Liquid Log Entries 070 - 079 (2001) 70 - 01/01/2001 - THE 52-CHALLENGE - My pet project for 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 70 - January 1, 2001 Finally! The new millennium is officially here and we can put all the discussions about whether or not it actually started this year or last year behind us. A few days ago, Davin de Kergommeaux from Canada
informed the other Malt Maniacs about his new year's resolution; he will try to taste one new single malt whisky every week of 2001.
For the mathematically challenged: that's 52 different single malt whiskies within a year! Davin's audacity inspired me. Anyway - this means I better start to drink more seriously... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 71 - January 6, 2001 I'm making pretty good progress in my search for the perfect single malt. Between January 1997 and December 1999, I've written only 30 log entries. Over the year 2000 alone, I've managed to produce 40 log entries. I have now tasted the product of more
than 80 different distilleries. And with all the new malts in my reserve stock (and a few more on order), I'm pretty sure I will be able to sample malts from the remainder of the active distilleries in Scotland.
Storing the bottles of single malt whisky in my Astrid (a girlfriend of mine who's slowly starting to appreciate whisky) came by to assist me in finishing a great number of nearly empty bottles. She can drink vast quantities of liquor - a
quality I admire in a woman... She arrived a little early, so we decided to have a few 'appetisers' before dinner. The bottle of Linkwood 12yo 1984/1996
(43.0%, Signatory Vintage, distilled on 9.10.84, matured in sherry butt #4031, bottled on 14.11.96, bottle #461 of 636) has managed to hide itself pretty well on my bottom shelf. I bought it almost three years ago, in February 1998. Time to finish the last three drams in the bottle - especially because I recently picked up a more recent replacement - the Signatory Vintage Linkwood 12yo 1988. I could have had myself an interesting little H2H-session, but I decided to keep the new bottle closed until the proverbial 'rainy day'.
In retrospect, this bottle should have been on my top shelf. This Speyside distillery definitely needs further research; too bad there aren't any 'official' bottlings available
around these parts. I'm very glad I have a replacement Linkwood in my OK - the bottle of Linkwood is empty and I feel ready for the psychological pressure that comes with a
final rating. My little eye spied the Old Fettercairn 10yo (40%. OB, 100cl). The Old Fettercairn moves to my bottom shelf, making room on my middle shelf for the fresh bottle of Knockdhu 12yo
(40%, OB, 100cl). It's actually a new version of the An Cnoc 12yo I've tried a few years ago, marketed under another name. That's three single malts down. Time to eat before we delve into the 'inferior' material. Then we turned our attention to the Johnnie Walker 15 yo Green Label, another vatted malt that's priced a little
over the premium 'Black Label' blend here in Holland. So what have we learned so far?
Time for a little break with a 'Croissant Gravad Lachs a la Johannes'. Enjoy! Astrid complained that it was a little too fat, but hey - so am I... Our next bottle was the Te Bheag, 'unchillfiltered Connoisseur's Blend'.
I'm only human, and therefor I err. My suspicions about the origins of my 'bastard' bottling of the aptly named Cockburn 6yo may have caused me to underrate this whisky. Let's find out if prejudice was involved... Ah! By now, we had lost our 20/20 vision, but we managed to spot the bottle of Jack Daniels
in the back of my cabinet. This bottle must've been there for at least three years, but now it's time it gets replaced by a proper whisky. Finally, we turned our attention to the Suntory Kakubin
, a Japanese blend. Around 3:00 AM my shelves were cleansed of six 'inferior' liquids - and we had a lot of fun during the cleansing process. There's nothing wrong with some moderate alcohol
abuse. We had a lot of other fun as well, but I won't go into that right now... - - - mAddendum 71A - First Alcoholic Acquisitions for 2001 Inspired by Davin's '52-Challenge', I performed my first alcoholic acquisition of 2001 on January 11.
Then I went downtown, to And the Mac isn't the only single malt
that became more expensive. Especially since the last few months, I've seen the prices of some of my old favourites (Lagavulin 16, Macallan 12, Laphroaig 10, Longmorn 15, etc.) increased by as much as 5 Euro's. The Lagavulin 16 (0.7 litre), for example, used to cost just 31 Euro's. Right now, I'd have to shell out 36 Euro's (fl. 79,95) for a bottle. This is still a very reasonable price for
such a good malt, but I certainly hope this isn't the start of a trend. Just to be on the safe side, I picked up two litre bottles of old favourites who are still bargains; Laphroaig 10 and Longmorn 15.
