Was Revival Needed?

Taste Review #101 – Glendronach 15 old vs new

Rebirth. The chance to start anew. And in this dram’s case it has had a couple more re-awakenings than Lazarus. As we are now into the top three of the drams to be compared to old vs new, I turn my head back to the GlenDronach distillery, which I last reviewed in July 2020. I have to tell you that if I was to call myself a fanboy of any distillery, GlenDronach would be there. Only I detest the term fanboy, makes me think that I should be devoid of body hair from the nose down and wearing latex underpants and little else. That is a sight you do not want to see. It’s just that I really appreciate the Glendronach 18 Allardice, which was the subject of my last review from this distillery. I do like a sherry bomb if I am not getting my head blown off by island peated whiskies, and GlenDronach fits into this very category very well, same as some GlenAllachie, Glenfarclas and Tamdhu, but we’ll skip over the Aberlour for now due to some fairly disappointing reviews of young age core range.


GlenDronach 15 Revival

Glendronach distillery (let’s dispense with the Billy Walker signature capitalisation for a moment) has been operational since 1826, and was owned by Allied Distillers when it was mothballed in 1996. The older sample I have to try tonight is from that era, and was purchased from the Speyside Whisky Shop. By 2002, the distillery was reopened, while Allied Distillers eventually became part of Pernod Ricard. In 2008, the distillery was sold to a business consortium that included Billy Walker, who’d already bought the BenRiach Distillery in 2003 and would go on to buy the Glenglassaugh distillery in 2013. All three were sold to Brown Forman, the parent company of Jack Daniels in 2016, and in 2017, Billy was involved in the purchase of Glenallachie distillery to work his magic there and spread some more seemingly random capitals into a brand name.


Glendronach 15, pre Billy Walker era.

From what I could gather from the internet after my taste test that this 15 y.o dram was released in 1996, just before the distillery closed. It was the best seller in the limited range available at the time, although I do not know when it was discontinued. It wasn’t until 2009, under the watchful eye of Mr Walker, the GlenDronach 15 Revival was released, though by 2015 it had ground to a halt, in order to preserve older stocks. Re-introduced in 2018, this time by Rachael Barrie, I’d be hoping that stock management will ensure it will not have to have a hiatus again in the future, for this is a whisky that I’ve heard a lot of rave about, but never managed to wean myself off of the 18 yr old bottling. It’s time to find out if I can be persuaded to look beyond the 18 year old Allardice offering.

Glendronach 15 (1990’s)

Region -Highland Age – 15 y.o Strength – 40% abv Colour – Auburn (1.5) Cask Type – Sherry Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Caramel, plum jam, pipe tobacco, leather, prune, cherry, cocoa Palate – sherry, leather, slightly drying, black tea, molasses, cocoa, burnt toast. Finish – medium, charred wood, treacle, gently fading spice,


Glendronach 15

GlenDronach 15 Revival (2019 Bottling)

Region – Highland Age -15 y.o Strength – 46% abv Colour – Chesnut Oloroso Sherry (1.2) Cask Type – PX and Oloroso Sherry Colouring – No Chill Filtered – No Nose – Sherry, Strawberry, Vanilla, canned peaches, citrus peel Honey Nut Cornflakes. After sitting for a while and after water added a more pronounced sour citrus (lemon peel) became apparent. Palate – Oily, coats the mouth. Spicy wood arrival, Slightly sweet, dried dark fruit, orange peel, gingernuts, milk chocolate Finish – medium – wood tannins, slightly astringent, raisins, apricots, milk chocolate truffle. Needed water to calm down the wood spice and bring out more of the flavours.


GlenDronach 15 Revival on right

Conclusions

As much as these two drams may be similar in age, they do have enough differences to almost say that they are different whiskies. Looking at the two just in the bottle, we can see that the Revival bottling proudly states no colouring and no chill filtering. However the previous era bottle says nothing much apart from what it is legally obligated. So what do I think?

Let’s delve into cliches. The cliche about first impressions matter comes immediately into mind. When sampling the two whiskies neat, the older version was instantly drinkable and had so much more pleasant aroma. It would be remiss to write off the Revival at this point, as it was also presenting a decent nose, but yet had a slight sourness to it. And there I stick my hand back into the bag of cliches to find that you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. Of course, I take a look at the cover of my Revival bottle to see the magic numbers of 46% written. So I’m not really comparing like for like, and by dropping the the ABV down by adding some water, the playing field has been levelled somewhat. I am mindful as I write this that if somebody is playing cliche bingo, you may have a full house by the end of this review.


Side by side – Revival on right

Because I was wanting to conduct as accurate a comparison as possible, I poured a new dram of 25ml and added 3.5ml of water, thus taking the sample down to 40%. This changed things a bit, the Revival has become more calm, the wood spice has subsided somewhat, and the flavours, although I didn’t find any more, came into a clearer focus. I also felt the mouthfeel change somewhat to be less viscous, even than the undiluted 40% sample of yesteryear. The spices were still dominant for me, and I had to add even more water (1ml) to make it as pleasant as I felt the older sample was, then we have to realise that we have taken the dram down to just under 39% abv.

And here is were we have to face an elephant in the room. And for a change it isn’t me making the trumping noises. There is a lot of noise made about alcoholic strength, and how more is better as you can dilute to how you like it. That is an undeniable fact. The other fact about having a stronger abv is the need to chill filter is removed, as the fatty esters that make a cold whisky go cloudy will remain in solution, and by not chill filtering, more of the goodness is retained within the spirit and transferred into the bottle for your drinking pleasure.

But let me suggest this, as we try to back the jumbo into the corner. Remember the earlier era sample was chill filtered, yet to me tasted better than the undiluted 46% Revival. In order to get the Revival to taste as pleasurable, I had to dilute it to a lower abv than the older sample, which left it with a thinner mouthfeel. Therefore, what sample is better? This is something that caused me a bit of consternation as it was obvious that it would look as though I am just expressing a personal preference. I reached out to one of my #Whisky Twitter colleagues Mick as part of the @Whiskychaps who review a lot of whiskies and asked his opinion. The advice was sound I feel, as he said that it is MY preference that matters whether or not the whisky was better. What do I get most enjoyment out of? He also made a very fair point that impressed me quite a bit when he pointed out that few, if any people who will read this will have tasted the pre-Billy Walker whisky and in my opinion that I can add probably even fewer can remember it. After all, it was in the times of Allied / Pernod Ricard ownership that this was distilled, pre 1996.

It is while thinking of this point that I can bring another strong argument to the table. I said in my exchange with Mick that I can compare the older dram to the 18 year old Allardice. It is an hour later after that exchange that I just thought of checking my notes for that review that I see a general similarity. It is worth remembering that some people are raving about the fact that the Glendronach 18 and 21 were using significantly older spirit than the age statement that was distilled not by Billy Walker, but by the former owners pre-1996. The Revival I have now is likely to be using spirit that was distilled entirely after the distillery re-opened in 2002. Remember that the initial Revival release was discontinued for 3 years, and the original revival was also using Allied distilled spirit. I think this forms a pattern that leads me to a definite conclusion. Perhaps I need to try the original Revival to be sure, but with auction prices being adventurous just for a quick taste, this is not a realistic option.


GlenDronach 18 Allardice.

While I can honestly say that both whiskies are good whiskies, I’m not going to rush out to buy another GlenDronach Revival, but if I saw a pre Billy Walker era 15 on sale, I would snap it up. Controversial? Possibly, but what matters is taste, and I could enjoy the older dram straight off, the flavours seemed more balanced. While I have a lot of time for what Billy Walker and now Rachael Barrie produce, but I wonder now that the distillery is using spirit made since the re-opening, will the 18 and 21 head the same way going forward? I realise that this may not be a popular opinion, but we will see what happens. Will people start harking back to the Allardice and Parliament produced in the pre 2020 period in the same way they refer to the original Revival?

For me, this is an older spirit win. Thanks to Mick for raising some good points that helped me focus on what really mattered. I bought both drams from the Speyside Whisky Shop – thanks to Matteo for shipping to my ‘remote location’ as deemed by DHL. I paid £25 for the old miniature and £63 for the full sized bottle of the Revival.

