Tasting Notes: Red Breast: 12 Year

Red Breast: 12 Year (Irish Single Pot Still Whiskey: 12 Year: 40% ABV)

Visual: Light banana skin to gold.

Viscosity: Generally very slow puckering that barely breaks into streaks.

Nose; Light ripe banana skins. Some alcohol prickle. Shredded wheat. Caramel. Pineapple. Water lightens the aroma.

Body: Still an alcohol touch. Pears in custard. Banana. The alcohol effect picks up over time. Water really mellows the fire and makes the flavour more malt and biscuits styled

Finish: Pear and malt chocolate. Apples. Smooth sheen. Water makes digestive biscuits come out and adds banoffee pie.

Conclusion: After visiting this one many a time I thought I had best review it.  Oddly this sampling found the whiskey the most flavoursome that I have ever tried it. How auspicious.

This has always seemed a slightly fiery whiskey when taken neat, so it took me a bit of time to unveil the flavours within. It isn’t badly burning, but there is a noticeable alcohol element. Water does a great job of dampening the fire, but it does remove some of the high points from the main body. The finish seems bullet proof though and works the best of the whole drink.

I’m getting ahead of myself again though aren’t I? This is a whiskey with a lovely feel, like banana skin. Coincidentally it has the flavour of banana as well which makes for a nice thematic touch. The whole thing is wrapped around a predominantly apple and pear body. In a way it makes me think of what St Georges Whisky may be like when it grows up – we can but see.

It has a good balance of texture and flavour, a lasting sweetness and good fruit elements. Despite the occasional fire it still feels dessert like, the alcoholics cheesecake perhaps.

With water it is very easy to drink and the banana touch complements the green fruit well. The combination givens the result of a thicker flavoured whisky than those elements would usually match. Despite that it never feels heavy; in fact at times the spirit feels like it could easily evaporate from your tongue. Overall a fine fresh whisky, light in feel but not in taste.

Background: Drunk at the Raven. This is part of my attempt to branch back out into Irish Whiskies after not giving them the attention they deserve for a while.  I had a bottle of this a while back and enjoyed it, and since The Raven do nicely over sized measures it seemed like a good time to revisit and see how it holds up to my memory. Investigating the term “Pot Still Whiskey” it seems that it is generally triple distilled but what makes it distinctly “pot still” is that does not use purely malted barley. Ok I copied that off wikipedia, but it hold up with what I had heard before so may not be a complete lie. The term seems odd as best I can tell Single Malt whisky uses pot stills the same as “Pot Still” whiskey so it seems a not overly useful descriptive term. Huh. Maybe I should look into it more.

Tasting Notes: Van Winkle: Special Reserve: 12 Year: Lot B

Van Winkle: Special Reserve: 12 Year: Lot B (American Wheated Bourbon: 12 Years: 45.2% ABV)

Visual: A very dark amber gold.

Viscosity: Comes down thick and as a single sheet.

Nose: Rye bread. Spice. Shelled husks. Faint oil air. Orange peel. Water lightens mainly without adding much.

Body: Very sweet and spiced. Orange liquor. Sherry soaked red grapes. Treacle. Muscat grapes. Chives. Rye bread.

Finish: Red grapes. Mulled spice. A scented candle like oddity that hands around just at the back of the nostrils. Quite dry. Treacle and herbal.

Conclusion: Not for the faint of heart this one. Before drinking it I thought I had worked out the rough range of flavour the Bourbon played with. Then this passed my lips and I realized I was wrong.

Very sweet with this almost liquore touches countered by very herbal mulled wine styling. The more traditional Bourbon flavours expected show them underneath that, but on top it is all dancing spicy flavour.

Unfortunately you acclimatise to this shock too quickly. It is such a pleasant experience that I would like to be surprised anew on each sip, but the eye blinking oddity loses its punch as you get used to it.  That doesn’t mean it becomes bad, just that you can only really have that surprise once.

Also, don’t add water, it doesn’t seem to benefit and water  kills some of the higher elements in it.

