Tasting Notes: Bushmills: Caribbean Rum Cask Finish

Bushmills: Caribbean Rum Cask Finish (Irish Blended Whiskey: 40% ABV)

Visual: Clear gold. Fast, thick streaks come from the spirit.

Nose: Noticeable alcohol. Spicy. Dark rum. Sugar cane. Strawberry. Rhubarb touch. Cake sponge. Water makes cleaner.

Body: Smooth. Light lemon cakes. Dry grain alcohol. Strawberry. Red raspberries. Toffee. Sweet, dark rum. Vanilla. Water makes smoother. Adds grapes. Soft lime. Cherries. Brown sugar.

Finish: Alcoholic jelly touch. Red fruit medley. Dry rum. Brown sugar. Treacle touch. Alcohol air in general. Water makes burnt brown sugar. More clear rum. Dry rice.

Conclusion: This is rum finished, rather than fully aged in a rum cask like the Travel Exclusive Steamship edition. This is a blended whisky with grain whiskey in it unlike that Single Malt Steamship, and the classic 12 Year Caribbean Rum finish travel exclusive Bushmills. It is a no age statement whisky, similar to the Steamship but unlike the 12 year.

So, with all that said, you would expect the Steamship Rum edition to be superior and probably closer to the classic 12 year right? Yet, somehow it is not. Which is a long way around saying that this blended rum cask finish is pretty cool.

So, let’s get the bad side out of the way first. I’m not sure how much grain whiskey was used in this, but the neutral, rough grain kind of spirit is evident here. Not a great look, especially in the finish where it hangs around. Water mutes that but also takes down the vibrancy of the whisky a bit. So, the choice, especially for the aroma, is slight grain alcohol tingle or a more muted character.

That said, this feels pretty joyous despite its flaws. There are light citrus notes that are familiar to the Bushmills spirit that are evident there – lemon and lime notes particularly make a show. Now these citrus notes are by far not the main show, this is very much about the rum finish, but it does show one of the reasons I prefer this over the fully rum aged version – it gives more room for the native Bushmills character to show alongside the unusual ageing and give more complexity and range to the whiskey.

The rum is very present but not overwhelmingly dominant, showing as a mix of red fruit, rum itself obviously, and burnt sugar. Lovely and vibrant, yet the base Bushmills character gives that fresh contrast and make it pretty smooth overall despite the grain rough edges.

So, to no surprise, the 12 year old single malt Caribbean rum finish that now only exists in my idealised memories of it, is better than this. However, this, nearly 20 years on, is still slightly cheaper than that was – and we have had a long time of whiskey getting more expensive in the mean time. It is a heck of a lot easier to get than that was and , oh yes, this still exists – unlike that one.

So, go in expecting the grain edges, a slight rice in the finish and accepting it won’t be a classic and you will find a fun rum finished Bushmills. One that will do as a stand in while I plead for them to pull their damn finger out and remake the proper 12 year single malt take again. It is far from perfect, but a decent price point for a fun dram, so it does the job for me.

Background: Ok, this one has some background indeed, as has been hinted at in the main notes. The travel exclusive 12 Year Caribbean Rum Cask Finish Bushmills Single Malt was one of my first real great whiskeys I tried. So, since that was only available for a short time, I have spent the years since trying to find something similar. So, when I found this, a blended no age statement Bushmills, with that cask finish, at Independent Spirit I had to grab it and give it a try. Since it was calling back to a more innocent age I went with The Eels: Beautiful Freak as music. Loved that album and hadn’t listened to it for a while.

Advertisement

Tasting Notes: Glen Flagler: 100% Pot Still Whisky – Rare All Malt

Glen Flagler: 100% Pot Still Whisky – Rare All Malt (Scottish Lowland Single Malt Whisky: 40% ABV)

Visual: Very pale, lightly grain coloured whisky. Very slow, medium thickness puckering comes from the spirit.

Nose: Crushed concrete dust. Wisp of smoke. Noticeable alcohol. Menthol to lime air. Light dried beef slices. White grapes and vanilla. With water it is still rocky but cleaner and with less alcohol.