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

A Walk In The Park

Taste Review #100 – Highland Park 12 Old vs New

This is truly a momentous occasion. It’s my 100th review, and its appropriate to mark this with a distillery that has a great reputation. It’s even better that this has happened during my series of old vs new, as I don’t get to taste just one whisky; I get to taste two!


Making a second appearance on Scotty’s Drams, Viking Honour

I’ve reviewed a new Highland Park 12 before, this being the current offering which is called ‘Viking Honour’. I found to be acceptable and value for money. However the Highland Park distillery is one of those which often comes up in the whisky geek conversations that I have online where that it’s said that the previous era releases of this whisky are better. I can’t really speak with any authority on this, as Highland Park like the fellow other fellow Edrington stablemates Glenrothes and Macallan, are bottlings I don’t really purchase much, if ever. However I am in the fortunate position of finding an older Highland Park at auction. £46 for a 10cl bottle was a bit steep, but you can’t really walk into a shop to buy it.


1980’s Highland Park

What you can go and buy in many UK supermarkets is the latest incarnation of Highland Park. Its the youngest age statement in the Highland Park range and is often available for sub £30 if you look for offers. I felt that this wasn’t bad for its price point, but there is usually a bit of compromise involved in whiskies for this outlay. How does it match up to the older edition of the 12 year old Highland Park? It is time to move onto tasting and find out whether the newer one has kept up with the reported standards from previous eras.

Highland Park 12 y.o (1980’s)

Region – Highland Age – 12 y.o Strength – 40% abv Colour -Russet Muscat (1.3) Cask Type – Ex-Sherry Colouring – No Chill Filtered – Not Stated, but did not have any Scotch mist after leaving in the fridge prior to the tasting. Nose – Raisins, Sherry, Honey, charred wood, apples, vanilla, fig rolls, salt laden air, a wisp of smoke. Palate – Entry is mild, slightly oily and sweet, moving towards figs, honeydew melon, dried currants, and a bit of sweet heathery smoke. Quite mild tannins. Finish – Medium. Honey, smoke, light brine and a building wood spice that doesn’t overpower anything else.


1980’s Highland Park

Highland Park 12 Viking Honour

Region – Highland Age – 12 y.o Strength – 40% abv Colour -Deep Copper (1.0) Cask Type – Ex-Sherry Colouring – No Chill Filtered – Not Stated, but did not have any Scotch mist after leaving in the fridge prior to the tasting. Nose – Honey, Slightly smokey, grapefruit, pine Palate – Entry is quite mild, weak and watery, Honey, heather, slightly floral which builds to a nutmeg, peppery wood spice, which becomes quite strong in comparison to other elements. Finish – medium short, wood spices, smoked wood, light sweet smoke. A burn of alcohol as it descends down the throat.


Highland Park Viking Honour

Conclusions

I’m not really wanting to beat around the bush here, but both drams were acceptable to my palate though one was a lot more refined than the other. There was noticeable differences between the drams. There is not any point in looking at the colour, as the colour does not determine taste and may just fool our minds into thinking the darker whisky was better. Highland Park does not add colour to their spirits. However both are chill filtered as far as I can see, though the distillery does not disclose on the packaging whether or not this happens. However as the fellow Edrington owned Macallan does chill filter their basic releases, I’ve no doubt that this is the case here.


New (l) vs Old (r)

There has to be a comparison made and to me the difference was a lot more than marginal. The older dram was smoother, more sweet, not so much sour and not so much wood spice. There was no overpowering flavours and the whole dram was one of harmony. And this is where the rub comes – tasting the newer Viking Honour beside a spirit at least a generation older shows that while many will accept the Viking Honour as a decent whisky, it is faded glory compared to that of the 1980’s dram. A strong citrus sour note, an increase in the wood spice and the rough end to the finish in the spirit burn as it goes down the throat is much more noticeable when compared to the old one.


New (t) Old (b)

In my previous review of Highland Park 12 (Honour) I said that it wasn’t bad and was probably good value. However when compared to the older generation 12, it is easily overpowered by its forebearer. Without a doubt, I’d have to say that the older dram is easily the better one and a lot tastier. If you ever get a chance to try an older edition Highland Park pre-Viking Honour, please do. You will not be disappointed.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

The Dram That Turned To The Dark Side.

Taste Review #99 – Ledaig old vs new

The dark side. We all probably have one, or perhaps I should stop judging others based on my own experiences. This is the one time that I wished that I did a little bit of research before sampling these drams, as if I had, I would have learnt that one dram in the tasting tonight was in its initial incarnation before it joined the dark side and peat was added to the mix.

I feel it is important not to research too much beforehand as this is likely to influence the review I am about to give. I may look at the distillery history, as I quite often type this bit out as the whisky I want to review settles and has a wee breather in the glass. However it is not so long ago I wrote an article about making sure of what you are bidding on at auction, which included a tale of what happened when you failed to check and yet again I’ve ended up scoring a spectacular own goal. The two whiskies I was to compare to see if either the later or more recent expression was better has failed at the first hurdle – the two whiskies are completely different and cannot be compared, due to one being peated and one not.


What was planned for comparison

For my faux pas to be explained, Ledaig is a whisky that is produced at the Tobermory Distillery on Mull. I’ve already reviewed one of their whiskies and quite liked it. But the distillery hasn’t always been known as Tobermory and it was the failure to see this rock of knowledge that saw my ship grounded.

The distillery which is the only one on the island was founded by John Sinclair in 1798 and named Ledaig. It had a patchy history, often with long periods silent, two of which were around 40 years in length. It wasn’t until 1979 that a Yorkshire based company, Kirkleavington Properties bought the distillery that it was named Tobermory. They didn’t have much success with whisky production, closing 3 years later, but they converted some of the buildings into accommodation and leased other bits for cheese storage. It all looked a bit dismal until 1993 when Burn Stewart took over, continuing with the Tobermory name.

It wasn’t until 2007 that the whisky we know as Ledaig was produced. It is a peated Tobermory, and it was my mistake to assume that whisky with Ledaig on the label would be peated. Before the 1979 rename, in 1972, a company formed of a Liverpudlian shipping company, Pedro Domecq and some business interests from Central America reopened the distillery. They weren’t successful either and the distillery went bust in 1975. Perhaps this is why a change of name which was also more pronounceable was carried out in its next period of production. Thankfully this was not before one of the drams I will be trying in this review was distilled. Still, a massive disappointment was experienced when I found out that it didn’t seem to be peated and was probably quite close to what Tobermory would be now. Oh well, my bad.

It is kind of pointless to debate whether this is a better dram than the 10 year old, as it is a completely different style before we even consider the age of the bottle, the lower abv and the greater age of the spirit. Therefore in this case before we even taste the whisky, I’m going to have to call this match null and void. I can give comparisons I suppose, but it was then I remembered that I have another sample of Ledaig in the house – a quick furrow about, and I find a 2008 bottling from Robert Graham’s Dancing Stag range. Not enough of a difference for an old vs new comparison, but still a worthwhile exercise to examine these drams now I’ve got them out.


What had to be added to the review

Ah well. Worse things happen at sea I suppose. At least I now have three drams in front of me so time to get cracking.

Ledaig 1974 (Bottled 1992)

Region -Highland Age – 18y.o Strength – 43%abv Colour – Amontillado Sherry (0.9) Cask Type – Not known Colouring – Not known Chill Filtered – Possibly Nose – Quite Light, slight malt, fruity, heather, window putty, a whiff of smoke, wood varnish. Palate – Quite light. Honey, peaches, grassy, buttery, vanilla, sweet gingery wood spice, a hint of brine. However, overall insipid. Finish – short / medium, slightly astringent, more wood spice, a hint of lemon citrus and brine.


Ledaig 1974 – not peated

Ledaig 10 y.o (OB)

Region -Highland Age – 10 y.o Strength – 46.3% abv Colour – Old Gold (0.6) Cask Type – Not known, likely Bourbon Colouring – No Chill Filtered – No Nose – Smokey peat, ashes, earthy, vanilla, honey, seaweed. Palate – Smokey, pepper, lemon, ash, brine. Slightly nutty – walnut. A hint of nail polish remover. Finish – medium, not particularly spicy, citrus, oranges, fresh tarmacadam being laid – the sort of sensation you get when your nostrils and throat get saturated with the smell of a road surface being laid.