If 'bang-for-my-buck' had been my only criterion, I would have simply picked up a whole bunch of litre bottles of Laphroaig 10. But since my voyage through maltland has just started, I still feel the overpowering urge
to try as many new single malts as possible. The Aberlour, Glendronach, Glenrothes, Knockando, Longmorn Glenlivet and Linkwood are unfamiliar versions of familiar malts. Well - the Linkwood is kind of familiar; I have just emptied
a four years older version of the same age (Signatory Vintage 12yo 1984 - 81 points). If this version is just as good that's quite a bargain. I bought the Irish Locke's so I could compare it to the (nearly empty) bottles of
Tyrconnell and Connemara currently on my shelves. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 72 - January 13, 2001 This afternoon, I picked up a sample of ILeach NAS at the post office. There is no 'Ileach' distillery on Islay, which means that this is something I'd like to call a Starting with Jim's sample of the Ileach NAS (40%, bastard malt). The second dram with a few drops of water revealed some salt and smoke in the nose. Some
chloride perhaps. Very light citrus under the layer of peat? The taste didn't change that much - still an interesting development switching between sweet and peaty episodes before ending in a burning dry finish. The taste remained pretty much unaffected by the few drops, but was completely ruined by an extra splash of water. It left a bland, watery start and a barely noticeable, dryish
finish. So, this whisky is best enjoyed straight. Great stuff! Especially the nose is wonderful. If I had to guess, I'd say this is a very young (6 - 8yo) Ardbeg, Lagavulin or Laphroaig - probably the latter because of
the iodine in the nose. One of the best 'bastard malts' I ever tasted. I don't know what it costs compared to the 'official' Islays in Sweden, but I'd choose this over a Bowmore Legend or Bruichladdich 10 any day. I don't usually
rate single malts after only one tasting session, but since I'll probably never taste this one again I went ahead and gave it 78 points. And the Ileach was just the beginning... Ardnave 10yo ('Malts of Distinction' Series - Islay) Now I just recently heard about the
Ben Wyvis distillery (as far as I know one of the few single malt distilleries in Scotland that isn't mentioned by Michael Jackson), but the other three names are not familiar. An extensive search on the web didn't produce any
useful results either. Gall & Gall have a reputation for releasing crappy private bottlings from dubious origins (usually overpriced and with fanciful names like Glen Stuart), so I had my doubts whether these were
actually single malt whiskies or not. These doubts grew even more doubtful when an extensive search on the world wide web didn't produce any useful background information either. Inquisitive E-mails to Gall & Gall and
Invergordon remained unanswered as well - maybe a sign they have something to hide? Nevertheless, I was willing to take a chance on the Ben Wyvis and Ardnave - on the off chance that the latter would turn out to be a relabeled
Ardbeg 10. Sadly, when I visited the nearest Gall & Gall store on December 12, they were all out of Ardnave. I did find one bottle of the Ben Wyvis 10,
though, hidden away behind dozens of bottles of Cairnluish and Glen Foyle. Seems like some bottlings in this series are more popular than others. I purchased the Ben
Wyvis, together with a bottle of the new 'Special Reserve' from Glenfiddich, labelled as a 12 years old single malt. It is rumoured to be significantly better than the old 'Special Reserve' without an age statement. I managed to
restrain myself and didn't pick up the new official bottling of Glenfarclas 8, although it was on sale. I already have three versions of Glenfarclas on my shelves (105, 12 and 21), so I could do without a fourth bottle taking up
precious shelf space. Did I say I managed to constrain myself at Gall & Gall on December 12? I bought the Ardnave 10yo
(40%, bastard malt) on the off chance that the latter would turn out to be a relabelled Ardbeg 10 for almost half the price. One can always hope, can one not? Let's confront reality.
Even after several glasses, I had my doubts, so I decided to put it to the ultimate test: A head-to-head with the 'genuine article', Ardbeg 10yo
(46%, OB, score 85 points; *******). The Ardbeg
is much lighter in colour than the Ardnave. Even from a considerable distance, the intense aroma of the Ardbeg clearly identified it as an Islay whisky. The nose of the Ardnave wasn't nearly as powerful - and completely different. On closer examination, the Ardnave appeared very oily and grainy compared to the Ardbeg. Next to this powerhouse malt, the Ardnave pretty much shrivelled up and died. The Ardbeg aroma expressed a distinctive salty and peaty character, the Ardnave... well, let's just say that it didn't. The taste of the Ardbeg 10 was great! Uncompromisingly Islay. Strong, salty and peaty with a peppery explosion. Some smoke. Hint of peaches. The Ardnave, on the other hand, appeared really unpleasant on the tongue. No 'cohesion'. Very oily with a unpleasant chemical sweetness. Lacks a decent finish.
No way is the Ardnave 10 a ten years old Ardbeg! The Ardnave 10 has it's moments, but they are brief and far apart. I thought about using the remainder of the bottle for my 'special blend', but I figured Klaus might want to try some next when he's in Amsterdam. I put the bottle aside and pulled out the
other 'Malt of Distinction', the Ben Wyvis 10yo
(40%, bastard malt). Because I couldn't find out where it's actually distilled, I won't add the Ardnave to any of my 'official' lists. The Ben Wyvis, however, gets the benefit of the doubt because it actually IS an existing (albeit unknown) distillery owned by Invergordon. This just might be a genuine single malt, although it isn't mentioned in Michael Jackson's latest 'Malt Whisky Companion'. I figure that's because the product hasn't been offered as a single malt before.
Nose: Rather sharp. Extremely oily, not much else. A memory of smoke, maybe. Eucalyptus? One dimensional. Very disappointing, although it opens up a little after fifteen minutes, picking up some peaty elements. Taste:
This is not unlike drinking fermented cod oil - with a little peppermint, perhaps. Chemical smoothness; a bit like tequila. Grainy. Long, unpleasant burn. Strange, sweet finish. This malt (?) reminds me of Tullibardine and Isle of
Jura - not a good thing. It actually seems worse than those single malts at the bottom of my list. This calls for a rating that clearly expresses it's 'worseness'. Final rating: 43 points (- Those carpetbaggers at Gall & Gall
have managed to disappoint me once more. Doesn't the guy that selects their whiskies have a nose??? When I presented my brother Franc with a few samples for a second opinion he suggested that a better name for the series would be
'Malts of Extinction'. It's a good thing I tasted these malts in my 'Bypass Operation', because neither deserves a place on even my bottomest of shelves. Rest assured I won't try any more 'Malts of Distinction'. But not all 'bastard malts' (single malts of unknown origin) are as bad as the Cockburn 6yo or the Malts of Distinction. Some of them are actually quite good and offer great
value for money. Especially the aptly named 'Vintage' series by Signatory Vintage. It's a range of very affordable single malts, only identified by their region of origin (Highlands, Islands, Lowlands, Islay, Orkney, Campbeltown).
The 'McLelland's' series of Bowmore/Suntory (not available in Holland) is another example of a 'regional range'. According to John DiMarco, the Islay is a 5y Bowmore, the Lowland is a 5y Auchentoshan, and McLelland Highland is a 5y
Glen Garioch. I haven't tasted any of them, I'm afraid. Until some five years ago, my small income and large alcohol intake often made me pick a cheap 'bastard' bottle instead of the 'official' bottlings that usually
cost twice as much. Before I could afford to buy more reputable malts, I enjoyed vast quantities of Signatory's Islay single malt, reputed to be a Lagavulin 5yo these days. Back in the days when they didn't put an aga on the
bottle, it's rumoured to have been a 6 years old Lagavulin (score around 80 points) for less than 15 Euro's - amazing value. About two weeks ago, I decided to drop by Menno Boorsma from work, to buy myself two bottles
of the current 'Vintage' series - just for old times sake. I chose the Vintage Island Skye 8yo 40% (Talisker) and Vintage Campbeltown 8yo 40% (Glen Scotia). Price: fl. 39,95 - only 18 Euro's! Over the last week, I've tasted them
intensively and extensively; now it's rating time. I started with the Vintage Campbeltown 8yo (40%, bastard malt) Oh yeah - I can confirm that this is a Campbeltown single malt, probably Glen Scotia. Well, the only other option would be Springbank, and I think the chances of finding a Springbank at these prices are very remote.
