NOT Single Malt Report: Black & White Blended Scotch Whisky

The Personal Classics, Part 1:  Black & White

Original Producer: James Buchanan & Sons
Current Owner: Diaego (they don't even show it on their site)
Brand: Black & White (no brand website)
Type: Blended Scotch Whiskey
Age: minimum 3 years
Alcohol by Volume: 40%

This the first in a small series of Reports covering whiskies that are of historical import to me.  These are the whiskies that that greatly influenced my whisky love.  And I'm starting with the rarely seen (in the US), but always cheap, Black & White.

---

Personal History
In mid-October 2002, I left my job at a talent agency, took a bunch of cash I'd saved up and headed east towards the British Isles.  I spent over three weeks wandering across Ireland and Scotland, staying in cheap hostels, walking five or six miles a day, soaking up the rain, coming to terms with my failures as a human being, embracing being lost, and drinking copiously with hostel-mates from around the world.  I also ran up a credit card debt that took three years to pay off.

It was the loveliest three weeks of my life.  Not only did I sort through considerable personal issues, but I developed an internal connection with Ireland and Scotland that has never left me.

At that point my Scotch drinking had been minimal.  I drank all sorts of stupid stuff in college, but I had enjoyed the Scotch that my cousin Jon had introduced me to a few years before.  Otherwise, there was a lot of vodka shooting in my then recent past.

My brother was working in Dublin at the time for the Irish government.  Perhaps that influenced me to travel that direction, I really don't remember the full reasoning.  But I stayed at his place in Dun Laoghaire for a few nights at the start.  Then we met up at Killarney National Park (Ireland) for a couple of days.  Also staying at the cheap Killarney hotel was a NUTTY Scot, John, that I'd just hung out with in Galway.

One night the three of us headed down to the hotel pub for a drink.  I asked John what working folks drank where he came from.  He surveyed the whisky bottles and ordered me a Black & White on the rocks.  I continued to drink Black & White throughout the trip, in between gallons of stout.

When I returned to The States, Black & White was nowhere to be found.  I once found a big ol' 1.75liter handle of it in a liquor store in Maryland in '06, but then it was gone the next time I went back.  Then, this past December, I spotted a caseload of 1 liter Black & White bottles sitting high on a shelf at Mission Liquor in Pasadena.  I bought a bottle of this old friend for the new year.

---

Whisky History
There's very little information about this blend online and the little that can be found is debatable.  For instance, Wikipedia says that it's not available in the UK.  It certainly was when I was there, plus one can find Scots reviewing it online.  What does seem to line up is this:

James Buchanan created this blend (called then Buchanan's Blend) in the early 1880s and through a level of influence obtained the contract to supply the House of Commons bar.  It became the only scotch blend they served there, thus it became known as Buchanan's House of Commons Scotch Whisky.

That contract wasn't going to last forever, so Buchanan started selling it at public grocers.  People knew the whisky by its black bottle and white label, thus he labelled it Black & White.  In the 1890s, Buchanan added the Black & White Highland terriers to the label to create a recognizable logo.  One hundred twenty years later, those dogs are still on every bottle.

---

The Whisky
Most blended scotch whiskies contain 30-40% malt and 60-70% grain whisky.  The cheaper ones tend to have more grain, the pricier ones have more malt (and they usually advertise that element).

Black & White falls on the much lower end of that scale.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there was less than 30% malt in it, as the grain whisky is so prevalent in its nose and palate.

I'll admit some level of disappointment when I poured my first neat glass of this in January.  It was extremely difficult on first nose and taste.  Instantly, I realized that I'd always had it on the rocks nine years ago.  All the cold and water tampers down the rough young cheapy grains.

What a sensitive little American you have become.
Shut it.

First, let's drink it neat.  The color is a hay-like light amber.  The nose is sickly sweet at first, bourbony, musky, fleshy, and ultimately quite like old vinegar.  The palate is heavily grainy, salty, has lots of smoked cardboard, no sherry, just bourbon, with a creamy texture.  The finish is "gross then gone" at first, then later the grains and vanilla show up upon further sips.