Body: Wet rocks. Vanilla. Moderate peat. Slightly gritty. Moss. Vanilla fudge. Slight sulphur. Water makes smoother. Still mossy and gritty. Peated caramel. Chocolate eclair hard sweets.

Finish: Wet rocks. Gritty. Vanilla. Moss. Smoke to ash trays. Slight sulphur. Water makes very gritty.

Conclusion: Another peated lowland? Was this a trend in the past that I missed out on or something? Though since it seems every distillery that tried it died there may not be as much demand for peated lowland as I hoped. May be just me wanting it then.

This is slightly more rough edges than the Dunglass I tried – there is definitely a more evident youthful spirit character, even though I *think* they may be the same age. If feels kind of similar to the Dunglass but grittier, rockier and with more evident peat.

Now, this isn’t the experience the whole way through. It does open up to a sweeter vanilla fudge style over time, but even then it has a sulphur led roughness to it.

Water initially just smooths the alcohol, which is appreciated, but keeps it fairly gritty as a whole. However a touch more water brings out a caramel and chocolate set of notes, kind of like chocolate eclair hard sweets. This does mean that the higher levels of peat gives it a peated caramel style which is not something I expected to ever encounter.

Now the peat isn’t heavy, just heavier than Dunglass does it, but the smoke and rocky character is definitely the defining element here.

Since we are comparing dead peated lowlands here, Dunglass did it better. This is a bit more of a rough experience, it doesn’t really full indulge the peat, nor the smoothness of the lowland character, so doesn’t make the most of either style it wears.

It still makes me want more peated lowland whisky, it is just this doesn’t quite have the spark. A nice idea that has been done better by another (also dead) distillery. We so need a running distillery to get on this.

Background: Well, this is hard one to get information on, I have bought or been given a ton of books on Whisky over the years and the vast majority didn’t even mention this one. It is a peated lowland whisky that was made between 1964 and 1985. I saw this miniature at Old and Rare whisky and grabbed it to be able to give this dead distillery a try. This is the last of a small batch of miniatures I got from there. They are a darn expensive web site, even for what they have, but I wasn’t going to pass up a chance to try these without having to buy a very expensive 70cl bottle. This is listed as 70% proof, which may confuse some people from the USA as by USA measures that would be 35% abv and so below the 40% abv minimum needed for whisky. However by UK 70% proof that is 40% abv. Confusing, yes? So now you know. There is no age statement on this, but the art matches the 5 year 70cl bottling, sooo, maybe that? Who knows. Went with Pulp: Different Class as backing music. Still good after all this time.

Tasting Notes: Littlemill: Dunglass 5 Year

Littlemill: Dunglass 5 Year (Scottish Lowland Single Malt Whisky: 5 Year: 40% ABV)

Visual: Clear gold colour, with quite slow puckering from the spirit.

Nose: Clean vanilla. Ash. Dried beef slices. Alcoholic lime. Broken rocks. Alcohol tingle. Water makes gentle. Light moss and gentle peat.

Body: Smooth. Lime. Vanilla toffee. Cream. Managed peat. Water adds more ash like notes and heavier smoke.

Finish: Vanilla fudge. Smoke. Slightly dry. Water adds heavier smoke. More water brings out a wet cardboard note.

Conclusion: Now, for all they are prized for collectors, with a lot of dead distilleries I can see why they died. A lot are not particularly stand out in the whisky world. This distillery, and more so than just the distillery, this particular Dunglass style expression – why did this not survive?

As a pretty expensive dram it is fairly simple for what you are paying. It is smooth, very obviously lowland character with smooth vanilla. The peat used is gentle, and while there is a bit of youthful alcohol it is still generally smooth, and the little bump it has can easily be smoothed out with a few drops of water. It would seem to be a very stereotypical smooth lowland if it wasn’t for that gentle peat.

That gentle peat? That is such a pleasure. Not fancy, but it gives a very different character to this easy to drink whisky. A tasty peat character but without any of the harshness that usually comes with peat – in fact this is gentler than most of the unpeated whisky on the market.

If you add more than just a drop of water to this it does become more ash filled, more peaty and heavier. Not bad, but it makes it lose its raison d’etre. There are many better peatier and heavy whiskies than this with some water, but none that are as lowland smooth, sweet and yet peated as it is before you add that water. At least none that have been encountered by me. In fact I was surprised to find out Littlemill was not triple distilling at this time as this very much has that character. A bit more water also adds a less pleasant wet cardboard note, this is definitely just a drop or two of water dram.

