...where distraction is the main attraction.
Showing posts with label Single Malt Ramblings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Single Malt Ramblings. Show all posts

Sunday, July 4, 2021

A meditation on the Port Charlotte Cluster and other things

(Port Charlotte cluster homepage)

If you think this series has gone on for an eternity, I can relate. But time plus booze equals......a quicker march towards the infinite? I don't know, what was my point? Ah yes, these clusters disabuse me of all my previously held opinions, notions and theories about the distillery or brand of focus. Knowledge over romanticism. Three reviews, or even six reviews, just won't do.

Each cluster starts with excitement, like a new love, then it drifts towards fascination before slumping to boredom, then arising to objective distance, and finally curling up in exhaustion.

Twenty-four reviews later, I no longer see Port Charlotte as a "brutalist malt," "strange, jagged and stark, conjuring images of concrete and steel." When young it's a savory, salty, coastal thing, but to find that core, one has to dive beneath the heat of its often outrageous bottling strengths. As it ages, it releases its grip on those characteristics, sometimes gradually, sometimes abruptly, depending on the maturation vessels. I'm sure this is the case with all whiskies, but I see Port Charlotte's development more clearly now.

By the time it reaches its mid-teens, Port Charlotte takes its spot among the great malts of Southern Islay. It trades most of its youthful eccentricity for balance and stability, resulting in a more familiar single malt.

But what is better? The excitement or the reliability? That is the crux of the biscuit, my friends. It depends on your preferences, as well as the moment. Is it mid-January in the Midwest, or late summer in Southern California? Are you watching the rain in Port Ellen, or wiping the sweat from your lower eyelids at a Ginza cafe in June?

For me, Port Charlotte (and Laphroaig and Lagavulin and Ledaig and Ballechin and Ardbeg and Kilchoman and Hampden and Worthy Park) can be a rough drink in the summer. My palate has no disputes for the other three-quarters of the year, though.

Were price no barrier, I'd continue to explore bourbon-cask and sherry-cask Port Charlotte as it gets older, to see if it trends towards any other familiar single malt styles. For now, I'm perfectly happy to enjoy the official 10-year-old and Islay Barley editions. And I'm even happier that I still enjoy Port Charlotte at the end of this cluster.

Now on to the next one...

Friday, March 19, 2021

Concluding the Kilchoman Cluster

(Kilchoman cluster homepage)

Seventeen Kilchomans, all with scores between 81 and 89, have been ingested, each compelling me to regurgitate words about them. That narrow range of scores may disappoint some and bore others, but there are plenty of tales beyond the scores. Of course there are! Blog content!

CASKS

As you may have noticed, there were no alternative casks included among these reviews. No STR, madeira or mezcal(?!) casks. Just bourbon and/or sherry casks, or no cask at all. I wanted to get down to the bones of the Kilchoman spirit and see how it moved across an extended sample size. There were pros and cons to my whisky selection:

Pros:
--A lot of Kilchoman.
--No hyperactive American oak.

Cons:
--Not enough sherry cask Kilchoman (with the Machir Bays showing nearly no sherry influence).
--A lot of repetition between all the bourbon cask babies.

I didn't realize the sherry cask issue until I got to the end of the seven Machir Bays. It was later painfully confirmed when I tried the two very good sherry cask whiskies side-by-side.

BARLEY

Some of my crunchier hipster readers may have wanted more 100% Islays in the mix, and that's valid. That Islay barley makes up 25% of the malt used for Kilchoman's products, so perhaps I should have had 4¼ 100% Islays out of the 17 selections. The reason for falling 1¼ short is because those annual batches remain (for me) the wobbliest portion the distillery's releases. It was difficult for me to summon the interest to get a sample of just one of the batches.

What did interest me about the two different spirits was that the 100% Islay whiskies took to dilution very well (3-for-3), while the Port Ellen Maltings (PEM) spirit did not. Only the two oldest of the fourteen PEM whiskies didn't crumble under slight dilution, and none of them improved when reduced. Could the Islay barley's spirit be sturdier earlier than that of the PEM? It makes one wonder how this will play out over the next decade.

HAPPY


Within the small band of scores — 81 to 89, or B- to B+ — were some positive surprises. The stellar PEM new make spirit demonstrated how Kilchoman gets off to a solid start even before barreling their spirit. My early Kilchoman adoration was validated by the 2013 Machir Bay bottling, as it firmly swatted my bottle of an 2018 release. The two whiskies with the highest scores were the two I am lusting after, the first Machir Bay CS and the 2020 Loch Gorm. One shows off the quality of the past, the other offers some hope about the future.

THE WHOLE PAST AND FUTURE THING


In this cluster's introduction, I wondered if the Kilchoman whisky we were enjoying from 2010-2014 was, in its youth, only hinting at the distillery's potential or if we were already seeing the peak. I truly hoped it was not the latter. But after 17 pours, I'm not convinced their whiskies have improved significantly despite higher age statements and seven more years of production experience.

The 2013 Machir Bay read older and more complex than its elder sibling, the 2018. In fact I'm tired of my 2018 bottle, and it's still half full. The 2014 Machir Bay CS was an utter delight, while I may have been charitable in not giving the 2020 a grade in the 70s, as its cheap-tequila palate dragged it down. The 2010/2019 Vintage had a disappointingly flat palate that read less mature than the 2008/2015 Vintage. As with the 2020 Machir Bay CS, the 2010/2019 Vintage was saved only by its nose. How much longer will that be enough?

Some hope does appear for the distillery's present and future whiskies. They DO have a legitimate and unique 14 year old whisky. And their Loch Gorm is getting better, developing into one of the best standard sherry cask releases on the island. Add in the gradual growth of the 100% Islay releases, and the distillery does have a framework for their future.

It's possible the bourbon cask PEM whiskies present the weakest link in this series. Seeing the decline in Ardbeg Ten — which uses the same PEM specs — in my big 2017 Taste Off makes me wonder if the two circumstances are related.

WHAT NEXT?


In 2019, Kilchoman Distillery expanded its facilities so that they could double their production. Taken out of context it already looks significant. But consider this: Their capacity was 110,000 liters in 2011; it is now 500,000 liters in 2021. That level of success and commitment means one of two things. Either the Willses are in the game for the long haul, with a standard 10-12 year old queued up for the 2030s, or they're getting the distillery in order for a massive payday from a multinational conglomerate. Either way, what's the price on that 12 year old going to be?

That's not just an idle, snarky question. I honestly don't know if I'll still be wacky for whisky in ten years, but I will be mindful of money. After this cluster, I have no interest in chasing down the next Vintage, 100% Islay, any single cask, nor even another Machir Bay. Perhaps I'll go after a Loch Gorm, especially if The Tariff vaporizes for good. But I'm going to leave the Kilchoman fanperson-ism for the new breed of whisky consumers. Cynicism hasn't yet touched their wallets.

