Daldurrahabhain

Or, fun with home blending.

I went to pour myself a drink a couple of weeks ago, whilst perusing the options I noticed my almost entirely empty bottle of Dalmore Dee standing there.

It was a nice whisky but for whatever reason I’d never quite got round to finishing it off, nor was I in the mood for it right then. And finishing off whisky should never be a chore, so what to do?

I remembered something I’d seen watching this video from the excellent Ralfy. The video is mainly about keeping whisky fresh but towards the end of the video he blends together 3 whiskies from the Springbank distillery (Springbank, Hazelburn and Longrow) – I forget why but it seemed an interesting thing to do.

Since there was only a drop left I thought I’d give it a go with the end of my Dee bottle… pouring it out there was 60ml left. Based on Ralfy’s advice I needed another 2 whiskies to be added in equal measure. What to choose? I looked around at what else was open - a newly topped bottle of Bunnahabhain? Yeah - I could spare 60ml of that. A fancy bottle of SMWS … hmm… that seemed a touch extravagant so I settled on the some Glenlivet Nadurra. Three nice whiskies all of a similar value (£35-45). I mixed them together then poured the concoction into couple of empty miniature bottles and left them for a week.

Fast forward a week and I poured myself a drop of the newly created world’s first Daldurrahabin.

Well, the first whiff was alcohol and not much else. Disappointing - had I flattened the whole thing and killed the flavours? I gave it another minute before trying again. This time it was much sweeter, much more like the Nadurra in fact.
So now I worried the Nadurra was dominated proceedings. But then that sweetness started to be tempered that distinct Bunnahabhain spiciness, which worked nicely.

What about the Dalmore that prompted this in the first place? I wondered if the Dalmore had been a bit lost but it kind of sits in the middle of those two whiskies anyway. Certainly this was smooth like the Dee – it didn’t need water.

Anyway, there’s little point going into the tasting too much since I can pretty much guarantee no one else will ever make this blended malt (?).

The verdict on home blending generally: I wouldn't for one second say I had improved on the whiskies but it was good fun to test the theory out and I was pleased that I hadn't created a total abomination. I had created something new and interesting, but that could also be traced back to its roots.

I doubt I’ll be risking any serious quantities on this type of venture, but I do think it could be a fun way of throwing together ends of bottles in the future. It was genuinely quite exciting to test what had been produced. One last thought is that I’m glad I kept the standard of whisky roughly similar. Not point slinging a rough blend in with a 50yo MacCallan, you're only going to ruin a good whisky rather than improve a bad one.

Back to proper reviews for the next post.

Ardbeg 10 Year Old

Let’s face it, there are surely only two possible reasons that you might be reading this review. Either you’ve never tried Ardbeg 10 year old whisky before and you’ve decided to find the most obscure review possible before committing to buy it or not. Or else you already know the drink and are looking at this to reinforce your opinion that you love or hate Ardbeg.

I suppose a third option would be that you’ve stumbled across this by accident and haven’t made it past the first sentence before clicking away. So well done for making it this far.

Ardbeg – it clearly a manly drink for manly men. I mean just look at that bottle for a start – so dark, so brooding, they could slap a label on there saying ‘It’s not for girls’ if it weren’t a direct breach of copyright to do so. But you’ll probably know Ardbeg, like Laiphroaig and most of the other Islay are the Peaty Beasts. Strongly flavoured, medicinal and often seen as an acquired taste.

Looking at reviews and comments online you see the same phrases coming up – it's all "blasts of peat smoke" this, "full flavoured" that and "monster" the other. Everything is very big and aggressive. There doesn’t seem to be much in the way of subtlety but it clearly inspires some serious dedication.

I do like a peaty whisky and I’m pretty familiar with Ardbeg but this is the first time I’ve thought to compile any notes on a bottle. So here goes;

There’s no doubting is a serious no-nonsense whisky. I think it keeps things simple and plays to its not inconsiderable strengths. It’s too brawny to be considered smooth but it’s not harsh. A bit of burn so it’s worth a little dash of water. As you’re drinking it you realise it’s a little lighter than you might expect with a bit of sweetness - citrusy fruit rather than sherry. Also, it looks paler than you might expect given the expectation of full-on monster flavour.

