NOT Single Malt Report: Old Taylor 6 year old Straight Bourbon Whiskey (1996 bottling)

I was doing some dusty hunting a couple weeks ago and spotted an old looking Old Taylor 200mL bottle on a shelf.  I turned it over to find the glass bottle's production year and thought I saw what appeared to be an '86'.  Holy moley, I thought, I've found a National Distillers era Old Taylor.  And it was $3.89.  Sold.

The following week I did some snooping around online and noticed that the label really didn't look like the National Distillers Old Taylors.  In fact it looked much like the current one.  After further staring and staring and staring, I realized the number was a '96'.

So what the heck does all that mean?

Like the Old Grand-Dad brand from yesterday's report, Old Taylor bourbon used to be owned by National Distillers.  Along with OGD and a number of other brands, Beam Inc (Fortune Brands) bought Old Taylor in 1987.  At that point, the production moved to Beam's Clermont plant using the standard-rye Beam mash bill.  In 2009, Buffalo Trace bought the brand from Beam.

The Old Taylor 6yo (OT6) distilled by National Distillers is well liked by many bourbon geeks who say that it was a big butterscotch bomb.  And, according to one fellow from Straightbourbon who quoted Michael Jackson (the whisky one), during the bourbon glut in the '80s OT6 was actually 10-11 years old.  Thus my glee when I thought I had a 1986 bottle.  Thus my tempered glee when I realized I had a 6yo Beam.

I really do not like Beam White Label (four years old) and I sorta tolerate Beam Black Label (eight years old) when on a plane.  But I do like this Old Taylor...

...which makes me wonder if Beam's current distillation and maturation processes have changed since 1989/1990.  Or perhaps they were still adding extra older stuff into the mix in the mid-90s.

As you may know, my palate is much more familiar (and happier) with single malt whiskies so this is a continuation of my bourbon education.  But let's give it a go anyway.

Owner: Beam, Inc. at time of bottling, but now owned by Sazerac
Brand: Old Taylor
Distillery: Jim Beam Distillery
Location: Clermont, Kentucky
Mash Bill: Standard 15% rye (probably)
Age: minimum 6 years old
ABV: 40% ABV
Bottle year: 1996

The color is a medium gold.  It looks a little watery and light.  The nose starts with a very rich vanilla bean blanket covering corn chips and black cherry syrup.  It's a little yeasty and bready at times.  Then there's more corn, as in corn meal and grilled cob.  With some air, a load of caramel notes develop along with butterscotch bread pudding.  It always smells like it's going to be sweet, but actually the palate remains very mild.  It's completely inoffensive.  Lots of whipped cream, vanilla, and caramel sauce.  There's a brief floral puff and a light vegetal note.  The finish is very short and mostly matches the palate.  Maybe a hint of bitterness and sawdust added in.

There it is.  A mild, light bourbon without any of the ugly off notes of Beam White and Black.  There's not much to it, but what there is is good.  I was (and am) a little shocked by how much I liked it, even going a second round without notes just to make sure.

It has none of the stamina or structure of OGD114.  It can't take water or club soda.  Its finish is non-existent.  And if you're looking for complexity, you need to go elsewhere.  But, I'd be happy to buy a bottle of this for the house bourbon.  I should match this up with Evan Williams to see who wins at this price point.

DISCLAIMER TIME:  I cannot say if the current version of OT6 is similar to this one.  In fact, I sincerely doubt it.  Even though Buffalo Trace / Sazerac owns the brand, the bourbon is still coming from Beam.  And as I mentioned above, the current Beam White and Beam Black are undrinkable compared to this.  Thus the current bottles of Old Taylor 6yo are likely to be very similar to White and Black.  IF you're interested in trying OT6, keep an eye open for the 200mL bottles.  They should be around $4 (and thus cheaper than a bar pour) at some corner liquor stores.  Before buying the bottle, take a look at the bottom and see if you can spot a two digit number beginning with '8' or '9'.  That will tell you the bottle's year.  If you find one with an older label, then that's probably made with National Distillers juice and seems to be recommended often by bourbon dorks.  Meanwhile, the current version is generally disliked.

