Review 168: Dalmore 12 Year

Review 168

6/30/13

Dalmore 12 Year: 40% abv

Background: Dalmore is the pinnacle of marketing class. The bottle design is elegant and sexy, there is a metallic-looking stag on the front, and it takes a minimalistic labeling scheme. With all of this, it is tough to walk through your single malt section of the liquor store and not let it catch your eye. Dalmore distillery is a Highland distillery in Alness, Scotland. The company is owned by Whyte and Mackay. The distillery was established in 1839 by a trader who was pretty into the whole opium trading thing, as I’ve heard. In 1886, the distillery was bought by the MacKenzie family, of which one of their predecessors allegedly saved King Alexander III from a rampaging stag. This resulted in the MacKenzie bloke to be able to bear the emblem of the 12-point stag. That brings us back to the bottle, which has used this as a means of marketing shenanigans. This bottling is the 12 year, which doesn’t tell us that it isn’t chill filtered, or that it is naturally colored, and it does get bottled at only 40%. That being said, none of that guarantees us that this is a poorly made Scotch. That’s why we’re here to tell you exactly what to expect before buying a bottle. Before we dive into this, we can tell you a bit about how this is aged. Dalmore tells us this whisky sits for 9 years in bourbon casks, and then is divided (carefully, they say). One half of the whisky sits for another 3 years in bourbon barrels, and the other half sits in “30 year old Matusalem oloroso sherry casks”. What does this mean? Not a whole lot.

Straight

Nose: So right out of the gate, this nose gives off some hints of harsh alcohol, implying maybe not the best quality of spirit. Dig further, you’ll get a signature oloroso nuttiness and sherry combo coming out nicely. There is a sense of wet grass and burnt wood in the nose, with some stale malt flavor coming in the background. It doesn’t start as a fresh nose, quite honestly. It isn’t very crisp or refreshing, but more heavy and compacted. That being said, there are some nice dark apple flavors coming out of the nose, with small hints of butter and honey. The nuttiness seems to dominant the nose at the end of the day, but it reminds me of a toasted almond that got burnt. I have to confess, this is a relatively confused nose.

Arrival: The arrival starts off butter and butterscotch, almost like you are grabbing some popcorn. There is a pale maltiness that lurks in the shadows, and a bland sense of fruitiness comes through. It feels pretty worn and unimpressive. After a couple of sips, the best guess for a flavor is dried cranberries and grapes. There is still some burnt wood flavors coming through as well. The arrival is pretty flat.

Body: Into the body, you will get some more of the nuttiness coming out in the whisky, which is good. The overall sherry idea is somehow loss in the flavor. There is a sense of marzipan in the body, with again a reoccurrence of dried fruit flavors. There is slight vanilla notes involved. The maltiness in the whisky is uninspired and flat, and does not pop in the flavorful, fresh manner that we saw in the anCnoc.

           

Finish: There are terribly dominant notes of popcorn kernels, sherry, and chocolate in here. There is hardly much to talk about, minus a slight residual hint of tobacco. There is still a nuttiness from the beginning of the flavor, with some vanilla and more burnt flavors. It is really a short and simple finish that doesn’t excite us a whole lot.

With Water

Nose: Water seems to just exacerbate the rough spirit smell that starts at the beginning. There is still the burnt sensation that is apparent in the beginning of the whisky. That ashy smell seems to over dominate the nose again. Not worth continuing with more notes on the nose.

Arrival: Finally, there is some salvation. You may have thought this review was going to be 100% negative, but alas, in tasting the whisky after adding a teaspoon of water, it seems like the maltiness has jumped forward much more, along with making the fruitiness more lively. There is actually some caramel coming through, with some light spiciness and a sort of peanut butter cookie flavor. This isn’t a perfect arrival, but it is certainly MUCH better with some water.

Body: The body carries over some of the burnt flavors still, but in addition there is a sense of confectionary notes as well which help to balance out the ashy character. There is some apple character and some cinnamon sugar flavor coming through as well.