As a rare whisky it is too expensive for what it should be – a gentle, easy drinking whisky with that surprising touch of peat weight, but I genuinely want an easier to buy whisky like this. Someone please make and release it. This is simple, satisfying, sweet and peaty and you can’t go wrong with it except for the higher price.

Background: So, another chance to try a dead distillery, thought technically the distillery is not a new one to me. I got to try a Littlemill a long time back at the Rummer Hotel. This however is a rare lightly peated expression they did in the late 1960s, with the actual distillery closing in 1992 (ish? I’ve seen 1994 listed as well, and it had closed previously in 1984 – frankly don’t trust these dates too much, I’ve seen too many different ones) and dismantled 1997. Looks like they also did a heavily peated one called Dumbuck, but I’ve not tried that one. Anyway saw this 5 year old miniature at Old and Rare Whisky. As I have mentioned before they are expensive, even for the whisky they sell, but the chance to try this whisky without needed to buy a full and very expensive bottle was an opportunity I did not want to pass up. As you can tell from the spirit being made in the 60s and this being 5 years old, this bottle has been around a while, and the cap seemed to almost fuse with the bottle. Took some proper effort to get it off and to the whisky inside. There isn’t any abv listed on the bottle, but the listing online said 40% abv so that is what I put here. Wanted some light but haunting music for backing so went with Celeste: Farewell.

Tasting Notes: Connoisseurs Choice: Millburn 1966

Connoisseurs Choice: Millburn 1966 (Scottish Highland Single Malt Whisky: 40% ABV)

Visual: Very dark, caramel to treacle brown colour. Slow thick streaks come from the spirit.

Nose: Caramel and treacle. Heavy. Treacle toffee. Light smoke. Hot sticky toffee pudding. Light pencil shavings. Water makes lighter and brings out slight menthol.

Body: Very smooth. Caramel. Light greenery. Tingle on the tongue, but not in a boozy way. Charring. Dried beef slices. Peppery. Water makes cleaner and brings out more greenery.

Finish: Stir fry vegetables. Charring. Smoke. Moss. Oak. Malt chocolate. Water brings out treacle and white pepper.

Conclusion: Well, this is both heavy and light. AT THE SAME TIME. Odd, no?

The aroma is heavy caramel and treacle, in a real thick, sweet booming set of notes – so from this I was expecting a fairly chewy character of whisky ahead of me.

So, I take a sip and the flavours are still heavily on the caramel side, but initially the body is surprisingly smooth and just slightly light. Far less chewy than the aroma had led me to expect. The flavours are still heavy though. Under the sweet notes that the aroma promised there is instead a very greenery, peppery and slightly smokey thing, with just a hint of menthol release. Instead of simple sweetness it feels like a spice jar of a whisky.

Water actually makes it feel thicker. Don’t know how that works, and as well as that extra weight makes it also feel even more spice led.

The emphasis on spice isn’t to my personal taste, so this isn’t a favourite for me, but it is still impressively weighty in the flavours it brings to the fore. I think it would make a good part of a vatted malt if it was not nigh impossible to get now. The weight would be a boon to many a blend, and if used as a backing the spice could be a great element.

A fascinating one I am glad to have tried, but not super to my taste so I am glad I don’t have a full bottle to go. Especially at current costs.

Background: So, the amount of single malt whisky distilleries in Scotland I have not tried has reduced to a small number now – mostly either newly opened distilleries, or, like this from one of the silent distilleries that have closed over the years. Bottles from these dead distilleries can be expensive beyond my capabilities. So, when I saw that Old and Rare whisky had miniatures from a few distilleries I had not tried I was very interested. I don’t use Old and Rare much, they tend to be expensive, even for what they offer – and millilitre for millilitre these minis are expensive, but compared to getting full bottles it al least gives me a chance to try these distilleries. There is no age statement on the bottle, but a google suggests that there is a 70cl bottling from 1966 by Connoisseurs Choice that looks similar that is a 16 Year. Doesn’t necessarily mean that this one is, but that is the best guess I can get. You can tell this has been bottled for a long time though – with rust evident of the outside of the cap, and the bottle not quite being full due to loss of spirit over the years. Anyway, wanted some big music for the occasion so went with Godspeed You! Black Emperor: Allelujah! Don’t Bend! Ascend!. Lovely haunting stuff and perfect for the occasion.

