Fail...er...Adventures in Blending: Improving Kilkerran Cask Strength, AGAIN

I love love love Kilkerran's Work In Progress (WIP) single malts, all of them. They're brilliant and possibly the best whisky being produced in Campbeltown at the time. The first batch of Kilkerran 12yo was also a more-than-worthy mate to Springbank 10yo. I'd grab another bottle if I could find one.

So I was very excited to hear that Glengyle distillery was going to release a series of age-stated cask strength Kilkerran batches. I bought a bottle of Batch 1, all ex-bourbon casks, as soon as it materialized. And it took me nearly five years to finish it. It just did not work. Despite being older than half of the WIPs, it read more immature than all of them, very hot and incomplete. I tried to spruce it up with some magical old Famous Grouse 18yo Malt, with mixed results.

In 2020 I tried Batch 4, which was all recharred sherry casks......and I wasn't wild about that one either, as its oak and sherry elements were completely out of balance with the spirit. Then, in 2023, I split a bottle of Batch 7, port casks, and that one went the wrong direction, full-tilt.

Thus I've lost interest in the cask strength batches, especially if Glengyle won't release batches with a mix of sherry and bourbon casks. They blended casks in the first four WIPs (younger whisky may I add) and knocked it out of the park each time.

But what if I did a little blending myself? Well, I did in 2022. And then completely forgot about it. So my two little ~35mL creations sat for 21 months, marrying or merging or cuddling. And now it's time to find out what resulted.

---

Vatting #1

1 part Kilkerran Work In Progress, Sixth Edition, sherry wood, ~10 years old, 46%abv

+

2 parts Kilkerran Cask Strength, Batch 1, bourbon casks, 8 years old, 56.2%abv

Full strength, 52.8%abv

Nose: Walnuts, honey, and oranges. Antiseptic, sandalwood, chocolate, and mild peat smoke.

Palate: Slight sooty with a bit of heat. Sweet oranges and Luxardo cherries.

Finish: Soot, oranges, hint of toffee.

Comments: NAILED IT. Oh wow, this keeps many of the best parts from WIP6, ditching the weakest elements of CS1.

Diluted to 46%abv

Nose: Toffee, almond butter, and date rolls. Peat smoke starts out quiet, then expands with time.

Palate: Weirdly bitter, with almonds and black pepper in the background.

Finish: Sweeter and less bitter than the palate.

Comments: The nose works. The palate does not. I'm surprised by how much it changed.

---

Vatting #2

10mL Kilkerran Cask Strength, Batch 4, re-charred sherry casks, 8 years old, 57.1%abv

+

25mL Kilkerran Cask Strength, Batch 1, bourbon casks, 8 years old, 56.2%abv

Full strength, 56.45%abv

Nose: Brine, barley(!), and almond extract, with hints of blossoms and industrial smoke stack.

Palate: Very floral and hot. Heavy peat. Tart lemons and a hint of soap in the background.

Finish: Floral, salty, sweet, and very peppery.

Comments: Very good nose, but everything else is out of whack.

Diluted to 46%abv

Nose: Brine, black currant jam, and piney peat.

Palate: Orange marmalade. Plenty sweet with gentler oak and peat.

Finish: Oranges, wood smoke, and a touch of bitterness.

Comments: Much better this way. I wish I had another ounce or two to ponder.

---

#1 at full strength is the obvious winner, though I'd be happy with a bottle of #2 at 46%abv. Both are complete whiskies, fashioned with dumb luck. I guarantee you that J&A Mitchell & Company's blenders have the stock and skillset to run circles around me, so why don't they give it a try? There's room to grow with this CS series, and I do not mean tequila casks. Kilkerran can still offer coffee-dark sherried or straw-light bourbon cask batches, while also dropping a masterful mix into the series once in a while. No finishes, just vattings. I know I'd buy it.

Fail...er...Adventures in Blending: Improving Kilkerran Cask Strength?

It pains me to write this, but I was disappointed by the first batch of Kilkerran 8yo Cask Strength. I'd waited and waited for them to release something like it. Then they did, and I bought it. And I found it to be just fine, which is (for me) a letdown because I'm very big fan of their whiskies. Also, the key to making it "just fine" was by diluting the whisky down to 46%abv, which is the strength of their regular releases. Yet, even then it wasn't as good as their regular releases.

At the end of my review of that whisky, I said it "could have used a small percentage of the distillery's good sherry casks to lift it up a bit". After additional sips, I realized it was so raw that perhaps it needed some sherried whisky with more age and less alcohol. This called for my new blending friend: Famous Grouse 18 year old blended malt.

While visiting another one of these United States this year, I found the oldest of the vatted Grouse on clearance for $49.99. So I scooped one up and opened it immediately (but not in the parking lot).

I'll review it on its own another time, but I'll say here that it's deeply sherried and very approachable. As it was bottled in 2011, it contains quality ingredients from the early nineties, possibly Macallan and Highland Park, though more likely it's mostly Glenturret.

Its individual parts were chosen for blending purposes so that the end result would be a good blend. And that good blend, in turn, seems to blend well when applied to other whiskies. Would it work with the fiery Campbeltown youngster?

