NOT Single Malt Report: Campbeltown Loch 21 year old Blended Whisky (40%abv version)

How about a blend made up of, "as much as 60%", 21 year old Springbank?  And at $70?  Sounds amazing, right?  You may notice though, that no one ever really raved (okay, maybe Ralfy) about the 40%abv version of Campbeltown Loch 21yo.  No "must buys" or "gold medals" or "5 stars".  I found this silence over a well-aged Springbank product kind of odd, so I bought a sample of it to find out if we were all missing out on something special.  I mean, the single malts coming out of Campbeltown are often fantastic, shouldn't their blends be good as well?  Anyway, as soon as I bought this sample, J&A Mitchell updated the blend giving it more modern packaging and a 46%abv.  Oh well, here's the old stuff.

Brand: Campbeltown Loch

Ownership: J&A Mitchell & Co. Ltd.

Type: Scotch Blended Whisky

Age: minimum 21 years old
Distilleries: Springbank (malt) and probably Girvan (grain)

Alcohol by Volume: 40%
(Sample purchased from Master of Malt in 2013)

The color is amber with a slight pink tint.  The nose is very mild.  Takes a moment before it wakes up.  Then...limes and soil.  Light vanilla, light sugar.  Light mango, light fresh apricot.  After 20 minutes a nondescript citrus note takes over -- kinda lime, kinda lemon, kinda grapefruit, kinda clementine.  A tiny bit of sherry, maybe a tinier bit of sulphur.  The palate is pretty malty.  Some strong caramel.  Dried apricots and dried pineapple.  After 30 minutes there's definite oloroso action (toffee, almonds, and dried cherries).  Plus a whisper of peat.  Salt and chewy caramels in the finish.  Some of the dried pineapple.  Eventually it gets some tart grapefruit, dried cherries, and a small smoke note.

Had I not known what I was drinking I'd have had no idea this had Springbank in it because it's yet another blend drowned in water, handcuffed by its minimum level 40%abv.  It's not bad and it's not entirely boring.  Its second wind of oloroso lifted it up a little.  But aside from the sherry and the fruit, there's really not much going on here.  Like many blends, it likely aims for "smooth" but doesn't entirely deliver on that or on any real character.  It needs more of everything.  Luckily, the 46%abv version replaced it.  Though I haven't had that version, I'd go for that one over this one.  Or I'd just buy an actual Springbank single malt instead.

Availability - This version, I don't know. New version, at many European specialty retailers.

Pricing - This version was $55-$75, the new version is $90-$110

Rating - 79

NOT Single Malt Report: Compass Box Peat Monster 10th Anniversary Edition

Yesterday I suggested Compass Box, so here's something from Compass Box.

Last September I called the current edition of the regular Peat Monster "merely great", an upgrade over my previous experiences with it, which were merely decent.  So I was very intrigued when I read the news that they were releasing a limited older bigger version in 2014.  Then I discovered that it was going to be in the $100-$120 range.  Less intrigued.  But when K&L put it on closeout for $75, I found myself unable to resist this guy:

As for its ingredients, Compass Box released this tweet:

@whiskycast @n1vux PM10 has more Laph (72%), some old Ardmore (16yo), a dollop of French oak Clynelish, and a dash (6%) of 21-25 yo CI & Cly

— Compass Box (@CompassBox) June 9, 2014

All of those parts sound good to me.  And they were.  This bottle went very quickly.

Company: Compass Box

Type: Blended Malt (formerly known as Vatted Malt)

Distilleries, Maturation and Age: See above tweet
Limited Bottling: 5700

Alcohol by Volume: 48.9%
Chillfiltered? No
Color added? No
(find the official "Fact Sheet" PDF here)

NEAT
It has a regular ol' uncolored amber tone.  On the nose it starts out with bakery smells, like fresh breads covered in sugar and stuffed with cinnamon swirls; definitely some of my mom's zucchini bread, which goes heavy on the brown sugar.  The peat is very aromatic, as opposed to ashes or smoke.  Lots of toffee, a little vanilla.  Seawater/brine.  A beach bonfire in the distance (I♥Ardmore).  After 20+ minutes it gets smokier and picks up some sharp lime notes.  That aromatic peat continues in the palate.  Some baking spices.  A gentle sweetness.  Sweet dark berries followed by an herbal bitterness followed by tart berries.  That tartness is a little acidic, but not too bad.  After time in the glass, some anise appears.  The sweets and bitters grow, balancing each other out.  In the finish, the peat now reads as moss, smoke, and ashes.  Brine, vanilla beans, and a wormwood-like bitterness.  Tart berries and tart citrus.  It leaves behind that good grimy peaty aftertaste.