Wednesday, December 30, 2020

The burden of single cask single malt, and also Ardmore 13 year old 2006 SMWS 66.161

I've already tried today's whisky, and my tasting notes lie here in front of me. Despite ending its maturation in a brief first-fill charred ex-red wine barrique finish, this Ardmore isn't as much of a flop as I had anticipated. But it did leave me thinking about its need to exist.

SMWS has released scores of hogshead-matured Ardmores (see the two I reviewed just this week). I can't imagine this whisky was superb when it was pulled from its first cask, a hoggie, after 12 years, before it was primed and prettied in its second vessel. Though the wine cask finish didn't mangle the whisky, why did this even need to be released as a single cask single malt at all? Because, despite fads and pandemics and tariffs and Brexits, the single malt marketplace is still humming along. Single cask single malt has become one of the most expensive spirits in history. And those single casks keep selling out. But does single cask single malt always represent scotch whisky in its finest form? It's certainly close to being scotch whisky in its most unadulterated state, but does that mean it drinks or smells best in that form?

When drinking casually (as in, no notes!), I now reach for small(-ish) batch official bottlings and dusty blends. My nose and palate have confirmed those whiskies are no less complex, satisfying and reliable than single casks, in fact they're often more so. I gain more respect for the blending craft with each passing year, and I'm beginning to believe that many mediocre-to-decent single casks could have been better utilized in a high-quality blend, vatting or small batch single malt. I'm not saying 1 + 2 = 4. Rather, 1 + 2 may in fact equal 3, though it takes tremendous skill to get there.

I stopped reviewing current bestselling blended whiskies some time ago due to the grim quality I've found in many of them. This isn't intended as a dig at individual blenders, nor do I think it's due to some sort of corporate conspiracy beyond general capitalism. Taking even a cursory look at the demand for single malt whisky, one can surmise the supply of good malt available to blenders is at one of its lowest points in the history of the craft. If the good stuff sells better and higher on its own, then that's how it will be offered. And blenders can't create the same art with fewer quality options for their palates and palettes.

I won't tell you that all old blends are amazing. There have always been plenty of stinkers. But many of the blends from the '40s through the '80s were fabulous. Even my open 1970s J&B Rare has become the best highball scotch I've ever had. The flavors, the facets, the maltiness in previous decades' blends leads me to believe that during eras of small, or nonexistent, demand for single malts, whisky companies had better options for their blenders.

That brings me back to today's whisky. Was this Ardmore malt (and its drinkers) best served by depositing its hogshead's contents into a potentially hyperactive cask for a short period of time? Or would it have been better as a pivotal element in an upscale Teacher's blend, or a Compass Box vatting? I don't know. Not too long ago, I would have chosen the single cask because Purity. But now, I'd lean towards the latter.

Distillery: Ardmore (SMWS 66)
Ownership: Beam Suntory
Region: Highlands (Eastern)
Independent Bottler: Scotch Malt Whisky Society
Age: 13 years (6 March 2006 - 2019)
Maturation: ~12 years in a hogshead then ~1 year in a first-fill charred ex-red wine barrique
Cask#: 66.161
Outturn: 295
'Quirky' name: Chateau du pork scratching
Alcohol by Volume: 58.1%
Chillfiltered? No
Caramel Colorant? No
(from a bottle split)

NEAT
None of the suggest meaty notes appear in the nose, instead there's cocoa, fabric, marshmallow fluff, cherry jam and jalapeños. The peat appears in the form of chocolate-dipped moss. The palate begins with a fizzy combination of cherry-flavored Tylenol, mint leaves and Dr. Brown's cream soda. Hints of herbal bitterness and blackberry jam float beneath. Cherries, tart and sweet, lead the finish, followed by salt and burlap.

DILUTED TO ~46%abv, or 1½ tsp of water per 30mL whisky
The nose shows considerable improvement. It's more herbal, vegetal and nutty. It's even slightly earthy. Cocoa, butterscotch, marzipan and raspberry jam appear here and there. The palate remains sweet and berried (a joke!?), with raspberries in whipped cream, but some sea salt, pepper and bitterness provide additional angles. It finishes with a cherry/ginger syrup, a pinch of salt and squeeze of lemon.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
Despite my fears, this was not worse than 66.32. In fact, with a little added water, this Ardmore was very approachable. Though the spirit does seem hindered, tragedy is avoided. It is not "strangely sweet, gloopy" (what an odd way to pitch your whisky) despite SMWS's label notes.

Before finishing this sample I looked at the remaining whisky in my glass and wondered what the point of this whisky was. And that triggered all those paragraphs above. I'm thankful to have had just 60mL of this whisky rather 750mL. Had I a full bottle I'd immediately initiate some foolish vattings, attempting to find a better whisky.

Availability - Sold out
Pricing - was £61 one year ago
Rating - 80 with water

Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Suntory Toki versus Hibiki Japanese Harmony

Though Kakubin is likely their biggest seller, due to its budget pricing in Asia, Hibiki has long been positioned as the king of Suntory's Japanese blended whiskies, its luxury blend with big prices and gorgeous decanters. Not too long after Suntory phased out their single malts' age statements, the company followed suit with Hibiki. The 21, 17 and 12 faded out and Hibiki Japanese Harmony faded in by 2016.

As Hibiki Japanese Harmony arrived in the US, so did a new Suntory blend, Toki. "Toki" means "time". So yes, it is in fact Suntory Time. Though I'm usually not seduced by marketing fluff, I really enjoyed the erotic highball videos on Toki's official site. So I bought a bottle. And finished it in three weeks. Normally I don't even finish a bottle in three months. I'm not going lavish Toki with superlatives regarding its quality. When neat it's very sippable (likely designed for relaxing times), but it seems well-engineered for its actual advertised purpose, the highball. If you're wondering what I mean by "well-engineered", may I refer you back to the fact that the whisky vaporized down my gullet in record time.

What I didn't do during the bottle's brief life was conduct an official tasting. Luckily I saved a sample. 

Meanwhile, I sourced a sample of Hibiki Japanese Harmony just this month. I've been underwhelmed by Suntory's NAS single malts and found Japanese Harmony Master's Select to fall short of the old 12's quality.

It's time for the two blends to meet in the Thunderdome that is my hermetically-sealed whisky tasting cave.