---

I made two vattings and let them marry for three months. A Vegas marriage, if you will. Here's the resulting Taste Off:

K8CS - Kilkerran 8yo Cask Strength batch 1, full power (56.2%abv)
K46 - Kilkerran 8yo Cask Strength batch 1, diluted to 46%abv
KILL GROUSE, THE YOUNGER - (4:1) 4 parts K8CS to 1 part Famous Grouse 18yo (53.6%abv)
KILL GROUSE, THE ELDER - (2:1) 2 parts K8CS to 1 part Famous Grouse 18yo (51.8%abv)

K8CS
Nose - Yeasty, bready. Citronella candles and fresh apricots. Simple peat. A hint of raspberries.
Palate - Very hot. Sweet and malty. Unsmoked tobacco, chocolate milk, black peppercorns, yeast and paper.
Finish - Heat, peppercorns, sugar, yeast and paper.
Commentary: I'm sad to report that this bottle has gotten less interesting in the eight months it's been opened. While it's of interest to try something that seems like a barely legal Glengyle, it's not worth more than one try at full strength.

K46
Nose - Cocoa, flowers, a few more fruits. Dough and wet cardboard. It fades fast, becoming just yeast and peat.
Palate - Still hot, though creamier and peatier. Peppery and grainy. Hints of tobacco and flowers. Fades quickly here too.
Finish - Hot sauce and apples. Sense memory: unflavored prescription cough medicine from the '80s.
Commentary: My notes here are different than they were in the November review. The dilution also doesn't work as well as it did before. It's still a minor improvement over the neat version.

KILL GROUSE, THE YOUNGER
Nose - Very fudgy. Some dunnage notes and funkier peat. Mixed berry jam. How about brownies with a raspberry ribbon?
Palate - Starts with honey, oranges and lots of fresh ginger. But then the K8's heat comes blasting in. It turns tangy and peppery. With port-like berries and pretzels?
Finish - A gingery sizzle on the tongue. Tangy and sour citrus. Pepper. Less heat.
Commentary: It's an improvement. It's also sort of a mess on the palate. The nose works though. Fascinating how just a little bit of the 43%abv 18yo malt totally turned the nose around.

KILL GROUSE, THE ELDER
Nose - More grapes. Cocoa and baked blueberries. The peat fades into a soil-like note. Chocolate malt, nougat, graphite and a hint of lime.
Palate - Softer heat and more graceful peat. Limes, berries, light florals, milk chocolate. Mothballs. Less ginger. A bit winey at times.
Finish - Big. Ginger, pepper, citrus candy and peat.
Comments: Best mouthfeel and longest finish of the foursome. It's the closest to a complete product, though again the theoretically thinned out older malt still knocks the younger stuff right over in the mix. More of the 18yo would have hidden the Kilkerran entirely. Though that's not the worst thing, it also wouldn't result in a balanced blend.

KILL GROUSE, THE ELDER wins the battle, and that was entirely due to the surprisingly muscular Famous Grouse 18yo malt. But. Kilkerran Work in Progress editions 5 through 7 (all woods) would beat all four of these contestants by some margin. So I'm going to steer clear of the Kilkerran CSes until they pick up some age or a few sherry casks.

MAO Mix: Tomatin Cuatro flavour

MAO mao mao mao
MAO mao mao mao
MAO mao mao Mao
MAO Mao mao mao
MAO mao mao mao
MAO mao mao mao
MAO mao mao Mao
MAO Mao mao mao

I'm going to get so many clicks now! That's how SEO works, right?

---

Upon opening a parcel recently sent to me by Comrade My Annoying Opinions, I found this:

Oh, and also this:

For those who've drifted on to more pleasant non-whisky pastures (such as brandy, rum, politics, carving out your eyeballs with a teaspoon, etc.) since 2014, Tomatin distillery simultaneously released four (cuatro!) 12 year old single malts, with each having spent nine years in ex-bourbon casks and 3 years in a specific type of sherry cask. Fino, Manzanilla, Oloroso and Smuckers Pedro X each received its own release.

MAO took a hit for the team and bought all four. He reviewed them. Then he mixed them. And reviewed his mix (see Blend A). Now I will review his mix.

MAO Mix: Tomatin Cuarto flavour - 46% abv
1:1:1:1 (Fino : Manzanilla : Oloroso : Pedro Ximenez cask releases)

At first the sherry is quite reserved in the nose, letting the malt stand out. There's also hint of something smoky and industrial. The sherry element grows with time, showing up as both nutty and (berry) jammy. Fresh pears and white peaches. Those fruits pick up a funky fermenting note after the whisky sits in the glass for 30 minutes.

Some moderate fruity sherry in the palate, which is more sherried than the nose. Tart fruits and raisins. A hint of woody bitterness that gradually turns into an almost eucalyptus-like zing. There's a dark, almost tarry, note underneath.

On the finish it's raisins and star anise, then hints of bitterness and sweetness. A solid salty note. A good length.

