Review 163: White Horse Blended Scotch

Review 163

5/29/13

White Horse Blended Scotch: 40% abv

Background: White Horse Scotch is a Blended Scotch, and it marks a couple firsts for us. It marks the first time we’re reviewing a Blended Scotch, the first time we’re reviewing a Scotch under $20, and the first time we’re documenting a new experiment. I will explain that in a second. White Horse is made with a blend of Lagavulin, Talisker, Caol Ila, and Linkwood. Of course, there are many more malts in this whisky, but they aren’t all mentioned. For the price, this is a nice blend and it has a moderate amount of peat influence to it, due to the Islay Scotches involved. What’s the experiment part about? If you have paid attention to our decanter in the background, it currently has some liquid in it. It is a homemade solera vat. A solera vat is a process where a certain amount of liquid is taken out and is replaced by an equal amount of liquid of a different quality. So what we do is take a majority of a certain whisky we don’t find particularly appealing, and then add higher quality whiskies incrementally. This White Horse will be the base of a new peated Scotch Solera Vat, and we will take some notes every couple of times we add new Scotches. For now, let’s see how standard White Horse is.

Straight

Nose:  The complexities in a blended whisky are actually not that hard to find. Right off the nose, you start to see some prominent notes of champagne and creamy barley coming through. There is a lemon-like tartness and some fruity notes coming through intensely. There is a noticeable maltiness, with some sweetness akin to caramel and vanilla complimenting the grain character. Now, as you would expect there is a sense of peatiness here, but it is more like a suggestion of peat, not a huge presence of peat. Along with that though, there is a far more dominant spiciness that adds intensity and heat to the nose. The spice seems like a mixture of hot spices, but doesn’t promote a single character very definitively to us. There is also a sense of tequila present in this nose, which is kind of peculiar. It isn’t even subtle in this case. I can’t fully explain what would evoke such aromas, but we enjoy it nonetheless. Overall, this is an above average nose for a blended scotch.

Arrival: The arrival starts off soft and creamy, in a pleasant, smooth way. There is no intense woody character or harsh burn present from the grain. This is truly a higher quality than I would ever expect from this offering. It has nice vanilla and malt overtones to it, with genuine sugar sweetness coming forth as well. None of the harsh peatiness we expect from these whiskies is coming through. If you really agitate the whisky in your mouth, you can start to get some pepper notes and slight bitterness coming through, but it doesn’t strike me as off-putting or coarse.

Body:  In the body, there is still a large sense of vanilla and creaminess, which seems to be the highlight of this whisky. That soft character must be coming from the grain spirit, because the single malts listed are going to be a more dominant character. There starts to be an evolution into some soft sherry notes, although it doesn’t come out in a rich, dark flavor, but more over a light, fruity hint of sherry. There is some dry fruitiness in the body that carries over to the finish. This isn’t a flavor you’ll normally see from a single malt, and I think it has something to do with the grain whisky.

           

Finish: The finish starts to bring out the contribution of peat, although the cream and vanilla notes that we noticed in the other parts of the whisky has not diminished much at all. The grainy harshness of the barley starts to become prevalent here, but is still not terribly off-putting. By the same token, it should come as no surprise that there is some spice character coming through as well. The agave we smelled in the nose makes a small appearance here, albeit it is hardly the star of the show in this whisky. There is still the sense of a dry fruit presence, which can unfortunately provide a slightly pasty residual mouth-feel.

With Water

Nose: Generally, when we see a whisky at 40%, especially a Blended Scotch, we try to be really shy with the water, so we only added a small portion. After adding said water, the intensity of the barley spirit comes out more, emphasizing darker, richer characters. In general, the biggest highlight is some more sherry and dark fruits coming through, but they are not overly prominent which respect to the other notes.

Arrival: Surprisingly, the nose here is even softer than before, with little flavor change and just a smoother mouthfeel.

Body: The body has become hugely enhanced with the barley sugar flavor. There is a big sweetness that was not so much an overtone in flavor that comes out now, and lasts for quite a while.

           

Finish: The finish takes on the sweetness character that was discussed in the body. It lasts like a sugar cookie treat with some malt sprinkled on top. What a pleasant treat, but it doesn’t do much for the complexity side of things. It sort of overshadows the peat aspect.

