Scotch Ain't Dead Yet, Part 1: Export Volume and Value

Reports of Scotch's demise are greatly exaggerated.  For some of us the idea of an industry collapse brought more than a little schadenfreude and many hopes for a decline in prices.  For others, including the authors of a truly baffling online petition for the Scottish government to protect the industry, there was fear that 1982 was upon us again and dozens of distilleries would fall.  But there hasn't been a crash or a precipitous crippling plummet or even a belly flop.

There does seem to be a steady drip drip drip decline.  I resisted quoting last year's financial analysis and calling this series "What is the Scotch Bust?" because there is no bust, yet.  But I will keep that title in my back pocket for next year or the year after, in case the trickle turns into a loch.

This year's trilogy will structurally mirror last year's.  Part 1 focuses on the export volume and value numbers published by the Scotch Whisky Association.  It's the post with all the cute minimalist charts.  Part 2 will be the newly updated and expanded US prices for single malts.  More whiskies!  More rows!  More columns!  More graphs!  Part 3 will include final analysis and conclusions and 2015 numbers and I really hope to make it briefer than last year's tome.

All of the data from my Excel charts here can be found in the SWA's Publication section, where the reports for 2009 through 2014 are available.  They just, literally two days before New Year's, published the 2014 numbers...

---

Welcome back to 2014!  The value decline seen in 2013 not only continued in 2014 but became steeper.  Export volume decreased, as it had in four of the previous six years.  And very curiously, the price per liter of exported whisky dropped below 2013's, 2012's, and even 2011's average.  Single Malt sales worldwide continue to soar, meanwhile blend sales are sinking.  Aged single malt stock is draining, but production has ramped up at a much higher pace.  And in scotch whisky's biggest export market, the United States, volume sales experienced a large decline, even taking value down with it.

EXPORTS

First, the big graph.

As with all of these cromulent charts, you should click to embiggen

Though I include this mostly for completists, one can very clearly see the spikes in 2007 and 2011, the boomiest of the "boom" years.  But one can also see the dips that follow during the succeeding years.  Because there's very little point of reference here, I'll take a look at the gains since 1980 and add in the value and price per liter:

Last year I wrote about the plateau that had formed in 2012 and 2013.  Plateau no more.  Volume (liters) fell 3%, Value (£) dropped 7.3%, and even the value per liter declined 4.4% (or 7% since 2012).  So you don't have to squint to see most of this, let's zoom in from a different perspective and take a look at the growth and decline since 2007:

All three of these lines (volume, value, and value/volume) fell to their lowest levels since 2010.  Since 2011 was the biggest sales year in scotch whisky history, we're essentially at the point before the big shoulder formed.  If the declines continued in 2015 and the totals drop below 2010 levels, one could argue that that may be a cause for worry amongst the beancounters.

Before I delve into what was behind this decline. I wanted to include the next two charts which each contain possibly the saddest lines that a whisky chart could contain.

UK citizens are not drinking the very whisky made in their country.  And by the looks of this trend, they're very determined to not drink it.

But the rest of the world is drinking it.  Maybe a little less than we just were.  Let's see what's behind that drop.

MALT AND BLENDED WHISKY SALES

Last year, I focused solely on sexy sexy malt whisky.  But it's not the driver of the decline.  In fact malt whisky sales continue to grow.

To quote from last year's post, "Reading books and magazines and interviews, a whisky fan will come upon quotes that single malt whiskies make only up 5 or 7 or 8 or 10 percent of whisky sales."  And, man oh man, not only were those stats false a few years ago, they're not even relevant now.  If we're talking about value (as corporate financial reports occasionally do), malt whisky has now crossed the 25% marker.  It's no longer a niche, no longer a nerdy little corner of the market.  I wouldn't doubt if malt sales wind up doubling over a period of 8 years (2008-2016).

So if malt whisky sales are on the rise, then what's going on?  Well, this is where numbers need some explanation, because it is here where the decline occurs...