So it had wondrous first sips and  then a tingling spiciness that makes for fair decent flavour by itself. Reminds me a bit of Muscat cask ageing and that’s a fair impressive feat.  Overall very impressive without compromising the core elements. I will definitely have to try the even older versions.

Background: Made at the Buffalo Trace distillery, this is apparently a wheated Bourbon. Best I know that means that despite it containing elements that I was convinced was rye bread like, there was actually no rye used to make it. Go figure.  Drunk at the Rummer Hotel. I have been having a lot of Scottish whisky recently and decided to give their Bourbon selection a try for a change. No I don’t know what “Lot B” is.  Twelve years is bloody old for a Bourbon, I didn’t think they survived well aged for more than six. Obviously I was wrong

Tasting Notes: Glen Garioch: 12 Year

Glen Garioch: 12 Year (Scottish Highland Single Malt: 12 Years: 48% ABV)

Visual: Slightly bronzed gold.

Viscosity: Generally slow and middling length streaks. A few fast chasing streaks.

Nose: Marzipan. Sugared almonds, very sweet and light. Light planed wood. Hint of smoke. Water brings out stewed apples.

Body: Oak front. Golden syrup. Custard and dried apricot.  Milky chocolate. Pears. Water makes apple crumble and oak come out, overall much more fruity with water.

Finish: Almonds and chocolate. Pear drops. Tiny meat broth occasionally. Light oak. Cinnamon. Water makes much more chocolate emphasis come out.

Conclusion: This is really smooth, and if I didn’t know better I would have called it as Speyside for its sweet and fruity style. It has a bit more punch that usually for the fruity sweet style though, probably due to the slightly higher than average abv. No bad thing though. In fact I would advise against watering it down too much because while a drop or two really helps it open up it very quickly looses that extra force and thickness that really helps it stand out from the crowd.

It has a lovely luxurious chocolate finish and a delicate sugar and fruit nose to set it top and tail. It brings you in easy and heads out smoothly.  In fact while it is different in flavour the texture and class reminds me of the pacing on its fellow highland whisky Dalmore.  In my opinion that’s a very good whisky to be like, and the lovely fruitiness means that it brings nearly completely different flavours in with the same stylish touch.

Overall an impressive mix of style and fruit, and stewed and dessert in its flavours.  It balances the extra force with great ease of drinking in the flavours. It isn’t one for long sipping session neat due to that extra force, but works well that way watered down a touch. Neat I would say it would be great post dessert whisky.

A nice introduction to the distillery.

Background: Drunk at “the Tasting Rooms” who usually have a nice selection of less common whiskys.  I’d been meaning to try this one for a while, it being yet another distillery I had yet to try.  Apparently the pronunciation on the name is Glen Geery. Yeah, I would never have worked that one out. Drunk with friends who were similarly enjoying a range of spirits and commenting which gave a nice tasting atmosphere.

Tasting Notes: Signatory Vintage: Cask Strength:Glen Ord 1998

Signatory Vintage: Glen Ord 1998 (Scottish Highland Single Cask Single Malt Whisky: 12 Years: 59.6% ABV)

Visual: Pale Grain.

Viscosity: Thin but quite fast streaks.

Nose:  Planed wood and light nuttiness. The alcohol burn is uncompromising unsurprisingly. Distinct dry oak.  Water makes slight perfumed and more towards crushed peanuts on the nuttiness. A touch of peat possibly?

Body: Sweet syrup. Nut liquore. Tingle of aniseed. Salt. Water makes sweeter yet brings out a charcoal feel to fight it.

Finish: Dry charring. Slightly medicinal. Iodine and a dry gin air. Becomes very dry as you drink more.

Conclusion: This is very dry. It’s a desiccated tongue inducing drink and no mistake. Very slightly medicinal and definitely astringent with a gin like touch to the alcohol.  I’ve probably put off some of you already, and have the others on tenterhooks.

