Most of MM#7 has been put together by our French maniacs.
Olivier wrote an impressive trio of E-pistles, but fellow Frenchman
Serge upstaged him at the last moment by submitting the final two
articles for this issue. His Venexpo 2003 Report covers quite a few
interesting new bottlings, including a couple of new Bruichladdichs,
a selection from Murray McDavid's 'Mission' range and their brand
new (top-shelf) 'Heartland' series. Serge also managed to sneak
in two mini-interviews into his E-pistle; one with Fred Laing (from
Douglas Laing) and one with Euan C. Shand (from Duncan Taylor).
 
The last article of this 'summer' issue is Serge's fresh report on
the 2003 Paris Whisky Festival. Despite the efforts of hyperactive
bouncers Serge's report covers 15 malts - many of them brand new.

Johannes

Meanwhile, the mad scientist on our team has been busy as well.
Klaus will be writing a series of E-pistles about the chemistry and
physics of single malts for the next few issues of MM. To get you
in the mood he cooked up a little quiz about the science of malts.
For example: if you want to add a banana flavour to your whisky,
do you add a) Acetaldehyde, b) n-pentyl acetate or c) Ethanol?
Do you want to know the answer? Take the quiz and find out!

Our other new team member is Peter Silver from New York, USA.
Peter has been dramming seriously for almost a decade now. In his
first E-pistle he recalls his discovery of single malts and his recent
expedition to Scotland that secured 64 more bottles for his vault.
The story proves that Peter deserves the title 'malt maniac'.
(Make sure to check out his deviant scores in the matrix.)

And there's plenty of other exciting stuff going on as well.
First of all, two new maniacs have joined the team. Some of you
may remember Olivier Humbrecht from the interview that Serge did
with him for MM#4. Well, I'm very happy to report that Olivier has
agreed to join the malt maniacs in their quest for liquid perfection.
Putting some of the 'veterans' on the team to shame, Olivier wrote
no less than three (great) E-pistles for this issue of Malt Maniacs.

Not in the picture is Australian maniac Craig Daniels who joined
us a few days after this snapshot was taken at Edradour distillery.
Krishna wrote a 'teaser report' about one of the many highlights of
our trip: a midnight dramming session along the tranquil banks of
the river Ness. Davin wrote a full report that covers
a great deal of data on the distilleries we visited.

Malt Maniacs #7  -  September 1, 2003

Hurray! As the picture above shows, some of the
malt maniacs finally made it to Scotland for our
very first official 'pildrimmage'. The picture shows
(from left to right) Davin de Kergommeaux from
Canadia, yours truly from Holland, Iain Henderson
(honorary 'maniac' from Scotland), Serge Valentin
from France and and Krishna Nukala from India.
Four certified malt maniacs in hog heaven...

E-pistle #07/01 - Walpurgis: 8 Beauties & 8 Beasts 
by Serge Valentin, France 

What? Johannes will be the only Maniac organising a Walpurgis tasting session this year?
No way!  Of course, we're not used to these odd Northern customs, here in France. Dancing in graveyards, drinking beer out of skulls, invoking ancient gods, sacrificing chicken...  Hum, no, sorry, that may be voodoo...

Anyway, we, gentle and well-bred Latin people prefer to do nice things, nicely. I never heard of Walpurgis before last year, when Klaus launched that strange idea of a Walpurgis tasting session. Well, to be honest, I knew Procol Harum's tune 'Repent Walpurgis', but that's all. Anyway, I won't let the Flying Dutchman alone in his alcoholic trauma, and that's why I decided to go for my own Walpurgis session, even if a little later than April 30th. Sure, there are many weird whiskies in Scotland, but I thought I'd rather taste quite a few 'foreign' whiskies, thus browsing the whole whisky world, from India to Austria, and from France to... Wales, thanks to Lex Kraaijeveld, who swapped some of these strange samples with me.

Okay, fasten your seat belts, we're just taking off, direction: Japan.

Nikka Pure Malt White (43%, OB). Japanese whiskies are very hype today, and whereas I always wondered what was the use of drinking just another "remote" so-so 'Speysider', I happened to spot a bottle of that peated Japanese in a Swiss general store, while I was looking for some Chinese beer. Is that international enough for you? We all know that a careful use of peated malt can transform an average whisky into a dazzling glory (Brora), or, at least, into a good whisky (Ledaig). I don't know whether the Nikka White is a vatting of several Nikka distilleries' outputs (Yoichi, Senda...), of if it all came out of Senda, which did, indeed, produce some peated malt a while ago. You are going to tell me they should have named it 'Single' then, rather than 'Pure'. You're right, but perhaps they wanted this bottling to fit the rest of the series (Nikka Black, Nikka Red, all pure malts). Anyway, enough babbling now, let's taste it...
Colour: deep amber
Nose: Fresh, but not 'coastal' at all.
Nicely warming, beautiful peat, orange zest, tangerine, lemon.
A peated malt on its own, not trying to mimic an Islay malt.
Smokey, dry leaves, bonfire... In short, really, really  great.
Mouthfeel: extremely balanced, a little salty.
Palate: smoke, lapsang souchong tea, orange marmalade.
Rosewater, very nice wood and tannins. Rich and balanced.
As often, a little less expressive than the nose, but still great.
Very nice and quite long finish, nicely bitter like a good orange marmalade.
A terrific whisky  for just 33 Euros (but only 500ml per bottle). The only one I know you can offer a friend who usually doesn't like peated whiskies. If you ask me which Scottish malt it compares to, I would say Talisker. It's just less peppery. Well done, Empire of the Rising Sun!  If it were a person: it would be Riyuichi Sakamoto, a Japanese composer who's skilled enough to write brilliant pop tunes, great movie soundtracks, contemporary concrete music and modern jazz pieces. 90 points.

Wow, this session starts brilliantly! Now I fear the coïtus interruptus... Bah, let's shift a little further West now, and taste two Indian whiskies, for the sake of our friend Krishna. Sikkim Premium Old Gold Single Malt Whisky (40%, OB). Now, this is a masterpiece. I'm not talking about the whisky, I'm talking about the bottle. The twist cap itself is a piece of art. And the label... Wow! It's Bollywood! Four great medals obtained: Golden Europe Award Paris 1996 (what's that?), GQM Award Cannes 1998 (never heard of), Golden Trophy for Beverages Düsseldorf 1997 (Klaus, ever heard of that one?), International Gold Medals for Quality Madrid 1984 and 1985 (sure, twice!) But those fake trophies don't draw you a complete picture of this incredible 'product'. The back label itself should enter the Musée de la Publicit‚ in Paris. Read this: "Sikkim Premium Old Gold is a classic WHISKY (good idea to write that in big letters, because once you've tasted the spirit, well...) fully matured with utmost care in wooden vats (why not talk about oak, while they are at it?), which has at its heart, the unmistakable flavour of a venerable single malt whisky (means it isn't whisky, or am I bantering? But read on...) It will appeal to the palate of even the most expert connoisseur since it has been manufactured (yes, that's the word) using skills and craftmanship handed down through generations. A toast from the oldest operating Distillery (there must be only one...) in the eastern foothills of the mighty Himalayas, this Whisky truly deserves the accolade "India's finest". Phew...

After having bought two bottles of Sikkim in Germany (I told you, in-ter-na-tional), I sent one of these to Lex, who started the researches on the Internet. Guess what, Sikkim has got a website, and here's what they publish: " Sikkim Old Gold Premium Single Malt Whisky is a blend of selected well-matured malt alcohol, Extra Neutral Alcohol and Himalayan spring water."
A single malt, indeed! Incredible, isn't it?  Anyway, perhaps it's time to taste it now... Colour: yellow (not gold, yellow!).
Nose: burnt sugar and alcohol. Cheap curacao. A little vanilla (so yes, it spent a few days or months in wood).
Mouthfeel: weak, no whisky taste at all.
Palate: icing sugar, burnt plants, overcooked coffee. Yuk!  Finish: something bitter on the tongue... Quick, some water!
Alright, I've been punished for having been too curious when I spotted the bottles in that shop. An ode to Johnnie Walker Red, Loch Dhu 10yo and Glen Kella! And it'll be the first time I really have to break the 50 points barrier. Downwards, no need to say.
If it were a person: hum, could 'it' be human? Of course not, that would be an insult to mankind. 12 points .

But hey, why not ask our fellow Maniac Krishna what he thinks about the Sikkim? Here's his reply:
The Sikkim Single malt is no malt at all. I have never had the  opportunity to drink it. For your info on Sikkim and its liquors let me give you a brief back ground. Sikkim is a little Himalayan State sitiuated in N.E of India. Most people are Buddhists and the state, due to its mountainous nature, is mostly a tourist destination. One can have a very beautiful view on Mount Kanchenjunga, the third highest peak in the world. The state produces various liquors - all based with alcohol produced from molasses. The only genuine stuff available is beer. India is a large country with more than 25 states, each having its own tax laws. So any liquor produced from one state attracts various taxes from other states and hence the cost of liquor varies vastly. For exemple, the Sikkim liquor is not available in most parts of the country. Since the Company manufacturing the so called Sikkim Single Malt knows that they are not producing real single malt, they would not take any criticim kindly. It would effect their sales and reputation. Unfortunately 99.9% of the guys in India drinking the stuff do not what a molasses based alcohol or a grain based alcohol are. So they do not bother to probe and the companies take advantage of people's ignorance. For you information there is one more company - Mcdowell India Ltd. This company is perhaps one of the largest liquor producing companies in the world. It may be second or third by sales volume. I believe the Macdowel Single Malt Whsky also belongs to the same category. My efforts to contact the company guys to obtain more info so far failed. So I have to go to the distillery to do some investigation, just prove that I am right and claim myself a whisky proffessiona! I shall do that soon and report back to you and the Maltmadness web site. - Krishna

Thanks, Krishna! It's funny, you talk about McDowell, another Indian whisky! I know that one is much more famous than the Sikkim, and many books (like Murray's) mention it. So, why not taste it right now, and check whether it's better than the Sikkim or not?

McDowell's Single Malt (42.8%, OB). The distillery lies in Goa, South of India, and is said to produce great whiskies... I don't know whether the Goan hippy communities did have their shares of that local output as well, but let's find out if it is a genuine Peace and Love whisky. Colour: gold. Nose: A little warming. Really smells like a Scotch whisky! Malty, grassy, a little lemony.
Quite woody... I would say an average blend, just much woodier...  Mouthfeel: light. A little sweet and bitter at the same time. Fragmented.  Palate: Watery, woody. A little drying, but not bad at all. But it still is too weak, and the finish is very short.
Anyway, I think the Indians did a good job here. Maybe the Sikkim people should get there as trainees...
If it were a person: Sandra Bullock. Not much charm, but she's trying hard... 60 points.

