Batch Match Up: Eagle Rare 10 year old versus Eagle Rare 10 year old

Brand: Eagle Rare

Distillery: Buffalo Trace
Ownership: The Sazerac Company
Type: Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey
Region: Frankfort, Kentucky

Age: minimum 10 years
Mashbill: BT low-rye: approximately 80% corn, 12% malted barley, 8% rye

Maturation: charred white oak barrels

Alcohol by Volume: 45%

Unlike the High West Double Rye from Tuesday's post, Buffalo Trace's Eagle Rare 10 year old (ER10) bourbon is a single barrel release per its label.  But nowhere is it listed what barrel number is used.  It's just "single barrel" and no listing of any specific real or made up information.  You know, just something to throw to their customers, so that we may say "Hey, barrel 3701B and 185A are the sh*t!" and buy more of the same.

Eagle Rare uses the approach opposite to the same company's Blanton's single barrel bourbon, whose label lists more information than most of us desire.  The lack of disclosure on the Eagle Rare label makes me wonder "Is this really from a single barrel?", "Is there any proof they have to provide to the TTB regarding its Single Barrelness", and "How much should I really care?"  I'm not angry about it, I just think it's a little silly.  Disclosing the barrel number would not only benefit us, but it would lend a little boutique element to a mass-produced bourbon.

I'm a fan of Eagle Rare's little brother, the regular Buffalo Trace bourbon, a $20-$25 whisky that always hits the spot.  So when I saw a 375mL bottle of the ER10 on a shelf for $14.99 I snapped it up.  It was an easy drinker, having many of the elements I liked in Buffalo Trace.  Thankfully, I saved a review sample of it before the bottle was empty.  I was then inspired to buy a 750mL bottle selling it for less than $25.  But from the start, that bottle was......not as good.  As a result it went into a number of Old Fashioneds and highballs.  I may have even poured a few ounces down the sink.  It wasn't terrible, but life is too short to sweat over lesser whiskey.  Again, I saved an ounce for review because I really wanted to match it up next to the first bottle to see if the whiskey was different or if my palate had changed.

Though ER10 does not have that barrel number on the label, there is a bottle code one can reference.  Whether or not it's from a single barrel, the bourbon is bottled in batches of some size and the printed code (near the bottle's back bottom) will at least provide a date of bottling.  Here are the codes for the two "barrels" in question:

B13119 - This was the original 375mL bottle I'd purchased at Hi Time Wine Cellars in early September 2013.  My guess is that it was bottled on the 119th day of 2013 (April 29th).
B13140 - This was the 750mL bottle I'd purchased at Hi Time Wine Cellars in December 2013.  Again, my thought is that it was bottled on the 140th day of 2013 (May 20th).

Two batches of the same bourbon, purchased at the same store, possibly bottled within a month of each other.  Here's how they match up:

B13119, first bottle
Its color is actually slightly darker than the other ER10.  The nose holds the old school Robotussin note that I sometimes find in regular Buffalo Trace.  There's also corn syrup, corn chips, spearmint, cilantro, and maple syrup.  With a lot of air, more youthful spicy rye notes open up along with some light caramel.  Quite a bit of spice in the palate, mostly pepper.  Peppery vanilla and caramel, then it quickly goes dry.  Mild mint notes carry throughout.  It's not that sweet at first, but (again) after a lot of air, the whiskey grows sweeter, very sugary.  At first the finish is dry and tight, a little salt and savoriness.  Once the sample was aired out, more pepper notes arose, along with dried cherries and vanilla beans.

This needed at least 35 minutes in the glass before it came alive, which is (in my limited experience) a little unusual for a modern 10 year old bourbon.  But it needs to breathe or else it seems very closed up.

B13140, second bottle
The nose starts with mint, floral perfume, and new carpet smells.  Then some taffy and bubble gum.  Corn and caramel notes grow with time.  Orange oil, rubber, sugary glaze, and one moment of menthol.  The palate goes from brief sweetness straight to bitterness.  Very closed.  Maybe some vanilla.  Sweet corn and a slight herbal rye spice.  But plain bitterness makes up at least 75% of it.  More bitterness in the finish.  Hints of corn, caramel, tart citrus, and granulated sugar.  But mostly bitter.

This one does not improve with time in the glass.

Winner:
Nose - B13140
Palate - B13119 by a considerable margin
Finish - B13119
Overall - B13119

The B13140 reminds me of an IPA that is all bitterness with nothing else going on.  The single note is interesting for one glass and then you look around the shelf for something better.  The B13140's nose is the best part of the package, but even that can be easily trumped by most of Buffalo Trace's other products.

