the diggers that fought and died at Anzac Cove, Lone Pine, Shrapnel Valley etc. March 22nd "Macallan Horizontal" - Report Card The report card will take a different format from the
usual, as to be perfectly honest I didn't take many notes and my scores were of less interest to me than the thoughts and scores of others. The purpose of the evening was to try and discover whether there had been a change in the
flavour profile and the quality of Macallan 18
in the last decade or so. I did my best to make it an objective test by making sure that we tasted them all masked so that the tasters did not know beforehand which was which. This was done to really find out which of the three was judged to be the preferred one and to avoid any possibility that tasters would adopt the reactionary assumption that the older one is automatically better.
Furthermore, while most of us noted definite differences between the three, the family resemblance far outweighed marginal variations, especially between the 1977 and the 1980. I thought the 1967 much easier to
differentiate from the others, I suspect for two main reasons. Firstly, when the 1967 was distilled and racked, new sherrywood, while more expensive than fresh bourbon wood, was still relatively inexpensive compared to
later when the price relativities made a strong bottom-line argument for a reduction in the proportion of first fill sherry barrels used in the maturation of the later vintages. Secondly, when the 1967 was bottled (circa
1985), the scotch industry was in the middle of a huge slump, the single malt market was still languishing at less than 3% of total sales and there wasn't much demand at all for older malts. I suspect that these factors
combined to deliver a greater proportion of older material into the 1967 than went into the 1977 and especially the 1980. My logic would tend to the conclusion that the 1980 had both less first fill sherrywood and less older
material (due to special releases such as the 1874 and Gran Reserva), but I don't expect the company to confirm my hypothesis. But I here all fair minded maltsters cry; 'What does it matter if there is less first fill sherry wood
and older material if malt lovers prefer the 1980 to the 1977 and 1967?' Fair enough question too! The really interesting result of the masked tasting was that only 1 out of the 18 tasters ranked the 1980 highest, 4
ranked the 1977 first and a whopping 13 (72%) regarded the 1967 the superior dram (even when they hadn't guessed Malt B to be the 1967). The mean scores for the three were 1980 (7.97), 1977 (8.14) and 1967 (8.39). I contend
that the experiment lent solid support to the widely held belief across the international malt community that the quality of the Macallan 18 has indeed been slipping and the most depressing conclusion one can reasonably draw from
the results is that the best Macallan 18's are behind us. To get equivalent quality in a Macallan as the 1967 we're going to have to shell out a lot more dough. I know one thing, if I spot any Macallan 18's from earlier
that 1980 on retail shelves from now on I'm going to grab them. The Blind Balvenie 10
- Selected by Keith "The Legend" Dobson, who lived up to his newly acquired status by being one of only five maltsters to identify the Macallans correctly. Well done for someone at only his third tasting. Congratulations also to Alex Keegan (whose blind descriptors were perfect for Tormore 10, but it wasn't on the list of possibles) who got all four right as did the Laird. Bob is in awesome form leading up to the Malt Tasting Competition so as much as the Rob Roy might try to stack the odds in their favour by not releasing the practice list, the date of the competition or the venue, we'll be ready for them no doubts whatsoever. While Keith didn't manage to fool everybody this time, the big sherry in the Macallans sure made the Balvenie seem anaemic in that department, sending more than a few into the Glenkinchie camp. I didn't find any orange at all this time and in the company it appeared very yeasty. I probably would've picked it as Glen Keith except it wasn't on the list. Balvenie was closest so I got it right. Score 7.3
The April meeting will return to the merely excellent from the stratospheric reaches of the March Macallans. Regards Craig Daniels - - - Next Meeting: 26 April 1999 - "On The Beaches - Lest We Forget" Our regular meeting night being the day after Anzac Day delivered a big impetus to the theme of this month's Tasting. Given that Anzac Day originally celebrated the less than
supremely successful landing on Turkish soil during 1915, I guess having a selection of malts made and matured by the seaside is appropriate. Lots of malts come from seaside distilleries, so there were plenty to choose from
but some are more interesting than others. We don't get a lot of opportunity to try Scapa
as very little makes it's way here. The one we're most familiar with is the Gordon & MacPhail 8 year old, which was pretty ordinary and used to make a lot of peoples bottom ten list. The one we have to try is a 12 year old destined for the American market and brought back to these fair shores by Paul Rasmussen. Like a lot of coastal malts (Bruichladdich & Glenmorangie being other examples) they don't necessarily show much marine character. Scapa generally has a malty sweetness with a touch of spice and some fresh scone dough yeastiness. Scapa, on Orkney and abutting the shores of Scapa Floe at least has some obvious connections to WW1, being the final resting place of much of the Imperial German Fleet, scuttled after armistice.
Neither Oban nor Bunnahabhain have any obvious connection, but Bunnahabhain
is a favourite and I, for one, need more practice on Oban before the resurrected National Malt Tasting Championship sometime in the next couple of months. Bunnahabhain is slap bang on the shores of Islay looking out across a scree of shale gray pebbles (no Australian would dare think of calling it a 'beach') to Jura, but it's a bonnie place all the same with a placid serenity found at few other distilleries. A good clean whisky, more like a Highland than an Islay, it has a nice fresh nose with malt and a hint of seaweed but very little obvious peat.
Oban
is a rarity amongst modern distilleries, being in the high street of a major town. Although not technically on a beach, it's pretty close (a couple of healthy irons would find the water). Mind you it's not something that postcards are made of; up a short cul de sac at the end of a row of Georgian Terrace houses and looking much more like the entrance to a Barristers Chambers rather than a distillery. Oban 14 is a chameleon in the whisky world. It has a little of the typical coastal traits of fudge and honey biscuits, a little of speyside malty sweetness and a little bit of smoke in the tail. A nicely rounded malt and very hard to pin down as a blind.