So you can look at the above chart and see two things.  Firstly, it confirms that malt volumes are blasting off.  Secondly, it appears as if blend volume sales are treading water.  They go up and down a little bit each year, percentage-wise, but don't appear to move too much.  In fact, they're within 0.09% of where they were in 2008.

But here's the thing, even though the handsomer of the whisky siblings, MALT, is growing quickly, the other sibling, BLEND, is still really really huge.  So even the smallest percentage decline in blend sales can drag everything else down with it.

As in, "Whoopie, malt sales increased by 4.7 million liters in 2014!" "Yeah? Well, blend sales dropped 16.7 million liters that year."

Or, "Yay for malt whisky value jumping £103 million in 2014!" "That's quaint. Blends lost £424 million in value in 2014."

I don't know what lunatics are having that conversation, but the point is that blends lost a lot of drinkers in 2014, and no matter how many of them moved to single malt it's nowhere near enough to make up for the loss.  Blends are the gravity behind the fall.  Even the value per liter of blends dropped 7.4% in 2014 (almost 12% since 2012), while malt went up 1.5% in 2014 (32% since 2010).  I'll write about this further in Part 3 on Friday.

AGED MALT WHISKY STOCKS

With malt sales still growing nicely and the price/liter nudging up, it's clear what's in demand.  How's that supply going?

Here's the bad news:

Sadly, the SWA data doesn't provide granular data for ranges on whisky older than 10 years, but I can say the following: the amount of >10year stock in 2014 is 37% lower than it was in 2008. Let me see if I can find some positivity here......the annual rate at which the volume of >10yo stock being drained has dropped since 2010.  In fact, the volume drained/bottled in 2014 was almost 10% less than was done in 2010.  Thank you, NAS bottlings!  Sorry.  :(

Here's the good news chart......or maybe not?

That is a truly insane boost in production.  The amount produced in 2014 is double what was in 2004.  I'm talking 142 million liters more.  And that's just in 2014.  Whisky sales are not, nor ever have been, growing at that rate.  So, when you hear concerns from people within the whisky industry about a whisky glut, this is what they're talking about.  I mean, whom do the suits think is going to buy all this whisky?  The Americans?

EXPORTS TO THE UNITED STATES

Whew, I had to sweat to find a segue there.  But it's a good one, because here is another driver of the downturn.

If one reads the industry commentary about which export markets were responsible for the drop in sales, you'll hear about the cutbacks by the Chinese government and the embargo with Russia.  These are pretty good excuses.  But those two markets added together carry but a fraction of the export weight that the Yanks do.  The USA remains the biggest whisky export value market by far (nearly the size of the next three markets combined).  And whisky exports to America stunk in 2014.

Volume, down 6.7% (or almost 9% from the 2011 peak).  Value, down by 8.6%.  Even the price/liter dropped (for the first time on this chart) in 2014, by 1.9%.  Those volume and value declines account for almost a quarter of the the entire export drop in both categories.

Because the SWA doesn't provide more granular data than this, one can only speculate what's going on.  As you'll see in Part 2, retailers' single malt prices continue to rise, so I'd be willing to bet that blend sales have also fallen off sharply in The States.  And maybe people aren't buying the more expensive bottlings whose prices are rising exponentially faster than the rest.  You'll see what I'm talking about in Part 2 on Wednesday.

---

Yes, 2014 was a crap year for the scotch whisky industry.  The biggest export market had a bad year (as did the former third largest, Singapore).  Export value, volume, and price/liter fell noticeably.  UK consumption continues to vanish into oblivion.  And export losses were entirely due to a 16.7 million liter (£424M) decline in blend sales.  Meanwhile, sales of malt whisky continue to blossom, stemming a bigger mess.  Optimism has spurred a major increase in malt production, which will either fuel a future boom or give whisky drinkers A LOT of long-aged whisky to consume over the next two decades.