I still like the B13119 better, but not enough to ever buy Eagle Rare 10 again.  The price on the bourbon is good and it makes for a mildly easy drink, but not much more than that.  To tell the truth, I didn't finish either of these small samples and instead vatted them for a future Old Fashioned.

But back to the original intent of the batch match up.  There is a significant difference in the palate between the two Eagle Rare bottles.  The B13140 was bitter and otherwise boring from the start of the bottle.  The B13119 was always sweeter, though maybe a little limited on the nose.  There are similar elements between the two.  The corn, rye spice, and caramel notes, though present in different quantities, are comparable when they show up.  But other than those somewhat common bourbon characteristics, I doubt I'd believe these were the same brand if I hadn't owned the bottles myself.

(Update: For a different take, here's MAO's review of the B13140.  And I think our samples came from the same fill level in my bottle.)

EAGLE RARE 10 YEAR OLD SINGLE BARREL
Availability - Most liquor specialists

Pricing - $25-$35

BOTTLE CODE B13119

Rating - 80

BOTTLE CODE B13140

Rating - 74

Batch Match Up: High West Double Rye versus High West Double Rye

No, this is not an April Fool's joke.

One of the things I wanted to start doing on this site this year was comparisons between whiskies bottled under the same name.  I'll compare batches, barrels, bottling years, ABV versions, ownership changes, and shifts in mashbills or oak.  This is partially to demonstrate that the whisk(e)y websites and books which exist for the sole purpose of being buying guides are not entirely reliable.  But these matchups' main purpose relates to my intent for all of my spirits posts, and that is to document my personal experience and share my findings with you.  Our palates change, as does the liquid.

I'll be sprinkling these posts around, mostly when I have the samples in hand.  Last week, I really enjoyed doing the Old Taylor lineup because the whiskey was so damn good.  This week, I'll do two slightly more relevant posts.  Today, it's High West Double Rye.

Two months ago, I reviewed my bottle of Double Rye and found the whiskey to be surprisingly uninspiring.  I'm a big fan of High West's Rendezvous Rye, but its little cousin was a letdown.  Immediately following my post, reader Florin exclaimed, "WTF?! GTFO."  He claimed his Double Rye experience did not match mine, saying his open bottle of the Double was good.  And he generously supplied a sample.

The usual rundown:
Product: Double Rye
Producer: High West
Distillery: Barton/Tom Moore and LDI distilleries

Type: Straight Rye Whisky
Region: Utah (High West), Indiana (LDI), Kentucky (Barton)

Age / Mashbill: 16 years, 53% rye 37% corn 10% malted barley (Barton) + 2 years, 95% rye 5% malted barley (LDI)

Maturation: charred white oak barrels

Alcohol by Volume: 46%

High West is great when it comes to a batch match up, since their labels actually list batch numbers.  And their batch numbers are usually decipherable.  In this case, they are as follows:

My bottle -- Batch 13C07 (likely March 7, 2013), bottle 2309, purchased at Costco,
Florin's bottle -- Batch 12J12 (likely October 12, 2012), bottle 782, purchased at DrinkupNY or The Party Source

Line 'em up.

BATCH 12J12, bottle 782 (Florin's)
Actual rye seeds in the nose; fennel seeds, too.  Pickle juice, black pepper, and something almost rosemary but not quite.  It gets sugarier with time: brown sugar, simple syrup, and fresh baked carrot cake.  The palate is dry and herbal, like a mellow Willett LDI rye.  Salt and savory, very little sweetness at first.  Rye bread toast with salted butter.  A graceful floral note develops with time.  That extra air also brings a sweet(er) -> herbal -> spicy progression.  Salt and pepper in the finish.  Green and pink peppercorns.  Not particularly lengthy, though it develops some nice bitterness, over time.

BATCH 13C07, bottle 2309 (Mine, from Costco)
The nose starts with chlorine, vodka, cherry juice, and hints of mint and pepper.  Then brown sugar, bubble gum ice cream, cinnamon candy, and orange candy.  Rubbing alcohol.  With some air, the whiskey shows some maple syrup and a lot of new oak.  The mild sweet-ish palate is oddly corny.  Vanilla from the barrel char and then a hit of bitter oak.  It's very green, in both herbs and grains.  Some peppery spice and artificial mint flavoring.  Cinnamon, sugar, and the fake mint thing make up most of the finish.  A slight rye zip grows with time.