The steep prices of Springbanks usually leave a bad taste in my mouth, but my experiences with the Glen Scotia 14 and this bottling have improved my opinion about the Campbeltown area.
To confirm my findings I poured myself another dram, and a dram of the 'official' Glen Scotia 14yo
(40%, OB) from my top shelf next to it. The 14yo (rating 84 points) is a bottle of the old stock, before the distillery was temporarily closed in the 1980's. The Vintage, however, is produced in the 1990's, after Glen Scotia resumed production. This should be interesting....
Sampling them next to each other, it looks like the new distillery style resembles the Springbank closer than it used to. Compared to the Vintage 8, the Distillery 14 almost seemed like a Speyside malt. It had a lot
of the same elements as the Vintage 8, but they were deeper and more balanced. The 14 had a lot more wood in nose and taste, but I guess that's to be expected of a malt almost twice as old. The Vintage 8 manages to hold it's own,
though, with a youthful charm and spontaneity. I'm no big fan of 'oily' malts like Tobermory or Isle of Jura, but here the oiliness is balanced by a lot of other scents and tastes. It's a lot more transparent than those malts from
the islands Mull and Jura as well, with a long and intriguing finish. If this is the new direction of Glen Scotia, I like it! Final rating of the Vintage Campbeltown: 77 points. I like this better than the
Springbank CV, which costs more than twice as much. And It doesn't look too bad compared to the official Gen Scotia 14 either - I had to pay fl. 86,95 (almost 40 Euro's) for that bottle almost a year ago. This is an AMAZING
DISCOVERY! I don't usually buy bastard malts for my reserve stock, but I may make an exception for this one. When official or independent bottlings of the new Glen Scotia stock become available here in Holland, they'll undoubtedly
cost a lot more than 18 Euro's. I moved on with the Vintage Island Skye 8yo
(40%, bastard malt)
The bottles look like shit, but I couldn't care less at 18 Euro's a bottle. These
'Vintage' single malts could actually be a great introduction for beginners in maltland. Those who are (understandably) hesitant to shell out 35 Euro's or more for a bottle can experience the different regional malt styles at
prices comparable to middle class blends. In my opinion, these malts beat premium blends and vatted malts like Johnnie Walker Black and Chivas Century with a stick. And they are considerably cheaper to boot.
So - where does that put me in the '52-Challenge'? - - - Addendum 72A - Panic Purchase Last year, I built a website for Ton Overmars, my favourite liquorist in Amsterdam. When I phoned him on January 24th to help him out with some 'tech stuff', he was foolish enough to tell me that he was so busy he hadn't had time yet to
change the prices of his malts. Even over the electric telephone, this sounded like music to my ears. Why? Not only have the prices of a lot of malts gone up 5 Euro's or more over the last few months, the sales tax in
Holland has increased from 17.5% to 19% as well. The combination of these factors has resulted in an average 10% price raise for the average bottle of single malt over the last 6 months. As you may have noticed from the attention I
gave this topic in a couple of previous logs, I'm a bit preoccupied with value. After all, I'm Dutch enough to worry about all the other fun things I could do with the money I spend on a bottle - like buying a different bottle
instead; preferably a cheaper one. You can imagine how these price increases have freaked me out.
Good prices, huh? Well, except for the Balblair and Springbank. But I've heard so much about these bottlings lately I just had to buy them to verify the rumours.
Laphroaig 10 and Talisker 10 are old favourites that will take their rightful place on my top shelf as soon as there's an empty spot. The other bottlings are all completely new to me. And it didn't end there. Now I remember why this is my favourite liquorist! Although the prices at Menno Boorsma (my second favourite liquorist in Amsterdam) are very nice compared to those at major outlets like Gall & Gall, Ton Overmars offers a lot of malts considerably cheaper. If you're looking for the best value in Amsterdam, it's certainly worth the occasional detour into the suburbs (Hoofddorpplein). On the other hand, Menno Boorsma (Ferdinand Bolstraat) offers a slightly wider selection. - - - Addendum 72B - Boring Purchase Notes I guess these listings of my purchases may seem a bit boring. - - - Addendum 72C - Status 52-Challenge I wrote about the '2001-52 Challenge' in log entry #70. - - - Addendum 72D - Colour Coding Because I didn't know the price of the Ileach, I couldn't give it the sort of experimental colour coding described in log entry #69. But I found that the new system doesn't offer the kind of sophistication I'm looking for anyway, so I
decided to return to my previous system of preliminary ratings for now. Ne - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 73 - January 25, 2001 Some five months ago, Klaus, Michael and Marlou from Hamburg came over to Amsterdam for an international tasting session (see log entry #49
for details). It seems they enjoyed themselves the first time, because now they returned for a second tasting. Apart from muling over my order from Weinquelle (see mAddendum), my guests surprised me with two free bonus bottles, the Macallan 7yo and a handy little hip bottle of Laphroaig 10. Great! The Macallan 7 years is an official bottling for the Italian market that I've been curious about for years, especially after my disappointing experiences with the Macallan Speymalt 1990 by Gordon & MacPhail. And an easy to carry flask of the 'Liquid Heat' Laphroaig 10 is always handy during the cold days of winter.