Final Comments:  This whisky is only the beginning of an experience, but it might be more than that to you. It is completely drinkable neat, and requires no water. It is sweet and smooth, and is not cheaply crafted. It also doesn’t taste horribly young and doesn’t reflect what you might call a high grain content blend. It also has some interesting flavors that we enjoyed when we tried it. It is by no means a groundbreaking whisky, but for the money, it doesn’t need to be. I think this might have just replaced Dewars, Black and White, Chivas Regal, and maybe even Grants.

Why you’d buy it: You want to drink cheap Scotch but still enjoy yourself.

Why you wouldn’t: You like Johnnie Walker Red because you feel cool saying you’re drinking Johnnie Walker (that’s an IQ issue)

Score: 8.25/10

Review 162: Glendronach 12 Year

Review 162

5/25/13

Glendronach 12 Year: 43% abv

Background: Well this is an exciting review to do for us. If you’re from Michigan, this is not something you can normally grab a hold of, and that goes for us too. It is also not common to find that many cheap, sherried whiskies of relatively good quality. To add to that, Glendronach Distillery, a Highland Malt producer, has recently just been reopened. The distillery was mothballed (mothballing is temporarily ceasing production, despite still having capability to produce) in 1996, and was reopened in 2001. What makes that so exciting is that we are seeing resurgence in their whisky’s popularity, and that extra life might keep their good quality whiskies on the market. You can’t actually get Glendronach in Michigan, but we made the trek to find it. The 12 Year standard offering by Glendronach is aged in exclusively sherry casks, being a mixture of PX casks and Oloroso casks. The Pedro Ximinez (PX) grape makes for a very rich, syrupy, sweet sherry, while the Oloroso is more nutty, tart, and balanced. You can tell that this is a dark whisky from the look of it, and that’s not coloring. Sherry casks add a lot of red color to Scotch. It should also be noted that as well as being 43% abv, the label will tell you that this single malt is non-chill filtered and natural color. Those are both pluses. Let us see how this turns out.

Straight

Nose:  You might expect what I’m about to say, but it is no surprise that you get a blast of malted barley and sherry right in the beginning of this whisky. There is a large prominence of stewed apple flavor in the nose. The sherry flavor can be broken down to the smell of brandy, the fortified part of the wine coming through. There is a sense of new make spirit here, so there should be no surprise that this is a young spirit, at only 12 years. Since sherry casks can tend to be larger, they also leave the freshness of the spirit in tact fairly well at older ages. This is still prominent among this 12 Year, almost to a fault. It isn’t quite mature enough from the nose. You do get some clove and cinnamon spiciness in the nose, followed by a small residual chocolate, fudgy richness finishing off the aroma. There is some smoothness contribution from vanilla in the nose, which only compliments the raison-like quality to the sherry nose. It also gives a hint of confectionary quality.

Arrival: The sweetness in the arrival is immediate and fairly consistent. It is certainly what you would expect from the sherry. But my lord is it a pleasant taste. There is a little bit of spicy tang that come in the arrival. The apple fruitiness, along with some cinnamon and custard, make a pleasant flavor contribution to the arrival. In contrast, there is still some hints of rough, young spirit that can be pulled through the arrival, in particular. This is not enough to turn one off, but it certainly is noticeable. There is also a suggestion of vanilla and chocolate that come through at the end of the arrival, and lead into the body.

Body:  When you get into the body, the Oloroso taste takes over, with some definite citrus tartness to compliment the rich raison texture at the forefront. This balance is a pleasant contrast, and amplifies the fresh, vegetal quality of the malted barley flavors. There is a fond nuttiness that can be picked from the body, and it complimented by a dry, floral flavor. The body has no shortage of personality, but there is a salty, briny flavor that can, depending on the swallow, become almost overbearing on the palate and ruin the finish.

           

Finish: The finish is dominated mostly by hot, spicy flavor with some peppery notes and some small acidity. There is a significant nuttiness that you’ll find right in the finish, and it is also noticeably dry and somewhat leathery. As noted before, there is a salty quality to the whisky that only comes out when agitated the right way. It can be a little bit overwhelming to the finish and mask the sweet, beautiful sherry notes. There is a note of the apple coming through again in the finish, with a minor earthiness that compliments the sweetness.