Odd then, that compared to what I have just described, the front of the whisky is massively sweet which makes the dry wine like finish even more unusual.  Initially I took this to be just part of the high alcohol content of the cask strength, but it’s dry nature survived a significant water induced dilution.

It is obviously very unusual, its most standard element is probably the nut character, but it is the dry medicinal touch that stands out. Very different from Laphroaigs take on it, and doesn’t match it with the same level of booming flavour as that beast.

Definitely a whisky that works better with more in your mouth, where the sweetness can tease itself out before the dry finish mutilates you. An interesting and harsh whisky. Fascinating, but too dry for my tastes.  Despite being one for the extremes in whisky I couldn’t take to it.

Background: I’ve never drunk a Glen Ord whisky before. This one I found at a new café/restaurant in Bath. I had noticed their impressive selection of whisky (Many more than on the web site) in their wine shop below earlier that day and decided to give the place a try.   The restaurant looked pretty impressive, and was very friendly staffed, though we limited ourselves to just drinks on this occasion.

Tasting Notes: Connoisseurs Choice: Caol Ila 1997

Connoisseurs Choice: Caol Ila 1997 (Scottish Islay Single Malt Whisky: 12 Years:43% ABV) (Bottled 2009)

Visual: Reasonably dark toffee gold.

Viscosity: Initially quite solid, but forms into fast thick streaks.

Nose: Smoke, treacle and slightly tar like. Salt, vanilla and oak. Liquorice. Water opens it up heavily to a floral style, adds more vanilla along with raisins and orange peel.

Body: Salt and golden syrup mix with toffee. Light peat grows throughout, Meaty. Water again makes large changes. Custard sweet, more salt, yet still slightly tar influenced.

Finish: Milk chocolate, dry oak and again slight tar stylings. Water makes salty yet sweet with a good dose of peat.

Conclusion: Another Caol Ila! As a big fan of them, I love comparing the different bottlings to explore the range, so jumped on this one at a tidy 12 years of ageing or thereabouts.

This one is quite a heavy duty expression for the spirit, initially quite thick and tarry with a bit more peat than usual.  That said the extra weight does it good and doesn’t harm the spirit at all.  The difference may put off people who enjoy the normally more mellow restrained Islay character of Caol Ila, but for them there is still hope.  With water you get a large change, with massive sweetness coming out to counterpoint, resulting in a dulled, but not completely overpowered Islay character.

So a very nice take, with two competing styles when with or without water, a tale of two whiskies as it were. Tarry, peaty and sweet, it’s very distinctive and enjoyable.  A very interesting take on the spirit and a fine independent bottling for anyone who wanted just that touch more force to the spirit.

Background: I’m a big fan of Caol Ila and love the fact that Connoisseurs Choice make available a mix of their bottlings to sample quite cheaply.   Drunk at a local pub which has Michael Jackson’s whisky guide behind the bar, and an ever rotating stock of CC bottles.  Caol Ila is often viewed as one of the more subtle Islay whiskies, though I find it still has enough of the style to stand out, it only seems mellow compared to say Ardbeg and Laphroaig.  Note: If you look carefully, you can see my god awful handwriting in my current notebook in the photo.

Tasting Notes: Mannochmore: 12 Year

 

Mannochmore: 12 Year (Speyside Scottish Single Malt Whisky: 12 Years: 43% ABV)

Visual: Light white grape juice.

Viscosity: Quite slow to form, but thick streaks from the spirit.

Nose: Smooth. Vanilla and white grapes. Grain fields and lime. Slight sherried fruit. Water adds a very dry cider touch and pressed orange juice.

Body: Very smooth, light at the front and sweet. Grapes again, planed wood. Water makes lighter, possibly too light and adds slight red grapes.

Finish: Slightly spicy. Malt chocolate and vanilla custard. Water adds slight charring and rum spice.

Conclusion:  A more formidable whisky that it first seems, though that’s not hard to do.  Initially very light and almost too smooth, it doesn’t make much of an impact. After a few moments to settle on the tongue you get past that light front to be able to recognise the flavours that tingle behind.