Come along and share a dram and raise a glass to the diggers. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
prE-pistle #24: Earls of Zetland / April 2000 Report HI to FELLOW MALTSTERS, In May we're going to revisit some perennial
favourites, Talisker and Lagavulin, that are stalwarts of any decent malt bar and one (Tamdhu 10) that blew a whole lot of us away when Tom Perry brought it as a blind a year or so ago. Geoff Jarrett has the distinction of
being the only person to identify it on both recent occasions it was the blind. As our esteemed Laird has commented frequently the true test of the worth of any malt is how we rate it as a blind. The Tamdhu 10 has been
assessed by the club on 6 different occasions, three disclosed and three blind, so is an interesting case study. The average score disclosed was 6.85 ( in the same ball park as Aultmore 12, Glenturret 12 and Isle of Jura 10),
but as a blind it has averaged an impressive 7.44. Now this score puts it in some seriously better company indeed such as Macallan 12, Benromach 12, Glendronach 12 Traditional and Dalmore 12. The discrepancy screams
"seriously underrated". I think Tamdhu's relative advantage comes from the heaviness of the new make. Jim Murray describes it as "unashamedly rich" and our scores indicate that it has a solidity,
heartiness, complexity and longevity in the glass not found in too many other young Speysides. April 26th "On The Beaches - Coastal Malts" - Report Card Scapa 12
- Not available in Oz, this one was brought back from America by Paul Rasmussen. I must admit I wasn't expecting overly much with this one, and the less kind of those present probably echoed those sentiments, but I was pleasantly surprised. Based on tasting notes I had read before, I was expecting it to be similar to Bruichladdich, but have to admit that it was closer to Aultmore and Knockando, especially after it had been in the glass a while. Early on the nose was light, moderately sweet with apple pie, vanilla and spice (in the allspice-mace family) with a lot of creamy bourbon wood. It evolved to display much more solvent style esters in the nose with a lot of lifted fruity notes, segueing into juicy fruit chewing gum and tutti frutti bubble-gum. The dominant fruit character (moving from apples to something tropical (melon & mango maybe). followed through to the palate. Had a fairly light body but a nice clean mouthfeel and nothing untoward in the aftertaste where some drying tannins helped clean up the finish.. Clean and light, yet tasty. Score 7.6
Bunnahabhain 12
- My notes on the night were pitifully sparse - 'salty, sweet, malty and meaty', but they sort of say it all. Showed all the traits needed to identify it ; nice sherry wood, nice fudgy maltiness and a nice whiff of salty roasting pan and gravy, plus an interesting hint of pickled onions and balsamic vinegar.. To digress a little, the meaty/nutty/briny aromas are also to be found in older, sherried Glenfarclas. I've tried two independent sherried Bunnahabhain' (a 25 from Whyte & Whyte and a 17 from Signatory), that I thought were from Glenfarclas. I find it interesting that malts from so far apart can show 'family' resemblances. I suspect it's probably due to the type of barley and the sherrywood but it still is remarkable. Nice clean, well crafted and tasty malt. Score 8.1
Oban 14
- One more chance to practise on the elusive one before the malt comp. Alas and alack, I still can't find anything distinctive in the Oban to hang a descriptor on. It was faintly burnt toffee salty and moderately sweet (sweeter than the Bunnahabhain but not as sweet as the Scapa) with an irritating spirit prickle in excess of what the alcohol level suggested. Had a bit of bite in the finish and some smoke and seaspray in the aftertaste, but not as obvious as Highland Park for example. Bob loves it because it is so seamless. I just find it annoying because I can't get a handle on it. I also didn't think this particular bottle was as good as some we've had, but it may be the company or evidence of a bit of pique. It was funny but the increase in alcohol level from the Scapa and Bunny (both 40%) to the Oban (43%) was readily detectable, the first time that I'd honestly noticed that I could tell the difference. Score 7.9
The Blind Springbank 12 46%
- Paul Rasmussen supplied it and while he'd done his homework, he still managed to get one we hadn't ever tried before. We have had a Springbank 12 before, it is true, but it was the 100 proof or "Double Dark" much beloved of our American brethren. However I couldn't get too cross at him as I had it pegged early on and was sure it was a Springbank but not the 100 proof. Just goes to show that there are such things as discernible distillery character. The nose opened with a scream of serious sherry, nice spicy notes; big and inviting. The colour was a trifle strange with a dark olive green sheen in the meniscus, similar to the 1967 Macallan last month but even greener. I wonder if it's because the Springer is not chill filtered? I picked it as having a higher alcohol level than the others and when I found coconut and vanilla icecream after about 15" I was pretty sure it was from Springbank. It had a long hopsy metallic finish that diverged from the '"Double Dark" as well. Best of the night by a fair margin. Very moreish. Score 8.4
Regards Craig Daniels - Treasurer - Earls Of Zetland Malt Tasting Club - - -
Next Meeting: 24 May 2000 - "OLD FAVOURITES" Tamdhu 10 is interesting, mainly because the size of variation between its score disclosed versus blind is so huge, but it happens with other malts as well although not
so dramatically. Balvenie 10 is another case in point, although in the other direction, "overrated when known". The Club has sampled the Balvenie 10 on 8 occasions with the 'new' Balvenie 10 being the blind on
all occasions it was the traditional blind. The time we had both old and new versions together (February 1997) the scores were very close (7.03 versus 7.05) with the 'new' coming out ever so slightly but not significantly
ahead. This comes as a bit of a shock to me as I reckon the 'old' version is a 1/2 point better whisky, but obviously the rest of the club don't. As a disclosed malt the Balvenie 10 has averaged 7.02 over 5 occasions since
May 1990 and only 6.75 as a blind. (Macallan 12 also shows this tendency but not as starkly (7.32 B vs 7.54 D)) I think this, when compared with Tamdhu 10, indicates that every experienced maltster has a range of scores they
award 10 year old Speysides, (simply because they are 10 year old Speysides) and when such a malt is on the agenda an appropriate score is allocated. As evidence look at how close the disclosed scores are for the 2 malts in
question (Tamdhu 10 6.85 versus Balvenie 10 7.02). I also expect that the tendency to overrate Balvenie when disclosed and underrate Tamdhu relates to the reputation of the distillery and brand recognition. Other malts
that fit the "underrated as disclosed" criterion include Highland Park 12 (7.18 B vs 6.92 D) which dents my theory about reputation and brand recognition and Inchgower 12 (7.27 B vs 6.83 D) which confirms it! With some
other SMS the blind and disclosed scores are remarkably similar, indicating the performance of the malt matches reputation and expectation. These include Bowmore 12 (7.23 B vs 7.26 D), Bunnahabhain 12 (7.31 B vs 7.38 D), and
Lagavulin 16 (7.61 B vs 7.69 D). Talisker 10, interestingly enough falls into this category as well (7.60 B vs 7.65 D). Thus I think that both Lagavulin 16 and Talisker 10 fully deserve their place in the Club pantheon
and Tamdhu 10 is a worthy companion on the agenda as no other Speyside 10 gets close to scoring 7.44 as a blind, making it an extremely good performer for the money.
