Whisky with Florin - Part One: Getting Started

Last November, I had the great pleasure of meeting Florin, a contributor to a great deal of the online whisky discourse. I’ve always appreciated Florin’s modesty in an arena wherein we all consider ourselves experts. Though he is a font of whisky wisdom, he is always asking questions, open to others’ thoughts.

Florin welcomed me into his Southern California home where I had the opportunity to meet his lovely wife and the first two (there are now three!) of his beautiful children. He and I talked a lot of whisky and drank a lot of whisky. It was an excellent afternoon, one I hope we can repeat sometime soon.

At the start of our whisky session, Florin introduced me to a blended malt he had designed in his down time --- The GlenPhroaig. It is excellent. I’m not exaggerating when I say someone should bottle this stuff and get it on the shelves. I had originally intended to just interview him about the blend, but we wound up getting into a bit of a whisky exploration via email. With Florin’s permission, I’m presenting our (December-to-January) conversation this week, culminating in a review of The GlenPhroaig.

MK: Looking back on your whisky journey, was there a specific dram that started it all? If the catalyst wasn't one whisky, was there an experience or moment that ignited your interest?

FV: As a whisky lover it's always fun to look back to that first drink that started it all, isn't it? For me, this trip started 12 years ago, and it was in fact two drinks. I was 33 when I had my first single malt & bourbon. (If I was Jesus or Buddha I would have died without ever trying it, isn't that scary?).

Growing up in Romania, I had plenty of wine from an early age, at social events or hanging out with my
friends. The local spirit is plum brandy - we call it tzuica, you probably know it as sliwowitz. I enjoyed that too, it was always artisanal, made in hilly country by somebody's uncle or neighbor, and often very very good! We should have some together next time you visit!

I came to the US at the age of 25, for graduate school, so I was spared the usual college experimentation phase, with drinks that you know you'll never touch again in your life. I did once have a Johnnie Walker Red, which put me off whisky for a few good years. If that's what whisky was, then it was not for me. But by 2001 I was ready to expand my horizons, also prompted by a good friend who moved to Scotland. "Don't tell me you are now drinking whisky!" I told him over the phone. "Well, single malt is actually really good!” This intrigued me, so I got my hands on a book on spirits published by Beverage Testing Institute. It said there that a certain Pappy van Winkle was the best whisky in the world, scoring 100/100. I did not want to spend a $50 fortune on that, but I picked up a bottle of Rip van Winkle 107 proof, which had scored 97 or 98, and somehow also a bottle of Talisker 10yo. At under $30 each, these were still a major investment for me at the time. Boy, was I in for a treat! I just could not believe how good these two were! I would pour myself every evening a nice snifter of either one or the other, and I would just nose that glass and smile, looking like the cat that swallowed the canary! I was completely sold! The Talisker had a nice map of the island on the label, I understand it's a collector's item now; the RvW107 I had last year was nowhere as good as the one of my memory. Having had such a beautiful start with these hardcore whiskies, I don't buy the idea that one has to begin gently, try your Chivas Regal or Jack Daniels first to see if you are worthy, and then move on from there.

One year later, in 2002, I had the chance to visit Scotland for work for two months, but that's a different story...

MK: You bring up a interesting point about the old thought that everyone needs to start with blends and cheapies. I've found many blends and cheapies unappealing when served neatly since they're "designed for mixing" (read: made from the youngest stuff possible).

On the other hand, you have a considerably different palate than the newest generation of consumers whose palates have been formed by drinking Kool Aid, Coca Cola, and Coors Light -- drinks engineered not to challenge. Starting with wine while young (as my wife and I had), could you have unintentionally prepped your palate for more immediately demanding experiences, like sliwowitz (or Laphroaig Cask Strength!)?

Going back to the first hand: JW Red Label, Dewars White Label, and Cutty Sark are unpleasant starters. They make even less sense as starting points buried under sugary mixers. I had my start with Glenfiddich and Glenlivet; they're priced well and have had their edges rounded. I had Talisker 10 early on too, too bad it isn't $30 anymore! I know a lot of folks who were sold on whisky via Macallan 12yr.

All that aside, I'm jealous that you had your start with Van Winkle and Talisker!

Okay, now that you've teased it, you must recap your Scotland 2002 story! I was there in November 2002, but had not yet hit my whisky stride.