That rough year wasn't without precedent, in fact export volume fell more precipitously in 2012.  Even single malt sales fell in 2012 (and again in 2013).  Export volume had a bigger fall in 2008 than it did in 2014.  What happened in 2014 that has drawn attention is the fact that exports' value fell along with the volume.  That doesn't occur frequently, but value also fell in 2013, 2004, and to a greater degree in 1998.  These are things that happen in markets.  There are good years and there are bad years.  2014 was a bad year, but what remains to be seen is: Are we seeing a trend?  One year does not equal a trend nor do two years.  The "Scotch Boom" was hyperbole, and perhaps we should wait before we announce doom as well.

On Wednesday, I'll take a look at single malt prices in the US, which *spoiler alert* continue to rise.  So sharpen them pitchforks.  On Friday, I'll mix all this stuff together, sprinkle it with some helpful 2015 data, and bake a whisky cake full of analysis.  You may need to wash it down with a glass of something.  I hear bourbon's pretty popular.

Single Malt Report: Kilkerran WIP 7 Bourbon Wood Cask Strength

If you've read one or all of my Kilkerran reviews, you may have quickly noted my enthusiasm for this Glengyle-produced single malt.  I love the stuff.  It's one of the few whiskies that gives me hope, reminding me that new great whisky is still being made in Scotland.  And though they keep calling each of their whiskies a "Work in Progress", we shouldn't keep holding our breath for the final result.  Each of these WIPs are good to excellent right now.

But the WIPs will end, allegedly, this year as the 12 year old will enter the market.  I wonder what color the label will be.  Here are the WIP colors thus far:

WIP 1: White label
WIP 2: Gray label
WIP 3: Light green label
WIP 4: Beige label
WIP 5: Blue label (Bourbon Wood & Sherry Wood)
WIP 6: Pink label (Bourbon Wood & Sherry Wood)
WIP 7: Dark green label (Bourbon Wood CS & Sherry Wood)

Sure there are some questions.  Will they release two whiskies again: an ex-bourbon and an ex-sherry?  Which will have aged better?  Will they have a cask strength version of the 12?  Will they throw in an NAS CV like Springbank?  How about a port cask?

It's fun to speculate, but it's even better to drink what's already here.  And here is WIP 7, an 11 year old single malt, aged in former bourbon barrels and bottled at cask strength (or a high batch strength, more likely).

Sorry, I can't find a photo of
the sample bottle. So here's an official
bottle shot.

Distillery: Glengyle

Owner: Mitchell's Glengyle Limited

Brand: Kilkerran
Region: Campbeltown

Age: 11 years (2004 - 2015)

Maturation: ex-bourbon American Oak barrels

Alcohol by Volume: 54.1%
Label color: Dark green
Limited release: 6000
Thank you to smokypeat for the sample!

NEAT
Immediately upon nosing it, I involuntarily released a simian grunt of approval.  That forest floor note in the nose has become like a welcoming old buddy in every new WIP.  The peat reads larger in this edition than any of the previous ones, maneuvering back and forth between BBQ and salty seaweed.  Perhaps that's due to the bigger ABV?  My notes read "rocks!". So apparently I smelled rocks.  Notes of apples, pears, and vanilla roll about in the background.  With lots of air, notes of fresh cherries and mango develop.

In the palate an intensely aromatic fruit note merges with the peat and malt and earth and salt. Big fruity and almost floral esters coexisting with the grunge.  A bold herbal bitterness and spice.  Hints of almonds and dried apricots.

A very long finish.  Moderate sweets and spices.  A little bit of vanilla and sugar.  Forest floor, malt, peaty residue, and a hint of blossoms.

WITH WATER (~46%abv)
Bringing the alcohol level down to the previous releases, the whisky becomes reminiscent of those WIPs but again with more peat in the nose.  There's seaweed, dirty hay, lemons, and roses.