Lots of grapes in the main body, mainly white grapes but with some red grape spiciness as well. Very much gives a wine feel, although I doubt it has been anywhere near a wine cask.

A very light and fruity whisky with just a hint of spice. Not one to add water to, it doesn’t have the body for that to work.  It’s a light refresher, maybe to have between courses for a meal, or as a light aside with dessert.

Background: Had at a quiet tavern where the owner was happy to talk about the whisky, I didn’t have the heart to tell him I was well aware of who Michael Jackson was, and of the different whisky regions. Mannochmore used to make the famous “Black Whisky” the Loch Dhu, though it has been suggested that that’s whisky’s colour may have been due to somewhat artificial colourings rather than a natural property of the whisky. Looking at this very light whisky I can easily believe that to be so.

Tasting Notes: Knockdhu: anCnoc 12

Knockdhu: anCnoc 12 (Scottish Speyside Single Malt Whisky: 12 Years: 40% ABV)

Visual: Medium custard influenced gold.

Viscosity: Initially rock solid, then thin trails form from the spirit.

Nose: Lavender, pancakes and pencil shavings.  Muffins. Slight custard sweetness. Wet pine cones. Water lightens, almost to a sticky rice aroma.

Body: Light meaty feel, with tiny peat traces.  Lime and sweet syrup. Broth. Slick and thick texture. Water makes much less meaty and also less interesting.  Rice with ground pepper undertones. Slight crushed leaves mixed with custard. Yeah, that sounds odder than it was.

Finish: Dry and sawdust. Beef crisps. Milk chocolate drink. Bitter chocolate. Leather. Water makes for a more noticeably rough end, a kind of potatoes crisps texture.

Conclusion: An interesting spirit here, flirting lightly with the meat and peat without jumping headlong into the heavy hitter territory. It brings in a nice broth flavour into an otherwise quite sweet whisky.  Not a batch of flavours that takes well to the addition of water though.

In fact the broth like element really is the main variant from standard, and it is nice enough to do the job, but that alone doesn’t shout to the heavens.  This results in a decent whisky that however feels slightly under decorated. A good but nude whisky then.

Generally I prefer to have a whisky that is good on its own before thinking about odd finishes, but this almost cries out for the extra touches that would bring. Of course maybe a few extra years in a standard barrel may bring that extra touch by itself.

A solid base whisky then, with promise of something more.

Background: The Knockdhu distillery has started selling its wares under the anCnoc label. possibly to stop the easy confusion between it and its speyside brethren Knockando.  This has a reputation as quite a light whisky.  I grabbed a miniature as part of my efforts to explore distilleries I haven’t tried yet.

Tasting Notes: Bunnahabhain 12

Bunnahabhain 12 (Scottish Islay Single Malt Whisky: 12 Years: 40% ABV)

Visual: Darkened gold.

Viscosity: Lots of thick fast streaks.

Nose: Light smoke, rock and roast beer. Slight sulphur, turned earth and fruitcake.

Body: Very light front into custard and sea wetted stones. Sea breeze. Light cinnamon spice and sherry. Water makes lighter and more custard doughnuts and brings out rounded bready tones.

Finish: Light, fresh air and sea breeze. Malt loaf and malted drinks. Still a  touch of sulphur and yet becomes custard like again with water.

Conclusion:  We all know Islays reputation for massive force and peat.  So many may ask what the heck is this?  The understated Islay.  Still lightly salted and smoke, it brings in custard sweetness and fruitcake elements. Very light on the front it takes a bit for the flavour to develop, all in all happily defying the areas expectations.

Whilst I applaud the difference, the whisky does not quite make itself known for what it is, as some of the flavours are slightly indistinct.  You find the slight rockiness and the sweetness pulling against each other and losing some of their character in doing so.  It is as each part is put together well, but the whole is less than the sum of its parts.

Not bad, but not inspired.