Ledaig 10 – peated Tobermory

Ledaig 8 y.o 2008

Region -Highland Age – 8 y.o Strength – 46% abv Colour – Pale Gold (0.3) Cask Type – Not known Colouring – No Chill Filtered – No Nose – Peat, smoke, overheated electronics, fudge, lemon, vanilla Palate – quite light smoke, black cracked pepper and sea salt, fudge, earthy, slight citrus. Finish – Long. Spicy, peppery oak spices, smoke, brine, celery sticks.


Ledaig 8 (2008) – still peated

Conclusions

It is not the first time that my failure to prepare has got me into trouble. I should take my own advice more often. Even this week when going for a morning shower, I had forgot to take a bath towel with me and only realised the omission by time my shower was complete and I was soaking wet. Fortunately there was a hand towel handy, but it was like trying to dry an elephant with a facecloth. Making errors though needn’t be a bad thing, especially when tasting whisky as it just drags you onto new avenues, and at least its not as bad as discovering by accident that disinfectant bathroom wipes are not good for wiping your bum with.

However, if the older dram had been peated, I would have had to say that it would not have been the victor. It did have slightly less strength at 43%, but it also had an extra 8 years in a barrel. Not years well spent I think. To be slightly more considerate in my approach, it had been bottled in 1992, had signs of slight evaporation, so while I could pick out one or two notes, it was definitely a dram that had gone flat. I got tired of drinking it and although it was not repulsive to my palate, I had lost interest, so down the sink it went.

The peated Ledaig we are all probably more familiar with was a different kettle of fish. The flavours and aromas were well balanced, quite bright and punchy, yet not a knockout blow. I’d put this dram somewhere between Laphroaig 10 and Talisker 10. I managed to finish the lot without a single drop of water. Delicious.


Hint: – the tasty one is on the left

The independently bottled Ledaig was not too bad but lacked the same depth of flavours and punch as the original bottling, despite being only 2 years younger and only 0.3% less in abv. I cannot help but think that keeping it in the cask any longer would not have done it any favours and I’d argue that this has been over diluted. It might be a cracking dram at cask strength, but in this guise it was a bit of a let down. Pity, as I bought it while in Glasgow while picking my wife up from the airport a couple of years ago, and bought one for my former Dalwhinnie tour guide neighbour as a thank you for looking after my canine equivalent of Jimmy Saville while I was away for the day. He said that he liked it, but that may have been politeness. At least his dog wasn’t under much threat of attack as it is a Newfoundland, and even Maksimus isn’t going to manage to ravish that. But like us with whisky perhaps he may have thought it worth a try.

You can still find the 8 year old Ledaig for sale from Robert Graham, but while it was an ok dram, it wasn’t as good as the original bottling. The price of £87.50 for an 8 year old spirit at 46% is a bit adventurous for the quality on offer here.

While I have already declared this as a null and void review in terms of the old versus the new, I can’t help but feel that the newer dram would have been the better of the two. I don’t wish to cast aspersions though it could be because the older dram was made during one of the two periods where the distillery was only open for 3 years, and they might have needed someone who knew what they were doing. I’ve heard the 1972 or 1973 are better but I’ll pass.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

Classic Capital Malt

Taste Review #98 – Glenkinchie 10 old vs 12 new

As the blogging behmoth of the old versus new project continues (note to self; don’t do anything like this again!), I find my attention turning to the Lowland region for the second time. As hard as I have tried to spread out the samples of whisky to ensure I am trying a variety of styles and regions, it has all depended on the availability of miniatures or older whisky. The Campeltown and Lowland Regions were the hardest, due to the low number of distilleries in these regions. For many years there has only been two distilleries in Campbeltown until the re-emergence of Glengyle (Kilkerran) in 2004, supposedly to stop the SWA discontinuing the Campeltown region. The Lowlands have been similar, with only three malt distilleries, Auchentoshan, Bladnoch and Glenkinchie. In recent years there has been an explosion of Lowland malt distilleries – Ailsa Bay, Annandale, Borders, Clydeside, Daftmill, Eden Mill, Glasgow, Holyrood, Inchdarnie, Kingsbarns and Lindores Abbey, with Rosebank re-opening and several others in development. Of course, the other problem is that older stock to do an old vs new review is impossible to get from these distilleries as of yet – I’m going to leave that project to somebody else in the future.

Glenkinchie was the closest malt distillery to the Scottish capital city of Edinburgh, until the opening of the Holyrood distillery. It was founded in 1837, by borhters John and George Rate. It may have existed as the Milton distillery in 1825, but records are a bit unclear. Unfortunately they weren’t that successful and they were bankrupted in 1853. The distillery was then converted into a saw mill, but this would not be the end of whisky distilling on the site. In 1881 the distillery was reopened due to the success and popularity of blended whisky, with the distillery as it now exists largely in place by 1890.


Glenkinchie 10

In 1914, the distillery joined with Clydesdale, Grange, Rosebank and St Magdalene to form Scottish Malt Distillers which in turn by 1925 merged with Distillers Company Limited (DCL) which has since evolved to become Diageo. The distillery did not shut down due to the restrictions on the use of barley in the Second World War, and eventually closed its on-site malting in 1968. The maltings were converted into a whisky museum which includes a scale model of a working distillery made for the 1925 British Empire Exhibition.

Glenkinchie was launched as a single malt with the arrival of the UDV Classic Malts in 1988. (UDV were formed by the amalgamation of DCL and Arthur Bell & Sons in 1987.) This was a series supposed to showcase different styles of Scotch Malt Whisky, but does not have a Campbeltown example, so has two Highland Malts (Oban and Dalwhinnie) as well as Lagavulin, Talisker, Cragganmore and Glenkinchie. Kind of pointless, as Dalwhinnie is also a Speyside, being closer to the River Spey than some of the traditional Speysiders like Glenlivet. Of course the saying goes that all Speyside whiskies are Highlanders although not all Highlanders are Speysiders. Glenkinchie was selected as a Classic Malt ahead of Rosebank, which became a part of the Flora and Fauna series in 1991 instead, eventually being mothballed by UDV in 1993.

Lowland malts are smooth, and were often triple distilled, but Glenkinchie is only distilled twice. It does however have the largest wash still in Scotland, with a charge of around 21,000 litres. It also has descending lyne arms from the top of the still, leading to an iron worm tub. This limits copper contact during distillation and can give a meatier, sulphurous profile. However the final result is light and fragrant.


Glenkinchie 12

The older sample is a 10 yr old at 43%. I obtained it as part of a miniature bundle at auction when I was wanting something else in the bundle. It has since been discontinued and replaced by a 12 year old. The newer whisky, which is also at 43%. It is a 20cl bottle which I bought at Cardhu in October 2019.

Glenkinchie 10 (old)

Region – Lowland Age – 10 y.o Strength – 43% Colour – Amber (0.7) Cask Type – Not Stated Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose -Light Malt, honeycomb, gingerbread. Smells greasy like a used chip wrapper paper. Hints of Brasso / Duraglit Palate – More malt, digestive biscuits, honey, vanilla, walnut. Develops into spicy oak, orange peels. Finish – Medium / Long. Peppery, white pepper oak spice, more peel, becomes slightly astringent with a hint of honey. There is also on taking another sip a hint of smoke and peat, star anise. Adding water gave me a burst of peppermint in the finish and an increase of the oak spices.


Glenkinchie 10

Glenkinchie 12 (new)

Region – Lowland Age – 12 y.o Strength – 43% Colour – Amber (0.7) Cask Type – Not Stated Colouring -Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Honey Nut Cornflakes, malt, fruity – apple pie with sultanas and a hint of cinnamon. Light citrus such as a lemon cheesecake. Palate – Medium body. Quite sweet, vanilla, honey, malt biscuits, sultanas, grassy notes, peppery wood spice. Finish – Medium. Builds to bitterness as the finish continues, wood spice is peppery / gingery and slightly drying. a very faint whiff of smoke.


Glenkinchie 12

Conclusions

I’m going to have to be quite clinical about this as I was shocked as to how close the two drams were, yet both did give slightly different experiences.