FV: I've never thought of the effect of growing up with Coca-Cola on the average American whisky consumer! You are clearly right: that must make a big difference in terms of what people like and don't like. On the other hand, you & your wife grew up in the US, I believe, and you don't have the average American palate either. Let's keep in mind that the single malt drinkers are a minority among consumers, 1-3% among whisky drinkers and a fraction of that among drinkers at large, whose top choice is vodka. So there is clearly some self-selection at work here. (Oh, I don't want to put down vodka, my wife is Polish and they make great “wódka” there. I always have a bottle of Zubrówka on hand! The one in Poland tastes better, something to do with bison grass being banned in the US; apparently it makes a very good rat poison. The Poles are not worried.)

Your start wasn't bad either; Glenlivet 12 is one of my favorite whiskies, which for some blessed, crazy reason I can buy here in California at less than half its price at the distillery shop in Scotland! On the right night, Glenfiddich 12 is a great session whisky. There is a reason that those two are the best selling single malts in the US and in the world.

But returning to Scotland 2002, who knows, we might have rubbed shoulders! I spent October and November there, visiting University of Glasgow. I fell in love with Glasgow and Scotland, despite the abominable weather - remember? My feet were wet and cold at all times! My story is anticlimactic: I really enjoyed driving a car with the steering wheel and stick shift on the wrong side on roads the size of back alleys, and visiting Oban and Edradour distilleries; but I was in the middle of a spiritual search, which meant reducing my drinking and ultimately stopping altogether. Talking about bad timing! I went dry for three years, 2003-2006. So you can say I didn't take full advantage of my visit, but the seeds were planted, I got a clear sense of that vast world of immense possibility!

I'm posting this pic again since it always makes me happy.

MK: Like you, I didn't take advantage of the whisky potential when I was in Scotland. I drank the cheapest blends I could find, along with gallons of beer. And absinthe. I remember that soggy weather well. With all of my hiking and wandering, I remained soaked for a month. I was actually in Scotland on my own personal search as well, though I definitely did not stop drinking (see the photo to the right).
 
Three dry years requires some tremendous discipline and focus. I admire your ability to commit to that.

Since you re-integrated whisky in your life (sorry for the horrid segue) you have built up a tremendous collection. How did you expand your whisky knowledge and assemble The Bunker? Did you go to tastings? Buy or trade samples? Or was there a lot of blind-buying supported by research?

FV: After my self-imposed dry phase I rediscovered whisky gradually. Caol Ila 12 was a revelation, then others slowly followed: Glenlivet 12, Glenfiddich 15, Dalwhinnie 15, Glen Garioch 10, Old Pulteney 12...

Common as they may be, I could live a happy life drinking nothing but these! Then, in the Summer of 2010, I went to Scotland with the family, and this time we made sure it was about the whisky. We spent one week touring, with two nights on Islay and two in Speyside. After a few distillery visits my 9-year old son would ask clarifying questions about the wine stills and the spirit stills. He visited Kilchoman before Kilchoman was cool. Been there, got the t-shirt - seriously, it's a very nice t-shirt! In any case, since that Scotland trip I became committed to whisky. Back in the US I didn't have many resources for sampling, and among my whisky friends I'm the most fanatic; San Diego where I live is off the radar for touring brand ambassadors, and driving to LA or flying someplace for a whisky tasting or festival did not seem worth the effort. So this meant buying a lot of bottles! In 2011 I discovered whisky blogs, which were my guiding light, and then the Malt Advocate (now Whisky Advocate). They led me to American rye, which was a huge discovery for me! Then I wanted to learn more about bourbon. I've been playing the field, but I've also stocked some of my favorites, out of fear of the crazy price increases that we saw lately. I'm really grateful for having the income to support this extravagant hobby so far - and especially for being blessed with an understanding wife. After having opened about 200 bottles in the last 2.5 years I'm ready to slow down now and to live a little off the bunker, which may not be as impressive as you make it sound.

Speaking of impressive, you have accumulated a lot of whisky experience for your tender age; I haven't seen your collection, but from what I've read on your blog, I'm sure you have a nice line-up yourself! Maybe you can share some of your own experience...

Tomorrow:  Part Two - The Whisky Market...

Single Malt Report: Glenmorangie Ealanta 1993/2012

What is this?  Diving for Pearls reports on a NEW whisky?