Background: If not for Kilchoman opening up, this would be the last Islay distillery I needed to tasting note. As it is the delicious journey continues.  Islay has a reputation as the island that has the most challenging of the Scottish whiskies, though that is mainly the result of the Adbeg, Lagavulin and Laphroaig distilleries who all turn out beasts. Unfortunately behind these the lighter Islays tend to be ignored.

Tasting Notes: Suntory: Hibiki 12

Suntory: Hibiki 12 (Japanese Blended Whisky: 12 Year: 43% ABV)

Visual: Pale Gold

Viscosity: A couple of fast streaks, but in general surprising slow and slightly thick.

Nose: Pencil shavings, sweet liqueur and plum. Fresh potpourri. Noticeably smooth. Water adds shortbread and completely nullifies the already mild alcohol. Celery.

Body: Spiced blood orange, toffee and vanilla. Malted drinks. Rum soaked raisins. Water brings out a biscuit style and sweetness whilst letting the rum like elements roam. Very smooth. Celery again. Plums lightly arise.

Finish: Lots of chocolate and chocolate orange. Light syrup, celery. Oysters. Comparatively simple.

Conclusion: So here we go, trying a blended whisky, the first for a while on this blog. A very reputable example of blending as well.  Now normally blended whisky isn’t my cup of tea but this sounded interesting enough to give a try.

Well its high quality, you can tell that instantly, and still very distinctively a blend.  It has that slightly overproduced feel, all smooth edges and pop inoffensiveness compared to the often rough punk and indie edges to a single malt.  So its not trying to duplicate the malts, it stands upon its style very deliberately.

This does not mean it isn’t good however, for all blended is often used as an insult, it’s just a different beast. It is very smooth, spicy but with a chocolate finish. As suggested before it is all rounded edges and smooth curves managed in a very sensual way.

The oddest element is the repeating feel of celery within it (possible bamboo could be a call to, but I do not have enough experience in that to say). Very unusual, but not disconcerting.

It’s balanced, with subtle fruit, and lends nice mix of textures and tastes. Overall a well made whisky that only suffers due to my preference for rougher edges.

Background: Presented in a wonderful bottle, with 24 facets symbolising the hours of the day and old Japanese calendar (or so it says) and a nice little booklet explaining its background it does a lot to establish good first impressions.  Apparently the oldest whisky in this is 30 years old and the whisky is partially aged in umeshuu  (plum wine) casks.  Well regarded in general, and I’ve been meaning to get hold of a bottle for a while. As mentioned I tend to prefer single malts over blended whisky.

Tasting Notes: Bruichladdich 12

Bruichladdich 12 (Scottish Islay Single Malt Whisky:12 Years: 46% ABV)

Visual: Reasonably light golden glaze.

Viscosity: Quite a few middling width fast streaks.

Nose: Very light peat, sulphur and brimstone with light oak and beef.  Just slightly salty. Not too heavy for an Islay, but still noticeably of the style.  Slight syrup undertone. Becomes more brine influenced with water, and adds dry beef powder or beef crisps style influence.

Body: Meaty and again surprisingly lightly peated, syrup in the body. Salt water comes out with a drop of water, yet mixes with sweet syrup.

Finish: Meat and salt, slight chocolate cream and charring. More salt and sea water comes out with a drop of water.

Conclusion: An impressively subtle Islay with all of the style but the punch turned way down.  Very beefy and meaty oriented which gives a great texture, and this beef dusting style makes for an interesting nose, though the sulphur influences does not mix well and adds an unwelcome whiff until you put in a touch of water.

The brine aspect from adding water gives a bit of extra interest and makes a sea breeze take on the whisky, well sea breeze munching on a cow if that makes any kind of sense.

It’s amazing what you will write sometimes, whilst drinking whisky, anyway, back to the tasting.

It’s a flavoursome Islay whisky, distinctive without being overpowering, and from what I can find, the very light peat seeming aspects are most likely not from peat at all, as the whisky itself is made from unpeated malt.  A very interesting drink then.

(Guest Note: Will suggests that when I say sulphur in this tasting, I mean in fact it smells like a wet fart. I could not possibly comment)