With Water

Nose: After adding some water, we start to see a maturity in the flavor, with the sherry backing off and being less of a stage hog. The nose becomes more balanced with spiciness, vegetal notes and much more grain character to it. There is more of a heather honey smell coming through, which balances nicely with the compressed spiciness. It smells more refined, less adolescent, and truly complex. Don’t be mistaken, though. There is still plenty of sherry involved. Another interesting evolution of this nose is the prominence of oaky wood character coming through.

Arrival: The arrival doesn’t hit you like a train this time. The sherry and spice creep up from afar, and then come in strong once you realize they’re on their way. There is a unique blend of caramel, fruitiness, spice and cereal grain coming through on the arrival. This is truly what a good arrival should be like. This is much livelier than without water, and it lasts.

Body: The body seems to be quite similar to before, with the addition of just a bit more tartness, almost akin to sour green apples now, and with some pear-like flavor contribution involved. The body doesn’t remain to be a very significant part of this malt, but it is still very much a player. The changes, although tangible, are small and don’t really highlight the potential of Glendronach.

           

Finish: This finish is also better with just a bit of water. It seems to reside longer, makes for a more engaging experience. The pear flavor dominates here, and the malt and grain character doesn’t shy away at this point. This is a memorable finis, and it really is worth savoring. The water also starts to amplify the confectionary notes more. It starts to make sense with some of the floral, modestly bitter notes that creep in at the end, how this is truly more complex than when you first start drinking it.

Final Comments:  At first, you might describe this as a classic sherried Scotch. Certainly it is just that from some perspective. You might say this competes almost exclusively from price and flavor to Macallan 12 Year. It is hard to compare the two from quality, because they’re both pretty respectable whiskies, although it can be noted that Macallan 12 TASTES a little older than Glendronach 12. That being said, Macallan 12 does age in bourbon barrels as well, and subsequently doesn’t give you as much of the sherry complexity that you get from the ‘dronach. The addition of water balances and amplifies the complexity of the whisky, and it is very much suggested. We tend to like it a little bit more this way, but in either case it is good. I think that is what makes this bottling of Glendronach shine. That being said, I don’t think this whisky has reached its maturity, and would truly benefit from more time in the casks. Surely enough, that bottle of Glendronach does exist; Glendronach 15 Year Revival is a statement to Glendronach’s “revival” from mothballing, and we have a bottle sitting dormant for a review in the future.

Why you’d buy it: You like sherried Scotch and don’t want to support stupid marketing by Macallan, plus this is a good, complex bottling of Scotch

Why you wouldn’t: You like stupid marketing and want an Oakley-designed flask…idiot.

Score: 8.5/10

Review 161: Stone Imperial Russian Stout

Review 161

5/20/13

Stone Imperial Russian Stout: 10.6% abv

Background: We have done a number of Stone beers in our time. Stone is a big California brewery which produces hugely bitter and dry beers. It is an embodiment of the West Coast style of brewing. Stone is pretty highly revered, but it doesn’t mean all of their beers are good. This is a Russian Imperial Stout that is not a mainstay in their lineup, and we were quite interested by this offering.  Russian stouts, initially designed to impress the Czar, were high in alcohol and had very malty character to them. They can tend to be dry and low to moderate in carbonation. What we are more interested in is this particular Russian. With the bitter nature of Stone beers, we’re wondering how much like a stout is

Nose: Well you might expect to smell some chocolate, coffee, and vanilla in the beer. And you won’t be surprised to find you smell that. There is a crisp apple-like smell coming through, making the aroma pleasant and not overly rich. You can sense a sort of molasses and raison-esque sweetness coming to the forefront as the beer opens up as well. You will eventually settle upon some dry maltiness, coupled with the fruitiness. Besides apples and raisons, one can start to get a slightly tart smell coming through, which is slightly reminiscent to a tangerine. There is a strong note of black licorice that comes through, and starts to over-dominate the smell. At the end of the nose, you will get a short, acidic tartness which we felt was close to dark cherries. Overall, this is a light, but surprisingly interesting nose.

Arrival: The arrival, if you know Stone beers, might be deceiving. This ends up being a fairly sweet and modestly tart arrival. The beginning is sharp and sour. The sour note is interesting and very much not what we expected. This sourness actually lasts through the arrival and into the body. This can be related to apples and lime citrus, followed by some dry fruits like cherry and raisons. You will find in the spiciness some black pepper and just a ting of rye grain as well.