WITH WATER (~40%abv)
The peat gets a little stinkier and aggressive in the nose.  Vanilla frosting.  And to be really vague, it's reminiscent of young Lagavulin, mostly seaweed and rusting boatsides(?!).  The palate gets very peppery and sugary sweet.  Some bitter chocolate in there.  The peat reads as green and mossy.  Sweet and peat in the finish.  A little bit of bitterness lingering.

Very good.  It's right up there with my favorite CBs, Spice Tree and the NY Edition of their Great King Street Blend.

It's a much different creature than the regular version, and I prefer this one's recipe and strength.  The peat is louder and richer, and overall a little sweeter especially with water.  It's a good rainy or snowy evening drink if you actually get that sort of weather by you.  It's missing the sort of complexity that would propel it into 90+ points, but everything else is in line so it sits right on the border grade-wise.  Sadly no one else has since lowered the price on this whisky.  At $100-$120, it's difficult for me to recommend it, but at $75-$80 I felt no buyer's remorse and probably should have bought another bottle.

Availability - Retailers who never dropped their original price

Pricing - $95-$125

Rating - 89 (recommended w/o water)

NOT Single Malt Report: Chivas Regal 18 year old Blended Whisky

Let's talk about Smooth.  Most scotch buyers want smooth.  Most drinkers do not want to wince.  Most drinkers don't want Islay Stank in their mouths the next morning.  Most drinkers want a quiet but tasty libation.  The cheap blends aren't smooth, and I know this because in a previous chapter of my life I consumed a high quantity of cheap blended scotch whisky.  Many of the whiskies we geeky geeks geek about can be thunderous, trying, or even abusive experiences to most palates.  Some folks don't want Penderecki's Threnody, they want a three-minute pop song.

May I introduce, Chivas 18.  Produced and engineered to be smooth, Chivas 18 is much cheaper than Johnnie Walker Blue Label (engineered for the same purpose).  Hell, Costco has this thing on sale for $45 sometimes, so you can get three (or more) bottles for the price of one Blue.  I will not declare that Chivas 18 is great nor profound whisky, but it tastes good, has some character to it, and has an actual finish.  The last of which cannot be said of JW Blue Label.  But as I cannot write a paragraph without including some complaint, I do mourn the quantities of 18 year old Longmorn, Glenlivet, and Strathisla being expended to create smooth.

Let's have a sip.

Brand: Chivas Regal

Ownership: Pernod Ricard (via Chivas Bros. Ltd.)

Type: Scotch Blended Whisky

Age: minimum 18 years

Alcohol by Volume: 40%

Bottling: 2014, I think
(Mini purchased at a local liquor store)

Its color is a red orange gold.  Definitely redder than DiageoGold™.  The nose is pretty straightforward at first.  Sherry, vanilla, halvah, hazelnuts, and very distant fruits (melon and pear).  There is a slight burnt note, but it vanishes after a couple minutese.  After 20 minutes, notes of oranges and orange blossoms arrive.  More raisins and prunes.  In fact there's a good funky sherry note somewhere in the back; it's too bad it was watered down so.  The palate is very easy, stress-free, steady, polished, frictionless.  Lots of dried fruits and caramel sauce.  A roasted/malty note in background.  It's lightly tingly, but even that bite is comforting.  It grows fruitier with time, think citrus and tropical stuff.  The caramel remains prominent throughout.  It finishes with the dried fruit, lychee, some flower blossoms.  The slight burnt thing comes back for a moment: e150a?  Finally, caramel candies and a subtle bitterness.

'Tis schmoove.  The thesaurus has "velvety" and "creamy" as synonyms for "smooth" but, due to the level of filtering and added water, Chivas 18 never earns those adjectives.  But it does have a dependable and enjoyable level of fruitiness and some pleasant sherry.  While in its current state there's nearly zero complexity, I do think the potential is present for a really good whisky if it were (here it comes again) bottled at 46%abv, unfiltered, and uncolored.  Instead what we have here is easy drinking.  If you want more from your whisky, go elsewhere......to, say, Compass Box?