           

Finish: Those peanut butter cookies are interestingly lasting through the finish, with a sense of chocolate and cinnamon as well. There is some tobacco notes in here, but there is still some nuttiness, apple and cranberry flavor, and gingerbread. This is a much better surprise than the initial flavor content. There is also a citrus, orange flavor coming through at the end.

Final Comments: There is a terribly disappointing quality issue here. When we talk about “flatness”, we are not talking about carbonation, but rather a lack of dynamics and assertive flavors in the whisky. This is a flat whisky, and the flavor doesn’t pop out in the arrival, or in the body, or in the finish. Without water, there is not much flavor to be had at all, and we were disappointed by how much we didn’t enjoy unassertive notes. The saving grace to this whisky is that with a bit of water, there is some more complexities and flavors to overcome the shortcomings slightly. That doesn’t make this whisky “fantastic” by any stretch of the imagination, but it does provide some hope that it could be drinkable. Also, don’t think this means we’re dismissing Dalmore. I hear there are some great independent bottlings of Dalmore.

 

Why you’d buy it: You want a nice centerpiece for your table, and that bottle just really hits your “I want this as my centerpiece” buttons.

Why you wouldn’t: You don’t want to spend $50 on disappointment.

Score: 6.5/10

Review 167: anCnoc 12 Year

Review 167

6/18/13

anCnoc 12 Year: 43% abv

Background: Let’s get this straightened out: anCnoc (meaning “the hill” in Gaelic) is pronounced a-nock. The namesake of anCnoc has not been around for that long, but the whisky itself has been around for quite some time. That’s because anCnoc whisky is formerly known as Knockdhu Scotch, which comes from the Knockdhu Distillery, in Knock, Scotland (Knock on wood…). In 1994, the distillery stopped calling its whisky Knockdhu, because the distillery was being confused with Knockando Distillery. In 1894, the distillery was founded. They currently have about 1.7M liters of capacity, and from an outsider’s perspective, they are gaining presence. The 12 Year is one of two regular main stays in the reasonable price range, with the 16 Year being its right-hand man.  So reasonable is this whisky, it sits alongside the Glenfiddich 12, Glenlivet 12, and Macallan 10 price range. So does it warrant you moving away from these classics to potentially adopt a new staple into the liquor cabinet?

Straight

Nose: You might get some green fruits of the nose of this whisky. The two we thought of immediately were white wine and pears. You will definitely find a malty character to the aroma, complimented by a natural wheat flavor in the background. The vanilla character associated with this Scotch is pretty dominant, and ultimately you do not suspect the influence of peat or sherry in this whisky. It would be safe to say that there is not much influence outside of bourbon casks. There is, however, a very subtle salt note that comes through in the back of the nose. Even to an extent, there is some agave coming through as well. After further analysis, there is a noticeable piece of ginger aroma within the AnCnoc.

Arrival: Well, if you like malt, you won’t be disappointed here. This is an absolutely fantastic blast of malt flavor right in the front; this is a pure, creamy and malty flavor, which feels like the perfect flavor extraction from the distillation process. I might venture a guess that this would actually make for decent white whisky. There is a sense of dried fruit, oak, and vanilla that come through. There is a tart flavor that comes through as well. There is a mysterious spiciness that will be evoked in the arrival as the single malt opens up.

Body: There is still some good maltiness in the body, but there is an addition of wheat, vanilla, cream, and even some saltiness. The evolution is quite smooth, but also noticeable. It is an oxymoron of dynamic and subtle at the same time. It is ultimately incredibly smooth. There is a sense of pear in the body as well. There is a sense of slight tartness in the body, which carries over from the arrival.

           

Finish: You would never guess it, but you guessed it. This finish is super malty, with some earthy, floral notes involved too. The vanilla is dominant, along with some residual tartness, subtle wood flavor, and a long lasting creaminess that almost reminds you of ice cream. Right from the body into the finish, you will find a Laffy Taffy banana flavor that jumps in, which is a weird descriptor, but truly hits the nail on the head. As an accent note, there is a very negligible, almost invisible note of smokiness that comes through in the finish.