Tasting Notes: Walsh Whisky: Writer’s Tears – Copper Pot

Walsh Whisky: Writer’s Tears – Copper Pot (Irish Blended Whisky: 40% ABV)

Visual: Deep gold. Fast, thick streaks come from the spirit.

Nose: Smooth. Honey and toffee. Honey nut cornflakes. Shreddies. White grapes. Butter on crumpets. Fresh cut apples. Water adds trail mix and dried apricot. More green fruit.

Body: Smooth. Honey to golden syrup. Moderate thickness. Only gets warming if held for a while. Bready late on. Apples to apple pie. Pear to pear drops. Malt chocolate. White chocolate. Water adds more white chocolate and some grain like rough edge.

Finish: Malt drinks. Honey on toast. Margarine on crumpets. Chocolate cake. Apple pie. Water adds slight rice and grain rough edges.

Conclusion: Ok, this may be just because it is what I was told, but I can 100% believe that this is Bushmills whiskey in here. In fact a very short and sweet description would be that this feels like a better take on the charred bourbon barrel travel exclusive Bushmills I had a while back.

It is smooth, but with a bit more grip that I expected in an Irish triple distilled whisky, especially at 40% abv. Also it is, to paraphrase a comment used to recommend it to me, much juicier in how the cask influence feels. The green fruit feels bigger, the sweetness as well, and just in general juicier that most of this style.

It has a mix of the juicier and more natural feeling fruit notes, and a more artificial, sweeter notes. Apple vs apple pie and pear vs pear drops being the most notable examples. It is an interesting and refreshing mix.

There is a lovely, sweet honey base, but also a bready and margarine savoury thickness which gives a mix of weight and easy drinking sweetness. Nothing too heavy, just a bit more weight than usual.

Now, there are some bad points – for one somehow water really doesn’t help here. It brings out the more grain edged, rougher, dry rice kind of character that was hidden when it was neat. Thankfully it isn’t a huge issue, as it is smooth enough neat – it doesn’t need water and that is lucky as water just makes it a little worse.

So, what we have so far is smooth, with nice thickness – lots of show from both the sweeter bourbon ageing, and the more fruity spirit character. It is a really solid set.

It may seem expensive for a blended Bushmills based whisky, but it compares well to the ten year in quality – and shows a very different aspect by concentrating on the bourbon ageing. It is better than the bourbon cask version aged before, doing that thing’s main point better than it ever managed.

Overall a lovely easy drinking dram.

Background: So, I have it on good authority that the whiskey for this is sourced from Bushmills, of which I am already a fan. This is a mix of single pot still and single malt whisky, both triple distilled as is common in Ireland, then aged in charred bourbon casks. Fairly simple, and what I was looking for as I wanted a nice easy drinking whisky. I will note that this was described as feeling like it had a “Juicier” cask than some other of the whiskies I was looking at, and that did seem to hit home when I did notes, so I will admit I may have been influenced by that. This was bought from Independent Spirit and drunk while listening to Noctule: Wretched Abyss, a Skyrim influenced black metal album from the lead singer of Svalbard. I’m a huge fan of Svalbard so was definitely going to check this out. It is heavy and awesome.

Marks and Spencer: Kenmore: 5 Year Blended Scotch Whisky

Marks and Spencer: Kenmore: 5 Year Blended Scotch Whisky (Scottish Blended Whisky: 5 Year: 40% ABV)

Visual: Deep, slightly reddened gold. Very fast, thick streaks come from the spirit.

Nose: Caramel. Neutral spirit alcohol. Vanilla. Pencil shavings. Dry rice. Orange skin.

Body: Smooth front quickly into burning alcohol. Dry rice. Caramel. Cherries. Vanilla fudge. Light smoke. Dried beef. Water makes smoother, more dried rice.