Because these 'cold days of winter' have given me cold, I had a very bad nose day. As a result, most of my tasting notes are a bit sketchy. It seemed Klaus was feeling a little under the weather as well, but that
didn't stop us from starting our session around 20:00 with an old-fashioned head-to-head tasting. We tasted the official Glen Scotia 14yo (40%, OB) against the Vintage Campbeltown 8yo
(40%, bastard malt, probably Glen Scotia). I performed the same H2H two weeks ago (see The 14yo showed
liquorice and smoke in the nose, with a lot of fruit cake later. The taste started quite soft but developed into a long explosion. It didn't react too well to a dash of water, becoming 'sparkly'. Compared to the 14, the nose of the
Vintage 8 was a lot more subtle. Very oily with lots of cinnamon. Some salt. It became more briny with a generous dash of water, but quickly went dead after that. The taste didn't seem quite as powerful as I remembered from my
earlier experiences. Smooth and creamy, with an interesting development. Menthol? Dry finish, becoming sweeter. Even on this bad nose day, the difference between the two is very obvious. The official 14 is the clear winner of the
two, but the Vintage Campbeltown offered another interesting perspective. Judging from their reactions, neither Klaus nor Michael were very enthusiastic about the Vintage Campbeltown. Was my original rating of 77 points too generous? I don't think so. I like the subtle complexity of the nose. It has a character of it's own. I suspect that this malt will do very well in the summertime. The rating of 77 points stands - as does the rating of 84 points for the official 14. We proceeded with the Glenmorangie NAS 'Cellar 13'
(43%, OB, 100cl) from my middle shelf. This new bottling became available in Holland a while ago. It is around ten years old, but you have to read the fine print on the bottle to find that out. The Cellar 13 is distinguished from the 'ordinary' Glenmorangie 10yo by the fact that it's exclusively matured in first fill American mountain oak casks in Glenmorangie's warehouse closest to the sea. On the shores of the Dornoch Firth, to be precise.
I had planned to give it a final rating tonight, but given my bad nose day I decided to wait. I gave it a preliminary rating of **** for now.
Somehow, I had expected the product of the warehouse closest to the sea to be more powerful, with more salt and peat. Instead, you've got a malt that's sweeter than the original. However it turns out, I'm pretty sure it won't
return to my shelves. This just isn't special enough to justify the large price difference with the Glenmorangie 10. Whenever I have special guests, I open at least one bottle from my reserve stock for the occasion. As
long as we were tasting Glenmorangies, I might as well open the bottle of Glenmorangie NAS Madeira Wood Finish
(40%, OB, 100cl). Like with the Cellar 13, you have to look very hard to find an age statement on the bottle. As it transpires, this malt has matured in American white oak casks for at least twelve years and an undisclosed amount of time in madeira drums after that. Glenmorangie was one of the first distilleries to experiment with this kind of 'special' finishes. It began in 1994 with the introduction of the Port Wood Finish. I liked previous bottlings of the port wood finish and madeira wood finish a lot (85 and 84 points respectively), but I've heard that the quality of these malts varies a lot from bottling to bottling.
Let's find out how this bottling performs. And then I invited my guests to select a bottle from my reserve stock themselves. After some rummaging, Michael pulled out the bottle of Saint Magdalene 19yo 1979/1998 (63.8%, UDRM).
Personally, I wouldn't have picked a cask strength malt this early in the session, but Michael's selection proved to be an excellent choice, even though it was a Lowland. The nose was so great that didn't want to risk damaging it by water. But then again, 63,8% is a little too much to drink straight. The
few drops I poured on my tongue were just too strong. I poured half of my glass into a second glass and diluted it to about 50% to compare it with the undiluted version. It got more citrus in the nose, with whiffs of chloride and
spiritus. This is strange, because these 'alcoholic' notes weren't there at cask strength. But the nose is still very complex at this strength. The taste was sweet and sherried, with a long malty burn developing into a surprisingly
peaty finish. Is this a Lowlander??? Oh boy; even on this bad nose day it's safe to classify the St. Magdalene as an After Michael had proven his amazing instincts by picking the excellent St. Magdalene from the 60 bottles in my reserve stock, I invited him to select another bottle. He chose the Dailuaine 16yo Flora & Fauna
. We proceeded with the Blair Athol 12yo (43%, Flora & Fauna) from my bottom shelf; one of the few Midlands malts in my collection.
After five generous drams, my nose began to play tricks on me. Again, I found memories of Macallan in the nose. Rounded and well balanced. Complex and woody. Sherry. Mustard? The taste started quite dry, but grew smoother and
sweeter with time. Woody. Toffee. Very nice. Around
midnight, I proposed a head-to-head session of the Macallan 10 100 Proof and the UDRM Caol Ila 21yo 1975. Both bottles are nearly empty and I had planned to finish them tonight. But my guests reacted very modest and suggested I
save the rest of the Caol Ila for a H2H session with the mackillop's Choice they brought. Good thinking. We opted for a wee dram of the Macallan 10yo 100 Proof
(57%, OB) instead, leaving just enough in the bottle for one future session. It was great, as always. The St. Magdalene was a hard act to follow, but the Mac 10 C/S held up pretty well. The nose is just SO round and complex. The essence of Macallan; different dilutions produce different malts.
And that's where I stopped making notes. If memory serves, I poured myself one or two drams of the Dufftown 15yo
(43%, Flora & Fauna), while my guests opened the bottle of Talisker 10yo (45.8%, OB) from my reserve stock and took a closer look at Tomintoul 12yo (43%, OB), Glenesk 1984/1997 (40%, Connoiseurs Choice) and Tobermory NAS (40%,
OB). I remember some vague discussions about my 'nobility' and the hidden inequality in Dutch 'egalitarian' society. It's a shame that the senses are dulled and the head
becomes cloudy after 10 malts or so. I would have gladly sampled another dozen of malts but around 2:00 AM I had to give up and retreat for the night. The next morning I experienced my first hangover in years. - - - mAddendum 73A - Weinquelle Order 2001
It was very nice to see my german friends again, and the fact that they brought over a bunch of intriguing bottles from Weinquelle (
www.weinquelle.com) made it even nicer. My order included:
What makes this order so intriguing? Five of these bottles (Aberfeldy, Balmenach, Braes of Glenlivet, Glenglassaugh and North Port) are from unknown distilleries; I never tried any bottlings from them before. With the exception of Kininvie, I have now tasted and/or acquired bottles from every active distillery in Scotland. In addition to the 'Major Leap Forward In My Quest' order, Addendum 73B - Lagavulin 16yo When I did my grocery shopping this afternoon, I passed by a 'Vomar' liquorist I normally never visit - even though their
prices are quite friendly. It's one of those small supermarket outlets with a very limited single malt selection. At any given time they have maybe ten different malts in stock; about a fifth of the number of blends they carry.
