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
No comments:
Post a Comment