The palate gets a little sweeter.  Very aromatic in the mouth, without being perfumy.  I wrote "Battle Flowers".  I was apparently getting poetic, as it must have reminded me of my Mathilda Rose.  Anyway, it's richly malty with just a little oak.

Rocks and soil and flower petals in the finish.  Herbal bitterness and whispers of peat smoke.  Limes in sugar.

CONCLUSIONS
How much did I like it?  Well, I never buy more than one bottle of anything (because money), but I bought two bottles of this.  It didn't hurt that I found a place that had priced it incorrectly.  Sorry, but they've since fixed that.

If you liked WIP 5 and/or 6, you'll like this one too.  It's fruitier and peatier than those, and has a thicker texture.  Some of that may be due to the higher strength.  But yet there seems to be less oak and more vivid spirit in this one, even with water added.  It's rich without feeling like it's been produced or prettied up.  Whatever it is they're doing, they need to keep doing it.  My goodness.

Once again, Kilkerran reigns as my favorite autumn whisky.  But, you know, it probably drinks just fine in the winter too.

Availability - It's around but slowly disappearing...
Pricing - this edition will run $70-$90 in the US; similar in Europe when factoring in shipping
Rating - 90

A tour of Westland Distillery and its whiskey

I knew more about Westland's reputation than its whiskey when I traveled to Seattle this past November.  In fact I'd never even tried the stuff.  It was one of those situations wherein the more I'd hear people raving about the whiskey, the less I'd want to try it.  I'd say about 90% of the American "craft" (or new small business) whiskies I've tried are whiskies that I never want to drink again.  Each whiskey had plenty of hype ink in books, magazines, and online.  Each whiskey was terribly disappointing.  And when I heard that Westland was only making single malts, I was even less enthused.  The only American single malt I found to be recommendable up to that point was McCarthy's Oregon single malt.  But when my Seattle friend, James, said he'd scheduled a tour of the distillery for us, I was genuinely interested to see how Americans were making single malt.

The night of our Seattle arrival, James brought out two single malts: Longrow 11yo 'Red' Shiraz Cask and Westland single cask 16.

The Longrow was so-so, though I always expect Longrow to be better than so-so, especially at this whisky's price.  The Westland was......very good.  It wasn't just another six-month-old tiny barrel quickie whiskey.  It had 4+ years in an ex-port Hungarian oak cask.  It was rich, thick, spicy, and very drinkable at its high ABV.  Now I was really looking forward to the tour.

The next night we Ubered over to the distillery.  If you go to Westland, I highly recommend taking the Experience tour, like we did, rather than just doing a tasting at the bar.  The tour is very casual and as informative as you'd like it to be.  In our case, I asked a zillion questions.

Westland Distillery was started by two 20-something year old guys, Emerson Lamb and Matt Hoffman, in 2010.  Financially, it is backed by the Lamb family's extensive old wealth (specifically Enterprises International) from the lumber industry.  With this solid backing, Lamb and Hoffman wanted to spearhead the creation of an American single malt industry.  They bought a former crane factory south of downtown Seattle and turned it into the current distillery.  They built two large dunnage warehouses in Hoquiam, WA, for their barrels.  In October 2013, their products first started hitting Seattle shelves.  Today they have three whiskies -- American Single Malt, Peated Malt, and Sherry Wood -- in their regular range that are distributed across the country, as well as a rotation of single casks that usually stay local.

The thing I appreciated the most about Westland is how completely open they are about every step of their processes.  This is more common in the American craft brewing industry than the scotch whisky industry, which keeps mum about any detail they can't turn into a marketing ploy, as if they fear some random dude is going to recreate Lagavulin from scratch in his garage.

Westland has three malt bills.  First is their most common, the 5-malt bill.  Made up of 70% pale malt from East Washington, 10% Munich Malt from Washington, 12% Extra Special Malt from Wisconsin, and a little bit of Brown Malt and Pale Chocolate malt from the UK, this mix is what goes into the American Single Malt as well as many of the single casks.  Then there's the Washington Malt bill, which is made entirely of the pale malt from East Washington.  Finally, there's the peated malt which they get from Baird's in Speyside, peated at 55ppm.