Brand: Suntory
Ownership: Beam Suntory
Type: Blended whisky
Country: Japan
Distilleries: Yamazaki and Hakushu for malt, Chita for grain
Age: ???
Maturation: ???
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

NEAT NOTES

I normally don't comment on color, but this stuff is as pale as straw. The nose is peachy and grassy with mellow notes of walnuts and orange Smarties. It's all very light with neither ethyl nor The Turps. The palate begins with crisp limey citrus, hints of malt and salt, then almond cookies and cashews. It starts tilting grainier after 30 minutes. The simple, warm finish shows salt, limes, toasted grains, a hint of graphite and touch of sourness in the back.

WORDS WORDS WORDS

As I inferred above, this works very well in highball form, all crisp, citrussy and refreshing. You may blanch at the idea of spending $40 on a mixing whisky, but do keep in mind this is the cheapest whisky Suntory has in The States and it's (probably) 100% Japanese whisky. It also works pretty well neatly, especially in late summer months. The nose is light and pretty; the palate is cuddlier than the major 12-year-old scotch blends. The finish is its weakest element, showing signs of considerable Chita grain, but it still beats most of those scotch blends. I'll buy another bottle of Toki when spring comes around.

Availability - Widespread, even at supermarkets or state liquor shops
Pricing - $30-$50, though usually around $40
Rating - 82


Brand: Hibiki
Ownership: Beam Suntory
Type: Blended whisky
Country: Japan
Distilleries: Yamazaki and Hakushu for malt, Chita for grain
Age: ???
Maturation: ???
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

NEAT NOTES

While Toki was the color of straw, Japanese Harmony is gold. The whisky, I mean. At first the nose is loaded with Elmer's glue and paint VOCs. After 10 minutes those notes recede bringing lemons, grains, vanilla and new carpet. A few musty sherry casks appear after 30 minutes, as do hints of canned peaches, soap and metal. In additional to being lightly sweet and tangy, the palate offers up a note that sits somewhere between ground pepper and coal dust. Some orange juice as well. Compared to Toki, it has a harsher alcohol bite. The brief finish has oranges, flowers and toasted oak. It's also much more cloying than the palate would lead one to believe.

WORDS WORDS WORDS

While it's not a particularly great drinker when neat, Japanese Harmony does make for a good malty, nutty highball. But it's ninety-freaking-dollars. Should we not expect a little more for our money than "It goes well with a little club soda"? Like Suntory's NAS single malts, this Hibiki falls substantially short of its 12-year-old predecessor.

Availability - Most specialty retailers
Pricing - $75-$120(!)
Rating - 77 (lifted up a few points by its highball)



FINAL THOUGHTS

Suntory's blenders have done good work on Toki which beats a lot of scotch blends at its price point, both as a sipper and mixer. It was $34.99 in my state, so I took a risk on it and was pleased by the results. Hibiki Japanese Harmony is $99.99 here, but I wouldn't pay half that. The only Hibiki premium I can see is its nice decanter, though Toki's rectangle isn't half bad. If you spy Toki at a bar (whenever you do go back to a bar again) give it a try in a cocktail or highball or straight up. I do not encourage you to do the same with Harmony, especially if you're a Hibiki fan from years past.

Monday, January 27, 2020

Three Talisker 18s: An introduction

Diageo doubled the breadth of the Talisker range, from two to four, in 2004, by adding an 18 year old and a 25 year old to a line that had only included a 10 year old and the Distillers Edition. While the 25 year old was aimed for the ultra-luxury market, the 18 offered Talisker enthusiasts a way to ascend the consumer's ladder for a smaller premium. The 10 year old was about $40, while the 18 year old cost $80. That opportunity ended abruptly when Diageo hoisted the 18's price to $150 in 2012. This increase met with widespread grievance from customers and some retailers, as one of the best deals in the single market was gone.

New packaging, from boxes to labels, came with this price increase, so the whisky itself was not only more expensive but it looked different. I had been a very vocal devotee of the 18 year old in its previous livery, so I was curious when three whisky friends from different parts of the world told me, separately, that the "new" 18 year old was not nearly as good as the "old" one. And I wondered, "Had a change in recipe been partnered with the new visuals?

I dare say, 2012 is now a long time ago. And I'd been waiting to do a comparison of Talisker 18s since then, but I didn't know how.

My cupboard included one bottle of the 18 in its new packing, purchased for me by my wife. That was probably the last whisky bottle she bought for me because we both later agreed that more whisky bottles is not what our household needs.

Two years ago,  I discovered to my great surprise that I had saved a sample from my last old-label 18. It wasn't even in my whisky spreadsheet, so I had discovered a secret I was trying to keep from myself.

That then inspired me to scour the European auctions for an older bottling of the 18, specifically a 20cL bottle (one of the great bottles sizes, if not the best), and found just the one.

So there were three. One bottled in 2006, during the 18 year old's early years. One from 2011, just before the pivot, and one from 2012, just after.

The comparison was scheduled for late February 2020 but I could no longer fend off the anticipation. The tasting was moved to the day I write this introduction. In two days, I will post the results.

Friday, November 15, 2019

Where's the whisky? And where are the rye barrels? Important questions.

It has recently come to my attention that I drink whisky. Like, ofttimes. On the reg. Et cetera. Since this blog went whisky — and especially since parenthood commenced — I have rarely gone more than two days without a pour. When healthy, I have not gone more than five days without a single drink since.......since.

As of today (Friday), it has been one week since I last consumed an alcoholic beverage. The reasons are threefold. Firstly, I had an awesome whiskey experience a week ago, something I intend to write about shortly, and the body needed a rest afterwards. Secondly, a giant turd of a winter dropped early this year, ushering compounding colds into my home. If I can't trust my nose, then I'm not wasting liver cells. Thirdly, I appreciated the challenge.

After a week away from the sauce have I become a new man, clear of mind, sharp of reflex, calm of temper? Not even remotely. But I did it. Hooray for me. Now I would appreciate a glass of whisky.

Luckily I had Wednesday's Ledaig review in the queue, so there was some sort of content here, because no drinking means no reviews. I mean, Randy Brandy could have posted a review but he's busy doing......doing......what does he actually do?

Speaking of mysteries, where are all the rye barrels? I mean all the rye barrels. Society will never hear the end of bourbon barrel this and bourbon barrel that. Bourbon barrel-aged wine, beer, tequila, rum, brandy, every whisky not made in America, hot sauce, feta cheese and husbands. But what has happened to all the former rye whiskey barrels?

I've seen a few microbreweries age ales in ex-rye barrels. Johnnie Walker did their short-lived rye barrel-finished blend. Glenmorangie did a thing. There's a quarter-cask rye barrel-finished Tamdhu floating around out there (thank you to Jordan for pointing that one out!). But where are the other 99% of rye barrels going?