When I threw a thirsty glance through the window - as you do - I noticed the Lagavulin 16 for fl. 71,95 - less than 33 Euro's. I made an emergency stop. This excited me even more than the 'bargain' factor. Lagavulin 16 has not only grown more expensive over the last year; the quality of more recent bottlings seems to have dropped a little as well. It took more than a
dozen tasting sessions over the last six months before I was ready to admit that one of my darkest fears became reality; Lagavulin 16 is changing! Not dramatically, mind you - maybe two points worth. Some of the magical balance has
disappeared and the character seems to move in the general direction of the 'double matured' version; less extreme with more sherry. At the moment, the Lagavulin 16 is still my favourite single malt, but the distance between my no.
1 and runners-up like Talisker 10 and Ardbeg 17 has shrunk considerably. If this development continues, the king may even be dethroned. Best not to think of it... - - - Addendum 73C - Adjustment Scale Every cloud has a silver lining, though. The slight slipping (+/- 2 points) of the Lagavulin 16 allows me to make some more room at the top of my ratings scale, enabling me to better express
the finer nuances of my liquid love. A previous minor adjustment in November 2000 (with a liver-destroying series of H2H tastings in a bar) concentrated on the order of the malts on my personal enjoyment scale. Now I can look at
the scale itself. Instead of adjusting the rating of Lagavulin 16 downwards, I decided to 'stretch' the upper end of my rating scale a little. Why? Looking at my ratings in the Malt Madness Matrix, I realised that most members of
the team award a selection of their favourite malts 90 points or more. From the 124 single malts I've seriously rated so far, only three score 90 points or more. That's a bit stingy - especially in the light of the recent Lagavulin
changes. The Macallan 18 and Lagavulin 1979 Distiller's Edition currently score just below the 90 points benchmark, but they fully deserve the 'fabulous malt' classification that comes with a rating of 90 points or more. Another
'problem' with my current ratings is that they don't fully express my love for the hard hitting Islay 'tenners'. Given the choice between a Macallan 12 and a Laphroaig 10, I'm pretty sure my dram would be a Laphroaig. And given the
choice between a Highland Park 12 and an Ardbeg 10 I'd go for the Ardbeg. So both receive two extra points.
Lagavulin 16 - 95 points The rest of my scale remains unaffected. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 74 - February 3, 2001
The international tasting session with Klaus (see log entry #73) caused some chaos on my
shelves. We opened four 'debutantes' from my reserve stock, but didn't get to empty any bottles. So now I have a problem: 52 open bottles with room for only 48. I really want to limit the number of open bottles to 48. My
experiences have taught me that a larger number of open bottles means that some of those bottles remain on my shelves long enough for oxidation to affect them - typically after a year or so. Tonight's session should restore the
balance on my shelves and maybe provide some new insights in the 4 new bottles we opened during the previous session. If my first 'bad nose day' impressions are anything to go by, at least three of these bottles
(Glenmorangie Madeira, St. Magdalene 19 UDRM and Talisker 10) deserve a spot on the top shelf. And the Dailuaine didn't seem too bad either. Let's find out how things look through a good nose!
I started the session around 18:00 with the Tomintoul 12yo
(43%, OB, 100cl, HKDNP) from my top shelf. Maybe I like it more than I should, because the score of 76 points doesn't really justify a place on my top shelf. It's just that the weird bottle (like a jugendstil thermos bottle) gives me a lot of pleasure. It would have been nice to taste it against the new bottle of Tomintoul 10 in my reserve stock, but there are simply too much other interesting bottles I'd like to open first. So I emptied the bottle all by its lonesome self.
The empty bottle of Tomintoul leaves a vacancy on my top shelf. Before I went on with the next part of the session, I tried some of the highland oatcakes Klaus brought me.
After the 'loud' Highland malt I needed to neutralise my palate before I proceeded with the head-to-head tasting I had planned for two 'quiet' Lowland malts; the Rosebank 8yo 1983/1992 (43%, OB) from my top shelf and the
Littlemill 8yo (40%, OB) from my bottom shelf. They are both eight year old Lowland malts and the (closed) distilleries were situated relatively close to each other - along the remains of Hadrian's wall. The colour
of the Littlemill was a lot darker than that of the Rosebank; I suspect heavy caramel colouring has been used here. At first, the nose of the Littlemill seems extremely oily next to the Rosebank, which was quite soft and much
'fresher' with distinct lemon notes. Both noses blossomed after some breathing. The Littlemill became sweeter and slightly smoky, with faint hints of peaches and melons under a blanket of oil. The Rosebank really opened up and
became very lemony after a while, sweeter and heavier. The taste of the Littlemill was surprisingly sweet and malty for a Lowlander. But that's about all there is, ending quickly in a grainy finish. The taste of the Rosebank was
exactly what I've come to expect from a young Lowlander; clean, dry and a little bit sweet. This means I now have to empty a bottle from my bottom shelf to make room.
After another helping of Klaus' cakes, I proceed with the 'main event' of the evening. That was a H2H of the Saint Magdalene 19yo 1979/1998 (63.8%, UDRM) against the Macallan 10yo 100 Proof
(57%, OB). The first thing I noticed was that the colour of the Mac was considerably darker than the Magdalene, although the latter is almost twice as old and comes in at 63.8% against the Mac's relatively modest 57%. The strength of the St. Magdalene is pretty amazing for a malt this old. A second thing I noticed that the last glass of the Mac 10 had a lot of residue in it - perhaps pieces of the cork.