Body: The body brings out a huge amount of maltiness, with coupled notes of molasses and raisons, crisp fruits, and the residual tartness lingering from the arrival. As it gets to the end of the body, there is some slight spiciness. Here, you start to get some creaminess and milk chocolate flavors cropping up.

Finish: The finish, holding some espresso and grapefruit bitterness in the flavor, ends in complete contrast to the rest of the beer. There is some crisp apple tartness, coupled with some moderate spice and followed by gingerbread and creaminess. This beer has a medium long finish with a prominent coffee aftertaste. It still contains the tartness from before, only it takes on a different light now. There is also a subtle taste of anise in the finish to go along with what we smelled in the beginning.

Final Comments:  This is an interesting beer. This lacks the power of a traditional imperial stout, as well as the richness. It seems like there should have been a little more backbone to this beer. This is a very crisp, refreshing stout. There was a defined transition between the arrival, body and finish which makes for an interesting and engaging experience. At KCM, we seem savor the moments where we find a beer that changes in flavor over time. This is a lot different than what we expected from a Stone beer. It is not nearly as overbearing as we thought it would be in the bitter character, which is a welcoming contrast to the full range of beers they offer.

Why you’d buy it: You want to try a less fruity, rich stout with plenty of flavor.

Why you wouldn’t: You are afraid of a little bitterness, or you like the bourbon-seasoned richness of a bourbon barrel aged stout.

Score: 8.75/10

Review 160: Macallan 12 Year

Review 160

5/17/13

Macallan 12 Yr: 43% abv

Background: We are back to our second review of Macallan. You might observe that we bought a miniature of this single malt, and you might be wondering why. Well that is a perfect opportunity for me to get on my soap box and talk about my problem with Macallan. My problem with Macallan is not that they are a large scale producer of Scotch. My problem is that they have started advertising in partnerships with people NOT involved in Scotch. Do you know what that is? It is a distraction from what really matters. Macallan’s late and “great” 22 year old “The Flask” Scotch is a partnership between Oakley and Macallan. What does Oakley know about Scotch? Nothing. To make matters worse, the 22 year old Scotch is $1,500. I haven’t heard anything about the Scotch itself in all of Macallan’s advertising. That is why KCM chooses not to buy a lot of Macallan. They are focused more on brand recognition than they are their spirits. That being said, Macallan 12 is a very common single malt to see at the bar, and you need to know if you should take your chances with it.

Straight

Nose: This is probably one of the simpler and more straightforward sherried Scotches available. You certainly get that right in the nose, with a huge sherried, raison-like smell, with even some red grape and confectionary smells in the nose. It has an interesting blast of sugary sweetness to it, and throws some vanilla in to compliment the soft, pleasant aromas. Then again, this distracts you from the malt character that you might be getting otherwise. There isn’t much grain to be found here. Instead, you might find some vegetal qualities, with even some rose-like floral compliments, albeit they aren’t hugely prominent. Interestingly, there is also a rather leathery quality to the Scotch which you wouldn’t really expect from a 12 Year old, but it is a pleasant contrast to the sweetness. Despite all of these pleasant notes, you will still get some tingling and burn from the smell, and a mild spiciness, akin to cloves and mild white pepper. Overall, the sherry dominates the smell, but take the time and you will find some interesting alternative smells in there.

Arrival: Despite the strong smell, the arrival to this Scotch is actually pretty light. This certainly has a taste which creeps into the picture. It does not start off big or eventful, breaking down the doors. What it does do, is introduce some initial sweetness and gives off some graininess that you missed in the nose. There is also a hint of black pepper that can be evoked if the whisky is rolled around the tongue. On a different note, now and again you might start to notice an almost plastic-like taste coming forward in the later part of the arrival. I don’t get it all of the time, but it can be slightly unpleasant if you hold onto the flavor too long. You will start getting the sherry in the arrival, but not nearly as much as you would think. Just wait…

Body:  Here is where you start to get the sherry profile in the whisky, but it also introduces a decadent milk chocolate flavor right up front. It is a sweet, whipped chocolate and sherry flavor, which inspires. Why not make a sherry chocolate cake? First person who does this, let me know how it works out. You will also notice a mild pepper note will carry over from the arrival, along with some malty barley. The body does have a pretty big presents with big, sherry flavor.