New-ish.

Hell's thermostat needle is dropping.

Yeah, well don't get used to this.

I won't.

Good.  

Well then.  I have a number of samples in the queue, but I was definitely looking forward to this one.

Glenmorangie's newest Private Edition, Ealanta, was released in late January / early February of this year.  "Ealanta" is Gaelic for "skilled and ingenious" (not "modest").  The whisky is a single malt matured in heavily toasted new (or virgin) American oak for the entirety of its 19 years.  Dr. Bill Lumsden, Glenmorangie's famous Head of Distilling and Whisky Creation, didn't actually lay down this malt.  His predecessors did so, and Lumsden discovered the filled barrels during his first year on the job.  It seems as if they had attempted all sorts of experimental casks, many of which were released during the past decade: Artisan Cask, Post Oak, Truffle Oak, Burr Oak, Chinkapin Oak, and Missouri Oak.

Like with Glenmorangie's Astar release, the casks were made from trees in the Missouri Ozarks.  Ealanta's trees were specifically from the Mark Twain National Forest.  (On a side note: I find it adorable that we can be told the latitude and longitude of the trees that make up casks, but not a single word about the yeast or barley variety.  Yes, this a recycled gripe, but it's a gripe nonetheless.)  The Astar casks were heavily toasted but lightly charred, while Glenmorangie is only stressing that Ealanta's casks were heavily toasted.  They're both non-chillfiltered (yay!), but the Astar is about half Ealanta's age and much stronger (57.1% ABV).  I love the Astar, so I've been wondering how this new older whisky tastes.

GLENMORANGIE EALANTA

Distillery: Glenmorangie
Ownership: Louis Vuitton Moet-Hennessy (accents and umlauts not included)
Age: 19 years old (1993-2012)
Maturation: Heavily-toasted virgin oak from the Mark Twain National Forest in the Missouri Ozarks
Region: Highlands (Northern)
Alcohol by Volume: 46%
Limited release: 3,433 cases
Chill-filtered: No
Colored: Possibly, but not much

While the color is gold, it's not as dark as one would think considering its life in new oak.  Perhaps this is due to toasting, as opposed to charring.

A lot of honey, corn flakes, and vanilla beans show up first in the nose.  Then fresh mint, white bread toast, and candied orange rind appear after further sniffing.  Give it 30-45 minutes, then it's cocoa and maple candy.  A minimum of spice arises from the oak, maybe some cinnamon.

The palate is full of creamy treats.  Eclairs, cream puffs dusted with cocoa powder, and whipped cream.  It even has a creamy texture.  Confectioner's sugar and barrel char swirl around the malt, then after some time Andes mint chocolate candies appear.

It finishes sweet and creamy.  There's the eclairs along with the Andes candies.  Sawdusty caramel sauce meets Phillies cigar smoke.

It's all very controlled.  I'm impressed that with all that new oak the whisky wasn't syrupy and liqueur-like.  Perhaps that's a result of the reduction to 46% ABV?  Or it has to do with toasting versus charring the barrels.  The downside to the control is a muted finish, a mere trace of spice, and a limit on its character.  It's a sweet treat, but nothing surprising or new, especially considering the relatively unique-for-a-Scotch maturation.

[Disclaimer Time!  I wish Ealanta was spicy.  Give me a spicy rye or bourbon and I'm a happy boy.  But in Ealanta, Sensei Serge Valentin does find some spice but little creaminess, while I find very little spice but heaps of creaminess.  So who are you going to believe: me or the guy who knows what he's talking about?]

A brief bit of price analysis:  If you do your research, you can find the Ealanta for $100-$110.  This is approximately $20 more than the 18yr in Glenmorangie's regular range.  Compared to the 18yr, the Ealanta has 3 more points of ABV, one more year of maturation within a unique cask type, and issued in a more limited release.  Also, in the current state of the whisky market, I have doubts that LVMH will allow Dr. Lumsden to keep such an unusual (but salable) whisky in the cask for so long next time.  So, if you find the Ealanta only $20 more expensive than the 18yr, then you're probably looking at good pricing for this "Private Edition".