With water, I lowered the ABV to about 31%.  The nose shouts "harsh cheap whisky", pencil lead, sour, oaky, damp cardboard.  Plastic bottle Bourbon is strong on the palate, followed by some dried fruit sweetness, and some rotten cream.  The finish still brings a little heat before it fizzles, leaving behind something quite like chlorine.

Sounds palatable, huh?

Actually, it's not bad in a highball, as it's been my whisky & soda choice for two months.  The soda water curbs all of that vinegar and cardboard while bringing out a pleasant sweetness.  So I recommend it that way.  Try two parts soda to one part Black & White for your first one, then tinker with it from there.

Yes, this was tough at first, but the highball saved it for me.  Will I buy Black & White again?  Maybe, but not if I'm trying to recapture the romance of the past.

Pricing - Good at $20-$25 (for a liter!)
Rating - 73

Cons and Pros of the New Phone: MyTouch Q

Last Thursday I rid myself of my BlackBerry Bold 9700 (BBB 9700) for a new LG myTouch Q.

Old and busted

New hotness?

My list of issues with BlackBerries is endless due to almost 5 years of labored usage.  I will not enumerate these issues as I fear that I'll sound like that Cell Phone Guy who Louie CK always ridicules.

Instead, as a mini-phone review, I'll list the Cons and Pros of the LG myTouch Q when compared to the BBB 9700:

CON - The myTouch is bulkier, but that's largely due to the protective case I've added.  Yet BlackBerry Bold was inconveniently wide in order to allow for the full alphabetic keyboard.

PRO - Because it's bigger, I won't carry it around in my pocket, thus avoiding further risk of genital cancer.

CON - myTouch Q sounds vaguely sexual.

PRO - myTouch Q sounds vaguely sexual.

CON - The actual phone part of the phone is much more difficult to use, and oddly so.  For general device usage, the user can set the screen to shut off automatically after a certain short period of time in order to save battery power.  The BBB 9700 had the same option, but the screen remained on during a call to allow the user to multitask or see call information.  The myTouch does not keep the screen on during a call.  It shuts off, thus ending a call is at least a two step process.  Perhaps a first in the history of the telephone?  Also the 'End' on-screen button is small and surrounded by a bunch of other call options, making the call ending process a precise procedure.  Weird LG fail.

PRO - The Google-run Android software is beautiful to behold and runs very smoothly, most of the time.  The BlackBerry software looks embarrassing and antiquated by comparison.

PRO - The myTouch Q camera is 5 megapixels, shoots solid 720p video, and has a bunch of easy to use onscreen photo options.  The BBB 9700 claims to have had a 3.2 megapixels camera, but the results appeared considerably worse than that; also its level of focus was poor and the video was, technically, sh*t.

CON - A multiple non-intuitive process to get photos from the myTouch Q to a computer via the very USB cord that's charging the phone.  Perhaps this is a Mac issue, but it doesn't appear so.

PRO - Complete connection with all things Google.  So if the user has a Picasa page, then he or she can post the phone pics directly there without taking up any computer hard drive space.

CON - I have a couple of Gmail accounts for work purposes and though the phone runs on a Google platform it rarely notifies me of my new emails, even when I've set it to update or Sync hourly.

PRO - As I was typing that last message, the myTouch informed me of a new email just received.

PRO - Very easy to turn on/off the WiFi, Bluetooth, and GPS.

PRO - The BBB 9700 had two side buttons that were placed awkwardly resulting in photos of my pocket and constant demands that I "Speak a Voice Command".  myTouch doesn't have these buttons.

PRO - Fewer pocket dialings.  Yay!

PRO - Google Maps looks beautiful and has a great navigation setup.  Google Maps for all BlackBerry devices is clunky and at times totally nonfunctional.

CON - This may not be the phone's fault, but a 4G data connection isn't that super.  As 3G was only minutely faster than EDGE, 4G's not consistently better than 3G.  Thus the beautiful Google Maps requires a considerable wait.