Let me start out by saying I enjoyed both drams. Both were very pleasant and I would have no hesitation in not only drinking them again, but I’d also recommend both drams. Not anything that will set the world on fire, but both engaging and are a pleasant drink neat. The good thing is that Diageo have not played about with the abv, keeping the 12 year old, which was a replacement for the 10 year old at 43%. The colours were identical and it is clear that colouring has been used in these drams. There was no sign of Scotch mist when I added some chilled water, so I am assuming some sort of Chill Filtration has taken place.


Two drams side by side. Older one on right.

The problem I have in deciding is that while the 12 year old is more smooth and lacks the bite of the 10 year old, it is easier to drink. On the other side of the equation, there was slightly more flavour that was discernible with the 10 year old. This leads it to be a decision solely based on personal opinion. However I felt there was also a better mouthfeel on the 10 year old. The 12 year old seems to be a little thinner on the palate. I could go into reasons why I think technically that the 10 is the ‘better’ whisky but I’d be talking total mince as it would still only be my opinion.

In football terms this would be a score draw – both drams score equally well and it is not possible to say that the older whisky is better than the newer whisky, despite my doubts. I’m just going to drink and enjoy.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

The Keith Show

Taste Review #97 – Glen Keith old vs new

For those of you not acquainted with the North East of Scotland, summer is a great time for agricultural shows. The three biggest ones are the Black Isle Show, Turriff Show, and the Keith Show. They are pretty much like a Highland Games, although without the traditional competitions but can include country dancing, field sports, various acrobats or stunt driving, with the added ‘thrill’ of livestock and farm machinery thrown in. This is of course if you appreciate a decent ewe waiting to be tupped or decent Massey Ferguson machinery. And then there is the marquee, the staple of all Highland events where people go to get sloshed and it often ends in drunken violence at some point. It is also said you cannot fail to get a date at the Keith show. I suppose that if a lassie rejects you, there’s always the wooly livestock. Ooops! Perhaps I’ve said too much about my Aberdeenshire upbringing!

It’s been a quite a while since I attended such an event, and it’s likely different now. But apparently leopards aren’t likely to change their spots, so it is with a little bit of trepidation that I approach this old vs new review of some Keith whisky produce. The newer of the two drams, the Glen Keith Distillers Edition, I have reviewed before and to be honest I didn’t really care for it. I’m lucky that my wife did not see that review as the bottle was a present from her. Having said that she knows little about whisky, but I’m secretly proud of her thriftiness as she’s a non-Aberdonian. There’s little point of expecting a more expensive whisky gift from her due to her lack of knowledge and a total refusal to pick up on hints. I keep dropping subtle verbal nudges about another Brora may be nice but nothing so far…

However, with this whisky I have persevered and am now halfway down the bottle, though I have been giving some of my friends samples as an example of what a budget whisky tastes like. Since my initial review, I’ve been using it in hot toddies, along with other less than premium drams (Jura Journey, Naked Grouse and Haig Club) and they performed adequately, so perhaps it is time to give this dram another chance. You can read what I wrote before by clicking on this link Taste Review #42 – Glen Keith Distillers Edition.


Glen Keith Distillers Edition

Since that review, I haven’t actually tasted that whisky again since without adulterating it in some way, so perhaps now is time for a bit of redemption. This was a dram that I didn’t bother gassing, so it has had a bit of oxidation and hopefully this has kicked it into touch a bit. Its already had one kicking from me in the past. In my auction adventures, it’s earlier equivalent – a miniature of Glen Keith turned up, with a strange way of denoting its age on it – it says that it was distilled before 1983. Now usually there would be a vintage that states what year it was distilled, but this definition is open to interpretation.


Slight evaporation but still in good order.

Glen Keith isn’t an old distillery, becoming operational in 1960, just after Tormore. It is built on the site of a former meal mill. It was used as an experimental distillery and ran both double and triple distillations. It made the short lived Glen Isla single malt, which is a Glen in Angus, far away from Keith but is likely to have taken it’s name from the River Isla that flows past the distillery. This was a slightly peated malt. It is rumoured that the Craigduff peated single malt was also made here, although Strathisla has also been in the frame for this. Both Glen Isla and Craigduff are rare whiskies, and were included in the Lost Distilleries Blend I tasted (See Lost Distilleries Blend Review #55). The first single malt released from Glen Keith was in 1994, and it is the older sample that we taste today.

Glen Keith was mothballed in 1999, but refurbished and opened again by 2013. The Distillers edition was the first single malt released in October 2017 after reopening, so could have some pretty young whisky in it. I remember looking back at my other review that the dram was quite sharp, so lets see if a little bit of fresh air has calmed it down a bit and whether or not it meets the standard set by the first official release from the distillery.

Glen Keith 1983 (10 y.o)

Region – Speyside Age -10 y.o (1983) Strength – 43% Colour -Old Gold (0.6) Cask Type – not stated Colouring – Not stated – presume yes. Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Initially a slight old bottle funk, but dissipated after allowing dram to breathe. Grassy / slightly floral, orchard fruit – apple, canned pears, apricot. Barley sugars, creamy vanilla. Palate – The arrival is unexpectedly sweet. Vanilla, apple, then developing a bitter taste from the wood spice, lemon, ginger, peppery. Finish – Medium. Peppery wood tannins, light malt, Calvados as the spirit fades away. Adding 2ml of water gives everything a bit of a smooth out, slightly increased the wood spice and gave a waxy, candle-like note to the aroma.


Glen Keith – released 1994.

Glen Keith Distillers Edition

Region – Speyside Age -NAS Strength – 40% Colour – Yellow Gold (0.5) Cask Type – not stated. Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Caramel, Apple, Vanilla, Condensed Milk, honey Palate – Light, with a slight oily feel, a light spirit / wood buzz, lemonade, apples, cinnamon / peppery wood spice Finish -Short, honey, creamy vanilla, peppery wood spice, slight spirit burn. Adding 2ml of water kills pretty much everything, bar the burst of spice on departure.


Going down slowly- Glen Keith Distillers Edition

Conclusions

It seems that time in the bottle has mellowed the Glen Keith Distillers Edition. The sharpness and harsh burns that I got on my last review are no longer present and the fruit flavours are more prominent. But while it is more drinkable, than before, I have to say that it is fairly boring and disappointing. But then we have to remember that this is probably made up of whisky no more than 4 years old, possibly with some of the older stock mixed in. It’s price point was £30, but had I paid £30 for it, I would have still felt cheated. Not knowing my wife was going to gift me a bottle, I thankfully picked this one up for only £20 at my local Co-op, but put into store for a later date. As fair as I can be, I think now the spirit has had time to breathe, it has improved what I am tasting and £20 would be probably as much as it’s worth.

That means to me that this isn’t anything special at all and it will not be replaced when the bottle dies. I don’t mean to be unfair when I say that I wouldn’t give this to guests, but would rather use this as cooking whisky. I’ll be happy to sip away at it until the bottle is finished, therefore there is an improvement on what has gone before in my last review. I can say this dram does fit its position in Passport Blended whisky, another less than favoured review in the past.


The Two Drams – newer on left. There was a colour difference when viewed from above

But was it any better than the 10 year old? Well, the ten year old had a notable advantage, all 3% of them as extra points on the abv scale. And boy, did it show. The spirit was more engaging, there was more taste and furthermore, the dram actually had a proper finish. I felt that this dram showed off its palate and finish much more effectively. I’ll restrain from saying the nose as well due to the older bottle effect. But the mouthfeel was heavier, the flavours more distinct and water did not eradicate any of them. Of course, it could be argued that there has been evaporation taking effect of my distillers edition bottle plus it is only 40%, but then again, the 10 year old bottle is potentially 27 years old and didn’t have the perfect fill level either.

And just to put the unfair comparison accusation to bed, that in this series of reviews, I am trying to review comparable age statements or the entry level release from the distillery, which both of these drams are. It is sad to note that in this case, the alcohol level in this dram has been reduced from 43% to 40%, no longer has an age statement and has age that is most likely half that of the other sample, so on this note coupled with the bolder flavours I have to say that I think the older dram is the better one, as had I been given this dram as a gift, I’d maybe consider replacing it.