Okay, let's leave Asia now, and enter Eastern Europe. We won't taste the Turkish Ankara whisky this time, and fly directly to the Czech Republic. I didn't know they made whisky, until I got a sample of... Gold Cock malt whisky (40%, OB) - and this is no joke. This one is 14yo according to Ulf Buxrud's website, and comes from Dolany distillery, near Tesetice. Dave Murray writes beautiful lines about that distillery, that make you think its output may be situated somewhere between an Ardbeg Provenance and a Macallan 25yo. Oh yes?  Colour: straw. Nose: very weak. Sugared water, orange juice... What else? Nothing... Mouthfeel: weak and sweet.
Palate: alcohol, sugar and wood. Just nothing on the tongue. Totally uninteresting. Very short finish. I'm just wondering why they did this... The good news is that you won't come across that Gold Cock in your favourite liquor shop, unless you're Czech (congrats). I'm trying hard to get something more to say about this whisky...
Hum, did I ever tell you about my last trip to Prague? No, no, don't be afraid, I won't!
If it were a person: Laurent Fontaine, stupid and uninteresting French TV guy. 30 points.

What about an Austrian whisky now? Let's go...
Waldviertler Roggen-Malzwhisky (41%, OB). This one has matured "more than 3 years" in oak, and they say it's very heavy, malty, with very heavy chocolate and nougat notes. Oh yeah? Should be interesting then...
By the way, roggen means rye in German. So, this is a pure malted rye whisky. Colour: pale straw.
Nose: a little sharp, fruity like a grappa. I know why this one smells like that: because they must have used an eau-de-vie still, made for distilling fruit spirit, like I do myself every year. It isn't bad, it just doesn't smell whisky, even if they say it is. Makes me think of American rye whisky, which is quite logical, as it is malted rye. Grassy as well, fern, celery...
Mouthfeel: warm at first, but a thin middle-taste.
Palate: again, these white eau-de-vie notes. Quite good, but it just isn't malt whisky, taste-wise.
Not unlike some gins, or some aromatized vodka like Zubrovska. The Austrians have great skiers, they distil some nice fruit spirit and make some very good wine, but they're just not good at making whisky, not to mention malt. But again, it's not bad stuff. But where are the heavy chocolate notes? If it were a person: it just isn't strong enough to be Arnold Shwarzenegger.
Let's say Jean-Claude Vandamme, then. 56 points.

Let's go just a little further West now, near the city of Zug exactly, and taste a...
Swissky Single Malt (42%, OB). No need to tell you which country this whisky comes from, right?
Playing with words isn't always a good idea when looking for a brandname, I'm afraid. The bottle itself is quite tall, translucent like Jackson Row's one, and quite ugly, to be honest (see the picture). On the website, they tell you its making requires a precise and clean work. So Swiss! But how's the malt itself? Let's find out. Colour: straw.
Nose: weak and sugary. Fruity, and some 'burnt' smells. Not enjoyable at all...
The burnt smells are exactly like the ones you get when you don't control a direct-fire still properly. .
Mouthfeel: Weak and sweet. Like the Austrian, it doesn't taste like genuine whisky. But it's less clean.
Like a mixture of cheap vodka and tutti-frutti spirit. Finish: short, thanks God!
Conclusion: the Swiss should stick to banking, watchmaking and slow driving (and not keeping an airline company).
If it were a person: Heino, an incredible German Schlagersinger. 35 points.

Now, perhaps you think I'll skip my homeland? Don't worry, I won't taste all the French sometimes miserable whiskies. Lex recently published a great report about French whiskies on Celticmalts, and I don't want to do a useless repetition, and do it worse. So, I'll taste only one French whisky, and of course, this time, I won't choose the worst one...

Eddu Silver (40%, OB). This one comes from the Distillerie des Menhirs, in Plomelin in Bretagne.
A great bottle, not unlike the MMcD Mission series' one. 'Eddu' means buckwheat, and the whisky is entirely made out of pure Breton buckwheat (no pesticide, no manure), and then matured in French oak casks. Colour: amber.
Nose: quite bold and rich. Heather, butter, burnt cake, hot brioche, coffee.
Something very special here. I like it, and that's no cheap chauvinism.
Mouthfeel: a little drying. Sour and bitter, but interesting. Something I never tasted before. Very cereally and grassy. Roots, fern, cardboard, dust, barley. Yes, very interesting. Makes me think of a Banff I tasted recently. In short, Eddu did a great job, starting from scratch. Much better than what the other recent French distillery did (Guillon). I've been told they'll launch some even better bottlings later this year, and be sure I'll report on these a.s.a.p. If it were a person: Catherine Deneuve. 78 points.

Bravo to the Distillerie des Menhirs people!
But let's just cross the Channel, and go a little further West. Do you know Prince of Wales?
No, no, not the famous big-eared botanist, but the Prince of Wales 10yo Single Vatted Malt Welsh Whisky (40%, OB, eh?). I don't know which statement is odder, Sikkim's "Single Malt blended" or this "Single Vatted Malt". Anyway, good laughs here! Jim Murray writes this is Scotch whisky, which is just blended in Brecon with some herbs to give a unique tang. Hum, must be something. I bought this bottle in Germany, at Tabak Baumert in Kehl (great shop, cool guy), and then I noticed it had been imported to California by Canon Wines, San Francisco, and then re-exported to Europe.
Strange course! Was it worth the kerosene? Let's find out... Colour: straw.
Nose: pungent, aggressive, spirity. Something oddly fruity, like some rotten oranges... Mouthfeel: warming but thin. Undefinite.
Palate: very bad. Bitter, spirity, too sharp. Bad wood (sawdust). Yuk! Some say Wales is the original homeland of whisky distilling, but hey, how could they have forgotten the method? This is really bad whisky, and I can't think of any cheap blend that's that bad (and flat). If it were a person: well, why not Prince Charles himself? (who prefers Laphroaig, that is.) 25 points .

Right, such a tasting session wouldn't be complete without a few Scotch whiskies, but I'd better have these at the end. So, let's cross the Ocean and fly to Canada, to taste one of the most reputed grain whiskies...

The Forty Creek "Three Grain" (40%, OB) comes from Kittling Ridge, Ontario. There's some very good buzz about it on the Internet. I tried to get some more info about it on the web, and google gave me dozens of links. But strangely enough, all showed always this same text: "A delicate harmonization of malted barley, rye & maize. The small grains are distilled as separate batches in our copper pot still and patiently aged in small toasted oak barrels. Each Varietal grain lends a distinct character to the whisky. The nuttiness of the barley, the fruitiness of the rye, and the richness of the maize are skillfully blended to achieve the finesse of this complex whisky." See, most web people are nothing but copy-and-pasters. Or the Kittling Ridge people are very good at P.R.! Anyway, let's taste that one right now... Colour: light amber.
Nose: tingling, or even sharp. Very grainy, makes me think of Glenkinchie.
Beer, cake, hot milk, yeast. Not bad, but quite mono-dimensional. Mouthfeel: oily and sweet.
Palate: very young, but well balanced. Again, cereals. Cake, broiled cereals, mashed potatoes, sugar, hot brioche. Not the most interesting, but I must say it's much better than Canadian Club or Seagram's V.O. Balanced and clean, but a little simple.
If it were a person: Gwyneth Paltrow, no doubt. BtW, is she Canadian or American? 75 points.

Now, let's ask our Canadian friend Davin what he thinks about that one...
"I have tasted Three Grains and thought it was rather ordinary.  I  have a bottle at home, but I won't be there until May 17.  I'm in Quebec  now, then off to Vancouver on Saturday.  I'll taste it again when i get  back.  The best Canadian whisky  by far in my books is Lot 40 and it's as  good as a malt.  Gooderham and Worts is also quite good, though not as  complex as Lot 40." - Davin.

Flying further West now? Yes, good idea! Let's taste a Californian whisky...  St. George Single Malt (43%, OB) is made in Alameda, CA. They flavour the malt with wood smoking, and then let it age for three years in Bourbon casks. MJ gave it only 6 points out of 10, but let's check whether that was severe or not now... Or if it's any better than Anchor Steam's Old Potrero 2yo, which is extremely pungent and almost undrinkable for non-cowboys or Presidents... Colour: white wine.
Nose: overpowering and very perfumy. Old rose, rosewater, leetchee, kiwi, Kšlnerwasser, grape.
Then oaky notes... Very interesting, something I never tasted before... Mouthfeel: powerful and very sweet.
Palate: perfume, orange flower water, orange, Turkish delight, apricot. Yes, interesting and worth the try.
The finish is quite long... Anyway, this is a good whisky, and it's got its own perfumy, fruity style. I sort of like it, and it deserves a good rating, I think. Mark Adams, who knows the distillery very well, just told me on the phone that St George uses a little eau-de-vie still they use to distill other kinds of spirit. Again, that may explain why the whisky is very perfumy! If it were a person: French actress and model Noémie Lenoir. Don't know her?  Just google her and tell me what you think... 80 points.

By the way, Now, perhaps it's time to try something different...
Why not fly to Chile? I don't know of any Chilean whisky, but my old friend Jean-Louis (we visited Glenlivet together in 1981, imagine!) let me taste some pisco he brought back from Chile. Pisco is made by extracting the juice and pulp from some Muscat grape, and the fermentation process takes place in some steel containers. Then, the pisco is distilled in some funny small copper stills (see the picture). The spirit is then cooled, mixed with water to reduce the content of alcohol to the desired level, and then aged in oak barrels for a few months before being bottled...

And the result is...
Pisco Tres Erres - 3R (50%, OB, Pisco Elqui, Chile).
Colour: strange, beige-greenish.
Nose: ouch! Spirity and fruity, and some woody notes. It doesn't smell like some Muscat eau-de-vie made in France, Germany or Italy, which are always matured in glass, and not in wood. A little undefinite, but very aromatic...
Mouthfeel: bold, to say the least.
Palate: I never had something like that, so... Weird and strange notes!
Ripe Muscat grapes, lemon juice, a little dusty as well.
Interesting as an experience, for sure...
Finish: long and citrusy.
I won't rate that pisco, because I've got no reference. But it's worth a try, really!

Okay, if we fly further West, we're back in Japan, and although I'd love to have another sip of the Nikka White, I think we'd better go to Scotland, and taste a bunch of special whiskies. We've had some good surprises so far, but some bad ones as well, and we do deserve a reward just now, I think.