Having never done a proper official tasting with the 18yr, I can't really speak for it other than to say it is good.  Instead, let me compare apples to apples, or new oak to new oak.  If the Ealanta's price equaled that of the Astar, I would still pick the Astar without a second thought.  But that's just my personal palate.  I like the youth, richness, bold spice, and power in the Astar.  I like it more than any other Glenmorangie release.

To me, Ealanta is a chocolate eclair of a whisky.  That is not a bad thing.  It just depends what your palate desires at this malt's price point.

Availability - Many liquor specialists, for now
Pricing - $100-$125
Rating - 83

Single Malt Report: GlenDronach 21 year old "Parliament "

The Shadow of GlenDronach

After I received such a great surprise from the previous report's whisky, I decided to follow it up with another from the same distillery: GlenDronach's 21 year old "Parliament" single malt.  I've written about the rest of their regular range here, here, here, and here.

The 21 year old is a little harder to find than its younger siblings.  It's (obviously) pricier, though only 20-25% more expensive than the 18 year.  Compare that to Glenfiddich, Glenlivet, and Macallan Fine Oak whose 21s more than double the price of their 17/18s.  GlenDronach's small bump up in price for the 21 year also includes the highest ABV of its regular bottlings, 48%.  While the 15 and 18 are solely from oloroso casks, the 21, like the 12, is from a mix of Pedro Ximenez and oloroso casks.

And the "Parliament" moniker?  It has nothing to do with government.  Rather, birds.  Yes, a parliament of fowls (or Parlement of Foules), as Chaucer once wrote.  In GlenDronach's case, the fowl in question are rooks, these sturdy birds:

(Source)

When in a group, rooks (like owls) are called a parliament.  A parliament (or a parliament of parliaments) of rooks have made their home in that corner of Aberdeenshire likely long before the distillery was built.  So GlenDronach named this whisky after their neighbors:

Distillery: GlenDronach
Ownership: BenRiach Distillery Company Ltd
Age: minimum 21 years
Maturation: Pedro Ximenez sherry and Oloroso sherry casks
Region: Eastern Highlands (on the edge of Speyside)
Alcohol by Volume: 48%
Chill filtered? No.
Caramel Coloring? No.

As you may note from the pictures, the color is of a reddish maple syrup.

The bold nose leads with fresh stone fruits, especially apricots, along with dried cherries.  There's a sherry blanket surrounding everything, like Macallan 18 but larger.  Underneath the blanket lay raspberry jam, grape juice, pipe tobacco, and black cherry soda.  There are also highlights of bubblegum and fresh mint.  A wee peep of sulfur adds to bouquet rather than subtracting.

Cocoa powder leads in the palate.  It's followed by smoked prunes, ginger, and lots of salt.  It is very tart, dry, and tannic with sparse hints of sweetness.

The finish is very salty and dry.  Lots of tart grapes along with rich stewed raisins.  There's also a smoky note that is completely peatless.  But mostly it's dry and salty, like a dry Marsala.

---

What a grand pungent nose!  One could sniff this whisky all day long and never tire of it.  But it's whisky, so some folks may choose to drink it as well.  Had its flavors equaled its scents, then I would have written this entire report IN CAPS.  But the palate and especially the finish get tight, dry, salty, and tart.  Gavin Smith may note soy sauce in the nose, but I find drinking Parliament is like sipping a Kikkoman sherry cocktail (I hope that doesn't actually exist).

Having sampled the regular US range (yes there's a young NAS cask strength and a limited 33 year in Europe), I'd pick the 15yr first by a long shot, the 18yr second.  Meanwhile, the single cask releases are a league ahead.

But I'm not done seeking out GlenDronach.  I like their malt and their ownership, so I look forward to further exploring their whisky in the near future.

Availability - maybe a dozen liquor retailers in the US
Pricing - $120-$150 in the US, a little cheaper in Europe
Rating - 81

A few words about Jess Franco

He wasn't as sadistic as D'Amato, dramatic as Argento, aggressive as Fulci, moody as Bava, or formally erotic as Rollin.  He didn't have the talent of any of those directors, save D'Amato.  But he was more productive than all of them put together.  He made movies, arguably more movies than anyone else over the last fifty years.

IMDB really isn't of much use when trying to get a count of Jesus (Jess) Franco's films.  It shows his directorial count at 199.  But for each Die Marquise von Sade, there was a Doriana Gray.  It wasn't just an alternate title.  It was a completely different film.  Same actors, same sets, more or less the same plot, but different scenes, different mood, different characters, different languages, different endings.