Winner:
Nose: 12J12 by a lot
Palate: 12J12
Finish: 13C07 slightly
Overall: 12J12

These don't even seem like the same whiskey.  My batch tastes like a cheap young hi-rye bourbon.  Florin's batch tastes like a young but approachable LDI rye.  When I gave my batch of Double Rye its score last time, I was worried that it was too low.  But now I'm going to dock it a few more points.  It's a C grade whiskey.  Florin's is more like a B-/B.

I've floated the theory that Costco was given a crummy batch not on accident.  High West could save their best stuff for well-respected specialty liquor retailers that buy at a higher price (than a Costco bulk purchase) then turn around and sell the product to bigger spenders and/or pickier whiskey folk.  Though I can't really prove this, my bottle from the Costco batch was capital-L Lacking, while Florin's was demonstrably better.

Another more dispiriting possibility is that High West is running short on the 16-year-old Barton stock thus its almost total absence in the 2013 batch.  If you've had a batch more recent than mine please share your experience.

One final thought on price.  Though Rendezvous is still the better rye, if you can find a good batch (maybe an older batch) of Double Rye at $30, I'd say it's a good deal.  But, unless you know someone who liked his or her bottle of 2013 Double Rye, I can't even recommend buying the Costco batch at $27.99.

DOUBLE RYE
Availability - Most liquor specialists

Pricing - $30-$40

BATCH 12J12

Rating - 83

BATCH 13C07

Rating - 76

Single Malt Report: Longmorn 15 year old 1992 James MacArthur

Today is the first of five Fridays wherein My Annoying Opinions and Diving for Pearls will post simultaneous reviews of one whisky each week.  Five Fridays, five single malts.  MAO and I split a few bottles, swapped a few samples, and drank a few things, all resulting in this audacious leap forward into the future of whisky blogging.  (And here is MAO's post!)

Today's whisky is a 15 year-old Longmorn bottled by James MacArthur in his/their Old Masters series.  It comes from a single cask that was actually divided into two separate releases (here's its Italian twin on whiskybase).

As per the label, the Longmorn was aged in "Sherry Wood", an oak species called Quercus Lumsdenus, I believe.  The label also carries a quote from the great Scottish poet Robert Burns which reads, "An honest bottle and a good friend." Like most writers, Burns was probably both very lonely and very opinionated, so when he conversed with his whisky he clearly took its silence as a sign of warm approval.

Can you tell that I have nothing else to say about this whisky?  There is a serious shortage of Longmorn on this site, and I have a sad lack of experience with its often prized ex-sherry-cask versions.  So here's the site's first:

Distillery: Longmorn

Independent Bottler: James MacArthur & Co.
Series: Old Masters

Age: 15 years (1992-2007)

Maturation: "Sherry Wood"
Cask number: 62553

Region: Speyside

Alcohol by Volume: 59.5%
Chillfiltered: No
Colored: Probably not

As mentioned, I'm new to sherried Longmorns and wasn't sure what to expect, so I did two separate tastings.  The whisky in the second tasting was slightly oxidized.  I'm going to arrange my notes a little differently this time because there are a lot of them, sorry...

Nose neat - At first, cocoa powder and malt.  There are both Kit Kats and Twix, alternating.  Fresh fruits, too, along the lines of apricots and plums. The high ABV is very present at the start.  But after about 15 minutes, something really nice develops.  The cocoa and malt combine and welcome in a fresh mango.  Then some butterscotch, fried plantains (better than bananas), baked apples with cinnamon, and floral powder.
Nose neat with oxidation - More cinnamon and pepper this time. Caramel apples.  The fruits are bolder, while the chocolate is mellower.  Some mint chip, anise, and toffee shows up.  Unless its my imagination, there's a whiff of both wood smoke and the ocean too.
Nose with water - Grows more floral.  A little tooty too.  The chocolate recedes.  But there's orange peel, toffee, toasty grains, and limes.
Nose with water and oxidation - Soiled hay.  The citrus now smells like lemon zest.  The floral powder note is still there, as are the toasty grains.  Both cherry cordial chocolates and dried cherries.  The mango note arises again.

Palate neat - Lots of chocolate sauce: Hershey's to some folks, Midnight Moo to Trader Joe's customers.  Then there's hay, fruit cocktail, a hint of prunes, and a little salt.  It still packs quite a burn for a 15 year.
Palate neat with oxidation - The salt and hay notes are still here.  The chocolate reads more as cocoa powder than sauce.  Some cayenne pepper thrown in.  Then a progression from fruit juice to black coffee.
Palate with water - The chocolate recedes here too.  More malt and caramel.  Both golden raisins and Raisinets show up.  The sherry gets a little dry.
Palate with water and oxidation - Three or four levels of good bitterness operating simultaneously.  The sherry is dry again.  Malt, tart lemons, and maybe some of the nose's mango.

