Knockdu 12-year-old (1990s)

Bought: Online Auction, 12^th December 2014

Ratings:
81.25/100 – Whiskybase (average from 4 member votes)

As a pre-Christmas treat I decided to have a punt on a few whiskies I fancied in an online auction. Gradually, as the minutes ticked away, I was outbid on all but this bottle of Knockdu 12yo from the 1990s. I was interested in it because it predates the change by the distillery to AnCnoc, just in case people got confused with the other distillery called Knockando. Personally I don’t see the problem with two distilleries starting with ‘Knock’ given how many distilleries start with “Glen”. We all know the likes of Glenmorangie, Glenlivet and Glenfiddich are well established but surely the lesser ‘Glen’ distilleries are much of a muchness for whisky buyers outside of Scotland? And quite a few people in Scotland too! What makes Glenlossie, Glen Spey, or Glenallachie stand out from the rest?!

I’d done my research and I knew that my bottle of Knockdu without a box could fetch around £30 at auction, so I was delighted to get it for £15. But, add commission, postage, etc, and it set me back £28. That’s probably not bad compared to its originally price in the 1990s. Although the Whiskybase score of 81.25/100 doesn’t look good, the latest 2012 listing for the AnCnoc 12yo scores less than 80. Admittedly that’s from 238 votes compared to 4, so a bigger variation of tastes.

I’m tempted to keep this bottle as an investment, even though it’s hardly a classic of its day. In 10 years time the experienced whisky drinkers will be telling the novices that the whisky of the 1990s was soooo much better than now, much like some of today’s whisky aficionados say whisky was better in the 1980s. Or I might take out my bottle of AnCnoc 12yo and do a taste comparison. That sounds like a better plan! 🙂

Yoichi 10-year-old

Bought: Amazon, 5^th December 2014

Ratings:
83.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2013
86/100 – Ralfy – His YouTube review here (April 2009)

The very first whisky book I got that started my collecting crazy was Ian Buxton’s ‘101 Whiskies to Try Before You Die’. My initial idea was to acquire all 101 until I realised that some were impossible to purchase in the UK. Clearly the author never meant for anyone to take his title seriously. And with another book mentioning 1001 whiskies, my liver is thankful I failed before adding a further 900!

Now, where was I?! Ah yes, the Yoichi 10yo is the last whisky mentioned in the 101 book. I might not have all of them but I feel a sense of completion by having the very last one. The history of the distillery is worth a read but Ian Buxton finishes with his tasting notes, which are:

Nose: Bold and direct, with peat evident. Light citrus notes.
Taste: Minty chocolate and orange oil. Creamy mouth feel and delicate peat smoke.
Finish: Sweetness, peat and some antiseptic notes in alternate waves.

I will look out for these when I try it.

I had to go back to the Whisky Bible 2013 to find the Yoichi 10yo, so it is probably a different batch to the version I have. Jim Murray expresses shock that the release he tastes isn’t as good as he’s tried in the past and concludes with “Pleasant. Drinkable. But dull.” In the 2009 edition of the Bible there were numerous batches of the 10yo listed, with the most recent scoring 89/100. I’m curious to see where my bottle falls in the varying scale of Yoichi, and is its demise from the Bible a sign that it’s been discontinued?! Surely not another distillery moving to non-age statement releases?!

Scapa ‘the’ Orcadian 16-year-old

Bought: Drink Supermarket, 4^th December 2014

Ratings:
81/100 – Whisky Bible 2015
83.25/100 – Whiskybase (average from 65 member votes)

Last year I went home to my parents in Aberdeen, Scotland and cracked open a bottle of the famous, and dearly departed Scapa 12-year-old. It was as fantastic as I remembered from previous tastings. Each year from now on I’ll make a point to have a glass during a visit. Since nobody else in the family is that interested, it could take me 10 years before I finish the bottle. I wonder how much another one will be at auction by then? Some people say that it will be oxidised and horrible after 10 years but I’ve never found this with old, open bottles of whisky. My dear old uncle Hamish, sadly no longer with us, said to give a bottle a shake to mix the top layer in with the rest, and it’s as good as new. If you don’t, you might detect a slight bitterness from the oxidation from the surface layer.