But we'll keep it "special", and start with a... North British 18yo 1979/1997 (43%, SigV).
Yes, this is a single grain from Edimburgh. I found two bottles of that North British covered with dust in a shop in Strasbourg, and they were quite cheap, if I remember correctly. I remember having asked the clerk whether it was any good, and he answered "yes". Then I asked him whether he ever tried it, and he answered "no". So I asked him whether he was telling me it was good just to get rid of one bottle, and he answered "yes", with a smile. I thought that was funny, and I bought one bottle. The guy was that pleased that... He gave me the second bottle for free!  I opened one bottle a while ago, because I wanted to compare it to Olivier's Garneath 1969/1990, and although it didn't perform well enough to match that rarity of a whisky, it was quite good. So, let's taste it again now... Oh, I forgot to tell you that the North British has been fully matured in some sherry casks. Colour: deep amber.
Nose: powerful and winey. Sherry, raisins, burnt cake, pecan pie, hot milk, toasted bread.
Then some grassy notes: freshly mown lawn, anise, celery, salsify, palm tree heart. Great nose!
Mouthfeel: powerful, bittersweet.
Palate: dry sherry of course, toffee, fudge, coffee, toasted bread, wood. Very nice, although the spirit itself doesn't quite stand against the wood. Very long finish. One of the very interesting single grains Signatory did bottle a while ago (Cambus, Caledonian etc.) But I still have to taste most of these. I really think they are worth the try!  If it were a person: say Naomi Campbell, don't ask me why. 82 points. (I know, Naomi deserves more than 82 points!)

Now, while we're at it, why not taste another grain whisky?
What about John Glaser's Hedonism 1st Batch (43%, Compass Box). This is an award winner! A vatting of two casks of grain whiskies (a Caledonian and Cambus, precisely) made by John Glaser, thus producing only 690 bottles. Colour: white wine.
Nose: quite clean and smooth. Fudge, cocoa, caramel, lavender and gooseberry.
Nice woody notes then. Very elegant and refined! Mouthfeel: smooth and woody
Palate: vanilla, tannins. Then some spicy notes, such as clove and nutmeg. And finally apple pie.
Not very powerful, but nicely crafted. Makes me think of some very good Irish, like Midleton Very Rare.
Elegance is really the word. Medium finish, leaves you a little sugar on the tongue, funny!
Very good whisky, in a beautiful bottle that really suits its style.
If it were a person: Nicole Kidman, elegance and spicyness... 85 points.

Well who talked about playing with words a little earlier?
Did I? Right, now, what about this: Springbank 10yo "Against the Grain" (46%, Oddbins) has been bottled by Springbank exclusively for Oddbins a few years ago. It was said to contain some 30+ yo malts. A rarity, no doubt, and Lex just provided me with a sample. Let's taste it right away... Colour: straw
Nose: very warming, typical Springbank. Peppery and salty, very woody and sour (in a good way).
Spirity, grassy and very yeasty. And in the background, a few coconut notes. Mouthfeel: bold and very rich.
Palate: Powerful. Quite sharp, liquorice and wood. Then anise, roots, toffee, fruit, and here it is, a distinctive salty note. It's good, but nowhere near the old 12yo, 15yo or 21yo. Better than the CV or the recent 10yo or 15yo, though.
If it were a person: Ralf Schumacher (good driver, but his older brother's much better). 84 points.

Okay, are you in the mood for two other malts, provided they are somewhat special? Yeah? Let's go, then. And if you're into very young peat monsters, this one will suit you: I found the Talisker 8yo 1988/1996 (45%, Milroy) very recently, on the lower shelves of a wine shop. Again, very dusty... I'm sure the few remaining bottles have been lying there for more than 5 years! Ready for a good punch? Let's go. Colour: white wine.
Nose: yes, pungent, sharp and punchy. Like a peppered young Ardbeg.
Very peaty and maritime. Iodine, sea spray, humus, pepper. Limey.
Mouthfeel: bold but not too much.
Palate: great peat, citrus, pepper, and a "sea water" feeling that's absolutely remarkable.
A graceful malt, that isn't very smoky, for once. But the finish is very long and extremely peppery.
Yes, a genuine Talisker! I think it's better than the current OB, just because it's sharper and much, much cleaner.
If it were a person: Helen McArthur, young and talented sailor who already won many races. 88 points.

Now, perhaps it's time to end this post-walpurgis session nicely, with something really special.
A Macallan, for instance. What, you tell me a Macallan isn't a "special" malt?
You're right, usual Macallans aren't very special. But The Buxrud-Macallan (special vatting) is. Great Swedish whisky lover Ulf Buxrud organised a big-ass Macallan tasting session in London, on April 20th, 2002. Most of the older expressions came from his own collection, while the younger Macallans were selected and provided by Bob Dalgarno himself. At the end of the session, all the remaining malts have been vatted, and each participant got one bottle of that vatted Macallan as a gift. And you tell me about a vatting! 53 different expressions, including one of only three known bottles of a 1942, a 1946, both 1874 and 1861 Replicas, the Private Eye, the 25yo, the 30yo, three Gran Riservas, a lot of 18yo (from 1960 to 1984), plus some Macallan newmake only a few weeks old... Wow! I got a sample from a friend who happened to attend that fantastic session, and now I'm going to taste it for the very first time... In other words, being part of a legend (hum, sounds like a Harley-Davidson advertisement!).Colour: bronze-gold.
Nose: mellow and warming. Wow, very Macallanish, of course. Not overwhelmingly sherried, very subtle, toffee, freshly opened pack of coffee, Havana cigar, chocolate, orange zest, nice wood. Mouthfeel: balanced, creamy.
Palate: dark chocolate, wood, tannins, vanilla, toffee, orange marmalade... In short, again, the prototypical Macallan. A medium to long finish, slightly bitter. Anyhow, putting together such a number of great Macallans just could not have given us a bland whisky. As we say here, cats don't make dogs!  If it were a person: Sophia Loren, no doubt. 90 points.

Okay, 8 beauties and 8 beasts, that was quite a zoo, don't you think? If I wasn't afraid of speaking out a truism, I would say Scotland does make the best whiskies in the world. Now, that is a scoop, isn't it? Anyway, as you may guess after having read that, it's getting late here, and I have to go to bed quickly now, if I want to avoid the walpurgis demons and monsters.

So, g'dnight!

Serge
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

E-pistle #07/02 - My Pandora Premiere 
by Olivier Humbrecht, France

This is a report of my first Pandora tasting at Serge's house. In fact, this is my very first official blind malt maniacs tasting so I am a little nervous. To boost my confidence, super champion Serge gave me a few samples to try, before starting the real thing.

Glenturret 11yo (58.6%, Signatory Vintage) - Straw colour. Strong toffee, burnt nose, almost sulphur, quite dissatisfying. Mouth is powerful and sharp, really needs water to calm the alcohol bite, but it doesn't increase the aromatics.
Not bad, but nothing to be excited with. 77 points.

Tomatin 21yo (43%, IB Culinara Germany) - This is the typical kind of whisky that Serge is good at finding in some remote place in deep Germany, certainly after a six months investigation on the net. Apparently the whisky is aged in large glass containers and bottled on request. Gold colour. Strong cereals, esters, yeasts at first. Then mint, pepper, green vegetables, heather and grassy aromas. Quite refined for a Bavarian finish. Mouth: mangoes, kiwi. Tingling.
Very interesting vegetables/peppermint notes again. Very good length. 85 points.

Bowmore 1989/2000 (46%, Murray McDavid, bourbon casks) - Pale straw.
Warming nose with peat - iodine, spices, herbs, lavender. The mouth is discreet, with vegetables, peat again, burnt tyres developing slowly. Nice flavours, but only medium length on the finish. 84 points.

Macallan 1990/1999 (46%, Murray McDavid, 1st fill sherry casks) - Amber colour.
Warming nose, strong sherry and caramel nose. Develop also some ripe apples and wood spices. Powerful palate, sherry is more discreet on the mouth, with fresh fruits, apples, pears… Long finish, quite creamy with some weight and dry finish. Just lack of some Oumpf (sorry guys, this is a wine term) to be really good. 81 points.

Linkwood 1989/2001 (46%, Murray McDavid, 1st fill sherry casks) - Staw colour. Nose: fresh sherry, fruits (lime), apples, raisins, mellow. Mouth is discreet, cereals, grain and yeasts. Dry finish and medium length. 77 points.

Mortlach 1989/2001 (46%, Murray McDavid, 1st fill sherry casks) - Straw colour.
Nose: delicate, raisins, flowers, lily, violet, very floral. Palate: medium power, soft, creamy, nuts flavours quite heavy.
Finish is good and shows tannins, some dry wood that is a little too apparent. 77 points.

Ardbeg 1991/2000 (46%, Murray McDavid, bourbon casks) - Pale straw. Power nose, sharp, peat, iodine, smoked, warm charcoal, burnt wood. The mouth is spicy, resinous, peaty and balanced. It is a dry powerful Ardbeg, perfectly balanced.
More elegant than the 10yo OB. Long aftertaste. 89 points.

Edradour 10yo Distillery Edition (40%, OB) - Straw colour. Mellow light nose: glue, cereals, biscuit and grain. Some sherry. Mouth: very disappointing. Oak far too strong and unbalanced. Feels like artificial flavours. Dry woody finish. 65 points.

Glenglassaugh 1973 (40%, Family Silver vintage reserve) - Straw amber colour. Light nose, delicate wood, resinous & cinnamon, ripe apples, quite spirity (alcohol tastes strong and there isn't much flavour intensity to make it harmonious).
Mouth: salty, nice attack, a little boring on the palate, but no defaults. 74 points.

The Loch Fyne 'The Living Cask' 20/3/2003 (58%, blend) is a small 60 litres cask which is on the counter in Loch Fyne whisky shop in Inverary. Whenever it is a 1/3 empty, it is again filled up with new additions. This happens every 2- 3 months. It is a kind of whisky solera. No idea of origins or age. Straw colour. Overpowering nose, fresh, very aggressive palate, cereals, pepper, strong resinous character. Interesting flavours. Really needs water, aggressive zests, good finish. 81 points.

This being done, we started the Pandora V tasting:

Pandora V Sample #1:
Pale straw colour. Nose has a light, medium intensity. Very cereals, grain, milk and citrus. Bread yeasts and fresh wheat develop after a while. Nose suggests a 43 -46% alcohol. The mouth is sharp, tngling with malt and grain character. Good length.
I can taste some sherry when I added some water, fresh apples. I gave it 78 points.
In my mind I really had the Auchentoshan 10yo in my memory, mostly because of the malty/grain/citrus combination. I said Lowland to Serge, but he was already calculating whether it would be Rosebank, Bladnoch …. We definitely agreed on Lowland. Johannes granted us some points. Which distillery? We were allowed to name 5. Easy for Lowlands, except that we didn't mention Linlithgow - and it was Linlithgow 18yo 1982/2001 (43%, Signatory Vintage)! You can't imagine how this irritated Serge, who certainly has more Linlithgow bottles than all the other malt maniacs put together !