With Water

Nose: The nose, although quite similar, brings forward some of the more dominant flavors of the Scotch. There is a sense of lemon that starts coming through, accompanied by a candy sweetness. There is more floral harshness in the nose with a significant vegetal quality, but it still retains the sweetness from before.

Arrival: The arrival is pretty similar to before, with the thought that maybe there is a slight increase in woodiness.

Body: There is a small amount of spiciness into the body that wasn’t as prominent as before. This isn’t necessarily a black pepper spice, but something more hot and flavorful, without breaching the realm of red pepper potency.

           

Finish: The finish comes across as a little less prominent than before, without much flavor change. It is a softer ending, but not too much shorter. The vegetal earthiness that comes through in the finish is a little more dominant now than before water.  

Final Comments: Yes. This will replace Macallan 10, it will replace Glenfiddich 12, and it will DEFINITELY replace Glenlivet 12. Take the price out of the equation for a second. The quality of this whisky is great, no matter what the age or the price is. It tastes fresh, but the creamy, pure malt flavor feels like exactly what good distillation should be. The complexity of this whisky isn’t groundbreaking, but that doesn’t mean it is dull. The whisky takes a contradictory path of smooth, mellow character met with deep, engaging flavor. We truly enjoyed this single malt a lot, and to be honest, it is almost TOO easy to drink. For the price, it is a must try. We would advise you to review the flavors, to understand what you’re buying, because unlike Glenfiddich or Glenlivet, this is not as much about dark, rich fruit flavor, but rather crisp, fresh, but slightly dried fruit flavors with a super blast of maltiness. If you like a dram of Glen Grant 10, this should definitely be on your list.

 

Why you’d buy it: It is good.

Why you wouldn’t: I don’t know.

Score: 8.75/10

Review 166: Jim Beam Rye

Review 166

6/18/13

Jim Beam Rye Whiskey: 40% abv

Background: Jim Beam is obviously a big player in the world of bourbon, and if you are taking Jack Daniels out of the equation, they are the biggest. Rye Whiskey, as we may or may not have stated in the past, is in the stages of resurgence after its staggering loss of popularity post prohibition. Bourbon gained more traction because of its sweeter, more pleasant flavor, whereas the intense, spicy nature of rye quickly fell out of favor from the general public. It looks like the public has grown a pair again, and since the big guys have caught wind of it, they are jumping on the bandwagon. It isn’t as if Jim Beam Rye has been put on the shelves yesterday, so it probably seems like it has always been there, but on the cosmological scale of whiskey, this is a coming back in the Rye world. The question becomes, does Jim Beam do this well, or should we keep walking past the now-iconic bottle to something less recognizable.

Straight

Nose:  Right off the bat, you get a burning intensity from rye whiskey that could arguably be much less pleasant than bourbon, but don’t let that deter you on. Smell on. Once you get past the initial intensity, you will find a little more rye grain coming through to add. You will get some vanilla and anise coming into the nose after the whiskey starts to open up. There is a modest hint of caramel that layers over the aromas. There is an interesting sense of creamy, fruity notes coming through, akin to bananas and light yellow apples and other tropical notes. There is a sense of spiciness coming through, but it is pretty ambiguous and light.

Arrival: The arrival to this Rye whiskey, is surprisingly creamy, with some banana from the nose coming into the arrival. This is complimented by a sweet corn smoothness. There is some rye and malt grain coming through, with big vanilla flavor. There is also a slight oakiness. The flavor is surprisingly mild in the arrival, and does not to elude to a very dynamic body or finish.

Body:  There is a buttery, vanilla, and oak flavor coming through in the body. It is actually rather sweet, and non-obtrusive. The rye character is pretty light, and doesn’t really present the full intensity of what a rye whiskey can be. Surprisingly, there is more of a corn-flavor dominance coming through in the body, than the rye character.

