Kilchoman 2007 Vintage

This is my second Kilchoman review. A while back I reviewed the 2^nd edition 100% Islay. And I really liked it. This time around I’m looking at the 2007 vintage which at the time of purchase was their oldest whisky clocking in at a positively ancient 6 years.

I've just finished this bottle, and guess what? I really like this one too. I’d written previously that there was a vibrancy about Kilchoman that came through with the 100% Islay. And it’s still there with this one albeit a touch more refined.

To look at it has a pale straw colour which gives a rather false impression of being weedy. It has a big medicinal nose, but also creamy with a bit of butterscotch. I got citrus notes - grapefruit or apple; fruity but without being sickly sweet. It's smoky but not damp smoke like Laphroaig. Lighter and more floral. Like a forest fire or an arson attempt on a barn. You know - Summer-y smoke 

To taste it was smoother than the previous Kilchoman I've had, perhaps unsurprising given the extra time it has sat in a cask. It’s buttery and there's a pleasant, lasting finish. I was getting a lip-smacking BBQ sauce aftertaste and a satisfying burnt sausage repeat. In some ways there was more on the finish than the taste. 

It put me in mind of a barbeque on a summer’s day - there’s the a sort of giddy, fresh excitement you get at the start of a BBQ, anticipation of what is to come mixed with smokey getting everywhere. And then afterwards after it all settles down, there is a warming, fulfilling, contented finish. Imagine sitting on the grass at the top of sand dune, catching the scent of the nearby fire on the wind.

It’s still not hugely complex but very pleasing. It’s nicely different to other Islays, which it needs to be to stride into that marketplace. The direction of travel is that it’s getting tamed in the barrel but this still retains its exuberance.

Just another fantastic whisky. I don't know if it's just me - I have a friend that is far from convinced but I'm becoming a big fan.

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.

Bright Young Things

So I was just talking about whisky possibly being “too old”. But what about youth in whisky? As I said in my last post, the impression you get when starting out in the world of whisky is that single malt has to be at least 10 years old to be any good. 10 or 12 seems to the minimum age of most distillery entry level bottlings.

Obviously whisky can be younger (although it needs to be at least 3) but most stuff released before it turns 10 goes straight into making up the numbers in blends. But is there any good single malt whisky under 10?

Yes, of course there is. I just didn’t know this until recently. The realisation came about during two distillery visits on Islay. The first was genuinely a shock. You may have heard of Octomore whisky – it is produced by Bruichladdich and is the world most heavily peated whisky. It is £100 a bottle.

Also it is only 5 years old.

It seemed amazing that they would try and charge £100 when you could get a 20 year old for that kind of money. Thankfully I was lucky enough to try Octomore 4.2 at Bruichladdich and it’s one of the most amazing whiskies I’ve ever tasted – it was fresh and smooth and surprisingly light given the extreme phenol levels. I didn’t take any proper notes and this isn’t a review but one of the things that surprised me the most, considering the age, was how smooth it tasted. £100 is a lot of money but I don’t think I’ve ever been so close to shelling out that much for a bottle.

So an exceptional young whisky – but maybe that was it, it was an exception. An experiment with high phenol levels that’s produced a freakishly good 5 year old.

The next encounter with young whisky also took me by surprise but mainly because I didn’t realise it was under 10 until after the tasting. I stopped by the Laphroaig distillery, firstly trying the 10 Year Old (a familiar favourite) and then tried the Quarter Cask for the first time. I was won over by this – it really is very flavourful and I’ll post a review in due course. However I had assumed at the time it was a variation on the 10yo but didn’t realise until much later on that whisky is only 6 or 7 years old. The whisky spends 5 years or so matured in full sized casks and then is finished in ¼ cask. The greater surface-area to whisky ratio of the smaller cask means its finished differently and more speedily. Not to the detriment of the whisky I hasten to add - quite the opposite.

So two young whiskies discovered within a couple of days. One of them an experiment but the other a widely available standard bottle.

And the more I’ve looked into this they seem to be everywhere (often referred to as No Age Statement). Sometimes it seems they are bottled at a younger age to get a preview of what they will be like later on. The consensus on tasting notes is that younger whiskies are shorter on the finish but a bit fresher in the taste.

So that’s it. My interest is piqued and it is another facet of whisky to explore. The next whisky in the crosshair is an expression of the highly regarded Kilchoman - the oldest of which is only 5. Watch this space.