After experimenting with 27 different yeast strains, Matt (the Master Distiller) went with Belgian saison brewers yeast.  I can confirm it has fruity results.  They have a 5,000 liter mash tun (using 66ºC water) and 10,000 liter fermenters.  Their fermentation time is 5 days, which is much longer than most Scotch distilleries.  The resulting beer is 8%abv.

Their pair of pot stills, fashioned by Vendome and allegedly the largest west of the Mississippi, have the capacity for the installation of rectifier plates.  They have no set cut points, instead it's all done by nose and palate.  They redistill the heads and tails, so it's sort of a 2+ distillation process.

They use a number of casks.  They have ex-oloroso hogsheads and butts, ex-PX hogsheads and butts, ex-bourbon barrels, new American oak with different levels of char, Oregon oak, and the aforementioned Hungarian oak.  And with different sorts of casks, Matt uses different fill strengths.  Their warehouses are not climate controlled, so the oceanside weather affects the maturation.  Their target age range is two to four years.

Though there's only 200 casks in the warehouses right now, there's storage space for more than 3200.  Their daily capacity at the distillery is 5-6 casks.  The batch size for their regular range was 20-30 casks at first, but due to the expansion of their distribution the batches are now 50 casks.

So after all that, how is the whisky?

At the end of the tour, they pour the regular range, but while we were in the blending room we had a chance to sample a few single casks.  Cask 281 spent most of its life in a #3 char new oak barrel but was finished in a first fill Oloroso barrel.  The sherry was quite potent and whisky tasted much older than its 31 months (maybe even 8 extra years).  Cask 283 was massively peaty.  At 61%abv and 24 months in a first-fill ex-bourbon barrel it could easily compete with Kilchoman quality-wise.  Cask 313 was a whisky that had spent almost 3 years in a PX hogshead.  It was a dense desserty thing and though I'm usually not a PX fan, I liked this one the best of the three.

When it comes to their regular range, I think the American Single Malt is fine, not much more than that.  The Peated Malt is good, at least the equivalent of McCarthy's.  There are no too-young sharp edges, the peat is moderate and pleasant, and the oak stays back.  But it's the Sherry Wood that impressed me the most of the three.  It's quite a creation, utilizing six different cask types, the 5-malt bill, and a little bit of the peated malt.  The result is something that feels much more deeply matured than its 26 months.  I hope they can continue to match that quality in future batches.

I do have to say, though, the four single casks I tried all topped the regular range.  The very first Westland I had, Cask 16, the night before the tour, remains the best.  Its quality gives me a little bit of hope that something good will come from the American small distillery rush.  Eventually the market will thin out those who can't (most folks), leaving those who can (probably very few) to establish a successful American independent whiskey industry.

Happy New Year, whisky-wise and otherwise!

I'm sending many wishes of happiness and success to all of you, my excellent readers!  I begin the new year under the weather and thus in the middle of two weeks without booze and caffeine and fat and dairy and, oh god, happiness.  Luckily I have a few whisky things in the queue to post over the next two weeks.

As the reviews return, I'll continue with grouping them by themes or distilleries or countries.  In my reviews, going forward, I'm only going to comment on the color of a whisky if it's of interest, for instance if a pale whisky is very sherried or a dark whisky is spirit heavy or, you know, DiageoGold™.

source

I've also discovered (or actually MAO discovered) that my reviews are or were (for about five weeks) being republished in their entirety on a scraper website under the website's name, without my knowledge or consent.  I'm taking a few steps to prevent this from happening again.  Good times, y'all.  So to my readers viewing this post on other sites, welcome to Diving for Pearls!  I highly encourage you to head over to Diving for Pearls where the photos actually show up, the jokes make more sense (sort of), the reviews are more numerous and searchable, and the ads non-existent!