Availability - Very wide

Pricing - $55-$70, often cheaper at Costco

Rating - 82

Something Weird: Bourbon DeLuxe 4 year old, bottled in 1989

A couple weekends ago, I thought I'd tweet out something satirical.  In honor of all those folks who post a carefully lit close up of a 30+ year old Caol Ila / Laphroaig / Brora / Longmorn and ask, "Does anyone know if this is any good?", I posted this:

Opening this one up tonight. ND-distilled, bottled 1989. Good, gross, or meh...any bets? pic.twitter.com/BTg1b3iQwm

— Michael Kravitz (@kravitz_hubris) September 30, 2015

Yes my much treasured bottle of capital 'B' Bottom Shelf Stuff.  I was warned not to purchase it by two different people who were much more knowledgable than I.  Here's how one conversation went:

MK: "So I found this place that has National Distillers-era Bourbon DeLuxe."
CU: "Don't buy it."
MK: "They have it in their behind-the-glass section, claiming it's a collector's item. It's $50."
CU: "Don't buy it."
MK: "But they have two."
CU: "Don't buy it."
MK: "It's a liter."
CU: "Don't buy it."

So I didn't buy it.  But then I found another place that had it for $21.99.  And I bought it.  And then I quit dusty hunting altogether the next day.  Because this is stupid.  More on that sentence fragment another day...

Back to my tweet.  I realized on one warm evening there was nothing preventing me from opening the Bourbon DeLuxe.  So I hauled it out of storage.  And then I tweeted.  And, I guess, built into my tweet joke was an honest message-in-a-bottle that asked, "Has anyone actually tried this?  And what does it taste like?"

Well, that tweet had 120 interactions.  Most of my tweets have between 0 and 4.  Yet no one responded.

Bourbon DeLuxe was indeed one of National Distillers' brands, purchased by ND after Prohibition (possibly from L Eppstein and Sons of Fort Worth).  Like its better loved Old siblings (Taylor, Crow, and Grand Dad) it went to Beam when National Distillers was purchased.  I've found the ND versions of the "Olds" to be far superior to their current iterations, so I had some hope that my purchase wouldn't be a total loss.  Like my Old Taylors, this bottle has the National Distillers UPC code and has the Frankfort/Claremont designations.  So I figured that JB bottled it with ND bourbon.

Owner: Beam Inc at time of bottling
Distilled by: National Distillers (maybe?)
Brand: Bourbon DeLuxe
Distillery: possibly at Old Crow Distillery, some older spirit may be from Old Taylor Distillery but that's very doubtful in this instance
Location: Frankfort, Kentucky / Clermont, Kentucky
Mash Bill: ???
Age: minimum 4 years old
ABV: 40% ABV
Bottle year: 1989

Upon first sip, it was reminiscent of my 40%abv Old Taylor 6yo from 1991.  This suddenly now makes sense to me since the 1991 OT was 6 years old and the 1989 DeLuxe is 4 year old, which means they would both be theoretically distilled in 1985.  But there was also a sort of bland nuttiness that reminded me of modern Jim Beam White Label.  A week later, a more official tasting:

NEAT
Color - Very dark reddish brown
Nose - VOC-heavy paint, pecans, hazelnuts, peanut dust, and wood polish.  Sometimes there's a curious nutty sherry note as well.  Caramel and baked bananas in the mid-ground.  With time, a sap note develops and the caramel gets louder.
Palate - Simple and sweet.  Vanilla and caramel.  A vague paint note.  Some spirity heat.  Then it gets sweeter and spicier with time in the glass.  Cinnamon raisin bread, honey butter, and something similar to immature single malt.
Finish - Sour and sweet.  Paint.  Smoky oak.  Raisins in caramel sauce.  Picks up some wood spices after a while.  Quite some length, eventually fading into barrel char.

HIGHBALL
Sweet, wood, paint.  Not recommended.

First, the paint.  It doesn't bother me too much on the nose, while on the palate it weirdly almost works.  Sort of like taking a drink during a break from house painting.  But when it shows up on the finish and just hangs out in the mouth, it's not great.  In a highball it's worse.

Meanwhile, almost all of the National Distillers bourbon notes are gone, replaced by some funny cheap sherry-like stuff.  The result is a mildly quirky cheap bourbon.  When I first opened the bottle, I'd wished they hadn't watered this down so much.  Now, I wonder if maybe they did us all a favor by reducing it so.