Wow, that disclaimer was longer than my tasting notes.  I'm just trying to cover my bourbon butt in case someone buys a new bottle and proclaims that it's sh*t and it's all my fault.  Anyway, how the hell do I rate this?

Availability - More so in the Midwest, less so in the East and West

Pricing - $4-$5 for 200mL; for the current version $12-$15 (750mL), $18-20 (1L)

Rating - 80  (if it had any sort of finish it would be at least an 83)

NOT Single Malt Report: Old Grand-Dad 114 Straight Bourbon Whiskey

I was going to review a pair of Ardbegs this week, but I'm pushing them a couple weeks down the line.  Since it's the week before the Super Bowl -- seemingly the American-est week of the year -- I'd like to review a few bourbons, all of which are much cheaper than anything Ardbeg puts out.

Today, it's Old Grand-Dad 114, one of the most affordable high proof whiskies on the market.  Beam Inc., now owned by Suntory, distills and produces the Old Grand-Dad (heretofore shortened to OGD) line.  The range includes the regular OGD, OGD Bottled in Bond (BIB), and OGD 114, rising in proof (80 or 86, 100, 114) and price ($15, $20, $25 approx.).  They all utilize the same high-rye mash bill that Beam uses for (the more expensive) Basil Hayden straight bourbon and for good reason.  Mr. Basil Hayden was the old granddad himself and a distiller who preferred a higher rye content in his mash.

Some history in a snapshot (much of it courtesy of Chuck Cowdery):
1796 - Basil Hayden moves to Bardstown, Kentucky from Maryland.
1882 - Old Grand-Dad distillery is built, overseen by Basil's grandson Raymond Hayden.
1885 - Raymond passes away.  Distillery purchased by the Barber Family.
1899 - Distillery sells to the Wathen family.
1920-1933 - During Prohibition, OGD and many other distilleries are consolidated into American Medicinal Spirits.
1934 - American Medicinal Spirits is sold to National Distillers. The brand is re-released but the distillery is never reopened.  Instead the spirit is distilled at K. Taylor Distillers.
1987 - Fortune Brands purchases OGD, along with a number of other National Distillers brands, moving the distillation to their own facilities.
2011 - Fortune Brands is split up, its spirits division named Beam Inc.
2014 - Suntory purchases Beam Inc.  Much xenophobia ensues.

About 15 months ago, I reviewed OGD BIB.  I wasn't impressed by its flavor, though I liked its nose, and the bourbon made for a decent Old Fashioned.  Otherwise, I really couldn't recommend it.  Ever since then I've been pondering purchasing a bottle of the OGD 114 blindly because the price was so darned reasonable.  But luckily for me, my friend Florin supplied me with a sample to test it out first.

Owner: Beam, Inc.
Brand: Old Grand-Dad
Distillery: Booker Noe Plant
Location: Boston, Kentucky
Mash Bill: High rye, 30% rye
Age: NAS (It's not young. It's not old. I'm not helpful.)
ABV: 57% ABV

I tried it neatly, then reduced it to 50% ABV, then reduced to 43% ABV.

NEAT
The color is an orangey dark gold.  The nose leads with charred oak, bark, and artificially-flavored maple syrup.  Then lemon peel, corn syrup, and vanilla.  There's lots of young spirity stuff like chlorine and ethyl in there.  After some time, a baked banana + caramel + cayenne pepper note arose.  But overall, sawdust seems to be its main characteristic.  The palate is warm, but not as hot as one would anticipate from such a high proof.  Lots of corn syrup is backed by toffee, milk chocolate, and fresh cherries.  There's also a little bit of salt and some peppery rye spice.  It finishes with lots of caramel and Corn Pops.  Then black pepper, sawdust, and barrel char.