Obviously the smoke is there there’s no getting around it but there’s more to it than just a face full of peat. It’s not the same sledgehammer that you get with Laphroaig. It’s more of a fire in the hearth rather than the house being on fire.

So it’s pale, it’s smokey, it’s a little bit sweet. It’s just good stuff but you probably knew that already. Or else you hate the stuff because you don’t like smokey whisky, in which case I can’t really help you.

WW 

Jura Superstition

My review of Jura Superstition (with added commentary) 

I didn’t really know what to say about this whisky (an inspired start!). Jura added this to their standard range a couple of years ago on the back of a load publicity (topical, still at least you avoided going for a spoooky or supernatural Themed Review).

As I worked my way through the bottle over a number of weeks I scribbled a few notes. But ultimately the conclusion I was coming to was that that this was a solid if slightly unexceptional dram (*round of applause, garlands thrown, phones Nobel literature prize judges*).

But then something struck me (*sits forward, intrigued* Do go on). The bottle I’d just finished seemed to have disappeared much faster than the others that I had on the shelf (so, you’ve gone for the spooky angle after all?) The last thing I had written down was “very suppable” (the last thing before you passed out?).

So on reflection I came to realise that this is actually a very good whisky.  I found I kept turning to it when I couldn’t decide what to have – the times where I didn’t fancy anything too peaty or sweet or too expensive this was the one to go for. (That sounds like you’re damning it with faint praise).

That sound as if I’m not damning it with faint praise (See!) but at the same time that’s quite an achievement to produce such a crowd-pleaser, something you know you'll be happy with. I found it also went down well amongst friends. This is the whisky you can pour out and say “Try this, you’ll like it”. It became something of a go-to (or standby?) whisky during its short life.

What else to say? (How about some normal tasting notes?). The smell is sweet and pine-y. The colour is a dark treacle toffee. It’s very smooth, no water required at all (If I might interject. Personally, I think the smoothness is the biggest strength). It's got a nice bit of smoke, sweet and woody rather than damp and peaty.

  

Value wise, it’s good, £30+ which is not exorbitant (although is it just me or have Jura pushed their prices up recently?). As ever the No Age Statement makes judging the value a little opaque but at least they’re not asking £40+ like so many other NAS whiskies. The debate on No Age Statements has been raging on amongst whisky nerds for a while especially since (Blah blah – skip to the end).

The End

Kilchoman 100% Islay (2nd Edition)

I love this whisky. I really do. I love it in a way that's difficult to articulate. This isn't The Best Whisky I've Ever Had - although up against objective measures it stands up as a very fine whisky. But I can't quite put my finger on why I'm so enamoured with it. To draw an analogy I feel like Kilchoman is a new band and I have just heard their awesome debut album.

The good things about it – the smell is amazing, it gets off to a good start with a massive blast of sweet smoke, I confess I couldn’t stop taking the top off it for a niff.

The taste is lovely. Maybe it’s the youthfulness but it comes across as very fresh. It’s a little bit like the Caol Ila I’ve described elsewhere but with a more creamy edge like the Laddie 10. It has a very appealing straw colour that might make you think it was a bit weedy if you didn’t know better.

As I say, this isn't the perfect whisky; it’s very smooth for its age but still a tiny bit jagged on the edges and the finish isn’t the longest. But it’s exciting, it leaves you wanting more. It’s the unpolished 30 minute album that doesn’t outstay its welcome. I can’t guarantee that other people would love this whisky - in the same way that your best friend might be utterly non-plussed when you introduce them to you new favourite band - but I’ll be proselyting.

What else is there to say? Well I’m clearly not the only one getting excited by Kilchoman, their various expressions have been getting some good reviews. The Kilchoman Distillery itself is a very interesting operation, Islay's newest distillery in 100 years, very small output, big on provenance etc but you can look all that up.

Some might take issue with the price and might balk at the idea of paying £60+ for this expression  or others (£40 for their standard Machir Bay bottling) considering none of their whisky is even 10 years old yet. But considering the entire operation takes place on one farm (including growing the grain) the price does seem to reflect the input. Plus there is a scarcity vale due to the size of the operation. 