The lesson here is that there was always cheapo bottom shelf whiskey, and even dusty bottles of cheapo bottom shelf whiskey will still be cheapo bottom shelf whiskey when they're opened 26 years later.  This Bourbon DeLuxe fits that bill pretty well.  It's drinkable and mostly acceptable.  And then the finish poops out.  Now I'm left with at least 800mL of DeLuxe.  Woo hoo.

Availability - Happy hunting?

Pricing - ???

Rating - 70 (though this score has been declining with each pour)

The Summer Whiskies: Arran 10 year old (new label)

How about a review with a minimum of schpiel this time?  I'll keep it to the following paragraph:

Before finding a bottle of the new labelled version at price that was clearly a retailer's error, I had tried the old Arran 10yo on a few occasions and always liked it.  I continue prefer Arran in the 10-14yo range.  I've had a handful of Arrans older than that and, while none of there were bad, they all either felt muted or the cask tannins had taken over.  While I received confirmation that the recipe for the official 10 and 14 year olds had changed slightly, I don't know (or remember) how the 10 has changed.  Though I do see from my notes that some older casks were mixed in in order keep the whisky close to the old version.  All I can tell you with any confidence is that the new labelled version hit the shelves in 2014 and the whisky within the bottle comes from ex-bourbon and (mostly refill) ex-sherry casks.

I can't seem to find any of my bottle's photos, so here's
one of the glasses from the gift pack. It was utilized
for this review.

Distillery: Isle of Arran Distillery
Type: Single Malt
Ownership: Isle of Arran Distillers Ltd.
Region: Isle of Arran, Scotland
Age: minimum 10 years
Maturation: ex-bourbon and (mostly refill) ex-sherry casks
Bottling code: L11 10 14
Alcohol by Volume: 46%
Chillfiltered? No
Colored? No

NEAT

Official pic

The nose begins with a big note of hot cereal (think grits or cream of wheat), then that's met with lots of limes (juice and peels).  After a moment it's vanilla fudge, a note that stays for the duration.  Hints of grapefruit, metal, tar, and wet musty peat moss (if that's a thing) appear.  It's light on the oak and bigger on the spirit.  Not a showy bird, this one.  Quiet and confident, if you'll allow.  The palate is really malty, almost chocolate malty.  Then white chocolate, white peppercorns, toffee, and nutty sherry.  A sizable orange peel note appears after a few minutes, and it almost reminds me of Grand Marnier without the sweets.  Light on the vanilla and caramel.  After 30 minutes, there's a graceful balance of flower blossoms and bitterness.  There's a hint of the white chocolate note in the finish, as well as the orange peel.  A little bit of tobacco from the sherry.  A nice fizzy bitterness (Campari and soda?).

WITH WATER (~40%abv)
The nose is very similar.  More lime, no peat.  Lots of cereal, little oak.  Vanilla fudge.  Maybe some ginger ale and rose blossoms.  The palate gets very zesty and peppery with some buttery toffee at the edges.  Lots of barley.  Still has that bright bitterness.  Hints of sherry in the creamy finish, along with a slight mineral note.  It still has that fizzy bitterness.

It's funny, I opened this whisky as my easy drinking summer malt, but I clearly forgot that it can be pretty complex.  It is a good sipper, but it's not a background drink you pour to ignore.  It has some angles to it and can be austere (yes, the 'A' word) at times.  I know that a lot of whisky geeks rave about Benromach as THE under-appreciated 10yo -- and that is a good whisky -- but Arran 10 should be kept in mind as well.  The price range listed below may look a bit high, but Arran 10 year old's average price in the US is equal to Macallan's, $2 lower than Laphroaig's, and $7 lower than Benromach's.  That's the going rate, folks.

Availability - Most liquor specialists
Pricing - $45-$55
Rating - 86

The Problem with Power's Gold Label Irish Whiskey

John Power & Sons and I

I've viewed Power's Gold Label through a pair of particularly rose-tinted spectacles for thirteen years.  Built into Power's are a lot of sentimental connections and sense memories as it has always reminded me of an intense part of my life and a number of lovely experiences surrounding that time.  Three and a half years ago (my god has it been that long?), I posted a review of the version of Power's I knew best.  It is the whisk(e)y I've purchased the most often in this life.