REDUCED TO 50% (modeled after OGD BIB)
The nose smells like a rear end, and not a clean one.  Then some buttery (yes I said buttery) oak, white fruits (mostly apple), varnish, and sawdust.  The palate is pleasant and mellow.  All toasty grains, caramel sauce, and barrel char.  The finish is brief and mostly just that barrel char.

REDUCED TO 43% (modeled after OGD)
The nose is all caramel, corn syrup, oak pulp, and marshmallows.  The palate is lightly sweet and lightly bitter.  Corn and oak.  It finishes briefer and a little dry.  Oak and banana.

Firstly, I was impressed by how flexible the whiskey was.  I don't think I've had a bourbon that withstood so much added water and still came out flavorful.  Ignoring the quirky nose at the 50%ABV level, there were times that I preferred the lower ABVs.  It doesn't have much character at 43%, but makes for very easy pain-free drinking.

While I like the 114 much more than the BIB, nothing about it knocked me over.  I kept waiting for some more rye character to show up, but all I found was a little bit of pepper here and there.  The dominant sawdust note might be a turnoff to some folks, but I didn't mind it much.  So the bourbon neither sins nor shines.  But, again, its flexibility is a big plus for me, so I'd still order it at a bar as long as its price isn't out of whack.  Speaking of price, the bottle still costs about as much as it did five years ago.  I hope it holds...

(For another take, see Chemistry of the Cocktail's review.  Jordan's OGD 114 experience held much more rye-ness than mine.)

Availability - Many liquor specialists

Pricing - $22-$30

Rating - 80

Single Malt Report: Lagavulin 12 year old Cask Strength (2011 release)

Tuesday - Lagavulin 16 year old
Wednesday - Lagavulin 1991 Distillers Edition
Today - Lagavulin 12 year old Cask Strength (2011 release)

In what is possibly this site's final Lagavulin report, I present you with my favorite from their range...

Each year, Diageo presents to the whisky world their "Special Releases".  Amongst the old Broras and Port Ellens, whose MSRPs are exponentially increasing, sits the comparatively modestly priced annual Lagavulin 12 year old.  Sorry, that was a lot adverbs and adjectives.  Diageo makes me verbose.

Let's keep it short.  I've had the Lagavulin 12 release on a number of occasions, all of which were very positive.  It was nice to be able to buy a sample of the 2011 version from Master of Malt so I could officially dig in.

Please note: there are batch differences between each year's release.

Distillery: Lagavulin

Owner: THEM!  :-\
Type: Single Malt
Region: Islay
Maturation: former bourbon casks, possibly lots of refills

Age: minimum 12 years
Release date: 2011

Chill-filtration? No
Caramel coloring? No much, if any

Alcohol by Volume: 57.5%

NEAT
The color is pee.  My favorite whisky color.  It gives me hope that the oak levels are low and the e150a colorant is at a minimum.  The nose starts with peated sugar cookies, followed by a load of aromatic herb notes (fennel, anise, licorice) reminiscent of my other favorite distilled spirit (dubbed "The Mistress").  Then plaster, vanilla beans, bread pudding, butterscotch make up the midground.  The beach is in the background.  The palate delivers one of my favorite peat volleys.  Just a big dry chunk of peat moss.  Hints of vanilla and butter and lemon cake.  A light sweetness, like a little light brown sugar.  Then a little salt and a little savory to go with a honey & orange peel sting.  It finishes very clean and fresh with a menthol glow.  A little cracked pepper and mint leaves.  Grass clippings drying in the sun.  Some salt, along with that peat brick.

WITH WATER
The nose gets maltier.  The peat goes a little farmy.  A little more oak, but not much more.  Menthol, lemon peel, pen ink(?), and soil.  The palate gets grassy, drier, and tarter.  A nice bitterness.  Walnuts and almonds.  Earthiness, bitterness, and moss in the finish.