As you might guess I'll be trying more.

Glenfarclas 15 Year Old

Well, it’s been a long time since I last posted… I’m probably going to stop mentioning that since it’s how so many posts start. From now on in this has blog has moved from regular series of reviews to an occasional series. A very occasional series...

Mind you, in whisky terms these gaps are mere blips in the long maturation of this blog.  The only difference is that in the case of whisky things tend to get better with age, whereas this blog maintains a steady standard (of unexpurgated dreck).

So Glenfarclas 15 year old. An exellent whisky.

I was desperate to love this whisky. Even without trying it I have always had peculiar soft spot for Glenfarclas, I think mainly due to its amazing 1950s styling. The label oozes a kind old-fashioned classiness and distinction… like a grand old victorian theatre. So on a recent(ish) trip to Speyside I picked up this bottle following a tour of the distillery.

As an aside, having done the tour there was nothing there to dampen my ardour for Glenfarclas – it’s a very nice, friendly operation and wholly independent. It looks surprisingly industrial in its process – for example they have massive steel washbacks instead of wooden ones.  But then sometime I need to remind myself that they are operating within an industry and not running a whimsy factory.

A few days after getting home I popped the top off the bottle poured a glass of the dark sweet 15yo, took a nosing… and got blasted by a painful whiff of alcohol. I tamed it with a bit of water but something wasn’t quite right. It almost seemed a touch stale. Maybe I was wanting to like it too much and it wasn’t living up to my expectations but I couldn’t quite get a handle on the taste of it. It just seemed to burn and a be bit flat.

But fear not, I left it a few more days before trying again,  at the second time of asking it well and truly came through and every time since it’s proved itself to be a beautiful wee drop. I got a pleasant caramelised orange on the nose. It still looks the part that dark rich syrup colour but it’s so pleasantly sweet to the taste,  like drinking water that has been running over a tray of molten toffee. 

It lingers for so long too, like having something stuck in your teeth that you keep catching – but, you know, in a good way. The whole mouth feel is amazing.

What to make of the first try I’m not sure – either there was something that needed to happen within the bottle or, more likely, my tastebuds were having an off-day. I think it’s a salutatory lesson not to make any lasting judgments on just one taste.

Anyway I’m so glad it proved to be a winner - not least because it cost me £40. One of the best things I can say about it is that it’s distinctive too, it has a signature taste to it. The kind of whisky you could pick out of a line-up. What’s more I’ve got the 21 and 25 yo to try as well since they came in a tasting pack. Watch this space – I’m sure to have them reviewed this side of the heat-death of the universe.

Macallan Select Oak

What am I trying to describe when I talk about whisky?

When you read tasting notes or reviews people are always talking about particular flavours coming through. Take sherry. It’s one of the most common descriptors you see (naturally considering what's been in many of the whisky casks previously). And I do understand what that means. But then again, I don’t really drink sherry. I’ve tried it but probably only once or twice. But if I’m talking to someone that hasn’t had sherry before then it’s not that useful for short-hand. Which ultimately it led me to wonder if you could ever accurately describe what whisky tastes like to somebody that has never tasted whisky before. But that made my head hurt. I’ll leave that question for if I ever start up a Whisky and Metaphysics blog.

Anyway, from there I started to have a bit more sympathy with the Malt Whisky Society descriptions. Their highly esoteric descriptions are something I was mildly critical of a couple of posts ago - I’m nothing if not inconsistent. But I can see the value in linking whisky to time or place. Basically all of this preamble is a preface to what I’m about to write;

this whisky reminded me of Saturday evenings as a child.

 I don’t quite know why. It's not like I was knocking back single malt as 10 year old. But it’s a highly evocative mix and it took me to a place  that I’m not even sure existed. But it reminded me of being young on a Saturday tea-time. Maybe it’s something to do with the rich sweetness reminding me of old fashioned desserts. It also feels a bit stuffy, a bit musty. Not in a bad way, in fact it lends it a certain grandeur - the kind of smell you might expect to in the library of a stately home. Not that I lived in a stately home either, maybe just a badly ventilated one.