Finish: Dry rice. Alcohol air. Dry stir fry veg. Soot. Rough. Dry bamboo. Charring. Water adds more rice and makes peppery.

Conclusion: This is pretty rough – though with a few oddly smooth notes amongst them. Neat it is pretty alcohol touched. It is not too bad on the nose – fairly neutral in the alcohol feel there amongst sweet caramel and vanilla notes. Nowt too complex but decent, if fairly basic.

The first sip comes in smooth vanilla toffee … for about two seconds … then nope, alcohol burn as fuck. I was pleasantly surprised for those two seconds before the burn cut in, and then it leads out into a finish that is way too rough.

Still, no worries, it is a young blended whisky and there are some good notes in there – orange in the aroma and cherries in the body, a touch of smoke as well against caramel and vanilla toffee. I know how this works, young whisky just needs a drop of water to open it up, right?

Turns out the answer is fuck no.

Dry bamboo, stir fry and rice notes are prevalent – along with a rough general alcohol air. Though I will say at least the alcohol fire is doused with water. Unfortunately everything else is significantly worse – especially in the unpleasant, long lasting dry bamboo finish.

Neat it has hints of adequacy – sweet, subtle soot and smoke, some fruit. Hints, but unfortunately with far too much alcohol that makes most of it hidden. Water kills the fire, but makes it shit.

Avoid.

Background: This was a kind gift from a colleague at work for Christmas. Many thanks. Despite how much I slagged it off. Still many thanks. I notice it lists caramel as an ingredient, which explains how it looks so dark for a 5 year old whisky. Not much else to add. I put on Siouxsie and the Banshees to listen to while drinking, felt like something a bit strange, joyous and alternative.

Tasting Notes: Scapa: Skiren

Scapa: Skiren (Scottish Island Single Malt Whisky: 40% ABV)

Visual: Slightly darkened gold. Slow thick sheet of steaks comes from the spirit.

Nose: Pears. Warming alcohol. Honey. Pencil shavings. Vanilla yogurt chunks. Apples. Vanilla toffee. Jelly babies. Water lightens the alcohol and makes very clean.

Body: Smooth but warming. Honey. Light praline. Sweet nuts. Oak touch. Apples. Slightly oily. Vanilla yogurt. Water makes clean and light. Orange notes. Bready. Pears. Slight wisp of smoke.

Finish: Brown bread. Clear honey. White chocolate. Dry. Oak. Tinned tropical fruit. Salt touch. Water adds dry rice. Slight sulphur. Mostly clean. More white chocolate. Wet rocks.

Conclusion: Only my second visit to the whisky that is Scapa and this is a fairly gentle one for a whisky from the Islands. Though admittedly that is a fairly varied area. Also, when I say gentle I only mean flavour wise – it has a mildly alcohol character that needs a touch of water to deal with it. I’m guessing from it being a no age statement whisky and the character that it has a touch of the younger whisky in it.

With just the tiniest drop of water it becomes very smooth mid body though more than a drop makes it too light. So, take just a drop and you get vanilla yogurt, green fruit and tinned tropical fruits over a honey touch. Very bourbon influenced, and a very gentle take, with just a lightly oily and sulphurous undertone for weight and Island character.

It always has a slightly young feel about it though, especially in the finish which develops a dry rice note over time, which is not great. Still, in general a decent whisky, just one with a few rough edges. Smooth overall and in general this is a great one to show the influence of bourbon ageing – the influence just booms through. It does feel like the younger spirit hurts though – it has so much good stuff in the lighter, smoother, easy drinking style that the rough edges really hurt its main appeal. In general I can dig rough edges in a whisky, but they work better in bigger, booming whisky – though this has a few of the rougher island characteristics in a pleasing way as well – some salt and wet rocks, just very subtly done as a backdrop to the bourbon style.

Decent, not a must have but decent – a tad more polish and this would be a good island take on the easy sipper with just a pinch of weight – doesn’t quite reach there but close.

Background: Scapa, bloody hell been a while since I had my one and only experience of Scapa. An Orkney Island distillery with a fairly small output if I remember rightly. So was very cool when my parents came back from Scotland and brought me this bottle of 100% first fill American Oak (so I presume bourbon casks) aged Scapa. Many thanks. Went with Svalbard: Gone Tomorrow as music for drinking to. Not much to add, this as my second Scapa, is where I try to try and start working out what parts of the spirit are distillery character and what is ageing and other such touches that alter that base.