How both of these whiskies compare to an older, independent bottling remains to be seen – I’ve a 1968 G&M bottling sample to look at sometime in the future that was gifted by a work colleague, so will be reviewing that separately in the future.

Yours In Spirits,

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

So Where Were The Spiders?

Taste Review #96 – Linkwood old vs new

As I continue to move through my series of old versus new bottlings of Scotch whisky, we are eventually coming to the point were my supply of minis is starting to run out and I am going to have to start cracking into the full sized bottles. I’ve had both these miniatures for quite some time now and I feel that it is time to perhaps submit to the fact that they need to be opened. Plus it gives me a great opportunity to drink again yet another Flora and Fauna bottling, as well as a first go of a Gordon and Macphail distillery label dram from this distillery.


Linkwood old vs new

Linkwood is quite a old distillery, first being established in 1821 on the outskirts of the Morayshire town of Elgin, although now the town is starting to encroach around the distillery site. The distillery became fully legal on the passing of the 1823 Excise Act. It has been rebuilt twice, the first time in 1874, and with a second plant being established on site in 1972. By 2012, much of the old distillery had been demolished and rebuilt, with only the Malting Kiln and what I assume to be the former malting floors or warehouses alongside surviving. I remember having to drive past it often in the early 2000’s as I used to court a girl who lived by Elgin. Just as you approached the town on the rural Linkwood road, the carriageway narrowed quite a bit as you had to negotiate a partially blind bend with the distillery buildings forming the edge of the road on the way into Elgin. With the demolition of the buildings, that has now become sadly a thing of the past.

While the need to expand and change things is necessary to ensure enough production, one of the former distillery managers was quite adverse to changes. Roderick Mackenzie, who was manager between 1945 and 1963 felt that any slight change could alter the quality of the whisky, so he forbade any unnecessary changes, even to the point that spider webs were left intact in the rafters. Pretty eccentric behaviour I suppose, and when I was thinking about how to title this article, the line from the David Bowie song ‘Ziggy Stardust’ came into my head, although I am more likely to be listening to the Bauhaus cover version. One has to wonder what happened to the webs during the regular upgrades? When the distillery was being upgraded in 1962, Mackenzie ensured that the stills being manufactured were exact copies of those already in use. Perhaps that is not so eccentric, as Macallan did exactly the same when they were building their new distillery in Craigellachie.

In another little bit of trivia, the 70cl Flora and Fauna bottling has a bit of incorrect data on it. It says that it stands on the River Lossie. I can assure you that if this was true, then a large part of Elgin would have to be flooded, as Linkwood is on the east side and the River Lossie is on the west side, some 1.75 miles away.


One of the 1st Edition Linkwood White Cap Flora and Fauna 70cl – incorrect location data included.

Linkwood is used heavily for the Diageo blends Johnnie Walker and White Horse. It is apparently very popular with blenders for adding complexity to blends, but very little is actually released as single malt. The only regular official bottling is the Flora and Fauna, but it is seen as an independent bottling as well as a Diageo Special Release.

The bottles that I have for this review come from two different sources. The older Gordon And Macphail bottle was obtained in an auction bundle and I don’t have an accurate date or price for it. However from research I can see that this bottling was produced in the 80’s and 90’s, so is likely to be somewhere between 20 and 30 years old. It is in good condition with an excellent fill level. The newer dram, because I don’t want to open a full sized bottle, was bought from The Whisky Exchange and is a 3cl Perfect Measure Sample. I have had this for some time I and it probably cost around £4.

G&M Linkwood 15 (old)

Region – Speyside Age – 15y.o Strength – 40% Colour – Burnished (1.1) Cask Type – not known, but suspect a mix of bourbon and sherry. Colouring – not known Chill Filtered – not known, suspect yes Nose – Fruity, sherry notes, but quite light – dried fruit, almonds, powdered chocolate. Palate – fruity and sweet, oily mouth feel, raspberry, pink nougat, vanilla, Finish – medium / long – slight smoke, fudge, sweet floral (parma violets) with a hint of freshly podded green peas.


G&M Linkwood 15 y.o from 80’s/90’s

Linkwood 12 Flora and Fauna (new)

Region – Speyside Age – 14 y.o Strength – 43% Colour -Yellow Gold (0.5) Cask Type – not known, suspect bourbon. Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Sweet, floral, vanilla, light honey, crisp green apple, light tobacco smell – like the inside of an empty cigarette packet. Palate -sweet initial hit, but soon turns sour. Has a medium body, slightly oily mouth feel, dry cider, lemon, minerals Finish – Drying, short to medium length. Almonds, lemon peel, slight malt. spicy wood, quite gingery. Addling a bit of water enhances the lemon peel in the finish and adds intensity to the wood spices.


Linkwood 12 y.o Flora and Fauna

Conclusions

When we look at it, these are two completely different whiskies, and while I enjoyed the 15 year old more, I also really enjoyed the Flora and Fauna one too. I feel that the older sample had much more ‘tah-dah’ about it, more stronger flavours and it was easier to engage with, despite the lower abv. It’s length of time in a small bottle hadn’t really affected it either. Of course it has matured in a different cask style or had a different vatting recipe compared to the 12 y.o. The Flora and Fauna came alive with a bit of water and it was still quite easy to engage with but not as easy as the older sample, While it does not have the extra three years in a cask, and I also feel that the G&M bottling has more of a sherry component within it, the Flora and Fauna bottling does have the advantage of the extra three percent abv, nor has it spent over 2 decades in a bottle.


The two drams together

It is easy to say that the older one wins in this review, but that is doing the newer dram a great disservice. It isn’t really fair to compare an apple with a watermelon, as both were good drams, I already have a few Linkwood Flora and Fauna in store and would definitely ensure I had a drinking bottle. The 15 year old G&M bottling from the 1990’s I would also buy if I saw it was available and would certainly recommend if you saw it at auction to buy it. Gordon and Macphail now release this at 43% so could be good value if you see it at a decent price.

In the interests of fairness, I have to call this a draw in the debate of old vs new, but if I only had money for one bottle, it would be the G&M one

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

Let’s ‘Livet Large!

Taste Review #95 – Glenlivet 12 old vs new

Whisky history. It’s something that has gone through my mind a fair bit when I’ve been reviewing the old vs new drams. In fact it has been something that I’ve been reflecting on for a while. What sparked this mini confession was looking at the older bottle that I’m away to consume tonight. The label was in good condition, the fill level was good and it struck me that this was an almost immaculate bottle of at least 41 years of age. I wished that I was in as good a condition at 41! However, like me, the bottle couldn’t be preserved any longer and was away to meet its destiny. The end of its journey had been reached and had to be opened for the purposes of this review. And while sad as it was to destroy this history after reaching that age without a scratch, it was opened with the mantra ‘its made to be drunk’ running through my mind. After all, it was only a Glenlivet.



This thought of whisky should be destined to be drunk has been going through my mind more and more of late due to the rush on the newest Daftmill, Ardnamurchan and by the end of this week, the inaugural Torabhaig. I don’t mind the frenzy for new bottles. It’s understandable to a point, that perhaps people want to the the first to taste it, to have one for collecting or worse, to flip. As a collector myself, I’m not immune to criticism in this case, but it has saddened me to see Ardbeg ‘Arrrrrrrdbeg’ go on sale for over £100 more than the RRP. That is little more than gouging. A collector will know this and move on, knowing the value isn’t really there and wait for prices to subside, but it takes advantage of those who really want to drink it and forces them to pay through the nose. The distillery doesn’t care as they’ve sold out, but it is potentially damaging to their image. It’s a subject that I am determined to look into in the near future.

Anyway, from what I’ve heard, a source revealed that in his opinion Arrrrrrrdbeg tastes not too different to the 10 year old. I’ll save my money and buy Laphroaig or Octomore instead.

So, thinking of whisky history, It’s been a bit of a while since I last looked at Glenlivet. The Captains Reserve was the last bottle I looked at in 2019. You can read a little about the distillery history and what I thought about it here. Despite its massive output, Glenlivet is a distillery that I rarely look at. Perhaps because I feel their massive output is just ‘meh’. Not that I feel there is anything wrong with it, but my attention gets grabbed elsewhere. Perhaps it is just the ubiquitous nature of the brand that puts me off. I feel the same way about Glenfiddich, Chivas Regal or Johnnie Walker. Not that there is anything wrong with these brands either, I just don’t seem able to engage with them, plus wherever I seem to travel in the world with my work, at least one of these is always obtainable.