And finally, in personal news, my daughter will be going to daycare/school for half the week, every week, starting tomorrow.  I'm excited and nervous about it.  Meanwhile, I'll be going to back to fiction writing, again, with my newly expanded life.  I'm excited and nervous about it.  The planet has turned and the sun in the sky.  I'm excited and nervous about it.

Cheers!

Ghost of Whisky Yet to Come? Kavalan Solist Sherry Cask S090122079 Taiwanese Whisky

I skipped right over Ghost of Whisky Present because I'll be damned if I have to drink Laphroaig Select again.

To the future!

There are so many new whisky distilleries being built all over the world that I've given up trying to keep track of them.  With the Scotch whisky undergoing a market correction, and American whiskey probably doing the same within the next few years, I'm not sure there's a market for all these new distillers.  In Scotland alone, 20-30 distilleries were greenlighted (and more than a dozen older distilleries expanded) during the peak of the market and are now producing their spirit while export numbers continue to shrink.  Who's going to drink all this new stuff?  The Chinese and Indian middle classes?  I wouldn't bet on the Americans.  The newbs can price their whiskies as luxury -- you know, avoiding the shrinking middle class -- I suppose, aiming for the US wealthy, but that sector is pretty larded up already.

One new distillery whose single malts arrived at just the right peak time is Taiwan's Yuan Shan Distillery, producers of Kavalan single malt.  Their single casks hit the international market in 2011-2012 to much critical acclaim from both the everything-is-always-amazing crowd to the oldschoolers.  That high regard has continued right up through this year's Malt Maniacs Awards.  Thus Kavalan has established its roots before Nu Whisky arrives, giving it a better chance in whatever form the market takes next.

---

I have consistently disagreed with all the Kavalan raves, not to be a contrarian dick but because I actually had the opportunity to try six of their whiskies in 2013 and was completely underwhelmed.  Their $100 40%abv NAS whiskies were crap when neat, possibly only good for cocktails.  The $150 4yo single bourbon cask was a hot mess disliked by most of the folks at the tasting.  The $175 6yo sherry cask was so-so.  The $150 5yo Vinho barrique was decent.  The 6yo Fino cask was actually close to GlenDronach quality, but it was priced at more than $300.  Thus I had no idea what all the fuss was about, and was happy to not be tempted by very expensive whisky.

More than two years have since passed and $150 for barely legal whisky has become more prevalent and is, sadly, no longer shocking.  Positive reviews from more reliable sources, such as a couple Malt Maniacs who have relatable palates and also an actual maniac, inspired me to give it another go.

Distillery: Yuan Shan Distillery
Owner: King Car Group
Brand: Kavalan
Region: Yuanshan, Taiwan
Type: Single Malt

Age: 6 years (January 22, 2009 to March 9, 2015)

Maturation: "Sherry Cask", probably a sherry butt

Alcohol by Volume: 57.8%
Limited Release: 559 bottles

Samples purchased from the Whiskybase shop

NEAT
Its color is cherry syrup.

Enormous sherry on the nose: walnuts, raisins, dried cherries, and cherry snow cone syrup.  Soon a beef broth note develops and expands.  Maybe some mint too.  After 20+ minutes it picks up an earthy dried hay note and maybe some fresher fruit.

The palate has big sticky grapey sherry (almost a PX).  Chocolate and a mild herbal bitterness.  Hints of burlap and soil.  It's quite hot, but still drinkable.

Grape jam and dark cherries in the finish.  Caramel and chocolate (or maybe mocha?).  A little of the palate's decent bitterness.

WITH WATER (46-48%abv)
Raisins, vanilla, and baking spices (cinnamon, nutmeg, and cloves) on the nose.  A little more fresh stone fruits now.

The palate still has an ethyl bite.  Taste-wise there are raisins, plums, maybe limes too.  A little peppery and a slight mineral note.