But as of mid-2013, the Gold Label I knew was no longer.  A new Gold Label with a new label, bottle shape, and higher ABV replaced it.  Usually irked by new versions of good things, I actually found myself looking forward to this change.  Then I saw its new price.  The alcohol content went up 3.2 points -- from 40% to 43.2% -- which is an increase of 8%.  The price (in California) had jumped from $17.99 to $29.99, an increase of 67%.

The fall of Power's

That was enough of a hike to make even me, one of this whiskey's champions, take pause.  I didn't buy it for almost two years.  I didn't see any reason why I should pay $30 for my $18 whiskey.  Meanwhile on the business side, the $18 whisk(e)y market and the $30 whisk(e)y market are two different things, and I wasn't confident of the wisdom of Pernod's decision to move Power's to another market.  Nor did I see or hear any PR push to inspire people to pay 67% more for it nor to get the new demographic to buy it at all.  And it appears as if the market has spoken...

Volume sales dropped 5% in 2013 when the new version was introduced mid-year in the US.  Though that doesn't seem like much, consider that the other six leading Irish whiskey brands increased their volume sales 18% that year.  Then in 2014, the first full year this new edition was on the shelves, the volume sales of Power's dropped another 30%.  Adding it all up, since this new Power's was released the brand's volume sales have sunk 33% in the US, while the other six leading Irish whiskey brands' volume sales have risen by 28%.  That's probably not good.

I assume that Pernod Ricard was attempting to ride the coattails of the legitimate Irish whisky boom (volume sales up nearly 50% in 2014 compared to 2011), by releasing what they thought was a premium blend, something that was a step up from Jameson's.  Quality-wise, Power's has always been better than Jameson's, perhaps due to its focus on pot still whiskey versus Jameson's focus on grain whiskey.  In the end, it's the dollars that matter to Pernod, of course.  And though I don't have the official $ numbers, if I use winesearcher's average prices (rather than my anecdotal ones) with the Impact Databank table for 2012 through 2014, the value drop is 13%.  Yes, the price increase padded the blow, but didn't stop it.  Meanwhile, the rest of the brands have ascended.

But does it taste good?

So......about that whole quality thing.  How about a review?  It was one of my Summer Whiskies and all that.

Distillery: Midleton
Brand: Powers
Current Owner: Pernod-Ricard
Type: Irish Blended Whiskey
Age: likely minimum 3 years
Bottle code: L42861517313:18
Alcohol by Volume: 43.2%
Chillfiltered? No
Colored? Probably

The color is the same well-engineered bright gold of its predecessor.  The nose begins with orange blossoms, vanilla bean, and paint.  Then honeydew, cantaloupe, and pears.  Aerosol can propellant and brown sugar.  The palate is loaded with milk caramels.  Then creamsicles and toffee pudding.  Flan.  More caramel than vanilla.  A small cracked pepper note here and there.  Despite all of those dessert notes, it's not as sweet as the Elmer T. Lee I reviewed yesterday.  Salted caramel gelato on the finish.  Vanilla pudding up front and a tart citrus note in the back.  A spicy tingle and a good length.

The good news.  It's still Power's!  They didn't ruin it.  Those were my first thoughts upon my first sip of my first glass from this bottle.  While the nose can be a bit rough at times (as it used to be), the palate is very good (as it used to be).  I think there may be a little more fruit in the nose and the finish might be a little longer than before.

The bad news.  It's still Power's.  It doesn't deliver anything new, despite the extra ABV points and the lack of chillfiltration, despite the new design, despite the much higher price.  And to be honest, that was disappointing.  (Yes, I would have been more disappointed if they'd turned out a completely different lesser product, burying the old Power's forever.)  And while I usually try to savor a whiskey for what it is despite the price, I think the disappointment snuck in and tainted my enjoyment of Power's a little bit.  I started wondering if I was smelling the chemical notes stronger in this version.  Were the caramel notes beginning to overwhelm the rest of the package?  Or have I changed as a whiskey fan over the past two years?

Ultimately, this remains the best non-ultra-premium blend coming from Midleton and probably the best non-ultra-premium Irish whiskey blend overall (though I haven't tried any of Teeling's new things).  So, yes, it probably should be more expensive than Jameson, Paddy's, Bushmills White, 2 Gingers, and Tullamore Dew.  And yes, it's much tastier neat than any bottom (and many middle) shelf Scotch blends.  The thing is though, at $18 Power's was an incredible deal, a bottle I'd always have on hand.  At $30, it's just one of many options.