The Glenlivet 12 year old was discontinued a few years back, and was replaced by the Founders reserve. This appears to have been a lamented decision, as the Founders Reserve just hasn’t appeared to have been as well received, most reviews I have seen in the passing seem to prefer the 12. Perhaps this makes this age statement a prime candidate for old vs new. Besides, it’s not really enough to write a distillery off just because I don’t pay attention to their product. It is time now to put that to bed, and try what is one of the most popular of the Glenlivet age statements.

Glenlivet 12 (Old 1970’s bottling)

Region – Speyside Age – 12 y.o Strength – 70 Proof / 40% Colour – Deep Gold (0.8) Cask Type – Not known Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Light honey, vanilla, apple, slight leather, milk chocolate Palate – Quite sugary sweet on the arrival, with alcohol burn slowly arriving, golden syrup on toast, chocolate raisins, slightly heathery, creamy vanilla Finish – short to medium. spicy ginger as the last of the alcohol burn goes, chocolate bananas, custard, almonds. Adding 2ml of water only smoothed the spirit out, and has made for me the finish last that little bit longer with less of a gingery kick.


Pre 1980’s bottling

Glenlivet 12 (new / Double Oak)

Region – Speyside Age – 12 y.o Strength – 40% Colour – Amber (0.7) Cask Type – American and European Oak Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – Creamy toffee, slight hint of bitter citrus – grapefruit or lemon, lightly nutty smell at the end, possibly almonds Palate – Creamy, buttery, toffee, apple, vanilla. Finish – Super short. Blink and you miss it. If I was forced to say something that it is drying, my mouth is left as dry as Mother Theresa’s sandals. Very quick burst of wood spice then nothing but a light hit of creamy vanilla. Adding 2ml of water has increased the spiciness and reduced the dryness slightly. There is a bitter citrus note that builds then fades away. However, at least this has lengthened the experience at the end. But in truth, I took a bigger sip this time.


Glenlivet 12 re-release

Conclusions

This has been a bit of an eye-opener, mainly because I never had expected to get such a pristine miniature in an auction. There was very little old bottle effect in the older sample and I have to be honest that so far out of all the older bottles that I have tried so far in this series, this has to be one of the best, if not the best. It is certainly up there with the Glenfarclas 10 and Clynelish Flora and Fauna that I have tried at the start. Don’t get me wrong, I am well aware that the whisky that I am tasting is not the premium sips, but it is still a valid exercise to compare old to new to assess any differences.

Turning my head sadly to the newer Glenlivet, I have to say that nose wise it was fine, palate wise a bit light to my tastes but still an acceptable whisky, although I found it a bit boring, but my other eye was opened when I sampled it a few times and was getting pretty much zero finish. My palate went dry and it was almost like I hadn’t just tasted a whisky. Ok, perhaps zero was a little cruel, and I did get more of a finish once I added a bit of water, but even then, it wasn’t very exciting. Perhaps something I might put into a hot toddy or a cocktail.


Finish missing in the dram on the left

I was a bit concerned that I was missing something, so I took it upon myself to trouble somebody in the industry as to what actually is responsible for providing the finish. It was as though there were oils or something missing, my thoughts were the chill filtration had perhaps stripped the newer spirit of the taste. So, I messaged one of the distillers I follow on Twitter, and he graciously answered my plea for answers. I feel that he put my thoughts into a more articulate way, and suggested that in the 70’s there would have been a greater range of ages available to make up a vatting, and it is entirely likely that there was more 1st fill casks used. The more modern version is probably made of product a lot closer to the 12 year old mark, possibly with less first fill casks, meaning the wood has a bit less to give in producing not only the nose and palate, but also the finish.

I’m a bit reticent in naming who helped me lest what I write causes a bit of fallout, but I hope I have interpreted your answer correctly, if not then you can give me a proper hazing on Twitter and I’ll go and sit on the naughty step knowing I must try harder.

Both drams were balanced, but the older one was definitely moreish. To conclude my reviewing session I finished the newer one so I could spend more time with the older dram. The newer dram was pleasant enough, certainly more enjoyable than the Aberlour 12 I recently tried but it just wasn’t really engaging for me, and the length of finish when neat was extremely disappointing. I’d recommend it as training whisky. The older dram was definitely the winner here.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

Don’t Assume – Check!

Why not taking care can be costly at auction

How many of you reading this have been at one stage of their career have been an apprentice? I remember when I started out in the aviation industry I used to be a technician that serviced or repaired a lot of the black boxes that came out of aircraft. For those of you who don’t know, nearly all aircraft electronics boxes are black – only the flight data recorder or the cockpit voice recorder are orange. Ironic that they are known as the black box!

The company I worked for was based in Thornliebank, Glasgow, but had an outpost at Aberdeen Airport where about 8 of us worked. Every so often, we’d get a visit from somebody in head office to see how things were going, and as the apprentice I would get appraised as to how I was progressing within the training syllabus. In an industry littered with acronyms there was always space for one or two more mnemonics, especially when training. Of course, many trainees in the engineering trades may have heard of the 7 P’s – Perfect Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance, but the one that is relevant to this article was a play on the word ‘Assume’.


Here’s one I fixed earlier (much earlier!) in my career…. former G-PUMI used to belong to Bond Helicopters, but was sold to Bristows and operated in Nigeria. It came to a wet end – I had flown in it the previous trip. The ship I worked on at the time is in the background (Siem Marlin) whilst in the Agbami field, Nigeria

The aviation trade discourages people assuming things, or not reading the manuals. Failure to read a manual by an engineer once saw a pilot sucked out of the aircraft windscreen due to the screws that were replaced being the wrong size. (Look at Wikipedia article on BA flight 5390 if you have a couple of minutes). So it was little surprise that I was told by the training manager that “To assume makes up an ASS out of U and ME“. I did listen, but how I wished I had applied it a bit more thoroughly in this story I am away to tell you. Especially in the ASS region – my ass in particular.

Eventually I found the aviation industry was not for me and started working offshore a couple of years after successfully completing my apprenticeship. I thought I would do this for a couple of years to be able to afford a flat in Aberdeen, but after that purchase and nearly 25 years on, not much has changed apart from more belly, less hair and still having to go to work on a ship. Anyhow, after buying my first flat, it wasn’t uncommon for me to sit on the toilet reading magazines as when not offshore there was rarely anything to be in a hurry for. In my bathroom I had repurposed some vegetable racks for storing magazines and assorted cleaning accessories. It was here here disaster was to strike.


The offending bathroom set up. Magazines removed as this photo was taken prior to sale.

I had finished my constitutional, and as I do love my bum in an Andrex way, I reached down to get the moist toilet tissue. Being Aberdonian I was too tight to get the proper box for the wipes, so I had mine in the packet sitting next to the toilet on the magazine rack. I fished a wipe out, did the needful swipe between the cheeks and that is where I found out something was wrong. Very wrong. You see, in my absent minded haste not to put down the magazine and look as to what I was doing, I had inadvertently picked up a Flash antibacterial wipe instead. That is definitely not suitable for sensitive skin. I must admit to it being a bit nippy on my keekywinker for an hour or two. but on a positive note it highlighted the need to strain a little less in the future and for the rest of the morning when I broke wind, it had a note of pine freshness about it.

Translating this to whisky, if you are using auctions, you have to be careful about what you are ordering. It is all to easy to get caught up in the moment, especially as an auction closes and last minute panic bidding mode kicks in. You really need to be sure what you are trying to capture is exactly what you want, and you have to have your eyes wide open. You cannot afford to assume a single thing.

And unfortunately that’s similar to what happened to my friend Nick. The first I knew about it was when I got a message asking for advice. I initially thought it was advice for his blog, Whisky, Aye! which is worth a read, especially if you appreciate a dog as a whisky companion. But no, this wasn’t the case and it was a sorry tale I know well from personal experience. He was on the search for a Hazelburn 8 year old first edition. He put in a bid on a bottle which while wasn’t a lot of cash, it would have resulted in him winning a bottle he didn’t want. The error was caused by the incorrect title being applied on the auction entry – the bottle in question wasn’t a first edition but the second. If you knew exactly what you were looking for then it was clear that something wasn’t right though it is easy to get caught out. Oops.