CON - The vertical scrolling on the myTouch is not as smooth as it is on certain Apple products.  This results in all sorts of options being selected when the user is just trying to scroll downwards on the myTouch screen.

PRO - Non-iOS touchscreen typing software has improved significantly since my ill-fated brief usage of the Samsung Sh*t, two years ago.  Plus the slide-out keyboard has much bigger buttons than the BBB 9700.

CON - The alarm.  Ugh.  I've been using my cell phone alarm almost every morning for over 9 years.  I set my alarm, I shut off my phone.  My phone turns itself on for the alarm.  The phone I was using 9 years ago could do that.  The myTouch Q cannot.  If you set the alarm and shut off the phone, then you are sleeping in, my friend.  The software doesn't know how to turn the phone on for the alarm, nor does it have an option to allow for this.  The only workaround?  Leave the phone on, turn off the sound, switch on Airplane Mode, and let the battery slowly drain all night.  Serious LG fail.

CON - Most people use an alarm to wake up.  Thus when the alarm goes off, the shut off or snooze button should be very visible for a pair of discombobulated sleepy eyes.  It should not be one of a number of fingertip-sized choices on a screen.  LG fail.

PRO - The screen is beautiful and allows for a lot of customization.

CON - All of the beautiful screen stuff and great Android features run down the battery within hours, even after all sorts of battery-saving actions are taken.  I am constantly recharging the myTouch.

PRO - I can compose blog entries on my phone! (But not this one because I didn't want to run down the battery.)

Ultimately the myTouch Q is better device than the BBB 9700.  The unintuitive antiquated clunkiness of the BlackBerry software, the hideous camera, and the awkward buttons that caused all matters of unintentional comedy were all dealbreakers on both of my BlackBerry devices.  (Yes, there was once another.)  The myTouch Q looks good, runs on decent software, and has a usable camera.  Now if only the phone part worked well... 

Tulisa Contostavlos?

In other news, a video has been leaked that may or may not show a woman I've never heard of from a show I don't watch providing a man I don't know with an act of oral satisfaction.

Nevertheless, I've read 15 articles on the matter.

My only takeaway:  Your BlackBerry?  You filmed it on your BlackBerry?  Was that to make certain the act would never be clearly viewed again?  For shame.

Monday Miscellaneous (Home and Prometheus)

Good morning?

1.  We have a brand new dishwasher.  Our brand new dishwasher melted a plastic lid.  The melted plastic lid filled our condo with acrid toxic plastic smoke last night.  Last night, I spent a number of hours trying to get the acrid toxic plastic smoke out of our condo.  Between the sleep deprivation and poisonous odors, mye brane not werking.

2.  Kristen, who slept through last night's plastic meltdown, did some awesome wall painting.  I intend to post some of these pictures soon.

3.  And we have new windows being installed early this AM.

4.  Do you like-a the movies?  Then you need to watch these two trailers for Prometheus, Ridley Scott's (probable) prequel to Alien.  Even if the film itself were to fall short of expectations, these trailers are good.

The first:

The second:


Happy Monday to you!

Single Malt Report: The Macallan 17 year old Fine Oak (w/guest reporter!)

Distillery: Macallan
Brand: Fine Oak
Age: minimum 17 years
Maturation: American oak bourbon casks, American oak sherry casks, Spanish oak sherry casks
Region: Speyside
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

After yesterday's pricing rant, you're still here?  Great!  You will now be rewarded with some positive thoughts.

As I briefly noted in Monday's post, the Fine Oak series is a newer brand for Macallan.  As opposed to their classic whisky style (spirit matured in only sherry-seasoned Spanish oak casks), the Fine Oak whiskys contain a combination of malts that have been matured in sherry-seasoned American Oak, ex-bourbon American Oak, as well as the sherried Spanish Oak.  The result is a completely different nose and flavor profile, one that lets the malt itself shine through.