           

Finish: This is where the sherry really takes over, which is saying a lot considering how much it plays into the whole presentation. There is some significant maltiness that comes through at the end here, which is complimented with the notes of vanilla, milk, and rich chocolate which resonate from the body through the end of the Scotch. This is a pretty substantial finish, but doesn’t strike me as the most complex either. Like in the nose, you get a sugary, confectionary finish which has some semblance to Drambuie.

With Water

Nose: Well you might suspect that water will have an impact on this Scotch. It hasn’t really changed the nose at all. I mean, it is really exactly the same. Even after giving it fifteen minutes to marry with the Scotch and open up the flavors, it smells overbearingly of sherry.

Arrival: We have really pulled forward some grain character after adding water. It seems the arrival provides a much more malty and earthy character after a little water. It is actually a nice addition to the arrival, and it is much appreciated. Vanilla is also a big player here.

Body: The body doesn’t change much, although water does seem to help remove some of the less favorable tasting notes. There is still some pepper coming through here, but the sherry seems to become drier with the addition of water. There is some spiciness in the body as well, that wasn’t nearly as present before adding the water.

           

Finish: The finish actually pushes back some of the sherry after water, and brings out some vegetal and custard-like notes. It is a pleasant addition of complexity that really makes this a more interesting and diverse experience. There is definitely something with the aftertaste of fresh greens that jumps to the forefront after a few seconds. We got really excited when we started to taste some apple and even more so some pear in the finish, complimenting and adding to the raison quality that was already there. The diversification of fruit flavors makes this a less boring experience. After sitting for a second, wait and you might get some pleasant subtle nuttiness coming through as well. On the flip side of things, as was present in the arrival of this Scotch, there does appear to be a small hint of some worn flavors, that seem tired and almost stale. This comes in the aftertaste, and we believe this probably comes from the overuse of the cask or even just less quality grain.

Final Comments:  This is actually one of my favorite Scotches to get out at the bar. It is affordable, pleasant, and more complex than it initially seems. It is also fairly easy to find if you aren’t looking for it at McDonalds. When comparing this to Glenfiddich or Glenlivet 12, I always grab this particular Scotch. There is no comparison in quality and complexity, and I truly enjoy the simple, but not overbearing presence of sherry, probably even more than I like drinking sherry by itself. That being said, it does not compare in the maturity of flavors, to a Glenfarclas or Highland Park, but I don’t think it is really meant to. I believe Macallan’s quality will continue to diminish, but for the time being, this is actually a really decent offering for a reasonable price.

Why you’d buy it: You want to know what a sherry-aged Scotch is.

Why you wouldn’t: You are like us, and don’t like ridiculous marketing.

Score: 8.25/10

Review 159: J.W. Lee's Harvest Ale Aged in Lagavulin Cask

Review 159

5/3/13

J.W. Lee’s Harvest Ale Matured in Lagavulin Casks: 11.5% abv

Background: If you have stayed up to date on our reviews, you will know what this is all about. If you have not, just look down (you don’t have to look far) to Review 158. What you will find is that J.W. Lee’s is a brewery within the U.K. area. This is a barleywine called Harvest Ale, and the last review had the barleywine being aged in refill sherry casks. This beer was so interesting, we simply couldn’t wait to bring on the second variation of this that we had in our stocks. That could be a good or bad thing, because we had high expectations for this beer; rightly so, because this particular beer is being aged in old Lagavulin single malt Scotch barrels. Now, we haven’t reviewed Lagavulin, so I did want to take a minute to remind us what Lagavulin is. Lagavulin is a single malt Scotch made in Islay, which although not foregone, does make it a very peaty whisky. This is what interested us, especially since we thought the last Harvest Ale did contain a lot of peat and tobacco influence in it.

Nose: This starts off as a malty and wheat-like nose, with a slightly more peaty influence than the sherry-casked beer. It is also definitively woody. There is also sense of tobacco here. This beer smells old, not from a maturation standpoint, but as if it was slightly musty and briny. You will find, as a more prominent note, citrus flavors of orange and lemon. If you dig into the smell enough, you will find a sort of chemical aroma, close to wood lacquer. This sounds relatively off-putting, but it isn’t over dominant and we couldn’t find a better way to describe this smell. There is even a small portion of popery SP in it.