The mis-titled bottle (SWA)

Sometimes during the prep for large auctions, the entry may be copied and pasted to save the auctioneers the time of researching the same bottles time and time again. While the bottle on the picture was correct, the heading wasn’t. But Nick didn’t notice until too late. It’s unfortunate, but at the bottom of each entry is the disclaimer as in the screenshot below:-


Caveat Emptor (SWA)

An email was sent to see if the bid could be cancelled. To be fair to Nick, the mistake was the fault of the auctioneers, but in fairness to the auctioneer, they would have been justified by telling him that he should have checked as pointed out by their statement. However, fate intervened and Nick was outbid. Result – problem solved. Hopefully a happy result for everybody involved, but especially Nick.

To their credit, the auctioneer did say when they contacted Nick after the auction had ended that they would double check with the winning bidder to make sure that they were aware it wasn’t a 1st Edition as titled. Now that’s quality service from Scotch Whisky Auctions. Another Glasgow based whisky auctioneer could learn from this as they still have not responded to a query about excessive shipping charges.


The box that stops me going from clean and refreshed…..
…..to citrusy fresh

In auctions you need to be sure of what you are bidding on. This could have had a much different ending had the bottle been more expensive and the error wasn’t noticed until DHL delivered it. By that time it’s probably too late. Then you’ve the hassle of returning it to auction or drinking it, depending if you can afford to. But Nick isn’t the first one to have done this by not double checking, as I’ve fallen foul of it too, although in my case it was bottles I wanted, but the condition was sub-par. And twice I’ve had to suck it up when they arrived. Not the end of the world, as this is why you don’t over pay. I’ll hold onto the sub par condition ones as they will eventually be worth a good bit more than I paid.

And to make Nick feel even more warm and fluffy, I made a similar mistake to him at the same auction, as I bid on a lot with a damaged box. I never looked all the way down the page either. Ah well. I’ve hopefully sourced a new carton already. From Nick thankfully! Not checking carefully is an easy enough mistake to make, but don’t let a lack of attention rush you into an unforced error.

So, top tips for this week is to check, check and check again at what you are bidding for at auction, and keep your toilet wipes well away from your cleaning products. That’s a sheriff’s badge that will never be shiny, so don’t try.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

Auction Entry Photos – Scotch Whisky Auctions

Ditched Puma – saharareporters.com

All Other Photos – Authors Own


The Tranquility of Glenmorangie

Taste Review #94 – Glenmorangie 10 old vs new

Once more I take a delve into whisky history, and for your delectation today it’s a trip away from Speyside. In this review, we head up the A9 to the north of Inverness and arrive at the the small town of Tain, situated on the Easter Ross coastline over looking the Dornoch Firth. Of course, it can only be one distillery, and that’s Glenmorangie. The name itself is supposed to translate to the Glen of Tranquility, but I’m no Scots Gaelic expert. As a Doric speaker, English is often a struggle as I tend to mumble. Anyway, it is one of the most mispronounced names in the Whisky World after Bunnahabhain or Allt-a-Bhainne. The hint is to place the emphasis on the ‘MOR’ and the angie should rhyme with orangey. Try it.

Glenmorangie for me is a bit of an emotional distillery. It was where my whisky journey germinated – the absolute Genesis, the big bang event. At that point I had been a casual whisky drinker, but by the middle of 2006 I was a whisky collector by picking up two Glenmorangie Truffle Oak Reserve for £150 a piece. Not that I really knew much about whisky at that time to be fair, it was because as an eating enthusiast (that’s code for fat b*****d) I’m quite partial to a bakers truffle. I hadn’t really discovered the truffles you use pigs to find yet, but I’m available if you want to have a look for some. I had previously visited Glenmorangie in 2001, when on a short break in the Sutherland area with a previous girlfriend. The next time I was regularly in Tain during 2005 / 2006, I was dating a lassie from there, and eventually took a visit to the distillery again with a friend and ended up buying some bottles. The bottles were originally meant for wetting a baby’s head which sadly never came, and were put into a safe place and added to slowly.

The distillery was formed from a brewery in 1843 by William Matheson, who’s family owned the distillery until 1887, when it was bought by the Glenmorangie Distillery Co. who then owned it until 1918. It then passed to Macdonald & Muir who owned it until 2004 when it passed to the French owned Louis Vitton Moet Hennessy (LVMH). The distillery has the tallest stills in Scotland, at around 26 ft 3in tall, or 8m for those of a metric disposition. These are said to make a smoother spirit, as only the purest vapours reach the top, but also this will increase the amount of copper contact with the spirit. Much was made in their promotional material about the 16 men of Tain, the amount of men that used to work in the distillery. However, this has crept up slightly, so they are now known as the Men of Tain.


Little and large line up.

The distillery takes its water from the Tarlogie Springs to the west of the distillery. When the land near the springs was possibly going to be approved for development, the distillery stepped in and bought 600 acres of land that surrounded them. The barley used at the site is grown by a local co-operative of farmers, and once a year, Chocolate malt is used to create the Signet bottling.

The two drams that are in this review are of the same age, abv and cask type, so should be a good contender for a head to head competition. In the older expression, we can see that the volume is not stated on the label and is given in proof, which means it is bottled prior to 1980. I suspect this is a bottle from the 70’s. Unlike the older Glenrothes I reviewed a couple of weeks ago, there isn’t any tell-tale markings on the bottle saying 50ml which would date it post 1971. The newer dram was ordered via Drinksupermarket, whereas the older one came in an auction bundle.

Fortunately before I opened the older sample I noticed signs of sediment, so with the seal in doubt, the coffee filter procedure was employed. I am happy to say that once opened, I could see the seal appeared to be in good condition.

Details

Glenmorangie 10 (1970’s)

Region – Highland Age -10 y.o Strength – 70 Proof (40%) Colour – Pale Straw (0.2) Cask Type – Bourbon Colouring – Yes Chill Filtered – Yes Nose – sweet and sour – honey, caramel, bit of hay, slight hint of smoke and brine. Citrus. Slight funk from bottle. Palate – Quite oily, the legs are quite impressive for its age, subtle arrival of wood spices. Barley, citrus (orange peel) honey, cinnamon. Honey, slight smoke continues from the nose. Finish – medium long. Bitter orange, caramel, smoke, hessian sack, coconut, hint of brine and sulphur. Warming and slightly astringent on the finish. Hessian probably the bottle funk. adding water (2ml) increased the hessian and brine notes and added pineapple to the palate and finish.


Old style Glenmorangie 10.

Glenmorangie 10 (The Original

Region -Highland Age -10 y.o Strength – 40% abv Colour – Pale Gold (0.3) Cask Type – Bourbon Colouring -Yes Chill Filtered -Yes Nose – Sweet, quite light, natural honeycomb, peach melba, slight citrus, little brine, almond, nougat. Palate – Sweet arrival. More malty, barley once again, oak, coconut, reminds me of the pink / white bars of iced coconut.vanilla. Finish – medium. A burst of a savoury note after swallowing. Then sweet / sour. Oak, chocolate, brine, peppery. a touch of candy floss and almond. Adding 2ml of water smoothes things out a bit and reduces the savoury note at the start of the finish.

Glenmorangie 10 Original. Bottle emulating the tall stills

Conclusions

The trouble of doing these reviews of newer versus older whisky is that it is after all, pretty subjective. On the eye, although my iPhone photography may not show it, the newer dram is certainly clearer and more fresh looking in the glass. By colour there is not much to tell them apart, and even on initial nosing before I rested the drams, the noses on them were remarkably similar. So much so I had to mark one of the glasses so I would know what one is what.


Colour-wise not a lot in it. Older on left.

But as I am writing this, I am writing with a sinking heart as the dram I didn’t like, I’m wondering if it is just to my taste or if it is genuinely the worst of the two. It had the shorter finish of the two, and if I am going to be honest, tastewise it wasn’t the best. Then again I look at it from another perspective. The strong taste just after swallowing while not to my pleasure, highlighted something in the whisky that was probably more relevant – a lack of balance. Both drams were soft initially, but the older example had this continuously, and while it did produce that lovely oaky woody spices in the same proportions as the newer example, nothing really overpowered anything else.

