Mathilda Malt: Littlemill 22 year old 1990 Berry Brothers & Rudd (round 2)

I opened my one bottle of Littlemill, one year ago, to celebrate Mathilda's birthday. And......I was kinda whelmed. From my commentary:

There were substantial youthful notes throughout, yet there was also some heavy oak. And they didn't (or haven't yet) come together. I wonder if this whisky spent most of its life in a third- or fourth-fill cask before being re-racked into a hyperactive first-fill or new oak barrel.

and:

I like the youth, the leafy grassiness, the bite, the fight in this Littlemill......But the naked unintegrated (segregated?) oak stuff holds it back. I will indeed let this sit in the bottle for a year before I open it again, then I'll review it again to report on what's happened.

So I did just that. I mummified it with parafilm, then had it sit in the corner of a dark closet for one year so it could think about its behavior, much as I've done with Mathi.......okay, okay. Take it easy. Just a little joke for the parents out there.

(Actually, that was just to see if Kristen still reads my blog. I don't think she does because my readership has dropped 100% this year. From 1 to 0.)

How about that whisky?

Distillery: Littlemill
Former Owner: Glen Catrine Bonded Warehouse Ltd (proto-Loch Lomond Distillery Co.)

Independent Bottler: Berry Bros. & Rudd
Region: Lowlands (close to the Highlands border)

Age: 22 years (1990-2013)

Maturation: American oak?
Cask number: 17

Alcohol by Volume: 54.3%
Chillfiltered? No
Caramel Colorant? No

NEAT
On the nose it's lemon bars and key lime pie and orange lollipops. Roasted almonds and peach ice cream. A merging of mellow malt and vanilla, along with a green leafiness. Subtle for its ABV. That balance of malt and vanilla shows up in the palate as well. Then almond cookies, tart limes and salt. A crisp graininess. Something between a minerally white wine and tonic water. Limes and limestone? I don't know why I wrote that. There's a sweet undertow throughout. There's citrus in the finish, lots of citrus, but not acidic, thankfully. Brisk minerals, tonic water and almond cookies. A great length to it.

DILUTED TO ~46%abv, or 1tsp water per 30mL whisky
Water pulls the nose's characteristics closer together. Citrus/leaves/oak/nuts merge into one. There's a new tropical fruity note now, and a new vanilla cake one too. Meanwhile, the palate gets sharper, bitterer. Spritely. Mineral, quinine/tonic and limes with a sweet Bushmills-esque malt. The finish keeps its stamina. Tart fruits, mild bitterness and vanilla cake.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
Yay! All the dissimilar parts, which had been crashing into each other like cops in a Buster Keaton short, have transformed. The weird new oak notes have vanished, and the remaining vanilla plays nicely. Lots of spirit remains. Very fruity and minerally stuff. I liked the nose better when it was diluted, but the palate was more enjoyable when neat. I dig it either way.

But wow, what a change. This is great. Happy days! I'm going to enjoy another glass or two, then parafilm it up and open it again next year for Mathilda's birthday.

Availability - Sold out :(
Pricing - $140 back in January 2015
Rating - 88

Colonel E.H. Taylor Rye Bottled-in-Bond (2017)

Though I've tried most of the major ryes on the market, I didn't taste this — shall we say...Four Year Old Taylor? — rye until December of last year. And I liked it a lot. But when I priced-shopped, I was disappointed to find that $70 is apparently now considered a bargain, and many retailers won't blink at charging $90-$100 for it. It was better than the $25 Rittenhouse BIB but not by that much. And this BIB is neither scarce nor old. So I gave up on it.

Then one day, while driving through a state that neither begins nor ends with an 'O', I found a bunch of bottles of Taylor Rye BIB selling for $52.

And that is how I wound up with my one bottle, a bottle that has not impressed me at all, I regret to say. It hasn't work well in Manhattan's, at full strength or watered down. It's approachable but unremarkable when sipped neatly.

Because of this disappointment, I've left it alone for the past two months. The fill level is now below the halfway point. I hope a little bit of oxygen helped it out.

Brand: Colonel E.H. Taylor
Company: Buffalo Trace (Sazerac)
Distillery: Buffalo Trace?
Region: Kentucky
Type: Straight rye
Age: at least four years old
Mashbill: just rye and malted barley, the %s are as of yet unknown
Bottling Code: L172850115087
Alcohol by Volume: 50%

It has a nice, crisp nose full of fruit and spice. Anise and mint combine with hints of stone fruit. Orange peel and cinnamon. Rye seeds, vanilla syrup and potpourri. The palate has mild sweet and heat levels. Cinnamon and freshly split lumber. Jalapeño oil and oranges. Ume and tart limes. Loads of wood. A touch of vinegar and bitterness. It finishes on lumber and limes, ginger, alcohol heat and chili oil.