Finish neat - Chocolate first, then molassesy rum, toasted barley, tobacco, and that prune note.
Finish neat with oxidation - Nice and dark.  Coffee, dark chocolate, black pepper, and menthol.  Just a peep of fruits in the back.
Finish with water - Sweet barley stuff up front, with oak notes in the background, and leathery tobacco in the midground.
Finish with water and oxidation - Sweeter, but the bitterness is still present.  Hints of chocolate, caramel, and tobacco (think Black & Milds).

Okay, I'll summarize:
Fresh out of the bottle the whisky is surprisingly chocolatey.  But with some air, the nose gets more complex and gains fruit and floral notes that remind me of the few much older Longmorns I've tried.  The interplay between the chocolate and fruit is nice.  Both the nose and palate demonstrate that the wine and wood haven't submerged all the good barley underneath.  I'm not sure if its because I haven't had much cask strength whisky lately, but this one seemed very hot right out of the bottle.  I think the palate benefits from some water and air, as it seems a bit tight at the start.  Even then, the nose is the star of the show.

Availability - Sparse

Pricing - probably $100-$120

Rating - 87

Old Taylor ('85) vs. Old Taylor ('87) vs. Old Taylor ('96) 6 year old Bourbon

Once upon a time, Old Taylor Kentucky Straight Bourbon was distilled at the Old Taylor Distillery.  Alternately known as Old Taylor Castle and Stone Castle Distillery, it's really a hell of a thing to see.  Rather than swiping other people's photos, I will recommend that you click over to Fred Minnick's photo essay.  (K&L Spirits Journal has some good pics too.)

The Old Taylor brand, once actually owned by the Taylor family, was purchased by National Distillers after Prohibition had ended.  The distillery itself ran until 1972, after that the production of Old Taylor's distillate was done at other National Distillers distilleries, mostly likely OT's neighbor, the Old Crow Distillery.  In 1987, when National Distillers folded up, Beam Inc bought a bunch of brands including three Olds -- Grand Dad, Crow, and Taylor.  The Old Crow Distillery was closed down that year, its space then used for warehousing barrels.

Along with the brands, Beam picked up all of the related maturing barrels.  Due to the whisky glut in the '70s and '80s, a lot of older bourbons went into brands that had younger age statements.   As has been mentioned on the Straight Bourbon forums, Michael Jackson once wrote that in the mid-eighties, Old Taylor 6yo was around 10-12 years old.  Beam continued to bottle the original stocks until they ran out and segued to their own formula (and new labels) in the early '90s.  In 2009, Sazerac purchased Old Taylor from Beam and are now the current owners of the brand.

I've had limited success at hunting for dusty old bourbons.  But my best find has been '80s Old Taylor bourbon.  They are lovely things.  While I enjoy single malts, Irish pot still, and straight rye more than bourbon, the old Old Taylor has proved to be an exception.  It's incredibly rich, and can be used either as a brisk summertime pleasure or as something to mull over on a cold rainy night.

The first OT6 in this lineup was bottled in 1985.  Tax stamps were being phased out that year and my bottle was amongst those that didn't get that sticky paper seal.  It lists Frankfort, KY as its home, the location of the Old Taylor and Old Crow distilleries.

The second OT6, is a 375mL bottle from 1987.  That was the year Beam took over.  The label stayed the same except for the addition of "Clermont, KY" Beam's home.  One other difference is the listing of ABV along with the US proof, something companies had started switching to in the late-eighties.

The third OT6 has made multiple appearances on the blog this year.  First on its own, then as part of a Beam vertical.  No worries about it making a fourth appearance as it has all been processed by my liver now.  That Old Taylor was bottled in 1996 and was 100% Beam juice.  I tossed it into this lineup for the sake of comparison.  And I needed to finally finish the little 200mL bottle off.

Here are a few additional links about Old Taylor, in addition to the links above, in case you're interested:
http://www.ellenjaye.com/ghosts.htm
http://tomeblen.bloginky.com/2013/08/31/abandoned-since-1972-the-old-taylor-distillery-awaits-restoration/
http://recenteats.blogspot.com/2012/03/dusty-thursday-old-taylor-86-circa-1982.html
http://bourbondork.blogspot.com/2013/05/baltimore-dusty-hunt.html

---

Here are the tasting notes in bottling date order, from oldest to newest:

OLD TAYLOR 6 YEAR OLD (bottled in 1985) - 43% ABV


Owner: National Distillers at time of bottling
Brand: Old Taylor
Distillery: possibly at Old Crow Distillery, though some older spirit may be from Old Taylor Distillery
Location: Frankfort, Kentucky
Mash Bill: ???
Age: minimum 6 years old; though it has been suggested by Michael Jackson that 10+ year old whiskey is in the mix
ABV: 43% ABV
Bottle year: 1985

Please note, I zipped through this bottle much too quickly after opening it.  This sample comes from the bottom quarter of the bottle which I decanted into a smaller bottle.  It had already oxidized very quickly and the palate isn't quite what it was upon opening.