Oh dear.  Great whisky, steep price, ugly company.  The quandary.  That's what I thought about last night while enjoying this sample.

Looking past the troublesome details, I'd say, "WOW! Go get it, peatheads!"

Bringing in the expense, I'd say, "Wow!  Go get it, peatheads with a lot of discretionary income."

Taking everything into consideration, I say, "Fabulous liquid, a shame about everything else."

Availability - Specialty liquor retailers

Pricing - (for Lagavulin 12s in general) $85-$100 East Coast, $110-$125 West Coast

Rating - 92

Single Malt Report: Lagavulin 1991 Distillers Edition

Onto the whisky in the middle, Lagavulin 1991 Distillers Edition, a sample purchased from Master of Malt two years ago to the week!

There's no secret about the sherry presence in this whisky.  With its annual Classic Malts Distillers Editions, Diageo throws a whisky bone to its customers by releasing wine cask finished versions of its most popular single malts.  As they're somewhat limited, they carry a higher price tag, meanwhile their actual quality (when compared to the regular releases) is debatable.  But again, these releases do expand the somewhat narrow ranges of the Big D's "Classic Malts".

[On a grammatical note, where the hell are the apostrophes on the "Distillers Edition" appellations? Is it Distiller's or Distillers'?  I mean, it's a possessive.  The editions are for, to, of, or by the distillers.  Right?  Diageo?  Words?]

As you may have read in previous posts, I'm not the biggest fan of wine cask finishes, especially the sort of brief sherry work done on the DEs.  But since I've been tinkering around with my own finished whiskies at home, I've been trying to keep an open mind and maybe learn a thing or two.  I've tried two more recent Lagavulin DEs and found them......okay.  Absent was the Lagavulin thunder, present was a lot of PX (Pedro Ximenez sherry) sweetness that elbowed out everything else.  But those tries were in social settings.  This one was in my usual hermetic setup.

Distillery: Lagavulin

Owner: THEM!  :)
Type: Single Malt
Region: Islay
Maturation & Age: approximately 16 years in ex-bourbon casks, then less than a year in former Pedro Ximenez sherry casks

Chill-filtration? Yep
Caramel coloring? Probably

Alcohol by Volume: 43%

To make things a little confusing, there were two releases of Lag 1991 DE: one in 2007 (4/495) and one in 2008 (4/496).  Because this sample was still available to buy in 2012, I'm leaning towards it being from the 2008 bottles.  But at the same time, I doubt that it sat in the casks for an entire additional year, as it seems like a little bit of an odd unplanned risk by the normally profit-hungry ownership.  Instead, my thought is that it was done in a second batch of bottling shortly after the first.  I could be wrong about all of this, but Serge has reviewed both bottlings and given them the same score and SGP number.  If anyone has any further information, please let me know and I'll update this paragraph.  Cheers!  Now onto the tasting.

NEAT
The color is maroon mahogany.  Lots of fruity sherry on the nose, showing up as both fresh and dried fruits.  Fresh and dried cherries, plums and prunes, black grapes and raisins.  There are also some Heath Bar, corn chip, and rum-filled milk chocolate notes.  Lagavulin's spirit takes a seat waaaaaaaay in the back.  Often the peat doesn't even peek out from under the PX blanket.  But it does appear in the palate.  More moss than smoke.  The smoke that does show is a polite wood smoke.  After some air, the whisky releases a big floral burst.  And then maybe some orange zest.  It's a bit tart and very drying.  More action seems to happen in the finish as chocolate, flower blossoms, prunes, caramel sauce, and another whisper of wood smoke arrive.

WITH WATER
The nose gets much quieter even with just a couple drops of water.  Fewer fresh fruits, more dried ones (especially prunes).  Some malt finally shows up, which is nice, but so does a garbage pail full of rotting fruit, which is not as nice.  The palate is similar to the neat one, maybe a little hotter along with some young-seeming wood pulp notes.  Otherwise, raisins and prunes register the loudest.  The finish is brief, but still aromatic with more sweet sherry.