Does anyone have a lead on this? Am I missing something? Also, for goodness' sake, why isn't rye barrel scotch a thing? It can be done.

Monday, October 21, 2019

Tamdhu 12 year old (2019)

When it came time to select single malts for a recent charity event, I had to choose a Macallan Killer. For previous events I'd gone with Glenfarclas 15, Glendronach 15 or Bunnahabhain 12, all whiskies I knew well. This time I took a risk with something I'd never tried.

I had liked Tamdhu's 10 year old single malt and was surprised to see a 12 year old showing up beside it so quickly (in 2 years! Math!) this year. Thanks to a happy discovery right before the event I found a bottle of the 12 selling for the same price as the 10.

No one at the event hated the thing, and I don't remember finding anything wrong with it at the time. Now there's some left and I'm thirsty.

Distillery: Tamdhu
Ownership: Ian Macleod Distillers
Region: Speyside (Central)
Age: minimum 12 years old
Maturation: "the finest sherry oak casks"
Alcohol by Volume: 43%
Chillfiltered? probably not (per whiskybase)
Colorant added? probably not (per whiskybase and distillery site)

NEAT
It has clean, bright nose, with notes of roses, orange peel, almond extract and ginger powder. Some spice (cardamom and clove) and funky honey as well. The palate has some of the nose's roses(!), but is otherwise tighter and more astringent than expected. Nutty sherry and caramel. More oak and tannins appear with time. Roasted grains and caramel in the finish. Lots of rich American-ish oak. Hint of lime.

DILUTED TO ~37%abv, or 1 tsp of water per 30mL whisky
More generic sherry cask notes appear in the nose, like raisin and toasted oak. A little bit of honey mustard. Grape candy, raisins and ginger powder on the palate and finish.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
Not a Macallan Killer, this one. The very friendly nose clashes with the sharp oaky palate. I think the distillery claims to use mostly (or entirely) European oak casks, but I'm reading lots of American oak action throughout. The 10 year old suits my fancy much more than the 12, so I actually hope the older version does not replace the younger one. I found the 10 to be quirkier, more complex and a better drinker. Though this does not stop me from desiring a try of their new 15 year old.

Availability - Specialty whisky retailers worldwide
Pricing - $50-$75 USA, $40-$65 Europe (minus taxes and tariffs)
Rating - 81

Monday, February 25, 2019

7 Thoughts About Glenfiddich Month

1. I am forever cured of Glenfiddich 12 and its ancestry

Trying many versions of the same whisky expression over a period of three weeks is the most direct route for this writer to lose all interest in the subject matter. Though other whisky writers/bloggers would knock out all eight whiskies in one night, I am not in a social position wherein that behavior is appropriate. Also, I wouldn't trust my compromised senses after the fourth whisky. It's not that I judge those who choose that approach.

Who I am kidding? Of course I judge those people. Look at this website. I rate inanimate objects.

2. I am forever cured of Glenfiddich 12 and its ancestry

The trouble began when the current version of Glenfiddich 12 turned out to be mediocre. Then four out of seven of its predecessors proved to be at the same level or worse. The palate's the problem. The eight palates average out to a C- range of ratings.

Lessons #1 and #2 should have been taken to heart years ago when I spent a month reviewing nothing but middle-shelf blends. In fact, that month permanently changed my approach to this blog. You don't see me searching for bargains in sub-$20 dollar scotch anymore.

3. Bad fill-levels were not the source of the problem

All eight bottles had excellent fill levels. None of the bottles had the faded label tell-tale signs of sun damage. All, except the 2017 bottle, had screwtops, so there was no damage caused by warped corks. And every bottle came from a different source.

4. Mini bottles were not the problem

In my Killing Whisky History series I've consumed the contents of numerous minis much older and with worse fill levels than this month's whiskies, and none — except, perhaps, one from 70 years ago — were as off in the palate as 3/4s of the 'Fiddich minis.

5. Where's the pears?

Pear is (or was) my favorite nose/palate characteristic of young Glenfiddich. It was the one way I could pick Glenfiddich out in a blind tasting. You'll find that note listed just once in my reviews of the eight Glenfiddichs. Was that note getting filtered out by better (or worse?) maturation? Or was it all psychosomatic in the first place?

6. Whisky from decades past wasn't always better than whisky made now

Yes, I have often been a Luddite when it comes to whisky. Hell, that's why I keep seeking out dusties. But my real experience, as often demonstrated in many Killing Whisky History videos, is that a lot of the old stuff wasn't always great either. Mediocrity is timeless.

7. This has nothing to do with Glenfiddich. Or does it?

Friday, January 18, 2019

Single Malt Scotch in America: Prices Begin to Stabilize

Welcome to Part 2 of 2019's Scotch Stats! We're in America now, so things are going to get huge.

First off, there's The Spreadsheet or The Price List or The Sleep Deprivation. There are now 225 whiskies on the sheet. And there are at least 225 stories to be found within it. Today I will spare you, and tell only a few tales, including the one in the post's title.

Here's where The Spreadsheet's numbers come from:
I use Wine Searcher's Average Wine Price system, selecting only US retailers. Their site has an explanation behind how they arrive at their averages. To summarize, their averages don't include auctions; all prices are adjusted to 750mL bottles; the highest and lowest 20% prices are removed in order to correct for pricing errors and grievous retailer choices. Aside from the ability to view pricing history, Wine Searcher's big draw (for data and consumer purposes) is their large data set. For instance, if you search for Johnnie Walker Black Label or Talisker 10 they'll actually stop their listings at 500 because they have so many retailers in their system. Please note, this is not an advertisement for Wine Searcher. Their Average Wine Price history requires a paid subscription and I've been known to mooch off of other people's accounts from time to time.

My spreadsheet has gotten so extensive that I encourage you to check out my shared Google Doc at this link. It should be easer to follow and scroll through than it is here.



About the spreadsheet:
I'm using a methodology similar to the last time around. There are 225 whiskies (99% of which are official bottlings) listed in total and, thanks to spreadsheets, I have data back to 2007 for 115 of them. Each time I assemble one of these annual posts I include more whiskies. This year I added only those that had at least three years of US pricing history. Whiskies with ten or fewer retailer listings were retired in 2019, but were kept on the list for historic pricing purposes. They received a blank gray field for their efforts. Whiskies with fewer than 20 listings are marked "scarce" in the notes column. Don't be too surprised if all the "scarce" whiskies are retired next year, like the entire old Benriach range was this year.

Because directly comparing a 12-year price change percentage with a 3-year price change percentage with an 8-year price change percentage is crap math, I'm using the same metric as I did during previous years to measure the increases: Multiple of Inflation (or MOI).  MOI takes the total price change and divides it by the US's inflation (CPI) rate over the related period of time (12, 8, 6 or 3 years).