Imagine reading an old book and eating hot syrup sponge. That’s this whisky. I don’t remember ever doing those things together as a child but now I wish I had done.

I can give you the bits and bobs I wrote down – deep dark colour, treacle and toffee smell with a hint of old damp wood. Sweet orange peel. That’s what I got but I can’t put my finger why it feels so… retro. There’s something distinctly old-fashioned about this.

To be honest this trip down False Memory Syndrome Lane is a bit much for me. The sweetness is a little stifling, somehow constricting. I much prefer the Macallan 10 which from memory (clearly not that reliable) is a lot lighter and fresher. But it's still a good 'un.

Pricewise – it’s £40+ and only available to travel (I picked this up at the airport pretty much at random before an internal flight).  It's a 1 Litre bottle so that’s good value, but then again you can pick up the 10 year old for a similar price. This is a No Age Statement - no bad thing in and of itself but it does obfuscate things a little. There is an interesting article about NAS whisky here;

http://www.whiskyadvocateblog.com/2013/04/09/age-statements-how-important-are-they/

I might expand on that in the future but I’ll leave you with that link for now. 

Next time: more whisky, I should expect.

WW

My first bottle...

I started writing this blog post a couple of weeks ago around about St. Patricks Day - I had the canny idea of reviewing some Irish whiskey that I had lurking in the cupboard to tie in with the ocassion. But then I realised that pretty much every single whisky blogger on the internet was doing the same thing. So maybe I'll leave that review for another day - June 27th perhaps.

Instead I thought I'd write something about the bottle that first got me into appreciating whisky. What was that 'gateway' drink that meant a few years later I would end up spending significant sums of money on more bottles, keeping a shoddily maintained blog and just generally becoming a whisky bore? I think that in some ways a first bottle is like a first record for a music buff. There's something there that makes some people want to keep exploring and seeking out new things.

I didn't just grab a bottle having randomly decided to try out single malt whisky. Moving to Edinburgh was no doubt a factor, when you see so many bottles behind the bar in pubs you start to wonder if there might be something to it.

I'm not sure exactly which single malt proved to be the turning point but on trying some 'decent' whisky I do remember the revelation that you could drink it neat without feeling like your throat was being sandpapered. Most previous encounters with whisky had been cheap blends mixed with coke, that could be generously described as rough. Apart from the cheap stuff there was a brief period at university when Jack Daniels and coke was my vain attempt at something approaching... sophistication? Asking for a 'jack and coke' seemed like something a urbane person would do (never mind the fact you had to explain what that meant to the bar staff). As a side note - It seems outrageous to see Jack Daniels sitting on the shelf in the supermarket costing as much as a decent single malt.

Anyway, I just couldn't get used to the super sweetness of drinking whisky (or bourbon) and coke. As for drinking whisky it neat - it burned. The only spirits to drink neat were Tequila or Vodka and even then it had to be shot down in a drunken stupor.

But now I'd tried a bit single malt and I'd liked it. So then it was a case of actually getting a bottle of my own. It might seem silly but it felt like a big step for me, an initial hurdle of 'is this really for someone like me?'. As if somebody was going to tap me on the shoulder and ask 'who are you trying to kid?'.

Without trying to get too deep into it, it also probably marked the start of a time where I cared more about the quality than the quantity of alcohol. After all if you're going to drop £25 on something you better do your best to enjoy it.

And so to Glenmorangie Sherry Wood Finish - the first of my collection. I don't know why. It was available in the supermarket and I'd heard of the brand. It was the start. My own drink to dip into, to try to appreciate and to try to convert others. I don't remember too much about it but I must have enjoyed it. What really made the difference was trying Laphroaig soon afterwards, it was so completely different in character and what's more I could tell the difference. Before that point all whisky seemed to taste the same. Now I'd tried a few distinctive whiskies that I could tell apart - was I starting to develop a taste for it? It was just the start.

I don't know many people really read these blog posts but please feel free to tell me your the first bottle you owned and how it got you started. All the best.

WW