Come along and reacquaint yourselves with good, solid, high scoring and value for money malts. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
prE-pistle #25: Earls of Zetland / May 2000 Report HI to FELLOW MALTSTERS, As in the previous three years, the June meeting
will feature malts from my collection built up since 1995 and focussing very much on stocks from the now defunct Earls of Zetland Hotel. I suppose that in a way, this is an exercise in industrial archeology as these
malts, especially the two from Gordon & MacPhail (distilled in the seventies and bottled in the 1980's) I suspect are very rare now. We've had two of them before at previous Clan Drummond nights and one that the club has
never tried before, the Imperial 15, which I didn't know I had in my collection until unpacking after moving house. Ah the joys of relocation; uncovering a forgotten gem amongst all the (non whisky) stuff that you wonder why
you have, let alone why you packed it. STOP PRESS STOP PRESS STOP PRESS The Glenfiddich Australian Malt Taster Of The Year 2000 competition occurs 25 June 2000, a mere three days before our June meeting. Come along and
find out how the club went, hear all the post facto rationalisation as to why we got things so wrong (or right) as the case may be. You never know the meeting might be a chance to celebrate with a newly crowned National
Champion or commiserate with someone whose malt credentials are looking slightly battered. - - - May 24th "Old Favourites & High Scoring Blinds" - Report Card Talisker 10 Tamdhu 10
- very impressive. This was a pre 1992 bottling and it had a depth of flavour not found in too many 10 year old speysides. It was also smooth and held up in the glass remarkably well. Definitely had some funky fudge and gravy aromas along with nuts, marzipan, toffee and cream in the tail. Excellent for a 10 year old Speyside. Score 8.0
Lagavulin 16
- basicaslly the same story as Talisker. The litre bottling is much peatier than the current 700ml release. I can attest to this with some certainty as the Streah just happened to have the 700ml Lagavulin on the Wednesday immediately past. That one took twenty minutes to develop any of the garden bonfires in the nose that used to leap out of the glass as soon as it got within a foot of your olfactory gear. The litre one was much more redolent of the tar and leather and carbolic I expect in a Lagavulin. I guess the lesson is clear - buy the litre bottling, it is better. Score 8.5
The Blind Longmorn 15
- Selected by me and guessed right by a few. A few thought it might be Highland Park or even Bruichladdich 15. It was nice but not THAT good. Better than a lot and good value at the moment, Score 8.0
- - - Next Meeting: 28 June 2000 Imperial
and Glencadam are both in the Allied Distillery stable and are very much producers for the blended market. I have never seen an official release as a single from either. Royal Brackla, until very recently was owned by
Diageo (United Distillers & Vintners) but was recently sold to Bacardi. There have been official releases from Brackla but they have been forgettable in the extreme. The G&M offering is much more tasty than the
UD Flora & Fauna release which had to be the most insipid Speyside around after the ubiquitious Glenfiddich. The Imperial 15 is from James MacArthur, a minor independent label, that has still managed to have some beauties
in its stable. I have had all of them before and they are all interesting without being exceptional. The Brackla is the pick, but the Imperial has some left field wood qualities to it that might intrigue a few. Come along and participate in some industrial archeology of a bibulous nature. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subject: Results of Australian Malt Tasting Championship Hi all, I'm writing this after
having consumed a significant amount of malt whisky. Today was the reprise of the Glenfiddich Australian National Malt Tasting Championship which went into recess in 1996, so for the first time in 4 years we had a chance to test
our palates under competition conditions. The good news is that I came a clear third. At the end of the "Individual Round" there were four of us
(out of 20) on 6 right out of eight whiskies. At least two of us only made one mistake, getting the Glendronach 12 and 15 the wrong way around, I don't know about the other two tasters, but I'll get a chance to debrief them
soon. They tried to introduce a bit of mystery by including 9 names for the 8 whiskies, so the first thing one needed to do was to work out which of the whiskies wasn't actually on the table. As it turned out this was
pretty easy and I don't think any of the first four placegetters got this wrong. The list of 9 names included three "lights", three "mediums" and three "darks". So when you sorted out the
glasses there were only two lights. The list of lights included Glenfiddich, Glenfiddich 15 and Glenmorangie 10. Now the colour chart (in my head, no other aids allowed) says that the order of increasing colour goes
Glenfiddich, Glenmorangie 10 then Glenfiddich 15. The lightest one wasn't a Glenfiddich (no pastry dough or soap), therefore was the Glenmorangie. If the Glenfiddich on the table was darker than the GM then it must be
the GF 15. As it turned out this reasoning was impeccable. When 2 or more tasters have the same score at the end of the counting they hold a taste-off, where you get three malts and 6 names. The eventual winner ( a first
time woman competitor, Dr Sandi McOrist) got all three right. One other bloke and I got 1 right, so there had to be another taste-off. One glass and 29 names, where you proceed to list your first five guesses against the
list. The other bloke guessed in his first five, I did not even get close. In my defense I have to say that by this time the palate was shot and even though it was Lagavulin 16, I didn't get any Islay character at all
and thought it most probably an Aberlour 10 or Glenfarclas 15. The colour was right for Lagavulin, but the nose was wrong at least in my semi-inebriated state. So - if any of the overseas maltsters want to try their
tastebuds, I get the impression that Glenfiddich are keen to keep an association for some time into the future. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - prE-pistle #26: Earls of Zetland / June 2000 Report HI to FELLOW MALTSTERS, STOP PRESS STOP PRESS STOP PRESS STOP PRESS STOP PRESS DR SANDI MCORIST - STREAH MALT TASTERS The Most Excited Spectator Of The Year Award Anyone who was there or saw the Channel Seven news that night
knows what I'm talking about. More than one person commented to me "Boy the guy who won it got excited". I felt constrained to point out that not only didn't Eric win, he wasn't even in the competition.