Pandora V Sample #2:
Now this is the kind which can be put almost anywhere in Scotland if one isn't careful.
Amber colour (natural ? sherry ?). Light elegant nose: perfumes, anis. Harmonious delicate palate.
Soft finish, medium length, some wood character mixed with malt flavours. I thought that this would be a widely available good quality OB, Speysidish, but not really great for me: 76 points . Before I mentioned Speyside, Serge said "this is Linkwoodish to me". Fine, I agreed. Our first guess was Linkwood, than Benriness and eventually we managed to guess Longmorn 15yo (45%, OB). Johaness asked us to rank from older to younger. This one was easy, but not so much for Feb 1 and Feb 3.

Pandora V Sample #3:
These were my notes (at the time I didn't realize I had to send them to Johannes):
"F…… great Islay and f…… great mouth: Ardbeg!". It is powerful, peaty, good burnt wood flavours, very intense and rich.
Finishes with dry smoke and not too oily. 43% or +. 90 points.
One look to Serge, and we are quite clear on it, this has to be Ardbeg first choice.
Bingo: Ardbeg 8yo 1992/2000 (43%, Signatory Vintage). On the age question, I wrongly influenced Serge that it was between 9 and 12yo (Johannes gave us age groups to choose from), but Serge was right, it was below 9 yo! Amazing.

We eventually gathered 9 points out of 20 (if I am right). Johannes said it was a good score, but Serge was aiming for at least a 14 or 15, so he tried to negotiate a few points for some age ratings that we forgot to do properly… I think we didn't do too bad.

Olivier Humbrecht
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

E-pistle #07/03 - My Malt Maniacs Report #1
by Peter Silver, USA

My First Meeting With A Single Malt

 It was on an ordinary evening in May of 1992 in New York City that I tasted my first single malt scotch.  My wife, Erica and I were dinner guests at our friends Craig and Kathy's apartment uptown.  He had celebrated a birthday very recently and I was eager to bring him a nice gift.  I decided to call his wife Kathy and ask what she might recommend.  She said, "He likes this thing called single malt scotch."  This was completely unknown to me, so I asked, "What is single malt scotch?"  She said, "That's what he likes to drink now."  Obviously, I was going to have to find out for myself.  I strolled over to our nearby liquor store and found the malt section.   For at least five minutes, I stared blankly at the wall of scotch.  There were at least seventy-five choices and I was completely confused!  Before any of the employees noticed my indecision, I had unsolicited help from another customer.  A woman of a certain age, whose voice sounded like she had smoked three packs of Lucky's a day for the last sixty years came up from behind me and said, "Get the eighteen year old Macallan. You can drink a whole bottle and not get a hangover."  O.K., I thought, that's good advice.  I thanked her and decided to get a second opinion, maybe from someone who was not so clearly an alcoholic!

 So, I popped outside to the pay phone (this is before cell phones were so popular) to call Kathy and ask her which one to buy, when (you may not believe this) a guy wearing a kilt strolls past me and heads into the liquor store.  I hang up the phone and follow him into the store, figuring this is a guy who will know what scotch to purchase.  He was talking to the owner about promoting a whisky that the store didn't carry yet.  After patiently waiting a few minutes, I get his ear and recommendation.  "You can't go wrong with the 18 year old Macallan!"   That's it for me, if the Scottish guy and the alcoholic smoker agree, who am I to argue?  I buy the Macallan, get it gift-wrapped and we bring it to dinner that evening.

 After presenting it to Craig, he eagerly opened it up and graciously offered me a taste.  "Oh, no," I exclaimed, backing away from him,  "Scotch is horrible tasting stuff.  I've seen movies where really old guys drink it and they make horrible faces because of the awful taste.  That's why they serve it with beer, so you can get the taste out of your mouth as soon as possible"  He looked at me sadly and gently suggested that I give this special whisky a try.  I reluctantly took a very small amount in a glass and cautiously sipped a little, just to humor my host.  Wow!  As soon as a small bit got on my tongue and started spreading around my mouth, I knew this was something amazing.  I loved the sherry on the nose, the fruitiness, and the spiciness - the yummyness of it all! I rolled it around my mouth and reveled in the sweetness!  It was like rediscovering candy again, only much, much better.
From that point on, I was hooked. My life has never been the same since and neither has my wife's!
 

How I Recently Broke My 6 Month Moratorium Against Buying New Malts

 It is now eight years later and I live in a whisky enthusiast's dream.  I have collected over 500 malts and many are stored in our large Malt Vault which was custom designed for me by my wife Erica in our new home in Manhattan.  We have had many large tastings in our home, some with twenty people, all with amazing meals made by Erica.  We also have had innumerable small tastings for friends, visitors and other malt lovers who find us.  I need other whisky enthusiasts to help me drink all this whisky!  I have more than I can possibly drink in twenty lifetimes and I do believe that whisky is for sharing.
 We made our second pildrammage to Scotland this past December (2002), which included two days on Islay and some fancy travel plans to cover as much distance in as little time as possible.  This will be the subject of another story, but this focus is on the haul we brought back.  I saved for many months, budgeted carefully, compared prices and had shops all over Scotland hold bottles for my arrival.  I even had one ship a case of twelve to my hotel when I couldn't get there in time.  Of course, I still ended up going over budget….

 After getting valuable advice from other whisky enthusiasts, I purchased large amounts of bubble wrap then premeasured and cut it into bottle wrapping sized pieces.  I had plenty of tape for wrapping and back up material.  To calculate how many bottles I could carry, I took bottles and placed them in the suitcase to see how many could fit.  I purchased a folding duffel bag and a special six bottle carrying case with shoulder strap.  As my clothes that were worn on the trip would go into the duffel bag and my hard suitcases would be filled with whisky.  Even with all this planning I still ending up buying another suitcase in Edinburgh! 

 My final haul was 64 full size bottles and about a dozen minis.  At Heathrow, I was charged 110 pounds for excess baggage, but that would have been less than the cost of shipping back a case of twelve bottles.  When we got to customs in New York, I was really worried about what would happen.  They could seize all the whisky and say it was too much for personal use.  They could claim it was for retail and hit me with a huge charge.  Almost anything could have happened.  We were waved over to a young looking female customs agent, who immediately asked about the whisky we had declared.  When I told her how much whisky I had, she looked over to Erica and asked in disbelief, "What do you get out of this?"  Biting my tongue to keep from answering, "None of your fucking business!" I let my wife say something nice.  Suddenly, an older male customs agent appeared and asked about the alcohol content of each bottle.  I told him some were 40%, some were 43% and a few were cask strength of 50- something %.  He did some calculations and asked to see a bottle.  Of course, the one I chose at random was a cask strength bottle!  He said that it was OK; he had already figured it out as an average between 40% and 43%.  He then said he would charge me $2 a bottle and he offered to round it to $100.  I was stunned!  Then he apologized that the cashier wasn't on duty yet and he couldn't take a credit card.  He asked if it was possible to pay cash for this, and before he finished his sentence, I had $100 in cash pressed into his hand.  He assured me that I would be getting a receipt in the mail within a few days (I did, by the way).  It took a lot of self-control not to dance a jig as we left the customs area!

 With 64 bottles to add to my collection, I was incredibly happy!  Of course, I had overrun my malt vault by a few hundred bottles, overflowing into two large cabinets and three big shelves nearby.  Erica was not too happy with all these malts taking over.  I quickly did some rudimentary math.  Even if I opened up new malt every week, I would still have enough new whisky for over a year!  I had no plans to open up that much whisky that quickly anyway!  So, I decided to stop purchasing malts for at least a while and impose my own personal moratorium on new malts.  Besides, Erica was starting to complain that it was cutting into her jewelry money.

 At first I found myself hesitating to surf my normal websites, like The Whisky Exchange and Royal Mile Whiskies.  New releases were coming out all the time and I had to do my best to resist my instincts, honed after eight years of extreme malt shopping!  I turned to some close malt buddies to live vicariously through their recent purchases, getting tastes and opinions as soon as I could.  When a malt came out that I was dying to own, I starting going a little nuts.  Finally, when a Glenmorangie White Rum Finish came out, I knew that I was in trouble.  I had made it one of my missions to collect as many finishes of Glenmorangie that I could afford.  Finally, I had to pull the dreaded birthday request – I pleaded with my best malt buddy to buy me that malt for my birthday, which was still a few months away.  He managed to show a slight interest in my plea, but I wasn't sure if he would comply. 

 Fortunately events like Ardbeggeddon IV and Whisky Hill Dram Jam IV let me try a wide variety of new malts, as well as some classic ones that I might never see on my own.  Still, a day or two didn't go by where I was longing to purchase a new release.  Finally, I had to come to some kind of reconciliation with my purchasing desires and my lack of space, even with a most tolerant and supportive wife.  I decided to move on to the next stage of collecting malts.  I would no longer try to get every malt from every distillery, I would hone in on the ones I loved the most.  Of course, I would still try other malts, but purchases would be from a select few distilleries.  In the past, I had hosted wonderful extensive vertical tastings of Macallan, Highland Park and Springbank.  Of course, if my malts were depleted by a lot more tastings, I would be forced to buy all sorts of whisky.  Looking through my lovely collection, I decided to pick some of my favorite distilleries.  How could I possibly live without some Springbank, Ardbeg, Mortlach, Clynelish, Brora, Talisker, Glenmorangie and maybe a few others?

 The malt that finally broke my moratorium was the Clynelish 30 Mission Series.  I had a taste of this at Whisky Hill Dram Jam IV, heard John Hansell rave about it online and knew that if I hesitated, all would be lost.  A friend was placing an order with Royal Mile and graciously allowed me to piggyback onto his order.  Two nights ago in a lovely Italian restaurant in Greenwich Village in Manhattan, we met with our wives for dinner and I picked up my malt.  It had been a very long six months and it felt good to be back in the saddle!  Oh and by the way, my malt buddy did get me that bottle of Glenmorangie for my birthday.