The color-coding is based on the MOI, as follows:
Dark blue = price actually decreased, thus a negative MOI
Light blue = price increased between 0 and the actual rate of inflation
Green = price increased between 1 and 2 times the rate of inflation
Light pink = price increased between 2 and 5 times the rate of inflation
Fire Truck Red = price increased between 5 and 10 times the rate of inflation
Black = price increased more than 10 times the rate of inflation

Unlike last year, I'm ditching the MOI in my charts because I'm approaching the information from a different angle this year. Weighted calculations were laboriously factored into my formulas to correct for the different time spans involved in the averages.

If this is your first time seeing The Spreadsheet, I encourage you to pour yourself something delicious and then click over to the spreadsheet and dig in.



Now, for some pictures to go with the words.

THE STORIES!


The Rise and Pause of the NAS

Here's the headcount of the whiskies from the spreadsheet:


Yes, those tall black bars are NAS single malts. It is now the largest age category. The infection has set in. Nearly every official range has at least one single malt without an age statement. Some brands have multiple NASes. Some are made entirely of NAS whisky. And the prices?


There's a lot going on in this chart, especially the right side of it. But look over at the left side. The average price of the 52 NASes is higher than than the average 8-10 year old whisky, higher than the average 11-13 year old whisky. Let that soak in a bit...

...

...Okay, that's enough time, because something interesting has happened to the NAS category:



On the surface, it appears as if the average price has barely moved over the past three years. But within these numbers is another story.

Out 52 NAS whiskies, 21 dropped in price between 2016 and 2019, while another 15 rose in price less than 5% during that time. Leaving out the two Dalmore NASes, this category actually averaged a drop of more than half a percent over the past three years.

You'll see more low or negative numbers for NASes further down this post. I think we will need at least one more year of data before it can be determined if the category is truly trending down in price. But it's fair to say that it has at least plateaued, and that plateau is only being held up by a few pricier outliers.

Luxury is expensive


Yes, this chart again:

Those tall bars on the right get taller and the bars on the left get smaller every year. The prices for 25-40 year old whisky are rising at such a fast rate that they screw with my line graphs.

Like so:

Or this:

40 year old whisky has become irrelevant. A $5,000 whisky is superfluous for 99.9% of the whisky drinking public. 99.9% of us are ignored in its production, release and marketing. It wasn't always like this, but it's come to this because 40 year old whisky's price increases have been operating on a different plane than all other single malts.

Speaking of which.

EDRINGTON DRUGS


I guess the Internet Way to write about this is to toss up a ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and say "Macallan gonna macallan".

And that is valid. But I'ma write a little more about Edrington.

As I noted in reviews last year, Macallan's and Highland Park's branding has recently devolved into unfocused, confusing gibberish. But that hasn't stopped them from hoisting up their prices every time a marketing exec creates a different range, names it after something he just saw outside the window, then hoovers a line.
The "Average" in this table is the per year per whisky per owner. Yes, The Egregious Group is on a whole 'nother level.

The Main Story


But you didn't come here to read all that. Or did you???

Different charts tell different stories, and all can be true. There's a chart like this...
...which shows little steadying or plateaus other than with the NAS category (as mentioned earlier) and some straightening out with the younger categories.

All the percentages in this chart are compounding. A whisky whose price goes up 3% each year for 12 years won't be $136 at the end, but rather $142.58. It's not lies, nor damned lies. It's statistics. And it's why money market accounts used to be hella lazy awesome during different economic times.

But if I take the overall increase for each of the 225 whiskies, then split out the average annual increase for each available year compared to its first year on the spreadsheet (2007, 2011, 2013 or 2016), and then create a weighted average of all of it, I hopefully get a chart like this:


See things starting to even off now?

Prices are still going up, so why does this chart do the flattening thing? It's because price increases have been easing off, bringing the averages down. Thus the lines aren't heading towards the stratosphere (sorry Edrington). Some may even be slanting slightly down. Most are just pointing rightwards.

Here's a chart that shows the average ACTUAL year-to-year increases.
click to embiggen
The magic year is 2016, peak craziness. It is at that point, for the vast majority of whiskies in the spreadsheet, that a calming of price increases began. By 2019 most whiskies, and half the categories, were increasing by a rate lower than inflation.

This doesn't mean the prices are going down, except with the NAS category. It means the line is starting to flatten out, as shown in the previous chart. The 8-10, 11-13 and NAS categories' prices essentially did flatten out between Jan 2018 and Jan 2019. One wonders if 14-16 will follow suit by next year.

Of all companies, Diageo (yes, Diageo) has shown the most promise. They're the largest owner, and have the most whiskies on the spreadsheet. Their entire portfolio's average price has gone down 1% since 2016.

So......what's the cause? I don't know. As mentioned in Monday's post, single malt exports to the US are certainly not hurting (which also leads me to believe that prices are not going to drop soon). Are corporate executives — at companies other than Edrington — beginning to sober up and drift towards reason, easing off the acceleration? Could this be a reaction to the pricing of American whisky? Is the overproduction from the past decade about to come home to roost? Or is there something else on the horizon?

It's possible we're at the beginning of a new era of the Scotch business. It's also possible there are many years of more-of-the-same ahead. Either way, I'd be happy to see the end of the price hikes. Now can someone tell the independent bottlers about this?

Monday, January 14, 2019

Scotch Whisky Exports in 2017, or The rowboat still pulls the steamship

Welcome back to my annual analysis of the Scotch Whisky export market! Yes, one year was skipped. And there will be only two posts, instead of three, this year. This is because the Scotch Whisky Association no longer shares their annual Statistical Report. That report was my data source. So now I am piecing together data from various publications, including smaller items from the SWA and summaries from IWSR.

That means there are no new data for whisky consumption in the UK, nor annual production levels by SWA members, nor the age of whisky sitting in warehouses. Is this information being withheld on purpose? I don't know. But those data points certainly clashed with nearly every press release squawking about the burgeoning Scotch market.

Those narratives aside, the most noticeable change in the SWA publications was the categories. No longer was it Malt and Blends, but Single Malt and Blended Whiskies. I almost gave up writing this post entirely because I thought my big data sheet was rendered useless. But it wasn't. I just had to rethink the comparisons. Blended malts and bulk malt had been removed, and what was left was a more familiar, relatable subject: The Single Malt. And therein breathed the solution to today's post.