Nevertheless, you can't fault his esprit de corps or a certain elan in supporting his members. Hope you enjoyed yourself as much as we liked the floorshow. And the winnnnner isssss
Eric!
June 28th "Raiding The Vaults - Off The Beaten Track" - Report Card Glencadam 12
- When I indicated that I thought this malt ordinary, I was accused (by some unkind souls) of unloading a malt I didn't want on the club. As it turns out it wasn't as mediocre as I recalled and I realised that I no longer had a Glencadam in my 'distillery collection'. It wasn't bad and I would've preferred to hang on to it. The nose started subdued but with a slight hint of sour toffee and a distant whiff of dry herbs. As the nose opened up there were some more dry woody notes and a definite hint of stone fruit, maybe young cherries. The palate was medium firm with a bourbon wood reprise and a sour warming finish. Flat in the company. Acceptable, but not stellar. Score 7.6
Royal Brackla 14
- much more impactful malt overall: definitely more rounded and 'in your face' than the Glencadam. Lots of Highland (rather than Island) peat, unusual in a Speyside but perhaps reflecting distilling mores 30 + years ago: pity more around now don't have a decent whack of peat. Initially the nose showed burnt toffee & a lifted minty caramel edge. Then some honey and more fudge. The palate was earthy with a smudgey peat, lots of nutty notes and a sour finish. Funky & interesting and the toffee notes lasted a long time in the finish. Score 7.9
Imperial 15
- I'm still not sure about this one. I seem to like it when it's fresh and when it's been in the glass 30 minutes plus, but not in between, when there seem to be too many over-extracted wood notes. Starts nice and mild with a faintly fruity nose; custard apples which segue into vanilla slice and something like avocado. Then comes lots of stripped pine notes and a strong hint of camphor. I got the bay leaves/menthol/chalkiness of camphor the first time I tried it at the Streah (16 Feb 2000), so it wasn't (just) my imagination. After resting a while the dominant note in the nose is chalk/dry herbs - thyme and sage? The fruitiness goes from the nose, but stays in the palate and finish. Pretty complex. Score 8.0
The Blind Springbank 12 100 Proof
- Selected by David LeCornu and guessed right by yours truly. David tried hard to hide it amongst some exclusive and imaginative creations and managed to fool almost everybody. I was pretty sure it was an OP when it got within 6 inches of the olfactory equipment. I know a lot thought it might be a sherried Bowmore, but I for one didn't find near enough peat, however given my failure to spot Lagavulin in the competition, this leaves me on shaky grounds. I must apologise to the Laird, for an intemperate outburst upon his choice of Bowmore, I realise with the benefit of hindsight that exclaiming 'anyone who thinks it's a Bowmore needs a nose rebore' could be found to be offensive. I like this whisky and when I called it 'fat, hot whisky' this wasn't derogatory. It has a seriously minty sherry nose with some sour notes. Develops a faint hint of eucalyptus. The nose is very,very nice. Score 8.4
- - - Next Meeting: 26 July 2000 - "Super Sherried Speysides" July is usually a good month for attendance and has been the focus in past years for some of our more popular nights. This year will be no exception, being the second of our three
Super Premium Nights for 2000. This will be one of the highest quality nights of the year. Some Speyside whiskies seem to take to a long time in sherry wood better than others. I suspect that there are a whole stack
of reasons, but the relative heaviness of the new make must figure large among them. Of the better known distilleries, both Macallan and Glenfarclas are definitely part of the 'heavy brigade' and as Buchanan, Case &
Gellert noted in their 1981 book on Tamdhu, "its taste represents the larger type malts of the area. ie. it is not the delicate light variety characteristic of the Spey". Lots of other distilleries make malts that
can handle a big sherry treatment, but these three are in the vanguard no doubt at all. Tamdhu 15
- A very rare bottling nowadays as Tamdhu no longer releases a commercial malt at 15 years. I suppose I've had the chance to drink this whisky at two clubs over at least 4 years up to February 1997 and have always liked it. Now this may not mean much to you but I didn't score as high back in 1996 and 1997 as I seem to recently, but I still managed to score the Tamdhu 15 between 8.1 and 8.4 every time I've tasted it, The last time was as a blind at the Streah. I scored it 8.2 AND got it right. A whisky that has grown in my estimation as my experience of malts has broadened. Initially I thought it a bit of a one trick pony, but I suspect I was mistaking clarity for simplicity. It has a lovely big and straightforward sherry nose with quite a nice rounded palate and a lingering toffee finish. A generous and robust whisky.
Macallan 18 (1979)
- The more observant of you will note that the whisky originally intended for this spot was a Benrinnes 1974 21yo. Now the reason it is not is because thanks to internet e-correspondents who confirmed my (admittedly dimming) memory of it as not having an appreciable sherry treatment, so I thought I'd better pick one that met the profile I was trying to achieve. Macallan 1979 is a good replacement, being one of the rarest 18s. The reasons for its rarity are manifold. The scotch whisky industry entered a slump in the late 1970's and early 1980's and lots of distillers were overstocked, so started to slow laying down new stock. Secondly, around 1997 and 1998, Macallan started to look for new vehicles for older material to realise better returns and hence the 1874 and Gran Reserva were born and launched. Both reduced the amount of material available for bottling as the standard 18. Besides the club hasn't had this one before so the 1979 gives us another notch on the collective gun butt. Let's hope it is as good as the 1977 & better than the 1980, which I suspect it will be.