Macallan has been pushing its Fine Oak pretty aggressively in some world markets, sometimes more so than their Sherry Oak.  That may be because some folks think the Fine Oaks are more immediately accessible.  That may be true, but that's just opinion again.  The age range for the Fine Oak series is 10, 12 (not in the US), 15, 17 (not in the UK), 18 (not in the US), 21, 25, 30.

James and I concluded the Macallan Taste Off with the 17-year-old Fine Oak.  (It's the lovely one in the champagne glass, above.)  It was enlightening to compare and contrast it with its Sherry Oak cousins, 12 and 18.

The notes!

James:

Color - Amber meets wheat, with a tiny hint of red
Nose - Green grapes in the background, some sherry, cedar chips
Palate - Vanilla, notes of fresh cut grass, brown sugar
Finish - Short; nuts, especially almonds

Me:

Color - Amber waves of grain
Nose - Rummy, salty bourbon vanilla, floral, malty, dusty, paper, caramel, brown sugar
Palate - Lighter texture than the Sherry 18, vanilla, citrus at the edges, toffee, lightly brown sugared
Finish - Medium; toasted, vanilla, sugar cookies

Only twice have I ever paid three figures for a bottle of whisky.  On both occasions, it was The Macallan 17 year Fine Oak.  I've been enjoying this whisky for some time.  To share it thrills me even more.  I've been hoping to do tasting notes on this for so long, thus due to all my drinking practice meditation, my notes above are the more wordy ones.  James and I agreed that between the three Macallan drams, this one was the favorite.

Now, this bottle (in the picture above) was purchased and opened almost exactly a year before our tasting.  And it has had a low level for quite some time.  (You see, it was the whisky I'd save for really good days, and once more prevalent those opportunities recently have become few and far between.)  That low level and the extended time period means that the whisky has gone through considerable oxidation.  So, was it better last year?  Probably.  But it's still great now, thirteen months after its opening.

*sigh*  Here comes the hypocrite.  Yes, it is expensive.  Yes, it is probably overpriced.  But would I buy it again if I had the money.  Yes.

In my defense, it's not as egregiously costly as the Sherry Oak 18:

I'm sighing again, because the price went up this year.  In 2010 and 2011 it was $110, and I nabbed it both times for $104.  Those days are gone.

As always, I'm trying to do my best to ignore price when coming up with a rating.  If I didn't ignore price then yesterday's Sherry 18-year would have taken a sound whuppin'.  But the rating is about the whisky itself.  And The Macallan 17 year Fine Oak sits where it does in the in the Rankings because it is a splendid thing, even after thirteen months of oxidation abuse.  It merges the best elements of the three separate wood finishes into a smooth flawless whole.

I recommend it to any whisky lover, with the disclaimer of its expense.  Try the 15 year Fine Oak first, another great dram.  If you like that one and money isn't an issue, then this is the amber restorative for you.

Pricing - Slightly overpriced at $120-$130
Rating - 94

Single Malt Report: The Macallan 18 year old Sherry Oak (w/guest reporter!)

Distillery: Macallan
Brand: Sherry Oak
Age: minimum 18 years
Maturation: Oloroso sherry casks
Region: Speyside
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

"I come here to bury the Macallan 18yr, not to praise it."  Okay, not really.

I may lose some readership today, but I will be truthful.  This is just my moderately-tested opinion.  And if opinions are like a$$holes (everybody's got one) then behold......my moderately-tested a$$hole?

Let's do the tasting notes, first.  As mentioned in yesterday's Macallan 12yr report, my Scottish Scotch pal James and I undertook a Macallan Taste Off on February 18th.

After we sampled the Macallan 12 year Sherry Oak, we went to the 18 year Sherry Oak.  Then went back to the 12 to compare.  Here are our notes:

James:
Color - Darker than the 12, red hint in the center, approaching a maple syrup look
Nose - Heavy Sherry
Palate - Deeper and larger than the 12, meaty, Sherry
Finish - Long burnt finish, Sherry

Me:
Color - a reddened dark brass, warm maple syrup
Nose - Sherry, cherry cordials, almond extract, toasted almonds, Sherry, Sherry
Palate - Thicker than the 12; mostly Sherry, meaty, creamy, maybe coffee beans?
Finish - Sherry, burnt, Sherry reduction

(Everything that follows below, James is innocent of.  But I will say that all of my Scotch buddies have a very similar opinion to mine when comparing the 12yr to the 18yr.)