Peter Silver, New York
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

E-pistle #07/04 - One More Visit to Scotland
by Olivier Humbrecht, France

With my wife Margaret being Scottish and often homesick, I just need to say: "what about spending some time in Scotland?" and she is already preparing her suitcases... So, I do not need to find any obscure reasons to go there. On our last trip, we went to visit the Macallan and Edradour distilleries and had a tasting of Campbeltown whiskies with Euan Mitchell from Springbank.
These are my notes:

The drive to The Macallan was quite long and we managed to arrive late.
This wasn't a problem and the welcome was very courteous and the staff was understanding and re-arranged our booked tour. The visitor centre is modern, small and pretty, but similar to many other distilleries in its content: recent releases largely available (sometimes even more expensive than in the local shops). The only highlight was the entire 1926 - 1972 collection, exposed behind a glass cabinet: incredible colours and prices. The distillery itself is surrounded by beautiful fields (apparently planted with Golden Promise barley), but the buildings do not have the incredible beauty of the Islay distilleries. The distillery must have had a recent health and security survey, because many rooms were not accessible to the public. I learnt that The Macallan still uses about 20% of Golden Promise barley, grown in Scotland. It is an old variety, less sugar yielding but with more flavours. I asked where the other malt was coming from and the tour manager told us that everything comes from Scotland. (This is one of my dreams: a 100% Scottish malt.)  With a weekly production of 90.000 litres of malt (only 16% of the distillation is used), I doubt that there is enough barley in Scotland! The Macallan buys the barley already dried and without any peating. The process is very conventional. Only stainless steel is used and commercial fresh yeasts are used for each new fermentation. I counted 8 wash stills and 6 low wines stills. I noticed that the 'swan necks' were medium in height. (The finished spirit will become richer with short necks and richer with tall necks.)

We visited one of the wharehouses - not the mega-huge-multi-million-gallons, but one of the old stone built buildings. We were lucky enough to be able to nose a 1954 cask: absolutely wonderful, sherry, toffee, caramel, cinnamon and nutty. I rated the nose 95 points, but we weren't allowed to try it (and we insisted, believe me), so this was quite frustrating! Back in the visitor centre, we were offered a glass of the straight Macallan 10yo (40%, OB). Light colour, malty sherryish nose, quite weak with a dry unsatisfying palate but no real faults. Score: 77 points. This followed with the classic Macallan 18yo 1982 (43%, OB) which had a slightly darker colour. Nose: more pronounced sherry character, sweet oloroso type. Mouth: longer, strong sherry, sweet toffee. As Macallan as one can expect, but not the kind you remember forever. Score: 87 points.

At the end, we were offered to try the Macallan 1841 Replica. It appeared clearer in colour (perhaps I didn't have enough in my glass to properly asses the colour!) than the 18yo. The nose shows also sherry character, more subtle, mixed with interesting cereals, toasted bread flavours, almost burnt. Mouth surprisingly much drier than expected, quite austere, hint of peat?
Interesting but not for the sherry freaks: 87 points. On our way out, we purchased a bottle of the Macallan NAS Traveller's Edition 50's (40%, OB) and tried it straight away: gold colour, almost amber, satisfying nose, strong sherry, not very complex, round mouth, again strong sherry, nuts, vanilla, toffee, easy to drink, doesn't need water at all (neither did the other ones). 80 points.

Coming out of The Macallan distillery, we had an appointment at the Whisky Shop in Dufftown for a tasting of Campbeltown malts conducted by Euan Mitchell from Springbank. I expected that he was a member of the Mitchell family that runs Springbank, but there was no connection at all, pure coincidence (!!! or clever marketing). I learned that Campbeltown once had over 50 distilleries. Unfortunately there's only one left that operates today, producing three different whiskies: Springbank (distillation at 71% average when put in cask), Longrow (68% and more peated) and Hazelburn (triple distillation at 75%). When we asked what were the benefit of triple distillation, we were told that the whisky matures faster.
Springbang uses mostly bourbon casks, but occasionnaly also all the rest available.

We started with a cask sample of Hazelburn 5yo (59%, from fresh bourbon cask, to be bottled at 8yo at release time). Colour light yellow, nose caramel, bourbon, unpeated (triple distillation). Mouth: vanilla, caramel, strong tannins and wood, feels too dry today, needs more ageing, but good complexity. 79 points . Followed a tasting of three new makes: a new peated Springbang that tasted very interesting, not so burnt but more smoky. Hazelburn, very much like a young fine mirabelle eau de vie (yellow plum), disturbing and extremely delicate (is it the triple distillation?) and a Longrow that was peat, peat and peat, just like a Laphroaig new make.

Springbank 10yo (46%, OB, 60% bourbon casks / 40% sherry casks): Clear colour. Nose is fine, elegant, nice vanilla, wood delicate. Mouth coconut (bourbon), vanilla, good length and finishes dry. Good honest malt. 82 points.

Springbank 15yo (46%, OB, 80% refill sherry butts / 20% bourbon barrels). Nose is strong confectionary candy, toffee, chocolate and bourbon vanilla. Mouth shows strong dry fruits, candy, some dry wood and wine character.
Adding water makes it turn flat. 85 points.

I heard a lot of good of the Campbeltown 25yo (40%, OB) and did purchase it just under 40¥ a bottle. In fact, we were told that this a vatting of 1/3 grain whiskies and 2/3 malt whiskies from distilleries as varied as Tamdhu, Springbank and Ardbeg. It is a whisky that will be produced only once (12000 bottles) from casks that had been lying in Springbank's Campbeltown wharehouses for over 25 years. Light straw colour. Nose shows delicate light sherry character, dried fruits, apricot, very sexy. Mouth is soft, great malt and grain character without being too cereal. Definitely a great bargain. Inbetween a blend and a single malt in character. 85 points.

The colour of the Longrow 10yo 1992/2002 (46%, OB, 3/4 bourbon casks, two days peat fire to dry the malt) was quite clear. Nose: oily, peat, burnt rubber but fine. Mouth: powerful, rich, great peat, smoke and good oily texture. With or w/o water. 89 points.

Longrow 13yo 1989/2002 (53.2%, OB, 100% refill sherry cask).
Clear straw. Nose shows light sherry character, despite the huge peat, iodine aromas. Very interesting combination (and I am not a sherry/peat fan). Needs aeration in the glass. Mouth: beautiful balance, peat dominates. Very long finish. Great, 91 points.
 

EDRADOUR: has anything changed?

Staying near Pitlochy, at the very place where Pandora champion Serge Valentin rediscovered that he liked single malts, we decided to go back and visit the Edradour distillery. Certainly not because of the quality of the 10yo OB Distillery edition we tasted numerous times in the past, but mostly because super legend Iain Henderson would take us around. Anybody wanting to visit this distillery should park his car in Pitlochy and walk down main street, pass Bell's Blair Atholl distillery until seeing an old railway bridge on the left. Take the turn, go under the bridge and follow the black spout walk that will take you through a forest, waterfalls and if you always go up hill you will end up at Edradour distillery. (45' to 1 hour walk easy). If you do not want to go back the same way, you can follow the normal road back to Pitlochy through Moulin. You'll find a great pub in the Moulin hotel, also having their own micro brewery.

The Edradour distillery is still the smallest distillery operating in Scotland.
(Well, until Ladybank will be in operation.)  It's located in the beautiful Perthshire countryside above Pitlochy. This distillery is so small because it was created by four farmers that didn't know what to do with their surplus barley production. Today it is a three man operation (including Iain Henderson), making 90000 bt a year since Signatory took over last year.

So, what has changed? The distillation process is classic. Iain Henderson changed only a few things ("he twiggled the stills"). He likes the shape of the stills which have a very short neck going horizontally) and produce a rich oily type of malt. If Edradour mostly used sherry casks in the past, they are also experimenting with other origins now. (I hope not too much, Port Wood finished Laphroaig from the unchillfiltered range is not my cup of tea). More interesting, Iain confessed having just finished a 8 week distillation of heavily peated malt (50 ppm like Ardbeg or Laphroaig). This malt will eventually be released as BALLECHIN distillery, an old distillery name from this area. A quick nosing of new make showed really strong, heavy rubber peat character, very nice. Much more barrels will be stored in the distillery buildings - before, 90% of Edradour was going into House of the Lords blend.
We tasted three new releases from Signatory, certainly better than the old 10 yo:

Edradour 10yo 1992/2002 (46%, Signatory Vintage Unchillfiltered Collection, D 7/1992, B 11/2002)
Light amber, Sherry, chocolate, round, dried fruits, lots of oak.
Great on the Scottish moors when the north wind blows hard and you need something warming. 78 points.

Edradour 11yo 1991/2003 (59.3%, Signatory 'Straight from the Cask', D 8/1991, B 3/2003)
Dark amber colour, powerfull nose, great character. Huge difference with the classic 10yo.
Strong dry sherry character on the mouth. Oak is perhaps overpowering without addition of water.
Best Edradour ever tried, but will the oak soften up? 85 points.

Edradour 13yo 1989/2002 (57.2%, OB, Decanter glass, D 10/1989, B 10/2002)
Very dark amber, cupper colour. Very dry sherry nose, strong cask influence (finish?)
Mouth: warm tea, sherry, wood and oak dominate, has much less fruit and flavour than the 11yo.
79 points.

I had the chance to meet Iain Henderson before; on Islay (with Serge) and at the Paris Whisky festival (with Serge also, bizarre, isn't it ?). Each time he was wearing a tie, looked clean and was speaking energetically. At Edradour he really looked like the guy doing almost everything, wearing his overall, smelling peat and fire and, even if he was as enthusiastic as ever, he certainly was less voluble. Small is beautiful…

Olivier Humbrecht
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

E-pistle #07/05 - Pandora VI Pandemonium 
by Serge Valentin, France

(Comments and answers by Johannes are added in light green.)

Blind tasting can be highly addictive.
Trusting just your nose, your tastebuds and your memory, making risky choices, eliminating some malts, hesitating between two other ones, thinking a while, changing your guesses, thinking again, tasting again (and getting different feelings than last time...) Yes, that's an heavily addictive sport, and I begin to like it more and more, provided the "sender" composes the flight with much art and skill. And Johannes proved to be a master at composing nice (but tricky) selections. Sure, it isn't that difficult to make a difference between a Lowlander and an Islayer, but what do you say when somebody asks you to make the difference between... Three Speysiders? Even worse: three Speysiders that are quite similar? I say let's try, even if I know the results will be painful, no doubt! But we're all some naked emperors, aren't we?

Pandora VI Assignment: Three Pairs of Speyside Siblings
The Clue: Half a dozen Speysiders, combined into three pairs of siblings. 3 are OB's, 3 IB's
The Task: Match up the pairs (2 points) and give Top 3 possible bottlings for each malt (3/2/1 points)

Before my final tasting I had some serious sniffings.
I made some short notes, just based on the nose to get each malt's main marker.
General feeling: all six are fine Speysiders, sherried, but not too much. Possible pairings: 1-4 / 2-5 / 3-6.
All these Speysiders showed great sherried noses, although not in the Macallan style. All are good whiskies, nose-wise (none under 80 points). But on the palate, none was really thrilling. That's why I would classify them under a 'mid-sweet, mid-sherried' category.