Glenfarclas 21
- This whisky is a favourite, but (and there's always a but) I find I like it much better when tasted against other big sherried malts. In the standard Glenfarclas showcase up against the inimitable (and exemplary) Glenfarclas 15 it seems a little over the top in the sherry department; a little too minty and a little too sweet, where the peat in the 15 lends more balance. In amongst other sherried malts it performs better. When the Glenfarclas 21 and the Macallan 18 were roughly the same price (around $85-95) it was a tough call as to which represented better value for money. Now that Glenfarclas has decided to up the ante, unfortunately the 21 will lose market share. Whatever the market fortunes of GF 21, this is one opportunity to taste one that was purchased for less than $100.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subject: Cautionary Tales - Beware of Marketing Manipulation
(Stunts Liquor Companies pull with Tasting Panels) I must admit to being sceptical of tasting notes and especially scores produced by anyone where independence is even slightly in doubt - as I strongly believe in the old maxim
"who pays the piper, calls the tune", even if remuneration is very indirect. I've seen some pretty slippery stunts pulled by liquor companies to get the results they want from "disinterested" tasting
panels. No names, no pack drill, but my home town (Adelaide) is often used for market research purposes prior to brand launches going national. I was involved as an 'expert' on a tasting panel for a brand launch (American
whiskey, not SMSW, to make it any more specific would identify the parties), but I was only called in at the last minute. The rest of the judges including some local wine celebrities, a national wine writer, (now deceased) and a
few "consumer" representatives were given the full treatment before the "test tasting" at the media launch. The full treatment consisted of lunch and tutored tastings of the Sponsors product including all the
reasons why their product was better than the whiskey against it was to be benchmarked. As I was a late inclusion, I didn't get the 'benefit' of the coaching. Suffice it to say, I was the only judge on the panel that
scored the opposition better than the Sponsor's product. Personally I'd rather trust the gradings and rankings of Malt Whisky Tasting Clubs. Sites
like the Stockholm Malt Club are excellent. Check them out at www.home1.swipnet.se/~w-15573/index1.html. Craig - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
prE-pistle #27: Earls of Zetland / July 2000 Report
Greetings and salutations, LAST MEETING: The July meeting was stellar, shame there weren't more there to experience one of the highest quality nights that the club has ever put on. "Super Sherried Speysides" was
right up there with great nights of the recent past such as the Macallan Horizontal (March 2000), Bronte's Choice Islay Night (July 1998) and the Macallan Vertical of March 1999. I scored all 4 over 8.2 and I don't do that
very often. One serendipitous conjunction was that all four were the same alcoholic strength, so if one tasted stronger than the others, then it must have been something other than the spirit. The other aspect that was
notable was how similar the three disclosed malts were. To come across these three in a malt competition would be horrendous, not because they are in any way nasty but because they are so close together. My aim to
achieve a particular flavour profile was spectacularly successful, if I do say so myself. And I was right about the Glenfarclas 21, it did seem more balanced in the big sherry company. As a matter of fact I felt all
three to be instruments from the woodwind section of a piece by Dvorak, with the Tamdhu and Glenfarclas playing the alto/tenor notes and the Macallan the bass baritone, but all in exquisite harmony.
July 26th - Report Card Tamdhu 15 43%
- Even more emphatically sherried than I remembered, especially in the first 5 minutes after pouring but also the only one of the three that had readily discernible Speyside characters lurking behind the sherry. The nose was immediately clean and minty, with pine needles, nougat and rosewater/turkish delight emerging from behind the sherry after 15 minutes. The palate was sherried with fruit and nuts and a metallic hint in the finish. From the ability of the malt to poke its head up after a while I suspect the wood treatment would contain about 25-30% first fill sherry with most of the rest a combination of refill sherry and refill bourbon. Although there might well have been some first fill bourbon in the recipe as well as the nougat and pine needles are classic bourbon wood traits, but I'm only guessing and I can't think of a way to get an answer to this kind of speculation. It would be nice though to know how close I was. Could be good for the ego. A mighty fine malt and the base clarinet or oboe in this little woodwind ensemble. Score 8.4
Macallan 18 (1979) 43%
- There is no small anticipation when first hoisting an as yet untried Macallan towards the nasal passages and I was ready to be underwhelmed. However the 1979 was much more true to type than the 1980 (which gets my vote for worst 18 ever) and more than held its own in the company. There is something immediately inviting and reassuring in the Macallan nose. I got floor polish, honey and treacle on the nose and honey and beeswax on the palate. The finish was long and creamy and nutty, with a woody reprise. It was fuller and rounder than the others, bigger and chewier, somehow more substantial and resonant. The bassoon in this sublime orchestra. Score 8.6
Glenfarclas 21 43%
- 'Much more trepidation when approaching the 21. It's a whisky that I have always regarded well, but when pushed don't seem to find much to justify the respect. So I guess a little bit of my reputation was on the line with this one. I'm still amazed at how well it fitted. I'm partial to the cor anglais amongst the woodwinds and this fitted the bill in spades. More haughty and ethereal in the nose than either of the others; lifted and lighter. The palate was big and minty, a little surprising considering the relatively coy nose. The finish was initially sour but smoothed out with honey and cream. The nose gets more woody with floor polish and varnish but both the palate and finish stay creamy with a hint of peach. Lighter, creamier, flightier than the Macallan, but well and truly in the same class. Score 8.6
The Blind Glengoyne 17 43%
- I failed miserably in my attempt to fool the multitudes as the first person to hazard a guess got it straight off the bat. However, I wasn't really trying to trick people as I wanted to give the sherry theme another dimension by investigating how a lighter malt of similar age with about 30% sherrywood in the recipe (according to the background info) matched up against the heavy brigade. Pretty well as it turned out and I thought having the others on the table for comparison made it easier to sought out the sherry and bourbon contributions. The nose showed sponge-cake and fruit trifle, with a delicate hint of mint, (less than any of the others, but still enough to make an impression). The palate is malt biscuit sweet initially with some slight lactic acidity, which becomes very creamy. Honey on toast with sour cream reprises in the finish. The finish is reasonably long and quite warming: more noticeable spirit lingers than in the others, maybe made it seem a little younger. The balance of sherry and bourbon flavours was also much more typical of commercial highlands and I suspect that the proportion of first fill sherrywood compared to refill sherry was probably less than 10%. I quite admire this whisky and thought it held up well. Score 8.3
- - - Next Meeting:
23 August 2000 - "Overproof Oldies" A few of the more observant will note that I've made a slight change to the line-up for this month, substituting the
newly released Aberlour a'bunadh for the Hillside 25. Now while this completely vitiates the integrity of the original theme, (in that the a'bunadh is neither old nor from a silent distillery), my motives were relatively
pure. The Hillside was easily the poorest of the three Rare Malts (I score it around 7.8) and the Aberlour is a good, robust no holds barred, hairy chested kind of whisky with significant sherry influence. I tasted it
in America earlier this year and scored it 8.4. Plus I figured that the a'bunadh is much more likely to go on yours and my shopping list than the Hillside, simply because there is a significant price differential - the
a'bunadh is $43 dollars cheaper. And of course, this means that the cost of the night comes down and we need less people to turn-up to break even, however I'll be hurt if anyone suggests this was my primary motivation.