The nose leads with a nutty syrup, figs, dried cherries, and a mile of rich caramel.  There's actually a significant malty element (which appealed to this Scotch fan) and a hint of Old Bottle Effect (OBE) metal.  Then there are lavender buds, vanilla beans, cinnamon, cotton, black pepper, an old leather chair, and a slight medicinal note.  The palate starts off with Milk Duds, vanilla ice cream, and dried lavender.  Even with the oxidation, it feels much fuller and thicker than a normal 43% ABV whisk(e)y.  There's a wheaty-ness that might appeal to S-W fans (though I don't think this is a wheater).  The corn element remains very mellow.  Then some cream soda and an old moldy musty note.  Boisterous spices awake in the finish.  Then caramel, wood pulp, dates, and the musty note.  It's simple, but full and sweet.

OLD TAYLOR 6 YEAR OLD (bottled in 1987) - 43% ABV

Owner: Beam Inc at time of bottling
Distilled by: National Distillers
Brand: Old Taylor
Distillery: possibly at Old Crow Distillery, though some older spirit may be from Old Taylor Distillery
Location: Frankfort, Kentucky / Clermont, Kentucky
Mash Bill: ???
Age: minimum 6 years old; though it has been suggested by Michael Jackson that 10+ year old whiskey is in the mix
ABV: 43% ABV
Bottle year: 1987

This sample was taken right near the top of the bottle.

The nutty syrup, figs, and big caramel show up in the nose again, but they are followed by mint leaves, vanilla fudge, and toffee.  Then lavender growing out of freshly fertilized soil.  That's followed by a whole list of fun stuff: dried stone fruits, root beer, cream soda, pipe tobacco, smoky tea, smoky butter, and maple syrup.  The palate is unbelievably rich.  Decadent salted caramel and milk chocolate.  Rose petals and dried lavender.  Vanilla extract meets whispers of smoke and savoriness.  It's a bourbon pudding.  A little more corn in the finish, along with the moldy/musty note.  Cayenne pepper generously sprinkled in caramel sauce.  A little bit of the flora, a bit of sugar, and an herbal twist at the end.

OLD TAYLOR 6 YEAR OLD (bottled in 1996) - 40% ABV

Owner: Beam, Inc. at time of bottling
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

From the bottom half of the bottle.

First up in the nose, a bag of salted peanuts.  I missed that note in the Beam review probably due to the nuttiness in the other Beams.  Here, compared to the N.D. OTs, it shouts loudest.  That's followed by mild corn, stale dried fruits, simple caramel and vanilla, notebook paper, banana skin, nutmeg, and Cow Tales.  The palate is decently textured but nothing like its predecessors.  I find those peanuts again, along with caramel and corn syrup.  Also there's both barrel char and some actual uncharred oak.  The finish mirrors the palate.  Maybe some more salt, and then a whole cord of oak.

---

The '87 bottling is a knee buckler, no joke.  When I saw it in the store, I didn't know if Beam had switched to their own barrels once they bought Old Taylor, so I only bought one bottle.  Per Monday's post, as you can imagine, I wish I had bought more.  The vibrancy of the bourbon even shows itself in a flat wide tumbler glass; it's something to behold.  Had I saved a sample from the top of the '85 bottling, I'd likely say the same about it.  But all I have to go on now is a somewhat oxidized sip.  Still its nose is tremendous and the palate is still thick and tasty.  The '96 bottling is still very drinkable but almost feels like a different liquor genre next to its elders.

I'll cut straight to the meat about the National Distillers-distilled Old Taylor 6 year olds.  The only other bourbons I've had that can compare to the element of sheer joy (though for completely different reasons) are Stitzel-Weller Old Fitzgerald BIB and George T. Stagg.  If you ever find one of these old Old Taylors in the wild, I loudly recommend it.  It will probably be pretty cheap, and even if you don't find it very complex you'll at least enjoy the ride.

[Update 4/13/2014:  Now the 1987 bottling has oxidized very quickly as well.  The palate's richness has largely faded, and the finish has a slight soapy character.  But the nose remains awesome.  You gotta drink these old Old Taylors quickly, I suppose.  Straight from the bottle or mainlining or vaping the whole thing in the first night (slight exaggeration).]