Seeing a common theme?  Sherry.  Capital 'S' Sherry.  A good creamy Sherry...that drowns out everything else.

If you like Sherry, then why not buy a bottle of Sherry?  You can get a bottle of "good creamy Sherry" for $15.  Macallan 18yr costs $149.  In Spain, one can get an entire case of great Sherry for that price.

Let's take this a step further.

This is a pricing chart of official bottlings (with one exception), showing an average of five liquor sellers (both major and minor, the same stores I always use for reference in my "Pricing" listings).  I've included all of the official current 18 year old single malt releases in the US.  Where distilleries didn't have an 18-year release, I've used the closest in age.  Those younger are in green, those older are in pink.

Let's first address the bottlings near Macallan's price.  Dalmore also markets itself as a luxury product, but its distillery's production is only 40% that of Macallan's.  Like Macallan 18, the Dalmore 18 is largely bereft of the critical raves compared to many of the others on this list.  So Dalmore 18 sits in a similar luxury-sherry-oak boat as the Mac 18, but is in considerably shorter supply.

Meanwhile, the Springbank distillery uses all local barley, does their own hand malting, bottles everything by hand, and has an output 1/11th the size of Macallan's.  And that Springbank 18 year old?  It's only been released twice in the twenty years since the distillery reopened.

Now, the rest of the list.  Highland Park 18 is perhaps the highest rated officially bottled single malt in the world, has a complexity likely unmatched by anything else in its age range, and is produced by the same company owns Macallan.  And it's $50 cheaper than Mac 18, even $70 cheaper in some stores.  The Talisker 18 has a brain-melting complexity, has picked up raves everywhere, and is released in such limited numbers that it may have sold out completely in LA.  It's almost half the price of the Macallan 18.  Glenfiddich and Glenlivet, the only distilleries who can match Macallan's production levels, have malts at the same age for much less than half the Mac 18 price.

And that Rosebank 19-year may be from an independent bottler (Duncan Taylor), but that beloved distillery doesn't even exist anymore.  That, I believe, is a vision of scarcity.

Or maybe you prefer the luscious sherried style?

Glenfarclas, one of the last of the family-owned distilleries, produces about a third of the malt compared to Macallan, has comparatively limited releases in the States.  Their sherry casks produce a multi-faceted sophisticated malt that's highly regarded by professional noses (and unprofessional ones like mine!).  Their 25-year-old goes for the same price as Macallan's 18-year-old.

Then there's the grand Glendronach.  (Oh, how I hope to do a Glendronach Taste Off!  In May, perhaps?)  Let's put aside the fact that Glendronach has one-sixth of the malt production of Macallan.  Opinions as varied as all of the Malt Maniacs AND Jim Murray agree that Glendronach has the best sherry casked releases for at least the last three years.  Their SINGLE CASK releases are cheaper than Macallan 18.

Macallan has both large supply and high prices.  So, is it the Apple of the whisky world?  In my opinion, no.  Their work isn't revolutionary, nor are they the most innovative of distilleries.  They produce a good brand that is well liked.  As long as their fans don't venture too far off into other malts, they can keep edging their prices up as they market themselves as a luxury brand.

At the Raise the Macallan tastings, the Ambassador goes into depth about their work and investment in oak casks.  This in turn raises their production expense.  And they say that 65% of sherry casks imported to Scotland go to them, thus they have more first- and second-fill sherry malts than anyone else.

I don't begrudge them for their pricing.  They are a business and their customers keep paying for Mac 18.  I'm just rooting for those same buyers to branch out into Macallan's peers' releases.  I think they'll find high (or higher) quality products at lesser prices.