Aberlour a'bunadh 59.6%
- I have tasted this one before. It was the lesser of the three Aberlours it was my pleasure to run into in Las Vegas in January but the others (Aberlour 100 and Aberlour 1969) were awesome. The a'bunadh is merely impressive. There is no age statement and my understanding is that it is an amalgam of 8 to 12 year old malt from first and second fill sherry barrels. The colour is an orange red, very similar to the standard ten, with a little more dark ruby in the meniscus. The sherry is forward and the nose is spiritty. It tastes young, but it's a vital youth - plenty of interesting things happening in the background. At around $70 a bottle it has to be the best value cask strength around, especially as it is more generous and robust than its main competition in the Glenfarclas 105 and $20 cheaper.
Dallas Dhu 21 Distilled 1975 61.9%
- One of my favourite distilleries and this one is a little bit different as it's from a bourbon cask and most Dallas Dhu has a proportion of sherry. Remarkably smooth for the proof and the finish is very creamy - one of the creamiest malts outside of Glen Elgin, Miltonduff and Knockdhu that I have come across. One to savour - mighty fine stuff.
Glenury-Royal 23 Distilled 1971 61.3%
- This whisky is a real gem. I usually associate chocolate with speysides like Balvenie, Strathisla and Glenfarclas, but this Glenury is a chocoholics dream. Not quite in the desert island malt class, but not far away. Indeed the International Wine and Spirit Competition Judges thought it pretty damn good awarding it a trophy and 2 gold medals for best whisky over 12 years old in 1996. Don't miss a chance to sample this exceptional malt.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - prE-pistle #28: Earls of Zetland / August 2000 Report
G'day Sydney, G'day Australia, Hello World Sydney might have the Olympics and Australia might be doing a little bit better than the American swim and water polo teams might like but only Adelaide has the 'Olympic Spirit'
Challenge. Four spirits from the four corners of the world including a Single Malt from Japan (Yamazaki 12) a vatted malt from Scotland (Chivas Century) a single barrel bourbon from America (Evan Williams) and a lovely Australian
pot-still brandy (Yalumba 20). The test of course is to see how many of our little group of seasoned tasters can sort them out when presented masked. I don't think to many of us will have too many problems finding the
bourbon and the brandy, but sorting out the Japanese malt from the vatted scotch is a task of a much higher order and worthy of the spirit of Olympic competition. Of course, this event gives an opportunity to both schools of
thought about the Olympics: those who believe that participating is "what the Olympics is really about" and those who ascribe to the "results talk, bullshit walks' school; the inclusive imbibers versus the
compulsively competitive. August 23rd - Report Card We had a record attendance for a non-Christmas meeting with 20 making it along. Allan arrived a
little late and had to make do with non-standard glassware and Colin wandered in when we only had a bit of two of the bottles left. The Laird had issued an invitation to the newly crowned National Malt Champion and consequently
were joined by Sandi McOrist from the Streah Malt Tasters. I caught up with her at the Streah meeting on 20 September and she confirmed that she'd enjoyed the hospitality and found the Laird a most convivial host. Unfortunately
while the company was good, the quality of the malts was not as stellar or as even across the range as the malts we had in August, but at least two of the disclosed malts were very good, while one was a disappointment, especially
considering the price. The blind chosen by Bronte usually rates higher but in the shade of the OP's it was a watery shadow of its usually svelte and satisfying self. Aberlour a'bunadh 59.6%
- Very attractive nose with some clean ether/solvents revealed early. Develops fruitcake, fruchocs and warm apricot jam after the volatiles diminish. Palate has a lot of toffee and oak lactones & chocolate covered apricots. A generous and robust dram with lots of youthful exuberance, but doesn't get ratty or disintegrate like some young OPs. A little research through the UK Brand Manager revealed that the bottlings do vary (each bottling is from a distinct set of 8 year old first fill sherry barrels and second fill 12 yo sherrywood) so there will be slight but discernible differences across batches. I reckon this one was superior to the one I tasted in America in January. A remarkably solid dram throughout which represents exceptional value for money. Beautiful stuff. Score 8.5
Dallas Dhu 21 (1975) 61.9%
- Despite the highest alcohol level of all on the table, the nose appeared a little flat, especially after the a'bunadh. The nose was clean, if a little subdued: creamy with mint, fennel seeds and caraway but lacking impact. The palate was slightly creamy and the finish good if a little boring, but certainly nowhere near as creamy as the last time I tried it, but I expect the a'bunadh skewed the taste buds a little. Some funky dark woodiness in the finish raised the interest level. The mouthfeel was excellent and boosted the overall score. Actually, it was the mirror image of the Hillside 25 in the same series that we tried in August 1999. That one had a great nose and a raw finish, the Dallas Dhu had a forgettable nose but a great mouthfeel and a flawless finish. After the DD had sat in the glass for a while the vanilla and oak notes become dominant. A slight dash of water increased the forest floor woodiness, again not dissimilar to the Hillside. Overall well made, with no real flaws but ultimately uninspired - disappointing at the price. Score 7.9
Glenury-Royal 23 (1971) 61.3%
- Funnily enough, I reckon the chemicals that evoke dank, damp cardboard and moss and those that evince carob, coffee and dark chocolate are remarkably similar. The good news is that the Glenury-Royal, while the nose starts with an earthy, musty and mushroom nose evolves into the much more attractive dark unsweetened chocolate. This whisky has a very muscular palate with a lot of impact. Another one with good mouthfeel and also improves with a judicious addition of water. A different whisky to the a'bunadh, but in the same class. Not as clearly superior as the time that I tried it with the Streah Club in April 1999 when it had a distinct aroma of vanilla pods and warm honey behind chocolate and coconut rum balls. I still think it is on the verge of greatness though. Score 8.5
The Blind Longmorn 15
- Another excellent example of how one's judgement of a whisky is altered by the company in which it's tasted. The OP's made the blind seem a lesser malt than it truly is. Selected by Bronte and picked by a few and while I got close I didn't think it good enough to be the Longmorn 15 and picked it as the Balvenie 10 instead. To further reveal my lack of accuracy, my second pick would've been Glenfarclas as I didn't find the lively mint caramel toffee that I usually spot in Longmorn. The nose started with lots of bread dough and became increasingly yeasty with cardboard showing after 30 minutes. Also developed some carob and chocolate. The palate was OK, but really seemed very thin in the company. The finish was reasonable but fairly short. Probably not a fair test. Score 7.4
- - - Next Meeting: 27 September 2000 I figured that the Earls really needed to get into the swing of the Olympics. Since knowing the
difference between peating levels, wood type, distillation method or colour is about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike in the field of athletic pursuits, we just had to craft our own celebration befitting such an august