OLD TAYLOR 6 YEAR OLD (1985 bottling)

Availability - Happy hunting!

Pricing - ???

Rating - 90  (was even better before it oxidized)

OLD TAYLOR 6 YEAR OLD (1987 bottling)

Availability - Happy hunting!

Pricing - ???

Rating - 93

OLD TAYLOR 6 YEAR OLD (1996 bottling)

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

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

Rating - 80

A Poacher Enters The Dusty Hunt

I haven't spoken about this to many people, let alone blogged about it, but I have a reliable spot for dusty bourbons.  Rather, I had a reliable spot.

Many of us dusty bottle hunters have a place that's reliable, usually off the beaten track.  And eventually, with new hunters coming aboard every day, that secret place is found by someone else and he or she relieves the store of what remains.  That's just part of the hunt.  I personally do not believe in hoarding a good find, so I usually leave a bottle or two on the shelf for that next person.  Others have done it for me, and I am grateful for it.  If I ever do "clean out" a store, I will share the spoils because I believe whisk(e)y is best as a group experience.

The store of interest here, let's call it Tasty Liquors, had five different brands of '80s bourbons.  There's one particular brand (to be reviewed soon) in which I have the most interest and have occasionally purchased a bottle, leaving more on the shelf.

On Friday night, I opened a bottle of this bourbon and found it to be enormously enjoyable.  When I'd purchased this whiskey two weeks earlier, there were at least 3 more bottles on the shelf.  On this past Friday night, as I delighted in the delicious stuff, I decided that I'd get one more bottle for myself and one for a friend.  So, first thing on Saturday morning, I drove to the store.

When I got to Tasty Liquors around 8:30am, I noticed that ALL of their dusty bourbon bottles were gone.  Not just my favorite brand, but all of the dusties.  In place of every old bottle was its new/current version.  At first I wondered if the old bottles just went to the back of the store so the newer shinier more familiar looking bottles would take front stage.

(Tasty Liquors is run by a very polite Asian couple and I think they recognize me now since I've been gradually relieving them of their old stuff.  The husband had always looked at me oddly as I'd ask for bottles he hadn't been able to sell in three decades.)

More than a little disappointed by the missing dusties, I innocently asked the wife of the couple if they had any of the older versions left, emphasizing that I'd be happy to buy them, not knowing if she would know what I was referring to.  But the moment I said the name of my specific brand, she said that "they were discontinued".

"Discontinued", an interesting word choice.  The ownership and label had changed 25 years ago, the juice had changed 20 years ago, but discontinued?  No.  After additional careful polite questioning, I discovered that the distributor rep who restocks this bourbon told her that all of those old bourbons were discontinued and needed to be pulled off the shelf and replaced with the newest versions...

...and he left with all of the dusties.  I asked her if he had purchased the bottles.  She was confused by that question and said again that he'd said they were discontinued and needed to be taken away.

When I originally wrote this post on Saturday afternoon, I was really f***ing angry.  Part of it was grumpiness about someone emptying out the whole stash.  Part of the frustration was aimed at myself for not stocking up earlier.  But most of it was irrational righteous indignation.

Distributor reps have quite a bit of access to dusty bourbons.  Which is fine.  Some of them are serious bourbon geeks.  I have a buddy who works for a big distributor and he is the smartest bourbon guy I know.  He buys the fun dusties he finds and it's not a big issue for him since the bottles are always very cheap.  Plus he often shares his spoils.  He's the only reason I've been able to try Mr. Van Winkle's bourbons.

But in this instance, if I have interpreted Saturday morning's situation correctly, a distributor rep walked into a liquor store, lied to the owners and then walked out with up to a dozen bottles of collectable (and delicious) whiskey without paying for it.  Thus it's very possible that a thief cleaned out a liquor store using his unique position to lie to unknowing ownership; a lying thief who has access to many other prime dusty spots.

Could I be wrong about this?  Yeah.  Something could have been lost in translation in my chat with the owner.  The rep could have bought up the old stuff when he replaced it with the new stuff.  And if he didn't, the owners look like complete and utter saps for falling for his BS (though, historically, men have gotten laid utilizing more dubious stories).  Or, perhaps the owners finally wisened up after 30 years and realized that there was a market for the oldies (inspired by my sudden purchases) and found another avenue to sell the bottles at a higher price, thus they fibbed to me.  Or maybe I totally misunderstood and someone else had bought the dusties before or after the new versions were restocked.