Availability - Specialty liquor retailers
Pricing - $27-$36 for the new label, the old one can sometimes be found at its old price
Rating - 83

The Summer Whiskies: Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel Straight Bourbon (2015)

At some point in the Earth's history, September and October became LA's hottest months.  I really think this happened within the last five to ten years because I don't remember this being the case when I lived here from 1996-2003.  Or maybe I didn't notice it.  But now that I am older and crankier, and can sweat standing still in a snowstorm, not only do I notice this extended heat, but I find this whole situation bullshit.

Anyway, the "summer" I'm referring to in the reviews this week follows the whole solstice-to-equinox fascist measurement.  Lucky old sun my ass.

For casual drinking, I tend to drink more bourbon and beer during the summer than I do during the rest of the year.  They tend to wash over the palate, settle in the stomach, and work with my cracked-out thermoregulation system best during hot days.  Last year my go to bourbon was Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel.  This year my go to bourbon was......Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel.  The ETL was at some point in the recent past easier to come by and commonly priced at $30 or less.  Now its allocations (in America) are getting smaller and people are attempting to flip their bottles for twice or thrice its old price.  I have a little secret shop where I can readily find Elmer, though the bottle's price did go up 10% this year.

Named after the father of single barrel bourbons, Elmer T. Lee Single Barrel Straight Bourbon is one of the higher-rye bourbons in Buffalo Trace's portfolio, part of the Age International family, along with Ancient Age and Blanton's.  Like Blanton's, Elmer T. Lee is bottled from individual barrels.  But unlike Blanton's (yet just like Eagle Rare) there is no notation of barrel number or any other helpful information.  Just the bottling code if you can find it.  Thus you can't track down another bottle from a barrel you like, so all preferences, recommendations, and reviews are that much more pointless.

So here's a review!

Distillery: Buffalo Trace
Brand: Elmer T. Lee
Region: Kentucky, USA
Type: Straight Bourbon Whiskey
Age: unknown
Mashbill: Buffalo Trace #2 (higher-rye; about 15%)
Bottle Code: B1505421:29K
Alcohol by volume: 45%

I didn't intend to do a whole "life of a whiskey bottle" post with this one but I had somewhat different experiences at the top and middle of the bottle.  So, I'll list the notes here, then summarize below.

TOP OF THE BOTTLE
Nose - It starts with sweet corn, caramel sauce, cotton, and paint. Slightly minty. It doesn't seem to have much stamina in the glass, getting more candied and woody but otherwise fades out at 30 minutes. But at 40 minutes it suddenly gets very pretty and floral, full of limes.
Palate - Peppery with a mild corn & cherry sweetness.  Some rye spices and hazelnut liqueur.  Vanilla simple syrup with mint.  The oak feels more toasted than charred.
Finish - Sweet with cherry soda syrup, vanilla, mint candy, and ripe banana.  Again the oak feels toasted rather than charred.

Then...

MIDDLE OF THE BOTTLE
Nose - Robotussin, black cherry syrup, and cinnamon sticks.  Juicy Fruit gum at first, bubblegum later.  Brown sugar, split lumber, and furniture polish.  After 15 minutes, vanilla shows up.
Palate - So many sweets: brandied cherries, brown sugar, and orange slice candies.  Then some rye-like spice shows up (nutmeg and pepper), and the orange candies become orange peels.  A hints of corn and bitterness.
Finish - Sweet but milder than palate. Long and sticky. Bubblegum, cherries, brown sugar, corn syrup, and orange peel. A spicy zing of cayenne pepper and ginger.

I found the bourbon to be a little quirky but also a little boring at the top of the bottle, nowhere nearly as interesting as my bottle from last year.  So it actually took three months to get to the middle of this bottle.  Now at this point it has brightened up considerably.  It's become much sweeter, but also has minimal vanilla, caramel, and corn.  It also works very well in cocktails and highballs.  Comparing it to its older sib, Blanton's, I'd say it's sweeter but less spicy.  Normally, I don't have a sweet tooth when it comes to whisk(e)y but this one works for me.

So, if you can find it for $40 or less, then I could theoretically recommend this sweet little number.  I've listed the bottle code in the information above, otherwise it's impossible to know what barrel you and I are buying.  Meanwhile, if you see it for $100+ please enjoy the laugh and don't mourn too much for what you've missed.  There are plenty of other bourbons in the sea.

Availability - Scarce
Pricing - all over the damned place, from $30 to $130
Rating - 85