An improvement! The nose really opened up. And the palate is a little better. The whiskey is likely from a very high rye mashbill, but Sazerac pushed the oak big-time, perhaps to hide any scary parts. Thus this will be one of the rare times where I'll say this whiskey would not be better with a few more years of maturation.

Though it's a different style than Pikesville 6yo or High West's Double, Taylor Rye BIB is of comparable quality. But that's all a matter of temperament, as is how one feels about spending $90-$100 on a $40 whiskey.

Availability - In the US, most specialty retailers. A little harder to find overseas.
Pricing - $70 to (really) $200 (US), $100-$150 (Europe, w/o VAT or shipping)
Rating - 83

Balblair 1999, 2nd Release (bottled 2016)

As with the 2003 first edition, Balblair's 1999 second edition has had three releases: in 2014, 2015 and 2016. Then consider that the 1999 1st edition was also released during those same years, as well as in 2017. So that means one round of the first edition was released after the second edition but at the same time as the first release of the third edition. Transparent shell, chewy opaque center?

The good news is that all those second editions seem to have been produced from a mix of ex-bourbon and ex-sherry casks. Could it have been one big batch blended in 2014, with a one-third then being bottled and the rest put in steel? Or is the 2016 release two years older than the 2014?

DISCLOSURE: Amy from Ten27 Communications sent me this bottle, along with the 2003 and 2005 that I've already reviewed. (Thank you, Amy!) The 2003 somehow read younger and rawer than the 2005. They were both very decent whiskies, but since the 2005 felt more complete or fully formed, I preferred it over the elder bottling. Those two were entirely from American oak. The 1999 has some Spanish action going on...

Distillery: Balblair

Ownership: Inver House (via Thai Beverages plc via International Beverage Holdings Ltd.)

Region: Northern Highlands

Maturation: "American oak, ex-bourbon barrels"+ "Spanish oak, sherry butts"

Vintage: 1999
Bottled: 2016

Alcohol by Volume: 46%
Chillfiltered? No
Colored? No

NEAT
A bit of sharpness to the nose, some brute youth still in there. Nothing grapey or winey about this whisky. It's all mineral, lime, ocean air, barley and Cara cara orange peels. Those limes and oranges show up in the palate, and are met with tart berries. Then malt, molasses, honey and almonds. A little bit of heat too, which carries into the simple but long finish. Just honey, citrus and malt.

DILUTED TO ~40%abv or <1tsp water per 30mL whisky
Lots of barley in the nose. An unoaked mineral white wine with hints of lemons and peaches. A milk chocolate moment. The palate is sweeter, creamier. Darker. Tarter citrus, berry syrup, roasted barley and a sprinkling of soil. The finish has (good, homemade) limoncello with fresh ginger and a little bit of barley.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
"Straightforward" is the keyword about this whisky. It's neither subtle or loud, plain or complex. No gimmicks, no oak syrup. Just whisky, man. Consequently it's also difficult to rave over such a thing. But it's impossible to hate. It's a swimmer. And it *gasp* works on the rocks, especially on a muggy night such as this.

Plenty of refill casks are in the mix. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the batch was in fact made in 2014 because the whisky reads like it's in the early part of its second decade. That's not really a knock, since hints of old Balblair fruity charm are just starting to peek through. 20+ years with this maturation though...

Availability - some specialty retailers in Europe and the US
Pricing - $80-$100 (US), $65-$85 (Europe, w/o VAT or shipping)
Rating - 85

Hazelburn and Longrow twins! Same age, same year, same cask type.

Like me, my friend Matt W. is a Springbank fan. Unlike me, he actually reels in Springbank bottlings from around the planet and then opens 'em up. I think I've received samples of all of them and for that I am very thankful.

He brought a pair of cask strength bottlings to a recent whisky event. Both distilled in 2007. Both nine years of age. Both matured in Sauternes hogsheads. One Hazelburn and one Longrow. This past weekend I decided to set the siblings against each other...