The bad news is that after my Big Crunch effort, I've 'lost' (i.e. vatted) most of my opened bottles or samples. So, apart from Macallan, I have to use my memory... Of course, all that made it even more difficult to come up with correct answers. All the malts are quite similar! Furthermore, Johannes told me I never tasted any of these, according to the Matrix and my track record. But as the malts are quite similar, there's no need to dig deep into their characteritics, because that would lead me to list always the same fragrances/tastes (sherry, honey, wood, toffee, liquorice, flowers, fruits...). So, I think the best method, like for Pandora II, was to try to get each malt's main marker. And that only by nosing it, because I was fearing that trying to get the markers on the palate would be nothing but confusing.

So, here's my method again: 1) Quick sniffs, 2) Getting the main marker (or rather the most specific one), 3) Stating each malt's name (provided I had tasted the distillery before), 4) Verifying my findings by nosing the malts deeper, and finally, 5) drinking it, just to check whether there was any contradiction. Anyway, let's start now.

Blind #1:  Aberlour NAS Antique (43%, OB)
First impression: Not too strong. 40-46%. Marker: flowers, rose, lilac. Could be Linkwood.
Specific marker: rose. First guess: Linkwood.
Nosing deeper: perfumy, sherried, quite fresh, crystallized orange. The freshness confirms it could be Linkwood.
Mouth: soft, oily, woody notes, sherry, drying. That's what I was fearing, the palate is somewhat undefinite.
Could be many Speysiders, including Linkwood.
Rating: 81 points. Official guesses: Linkwood, Aberlour, Glenrothes

So, there you go... Two points already.
This was the Aberlour NAS Antique (43%, OB) - a vatting containing whiskies from 10 to 25 years old. It's a duty-free bottling. Your guess was pretty good, because this 'Antique' is not quite as sherried as other Aberlours. I agree the palate lacks personality. I really wanted to get your opinion about this version. I liked it and gave it 81 points as well, but Klaus and Roman rated it below average in the matrix. Your score helps lifting the average rating to a fairly respectable 79 points.

Blind #2:  Mortlach 1989/2002 (43%, Coopers Choice)
First impression: Again, a 40-46% malt. Very winey, hence difficult to put a name on.
But not sherried enough to be a Macallan OB.
Specific marker: some mint/eucalyptus, but not a lot. First gues: Glenrothes.
Nosing deeper: winey, woody, liquorice. Hum, difficult! Mouth: rounded, then slightly bitter. Not that woody. That one is really tough.
I still had a sample of the Glenrothes 1985, and these are somewhat similar. Okay, let's go for Glenrothes, but...
Rating: 83 points. Official guesses: Glenrothes, Aberlour, Cragganmore

No points this time, it's a Mortlach. Maybe the 'winey' impression came from the sherry cask(s).
My score is 84 points, so once again we seem to enjoy this single malt about the same.

Blind #3: Glenrothes 8yo (40%, G&M)
First impression: 40-46% vol. Honey, more toasted than Linkwood. Could be Mortlach.
Specific marker: honey, toasted bread. First guess: Mortlach. Nosing deeper: very toasted, rich. Nice sherry. Could be a G&M bottling.
Mouth: soft, nicely rounded, subtle, very classy. Must be quite old.
Rating: 86 points . Official guesses: Mortlach, Glenfarclas, Aberlour

Hehehe...It seems you mixed up Glenrothes and Mortlach, just like you did with blind #2.
'Must be quite old' you say?  Au contraire, mon ami. This Glenrothes is quite possibly the youngest bottle in the flight - just eight years old!  You were spot on when you guessed it's a G&M bottling, though. Unfortunately that doesn't get you any points. I'm not quite as crazy about it as you are, but I like it a lot. Amazing character for its age and very good value.

Blind #4:  Glenrothes 1987/2000 (43%, OB)
First impression: 40-46% vol. Flowery. Could be a second Linkwood.
Specific marker: rose, floral. First guess: here's our second Linkwood. Nosing deeper: fresh, tangerine, turkish delight, less sherried.
Mouth: Just a little more pungent than #1. Maybe a higher alcohol level. Quite woody, gets a little dry and bitter.
Rating: 80 points. Official guesses: Linkwood, Aberlour, Glenrothes

Yes, another point - this is the second Glenrothes in the flight. I haven't 'seriously' rated this official bottling yet, but at first sight I have to agree the younger (and cheaper) G&M bottling is at least as good - if not better. Craig and Mark have scored this one around 80 points as well, but Louis seems to have the hots for this bottling - his score is a whopping 89 points.

Blind #5:  Mortlach 21yo (40%, Sestante)
First impression: 40-46% vol. Very winey (sweet wine). Could be the same distillery as #2.
The wine does mask the distillery's style (if any).
Specific marker: I can't find any. Tough again! First guess: none. Nosing deeper: sweet wine, liquorice, wood.
Mouth: Woody and dry, and a little watery as well. Perhaps the worst of the flight, but still not a bad whisky.
Rating: 78 points. Official guesses: Glenrothes, Aberlour, Cragganmore

Hahaha!  Your third mix-up of Mortlach and Glenrothes. Too bad, because you were right when you said this could be the same distillery as Blind #2. And you know what's especially interesting? I bought this bottle at Giorgio's in Milan because you told me these Sestante bottlings have quite a reputation. Given the fact that these bottlings are selected and bottled by Gordon & MacPhail for Sestante I had my doubts. I'm always eager to debunk a myth, so I bought a bottle for 75 Euro's. As it turns out, a bottle that has aged for about a third of the time and that costs about a third of the money (the Coopers Choice) beats it.

Blind #6:  Aberlour NAS 100 Proof (57.1%, OB)
First impression: Cask strength - approx 60% or just a litlle less. Very honeyed. Goes with #3. Mortlach?
Specific marker: very honeyed. First guess: Mortlach.
Nosing deeper: toasted bread again (another Mortlach marker), burnt wood, a lot of toffee. That's a C/S whisky.
Mouth: bold and rich, liquorice and wood. Gets more powerful and quite burning (Hey, UDRM anyone?). A little grassy.
Rating: 87 points. Official guesses: Mortlach, Glenfarclas, Aberlour

And that's another point you've earned, bringing your grand total to 4 points.
This is a cask strength whisky indeed - the predecessor of the more expensive A'bunadh.
I have to say I'm a bit surprised you didn't find any sherry or fruits in there.
Anyway - your rating resembles mine (85 points).

No need to say I used Aberlour as a joker... I'm not familiar at all with Aberlour, although it has been French-owned since quite a long time, but as I know Johannes loves to play some dirty tricks from time to time... Oh yes, pairings... Let's say: 1-4, 2-5, 3-6. Hum, perhaps too logical... Okay Johannes, how far from the tracks am I?

Dirty tricks indeed...
Well, you matched up the Mortlachs correctly, so I'll give you an extra point for that.
That puts your final score at 5 points for this session - not quite as good as the 18 points you earned at Pandora II but still better than the performances of some other maniacs, including myself. Your instincts were correct, I did compose a 'logical' line-up for the blinds - but it was 1-6, 2-5 and 3-4 instead of the one you suggested. No shame, I made this Pandora flight a very tricky one.
So; let's review your scores for this flight;

March Blind #1  - 81 points - Aberlour NAS Antique (43%, OB)
March Blind #2  - 83 points - Mortlach 1989/2002 (43%, Coopers Choice)
March Blind #3  - 86 points - Glenrothes 8yo (40%, G&M)
March Blind #4  - 80 points - Glenrothes 1987/2000 (43%, OB)
March Blind #5  - 78 points - Mortlach 21yo (40%, Sestante)
March Blind #6  - 87 points - Aberlour NAS 100 Proof (57.1%, OB)

Okay, mixed feelings here...
I got them all, but in a complete disorder. My 'specific marker' stuff didn't work, obviously. The one I was the most sure sure about was Linkwood, just because of these bloody flowery smells... Otherwise, again, all I can say is that these were really similar... Quite a cluster, isn't it? Anyway, I think it's really a matter of cask management, rather than a matter of distillery style...

And too bad for the Sestante! I just read Dave Murray's comments on Mortlach. He writes about a 16yo: "as enjoyable as it is, I'd prefer to see them drop about four years off it and serve it when the malt has a bigger say..." and later: "sadly (...) even the independents are usually seduced by age on this one" So true! That Sestante just proves that Mortlach does suffer from too long aging, because the wood just gets the whisky to dry. Perhaps does that come from Mortlach's partial triple distillation..
Anyway, that flight was really crafted 'en finesse'. Congrats and thanks!

Santé, Serge
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

E-pistle #07/06 - Blind Ambition
by Johannes van den Heuvel, Holland

After the disastrous results of my latest 'blind' sessions (see E-reports 05/04 and 05/12 for the gory details) I've kept putting off sampling Serge's fresh octet of blind samples het sent me in January for several months. I just needed some time to build up enough courage to face the music again. I've been waiting for that 'good nose day' to come by, but so far it seems like the string of bad nose days just won't end. After warding off Serge's ever more frantic inquiries about my take on his blinds for a few months, I ran out of excuses when I received Serge's latest 'blinds' report. I finally decided to accept the fact that my nose is suffering from its own 'recession' - I'll simply go ahead and give the best analysis I can under these circumstances.

And the best I can do right now is taking our new system of 'indicative' scores for a test drive.
Those of you who've read my liquid log entries from the previous millenium may remember I've used 'preliminary' scores in the past when I wasn't quite what to make of a malt - at least not yet. I used these preliminary scores (nothing more than temporary ratings on my usual 1-100 scale) on bad nose days and whenever I was forced to 'work' under sub-standard sampling conditions - for example in a bar or at a festival. When the condition of my nose improved about 3 years ago I decided I didn't need those preliminary ratings anymore. Well, in hindsight it looks like I may have been a bit too hasty. I haven't had a single good nose day in months and my stash of unsampled miniature samples keeps growing and growing...