I'd choose this 12 year old Tomatin mix over the official Macallan 12. Of course, that's not as hot of a take as it would have been five years ago. But let that not be a strike against this MAO Mix, which is a well-balanced combo with good fruit stuff that reins in the excitable oak. It's a good winter drink, someone should bottle it.

Rating - 元元元习 (3 yuan and 1 Xí)

The Dusty Vat, my only great blend

Blending scotch whisky is an art form. Blending scotch whisky is an art form at which I have failed. Blending scotch whisky is an art form at which I have failed, repeatedly. Blending scotch whisky is an art form at which I have failed, repeatedly, damn it.

But then, this past August, I was in possession of several partial ounces of unexciting single malts. These were reviewed samples that I just could not finish. Amongst these samples were three dusties. Since I had little desire to drink them on their own, I thought what the hell, I might as well blend them. Plenty of lessons had been learned from my previous failures with scotch blends and I hoped to apply them to this mysterious alchemy.

The end result was exactly 6 fluid ounces of a blended malt, with ingredients from Speyside, Highlands, Lowlands, Islay and Campbeltown. I named it The Dusty Vat.

Ingredients

18mL Glenallachie 11yo 1985 Signatory cask 4063 (43%abv)
19mL Bladnoch 16yo 1980 Signatory cask 89/591/20 (43%abv)
19mL Port Ellen 14yo 1983 Signatory cask 266 (43%abv)
20mL Glenturret 10yo official bottling (40%abv)
39mL Tomintoul 16yo official bottling (40%abv)
5 mL Laphroaig 10yo official bottling (2016 UK release, 40%abv)
25mL Kilkerran 12yo official bottling (2016 UK release, 46%abv)
25mL Macallan Cask Strength (60.1%abv)
7mL filtered water, applied to Macallan CS before adding to the vatting

So, yes I sorta buried the lede. There's Port Ellen in the mix. But it wasn't particularly good whisky, so I hope nobody gets the vapors over me putting it in a blend.

As mentioned in the ingredients, I proofed down the Macallan CS (for 48 hours) before blending it in, to make sure it didn't overwhelm the other ingredients.

Speaking of overwhelming a blend, Laphroaig. If you're going to do your own blending, please please please be gentle with the Laphroaig because its character easily dominates everything else in the recipe. Personally, I recommend keeping Laphroaig at 5% or less of the vatting. In this case it makes up 2.8% and is fully present, bringing a lovely layer to the mid-palate.

The Highland/Speyside contingent makes up 61.5% of the malt. Ex-bourbon cask whisky makes up at least 80% of the vatting, and most of those casks were likely refill. Even the Macallan CS felt more like American oak than European when drunk on its own. My goal was to focus on the spirit and not oak, much like whisky producers of earlier times ⇐ admittedly a romantic notion.

THE DUSTY VAT blended malt, 43.05%abv

The nose is full of "barley barley", as per my notes. A hint of woody peat smoke. Peated Good & Plenty candy. Fried plantains, grilled pear and oxidizing/browning apples. Hints of vanilla bean and oloroso sherry cask. There's also an actual dusty note lingering about. 

On the palate there's LOVELY peat, WTF?! Then lemons, caramel candies, toasted marshmallows, graham crackers and a nice sharp bite. It's malty, has a bit of musty warehouse to it and a bright plummy foreground.

Wood smoke and earth lead the finish. Some peppery heat, barley and scorched marshmallows. An almost total lack of sweetness.

Wow. It's now gone and I am sad. I'm just going to lie to myself (and you) and say this is what '50s Teacher's must have tasted like. Though the majority of the blend's ingredients are mediocre-to-OK Speyside, the dusty and old school style whisky transforms the thing. That touch of Laphroaig also goes a really long way (as mentioned above). I'm staring at the empty bottle now. I don't know if I can ever top this vatting, but in my heart I'll always have The Dusty Vat.

Availability - Gone. :-(
Pricing - Buying the individual ingredients would cost hundreds of dollars or pounds or euros nowadays
Rating - 88

A week of wut? Michael's Solid Number Two, the review

After three months, WTF Is This? has come to a (temporary?) close.  But it's a stylish close!  This week I'll be honoring that series with three unique(ish) reviews you won't find anywhere else, hopefully.  First up, my whiskey.

I am a terrible whisk(e)y blender.  The blending failures not published to this site are vast, vast, vast in number.  Vast.  But even a poor blender is entitled to some half-assed success.  Enter Michael's Solid Number Two.  One year and one week ago, I wrote a post about three whiskey blends made from the cask strength version of Balcones's True Blue Corn Whiskey and Rittenhouse Bottled-in-Bond Rye.  Out of the three blends the second one turned out to be very good, thus the subtle literary post title, Michael makes a solid number two.

It was an ultra high (is that name my invention too?) rye bourbon, with a mashbill of approximately 51/40/9 and an ABV of about 51.4%.  For the experiment I made a 30mL sample and let it rest for 18 days.  After discovering the resulting success, I scaled it up to 650mL in the bottle above.  Would've done the full 750mL but I was out of ingredients.  Anyway, I drank it all.  Except for one sample...