Tasting Notes: Bushmills: Steamship Collection Rum Cask

Bushmills: Steamship Collection Rum Cask (Ireland Single Malt Whiskey: 40% ABV)

Visual: Pale bronzed gold. Lots of slow, middling thickness streaks come from the spirit.

Nose: Evident rum. Pencil shavings. Light sulphur. Oak. Water adds more pencil shavings. Strawberries.

Body: Vanilla and fudge. Noticeable alcohol. Spicy. Tinned tropical fruit. Thai spice. Cherries. Spicy red wine and bitter red wine. Strawberry. Water adds custard. Spicy rum. Liquorice touch.

Finish: Rum. Red cherries. Peppery. Tinned tropical fruit. Oak. Alcohol sheen. Treacle touch. Black licorice touch. Water adds more treacle. Fudge. Tannins.

Conclusion: Ok, first up, and to get this off my chest … This isn’t as good as the classic 12 Year Caribbean Rum Cask finished Bushmills that was a travel exclusive something like 15 years ago. That was one of my earliest favourite whiskeys so I have very strong opinions on this. Now, the fact that it was one of my early favourites may mean I am embellishing it in my mind. However a few elements of this new release, combined with the lack of age statement makes me think this is fairly young whisky. It has a slight rough alcohol edge neat, which is unusual for a quality Irish release, and so it definitely needs water to open it up. Considering this is over twice the price of that age statement declared 12 year release I feel it fair to be a tad irritated by this not living up to some very basic elements.

Now, while I am putting it through the screws it is still fairly decent, just overpriced for what it is. Anyway, let’s look at what flavour qualities it has. Well, it is quite spicy, and, as you may expect, it has a very evident rum character. It mixes that rum style with similar but different bitter and spicy red wine characteristics over time. There are some more gentle and sweeter vanilla and fudge notes, but generally the rum has free rein. Again, to go back to comparing to the 12 year rum finish, that was mainly aged in bourbon casks which gave it lots of time to smooth out and gain a good base to work from, which the well balanced use of rum added to, giving subtlety and complexity – while this feels much more one note and just slightly rough around the edges.

It may feel that I am being unfair comparing the two – but it does emphasise that, nice as this is, it feels like a real price gouge for lesser quality compared to what they used to turn out – even taking inflation and such into account. The original wasn’t that much more than a Bushmills 10, this is more expensive than Bushmills 16 is now.

Anyway it has moderate thickness but it is still reasonably easy to drink – though more weighty and harsher than most Irish whiskey. A lot of that weight is used to express the rum flavour, very spicy and well expressed but does overpower the more subtle sweetness and tinned tropical fruit notes.

Enjoyable, good rum character, but very overpriced for what it delivers. A pity that this didn’t use a bit of extra time to smooth and balance it into what it could have been.

Background: As I mentioned in my main notes, The 12 Year Caribbean Rum Finish Bushmills was one of my first favourite whiskeys. Thus when I heard about the steamship collection doing different aged Bushmills again, after years without, I was hoping for a rum release. Then when it was released, I spent ages searching for it in airports, but never finding this travel exclusive release. I finally found it at Master Of Malt when it finally got released from travel exclusivity. Woo. Master Of Malt have gone downhill a bit recently, but since they were the only place I could find it, that was where I grabbed it from. Rather than just finished in rum casks, this has been entirely aged in first fill Caribbean rum casks. Not much else to add, went with Miracle Of Sound – Level 10 for background music – his collection of his 2019 tunes Always good. Oh, and happy new year everyone – enjoy your drink!

Tasting Notes: Macleod’s: Island Single Malt

Macleod’s: Island Single Malt (Scottish Island Single Malt Whisky: 40% ABV)

Visual: Deep, heavy gold. Very slow, medium thickness streaks.

Nose: Salt. Wet greenery. Subtle fudge. Brown bread. Very clean. Lightly medicinal. Lightly peppery. Water adds light sulphur.

Body: Peppery. Slight alcohol. Soft lime. Crushed rocks. Salt. Unleavened bread. Light vanilla. Water adds peppercorns. More water adds custard and caramel.