The nose of the Mac 10 was sweeter and much more heavily sherried than the St. Magdalene. Much more woody notes too. It has been one of my all time
favourites, but next to the amazing complexity of the Magdalene it looks almost one dimensional. The Lowlander just has so much to offer. Although the 'style' of the Macallan is closer to my heart, the Magdalene really offers an
entire landscape of fragrances. On the other hand, the Macallan has more unity and balance. Tasted at cask strength, the Mac 10 was surprisingly drinkable as always. Very
sweet with the familiar woody and sherry accents. The Magdalene was a little harder to swallow, but still showed some sweet liquorice in the smooth burn. Diluted to about 50%, the nose of the Mac 10 opened up,
displaying more layers of sweet sherry and wood. The St. Magdalene showed more citrus and liquorice in the nose, with more chloride and alcohol/spiritus as well. The taste was very smooth and sweet at this strength; a little peat
and salt as well. The Mac 10 became a little more fruity with some smoke and a very long, sherry dry finish. After a final dilution to around 40% the Magdalene became very sweet and a little nutty in the nose, but the taste has
become a little watery. The Mac 10 became smoother, with a woody, sherried finish. Long, big and dry. Tasted on a good nose day, a little of the magic I felt when I opened the Saint Magdalene seems gone. It's still a bloody excellent dram, mind you! It's just that on closer inspection it shows a few tiny weak spots -
especially when further diluted. And that's exactly why I usually wait a while before I give a final rating. On this occasion, I wouldn't have rated it more than 2 points over the Macallan. These malts are very different (the wide
complexity of the Magdalene against the compact balance and character of the Macallan), which makes it hard to compare them. So, the result of the 'Big Cask Strength Speyside vs Lowland Bash' is a virtual tie. The final rating of
89 points for the Macallan 10 100 Proof stands, and the Saint Magdalene gets a provisional score of 91 points. I feel confident enough to put the Saint Magdalene on my top shelf. I think this is the first malt
in history that moves to my top shelf without being properly rated. The only reason I kept the Rosebank 1983 on my top shelf was that I wanted to be able to pour my guests a decent Lowland malt. Now I can pour them an excellent
one! Considering the 73 Euro's price tag, I will make sure to pour tiny drams though. To make sure I will be able to keep on pouring for a while, I phoned Ton Overmars (my liquorist) a few days ago and ordered the last bottle
he had in store for my own reserve stock. It arrived this morning. Ah - the great tastings that lie ahead. I had planned to taste the Dailluaine 16 (Flora & Fauna) and Talisker 10 tonight as well, but after the
violence of the previous H2H I just didn't feel up to it. The Dailuaine moves to my middle shelf, the new bottle of Talisker 10 takes its rightful place on my top shelf. Strictly speaking, this isn't a new bottling that needs to be
'on probation' on my middle shelf anyway. But I will make sure to taste it seriously in the near future to check if the quality is similar to that of previous bottlings I've tried. With the final rating for the Littlemill, the
meter of the '52-Challenge' now stands at 6 and balance has returned to - - - mAddendum 74A - Residue Extra note: I wrote about the residue
in the Macallan 10 100 Proof. Here's a little tip that may come in handy. Bottles with a crappy cork or malts that are not chill filtered may contain some residue. If you finish a bottle with a lot of residue, pour the last dram into the largest and roundest cognac snifter you have. Now, start to very slowly tilt & turn the glass. If you are careful enough, you'll see that more and more residue sticks to the glass as you tilt & turn. After you've turned the glass half way around and tilted it to almost 90 degrees, you can pour your clear dram into your glass of choice.
(This 'Tilt & Turn Tip' was brought to you by Malt Madness.) - - - mAddendum 74B - Little Still Tasting Night out in Amsterdam. I started with the
Linkwood 15yo (40%, Gordon & MacPhail). I spotted the bottle at my liquorist a few weeks back, but the 45 Euro's price tag made me pick up a 12yo Signatory Vintage instead. Then I ordered the Glen Moray 16yo (43%, OB, finished in oak casks).
Of course, these ratings are as preliminary as can be. They won't go into my official lists, but Davin and I agreed that we should give all new malts we try within the course of the 52-Challenge some kind of rating. When I left 'De
Still' around 22:30; the counter stood at 9. When I arrived home around 23:00, I had already made plans to investigate a few more drams by means of a 'Northern Highland Head-to-Head'. The (unrated) bottle of
Glenmorangie NAS Cellar 13
(43%, OB, 100cl) on my middle shelf is 3/4 empty. I suppose one could say that it's 1/4 full, but the sight of a bottle that's almost empty always depresses me. And depression drives me to drinking. So I decided to put this bottle out of it's misery and empty it. I picked the fresh bottle of
Balblair 16yo
(40%, OB) from my reserve stock to replace it. That would give me an opportunity to taste these two Northern Highland malts in a head-to-head session. The distilleries are located less than five miles from each other, on the shores of the Dornoch Firth - Northwest of the Speyside area. One would think that the malts from these distilleries should be very similar in character. And then one would probably be wrong. My experiences have taught me that, with the notable exception of the Islay malts, it's often very hard to find specific characteristics that can identify every malt from a specific region.
I decided to taste the two malts separately first, followed by a head-to-head session.
I started with the Glenmorangie Cellar 13; Then I opened the bottle of Balblair 16; The colour of the Balblair is a little darker than the 'Morangie; could be the age, could be the barrel, could be caramel colouring. Tasted head-to-head, the nose of the Balblair was a bit sharper than that of the Cellar 13, which was smoother and sweeter with a little more development over time. There were some hard to describe common characteristics as well. Smooth and sweet are also the most obvious taste characteristics of the Cellar 13. The taste of the Balblair didn't seem to fit the nose too well; a Speysidish nose over an Islandish taste - Campbeltown or Skye. With some more peat and power, this could almost have passed as a very light Islay malt. Both noses are intriguing, but the Glenmorangie is the clear winner on the taste buds. Conclusion: At first sight, it seems that the nose of this bottle of Balblair 16 is considerably better than my previous bottle.
The taste didn't do very much for me; it has some good intentions but never reaches the character and complexity of the big malts. The Glenmorangie is very nice, but not spectacular. Different from the standard 10yo bottling, but
not notably better. Not really worth the considerably higher price. The Glenmorangie Cellar 13 receives a final rating of 81 points. The preliminary rating of the Balblair 16: *** (Mid 70's)
With the final rating of the 'Morangie, I've now tasted a grand total of 10 new single malts since January 1; I'm still ahead of schedule. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 75 - February 17, 2001 And now for something completely different. A look at the Irish, to be precise. Until recently, the number of available single malts
from Ireland was quite limited, but with the recent boom in Scotch single malts it seems that more and more Irish malts appear on the market. Tonight, I've planned to finish all four bottles of Irish whiskey on my shelves:
Connemara, Tyrconnell, Locke's (all pot still single malts) and Jameson (a blend). Sadly, none of the malts has an age statement. The Locke's was a relatively recent acquisition, but the other bottles have been on my shelves for
over a year now. I started with a stiff dram of the Locke's Single Malt NAS (40%, OB). At first sight, the character of the Locke's seems a lot more like the Tyrconnell than the Connemara.