Color -- Dark gold
Nose -- Big rye, just like the old label Ritt I had used (and used to love).  Meaty/savory but also highlighted by flower blossoms.  Lots of mint and caramel sauce.  Some saline.  A vanilla bean note grows with time.  It sometimes seems like it's getting younger with time, too, picking up some yeast and new make notes.
Palate -- Hotter than the nose.  And (woo!) really peppery too.  Very thick texture.  A medium sweetness level, mostly fueled by corn syrup.  There's a nuttiness that leans towards roasted peanuts.  A slight burnt note.  Bitter coffee.  Gets drier with time.
Finish -- Extensive and sweet.  Brown sugar and cayenne.  Lemon and lime candies.  Black cherry soda and vanilla.  The bitter note from the palate does an upswing into tangy.

Yep, hits the spots.  Similar to the lower rye mashbill versions of rye (like Rittenhouse) with some more youth and sweets.  It works very well on the rocks, keeping much of its flavor.  Man, I miss this stuff.  I can't tell you how many days this summer I sat praying for another number two.

Availability - All gone, unless you make your own

Pricing - You'd have to buy a bottle of a sold out cask strength corn whiskey and the old label version of Rittenhouse BIB

Rating - 85

Fail...er...Adventures in Blending: Salvaging a Springbank

As documented in my previous post, I recently encountered a problematic single cask bottling of Springbank, a bottling whose main characteristic was ethyl heat.  Applying water did help open the nose slightly, but the palate just became watery.  At the end of the tasting that led to my review, 2.5 fl. oz. of the whisky remained.  After taking 6 months just to consume the first five ounces, I didn't have much interest in drinking the rest as is.  So I decided to do three separate vattings to see if I could salvage my whisky.

Historically, my home vattings cannot be described as successes.  The only one I've enjoyed drinking was the ultra-high-rye bourbon I built last summer.  But failure never stopped me.  Actually that is not true.  Failure always stops me.  But not with whisky!  So I made my three vattings and set them aside to compare with the original whisky then......forgot about them for four weeks.  At least that left the ingredients more time to commingle and merge.  Here are the results:

Whisky #1

Springbank 13yo 1999 Rum Cask for Whiskykanzler

The original whisky, tasted again without looking at my previous notes.

Stats:
Approximate ABV: 57.1%
Quantity bottled: 30mL
Resting time: 28 days

Nose - Oatmeal, pine, brown sugar, and a slight industrial edge that I don't remember being there before.  It's still one of the hottest noses I've ever experienced.  Smaller notes of band aids, honey, canned peaches, and polyester.

Palate - Heat.  Peat reading as smoke.  Caramel.  Coconut.  A hint of Mount Gay-like rum.  Slightly farty.

Finish - A sweetness that gets very aggressive, even with all of the ethyl burn.  Some citrus, rum, and smoke.

Verdict: Nose was better than I remembered it to be, but the palate is still a bum.  Suddenly way too sweet in the finish.

Grade Range: C/C+

---

Whisky #2 

3 parts - Springbank 13yo 1999 Rum Cask

1 part - Macallan Cask Strength (60.1%abv version)

Goal: Perk up the whisky with a little bit of full strength ex-sherry malt.  This version of Mac's CS is the only recent one I've enjoyed, and was also the only high strength sherried whisky I had open.

Stats:
Approximate ABV: 57.9%
Quantity made: 15mL
Resting time: 28 days

Nose - Something between strawberry bubblegum and plaster.  Vanilla simple syrup.  Plastic toys.  Graham crackers, a hint of lime, and blue raspberry sno-cone syrup.  Less ethyl, despite the higher abv.
Palate - Peppery, peatier.  Still very hot, but more drinkable.  Toasted grains, golden raisins, and caramel.
Finish - Salt and tart with a peep of sherry.  Blackberry syrup?  Mildly sweet, but very acidic.  Gets weird on the tongue and I can't wash it off.

Verdict: Somewhat successful.  A better (and very zany) nose is the highlight.  The odd finish holds it down.
Grade Range: B-

---

Whisky #3 

3 parts - Springbank 13yo 1999 Rum Cask

1 part - Lagavulin 16 year old official bottling

Goal: Perk up the whisky with a little bit of quality peated malt, yet not turn it into a peat beast.

Stats:
Approximate ABV: 53.6%
Quantity made: 15mL
Resting time: 28 days

Nose - An early puff of rotten meat exits quickly.  Lime and a light dusting of peat take over.  Also lemon zest, hot concrete, and a hint of mango appear.
Palate - Much peatier and saltier, pulling all the way out to Lagavulin territory.  But then it takes a quick turn into saccharine and ash.
Finish - Almost all Nutrasweet.  A whisper of peat shows up, only to be drowned in rotten milk.

Verdict: Nope.
Grade Range: D+/C-

---

Whisky #4

6 parts - Springbank 13yo 1999 Rum Cask

1 part - Lagavulin 16 year old official bottling

1 part - Macallan Cask Strength

Goal: Perk up the whisky by adding small touches of both rich sherried whisky and well-aged peated whisky.