I’ve said in previous posts about being reluctant to get the Scapa 16yo because a) it doesn’t score well enough in reviews, even if it’s supposedly won awards and b) it’s overpriced for what it is. If it hadn’t been for a Black Friday discount allowing me to get the Scapa 16yo for under £40, I still wouldn’t have it today. But I might be doing this whisky an injustice. Jim Murray’s mark in his Whisky Bible 2015 is rather confusing because he gives a different score for a bottle marked ‘the’ Orcadian (which mine is) but says it’s only for the Swedish market. At 87.5/100 it sounds a lot better than the 81/100 he gives to the ordinary 16yo. Perhaps the Scapa distillery realised the whole world deserved the good stuff and not just their Scandinavian ancestors.

I still have hope that one day we’ll see a return of the Scapa 12yo to battle it out with other 12-year-olds from the likes of Highland Park, Glenlivet and Glenmorangie, because the distillery has a lot to offer on a wider world scale. As for this 16yo, I will have to take a sample up to Aberdeen and compare it against its former younger brother. I have a feeling I wont be disappointed with the new 16yo.

Here’s Andy of ‘Single Malt Maniac’ with his review on You Tube (June 2013):

 

Old Pulteney 21-year-old

Bought: Drink Supermarket, 4^th December 2014

Ratings:
97.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2015
87.52/100 – Whiskybase (average from 69 member votes)
9/10 – Whisky Wednesday (video below)

I bought this bottle of Old Pulteney 21yo on Black Friday when Drink Supermarket was offering 20% off their normal prices. Fantastic news you might think but it almost killed my interest in buying whisky thereafter. Whisky is expensive stuff, so when you can get it for less you don’t want to pay full price again, if you can avoid it. Unfortunately, only buying whisky on one discount day per year isn’t an option my addiction will allow.

Like the Ardbeg Uigeadail I last blogged about, the Old Pulteney 21yo is one of those rare whiskies that scores top marks in the Whisky Bible. Jim Murray’s review dates back to 2012 where he gives the nose full marks of 25/25. The taste scores highly too with the comment “nerve-tingling journey of barley at varying intensity and then a slow but magnificently complete delivery of spice.” The Bible concludes with “absolutely exploding from the glass with vitality, charisma and class”.

The Old Pulteney 21yo was awarded “World Whisky of the Year” in the Whisky Bible 2012, which instantly set it up to be shot down. I’ve read several reviews that say “not the best whisky I’ve tasted” but that’s hardly surprising. It’s like being told you’re about to see the funniest comedian in the world so the instant reaction is “go on then, make me laugh!” But there’s no denying the quality of this single malt. A whisky no collection should be without, or an enthusiast should fail to try.

Here’s Jo of ‘Whisky Wednesday’ with his review on You Tube (July 2015):

Ardbeg ‘Uigeadail’

Bought: Drink Supermarket, 4^th December 2014

Ratings:
97.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2015
89/100 – Ralfy, Ardbeg Uigeadail Review, YouTube (May 2013)

At last! I finally got the Ardbeg Uigeadail! If you have a copy of Jim Murray’s Whisky Bible you’ll understand where my excitement is coming from. No other whisky scores more than 97.5/100 in the Bible, although there are 12 others that share the same honour. But something’s not right when you start reading Jim Murray’s review. There are 2 versions of Uigeadail. The one scoring 97.5/100 he believes is a release for the Canadian market, which he tasted in 2008 (so not a recent review) with a strength of 54.2%. Another version with a strength of 54.1% scores 89/100. Confused?! That’s whisky reviews for you!

Thankfully my bottle is 54.2%, the same as the 97.5/100 version but it seems that the Whisky Bible’s score and review are 7 years old! Perhaps a more up-to-date opinion can be gleamed from Ralfy’s review from May 2013 where he scores the Uigeadail 89/100. But he last reviewed it in March 2009 and scored it 92/100 (which is Ralfy’s highest score, so the equivalent of the Bible’s 97.5).

I’m getting the impression that standards have slipped a bit with the great Uigeadail but, as I’ve not tasted it before, will I notice or even care? Probably not. I’m also beginning to spot a trend in long-term whisky reviewers that, a lot of the time they say “whisky tasted so much better in the old days!” or words to that effect. Is this true or, as science proved many years ago, taste degrades as we grow older? But there can be other factors. I’m reminded of a lovely occasion during a family gathering when I first experienced the Lagavulin 16yo. I was thoroughly enjoying myself and a single malt had never tasted better! Over a year later I tried it again, sober and alone, and it didn’t taste half as nice. Nostalgia has a lot to answer for! So how accurate can reviews and re-reviews be if our changing age, mood, and other external factors influence our taste?