And in the end, price aside, I like Macallan 12 more than Macallan 18.  If you compare our notes on each, you'll see the greater complexity we found in the 12.  These notes vary very little from my own previous samplings.  If I didn't know the ages and I had to pick which one I'd pay more money for, I'd pick the 12.

The 18-year is by no means a bad malt.  It's good.  Very smooth and creamy.  Very Sherry.  And if an extremely sherried mellow malt is your style and you have $150 (plus tax) burning a hole in your pocket, then the Macallan 18 is all yours.

This a$$hole will take the Talisker 18 AND the Lagavulin 16 together for the same price and will be happier than a pig in whisky.

Pricing - Overpriced at $140-$160
Rating - 84

Tomorrow, we'll take a look at one of Macallan's Fine Oak series...

Single Malt Report: The Macallan 12 year old Sherry Oak (w/guest reporter!)

Distillery: Macallan
Brand: Sherry Oak
Age: minimum 12 years
Maturation: Oloroso sherry casks
Region: Speyside
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

There it is.  The gateway drug.

Sure the Johnny Walkers or Glenfiddich 12 can be starters too, but something seems to happen once the drinker takes to Mac 12.  Perhaps it's the first Scotch that he drank neat.  Perhaps it's the first Scotch that she actually enjoyed.

It's the one I've been recommending for years.  If you're new to single malts and have the money on hand (and spending $12 on a drink at the bar doesn't offend you), try a Macallan 12 neat.  Or perhaps with an ice cube or two if the flavor is too intense.  From there I usually recommend Redbreast 12 (yes, it's not Scotch, but I don't segregate), then Oban 14.  After that, we need to go drinking together.

But Mac 12 is the starter.  It has a creamy texture, a bright nose, and possibly the most accessible sherry-finish palate.  It's also very easy to find in bars, grocery stores, and small liquor shops.

In the US, it's simply known as The Macallan 12 year old.  In other markets it's called The Macallan 12 year old Sherry Oak due to the prevalence of their Fine Oak brand.

Upon return from the Long Beach Scottish Festival on February 18th, my Gaelic-Gallic (raised in the Highlands and Glasgow) buddy James and I took on the challenge of a three-part Macallan Taste Off.  I'd been looking forward to this for some time.  We've enjoyed some exceptional whiskies in the past and these bottles of Mac were burning a hole in The Whisky Closet.

We'd each had these three Macallans in the past, but never side by side by side.  We started with the 12y Sherry, using a 50mL mini I'd obtained from some happy hooch seller in town.

First, notes from James:

Color - Medium to dark gold, some orange, a brassy look
Nose - Light caramel scent, nutty in back, walnuts perhaps?; reminded me of an ice cream and whisky dessert "de mystère" I used to have with my grandfather Pappy P.
Palate - Dark chocolate and sherry
Finish - A good long fin full of cherries

Then, my notes.  But first, damn, I want a French ice cream and whisky dessert!

Color - Dark gold with orange hints
Nose - Caramel, chocolate rum cake, walnuts, almond extract
Palate - Thickly textured; Cocoa, nutty, fresh cherries, sherry, some alcohol heat; adding water sweetens it up
Finish - Decent length, sherry and cherries

High approvals from both of us.  It has the classic Macallan nose, the only nose I have pinpointed in a blind tasting (James was there, as was considerable alcohol that night at The Daily Pint).  A very lush sherried, nutty, caramel, chocolatey nose.  I'd even argue that the scent can be better than the palate at times.

This was the first time I'd noticed the cherries, an element I'd found in Glenfarclas's sherried whiskys.  Other folks have found honey, currants, brown sugar, pipe tobacco, and cinnamon.

As per all of these descriptors, Macallan 12 works best neatly as an evening sipper.  You can add water, ice, or club soda to it if you choose, but go ahead and try it neat once in a while.  For dessert, perhaps.  Or breakfast.

Pricing - Excellent at $40, but don't pay more than $50 because someone somewhere has it for less
Rating - 87

Tomorrow, we'll take a look at one of Mac 12's older siblings...