All sherry stuff in the finish.  Plums, grape jam, and black pepper.

This is good sherried whisky.  Due to all of the heat and humidity near Taipei, the whisky feels like it's several years older than your usual 6 year old Scottish single malt.  And the sherry is loud Loud LOUD.  Since Kavalan isn't held to the SWA's laws, I wonder if the producer utilizes paxarette or includes a generous quantity of sherry right in the cask at the start.

Like Tuesday's very different whisky, the nose is the star of the show.  The palate (and definitely the finish) feel muted after the nose's technicolor vibrancy.  But it swims decently, which is nice.  Overall this whisky might be close quality-wise to Glenfarclas 15 and GlenDronach 15, at least on the nose.  That's the positive side of things.  (For a very positive opinion, yes, see MAO's review from last week.)

On the other hand, if you're in the US, getting your hands on a bottle of this will cost you around $150 (with shipping), and that's only while the Euro is weak.  To me, the quality and price still do not match, probably by a factor of two.  But if spending $150 on a bottle of tempered brown poison is a regular occurrence for you, then have at it.  It's good.

Availability - Europe only
Pricing - $150+ if you're having it shipped to the US
Rating - 87

Ghost of Whisky Past: Hibiki 21 year old blended Japanese Whisky

In the midst of a major transitional period, a 5-8 year timespan that may prove to be the Dark Ages for its two largest producers, the Japanese whisky market finds itself with only very young stock after once being flush with numerous age-stated single malts and blends of excellent quality.  Over a three year period, with demand far outstripping supply, Suntory and Nikka, two publicly held corporations (whose annual production counts for at least 87% of Japanese malt whisky), elected to drain their aged stock quickly and entirely.

While this makes this former fanatic very bitter, I understand that at some point there was going to be a supply issue.  There just wasn't enough of the good stuff to make everyone happy.  What I do question is the management of this supply.  There are ways to regulate outturns and control the market, stretching the stock out another few years while the newer spirit aged.  Yamazaki 12 was heavily stocked at all major retailers week after week, priced at $45 (locally), until it was suddenly totally gone.  Limiting the amounts being exported and raising the MSRP -- which is being done by some Scottish and American whisky producers -- would have irritated many customers, but those same folks would have been much happier to at least have had the option to purchase it at all.  I can see how that may limit short term revenues, but would it have really been worse than tanking a decade's worth of sales just to make a good profit for a few years?

What we're left with are NASes (non-age statement whiskies) from Yamazaki, Hakushu, Hibki, Taketsuru, Yoichi, and Miyagikyo.  Having tried the NASes from the Suntory brands, I don't expect to be buying their products for a long long time.  I do hold out hope that Nikka can make something decent, but what price tag will they apply?  And will the quality of From the Barrel, a dynamite blend, take a dive as a result?

Whisky is much less fun with Japanese whisky in this shape.  (No, Chichibu is not an option while its 3 year old whisky sells for $200-$300.)  I hope the recovery is successful, but when Suntory's and Nikka's aged stock comes back on line there are going to be a lot more whisk(e)y options for consumers in 2023 than there were in 2013.

---

From the golden years of age statements, here's Hibiki 21, a premium blend from Suntory's Yamazaki, Hakushu, and Chita distilleries.  Five years ago, its US average price was $145.  Today that average has crossed $500, with a number of LA retailers selling it for $800.  I always found the 12yo and 17yo to be pleasant well crafted whiskies.  I've never had the 21 until now.  Thank you to Aaron Krouse (aka aaron197172 of Booze Dancing) for generously providing this sample.

Brand: Hibiki
Ownership: Suntory Whisky
Country: Japan
Distilleries: Yamazaki and Hakushu for malt, Chita for grain

Age: minimum 21 years

Maturation: ex-bourbon casks, ex-sherry casks, and Mizunara casks

Alcohol by Volume: 43%

Its color is a medium dark gold.