Well, the answer is, if you want to try a whisky you’ve never experienced before, if the majority of people say it’s good, chances are it is. Combine that with knowing your whisky likes and dislikes (peat or no peat?) you’ll rarely buy a bad dram, especially from a reliable distillery. But, avoid drinking whisky when you’re feeling miserable! I always find that cake is a better choice!

 

Speyburn ‘Bradan Orach’

Bought: Tesco, 1^st December 2014

Ratings:
76.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2015
76.5/100 – Whiskybase (average from 4 member votes)

“Bradan Orach” means Golden Salmon, so if you feel like this whisky slaps you around the face with a wet fish, you’ll know why! It’s a non-aged statement single malt from the Speyburn distillery, in Speyside. Jim Murray in his Whisky Bible 2015 has very little to say about it, which is “fresh, young, but struggles to find a balance”. Other reviews suggest it’s no more than 6 years old. But that’s not always a bad thing. Also mentioned in the Whisky Bible is a Speyburn by the independent bottler Provenance that is “over 8 years” which scores a very respectable 88/100. Scoring 76.5/100 in the bible classifies this single malt as “average and usually pleasant though sometimes flawed”.

Small things amuse me, so I find it funny that the average on Whiskybase from 4 member votes is identical to the Whisky Bible. If you’re considering buying this whisky it’s worth watching the video below by ‘Fun With Peat And Sherry’. What scares me the most is that he bought the Bradan Orach in America for $16.99! You might think you get what you pay for but the review suggests you’d be surprised (in a good way). Although his rating of 5/10 isn’t great. Also worth watching for Tipsy the cat who nearly knocks over the bottle of Speyburn at one point! 🙂

Ben Nevis – That Boutique-y Whisky Co (batch 1)

Bought: Amazon, 21^st November 2014

Ratings:
89/100 – Whisky Bible 2015
86.5/100 – Whiskybase (average from two member votes)

I’ve had my eye on the independent bottler ‘That Boutique-y Whisky Company’ for a while. On the downside, all their offerings are NAS, assuming you consider an age statement important. Personally I don’t care, so long as the whisky tastes nice. Certainly one negative is the bottle volume of 50cl rather than the more standard 70cl. So, at a diminutive size, what’s inside needs to be better than average. Things start to improve when you discover that most, if not all Boutique-y’s whiskies are cask strength. And lastly, the company generally gets excellent reviews.

Speaking of reviews, Jim Murray says of this Ben Nevis in his Whisky Bible “massive chunky delivery. All kinds of fruit in play, as well as barley sugar concentrate” and “a malt to match the mountain: just…big!” Then he scores it 89/100 which is “very good to excellent whisky definitely worth buying”.

You can’t help but notice the naïve, almost VIZ-like cartoons on the bottle labels, all of which tell a quirky story and relate to those involved in the bottling process. Initially I didn’t like the artwork but I’m warming to it now. It’s certainly unique in the world of whisky, which adds a certain charm. I got bottle no.129 of only 161 released so there aren’t many opportunities to get a taste of this interesting whisky.

Glenturret ‘Sherry Edition’

Bought: The Whisky Shop, 18^th November 2014

Ratings:
79.48/100 – Whiskybase (average from 27 member votes)

Happy New Year! I hope 2015 is a great year for you!

Generally I like to have a rating for a whisky I post up on my blog. Sadly, none of my usual sources have assessed this single malt from Glenturret. It caught my eye when I was looking at The Whisky Shop website. Having got the 10yo, and Triple Wood, I was left with a choice between the ‘Sherry Edition’ and ‘Peated Edition’. Which one to get first? My sweet tooth got the better of me but I’d like to get the peated version eventually.

The Triple Wood, Sherry and Peated editions are supposedly exclusive to The Whisky Shop here in the UK, which might make them collectable but I doubt it. Saying that, I notice today that The Whisky Shop website no longer has the Sherry and Peated editions. Perhaps if the Whisky Bible rates my latest acquisition 99/100 in the 2016 publication I’ll be able to sell it for a fortune! 🙂

The label on the back of the bottle says “Glenturret’s Master of Whisky has hand selected the best sherry casks to create this rich Single Malt Whisky. Homemade syrup sponge meets the nose with a sweetness and warmth that invites you in. The taste is of puff candy layered with aromatic sandalwood and smooth, sweet spices.”

Sounds yummy! 😛

Here’s Horst Luening of Whisky.com with his review on You Tube (June 2015):