Since the great peak of the Scotch Whisky export market in 2011, volume sales have had a bumpy ride year to year:

2012: -5.2%
2013: +2.6%
2014: -3.0%
2015: -2.8%
2016: +4.0%
2017: +1.6%

Even with those last two gains, export volume in 2017 was still 0.4% under 2013 levels, and 3.1% beneath 2011's totals.

Meanwhile, the value of Scotch Whisky exports was 3.3% above 2011's amount. As mentioned in previous years' posts, value can increase while volume decreases when the value per unit rises. In this case, it's GBP (Great British Pounds) per liter. Thus the price of exported whisky went up enough to offset drops in actual whisky being sold.

But it's not that simple. Three other factors have had a considerable effect on the Scotch Whisky export market's monetary gains: inflation, exports to the United States and single malt sales. Bring out the charts!

click to embiggen
I always start off with the above chart to show that Scotch volume sales are indeed up and look healthy since the 1980s and early 1990s. But then I always follow it with this chart:


This chart does a number of things. First, it puts all that volume growth into some perspective. It also shows what looks like stratospheric increases in value and GBP/liter. Scotch whisky appears to be a booming business. But those gains aren't quite what they appear to be.


This graph shows the monetary gains from the previous chart adjusted for inflation, starting with 1980 (the beginning of my data set). What one sees is an industry that has struggled to out perform the UK's inflation. In fact, the GBP/liter price in 2017 is still lower than the adjusted 1980 amount. It wasn't until 2011 that export value jumped ahead of inflation, but that was largely due to the peak volume sales mentioned above. Annual value sales were trending back to the 0% mark until the solid gains made in 2017.

I'm going to zoom to look at the past decade:


As referenced in previous years, volume sales have been anything but flourishing. And for a few years the reported annual value was also slumping. Yet there's been a 55% gain in value sales over this 10 year period. Again, this seems like business has been awesome.


But this shows again that the industry was in danger of underperforming the UK's inflation rate. Adjusting for inflation tempers all value gains, but as one can see from these charts, there have been actual increases in sales. One of the drivers behind the boosts is Scotch Whisky's highest valued export market, the Occasionally-United States of America.


Even as the whole market's sales (in value) dropped after 2011, whisky exports to the United States continued to rise.

Between 2008 and 2017, the value of Scotch exports to the US increased by nearly 150%, while the non-US export market saw gains of 28%. When adjusted for inflation, the US gains were still 116%. The non-US gains vanished, turning into a loss of 3%.

The United States is the largest export market in terms of value not volume, which means there's a higher than normal GBP/liter rate for its Scotch. That substantial rate is due to the fact that US is the biggest recipient of single malt whisky in the world, with totals larger than the second and third largest single malt markets combined.

And if one is still searching for some sort of Scotch Whisky Boom, one may find it in single malt sales.


While sales of blended whisky have plateaued (at best), single malt exports have zoomed in terms of volume and value over the past decade. And, unlike almost all other indicators in the Scotch Whisky export market, it shows no signs of letting up:


With these massive gains in single malt exports, why haven't Scotch exports blasted off as a whole? Well, single malt whisky still makes up a tiny portion of the market when it comes to volume.


But, as can be noted from the charge above, it is no longer an insignificant part of Scotch's value. Though it makes up only 10% of the volume, it will likely cross the 30% marker in terms of value by 2019.

On the flip side, blended whisky has been bleeding value market share:


And it's not just value. Blended whiskies' annual volume sales total in 2017 was still beneath that of 2008. But blends are such a behemoth that their declines always weigh down the entire market. Single malt sales are the rowboat pulling the steamship in Buster Keaton's The Navigator.

(pic source)
What's causing blended whisky's stall out? Blended whisky brands are much more recognizable. Names like Johnnie Walker, Dewar's, Chivas and Ballantine's are synonymous with Scotch, worldwide. And blends are priced much more affordably.


Of course this chart doesn't show the actual prices of single malts and blends, but it does show the difference in how the exports are valued.

Single malts are more luxurious (price-wise) and have the reputation of being well-aged premium spirits, but their names are less familiar, appearing as various Glens and/or cryptic Gaelic phrases. Are consumers leaving blends for single malts (and other whiskies)? Or are new drinkers going directly to single malts, skipping over blended whisky entirely? Are they seduced by the high prices or the connotation and mystique of the term "single malt"? Or are blends dropping in quality due to the demand for their most valued ingredient, malt whisky?

Whatever the cause, people (especially Americans) are spending a lot of money on single malt whisky. As blended whisky sales struggle and the Scotch export market barely keeps above the inflation rate, this continuing ascent of single malt sales has the been the key to Scotch's financial success in the past, present, and, possibly, the future.

Monday, January 7, 2019

My 25 favorite single malts under $80

So it has come to this. Clickbait.

Actually if it were clickbait, the title would be "25 Best Whiskies Under $80!" and I would have posted it near Black Friday. Yet......you clicked over here so let's get to it.

I use the word "Favorite" (American spelling!) rather than "Best" because whisky is subjective and expensive. $80 is set as a ceiling because:

  • It's a personal limit I'm trying to abide by for as long as possible. Good luck to me!
  • The next level of each distillery's/brand's range appears just north of $80.
  • Dude, I'm trying to keep this to only 25 whiskies.
Seven years ago this would have been a list of my favorite single malts under $50. So it goes.

THE RULES

  • Official bottlings only - I'm trying to include whiskies that are at least somewhat available. And there's a grim lack of interesting indie bottlings at this price range.
  • Scotch only - Yep.
  • Three years - No, not 3yo whisky. I'm only listing single malts that I've consumed within the past three years. I'm of the camp that believes batches, small or large, change in character over time no matter how talented the blenders may be.
  • Amerocentric Pricing - Current as of January 2019, and based on Wine-searcher Pro. European prices are calculated without VAT, but do include an average shipping rate for one bottle within a moderate-sized US order.
  • Subjectivity - Again, these whiskies will not appeal to everyone. Each of us has our own palate preferences.
  • Ethical-ish - I have purchased, or am currently price-shopping, all of these whiskies. My stomach does a weird wiggle-grumble each time I heap praise on a whisky I haven't purchased. Thus this rule is being applied so I can digest food properly this week.