Stats:
Approximate ABV: 55.7%
Quantity made: 15mL
Resting time: 28 days

Nose - Band aids, prunes, orange blossoms, Turkish honey, dried leaves, and a little bit of tropical fruit too.  Somehow the sherry reads the loudest on this one.
Palate - Peppery and fruity sweet.  Lots of citrus and stone fruits.  Rose blossoms, watermelon Jolly Ranchers, and peat cinders.  Peeps of sherry and vanilla.  The least hot of all the palates.
Finish - Peat and oranges.  Tiny bits of tart and sweet.  Least weird of the finishes, though it still leaves a strange aftertaste.

Verdict: Success.  I would happily drink this again.  The issue with the finish keeps this one from flying.
Grade Range: B

---

With two successes and one failure this is the best luck I've ever had with vatting single malts.  One element that ran through all three vattings was a strange residue/texture in the finish.  Perhaps it was due to the Springbank spirit or the rum cask itself.

As always, I recommend taking it easy with incorporating a peated whisky into a vatting, especially if you're adding one of the big Islays.  I'd recommend being cautious with adding sherried whisky as well, though a blend should be able to take on sherry better than peat.  Ultimately, I do think many subpar single malts can be salvaged to a point with blending.  Just keep in mind, the quality of your final product often lies in the quality of your ingredients.

Fail...er...Adventures in Blending: Trader Kirk's 10 year old blended malt

On Monday, I reviewed the 10 year old Highland single malt that bears Trader Joe's name on its label.  On Tuesday, I reviewed Kirkland's 18 year old sherry-finished Speyside.

Just gonna keep recycling the same bad picture

TJs' 10yo Highland joins the "don't buy at Trader Joe's" list, accompanying their chicken (the grisliest butchery since I, Robot and Bicentennial Man -- seriously, leave Asimov the f**k alone), their whole wheat pita (reliably covered in mold less than 24 hours after purchase), their refried beans (which taste like absolutely nothing), and the Dark Chocolate-Covered Pretzel Slims (because I will eat the entire damn bag in the car).  Meanwhile, Kirkland's 18yo Speyside is worth its $30 price tag.

TJs' single malt's weakness is its palate.  It is light on character, like a bland blend.  I was hoping that adding a little Kirkland malt would pep it up.  And by "little", I mean "a lot".  The ratio in my blend experiment was 3 parts Kirkland 18yo to 2 parts TJs 10yo.  The result?

The biggest element of the nose is a wall of charred American oak, almost like a watery bourbon.  Once that, and a big ethyl pop, wears off it gets lightly floral and grainy.  More welcome notes of halvah, cardamom, anise, and honey appear with time.  The palate is papery, bitter, and has an odd amount of heat for its 40%abv.  Tart lemons, black pepper, banana, and malt make brief appearances.  Grain, heat, caramel, and banana appear in the finish, but it's mostly black pepper and blah.

Thus, if you have a bottle of $19.99 Trader Joe's 10 year old Highland single malt that needs pepping up, you're going to need something bigger and bolder than Kirkland's 18 year old sherry-finished Speyside.  You'll need a sherry bomb or something Laphroaig-ish.  Otherwise, you shouldn't waste too much of the 18yo on it.

---

For this Turkey Day, I recommend not drinking.  That's right!  Whisky blog guy says don't drink on Glutton Day.  Save those calories for all the awesome food on the table.  Though, if the food sucks (and/or the company sucks) then drink something that tastes really good and isn't necessarily a bargain.  You gotta enjoy something.  May you all have a great Thanksgiving!

Further failures in bourbon blending......

(Yes, I'm aware that these aren't all bourbons, but I was looking for lazy alliteration.)

Two weeks ago, I shared with you the brief tale of my solid number two.  I made three whiskies out of Balcones True Blue Cask Strength corn whiskey and Rittenhouse Bottled-in-Bond straight rye.  Whiskey #1 and #3 had their strengths, but their weakness tilted them out of favor.  Whiskey #2, an ultra-high rye bourbon, was good enough to bottle 600mL worth.

On September 2nd, I took the last dribbles of the Balcones True Blue CS, the remainder of the Koval Dark Millet, and some of the Koval Dark Rye whiskey (each 100% one grain) and did two experimental blends.  The idea was to create a bourbon and a rye, but using the extra light millet grain whiskey rather than a malted barley whiskey as the third grain in each.

On the surface it sounds relatively harmless, but there were two issues floating above the experiments.  Firstly, these were all super young whiskies that displayed nearly no maturation characteristics.  Secondly, I didn't particularly care for the way any of them tasted on their own.  There were positives in their noses, but not in the palates.  With my previous whiskies, #1, #2, and #3, at least I had Rittenhouse BiB bringing a little bit of age and luscious flavor to the mix.

---

#4 - Goal: Design a 51%-corn bourbon.  Result: Due to adjustments I had to make to take into consideration the whiskies' alcohol strengths as well as the microscopic milliliter adjustments, I had to settle for a 52%-corn bourbon.  Curses!