Then there are the title issues.  Female Vampire was known as Erotikill, Erotic Kill, The Loves of Irina,  Insatiable Lust, Bare Breasted Countess, Les avaleuses, La comtesse noire, and a dozen other names that all more or less depict the subject well.  Yet among these titles are at least four different versions of the same movie.  But more on this in a moment.

Franco's first very productive period was during the late 60's through mid '70s.  The Italian giallo genre was extremely popular throughout Europe, so he tried his hand at that.  The sex film went mainstream, so he tried his hand at that.  European spy films, women in prison films, slasher films, satanic films, zombie films.  He took a swing at all of those genres, sometimes all in the same movie.

The artistic merit of the script, photography, editing, and direction was never the motivation for his audience's attendance.  The women, from Soledad Miranda to Maria Rohm, were reason we watched.  They were the main characters.  They were the side characters.  They were the bit parts.  One of these women stood out in particular.  Franco's wife, Lina Romay.

Lina wasn't a classic cinema beauty.  She had a considerable overbite, a more considerable posterior, a round tummy, and yellowy pale skin.  But she committed to her art.  Fully.  Her pubic region was one of the most surveyed in the history of cinema, albeit in a poorly lit and out of focus fashion.  She ran barefoot and naked through forests and over rocks, tackling, pummeling, shrieking, and occasionally raping her fellow cast members.  (Not to mention what she did to the cast's members.)  She read every line as if it was written by Ibsen and directed by Bergman.  And did everything EVERYTHING the project called for her to do.  As a result, she commands the screen every time she leaps into frame, the rest of the mise en scene melting away behind her.  Even in Franco's weakest films, Romay always had something to offer.

"You want me to do what?"

Female Vampire, one of Franco's better known films, succeeds because of her.  The film's conceit: Countess Irina, the last of her vampiric kind, fellates men to death.  Simple idea, and simply foolish if one thinks about it for too long.  I have thought about it for too long. (This subject seemed to be of interest to Franco, as Romay's characters murder men in this fashion in a handful of his other films.)  One would figure a single bite would be sufficient, but instead an actual orgasm is required......though this is never fully explained.  (By the way, men aren't alone in this as Irina services a woman to death as well.)

All of this could be easily captured in a straightforward porn film, but the most widely distributed version of Female Vampire is instead a soft-core film.  This would prove to be quite a challenge for any director.  To (terribly) paraphrase the late Roger Ebert, once two actual genitals start rubbing against each other, a fiction film becomes a documentary.  It is extremely difficult to depict graphic sexual content without losing one's viewer to thoughts separate from the plot.

Franco demonstrates his ability to meet this cinematic challenge in the film's first shot.  The Countess Irina, clothed only in a cape and belt, stalks through a mist-cloaked forest.  She strides slowly towards the viewer, almost floating into the foreground.  Her sensual dark eyes lock on us.  She approaches predatory, confident, commanding.  Until she bumps into the camera.

The film's inability to capture the sadness and emptiness inherent in a life like Irina's doesn't render it limp.  Though the script, editing, and lighting fall short of many YouTube cat videos, Franco can still frame a shot and Romay takes his direction as far as emotionally and physically possible.

I would love to recommend Doriana Grey for Romay's genuinely bravado performance as a pair of twins engaging in sexual thrills while struggling with deep mental anguish.  But I can't.  It's not a quality issue.  Instead, almost all of Franco's films are unavailable in the US.  I spent a number of years going through Cinefile Video's Eurosleaze imports -- some of them were filmed with Spanish actors, overdubbed in Russian with German subtitles -- probably the best video store collection of Franco's work, and still got through only 20+ films.  None of them make for easy viewing, though Vampyros Lesbos is pretty cool with its slinky gals and groovy soundtrack.  Macumba Sexual has a solid and consistent visual style.  Venus in Furs can be a trippy treat.  Both "Eugenie" films keep to their stories well (and have pretty ladies).  And there's the aforementioned Female Vampire.  If you can find any of the stronger versions, they make for less (or more?) silly viewing.

But if you do like any of those filmmakers I mentioned at the top of the post, or enjoy flawed threadbare but aggressive filmmaking, and you find any of his stuff available to rent, give it a spin.  (You can drop me a line here too, in case you have any questions or if you know where to get some of the alternate editions.)