occasion. True, we have had similar nights before, such as in August 1997 when we tried to tease out the intricacies of Linkwood 12, Bunnahabhain 12, Royal Brackla 10 and Highland Park 12 in a sort of Great Britain
Commonwealth Games trial. Even earlier, at our original foray into this concept (in May 1994); the "International Invitational" we found ourselves wading our way through Jack Daniels, Jamesons, Canadian Club and
Aberlour 10. This actually proved quite difficult as it turned out, especially to those who had never bothered to actually stop and analyze Canadian Club, rather than drown it in soda at every opportunity. And finally
most recently (and by far the most fun) was the "Benchmark Night" of 22 September 1999. We put some acknowledged standards from different spirit categories through their paces, with Macallan 12 representing Great
Britain, Hennessy Privilege Cognac VSOP (France), Baker Beam 7 Bourbon (USA) and Yalumba 20 Brandy (Australia). If memory serves, a few among our number managed to get the Macallan and the Yalumba mixed up and some got the
Yalumba and the Cognac around the wrong way. Not being a brandy fan, I found the Yalumba to be surprisingly good, but its lifted clean sweet wood and sultana/grape notes made the Macallan seem awfully peaty and slightly sour
in comparison. Just goes to show how the lineup can affect your impressions of what's in a blind. Yamazaki 12
- Not a whisky that I've had a lot of experience with but I have tasted it before and reckon I could find it among similar style Highland SMS. Has a distinct oiliness over a woody toffee, which unkind souls have described as fish oil, but which I feel resembles hair oil or light machine oil much closer. Its actually not a bad whisky and has distinct similarities to malts like Dalmore 12, Tomatin 12 and a single grain in Cameron Brig.
Yalumba 20 Brandy
- A really pleasant surprise last time we tried it in September 1999. On the night it was clearly superior to the cognac and the bourbon and was almost as good as the Macallan - not bad for a local product costing less than A$35, however one must acknowledge that the Macallan was more complex and remained much more solid in the glass. The brandy has much more forward and lifted minty wood.
Evan Williams 1990 Single Barrel Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whisky
- Up until I tasted this whisky, I liked the Baker Beam 7 the most of the limited number of bourbons I have tried. I'm not a bourbon fan as a rule, as I find them far too sweet and syruppy especially after 20 minutes in the glass, but this one is pretty good though. Interestingly enough it was awarded the title of Whisky of The Year in 1999 by The Spirit Journal. While I won't quibble, it would be nice to know what competition it was up against, because I'd find it hard to accept that anyone other than unashamedly partisan judges could rate a 9 year old bourbon in front of a 17 or 25 year old SMS. However, it is a, very good bourbon with less of the whipped cream that you find in the cheapies.
Chivas Century 100 Malts
- Another marketing exercise by folk that think blending is the pinnacle of the industry and that ascribe to the more is better school. On balance I think it a waste of many rare barrels but they probably didn't have enough to bottle on their own, so developing some spurious lore about 100 malts is one way to shift the product. I couldn't detect any Islay in it at all, but based on previous experience, where the Yalumba managed to make the Macallan nose much peatier than usual, I'll probably find some smoke this time. My tasting notes indicate it could be readily hidden in amongst middle of the road Speysides. May prove very hard to distinguish from the Yamazaki, but don't rely on my notes. I might be wrong.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - prE-pistle #29: Earls of Zetland / September 2000 Report Hi everyone, I
figured that the Earls really needed to get into the swing of the Olympics. Since knowing the difference between peating levels, wood type, distillation method or colour is about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike in the field
of athletic pursuits, we just had to craft our own celebration befitting such an august occasion. True, we have had similar nights before, such as in August 1997 when we tried to tease out the intricacies of Linkwood 12,
Bunnahabhain 12, Royal Brackla 10 and Highland Park 12 in a sort of Great Britain Commonwealth Games trial. Even earlier, at our original foray into this concept (in May 1994); the "International Invitational" we found
ourselves wading our way through Jack Daniels, Jamesons, Canadian Club and Aberlour 10. This actually proved quite difficult as it turned out, especially to those who had never bothered to actually stop and analyze Canadian Club,
rather than drown it in soda at every opportunity. And finally most recently (and by far the most fun) was the "Benchmark Night" of 22 September 1999. We put some acknowledged standards from different spirit categories
through their paces, with Macallan 12 representing Great Britain, Hennessy Privilege Cognac VSOP (France), Baker Beam 7 Bourbon (USA) and Yalumba 20 Brandy (Australia). If memory serves, a few among our number managed to get the
Macallan and the Yalumba mixed up and some got the Yalumba and the Cognac around the wrong way. Not being a brandy fan, I found the Yalumba to be surprisingly good, but its lifted clean sweet wood and sultana/grape notes made the
Macallan seem awfully peaty and slightly sour in comparison. Just goes to show how the lineup can affect your impressions of what's in a blind. Sept 27th - 'Olympic Spirit Challenge' By now most of the Olympic dust has settled and while the Paralympics struggles to hold our interest, the embarrassing jingoistic excesses of media jocks and the crescendo of
meaningless chants has thankfully died down. I don't know about the rest of you, but endless refrains of "Ozzie, Ozzie, Ozzie, Oi, Oi, Oi!", got more than a bit tiresome after the 477th rendition. Nevertheless, the
Olympics did provide the theme for the September meeting and it proved to be a very interesting exercise indeed, although in future I might restrict the field back to malt whiskies. While the brandy was pleasant and was awarded
the silver medal on the night, the bourbon scored very poorly. I suspect that this reflects the group taking umbrage at having to actually drink bourbon, and might indicate a wee prejudice, but there is no way known on God's earth
that the bourbon was anyone's idea of the World's Best Whiskey. I guess it just means that the opinion of the judges at the Spirit Journal are not worth twopence and get filed in the cortical retrieval system as sources never to be
taken seriously. It did turn out to be a stern test though with only two people getting them all right. As suspected while a tiny majority need some more practice (couldn't even get the brandy and bourbon sorted) the biggest
problem was deciding which of the malts on the table was the vatted and which the Japanese. Fooled me too. Yamazaki 12
- Highest scorer on the night overall, but not as nice as the brandy personally. Started bland and creamy with some honey, then developed some slight but definite smokiness. The palate was slightly metallic and slightly oily. The oiliness and industrial smokiness are pretty good markers for Yamazaki but the cream and metallic notes made me think Speyside and as I figured that the Chivas Century was likely to have a big heart of forgettable Speysides, plumped for it to be the vatted. Similar in style and the equal of many highlands.