THE WHISKY

  1. Ardmore 12 year old Port Wood Finish - USA: not for sale; Europe: $65-$75
    Just finished my bottle. Watch this space!
  2. Arran 10 year old - USA: $45-$55; Europe: $45-60
    The 10-to-15 year range is my favorite spot for Arran whiskies. They haven't messed with their 10yo since it arrived.
  3. Arran 14 year old - USA: $60-$80; Europe: $55-70
    Old label, new label. Whichever. Great stuff.
  4. Ben Nevis 10 year old - USA: >crazy; Europe: $65-$75
    Ben Nevis has arrived, and now this thing has become scarce. It's very good.
  5. Benromach 10 year old - USA: $45-$60; Europe: $45-60
    This distillery is run by, like, one grandma, one sentient rubber band and two schnauzers (per the marketing material), yet the whisky is excellent. Not enough love for this particular 10yo.
  6. Benromach 10 year old 100 Proof / Imperial Proof - USA: $70 and up; Europe $65-$75
    It's as good as the two-year-old hype. Possibly better.
  7. Bruichladdich The Classic Laddie Scottish Barley - USA: $45-$60; Europe: $55-$75
    This was such a surprise to me because I'm not a fan of Bruichladdich's unpeated whisky. WARNING: Serious batch variation.
  8. Bunnahabhain 12 year old - USA: $45-$65; Europe: $55-$65
    This has become an excellent whisky. I had it at two blind tastings in 2018 and LOVED it both times. Review of the current edition to post this year.
  9. Caol Ila 12 year old - USA: $55-$75; Europe: $55-$65
    One of those whiskies I hate to like because it's factory-made. But then again, so are all the great Midleton pot still whiskies and MGP ryes.
  10. Clynelish 14 year old - USA: $50-$70; Europe: $50-$65
    It still works, and is "better" than most of the indie Clynelishes I've had.
  11. Craigellachie 13 year old - USA: $40-$65; Europe: $50-$70
    Probably not a popular choice. It's a difficult whisky, but I've grown to enjoy it,
  12. Glenfiddich 15 year old Distillery Edition - USA: not for sale; Europe: $55-$70
    The most muscular thing Glenfiddich makes. And the best.
  13. Glen Garioch 12 year old - USA: $55-$70; Europe: $50-$65
    As I mentioned in my recent review, this is as good as I'd remembered. I just bought another bottle. 
  14. Glen Scotia 15 year old - USA: $60-$70; Europe: $65-$80
    The best thing the new regime has bottled. And I think it can get better.
  15. Hazelburn 10 year old - USA: $60-$70; Europe: $55-$65
    Another shocker. I wasn't a fan of the previous regular Hazelburns, but the Springbank folks found the right recipe this time.
  16. Highland Park 12 year old - USA: $40-$60; Europe: $45-$65
    Old reliable. WARNING: I haven't tried the new Leif Erikson's Boat's Starboard Dog's Wet Arsehole edition.
  17. Lagavulin 16 year old - USA: $65 and up; Europe: $60 and up
    Old Faithful still rumbles.
  18. Laphroaig 10 year old - USA: $35-$55; Europe: $45-$65
    Speaking of which.
  19. Laphroaig 10 year old Cask Strength - USA: $60-$80; Europe: scarce
    After a couple of lame batches the behemoth has returned.
  20. Longrow Peated - USA: $55-$70; Europe: $55-$70
    Springbank is a good distillery.
  21. Kilkerran 12 year old - USA: $60-$80; Europe: $50-$65
    Not as superlative as some of the WIPs, but still very good. It's much more fun/complex/drinkable than the first batch of 8yo cask strength stuff.
  22. Port Charlotte 10 year old, new edition - USA: $60-$70; Europe: $65-$80
    Watch this space!
  23. Port Charlotte Islay Barley, previous edition - USA: $60-$80; Europe: $75 and up
    I haven't tried the new one in the mortar-shaped bottle, but I adore the older one in the classic Bruchladdich bottle. Hope to post a review of it this year.
  24. Springbank 10 year old - USA: $55-$75; Europe: $55-$70
    Probably the Best whisky on this list, whatever "Best" means.
  25. Tobermory 10 year old - USA: $50-$65; Europe: $50-$70
    Another one that's probably not the most popular choice. Oh well. It's on the list.

NOTES:

  • Several of these whiskies deserve an updated review. I will labor to do so.
  • Some whiskies like Ledaig 10, Kilchoman Machir Bay, Oban 14, Talisker 10 and Balvenie 12, which would have been on this list in previous years, are currently under review.
  • Some whiskies, like Springbank 12yo Cask Strength, missed the list because the reality of finding them for less than $80 is vanishing.
  • Less than a third of these whiskies can be found for under $50. Yet the average age of the 26 whiskies is around 10.5 years old. Yes, Glenlivet 12 is cheaper, but have you had Glenlivet 12 recently?

Monday, September 24, 2018

Loch Lomond Week!?! Inchmurrin 14 year old 2003 Sauternes Finish, single cask 16/303-5

Loch Lomond National Park is one of the most beautiful places in Scotland. I highly recommend you visit at least a corner of it.

Loch Lomond Distillery does not make the most beautiful single malts in Scotland. I highly recommend you do not try most of them. That the distillery has, until recently, never shown an interest in conforming to what's popular or normal has made it seem like the last refuge of the whisky hipster.

I inserted the words "until recently" in the previous short paragraph because Loch Lomond has started rolling single casks of its multiple brands into the retail game. So far there haven't been any reported casualties, and the reviews haven't been bad.

Since Loch Lomond is now a thing (I guess?), I'm going to review four of their whiskies, all of which were released over the past few years. I could review five, but, you know, safety first.



Hey look, here's a release that's still in stores. In The Netherlands.

image from whiskybase
Inchmurrin is one of Loch Lomond's theoretically unpeated brands, though I have occasionally found something peat-ish in it. This Inchmurrin spent most of its life in regular American oak barrels, then had an unspecified finish time in a Sauternes cask (probably hogshead-sized). I'm a fan of neither unspecified finish times nor aggressive Sauternes casks, so this could be disastrous.


Distillery: Loch Lomond
Brand: Inchmurrin
Owner: Loch Lomond Distillery Company
Region: Highlands (Western)
Age: 14 years (Jan 2003 to May 2017)
Maturation: American oak (probably), then an unknown amount of time in a Sauternes cask
Cask number16/303-5
Outturn: 282
Exclusive to: The Netherlands
Alcohol by Volume: 52.9%
(thanks to Matt W for the sample!)

NEAT
The nose is......not disastrous. Pears, caramel, apple cider vinegar and McIntosh apples start things off. There's some heat to it, and brine and butterscotch. Pine sap and a slight oakiness. The palate is also inoffensive, even cheerful! Tart citrus, vanilla pudding, flowers and salt are in the foreground. It has some pine, mint gum and drying tannins. It's VERY sweet, as is the finish, which has mint, citrus, vanilla and pine.