Unlike the regular 16 year old, this one doesn't swim well.  So I recommend leaving water out of it.

I didn't mind this finished whisky that much, but I also found it sort of uneventful.  Dark chocolate was brought out as an accompaniment -- as per many online recommendations -- but the two flavors didn't dance well.  (Glenfarclas remains my favorite sherried-whisky partner for chocolate.)  Even though the whisky was from five years ago, sample oxidation did not appear to be a factor since the sealed bottle was fuller than many of my more recent MoM samples.

There are a lot of sweet sherried whiskies on the market, many of which are considerably cheaper than this one, so sherry fans have a lot of other options.  Some peat-heads may be a little bored with it, so I can't recommend it to all of them, either.  I think the sherry is much better integrated than Glenmorangie's Lasanta and more brings with it more character than Bowmore 15.  But at the same time, I prefer Laphroaig's Triple Wood because, even though its cask work is very aggressive, I can still get a reasonable hit of the distillery's character.  Of course, much of these comparisons aren't entirely fair because Lagavulin is using a completely different sherry.

I don't want to make it look like I dislike this whisky.  It's good.  The nose and finish are very good, when neat.  You're going to have to like some sweet sherry in your whisky and not expect a ton of Lagavulin phenolics.  Anticipate subtlety, not fireworks.

For more positive opinions see Serge's reviews or John Hansell's; for a moderate opinion see Jim Murray's in his Whisky Biblio; for a mix of takes see the LAWS reviews.

Availability - Specialty liquor retailers

Pricing - (for Lagavulin DEs in general) $90-$130, another wide range

Rating - 83

Single Malt Report: Lagavulin 16 year old

Yes, I've made it this far without reviewing any official Lagavulins.  But now, to celebrate the 250th whisky reviewed on Diving for Pearls, I bust out a threesome of 'Vulins.

Today, #250 will be Lagavulin 16 year old.  Sample courtesy of Florin!

I will admit here that I have never owned a bottle of Lagavulin 16.  Instead I've only enjoyed it via other people's generosity or via buying a pour at a bar (back when it wasn't $20 a pop).  This wasn't due to any preference against Lagavulin.  I really didn't go peat moss crazy until 4 or 5 years ago, and then in the past three years I've been reducing my Diageo product patronage to zero.  But Lagavulin 16 is always of a reliable quality.  Some reviewers deem it an all-time classic like Highland Park 18.

Yet many of those same reviewers will admit that Lagavulin 16 has undergone some changes over the past decade.  Some years were deemed a little grittier and rawer, other years sweeter, other years oakier, other years smokier, other years sherrier.  We all have our palate sensitivities, but there may be something to the more recent claims of changes.  Around nine years ago, Lagavulin cask maturation moved from Islay to mainland Scotland, thus perhaps temperature, humidity, and climate differences in warehouses resulted in shifts in character.  In 1997, the distillery ramped up production to meet with increased demand, so starting with the most recent bottlings you may be drinking whisky from stills that were pushed harder than they were in the past.  (Here are some links with some of these discussions: WhiskyMag forum chain, WhiskyWhiskyWhiksy chain, Driscoll, David OG.)

This sample came to me in 2012, so it's from spirit distilled before Lagavulin distillery changed their processes.  I will say there is definitely some sherry lurking within...