What's more, many of my big bottles are slowly oxidising away on my shelves. I don't know what a normal person would do under these circumstances, but a malt maniac like myself panics. A part of me wants to sample and score these malts as soon as possible, while they're still in their prime. Another part of me wants to wait for that perfect nose day to come along so I can 'judge' them as best I can. And yet another part of me simply wants to get naked and run around town screaming, but that's quite another story...
Anyway - I'm wandering off towards the cliffs of insanity again. Suffice it to say that I felt it was time to bring back preliminary / indicative ratings again. We've discussed this topic amongst the malt maniacs and finally decided on the following system;

[A] = 90 points or more (= Top of the bill, it doesn't get any better than this)
[B] = 85 to 89 points (= Highly Reccomendable)
[C] = 80 to 84 points (= Reccomendable)
[D] = 70 to 79 points (= An 'average' single malt)
[E] = 60 to 69 points (= Below average)
[F] = 50 to 59 points (= Questionable)
[G] = 49 points or less (= Avoidable)

That should work for now - this way, it's easy to spot how secure I feel about my scores. When you see a number (1-100) that means I've sampled a malt either 'by the bottle' or under perfect nosing conditions, when you see a letter (A-G) that means I'm not even trying to pretend that my judgement carries any kind of weight whatsoever. It's merely a very personal 'impression'.
But there was something else about these particular blinds that worried me. Like I said, I really wanted to get it right this time. That's why I had several small sniffs and nips of these samples during three earlier sessions. At the first unofficial session in February only samples #4 and #8 scored above average, while #5 and #7 did especially bad. But when I rivisited them again in April and sampled them in reverse order, #6 and #8 scored in the nineties while #3, #4 and #5 all ended up in the upper eighties.
Samples #1 and #7 received scores in the lower sixties while #2 got just 58 points. Hardly consistent, eh?
During a third run in May I ended up with these indicative scores - ranked from best to worst;
(Obviously I've added the 'answers' just now, after receiving them from Serge by e-mail.)

1 [B] - Blind #8 (Turned out to be: Braes of Glenlivet 16yo 1979/1995, 60.4%, Signatory Vintage)
2 [B] - Blind #6 (Turned out to be: Saint Magdalene 19yo 1979/1998, 63.8%, UDRM)
3 [C] - Blind #4 (Turned out to be: Ardbeg 1975/2000, 43%, OB)
4 [C] - Blind #3 (Turned out to be: Port Ellen 19yo 1982/2001, 43%, McGibbon's Provenance Spring Distillation)
5 [D] - Blind #5 (Turned out to be: Glen Mhor 22yo 1979/2001, 61%, UDRM)
6 [E] - Blind #1 (Turned out to be: Tamnavulin 12yo, 40%, OB)
7 [F] - Blind #2 (Turned out to be: Whisky de Bretagne NAS, 41%, OB)
8 [G] - Blind #7 (Turned out to be: Bruichladdich 1989/2002, 58.5%, OB, Paris Whisky Festival)

Once again, the tables seem to have turned...
Three different sessions produced some very different results, although the overall favourite seems to be #8 while the stinker of this batch is #7. Time to get it over with and have a 'final' session. Well - not THAT final, actually. I've been sampling modest quantities of these eight samples and all 125ml bottles are still more than half full. This means I will be able to save them for a good nose day.
OK, enough beating about the bush - time to think about tonight's job. Here are the details of Serge's Pandora challenge:

Clue N°1: Blinds 1 to 4 are reduced malts; Blinds 5 to 8 are C/S malts.
Clue N°2: There are: 3 Islay malts, 2 Speysiders, 1 Highlander, 1 Lowlander and 1 Mystery malt.
(The mystery malt isn't from any of these 4 regions - Hey, why not give you the distillery's name?)
Clue N°3: There are 4 OBs and 4 IBs.
Clue N°4: 2 blinds are tricky – 6 aren't (well...)
Clue N°5: You have tried 2 of these blinds before
Clue N°6: The names of the distilleries are...                            ... Hey, don't dream!

Your job and the rewards:
- Spot the exot (2.5 pt)
- Spot the other whiskies' regions (1 pt each)
- Spot the distilleries (1.5, 1, 0.5 pts) except for the exot (not possible)

Sounds easy enough, doesn't it?  Well... We'll see.
I decided to try something Serge suggested a while ago - getting a 'first impression' from our 125ml Revol sample bottles. They have quite a wide neck which allows you to get a lot of nose straight from the bottle. Maybe this will help me classify and identify the eight blinds before me. (Before I start, I'd like to stress once more time the extremely preliminary nature of my scores.)

Blind 1 - First impression: Sweet, sparkly and a little flowery. Lightest of the batch, together with #7.
Nose: Whoof! Quite oily. Clean. Sweeter and fruitier after a few minutes - and then a little more floral.
Maybe a faint spicyness. It remains restrained and oily, though. Too much nose to be a blend.
Taste: Bitter start. Oily. Smooth, sweetish centre. Then it turns bitter again. Quite hot. Dry.
Nutty. Peanuts? Alcoholic. Woody, gritty finish. Fish? Hard to swallow. Too much breathing?
Score: [F] . I really don't like this. Nothing spectacular - it feels quite young. It's just too oily for me.
Region: This could be a Highlander or a Lowlander. No Islay.
My guesses: Isle of Jura, Tobermory/Ledaig, Loch Lomond.
It was: Tamnavulin 12yo (40%, OB) - I've scored no points on this one.
My baffled reaction: Hmmm... Looking at my tasting notes from +/- 2 years ago (log entry 98 on Malt Madness), it seems I only got a few of the 'markers' this time - I also got the oil in the nose and the bitterness of the palate, but not much else. Different batch?

Blind 2 - First impression: Sherry, wood & smoke.
Nose: Orange peel. Lemon. Tangerines. Fruitier over time. Furniture polish. Sherry and smoke.
Organics. a hint of liquorice.Very interesting! Aniseed? Maggi? Jagermeister? Mint? Herbal.
Very complex, but it's a little grainy and restrained so you have to really work at it.
Taste: Yeuch. Sour and bitter - not unlike stale beer. Gritty like bourbon. Maggi. Is this whisky?
Orange peel. Bitter citrus elements grow stronger and stronger. Flat. Dry, no sweetness.
Fruity, sherried aftertaste. Fragmented. Deconstructed. It loses lots of points here.
Could be the Lowlander, I guess. Is this a wood experiment like the Auchentoshan Three Wood?
Score: [D]. I was prepared to go as far as [B] based on the nose, but the taste completely ruins it.
Region: The strong citrus elements hint towards the Lowlands, but it's unusually herbal.
My guesses: Rosebank, Bladnoch, Auchentoshan. It was: Whisky de Bretagne NAS (41%, OB), a grain whisky. Once again, no points for me. My baffled reaction: Well, never tried that one. It seems unusually complex for a grain whisky.
I quite liked the nose, but the taste didn't do it for me.

Blind 3 - First impression: Sherry & soap.
Nose: Sparkly but a little shallow. Soft fruitiness. Quite overpowering later on. This could be an Islay malt.
Plenty of character. More smoky and organic after a while. Pinch of salt? Ammoniac? Chloride. Faint melon?
Taste: No sweetness. A little sour at first, but then a salty burn emerges. Sour and bitter finish.
After a moment it displays some coastal traits - even more so with a splash of water. Hot. Smoke?
Score: [C] . It has improved after some breathing. Yes, this seems to be an Islay malt.
Region: I'm quite sure this is an Islay whisky. My guesses: Caol Ila, Bowmore, Bruichladdich.
It was: Port Ellen 19yo 1982/2001 (43%, McGibbon's Provenance, Spring Distillation).
My baffled reaction: Well, that's quite interesting - I've had an earlier batch in this series on my shelves about two years ago; the Port Ellen 18yo 1981/2000 Spring distillation. The colour of that batch was notably darker and it had more peat and sherry in the nose. Like this one, it needed some time to develop. The taste of the earlier batch was much, much sweeter. In fact, it performed a little better than this batch with a score of 86 points. I'm guessing the percentage of sherry casked malt was higher.
Anyway - I've earned my first measly point by identifying this as an Islay malt. So far so bad...

Blind 4 - First impression: Iodine and bandages. Definitely Islay - or maybe a Brora.
Nose: Heavy, brooding fruitiness with a smoky undercurrent. Sherried. Powerful. Mint?
Then some wonderful organics appear. Hint of menthol?  Whiff of chloride. Complex.
A lot of activity in the back of the nose - iodine drifting in and out of focus. Fizzles out.
The nose somehow reminds me of the Laphroaig 15yo, but it doesn't seem quite powerful enough.
Taste: Woody, sherried start. Dry. Then some iodine and smoke appear, growing stronger.
It remains very pleasant in the centre, but the finish feels uneven. Tannins. Rotting wood?
Score: [C] . The nose is quite wonderful (B) but this one loses some points in the fragmented finish.
Region: If it isn't a Brora it must be an Islay malt. I'm going with Islay. My guesses: Laphroaig, Bowmore, Bruichladdich.
It was: Ardbeg 1975/2000 (43%, OB). Once again I scored just one point for picking it as an Islay malt.
My baffled reaction: Wow... That's a high flyer. Knowing what it is, I'm a tad disappointed by the taste.
I seemed to like its 1975/1998 predecessor a little better. Will have to re-open the investigation on a good nose day.

Blind 5 - First impression: Oloroso Sherry. Sweetness & spices.
Nose: Wow! On an earlier nosing it appeared flat and chemical - no personality whatsoever.
This time it appeared to be extremely deep and complex. Lots of intruiging organics. Horse stable. Pine?
Over time, the feints become overpowering. Adding some water seemed to break the spirit. Melon?
More fruity fragrances emerge with more water. Something faintly lemony, nothing more. It's dead.
Taste: Big burn. Nondescript. Harsh. Unbalanced. Hot. No sweetness. Vomit in the sour finish?
With some water it seemed a little sweeter and fruitier. Oil. Sherry. Rough. Beer in the finish.
Score: [D] . This one certainly has its moments - too bad many of them are rather weak.
Region: I vote for Speyside, although the lemon could point to the Lowlands.
My guesses: Not a clue whatsoever. It was: Glen Mhor 22yo 1979/2001 (61%, UDRM).
My baffled reaction: Well, slap me with a chopstick and call me Mary... I've only ever tried one other bottling of Glen Mhor (a Signatory Vintage 1977/1998, see log entries 38 and 44) and that didn't go down all too well with a final rating of 71 points. This UDRM bottling does a lot better, ending up in the upper half of the 'average' section. The palate keeps it from reaching [C] status. According to Serge, some authors say Glen Mhor is a Speyside malt, while some others say it's a Highlander. If I take my own Distillery Data section as a guideline, it's a Speysider - which means I've earned my third measly point here.

Blind 6 - First impression: Sherry. Very deep.
Nose: Ooh, that's nice. Wood and fruit in perfect balance. Furniture wax. Peanuts? Rotting grapes?
Hint of lemon? Then some spicier elements emerge, along with the sherry I got from the bottle. Great.
Allowing it to breathe for a while seems to add structure and texture to the nose. Major improvement.
Adding some water didn't change much at first. After a while it became heavier and sweeter. Tobacco?
Oh yes, and now it also picked up heavy and tropical fruity aroma's. This one really needs time and water.
Taste: Flat and uninspired start. Hot and dry. Sherried. Strange moments. Hint of coffee?
Not pleasant at all - especially the sour, beer-ish finish. No sweetness at cask strength.
After adding some water it became smoother and fruitier. Still not very complex, though.
Score: [C]. I wasn't having a lot of fun at first - the nose started off nice, that's all.
But with the careful addition of time and water it turned out to be a real nose charmer.
Region: Let's put our money on a Speysider once again. (But it could be Campbeltown malt as well...)
My guesses: Springbank/Longrow, Glen Scotia, Mortlach. It was: Saint-Magdalene 19yo 1979/1998 (63.8%, UDRM)
My baffled reaction: What???? This is my #1 malt??? Serge is a truly EVIL Frenchman! Granted, I haven't sampled what's supposed to be my favourate dram in over six months but it never even occurred to me that this Pandora sample could be a Lowlander (even though I got some lemon in the nose), let alone the nasal roller coaster that I love - or imagine I love...
Well, this proves once and for all that I shouldn't do any serious sampling on a bad nose day!
And for Serge: hear this and hear this good: I WILL HAVE MY REVENGE!