For me, what I look for in the whisky normally is the nose, palate and finish. I’m looking for notes, aromas, full on flavours and spices, yet having such a large burst of a savoury flavour at the end, the newer expression of the 10 year old just does not hold the same balance. And for that reason I am going to say I preferred the older expression.

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.

Photo Credits

All Photos – Authors Own

(Un)Social Media.

Social media – what does it mean to you?

In these dark days of lockdown, more and more people are relying on social media to fill in their spare time. I resisted social media until 2009 when a long standing offshore contract came to an end and I joined Facebook to keep in contact with the people that I worked with. I’d been avoiding it for so long as I’ve got a mildly addictive personality, and being hooked on social media wasn’t on my life plan but I signed up anyway once a plausible excuse to myself turned up. And that was the beginning of the end really, as social media can be anything but social.

You don’t have to wander far to see that social media is pretty much like nuclear energy, as in it can be used for good or evil purposes and when things go bang, they often go bang in a big way. This is especially true when people use the media to push their own objectives or opinions. I have to say, that in the past that I have been guilty of this in the past regards political matters and that was the prime reason for starting my blog to give myself something creative to do, rather than something that was leading nowhere.

The advantages of social media is that you can keep in contact with people that you may not ordinarily see, ‘meet’ new people and exchange ideas. Different social media platforms have their own uses – I used to use Instagram as a photo editor for the filters. I joined Twitter in 2010, for a similar reason to joining Facebook but never saw the need for really contributing, and Facebook is fine for reaching out to people you know but is a very limiting tool for reaching new people without using paid promotions. The curse of the algorithm strikes again. There are other social media outlets and messaging services which I am sure we all know about, each one being more appropriate for different things.

Then, of course as in many things, the good side is counteracted with a negative side. And this to me often outweighs the good things. First of all, it has to be said that the poor thing about social media is the amount of time that people spend on their mobile devices. How many times have you been in a pub and people seem to be having conversations with other people on social media and not engaging with people that are there with them. Or more to the point, how many times have you been sitting at home on your phone and your spouse may be a bit fed up that you pay more attention to that than your family? This is a pitfall that many, including myself have fallen into in the past.

Getting sucked in?

It is easy to forget that unless you set filters, everything you post can be seen by anybody else. And it’s also easy to forget that nothing in life comes for free, and the price of free social media is our digital identities being used for marketing purposes. As social media consumers or even just internet users, we are targets for those looking to separate us from our money in exchange for their goods. How often have you maybe searched for something online, then minutes later, any targeted ads are suggesting what you’ve just looked for? It is constant and for me it is starting to get draining. It’s bad enough having my boss and wife look over my shoulder without retailers doing the same thing.

I’ve deliberately kept my social pages with regards whisky and family life separate. I personally don’t want my wife to find out what I am spending on whisky, or more to the point what I have spent on whisky! I think it is a good idea to have a social disconnect between the two things, and this works for me, as I don’t particularly want to have my private family life displayed for all to see. But with the time between looking out for family, my work offshore and my other interests besides whisky, I’ve had to adapt my social media habits and now tend to use Twitter a lot more than I used to. One really good advantage to Twitter is that it is almost like an instant chat service, with the added advantage it only limited photos and text in a single post, meaning the information you get is bite sized. The other advantage is that it is easier for all to see what you are posting, therefore getting more attention if you use it as a communication tool for your hobby, which is what many of you reading this will do.

But again, as I Iike to say after working with some of the grumpiest people in the offshore industry, “every silver lining has its cloud” and Twitter is no different. While I predominantely use Twitter for my whisky hobby, I try to use it as a social tool rather than an information gathering exercise. However others do use it as a vehicle to gather followers and spread their marketing message. The spirits industry has long been using social media to promote their products, and while it is good to be able to maybe see what is new on the market, the endless trotting out of new products is starting to wear a little thin. Indeed it often starts to feel that your social media feeds aren’t for socialising, but a field for marketeers to do their harvesting. And to me, that’s starting to encroach too much on my social world.

Its time to reclaim the social in social media.

So, this week I decided to have a cull. I pay extra to ensure any of my blog readers aren’t exposed to advertising , so it was time to take steps to limit marketing for me. The list of whom I follow / like or who follows me was away to take a wee bit of natural selection.

Now that the fun of #WhiskySanta is over, Master of Malt were top of the list. So were TWE. Nothing personal, I do use both sites but I don’t appreciate the marketing. Next were a bunch of distilleries which to be honest, I’ve no real interest in their whisky. Sorry Jura, but I still haven’t forgiven you for Journey. The next on the line were the people who constantly post stuff that aren’t whisky related. Football is an exception, extra points being given if they are a fan of Aberdeen FC. Even then, if it’s excessive they get muted. Crypto-currencies and Elon Musk’s wittering; retweeting that nonsense instantly consigns you to a cull or if you do post whisky stuff as well, mute may applied.

Still not forgiven or finished.

My largest personal ire on social media is reserved for the shameless self-promoters or influencers. Those who just crave likes or follows. They are in a second place of my whisky dislikes behind flippers. You have to ask what their agenda is as it is often marketing again or personal enrichment. They shall begone from my list of followers, as these are snake-oil salesmen and should forthwith be consigned to the fires of Twitter or Instagram Hell. Indeed I had to deal with one recently, who’d become a bit spammy after suddenly coming onto the scene. Feel free to do what you want. I can happily sail past it.

Do you value your success in the amount of interaction you have or the quality of your interaction? I don’t really mind not having a massive following as it reduces any pressure to perform by continually having to output content. Decent articles often take a lot of time to write and require a lot of research. I’ve written articles on whisky topics for people in the industry, so you need to know you’ve got your facts spot on. You can bet your bottom dollar I prefer quality over quantity. As Robert Louis Stevenson said “Don’t judge each day by the harvest reaped, but by the seeds you plant.”

If I can say one thing; it isn’t how big your collection is, how large your knowledge or how amazing your palate is. The recent article about Whisky Community I wrote mentions how more appropriate it could be to think of what you can add to the community in order to build others up rather than taking for your own selfish means. If you have to beg for followers then something is suspicious or you are just an attention seeker. Desperation is never an attractive quality.

One of the Whisky Twitterati I spoke to during my research for this article mentioned that he’d rather only 100 followers he engaged with than 1000 he didn’t. Wise words indeed. What’s the point of that 900 cluttering up your feed if you have no real interest in what they say? There is no gold medal for the most followers unless you are promoting something.

Though let’s not forget that there is nothing wrong with a bit of recommendation in my eyes. A recent review I wrote and a couple of discreet recommendations saw around 10 sales of an independently bottled single cask whisky from an independent bottler / retailer. Given the massive drop in his trade due to the pandemic, he was very grateful for the extra sales and exposure his business got. Hopefully those who bought the recommended bottle will see the quality in the bottling and will look to this retailer in the future. Word of mouth is a powerful weapon to create a social media buzz and has a positive uplift to it rather than the slick words of a marketing dept. And there is always the pleasant, if not slightly smug feeling of making a difference.

I come on social media to relax, and have some banter. I’m even happier if I learn something new. I have made plenty of sincere friendships since I started using social media as part of my whisky hobby and that had been a bonus. I don’t welcome retailers, companies or individuals pushing themselves into my online space. Of course there are brands and brand ambassadors I do follow, as they are good craic and certainly not overbearing. Often you’d forget they actually represent brands. The skill of these people is to communicate in a way you want to look at their product or even try it. Being too forwards or not properly interacting with your followers just encourages people to switch off.

The weeding out of the items that aren’t focused on my interests have been a long time coming. Indeed I have found this social media cull quite cathartic and will allow me more space for the people and opinions I do value.

Being unsocial on social media often has its benefits

Yours In Spirits

Scotty

p.s By the way, if you liked this article, feel free to share, retweet, like or follow. I’m not that grumpy. I’m sure you’ll get the irony.

Index of tastings here

Index of articles here


Scotty’s Drams encourages responsible drinking. To find out the facts about drink, and where to find help if you need it visit Drinkaware.co.uk by clicking on the link.