I may jest about the quality of Franco's work, but he was and is not merely a guilty pleasure for me.  He made movies.  Script, funding, and casting problems proved no match for this man.  Even if he didn't have any original footage, he'd re-cut a bunch of scenes from his other films into a brand new one and release it in a different European market.  That is bold.  That is commitment.  That is showmanship.  That is cinema without boundaries.  When Jess Franco passed away last week at age 82, having just directed another film (of course), the world lost one of its great filmmakers.  I encourage anyone with the means to get his work back out into the world for all of us to see.

Single Malt Report: GlenDronach 1991 18 year old Single Cask #2512

This one was a surprise on two levels.  I didn't really intend on doing another report this week.  And I've been having a sherried-whisky issue for a number of months.  Well, here's a whisky review.  And I've found a cure for the ailment.

Many thanks to Florin for the whisky that this once held!

For those new to GlenDronach, I did a four part post on their range here, here, here, and here.

In 2009, Billy Walker and the new ownership of GlenDronach not only gave their regular single malt range a facelift/refresh, but also started to release official single cask bottlings.  These small releases met with immediate approval by everyone from Jim Murray to the Malt Maniacs.  These single casks have continued ever since.

Each release spends its life maturing in sherry casks.  Some of them are from ex-oloroso, some are from ex-Pedro Ximenez, some are from butts, some are from puncheons.  They come different year groups -- 1971-1972, 1978, 1985, 1989-1996, 2002 -- and are priced accordingly.  Their big prices may give one pause, but they (at cask strength) are always cheaper than 43% ABV Macallans at the same age range.  They are rarer than those Macallans and better critically regarded.

Because they have different maturation lengths within different sizes of casks that had held different sorts of sherries, these GlenDronachs don't all taste the same.  I tried K&L's exclusive 1993 single cask, last month.  Two days ago, I tried this:

Distillery: GlenDronach
Ownership: BenRiach Distillery Company Ltd
Age: 18 years (August 1991- September 2009)
Maturation: former Oloroso sherry butt
Region: Eastern Highlands (on the edge of Speyside)
Alcohol by Volume: 51.9%
Cask: 2512
Limited bottling: 760

The color lies somewhere between maple syrup and well-steeped Earl Gray tea.

The density in the nose requires a bit of time (and a good nosing environment), but it's worth it, trust me.  First, there's digestive biscuits (the chocolate dipped kind, of course), then hay, fresh soil, unsmoked pipe tobacco, carob, and menthol.  Give it some more time.  Then there's maple syrup, clove cigarettes, orange rind, raisins, tropical fruit juice, and dark caramel sauce.  Finally, sherry gelato -- I don't know if it exists but it should.

The palate makes a direct progression from chocolate to cigar tobacco.  In between there's hazelnut cake with nutty frosting, a stone-fruity sherry, dried apricots, and anise.  The texture is very full and mouth-coating.

Then comes the big finish.  Spritely curlicues of sweetness spring up out of a dry sherry sea.  Nutella on toasted barley bread.  A little soil, a lot of menthol, with a hearty sweetness increasing with time in the glass.

An amazing finish, so dense it fills one's cranial cavities until one exhales sherry vapor through the nose.  This is the sort of sherry cask matured whisky I've been looking for, with the wine, oak, and malt working together as a team.  One can assume a lot of this quality comes from the sherry butt, though GlenDronach also produces a malt which compliments the barrel so well that we get this lovely union.

Of course, this particular cask is sold out everywhere.  Trust me, I checked immediately.  But from now on, Glendronach, I will be watching your butts.

Former oloroso sherry butts, that is.

Availability - Sold out, though other single casks are released annually
Pricing - similarly-aged GlenDronach single casks:  $140-$160
Rating - 92

Single Malt Report: Bruichlaiddich Bere Barley 2006

Whisky is made from malted barley.  Wine is made from grapes.  If wine nomenclature is organized by grape varieties why do we NEVER hear about the barley varieties in our whisky?  In fact, there are a ton of different barley varieties out there, which ones are malt distilleries using?