Stats:
Approximate resulting mashbill: 52/24/24 (corn/rye/millet)
Approximate ABV: 47.4%
Quantity made: 30mL
Resting time: 22 days

Nose -- Turpentine, caramel, vodka, corn, apple-flavored candy.  Lightly smoky.  But that's before I air it out.  After giving it 20+ minutes in a covered glass something awful began to happen.  While it still smelled of caramel and sugar, a massive note of rotten fish began to emerge.  And it wouldn't go away.  Either it absorbed something weird from the air or I crossed the streams.
Palate -- Corn, apple juice, vodka, and paper. With the extra time in the glass it improved slightly, with some more sweetness and bitterness.  But it never reaches a drinkable quality.
Finish -- More paper.  Very drying.  With air it becomes chemically bitter.

Verdict:  Wow.  Bad.  I could not finish it.  Worse than the sum of its parts.

---

#5 - Goal: Design a rye with Rittenhouse's mashbill (37/51/12), substituting millet for barley.  Result: Due to the structural issues mentioned in #4's, I got pretty darn close

Stats:
Approximate resulting mashbill: 37.6/52.6/9.8 (corn/rye/millet)
Approximate ABV: 45.1%
Quantity made: 30mL
Resting time: 22 days

Nose -- Less ugly than #4.  A little bit of rye spice sneaks in.  Some flower blossoms.  Vanilla.  Vodka.  Lots of corn pushes past the other elements.  With 20+ minutes in the glass there isn't much change.  Might be a little more sugary.
Palate -- Lots of bitterness.  No sweetness whatsoever.  Corn, paper (again), bland vegetation.  Very light, almost like a Canadian blend.  With time no major flavors develop.  Sort of semi-bitter / semi-sweet.  Sort of drinkable.
Finish -- Paper, corn, imitation vanilla extract, some bitterness and caramel.  Nothing changes with time.

Verdict:  Better than #4, but I still wouldn't drink it if it were free.

---

Both of these blends were crappy, though on different levels.  Aside from the bizarre rotten note, what was most disappointing was the feeling that in both instances I was drinking paper-flavored vodka (attention: makers of Cupcake Vodka...).  For a moment I considered blending #4 and #5 together, but then I decided that the whole thing needed to end promptly because...

The main lesson I learned from this blending experience is to not expect to suddenly create something good from elements one doesn't like in the first place.  Quality ingredients are the key to great dishes and cocktails.  Having at least one decent whisk(e)y may also be required in a blend.  So it's likely that one won't be able to salvage a bad whiskey by adding another one to it and then another one.

This week we'll see if professional blenders did a better job than I with the young whiskies they had at hand.

Michael makes a solid number two

(alternate title: Adventures in Bourbon Blending!)

I was sitting on (figuratively) about about eight fluid ounces of Balcones True Blue Cask Strength, a high ABV all-corn whiskey which smelled nice but didn't taste like much.  With no desire to ever drink it again, I wondered if there was a drinkable bourbon to be made from it.  Perhaps applying some good rye would fix things.  I had plenty of Rittenhouse Bottled-In-Bond on hand, so I began to tinker.

Here are the three bourbons I blended:

#1 - 50% True Blue Cask Strength / 50% Rittenhouse BIB.

Stats:
Approximate resulting mashbill: 71/24/5 (corn/rye/malted barley)
Approximate ABV: 53.6%
Quantity made: 30mL
Resting time: 11 days

Nose -- Very nutty, specifically hazelnuts and almonds.  Then caramel sauce, halvah, Heath bar, sawdust, and maple syrup.
Palate -- Very hot and tannic.  It's nutty here too, maybe walnuts?  Something fibrous and grainy in there.  A little bitterness and very light on the sweets.
Finish -- Wood smoke and coffee

Verdict:  Smells yummy but tastes so-so.  Too hot and woody for me.  Have no interest to drink it again.

---

#2 - Goal: Design a high-rye (~35%) bourbon.  Result: Due to the two whiskies' mashbills it became an "ultra-high-rye" bourbon.

Stats:
Approximate resulting mashbill: 51/40/9
Approximate ABV: 51.4%
Quantity made: 30mL
Resting time: 18 days

Nose -- A bit hot at first, but it eases down with a little air.  At first sniffs there's corn meal, molasses, sugar & spice.  Then a lightly perfumed foundation powder, sawdust, caramel, vanilla, kettle corn, and mint.  And oh so much rye.  Rye candy!
Palate -- Bourbony cough medicine, salt, and pipe tobacco.  An orange peel note develops into tart cherries and blackberries.  Very tingly with a soft bitterness underneath.
Finish -- Cough medicine, salt, and an herbal r(h)um. Mellow tartness and a mild herbal bitterness.

Verdict:  It's almost all rye on the nose, while the palate is thick and rich.  It tastes very good.  I wanted more as soon as I finished my sample.

---

#3 - Goal: Design a high-corn (~79%) bourbon.  Result: Easily doable with with these whiskies.