Arrival: There is a yeasty, malty arrival to this, more akin to the notion of a barleywine. It is decently sweet, with earthy, grainy tones coming to the forefront. There are still some thick, sweet flavors of honey that go along with the malt, with slight vanilla overtones as well. With a full glass at a chilled temperature, there is an enhanced smokiness to the arrival here.

Body: This part of the beer can be well described as a bridge between the two flavor profiles of the beer, from beginning to end. There is a stronger amount of apple cider here in the body, with some orange citrus as well. While chilled, one can find some vanilla in the body that accompanies the sweetness.

Finish: There is an optimum amount of peat in the end of the body, with the finish brandishing tons of malt flavors. There is, unlike in the sherry edition, some hops and grapefruit notes coming through as well. There are flavors of overly-ripened orange with some sour tang to be tasted. To add to the list of fruit notes that can be found in the beer, pear is also found in the finish as well. As the beer settles on the pallet, a reminiscent flavor of peat can be traced back from the taste.

Final Comments: I would like to propose that this version of Harvest Ale is not nearly as compelling as the last one we tried, which was a shock to us, and it should be a shock. Peated whisky can be some of the most complex, richly flavored, and ostentatious whisky available in the market (not meant in a bad way). So why in the world would this rich, heavy flavor not carry over into the beer like the sherry cask did? Some may propose that the sherry is more sweet and rich, and this will provide a larger sweetness to the flavor. We weren't satisfied with that, so we came up with a different theory. The theory is this: the Lagavulin cask is a highly “name” branded thing. It is like the Lamborghini of the cask world, if you will. Unlike an equivalent bourbon cask, this cask could be reused a number of times before Lagavulin needed to get rid of it. So to buy one from them would cost a fortune. What probably happened with J.W. Lee’s is they ended up getting a cask that was deemed “too worn” from Lagavulin and used that to age the beer. At this point, the oak would have a difficult time pulling flavor from the cask. J.W. Lee’s might also be a more gun shy in over-aging the beer in this barrel, so it would result in an early pull. The end result of this is a disappointingly less compelling beer, although it is adequately tasty and complex. 

Why you’d buy it: You are a Lagavulin fan and freak out at anything with the word printed on it.

Why you wouldn’t: The complexity, nor the namesake, does not warrant the amount of money they ask for the beer, and will leave you partially disappointed.

Score: 8.75/10

Review 158: J.W. Lee's Harvest Ale Matured in Sherry Casks

Review 158

5/3/13

J.W. Lee’s Harvest Ale Matured in Sherry Casks: 11.5% abv

Background: J.W. Lee’s is an independent brewery owned by a family in Manchester. That is a pretty interesting point, because we haven’t reviewed a lot of authentic U.K. beers. They were founded in 1828, and now are on their sixth generation of family ownership. They also own a number of hotels as well.  This brewery tends to show off cask-aged ales, so that seems to be the focus. These guys produce quite a few beers, but as it tends to be in the European brewers, their beers tend to be very low percentage. This one, on the other hand, is not low at all, being at 11.5%. This is a Harvest Ale. This is actually considered a barleywine, which will explain why some of the flavors of malt come out more. This particular special release is aged in sherry barrels, which by itself is not very well seen in brewing today. We were very excited to see what this did to a beer.

Nose: Starting off as a fairly neat nose, one can relate the slight fruitiness of this beer to a Belgian style, but the uniqueness takes over from here. There are some notes of subtle raison, nuttiness, and slight malt. There are sweet notes of caramel and honey which front the nose, charging forward with ornaments of molasses following behind. If I had to guess, I would say this was aged in an Oloroso sherry barrel, although the size is hard to approximate. It adds a sort of obscure wine-like character to the beer. Not only does this beer look like apple cider, but you do get some notes of apple cider as well. The nuttiness, as the beer starts to open up, resembles toasted nuts; maybe not almonds per say, but none the less a toasted smell. We even started to sense some notes of dried oak, albeit not an aggressive smell, and a unique bit of plum as well, with even a hint of dark cherry.  