Finish: Unleavened bread. Peppery. Water adds slight charred oak and slight gin. More water adds light custard and caramel. More charred oak. Cinder toffee.

Conclusion: Another call for the use of water here. Neat this is another ok but simple whisky. Quite clean, pretty smooth. Has a salty, lightly medicinal character that marks out a lot of the Island distilleries. Predominantly though it is just a peppery, medicinal dram.

Ok, so on the good side it shows the Island style, and is smooth for the low cost, but it is nothing really exciting.

So, water play time.

Water takes out the little alcohol character it had while accentuating some of the more medicinal notes. More importantly it brings out a slight sweetness and a thickness previously lacking. It doesn’t radically change the experience, but it gives contrast and grip that makes it much more enjoyable.

Still not stand out – has a few rough edges in the finish, but nicely shows the clean, salty island character without any real peat infusion.

Not bad, not stand out. Probably a weaker entry in the series but it does the job.

Background; Third of the Macleod’s regional whiskey minis. Yeah, while they have not blown me away, for the competitively low cost they come in at they have amused me enough that I keep grabbing another region I have not tried from them yet. So the Island region – more a set of regions as they have quite a diverse set depending on where they come from, but hey, its a way of grouping them. Anyway went with IDLES: Joy As An Act Of Resistance as music. Finally going to see them live soon and very excited about it. Bottle was grabbed from Independent Spirit.

Tasting Notes: Macleod’s : Lowland Single Grain

Macleod’s : Lowland Single Grain (Scotland Lowland Single Grain Whisky: 40% ABV)

Visual: Deep, slightly darkened gold. Fast thick streaks come from the spirit.

Nose: Alcohol air. Clean. Vanilla. Muesli.

Body: Light and smooth front. Alcohol jelly touch to the middle, but not heavy. Jelly babies Marshmallow. Water adds white chocolate. Toasted teacakes. Buttery notes.

Finish: Tinned tropical fruit. Clean. Vodka. White chocolate. Apricot. Water adds more white chocolate. Some chocolate cake. Sugar dusting.

Conclusion: You know, considering the dark gold colour this has, I was expecting a bit more to the flavour it comes with. Or at least a bit more weight to it. Ok, yes this is a lowland single grain, but man this looked utterly soaked in its bourbon ageing.

Instead, without water, this is a fairly clean, smooth spirit. It is a tad alcohol touched, but not too much, just a bit more than you would expect from a 40% abv lowland. It is kind of vodka with whisky flavours added in style more than anything else.

So, yeah, this definitely needs water in order to get it going. Which is no real surprise with the exception of the aforementioned colour of the spirit. I’m guessing that this isn’t old spirit, despite it being generally smooth, so a bit of water always helps, and this is doubly true with grain whisky.

Now water makes this a fluffy, marshmallow, lightly sweet thing – against a still sweet, but bready toasted teacake backing. It is still nothing like what you would expect from the darker gold colour, but, oh yeah, this is some easy drinking fun.

It is still not up there at brilliant, the tail end finish is kind of neutral alcohol which is .. meh – but generally it is a gentle, sweet, light fluffy thing. In fact it very much shows the bourbon influence – maybe that is all that is shown – like a lot of grain whisky the base is very neutral, so nearly all if not all the flavour is from the oak.

Still, it is nice bourbon ageing. It is very much a one style whisky, and very much needs water, and even with that has a few off notes buuut generally you will find it an easy drinking, sweet and fun whisky for a fairly decent price.

I dig it.

Background: I can’t actually find much on this whisky. I can find a lot on Macleod’s Single malt regions range, but, while this is visually very similar, and comes from the lowland region, this is in fact a single grain whisky. Which does not get listed with the regional single malts for obvious reasons. Anyway, there are not many lowland single malts, which I guess is why they went with a single grain for their pick for this – I’ve only had a few single grains, and while very different from single malt they have earned their place. Tend to be much more influenced by oak ageing than base spirit in my experience. Anyway- have been playing the utter hell out of Celeste for a while, so went with Celeste: farewell OST for drinking music. Such a good game. This was another one grabbed from Independent Spirit.