Stats:
Approximate resulting mashbill: 79/17/4
Approximate ABV: 54.6%
Quantity made: 30mL
Resting time: 18 days

Nose -- Less hot than #2 (though the ABV is higher).  LOADS of caramel.  Saltwater taffy, butter, caramel apples by the ocean, maple candy, and raisins.
Palate -- Here it's much hotter, though quiet flavor-wise.  Corn stuff, but not sweet.  Some rye spices lift it up.  A hint of wood smoke.  Grows a little sweeter with time.
Finish -- Cigar mouth, sugar, some tartness.  Long, but mild in content.

Verdict:  The nose was good again, though the buttery element became weirdly strong.  Yet as vibrant as the nose showed itself to be, the palate went the opposite direction.  The corn and rye didn't merge and almost no secondary flavors appeared.

---

Without a doubt, my favorite was #2.  While all three blends smelled nice, #1 and #3 didn't taste great.  I enjoyed the second one so much that I sacrificed the rest of my Rittenhouse bottle to fix up 600mL of this solid number two.

After giving it two weeks in the bottle to marry, I just tried it again last night and it's still very lush.  Sometimes it tastes like a bourbon, sometimes like a rye.  It's almost too big for the 90+ degree September heat, so I'll probably use it to fix up mint juleps and sazeracs.  If I can remember to do it, I'll save a sample for a proper review when the weather cools off.

Next week, I'll post about bourbons #4 and #5, which I built from three American whiskies...

Fail...er...Adventures in Home Blending, Part 3

They're baaaa-aaaaaack.

Actually, I couldn't bring myself to finish either of the minis, so I bottled an equal remained amount of each: 0.5oz and 0.5oz.

I called it:

SPEY SPEY

As you can tell, I put about as much imagination into that name as The Speyside Distillery put into their own.

To counter any zingers about The Speyside I always mention the great indie bottler, Scott's Selection,  their company owns.  Their distributor has an AWESOME rep, Monique Huston, who is whisky brilliant and also awesome.  Much of The Speyside malt goes into their McGavin's blends, of which I recommend the peated Highland blend over the non-peated Speyside blend.

As for Speyburn?  I divulged all I know in last week's post.

So let's get back to this glamo(u)rous home vatted malt.  It was one ounce-worth in total, weighing in at 43% ABV.  It spent 11 days intermingling.  Let's see how it turned out.

October 25, 2012
NEAT:
Color -- Apple juice
Nose -- Vodka and farts. Then vodka farts (there's a subtle difference). Corn chips, ripe apples, nail polish remover, The Turps, barley grains.
Palate -- Not much going on; sweet cream, cheap cologne, some alcohol zip. There's a lightly floral moment. Not actual flowers though, more like bathroom spray (to cover up the vodka farts? No.).
Finish -- Moderate, sweeter, sugary breakfast cereal

W/WATER:
Nose -- Brussels sprouts, burnt grass, rotten eggs
Palate -- Quiet, alcohol, floral bathroom spray remains, late sweetness, creamy, reminiscent of a mild blend.
Finish -- More floral bathroom spray, lightly sweet

Though perhaps not as bad as the notes read, this blend should not be repeated.

Now let us never speak of this again.

Fail...er...Adventures in Home Blending, Part 2

I am blessed.  I have a great home.  I have a brilliant lovely partner.  I can still be moved by art and poetry.  I am ambulatory and conscious.  My five senses still work when required.  My vital signs and general health metrics meet or better acceptable levels.  And I live in a time and place where (and when) I can type these words which appear instantly on a glowing screen, then click a "Publish" button which instantly releases them into a universe where people I've never met can find and read them at their leisure on their own glowing screens.

I complain a lot in my daily life, but that's mostly due to laziness.  It's easier to allow the many (mostly minute) inconveniences to direct one's focus away from the more profound gifts.  It's a considerable challenge to climb above the distractions to see the good clearly.

So, I'd like to say right now: I am so lucky.  So lucky to not have to choose between Duggan's Dew and Clan Macgregor as a nightcap.  Instead, an almost infinite number of decisions and opportunities have brought a number of enjoyable whiskies into reality, then into my whisky closet.

Most recently, bottles of Old Pulteney 12 and Kilchoman Machir Bay found their way here, both through unusual chance -- a friend wanted to sell one and a shop had mis-priced the other.  They were good bottles.  Were.  They are both now empty.  But not before I merged the two into...


KILL PULTENEY BAY

3 parts Old Pulteney 12
1 part Kilchoman Machir Bay
16 days married in the dark.  An ABV of 43.75%.

I did my best to better obey the two blending rules that I listed yesterday.  Little goes a long way with peated whiskys and leave the blend some time to mingle.  I was actually going to give it a week, but other fine things kept me occupied.

Let's see what happened.

October 22, 2012
NEAT:
Color -- Medium amber
Nose -- Nice oak, vanilla & cookie dough, maybe some distant sherry, berries, notebook paper, mild peat, toffee, angel food cake, and butterscotch.
Palate -- The Kilchoman punched me in the mouth! Somehow feels even peatier this way. More vegetal than smoky.  Moss.  Some white fruits, like pears.
Finish -- More Kilchoman. Some more veggies. Vanilla. A little sour. Eventually some bitterness.

With time there were more baked goods on the nose, but also a considerable bitterness gained steam in the mouth.