DILUTED TO ~46%abv, or <1tsp of water per 30mL whisky
The nose reads more solidified, or at least it's tougher for me to separate the notes. White fruits and pine sap. Calvados and maple syrup. The palate is sweet and tart. More peppery, like green peppercorns. Caramel, mint and lemon-lime soda. It finishes warm and sweet. White fruits, flowers, sugar, lime candy and a little bit of oak.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
My stars, Loch Lomond has made a modern whisky. This thing is sweet and oaky with nothing that would frighten away the casual drinker. Normally I'd say such a whisky was well engineered, but here it was all about cask selection.

While it's not my style of whisky — it's much much too sweet for my delicate temperament — I'll focus on the positives. The Sauternes influence is very mild (yay!), the whisky swims well, it'll never put up a fight and it's absent even the slightest hot dumpster note. What a curious start to the week.

Availability - The Netherlands
Pricing - ~€80
Rating - 82 (those with sweet teeth would rate it higher)

Monday, April 2, 2018

Let FWP Die, also a 1989 Bowmore review

photo source
Though I am among those who have used the term "French Whore Perfume" to describe the characteristics of 1980s Bowmore, I would like to entreat everyone to bury the term altogether.

Aside from it having become lazy shorthand utilized by no one who has met une prostituée française, the term leaves every Gallic streetwalker pondering, "Why am I getting stigmatized? The real problematic odor is French John Sweaty Ass (aka FJSA)." I mean, we poets haven't labelled the Bowmore problem Violets, Soap And Failure, have we? No, we're saying the whisky smells like something a female sex worker wears to cover up the scent of previous customers so that she can be sexually alluring for the next man. Yet we're using a word that has long been separated from its denotation, and now has merged with its connotation, just like "slut".

Sure, worse words can be used to directly link whisky with women (and sexuality). But FWP goes there. And I'm publicly prodding this problem because I hope this boy's club of a Scotch community will think about this, if just for a sober moment, even as we're served by an industry that still struggles with the idea of gender equality amongst its potential customer base. You don't need to be woke to know that the words "French Whore Perfume" will age even worse than "The Jane Walker Special Edition".

I am happy to see FWP referenced less frequently than before, but we can thank the scarcity of those infamous Bowmores for that. So, my dudes, let us allow FWP to go the way of that crummy chapter of Bowmore's history. Let's let FWP die.



And now, a 1980s Bowmore.


Thank you to My Annoying Opinions (hey, he's not the only one with annoying opinions, you know) for the sample. I have no idea when we did this sample swap.

Distillery: Bowmore
Independent Bottler: The Whisky Agency
Series: Liquid Sun
Region: Islay, Scotland
Age: 22 years (1989 - 2011)
Maturation: bourbon hogshead
Bottle count: 256
Alcohol by Volume: 50.7%
Chillfiltered? No
Colored? No

NEAT
No Violets, Soap and Failure on this nose. It's a tree root ball, dense roots and soil wrapped up in burlap. Charred honeydew. Iodine and chalk. Lemonade powder. Clementines. A smoky nut brittle. The palate a light peat, almost mesquite (sorry for the rhyme). Burnt, mineral, with a perky zing. A tangy green note that I want to say is cactus, but probably isn't. A bit of agave nectar, but also añejo tequila. The charred melon comes back to the finish. A brisk bitterness meets soft peat smoke. Agave nectar and limey citrus.

DILUTED TO ~40%abv
The nose gets fruitier, like peaches and melons. Milder smoke. Wet ashes, wet sand. The palate is still very sharp, almost (here it comes) austere. Mineral, tart, salty, bitter. Chile peppers and a hint of smoke. Tangy citrus and chile peppers in the finish. Mild sweetness and smoke.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
As if I haven't written enough words today.

This whisky noses and drinks very well at its modest full strength. The peat never dominates, nor does the fruit or minerals. That balance holds, and maybe even improves, with air. Nothing about it is a knockout, but it is very good multitasking whisky, especially when snow falls in April.

Availability - Probably sold out a half decade ago
Pricing - I think it sold for just a little bit over €100 back in the day
Rating - 87

Thursday, March 22, 2018

Mission: Mars concludes

Here are the Mission: Mars whiskies I reviewed:

--Shinshu 12 year old 1986, cask 452 - 43%abv - Rating: 90
--Shinshu 12 year old 1992, cask 1125  - 43%abv - Rating: 88
--Shinshu 20 year old 1989, cask 618 - 58%abv - Rating: 82
--Tsunuki New Pot Heavily Peated new make - 60%abv - Rating: 63

Before

What Was versus What Is


At first glance, it appears as if the scores are saying, "The stuff from back in the day was better." But that's not necessarily true. The current era of Mars whiskies are barely legal, while the malts I tried from the previous era had much longer maturation periods (and were unpeated). Also, that 20 year old single cask was overoaked and uninspiring.

The last four whiskies were substantially peated, so the era was different, the maturation periods were different and the spirits themselves were different. That being said, I am not motivated to try any current Shinshu/Tsunuki whisky until it gets 8+ years on it. It's nearly impossible to produce an excellent 3 year old whisky, but Mars does get respect points for not oak-doping these whisky toddlers. But will any of us be able to afford 8 year old Shinshu, because...

These whiskies are crazy expensive


My conservative estimate for the price of the first seven bottles is $3000. Yes, some of that pricing is due to the secondary market. But if you think Mars is going to sell their upcoming single casks for less than what they know they can get, then I want to give you a smooch because you're adorbs.

Perhaps the "Nature of Shinshu" series provides a good estimate of Mars's current pricing plans. Those whiskies range from $150-$200 or so, and they're almost entirely 3-5 year old stuff. Though the company claims there's some 25+ year old malt in the mix, I doubt it's more than a sprinkle. Unless those old casks fell below 40%abv, they're tremendously valuable. Do you know what 25-30yo cask strength Japanese single malt is worth? If you don't, that's okay because it barely exists in the present market. Those would be multi-thousand-dollar bottles.

Speaking of cask strength


My favorite whiskies of the bunch were bottled at 43%abv. My least favorite whiskies were 60+%abv. Part of that probably has to do with my current palate. But, again, I'm comparing Satsuma plums to Satsuma oranges here.

By the way, Satsuma oranges aren't actually from Satsuma. They're from Zhejiang, China. They acquired their name because the fruits were originally exported to America through Satsuma. A Satsuma (or unshiu) variety is now grown in Gulf states, like Louisiana and Florida. Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.



After

Is there hope?


Probably not.

Oh, you mean for the current era of Mars whiskies? Maybe. The "Nature of Shinshu" Kohiganzakura was decent, and the Komagatake Sherry & American White Oak was very good. By producing four kinds of malts at each of their distilleries, Hombo Spirits is bound to find at least one or two successful combos. I just hope they give their casks some time. And then underprice Chichibu. Please.