OK - Let's investigate further and pit the Tyrconnell against the Locke's. The last H2H of the evening was the Locke's against the Connemara. Conclusion: Who would have thought that Irish single malts could come so far is such a short time? These single malts are amongst the most outspoken Irish whiskies I've ever tasted. The difference with Irish blends
like Jameson or Paddy is absolutely amazing. The malts I tasted tonight beat a lot of single malts from Scotland with a stick. The Connemara offers very good value at 23 Euro's a bottle; Tyrconnell and Locke's are slightly more
expensive but still well worth a try. It looks like my previous ratings for Tyrconnell and Connemara (72 and 73 points respectively) may have expressed some kind of unconscious prejudice against Irish single malts. The new status
quo: As long as I was tasting Irish whiskeys, I might as well finish the evening with the last two drams of the Jameson NAS, an Irish blend.
Nose: Nice and round. A little dusty. Coffee. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Log Entry # 76 - February 27, 2001
Over the last few weeks, a lot of my tastings have been concentrated around 'deviant drams (Irish, bastard malts, etc.). It's high time for a proper tasting session to speed up the traffic between my shelves. For starters, I decided to empty my bottle of Ardmore 1981/1995
(40%, Gordon & MacPhail). Nose: Big, deep and complex. Sherry is the main characteristic, but there's so much more. It reminded me of some oriental soup I tried at a Thai restaurant once. Taste: Sweet, malty and fruity. A little nutty with a dry finish. A bit simple, which is disappointing after the good nose. The final rating of
78 points stands; with a taste to match the wonderful nose it would have reached 80 points or more - and maybe even top shelf status. With the Ardmore empty, I could proceed with the Craigellachie 1983/1994
(43%, Vintage Choice) from my middle shelf - a Speyside malt as well. Earlier tastings indicated that this is by no means a top shelf candidate, so the bottle can take the place of the Ardmore on my bottom shelf. Nose: Peculiar aroma. Very light at first. Sweetish, with a little smoke and oil. Fruitier after a few minutes; the oil becomes more pronounced. Taste: Sweet start with a hint of peat and smoke. Lacks complexity. Unpleasant bitterness evolves into a dry finish. A sharp bite, but quickly gone. Final rating:
62 points. The nose isn't too bad but the taste is just too harsh. Based on this experience, this will probably be the only bottle of Craigellachie I'll ever try.
Oh, joy! Now I get to open a fresh bottle from my reserve stock. At first, the noses are quite similar - both seemed a
little fruity (like fruit sweets) with a pinch of salt. I guess the similarity isn't too surprising given the fact that the difference in age is only two years. Judging from the nearly identical colour, I guess they must've been
aged in the same type of casks. After a few minutes, the 12 becomes sweeter and slightly more transparent than the 1985. Cucumber in the nose of the '85, citrus and a pinch of peat in the 12. A lot of similarities in the taste as
well. Both start rather soft and sweetish, with malt, honey and vanilla. The '85 is a little smoother, while the 12 shows some toffee notes. Both become much saltier after a while, showing a hint of peat and some pepper. The only
big difference is in the finish; the 1985 is shorter, sweeter and dry - the 12 longer, saltier and very bitter at the end. Conclusion: The final rating of 78 points
for the Scapa 1985 stands, the fresh 12 OB gets 77 provisional points. It's not bad at all, but at first sight it seems no match for 'the other Orkney malt', Highland Park 12. Let's see - what else? So, now I get to open another bottle from my reserve stock. I picked the Benrinnes 15yo (43%, Flora & Fauna) because the distillery is located in the Speyside area as well, less than 20 miles from the An Cnoc/Knockdhu distillery. The colour is the darkest amber I've ever seen. Nose: Wow! Big, sherried start followed by sweeter / more woody notes. Burnt caramel. The character is not unlike that of Macallan. Taste: Smoky start, then sweeter notes emerge. Liquorice. Very woody and smoky finish with a sweetish undercurrent. Preliminary rating: *** (Upper 70's). The aroma is wonderful, but the finish is way too smoky for my tastes. Not unlike Bowmore Darkest or Loch Dhu. But let's not jump to conclusions. I'll give the bottle a few months to break in before I try it again. By that time, the Macallan 15 may have also reached our shores; that should prove to be an interesting H2H-session. OK - That takes care of my single malt shelves. But it's still early and I'm not tired yet. The first bottle is the Lochranza blend I picked up a while ago. It is a blend produced by the Arran distillery that produces the - you guessed it - Arran NAS
single malt. I figured a H2H-session of the two could provide some insights. For one thing, I should be able to determine if the 32 Euro's I had to pay for the single malt are worth it compared to the astonishing 14 Euro's of the Lochranza blend.
The first thing that drew my attention was the fact that the blend is a lot darker in colour that the 'whitish' single malt. Caramel colouring - like it says on the back of the bottle. Paradoxically enough, the nose of the blend
seems a lot maltier than that of the single malt at first. It started off more powerful and nuttier as well. There is no obvious family resemblance here; the Arran seems rather light and oily while the primary impression of the
Lochranza was malty and unusually sweet. At first sight, the blend seems better than the single malt! After a minute or three the Arran catches up, showing some citrus notes and becoming more fragrant and complex altogether.
Meanwhile, the blend flattens out a bit, showing some of the oil I found in the malt. Nosed after 15 minutes, the Lochranza had opened up again, showing a lot of cognac and coffee beans. The primary impression of the Arran malt was
still: oil - and lots of it. Maybe a little nutty in the background. The taste of the blend is nice, but a little watery. Very sweet in the beginning, but less so after a few minutes. The finish starts grainy, but becomes very
bitter. It reminded me of grapefruits. The Arran malt, on the other hand, was sweet and peppery. It showed a little more complexity and development than the blend, but also arrived at the grapefruit bitterness in the finish. I hate to admit it, but the Lochranza is a surprisingly good blend! OK - Just one more bottle to go. So now I've tasted a few malts, a blend and a bourbon. That finishes things off for tonight. - - - mAddendum 76A - Ben Wyvis 10yo.