My first written note about the nose: "Rly fucken good." That's probably not helpful.  I suppose some specifics are called for.  Firstly, it noses like a much older single malt, like a gorgeous old 30-40 year old Speyside.  Graceful old oak, delicate tropical fruit, a toffee-coffee-baked-apple-and-apricot warm dessert.  After a while, the toffee almost takes over.  Then some salty air and small notes of tangerines and honey.

The palate feels both old and young.  There's dried fruit, ginger, peppercorns, a floral tea, very dark chocolate, and thick malt.  It's not as delicate as expected.  Nice and dry.  Brief moments of wood smoke and pipe tobacco.  A cooling sensation at the end.

There's old musty creaky oak in the finish.  Some soft sherry and roasted malt.  Armagnac dark cherries (specifically the ones I make; someday I'll have to post the recipe).  Tiny bitter notes and cracked pepper linger longest.

---

My goodness what a nose.  I'm talking about an all time Top Ten sniffer.  Four hours after the tasting the glass was redolent of the richest caramel sauce.  Had the palate matched the nose, this would have topped Yamazaki 18 as my favorite Japanese whisky.  That's not to say the palate isn't good, in fact it's very good.  It's never sweet, always pleasantly dry.  Very very malty.  It just doesn't stun like the nose.  I also expected a little more time and character in the finish.  But this still gets into the 90-point zone because of that nose.  Though Hibiki 12 and 17 are decent blends, this lives in a separate dimension.

Of course I wish it hadn't tripled in price over the past 5 years.  If you don't mind spending this kind of money, then there are many worse whiskies you can get at this price.  This is in fact, luxurious.  I'm hard pressed to think of a better blended whisky.

(Also, see the reviews by LAWS, Coopered Tot, Booze Dancing, and Whiskyfun for their experiences.)

Availability - Scarce in the US, easier to find in the rest of the world
Pricing - avg price in US is near $500, in Europe it's near $350. It can be found for less than $300 if you do some deeper digging
Rating - 90

Some final thoughts on the Longrow and Kilchoman reviews

After writing about 16 different Kilchomans this year, I'm suffering from Kilchoman fatigue.  You may be too, after my five posts this week, so I promise this will be the last post about Kilchoman for a long while.

---

1.  Kilchoman and Longrow are both in my Top Ten Favorite Single Malts list, with the latter being in my top five.  I chose to do these two packed weeks of reviews to end the year thinking that I'd be hootin' and hollerin' with joy about these malts/brands, with there being at least a few super duper whiskies.  Instead, while there were a couple very good items, there were a larger number of not very good ones.  Two things became clear.  First, that these beloved brands were in fact fallible.  And secondly, not only are their cheapest basic single malts (Machir Bay and Peated) respectable, they're better than many of the brands' more premium products.

2.  Getting peat + wine to work well is very difficult, yet most peated whisky producers are doing it damn-the-result style and promptly bottling it in order to expand their product ranges.  In some cases the limited edition hype will clear out the bottles regardless of quality.  But I wonder, are these customers actually opening their bottles?  Or are they hoarding?  Or are they "investing" (aka flipping)?  And for those who are drinking their whiskies, are they so motivated to buy a second bottle or come back for the next edition?  Time will tell if these products can outlast their hype.

3.  Due to the prices of the Kilchoman and Longrow whiskies reviewed over the past weeks, I wouldn't buy a single one of these single malts.  Good-to-very-good young single malts (especially if they're not single casks) will not get me to part with $120 or more.  And I'm one of the fans!

4.  Single malt whisky prices have changed drastically.  The selection of quality whiskies for the lower working classes were abandoned 8-10 years ago.  And now the quality options for the middle classes are fading.  Thankfully, several good basic single malt "expressions" remain.  If we get priced out of those, then the industry (whose volume sales continue to struggle) is going to have to offer us more than NASes to keep our business.