Distillery: Lagavulin

Owner: THEM!  :)
Type: Single Malt
Region: Islay
Maturation: likely a mix of ex-bourbon and ex-sherry casks

Age: minimum 16 years

Chill-filtration? Yep
Caramel coloring? Yep

Alcohol by Volume: 43%

NEAT
The color is DiageoGold™.  I always found some sort of cinnamon thing going on in Lag16's nose, and happily it showed up on cue with this sample, this time reading as cinnamon sticks.  There's more peat moss here than in the palate, and it's joined by creme brûlée and vanilla pudding.  Then there's some Super Ball rubber and grapefruit, along with a little bit of sherry and golden raisins.  After 20+ minutes of air, much more citrus shows up.  It gets sugary and mossier.  Some caramel sauce as well.  The palate leads with boat diesel exhaust and charred fish.  The loch's on fire!  Then comes honey, wood smoke, and a veggie note that's not dissimilar to sautéed kale.  Maybe a little black pepper (though it's no Talisker) and pencils.  Very tannic on the tongue.  The finish is sweeter than the palate.  Smoke and charred meat, along with a tart candy tingle.  It's long-lasting considering the ABV and filtration, but its make up is mostly smoke.

WITH WATER
(A thing of note: I finally bought a glass eye-dropper.  Previously, I'd been using small spoons to apply water to whisky.  But now I'll never go back.)
With just a few drops of water the whisky undergoes one heck of a transition.  In the nose there's a flood of sherry notes.  Oloroso sherry, dark dried fruits, cherries, and milk chocolate.  The cinnamon sticks are still there.  New notes of sawdust and leather couch.  But the more water drops, the more sherry shows up.  The palate gets much sweeter and meaty.  Sugar, caramel, and oranges.  It's still smoky, but the moss element grows as does some bitterness.  It finishes very tartly and dry.  Smoke, coffee grounds, and dark chocolate.

This is very good whisky.  If new and future bottlings do change, I hope it is not for the worse.  I may not wish the best for Diageo, but I don't like seeing whiskies lose their mojo due to financial decisions.  If you're a peated single malt lover and haven't tried Lagavulin 16 yet, then I'd recommend doing so.  If you can find it at a bar for $15-or-less, I'd suggest trying it that way rather than forking out larger sums for a blind bottle buy.  Maybe you'll fall in lust with it as many have or maybe you'll stay with your current favorites.

As for me, I find it of similar quality to younger official versions of its neighbors, Laphroaig and Ardbeg.  And it actually isn't that much of a step above Caol Ila 12.  I think the watering down, coloration, and filtration prevents a proper presentation to what should be a gorgeous middle-aged Islay.  (And may I be the 10,000th person to request a 46%ABV NCF version?)  But as I said before, it's still very good.  Quality and bold character still sneak through all of Diageo's manipulation.  And the fun shift that added water brought gives it a couple extra points in my book.  I can't promise there will be any sherry notes in future bottles nor do I have any idea how loud the peat will shout.  But hopefully it remains recognizably Lagavulin.

Availability - Most larger liquor retailers; also Costco has good deals once in while

Pricing - $65-$100, yes it's that wide of a swing

Rating - 88

'Phroaig Phriday: Laphroaig 10 year old Cask Strength Batch 005

Okay, maybe one more report this week.  Since there was a Laphroaig last Friday, I'll do another one today.  This time it's even a current bottling.  WOW!

I like Laphroaig's batches of 10 year old CS.  They bottle a new round every year and each tends to be pretty solid.  I reviewed batch 002 way back in the day (almost two whole years ago) and was very taken by the multi-layered finish.

No matter how many bottles Laphroaig churns out of the 10yo CS, it's often very hard to come by via European retailers.  Meanwhile, here in The States it appears to be easier to get, but the price rises $5 to $10 with each new batch.  In California, the price is climbing close to $80.  But last month, while traveling with my in-laws in Upstate New York, I found a bottle for $57.  And promptly grabbed it.  This review is from my bottle.  Not the top of the bottle, rather a few drinks down the shoulder.

I don't have a bottle pic as the bottle currently resides 3000+ miles away, so I'll have to go with an official one.