WITH WATER (38% ABV)
Nose -- Maltier, less peat, almost a lightly peated Glenfiddich 12, ammonia
Palate -- Peat and Windex, more white fruity sweetness
Finish -- Bitter and sweet, a touch of peat, some sourness, getting very bitter

Shucks.  This thing can't swim, in water or oxygen.  All the promise of the nice nose and decent palate went angry and cruddy with time and water.

The sourness may be courtesy of a fruit-sour note often found in OP12.  The bitterness, I can't explain.  It's not there upon first pour.  Nor after 15 covered minutes.  But once air gets in, bitter compounds begin to bloom.  Adding water causes these fed-after-midnight gremlins to multiply, air and time does the rest.  It feels like dark shadow of sweet peat.

But let's get back to the positive things I've learned.  Kilchoman is a muscular kid, beating down the old Pulteney with ease.  The neat nose is great.  The experiment was fun and absolutely worth it.

We'll travel a different path with the next home blended malt...

Fail...er...Adventures in Home Blending, Part 1

Unless that whisky in your hand is a from a single cask, bottled at its actual cask strength, you're drinking a blend.

Blended Whisky -- A mix of many barrels of malt whisky from different distilleries with many more barrels of grain whisky, watered down to 40%-43% ABV.

Blended Malt -- A medley of single malts from multiple distilleries, usually watered down to a 40%-46% range.

Single Malts -- A blend of hundreds, sometimes thousands of different casks of malt whisky from a single distillery, then often mixed with a portion of local water.

High-strength single malts, like Glenlivet and Glenfarclas 105 --  Blends of numerous casks, kept at a high ABV, and sometimes even watered down a bit obtain the profile desired by the producer.

Though the term "blend" has had a negative connotation (courtesy of cheap low-quality brown stuff) in the whisky world, blending is not a bad thing.  In fact it's an art.  It can be alchemy, mixing multiple whiskies with completely different characteristics in order to achieve a single statement.  It's adding 4 + 3 and somehow getting 8.  Sometimes the results are modern delights like Ardbeg Uigedail or Balvenie Tun 1401.  Sometimes the results are more perfunctory, with blends like Johnnie Walker Red Label and Dewars White Label.

From David Stewart to Rachel Barrie, the Master Blender can be a distillery's most valuable asset, aside from the amber liquid itself.  They're the ones who figure out the recipe, the flavor, nose, texture, finish, the entire experience.

It wasn't until I listened to an extensive interview with John Glaser of Compass Box (courtesy of David Driscoll of K&L Wines), that I ever considered tinkering with my own blends.  Glaser had been making small blends for friends for years while working for Johnnie Walker's corporate office before he made the leap to start his own whisky company.  The man has since mastered the magic of blended malts (Flaming Heart, Peat Monster, Oak Cross, Spice Tree) and his every new release is a cause for excitement.

I took Glaser's words as encouragement.  So I gave blending a try.

I am no John Glaser.

ROUND 1: The Benbeg Sauternes

I owned two bottles of which I had very separate opinions.
1.  The Ardbeg Ten -- loved it; would take a stinky bath in it if I could; plus I had some whisky to spare in a mostly full bottle.
2.  Benriach 16yr Sauternes Finish -- was down to the end of the bottle; did not love the stuff; can understand some of the appeal of the wine finish, but it was far from being appealing to my palate.

I wondered, "What would a young Ardbeg taste like with a French wine finish?"  So I mixed up a tiny batch.

First rule of blending: A little bit of peat goes a loooooooooooooooooong way.

I did not know this at the time.  Now I know.

I mixed five parts Ardbeg Ten with three parts Benriach 16yr Sauternes Finish.  In hindsight, I probably should have rethought that ratio.

The mix, the home vatted malt, was married for a mere 48 hours in a little glass bottle.

Second rule of blending: Let your blend marry. Allow the new couple some time to get to know each other.

48 hours was probably not enough.  But I don't think time would have rescued this relationship.  Here are my notes:


March 12, 2012
NEAT:
Color -- Sauvignon Blanc
Nose -- Sweet, meaty, hammy.  Honey and baked bananas.  Mellows with time, but there's lots of ham.
Palate -- Peat wins this round. Some band-aids. Butter. Boston creme. Drying yet sweet.
Finish -- Long peat smoke only, very drying

W/WATER:
Nose -- Sauternes finish up front like a sickly sweet varnish
Palate -- Very creamy, brown sugar, Ardbeg peat, gets quite bitter
Finish -- Sweetens up, grainy, then more bitterness. A heavy NutraSweet aftertaste.

Actually, these notes are very polite.  For a more accurate measurement, here's the lone final comment from my notes:
"never again".

Neat, it was ham and peated Boston creme pie.
With water, peated bittersweet varnish that I couldn't scrub off my tongue.

Happily, I only used 50mL of whisky.  Unhappily, I drank the whole 50mL.  Later, I woke up in the middle of the night with the reek still on me.  Don't do this.  Don't repeat this blend.

Two questions then arose, what if I blended two malts I like?  And what if I blend two malts I don't?

Let's find out those answers this week.