           

Finish: The finish is probably the most intense part of the whiskey, imparting a peppery, rye, character to the whiskey, with a light brininess counterbalancing the peppery nature. There is a corn flavor that comes through. There is a minty character that works into the end as well. The finish is still not very dynamic, and although the whiskey has flavor that is enjoyable, it is pretty non-complex. There is some sweet fruitiness coming through later in the finish, but it fades down rather quickly.  Fruit flavors might include berries and golden apples, but it was hard to pick out. The finish isn’t terribly long, nor is it terribly short.

With Water

Nose: Well, as per last time, the grainy intensity comes to the forefront. The nose is pretty similar after adding water. The creaminess is still there, if not amplified from before. With that being said, there is no major transformation to the aromas coming out of here.

Arrival: Well, the arrival is certainly a mellow experience here, with almost nothing happening without swishing the rye around in your mouth. A blanket taste of vanilla starts off, but as you let the whiskey sit, an intense spiciness creeps into the picture. This lives through the body and finish as well.

Body: The body translates some of that spiciness into gingerbread and cinnamon flavors, but carries over the general feel from before. Some of that banana and cream type flavor that was seen before is now just as lively as before water was added.

           

Finish: The finish, disappointing, becomes much duller after some water is added to the equation. Unfortunately, due to the fact that this whiskey sits at 40% abv, there isn’t a whole lot of room for growth. That does detract, and it should come as no surprise that the results of adding water can be a little bit deterrent from the already meek flavor.

Final Comments:  This is, in fact, a whiskey worth buying. Now, that does not mean it is terribly complex, nor does it mean it bears semblance to the classic rye whiskey. This takes on a contemporary approach to the rye flavor, with a little modesty. This sits comfortably close to the Jim Beam bourbon, probably by design. I think we would see this rye come to life if only they didn’t cut it down nearly as much. At 46%, this would be a great buy, albeit the rye content is probably awfully close to 51%. We would venture a guess that much sweeter grains were used in this mash, and it takes away some of the influence of the whiskey. We’d also conjecture that this would do better with another two years in the barrel. At the end of the day, you won’t go home crying if you buy this whiskey, but you might consider some others before pulling the trigger. Hopefully, we will be helping with that in the future.

Why you’d buy it: You want a soft introduction into rye whiskeys on a budget.

Why you wouldn’t: You really already know about the world of rye out there, and know there are better gems to be found.

Score: 7.25/10

Review 165: New Holland Michigan Hatter

Review 165

6/9/13

New Holland Michigan Hatter: ?% abv

Background: Well, we’ve been doing great on not having information for our reviews. This would fall into that realm, because we don’t have a clue what the abv on this beer is. Now, our friendly neighbors at New Holland are very much a hit or miss brewery, producing some really kickass beers. On the other end of the spectrum, it would be safe to say they have made some pretty disappointing beers as well. We would like to word it differently, but we don’t sugarcoat any of this. So imagine where that puts this beer…The Michigan Hatter, sits in the Hatter range as an IPA which contains exclusively Michigan Cascade hops. Sounds like a novel idea from a drinker’s perspective, right? Let’s find out.

Nose: The nose starts off with a sense of sweetness, complemented by an obvious hoppiness. There are fruity notes of baked plantain, pears and cantaloupe. There is a note of vanilla, some honeysuckle floral notes and some pine-like notes, probably derived from the hops. There is an acidic note of lemon that comes through, rather sweet and not terribly tart. After letting the beer open up, there is a note of wheat that comes through in the undertones of the aromas.

Arrival: The arrival to this beer is pretty eventless, so far as we can tell. It can almost be depicted as watery, which a light hops influence. It has a sort of bitter, quinine soda-water type flavor to it.

Body: There is a relatively short body, with suggestions of wheat, hops, pine and pear. It still has an extremely light mouth-feel with hardly much flavor.

Finish: The finish is rather short, which sums up the experience of the entire beer. The finish is powerfully grainy with yeast and wheat taking over. There is still some pine and hoppiness coming through.