Distillery: Laphroaig

Owner: Beam, Inc. (who have their own new owners...)
Type: Single Malt
Region: Islay
Maturation: ex-bourbon barrels

Age: minimum 10 years
Batch: 005, Feb 2013

Chill-filtration? No
Caramel colored? Probably not

Alcohol by Volume: 57.2%

NEAT
The color is apple juice gold.  The first thing about the nose that strikes me is all of the rich American oak, much more than I remember there being in previous batches.  It's not off-kilter or new-ish oak (like in yesterday's report).  Instead it's a series of notes -- vanilla beans, coconut cream, and sawdust -- that are firmly integrated with the matured spirit notes.  There's very fruity honeyed peat that shifts to peat moss after several minutes.  Whole cloves, star anise, and dried cherries bundled in a burlap sack.  An occasional whiff of wood smoke too.  Lots of burnt stuff in the palate, from peat cigarettes to barrel char to wood ashes.  Some baking chocolate bitterness and hot tar.  A very intense herbal blast; not cooking herbs, but rather something more medicinal.  That note carries right into the finish and meets with sea salt and fresh seaweed.  Charred fish.  Something I can only describe as tangy tar.  It's extensive and very drying.

WITH WATER
The burnt peat and cigarettes meet with some fresh apples in the nose.  Then grapefruits and cherry lollipops.  The beach, including sand and rotting seaweed.  The peat is more prominent now, the oak lessened.  The palate is lightly bitter, lightly creamy, and lightly floral.  There's the peat cigarette smoke and some orange and lemon rind.  It gets more candied with time.  The finish is also lightly bitter.  Some lingering smoke and a growing sweetness.

I read two reviews online in which the writers said they'd found sherry notes in this whisky.  I think what they'd experienced is the very rich oak imparting bold (not buttery) characteristics, maybe even some dried fruit.  This is indeed the oakiest of the Laphroaig 10yo CSes I've tried, the earlier batches being more nude and raw.

From what I've gathered from reading reviews by anoraks who have been drinking longer than I've been alive, this oak prevalence is becoming the new style almost across the industry.  When the oak is done well, it does add some richness to the whisky.  When it's done poorly, it's pretty awful.  The complaints by the older drinkers somewhat match my own: the added oak notes come at the expense of the actual malt spirit character.

I think ramping up the cask influence (via recharring, switching casks, warehouse climate adjustment, and increased knowledge about the oak itself) is easier and cheaper to do than improving the distillate.  If the company in charge of the distillery wants to make more product for less expense, then barley strains are going to be chosen for the amount of alcohol that can be squeezed out of each grain, yeast will be chosen for its activity, and still heating will be changed to cheaper less labor intensive means.  This will result in less expensive production processes, but it will also have an effect on the nose, palate, and texture of the resulting product.  And that's where the oak comes in to help bring more life into the whisky, or sometimes to artificially speed up the maturation.

All of that being said, I do like this batch of Laphroaig CS.  It's different than earlier versions, noticeably more decorated on the nose, but the oak plays well with the spirit.  If you prefer a brawnier Laphroaig zap, then I recommend going with an earlier batch (if you can find it).  I haven't had batch 004, but I do know that 001-003 are more raw than 005.  I hope that helps and I hope you find it at a good price.

Availability - Specialty retailers, though more available in the US than Europe

Pricing - $60-$85 (US), much higher in Europe

Rating - 87 (score dropped to 85 in a subsequent review)

Single Malt Report: Aberlour 13 year old 2000 Exclusive Malts (K&L exclusive)

Okay, I've gotta get a review in before this week slips away whiskyless.  What a shame that would be.

Four weeks ago, I posted a life-of-the-bottle report on the K&L exclusive Bowmore 2002 from Exclusive Malts.  It was an odd whisky with its malt overwhelmed by aggressive (and occasionally off-putting) oak.  That whisky wasn't a complete loss.  With lots of air and a little bit of water, it's decent.  But compared to the rest of the often excellent indie ex-bourbon cask Bowmores I've tried, it didn't fare well.

Released last year, that Bowmore is one of four single malts bottled by The Creative Whisky Company and sold exclusively through K&L Wine Merchants.  The other three, all very much in stock, are Fettercairn, "Island Distillery", and Aberlour.  My friend Florin (who also had issues with the Bowmore) sent me a sample of the Aberlour from his own bottle.