Yalumba 20 Brandy
- I felt this was the nicest spirit on the table and the equal of a lot of sherried Speysides, Had an attractive nose with evident grapiness and a hint of sour fruit. Stayed pretty solid in the glass although the sweet and sour notes tend to become disentangled and a bit discordant over time while good malts like Macallan and Glendronach never do. The palate was soft and sweet and the alcohol was not overly dominant. The age was revealed in a pleasant and distinctive sweet woodiness especially in the aftermath.
Chivas Century 100 Malts
- I actually thought this was the Yamazaki, because I expected the Chivas to be better. Big mistake and I'm sorry to say that my opinion of vatted malts hasn't improved overly much. This really is a moderately ordinary product that no amount of marketing hype will overcome. Malt drinkers are malt drinkers and not blend drinkers because they like the divergent and distinctive faces of single malt scotch. While it was well behaved overall and didn't have any serious faults, it did seem a bit rough to me with a dry woody catch in the nose and the palate was a bit fiery/grainy with pepper and ginger notes. The bumpf behind the product lists amongst the malts, content from 6 Islay distilleries including Ardbeg, Lagavulin and Laphroaig, but as I couldn't for the life of me find any peat in this whisky, one must opine that the proportion is miniscule indeed. Nice packaging.
Evan Williams 1990
Single Barrel Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whisky - I'm still not a bourbon fan and neither were any of the others. The nose was dominated by fresh pine resin, french nougat and candied almonds. Just too woody and too sweet in the nose, certainly less balanced than Baker Beam or Booker's and maybe only slightly better than Knob Creek, which believe me is not a high recommendation. The palate was sweet with lots of coconut in the aftertaste. Smooth enough, but too sweet. Wouldn't drink it in preference to any decent malt.
- - - Next Meeting:
25 October 2000 - "Islay, Islay, Islay - Oi! Oi! Oi! Well, we really had to have an Islay night as most of us would feel slightly cheated if we went through a
whole tasting year without at least one visit to our very favourite whisky isle. I'm sure that if most of us had to pick a Gold Medal Malt; our "number one, must have, can't survive without, desert island dram", a goodly
percentage would put an Islay somewhere very near the top of the list. Islay holds a special place in the heart of every malt lover as Islay offers a style for everyone. Ranging from the sneakily sophisticated to the "knock
your socks off" brigade; Islay has something to satisfy those that look for impact as well as those that seek complexity. For me Islay captures the very essence of the malt whisky adventure. In my personal pantheon of great
whiskies (scoring over 8.8) nearly half are from that tiny speck of windswept peat west of the Mull of Kintyre. In descending order of magnificence they include: Black Bowmore 1965, Ardbeg 15 (Allied Distillers), Laphroaig 15,
Lagavulin 1979 DE DMPX, Ardbeg 30 (Very Old) Ardbeg G&M (D1975 B1992), Ardbeg 1974 G&M (Spirit of Scotland), Caol Ila G&M (D1972 B1992), Bowmore 17 and Bowmore 1965 20 (Laird's Club). For the October meeting we have representatives from the heart of all the styles although the peat monster has gone AWOL as both the Lagavulin
and Caol Ila, while indubitably displaying healthy whacks of peat don't announce its presence by leaping out of the glass at arms length. Bunnahabhain 12
- Everybody knows that I hold this malt in high regard and consider it a much underrated dram. Most of the things I've written about Bunnahabhain before don't warrant repeating except for a couple of snippets : "A lovely, well balanced malt, despite the fact that its flavour profile suggests a coastal highland rather than exhibiting classic Islay traits. It improves in the glass with more toffee and peat coming out" and "easily the best highland malt made on Islay".
Lagavulin 8 (Ian McLeod & Sons Island 8)
- that this whisky is from Lagavulin is pure speculation on my part, but I have my reasons. The Signatory Islay we had early in 1999 was from Lagavulin and while the Macleods Island 8 taste profile doesn't resemble Lagavulin 16 it has quite a lot in common with the youngster from Signatory. Both actually taste like a cross between Laphroaig and Bowmore or maybe they could even hail from Caol Ila. There are hundreds of variables that affect the final taste of a whisky and both the type of wood and the length of time in wood make a huge contribution. I'd bet money that the Macleods 8 is 100% bourbon wood. The lively lifted bubblegum, sweet smoke and vanillan oak in the young one is typical of youthful Islay whiskies from all the peatier distilleries, while only the Lagavulin 16 of all the big peat monsters has any appreciable sherry wood at all.
Caol Ila 21 (1975)
- I have tried this one twice and fallen in love with the immaculate bourbon treatment with vanilla and stripped pine dominant over the expected Islay phenols and creosols, except in the finish where the smoke really explodes. I've always scored it high but have to concede that it does lack the complexity & depth that 20+ years in bourbon oak should have produced. Given that caveat, this is a very, very nice malt, and if the industry was handing out gongs for cleanliness this one would win a prize. A beautiful example of a mid-peated 100% bourbon wood Islay, but not as awesome as it could have been. Apart from the age, this one has more than a bit in common with the youngster from Lagavulin.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Also available: Craig's prE-pistles from
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Copyright © |
Click HERE for more malt mania!