Final Comments:  So, halfway through this review, we kind of gave up on any sort of thorough depiction of this thing. The reason being is we didn’t at all like this. The complexity, after the nose, was lost upon us and replaced with sheer blandness, and even so much as poor flavor. This is not an expensive beer, which is good considering how much we didn’t drink of it. The best description we could produce for this beer is hops-flavored soda water. It sits right above some of those well-beloved lager friends our macrobreweries are literally spewing out, minus the maltiness that remains present in a lager. Nothing good to say about this one. Sorry.

Why you’d buy it:.You wouldn’t.

Why you wouldn’t:  Everything.

Score: 5.0/10

Review 164: Dogfish Head 120 Minute IPA

Review 164

6/5/13

Dogfish Head 120 Minute IPA: 15-20% abv

Background: Dogfish Head, a prolific microbrewery that has done a great job making beers, and making them memorable. This beer stands as no exception to the rule. You might notice a peculiar “typo” on the header of this review. That is not a typo; we aren’t quite sure what this batch of 120 Minute IPA is in terms of abv, but rumor has it that it sits around 18% abv, making it the highest alcohol content beer we’ve ever tried. What is the 120 minute about then? The beer is boiled for 120 minutes while being hopped with high-alpha American hops, whatever that means. They claim that this is the ultimate beer for hopheads, and we were pretty compelled by such a claim. Don’t be intimidated though, it isn’t what you’d think it to be.

Nose: Well, since you know this is the most alcoholic beer we’ve reviewed, you might suspect the nose to be a boozy event. Nevermind the thick, rich aromas, the flavors you’ll find include definite apple flavors coming through, with yeast flavors and bitterness and coming through. The booze notes don’t come through like we initially expected, but to compromise for that, there is some citrus flavor coming through. After more smelling, we felt the apple note came through very powerfully. The nose is crisp, attributed to the apple flavor, which begins to overpower the nose with its prominence. There is a small suggestion of pineapple to go along with the fruity notes. This nose will remind you of more of a pale ale than an imperial IPA, but we are determined to find more in the taste.

Arrival: The arrival is surprisingly light, with a suggestion of alcohol taste coming through. You’ll get a hint of sweetness, which might suggest that this beer isn’t what you’d expect out of an IPA. The arrival starts with a thin, flavorless entrance. It continues onto a lemon candy, slightly pine-like, and sweet arrival.

Body: The body is sort of eventless in the sense that it doesn’t hold much flavor or content. It is tart and runs off quickly. There is a slight suggestion of hops, pine, and pineapple, with some apple crispness coming through. There is a sourness that comes through in the body, partially due to the flavor of sour green apple that comes through on bigger gulps. There is a slight suggestion of bubblegum, attributed to an odd sugar characteristic that holds through on the body.

Finish: The finish is dry, long and crisp. There is a refreshing, mint-like flavor that comes through as the beer finishes. There is still some lemon-candy, sugary sweetness, almost akin to a modestly tart rock candy. There is still an odd sense of bubblegum, which we find as a playful oddity in this beer’s profile. There is something almost bread-like about the finish, which reminds you of a tough Italian white bread, which compliments but does not overpower the sweetness of the beer.

Final Comments:  You might say there are some compelling notes present in this beer, but it certainly has a bit of an identity crisis. This doesn’t fit like an IPA, coming closer to a barleywine flavor style, probably due to its high alcohol content. This is to be expected, but it does make a person question why they are buying an IPA in the first place. Another fallacy is that this beer claims to be for the ultimate hophead, and we are going to say it is not. Not even remotely, in fact. This beer is for somebody looking for an interesting way to get drunk, albeit they’ll enjoy the taste while getting there. Finally, the price doesn’t encourage purchase. This definitely weighs in as a novelty item, and what Dogfish Head should do is strive to bring out more complexity and hoppiness to the beer, so people feel like they’re actually buying an IPA.

Why you’d buy it: You just won a  lot of money by gambling, and want to show off that you have nothing better to do with it.

Why you wouldn’t:  There are better barleywines out there for less cost, and there are better IPAs out there for less cost.

Score: 8.0/10