I've recently received some information about the Ben Wyvis 10yo that I wrote about in
Log Entry #72. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 77 - March 14, 2001
Arthur, the guy behind 'the whiskysite' tipped me about a tasting session in 'De Still' tonight.
Malt 1: Braes of Glenlivet 1977 (43%, Montgomerie's Single Cask, distilled 19/10/1977, bottled October 2000, Madeira wood cask no. 100763, bottle no. 117) Malt 2: Millburn 1974/2000 (40%, Connoisseurs Choice) Malt 3: Bowmore 32yo 1968/2000
(46%, Signatory Vintage 'Rare Reserved') Malt 4: Rosebank 11yo (43%, McGibbon's Provenance Spring Distillation) Malt 5: Macallan 11yo (43%, McGibbon's Provenance Summer Distillation) Malt 6: Imperial 11yo
(43%, McGibbon's Provenance Winter Distillation) Malt 7:
Clynelish 11yo (43%, McGibbon's Provenance Summer Distillation)
Malt 8: Provenance Ardbeg 9yo (43%, McGibbon's Provenance Autumn Distillation) Conclusion: Tonight was a major leap forward in the 52-Challenge. I've covered more than 15% of the number of malts I have to taste this year on a single
night. And I've actually learnt a few more things about single malts as well - which is nice... - - - mAddendum 77A - Present & Purchase Last
week, I organised a little tasting session for some of my new colleagues. As far as I could see, fun and a good time were had by all. This week, they surprised me with a gift to express their gratitude for opening up a whole new
world of alcoholic pleasure for them. They had bought me a bottle of Glen Scotia 14yo. A perfect present! This is the latest official bottling of this distillery before it was temporarily closed down in the 1980's, so I imagine it
will become quite rare pretty soon. (See log entry #72 for my notes of a tasting session with the bottle of Glen Scotia 14 that's currently on my top shelf.) I also picked up a bottle of Bowmore 15yo 'Mariner' this week. It was on offer at Gall & Gall for only 36 Euro's. Not the cheapest
malt around, but quite a steal compared to the normal price tag. It goes into my reserve stock for now. And that was just the beginning. During tonight's tasting, Arthur informed me that Ton Overmars had just received a new
shipment of Rare Malts, including a few bottles of St. Magdalene and Caol Ila. And what's more: for the first time in quite a while, the prices of some rare bottlings had dropped instead of gone up. Reason enough to drop by and
pick up the following bottles:
These bottles are all reserve stock material. Finally, I went to Menno Boorsma and bought myself three bottles of Irish whiskey. Or rather, I thought I bought three bottles - as
it turned out I bought five. I thought I had bought:
Actually, that last 'bottle' turned out to be a strange contraption of three fat little 200 ml bottles, stacked on top of each other to make it look exactly like an ordinary 700 ml bottle. Very clever - I've never seen anything
like it before. The little bottles contain three different versions of Clontarf; the Clontarf Irish Whiskey, the Clontarf Reserve Irish Whiskey and the Clontarf Single Malt Irish Whisky. All three are bottled at 40% and have been
'mellowed through Atlantic Irish oak charcoal'. - - - mAddendum 77B - Glen Moray Bypass Operation A couple of the more 'mundane' bottles in my reserve stock were the two different versions of Glen Moray 12
that I bought a few months ago. The first one is the 'old' distillery (1 litre, 43%) bottling, matured in oak casks without any kind of special wood finish. This has been one of my favourite 'sloshing malts' for many years; it
costs less than 25 euro's. It has recently been replaced by another version, matured in oak casks and then 'mellowed' in Chenin Blanc wine casks (0.7 litre, 40%). The design of the new bottling (both the bottle and the label) is
quite similar to the old one. A younger version of Glen Moray (without an age statement, mellowed in Chardonnay casks) has been introduced at the same time - I haven't tried that one yet. I opened both bottles of Glen Moray
12 a few weeks back, but decided to keep them out of my usual routine with the top, middle and bottom shelf. I've had a string of bad nose days and in my weakened state I didn't want to move any bottles in my current stock. I'm all
better now and ready to do some serious nosing and tasting. I started the session with the Glen Moray 12 'Elgin Classic' (matured in oak barrels). Then I proceeded with the new Glen Moray 12 'Mellowed in Wine Barrels'
(matured in oak casks, then mellowed in Chenin Blanc wine barrels). Nose: Faintly oily with a few woody notes. Soft sweetness. Peppery. Compared to each other in a H2H-session, the nose of the old bottling appeared smokier, while the new bottling smelled oilier with something that reminded me of sweet cakes. The nose of the old bottling is a little 'bigger' as well. The differences are minor. The taste of the old 12 is more to my liking; smooth and malty versus the extreme dryness of the new bottling. It has a longer finish as well. Strangely enough, the finish of the Chenin Blanc version is oakier than that of the old version, only matured in oak casks. Conclusion: The final rating of 75 points for the old Glen Moray 'Classic' stands. The new 'Chenin Blanc' bottling receives a final rating of 72 points
; it's very drinkable but not as fragrant and complex as the old bottling. At least, not to me. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Log Entry # 78 - March 31, 2001 I wrote about the aftermath of the tongue twisting second international tasting with
Klaus Everding
in log entry #74. Two new bottles that were opened during Klaus's visit (Talisker 10yo and Saint Magdalene 19yo) were in dire need of further investigation. Both had moved directly to my top shelf, even though I didn't properly taste the new bottle of Talisker and the St. Magdalene lacked the final rating that is usually required for a position on my top shelf. I was having a very good nose night, so I decided to iron out the last inconsistencies in my shelf situation.
I must have emptied at least 10 bottles of the Talisker 10yo
(45.8%, OB) over the last ten years. It has been my number two malt for as long as I can remember. |