Aberlour's official bottlings are well known for a considerable ex-sherry cask influence.  In order to get a clear sense of what their malt tastes like without sherry, one often has to go to independent bottlings.  I'm not the biggest fan of the Aberlour's OBs.  That has its root in an awful awful bottle of the 10 year old, purchased and quickly handed off seven years ago.  But I have tried two indie ex-bourbon cask Aberlours and enjoyed them both.  One of those whiskies was another 2000 vintage from Exclusive Malts, a 12 year old released in the US in 2012.  So, though hesitant to buy my own bottle of the K&L whisky, I looked forward to giving the sample a try.  Thanks, Florin, for this opportunity!

Distillery: Aberlour

Independent Bottler: The Creative Whisky Co. Ltd.
Series: The Exclusive Malts
Retailer: K&L only

Age: June 2000 - 2013 (13 years)

Maturation: "Oak Casks" (American oak in this case)

Region: Speyside (Banffshire)

Alcohol by Volume: 55.1%
Chillfiltered: No
Colored: No


NEAT
The color is a medium gold.  The nose is just loaded with honey.  As a citrus note edges in, it reminds me of orange blossom honey.  But the nose is also very woody, similar to the Bowmore but less punishing.  Sometimes it's a little piney, sometimes it smells a little green (if that makes any sense).  Then there's some cardamom, dried ginger, and Juicy Fruit gum.  After some time, a touch of varnish shows up, then some anise and a hint of papaya.  At times it smells little blend-ish when it doles out a big chunk of lightly-spiced vanilla.  The palate is a little unusual so please pardon these weird notes as I'd tried to capture it.  At first there are nuts (peanuts & almonds), salt water taffy, lots of butter, a chocolate/caramel/tobacco hybrid, and shortbread cookies.  The butteriness mixes with the chocolate/caramel/tobacco thing, then out bursts some very young malt spirit followed by a considerable push of burned oak.  It's not off-putting but it is unbalanced.  The prevalence of butter, caramel, and actual charred wood point towards a cask that's overwhelming the malt.  Lots of oak in the finish as well.  Some of that young spirit too.  Lots of nuts.  Plenty of alcohol sting but narrow in content otherwise.

WITH WATER (approx. 43% ABV)
Honey, barrel char, caramel, and cardamom lead the nose.  Some pine needles and butter.  The papaya hint still sticks around, along with a floral (blossoms, not perfume) note.  The palate is more pleasant.  Very caramelly, nutty, and sugary.  Seems to get maltier too, and has a nice spicy zing.  The finish is briefer, but the malt shows well.  It's sweet and a little grassy.  Some of that spice and vanilla.  And then at the very very end (like 45 minutes into the process) a dried leaves in caramel sauce note appears.  That was my favorite part.

I'll start with the good aspects.  The nose is enjoyable with or without water.  But I definitely recommend adding water here.  While it causes the whisky to lose some complexity, it helps out by making both the nose and palate more pleasant and less oaky.

But there is still so much oak showing up in every corner of this whisky.  It almost seems as if they'd used virgin oak casks.  But at the same time, the whisky releases volleys of very young distillate.  So it's somehow both oaky and young, and usually not in balance.  It made me wonder what the whisky would be like had it been left to age another few years......in a different cask.

The Bowmore had similar issues, but the Aberlour's are easier to navigate and modulate.  The Aberlour makes for easier drinking -- and that comes from someone who usually prefers peated whisky.

The price on the Aberlour is very reasonable in the current market.  In fact, it's 25%-30% cheaper than the Exclusive Malts Aberlour from 2012.  Personally, I have no interest in buying a bottle, but I'd drink it again.  Meanwhile, I'll be on the lookout for other indie ex-bourbon cask Aberlours.

Availability - K&L Wines

Pricing - $64.99

Rating - 82