Blind 7 - First impression: Honey, toffee and fruit cake. Light colour.
Nose: Nice! Sweet and mellow. Cookies. Creamy. Very pleasant and accessible. I like it!
With some time and water more coastal elements appear. Brine and a hint of peat. Smoke.
After a splash of pure H2O it softened up for a moment before returning to its former profile.
Taste: YUCK! This sucks ass at C/S. Sour, bitter and shattered. Peppery prickle. Soap - lots of it.
Bad wood. Physically repulsive. It reminded me of the Edradour. A real shame after the great nose.
With some water it became sweeter and smokier. Sherry. Bitterness (coffee beans?) in the sour, flat finish.
To me, this is a whisky for nosing, not drinking. Could this be the 'exot' Serge mentioned? Maybe...
Score: [E] - and that's just because of the highly entertaining nose. I simply don't care for the taste.
Region: Let's play our 'joker card' again: Speyside. Could be anything really - even an Islay malt...
My guesses: Bowmore, Edradour, Mannochmore. It was: Bruichladdich 1989/2002 (58.5%, Single Cask for Paris Whisky Festival). My baffled reaction: Well... not my type of dram, that's for sure... But if they were trying to come up with a substitute for the Bowmore Darkest (which many people love, by the way) they have certainly succeeded. A love-it-or-hate-it dram.
Once again, my feeble analytical skills have failed me - no points for guessing its heritage...

Blind 8 - First impression: Wowie!!! Wood, fruit and sherry. Organics. Very dark.
Nose: Ah. Sherry. Good wood. Milk powder? Slowly opens up into wonderful complexity. Excuisite.
The organics I got from the bottle took some time to develop in the glass. Wonderful composition.
When the organics appeared after a minute they complemented the other elements of the nose.
Taste: Sherried start. Very woody. A tad much for me, but the development is mighty entertaining.
On closer inspection it showed a fruity layer beneath the woody, sherried surface. This is a stayer.
Score: [A]. I'd give this one 89 or 90 points, I guess. The absolute winner of the evening for me.
Region: Well, this is a Speysider for sure - isn't it?. (If it isn't it might be a +20yo Springbank?)
My guesses: Macallan, Aberlour, Glendronach. It was: Braes of Glenlivet 16yo 1979/1995 (60.4%, Signatory Vintage, US version). My baffled reaction: Well, now we've ended up in real 'terra incognita'. Serge told me Mark Adams sent him this bottle from the USA. Too bad that one never got here - this proves once and for all that the actually get some pretty special batches in the states.

So, that was the last one of this Pandora flight - how did I do?
Pretty bad, as usual - a grand total of 4 points. Bugger! All I can say is that this was my first serious tasting session since I got back from Scotland nearly two months ago. I haven't been 'practising' my sampling skills enough, it seems. When I learned that Craig Daniels did 'practice' tastings before big tasting events I was slightly amused, but it looks that isn't such a crazy idea after all.

Let's see, any more excuses - apart from my usual whining about bad nose days?
No, not really. But I have an eye for the sunny side of life and the silver lining around every cloud. Tonight's events illustrate perfectly that even a seasoned drunk like myself has a different experience with every single dram. That means that my 20th century habit of awarding temporary scores to the drams I wasn't sure about (and waiting with a final score until I finished the bottle) actually made sense. Whenever I arrived at a 'final' score for a particular bottle or bottling, it was always an average of the scores I gave before. That way, the effect of bad nose days (or even bad moods) on any particular session is diminished.
If I use the same approach for my four sessions with this flight of Pandora blinds the result looks like this;

Blind #1 - [E/E/E/F=]  E - Tamnavulin 12yo, 40%, OB
Blind #2 - [D/F/F/D=]  E - Whisky de Bretagne NAS, 41%, OB
Blind #3 - [D/B/C/C=]  C - Port Ellen 19yo 1982/2001, 43%, McGibbon's Provenance
Blind #4 - [D/B/C/C=]  C - Ardbeg 1975/2000, 43%, OB
Blind #5 - [F/B/D/D=]  D - Glen Mhor 22yo 1979/2001, 61%, UDRM
Blind #6 - [E/A/B/C=]  C - Saint Magdalene 19yo 1979/1998, 63.8%, UDRM
Blind #7 - [G/E/G/E=]  F - Bruichladdich 1989/2002, 58.5%, OB, Paris Whisky Festival single cask
Blind #8 - [B/A/B/A=]  B - Braes of Glenlivet 16yo 1979/1995, 60.4%, Signatory Vintage

One the whole, these scores seem to make more sense than the results from any individual session. If I had any doubts left about the need to re-integrate temporary scores into my system, they are now gone. One of my first jobs will be combing through my liquid log entries of the last few months and change the 1-100 scores I'm not quite sure about to A-G ratings. I'll delve a little deeper into that topic in an upcoming liquid log entry. Meanwhile, all of tonight's Pandora samples are still more than half full, so I can try to let them breathe for a while longer while I wait for a good nose day to come along.
And that's about it from me  - excuse my while I go and try to re-inflate my ego...

Johannes
 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

E-pistle #07/07 - Three Days of Hard Work 
by Olivier Humbrecht, France

During the past few days, I started to re-taste, with absolutely great pleasure, all the bottles opened at the moment. When I say tasting, I mean no drinking, but taking notes, writing something, giving a rating, being concentrated…. I do this a lot on wine as I am a winemaker, but I always took whisky very casually and never wrote much about it before.
The exercise proved to be fascinating…..

Day 1 - This first series come from 12.5cl bottles that I saved. There's no special order, I just went from the left to the right of the shelf. (But I should mention I tend to keep my Islays on the right, because I can reached them quicker…..)

The Ledaig 1979 (43%, OB) was part of my first purchases of whisky, at the distillery door, mainly because I found that Tobermory is a beautiful old granite building, in the middle of the pretty harbour of Tobermory. I still have some in the bottle 10 years later, this should be a hint…. White wine colour, light mellow nose with cereals, malt, cake and delicate wood, not very complex but elegant, little maritime influence, hard to guess. Mouth: more barley/malt character, some weight on the finish, quite yeasty, heather. Not a great island malt but decent. 74 points.

Rosebank 20yo 1979/1999 (60.3%, UDRM). I sometimes find the UDRM range too overpowering, I and was afraid that this malt would appear to brutal after the light Ledaig. Clear colour, delicate citrus nose with sharp alcohol/varnish. Powerful dry mouth, quite elegant. Water helps developing more complex flavours: hay, grass, zests, almost wine. Dry elegant finish, very long, some tannins also. Very aristocratic. 90 points.

The colour of the Glen Mohr 22yo 1979/2001 (61%, UDRM) was straw gold. Powerful, lots of glycerol on the glass. Almost overpowering nose: hay, heather, wood. Again some water helps a lot, developing cedar, tobacco, cake/biscuit flavours.
Almost milky on the finish. Not an easy malt. 85 points.

The Cragganmore 1973 (40%, G&M Connoisseurs Choice) was one of my very first purchase, at GM shop in Elgin in 1988! The bottle is gone for a long time, but I had saved a little sample bottle. Gold, almost amber colour. Very, very aromatic nose of heather, citrus, rose, hay, strong floral notes and bee wax. The mouth feels elegant and again very aromatic and interesting. Alcohol feels low (perhaps after those two RM…), but the length is good with the same aromatics as on the nose.
Damn I didn't buy two bottles… 90 points.

Auchentoshan 31yo 1966 (45.8%, OB)
I am not so keen on the 10 yo even if I read good reports on it. This bottle ended up on my shelf after Serge and I decided to do a Lowland session last year. What a surprise !  Amber colour, very aromatic nose, powerful, absolutely great: citrus, banana, zests, rose, coconuts, hay, acacia honey…..Superb ! Great palate too with more fruity flavours, pears, lavender, heather, lily. Stunningly aromatic, round, rich, creamy but elegant. 93 points.

The Ardbeg 30yo 'Very Old' (40%, OB) is an old favorite. Mellow warming nose. Delicate peaty nose, some fruits (citrus), smoke, tobacco, iodine, sea sprays. Mouth is salty, peaty, intense smoky character. Long finish, good !
Not a blockbuster, but great complexity. 91 points.

Ardbeg 24yo 1976/2000 (50%, Douglas Laing OMC, 1/648). Yellow colour. Mellow nose, banana, peach, rum and vanilla, bourbon cask style. Light peat, quite discreet. Salt iodine on the palate. Delicate peat. Some water actually increases the peat on the finish. All progressive, good reaction with water. 90 points.

Bruichladdich 1974/1990 (56.3%, Scotch Malt Society, cask 23.5, D 12/1974, B 6/1990). Gold colour. Mellow nose: butter, biscuits, iodine and light sea sprays showing slowly with citrus zests. Extremely elegant mouth: vanilla, anis, salt and maritime palate. Sharp and powerful, but not fat. Water really helps and makes it taste better. Elegant finish.
My very  first bottle of single malt: 89 points.

Port Ellen 19yo 1982/2001 (43%, McGibbon's Provenance, Spring/Spring). Deep Gold. Warm, oily peaty nose. Lots of salt, rich oily mouth, but too heavy. Very harmonious, easy, rubber tire. Long finish. 89 points.

Laphroaig 1966/1997 (49.3%, Signatory Vintage, D 4/1966, B 5/1997, bottle #45 of 210). Gold colour. Tingling nose: smoke, peat, very sharp but great harmony of fruits & peat combination. Dry concentrated and elegant mouth. Young character, that's my style of whisky. Strong wood tannins, maritime character is reinforced by dry peat smoke flavours. 93 points.

Port Ellen 20yo 1978 (60.9%, UDRM). Deep yellow, sharp but beautiful nose. Absolutely fabulous. Delicate but keeps changing and becoming more and more aromatic in the glass. Very salty attack on the palate. Super peat, dry tannins.
Super powerful finish, liquorice and rubber (at least formula one size). 94 points.

Day 2