For the vast majority of beverage companies, whisky is a business first, a craft second.  Thus they choose barley types from which they can distill the most alcohol, varieties like the two-row Optic and Chariot.  Strains that had been used in the past, like Golden Promise and Triumph, gradually became less cost effective as companies found other barley types that squeezed out 10 to 20 percent more alcohol from their sugary starch.  So the barley choices being made have to do with profit-and-loss sheets 99.9% of the time.

Meanwhile, every whisky producer invests considerable sums in oak casks.  Depending on who you're reading or talking to, 60-80% of a whisky's nose and palate come from the cask it ages within.  What about the rest of the character, though?  Many distilleries will reference their water sources (or you can figure it out via maps and the terrain).  But rarely is there any mention of yeast, let alone the barley!

This is a subject that a lot of whisky fans are currently discussing.  We're aware that grape varietals determine much more of a wine's characteristics, than barley does with whisky.  But still......if some whisky producers brag about the sherry that was formerly in their casks and the very forests from which the oak was felled......then how about a word or two about the whisky part of the whisky.  You know, the malted barley?

There have been a few barley words shared here and there.  Kilchoman, Bruichladdich, and Springbank have turning out limited releases of malts made from locally grown barley.  Glenlivet released a Triumph-only single malt a few years ago.  The Arran Distillery has a Bere Barley release, as does Bruichladdich.  Bruichladdich used to be quite open about their barley: see here for their 2011 harvest information; and here for some info on their 2008 harvest.

I don't think there's some huge conspiracy against the customer in terms of varietal transparency (we can always discuss other conspiracies though!).  Part of the lack of forthrightness came from the fact that no one really inquired into brands' barley breeds over the past 200 years.

But now things are different.  Craft distilleries around the world are cranking out distillate made from all sorts of grains, and proudly printing mash detail.  We, as drinkers, can now compare and contrast these whiskies and the grains within them, studying which mash bills we like the best.  For instance, I love the hell out of American straight ryes with a 95% rye 5% malted barley mash bill.  Love 'em!  And I purposely seek them out, handing over my cash to the companies that turn out the best stuff.  That mash bill openness results in revenue.

How about it, Scotch whisky makers?  Perhaps terrior may not dominate your product as much as it does wine.  But it has an effect on the final product.  Your distillers know this.  Your sourced farms know this.  Even if it turns out barley varietals make very little difference in the final product, there's a whole market to exploit here.  Give it to us.  We'll drink it up!

Here's an example.

Bruichladdich Bere Barley 2006.  I bought it blind......from Europe.  See, I'm part of that potential demographic.  I found the chance to own a bottle of whisky made from the oldest of old school Viking-toted barley breeds.  And I'd heard it was tasty stuff.

As mentioned in the previous paragraph, Bere (pronounced "bear") was likely brought to Scotland by Viking invaders back in the ninth century.  Mostly grown on Orkney, it's a dense grain and proves difficult to squeeze much alcohol out of it.

But the whisky Bruichladdich managed to make from it tastes unlike any other single malt I've had.

BRUICHLADDICH BERE BARLEY 2006

Distillery: Bruichladdich

Barley variety(!): Bere from Kynagarry Farm in Achaba, Achfad Fields

Age: 6 years (2006-2012)

Maturation: ex-bourbon barrels

Region: Islay

Alcohol by Volume: 50%
Limited Bottling: 7,650
Chill-filtered: No
Caramel colored: No

NEAT --
The color is a natural light amber.  The first thing that strikes me about the nose is the similar characteristics to Corsair's Wry Moon -- the only White Dog in my house -- specifically bold bursts of cinnamon red hots and cracked white pepper.  From there the Bere switches to the Spice Channel (sorry): coriander, cardamom, and ground cloves.  There's also almond butter, fruit cake, and brown sugar.  And something that may just be a sniff of peat.  The cinnamon red hots and cracked white pepper are right there in the palate, followed by a pleasant IPA-like bitterness.  It's a little grassy, a little rough around the edges, and has that hint of peat.  But in front of all that, this is the barley-est whisky I've ever sipped.  I mean it's boldly out there with very little oak to hide it.  Toasted grains, toasted peat, toasted whole wheat bread lead the significant finish, along with that good Pale Ale bitterness.