But, I don't think so.  Those bottles didn't move for almost 30 years and it's very likely more bottles were needed after my previous purchases.  Thus a call to restock.  The rep had clearly pushed the "discontinued" angle.  And suddenly the dusties were gone, with a somewhat confused owner left in the wake.

I happily welcome this fellow to the LA-area dusty hunt, if he's purchasing his finds.  But if he's not purchasing them...  I know the region this person works in, the stores he stocks, and the company he works for.  I'm not going to spill this info in case I'm completely wrong about what happened.  But if, in my hunt, I find this happening again, I will be more than happy to share this information.  All's fair in the love and war of a dusty hunt unless you're a g****mned thief.

Yes, this is the calmer version of my post.  This sort of experience takes a lot of the fun out of dusty hunting.  I've been beaten to a good stash before, a few times.  But never by something that seemed so much like a scam.  And it didn't have to be that way.  These bottles cost, on average, $15.  Am I an overreacting sore loser?  Let me know.  Have you come across poachers in your rounds?  Do you believe in "cleaning out" a dusty store or do you leave goodies behind?  Or have I just inspired you to hoard even more?

Single Malt Report: Kilkerran Work in Progress 5th Release Sherry Wood

Tuesday: Work in Progress 3rd Release (green label)
Wednesday: Work in Progress 4th Release (beige label)
Thursday: Work in Progress 5th Release Bourbon Wood (light blue label)

Onto the last of the foursome: Work in Progress 5th Release Sherry Wood.  Like yesterday's WIP, it also has a light blue label.  You can tell the two WIP5s apart via the bold stamp reading "Bourbon Wood" or "Sherry Wood".

As I wrote yesterday, the Kilkerran brand (Glengyle Distillery) decided to shake things up in 2013 by releasing two WIPs rather than the usual one.  Each was nine years old.  One was aged in ex-bourbon casks, the other in ex-sherry casks.  This would allow consumers to experience how maturation is proceeding into two type of casks, and it also allows them/us to buy more bottles of Kilkerran.

Whisky Advocate gave Sherry Wood the Lowland/Campbeltown Single Malt of 2013 award, but I'm not going to give you the link because WA's award selections last year were often unintentionally hilarious.  With an independent palate and opinion I trust more, Jordan of Chemistry of the Cocktail liked the Sherry Wood a lot.  His palate takes to sherry better than mine, but I still respect his thoughts on booze of all sorts.

The Sherry Wood is the odd one out in this week's group, with the other three having been matured either exclusively or mostly in ex-bourbon barrels.  But at the same time, Kilkerran's producers had kept the oak element to a minimum thus far, so I hoped they'd do so with this one as well.

KILKERRAN WORK IN PROGRESS 5th RELEASE SHERRY WOOD

Distillery: Glengyle

Owner: Mitchell's Glengyle Limited

Brand: Kilkerran

Age: 9 years (2004 - 2013)

Maturation: ex-sherry casks

Region: Campbeltown

Alcohol by Volume: 46%
Label color: Blue
Limited release: 9000

NEAT
The color is medium gold.  Light for a sherried whisky.  The nose still has that piney forest floor element I keep mentioning, which is comforting!  It is matched with a nutty oloroso-type sherry, probably refill?  There's rubber bands, dried cherries, pastry crust, and new car off-gassing.  There are both grassy moments and chocolatey moments.  Soft peat rumbles underneath.  As for the palate, imagine Macallan 12 with much more barley and hay.  It's creamy with nuts (almond paste and hazelnuts), brine, bitter peat moss, or is that moss-meets-baking-chocolate?  Lots of almonds and hazelnuts in the finish.  Salted nutty toffee, a dry sherry, and almond skins.

A COUPLE DROPS OF WATER
The nose gets more herbal and farmy, along with anise and creamy sherry.  It grows more candied with air exposure.  The palate holds sticky sherry, black coffee, and sea salt.  The finish is aromatic: flower blossoms and stewed fruits.  Some salt too.

A COUPLE MORE DROPS OF WATER
A change of pace on the nose.  Now there's moss, tar, and menthol to go with the oloroso.  The palate also changes a bit.  Caramel, toffee, sweet wine, and something slightly medicinal.  The sherry shows up most in the finish.  Sugared raisins and toffee.

Like the other WIP5, this one swims well.  Actually that helped this one gain a few extra points, as it opened in several different directions as I added more water, all of those turns proving enjoyable.  I'll go a step further and recommend this with water as opposed to without.

The Kilkerran character is still present in the nose and the sherry isn't too intrusive there.  To me, the integration works better here than it does in some of the recent Springbank 10s.  I reference Macallan 12 in the palate notes because I think this would be a fun alternative to the big Mac.  When I've gone back to Mac12 recently, I keep finding it getting less rich and more narrow.  While I don't know if this Kilkerran is "better" than Mac12, it does bring with it more dimensions and more strength.