Arrival: The arrival, after smelling this beer for a few minutes, will knock you down. It has a sweet sherry and nuttiness at the beginning. There is some honey and maltiness in the arrival, but it is a pretty tightly packed, solid flavor. The arrival will start sweet at a slightly chilled temperature, and the sherry sweetness spills over into the body quite well. You will catch those apple cider notes in the arrival here as well. There is definitely some raison quality to this arrival. This might appear to be overly sweet when the beer reaches room temperature.

Body: To completely contradict the arrival, you will find interesting notes of peat and tobacco dominate the palate. It is not at all like the arrival, and leaves you a little astonished at what you just tasted. There are some burnt paper qualities to it. There is still some sweet raison to it, rich flavors of honey and the smoke becomes pretty powerful. This will calm down after the beer warms up though. The smoke flavors get pushed back to the finish as the beer transitions in temperature.

Finish: There is a little more peat in the finish than in the body, but you still get some prominent malt notes, along with the strong flavor of burnt tobacco. There is a strong amount of nuttiness to the beer, with the residual feelings of Oloroso and raisons. After the beer warms up to room temperature, the tobacco is right in the finish and kills the complexity.

Final Comments: This is probably one of the most complex beers we’ve ever had, with a dynamic influence from the temperature change. This has a great diversity, and the nose will tease you into thinking this would be simple and sweet, but it isn’t. This beer does model the sweetness of sherry, but takes on some prominent notes of other flavors as well, making this one of the most education beers we’ve ever had to drink.

Why you’d buy it: You don’t mind spending money, and want to try something completely different.

Why you wouldn’t: You are bitter and hateful and frown upon everything happy and good.

Score: 9.75/10

Review 157: Auchentoshan 10 Year

Review 157

5/2/13

Auchentoshan 10 Yr: 40% abv

Background: Auchentoshan has been discussed before in a review of their Triple Wood, so there should be some background to this distillery. But in case you need a refresher, this is a lowland distillery that uses triple distillation, a technique found more commonly in Irish Whiskey production. This particular whisky is nothing special. The 10 year bottling is a standard bottling that we bought as our first lowland whisky purchase. In Michigan, you can grab it for about $30 a bottle if you can find it. The question is, should you?

Straight

Nose: The nose starts off with an interesting aroma of mild malted barley, usurped in power by slightly vegetal notes and moderate spiciness. This spiciness can be related to an almost burnt peppercorn smell, the kind you might find on a peppered steak that’s been cooked too hot. Fortunately, this doesn’t over-play the soft fruit notes of pear and some grape. Oddly, though, there is some burnt wood smell that just doesn’t seem to relent when nosing the Scotch. One could also cite the experience of slight dill pickle smell emerging through the layers, although not in a horribly prominent fashion.

Arrival: The arrival is sweet, in a good way. There is some candied lemon, citrus-like flavor that comes about with some honey and sugary malt right in the beginning. In reality, this isn’t a complex arrival, with a slight lime and tart apple presence, but not much else there.

Body:  This whisky starts to dull with the taste of over-used casks, burnt wood, and even some burnt tobacco notes right in the body. The body  does not last long, and with a harsh, bone-dry grain flavor that seems uneventful and disappointing at best, it is best just to move on.

           

Finish: There is some stewed apple in the finish here, with slight malt and citrus notes as well. Unfortunately, this is overshadowed by the same burnt characteristics that the body contains. This is just a very disappointing finish.

With Water

Nose: The nose, after adding a teaspoon of water, still comes off as dusty, with strained notes of malt and slight hints of fruits, although the vegetal quality has left. It is not by any means an enjoyable or complex experience.

Arrival: With small pieces of vanilla and strawberry coming through, the arrival has brought about some new unique notes, but is unfortunately still not complex enough.

Body: The body doesn’t change much, although water does seem to help remove some of the less favorable tasting notes.

           

Finish: The finish remains pretty well the same with the addition of water.

Final Comments:  This Scotch was the first $30 single malt we’ve experimented with, and we were honestly not impressed. The flavors weren’t there, and the ones that were felt strained and unpleasant. This isn’t a knock on Auchentoshan, either. They make some fantastic bottlings, but this was not one of them.

Why you’d buy it: You want a single malt on a budget.

Why you wouldn’t: You’ve tasted it before.

Score: 6.0/10