WITH WATER --
The nose becomes more sugary.  The ethyl is a little stronger.  Fruit bread and menthol have joined the red hots and white pepper.  There's also a curious smoked fruit note in the background.  The palate is less bitter yet sweeter and more peppery.  Burnt grasses and anise notes arise after awhile.  The anise remains in the finish, joined by the pepper, red hots, a little soil, and a little citrus.

Yeah, this one is a lot of fun.  Its nose evokes different herbal notes with every new pour.  I love the fact that the oak remains waaaaaaaay in the back, the barley in the fore.  It's not an easy whisky by any means.  It is young and brash, 6 years and 50% ABV.  Frankly, it's a bit weird sometimes.  I have to switch off the "Scotch" preconceptions every time I pour a glass of it, even though this may be what some North Highland whisky tasted like a few hundred years ago.

For those in the US looking to explore this one, the good news is that it is now available in The States, though in a wide range of prices.  Because it's so unique, I recommend trying it before buying it, if that's possible.  As I can picture it not appealing to all palates, perhaps it's a one-time whisky for many folks.

Ultimately, I cheer on further exploration into Bere barley whisky.  Since it's quite a tough grain, I'm not sure if Remy Martin will encourage such experiments by the 'Laddie folks.  Perhaps they will, but at a considerable premium.  But there are many other distilleries out there with an ever-growing customer base.  Some of that base will be like you and me.  And they'll crave something they've never had before, something unique, and maybe a little more transparency...

Availability - a couple dozen liquor specialists in the US
Pricing - $55-$80
Rating - 88

Single Malt Report: Bruichladdich Links, Old Course St. Andrews 17th Hole

Disclaimer, first: This whisky may have gone bad in the mini-bottle, though it is difficult to tell since this malt's reviews vary so widely.

Bottle shot, second:

Odd white sediment floating in the bottle, third:

In 2003, Jim McEwan -- Master Distiller and Production Director at Bruichladdich -- began releasing a series of Bruichladdich Links single malts in order to celebrate two of the most famous of Scottish recreations: Whisky and Golf.  There appears to have been about a dozen of these releases so far, the first of which is The Old Course St. Andrews.  The well-detailed bottle and tin art of the course's 17th hole is courtesy of artist Graeme Baxter.  This particular single malt was aged for 14 years in refill Spanish oak, then had a limited 12,000 bottle release.

Those are the facts as per other reviewers online.  Bruichladdich itself has no information about any of the Links releases on their website, but then again they've produced a wide variety of whiskys and most of those are absent from their site as well.  But I don't think they'd be in any hurry to detail this release.

Distillery: Bruichladdich

Brand: Links

Age: 14 years

Maturation: refill ex-sherry Spanish oak

Region: Islay

Alcohol by Volume: 46%
Limited Bottling: 12,000
Chill-filtered: No
Caramel colored: No

NEAT
Color -- Light yellow gold
Nose -- Oaky, bland, and bready up front.  Then old beer vomit, Atlantic Ocean, plastic toys, and a vegetal note (possibly peat).
Palate -- Barley water and cardboard lead the way. It is considerably bitter and dry with a mild sweetness.  Smaller notes of tree bark, urine?, potpurri, and old hard dried up raisins at the bottom of the SunMaid box
Finish -- Bitterness first, then acetone and sea salt.

WITH WATER
Color -- Great oils and clouds
Nose -- It reminds me of a blend: muted oak and malt.  It's a little farty, cardboardy, with simple syrup.
Palate -- Something synthetic like toasted toys, a plastic version of cilantro, along with unfiltered sourness.
Finish -- Identical to the palate.

IF my mini was not screwy, then this could be a good example of 'Laddich dispatching a number of inherited crummy casks.  Aside from the synthetic notes aroused by the water, it's a bitter but sleepy whisky.

IF my mini was contaminated in some way, I recommend you take a look at Jordan's Chemistry of the Cocktail review as well as Ruben's review on WhiskyNotes.  I lean much closer to Jordan's take.

My apologies if this report is as bland as the whisky.  I was so underwhelmed by this malt that I dumped half the booze down the sink.  But let's end on an Up note.  The best part of this whisky?  The mini tin's top serves as a perfect Glencairn cap!  See the glass on the left in the pic below.

Availability - Europe, though only at "collectible" prices now
Pricing - $200-$350 (yup)
Rating - 67

Next up is another Bruichladdich malt that was sampled alongside this one.  It fared MUCH better...