This WIP5 does have me wondering how it will continue to develop, because the optimist in me thinks this could get exceptionally rich even by age 12.  Kilkerran has a great thing going with their single malts.  For me, the point has come where they've passed Talisker (old stuff not included), as the Skye distillery descends and Glengyle ascends.  What a great moment, wherein one can support a small business over a huge one, not just for philosophical purposes but also in terms of pure quality.

Availability - Many specialty liquor retailers.
Pricing - $60-$70
Rating - 87

Single Malt Report: Kilkerran Work in Progress 5th Release Bourbon Wood

Tuesday was Work in Progress 3, Wednesday was Work in Progress 4, Today is Work in Progress 5 (Bourbon Wood).

WIP1: White label
WIP2: Gray label
WIP3: Light green label
WIP4: Beige label
WIP5: Blue Label

In each of its first four years, Kilkerran's "Work in Progress" malts had a single annual release.  For the fifth edition, Glengyle Distillery chose to change things up by putting out two simultaneous bottlings, possibly as a way to demonstrate how the whisky was developing in two separate types of casks: Former bourbon barrels and former sherry casks.  And, with any luck, the whisky would be well received and they'd sell twice as many bottles.  Well, they're in luck.  The fifth WIPs have been very well received.

And I'll make it very easy on you, here are a few links:
Serge Valentin gives the Bourbon Wood a very positive review.
Later, he posts that it was his personal favorite whisky of 2013.
Then Sku of Recent Eats and LAWS was very enthusiastic about it, here and here.

Before I even started this week's tastings, I was a very big fan of all things Kilkerran, so you probably know which direction my review is going.  Thus if you so desire, you can skip to the score then click away.  But if you stick around for more words, I'll try my best to give you my perspective.

KILKERRAN WORK IN PROGRESS 5th RELEASE BOURBON WOOD

Distillery: Glengyle

Owner: Mitchell's Glengyle Limited

Brand: Kilkerran

Age: 9 years (2004 - 2013)

Maturation: ex-bourbon American Oak barrels

Region: Campbeltown

Alcohol by Volume: 46%
Label color: Blue
Limited release: 9000

NEAT
The color is still a nice amber shade.  And the nose still has the piney forest floor notes!  In fact, the nose is somehow even more potent in this edition than the previous two.  There are toasted grains, anise, sharp cheddar, a savory sort of peat moss, and a pinch of chili powder.  Citrus fruits are starting to show now at this age: lemon zest, sharp grapefruit, and some cardamom spice.  The oak doesn't show much except as the occasional whiff of pencils.  It all gets spicier with time.  The palate starts off doing the reverse of WIP4, going creme brûlée --> peppery spice --> hot cereal.  Then sometimes it goes custardy --> savory --> briny.  There's some apples and brown sugar on oatmeal.  And here's the peat, showing up a little smoky.  Citric sugars start developing over time.  It finishes peppery, grassy, barley juicy, and salty.  Limes and peppercorns.  Candy cane mint and taffy.  An extensive length for something of its age and ABV.

A COUPLE DROPS OF WATER
The nose holds moss, yeast, apples, cracked pepper, cheddar, lemon, and a hint of peat.  The palate is light on the sugar.  Some salt and an amber lager.  Toffee pudding with a cigarette.  The finish grows saltier, maltier, and savorier, with hints of smoke and oranges.

A COUPLE MORE DROPS OF WATER
The nose gets musky and earthier.  Then, toasted grains along with something savory.  The palate gets sweeter and the beer becomes more of a Belgian ale.  Floral notes start showing up, along with butterscotch.  The finish is all barley and sugar.

Let me sum everything up.  The whisky swims very well.  The oak remains reserved, while the peat does not shy away.  While I love WIP2's bold "outdoorsy" quality, WIP5 Bourbon Wood is the first Work in Progress wherein the quality of the palate and finish can stand proudly next to the nose's.

I do not like encouraging the whisky buying/hoarding craze -- it's a bug that has bitten me much too often -- yet I know how I feel about this "Work in Progress", so let me choose my words here...

As I nosed and sipped this whisky last night, I began to wonder if maybe we should all tone down the talking and dreaming about the potential quality of the future Kilkerran releases.  Instead, perhaps we should see the present clearly and appreciate what we have here right now.

Availability - Many specialty liquor retailers.
Pricing - $60-$70
Rating - 91 (dropped to 90 points in a subsequent review)