---

Distillery: Springbank

Brand: Hazelburn
Region: Campbeltown

Age: 9 years (December 2007 - September 2017)

Maturation: "First Fill Sauternes" and, judging by the outturn, a hogshead

Alcohol by Volume: 56.9%
Limited Bottling: 252

Of the four single malts produced by Springbank's owners, Hazelburn lands in fourth place, for me. That's not an insult since Hazelburn is still better than two-thirds of all Scotch malt brands. I haven't had a terrible Hazelburn, but I also haven't had a great one. So I'm wishy-washy on them overall, even though the triple-distillation approach should appeal to my palate.

Surprisingly available in the US, today's Hazelburn was three months short of its 10th birthday when bottled, and has a not-unreasonable ABV in its youth.

---

Distillery: Springbank

Brand: Longrow
Region: Campbeltown

Age: 9 years (November 2007 - October 2017)

Maturation: "Fresh Sauternes Hogsheads", probably four or five

Alcohol by Volume: 56.3%
Limited Bottling: 1134

Whereas Hazelburn is Springbank's Lowland-type malt, unpeated and distilled three times, Longrow is the Islay stand-in, heavily peated and distilled twice. Though I am unsold on the entire Longrow Red winey series, I did enjoy the now-old 14yo Burgundy Wood release as well as a Shiraz cask from Open Day 2010. Still, straight up all-bourbon-cask Longrow is one of the best things (ignoring the 10yo 100proof).

Today's Longrow was bottled exclusively for the Springbank Society. It falls only one month short of 10 years and its ABV is very similar to that of the Hazelburn.

---

There's the setup. Here's the tasting.

NEAT

--NOSES
Hazelburn - Flower blossoms, oranges, lemons and cardamom. Toasted nuts in caramel. A slight dunnage note. Definitely a mossiness to it. With time, there are larger notes of yeast and cereal grains, as well as vanilla.
Longrow - It's....almost identical at first. Flowers and citrus. Hints of vanilla and caramel. Slightly peatier. More wort and salt. But it gets more expressive with time, picking up more moss and iodine.

--PALATES
Hazelburn - Heat and sweet. Salt. Golden raisins, gobs of honey, lemon juice and apricots. Cardamom and cinnamon. Paper smoke and moss.
Longrow - Sweeter arrival, but with less heat. Similar honey/lemon/apricot note, but milder. It has its own oranges + cayenne pepper + peat moss + earth note. The peat reads much much quieter than its 50ppm malting level.

--FINISHES
Hazelburn - Here's the cayenne pepper, along with honey and apricots. It's plenty winey, but the sweetness gets gentler with time. Hints of smoke and tangy limes.
Longrow - Less wine here than in the Hazelburn. Less heat too. It's tangier, peatier, with plenty of honey and pepper.

DILUTED TO ~46%abv, or 1.5tsp water per 30mL whisky

--NOSES
Hazelburn - Less wine, more grain, at first. Simple citrus. Toasted oak spice. Then vanilla, sawdust and mint leaves as it trends towards American whiskey.
Longrow - Orange oil and toasty peat. Lemon peel, orange pixy stix and citronella candles.

--PALATES
Hazelburn - A very easy drink. Better mouthfeel with this dilution, milder sweetness. Hint of bitterness. Limes, lemons and moss.
Longrow - Better mouthfeel on this one too. Calmer sweetness, but perkier pepper. More bitterness and smoke.

--FINISHES
Hazelburn - Smoke, limes and sugar.
Longrow - Sweet citrus, black pepper and peat moss.

CONCLUSIONS!?
This is yet another Hazelburn that reads peated, even though its barley was not. Perhaps it's tough to scrub the phenolic residues out of the stills, thus the Hazelburn runs pick up some elements in that part of the process. The good news is, it helped out here, giving the whisky an extra dimension. The first fill cask and its wine are active throughout. I enjoy the imparted fruit, since it goes well with the 3x-distilled malt. It's a bit too sticky sweet here and here, but time and water fix that. I like the palate better when diluted, but prefer the nose when neat.

The Longrow is less peaty than expected, but I often find Longrow's peat mysterious. This lower peat register brings the two whiskies closer together in style on the nose. Again, time separates them. The earth, pepper and iodine show up, countering the wine casks. The two sides (Longrow vs Wine) cooperate more than clash, most of the time. I might like it better neat, but it dilutes well.

I prefer the Longrow due to the willpower of its grungier spirit. Perhaps it was served well by having multiple casks in the mix. I am not a big fan of Sauternes casks, but since they both had full maturations rather than finishes, the end results were usually light on weird messy sweetness. But drinkers who hate even the mention of wine-cask-matured whiskies should stay away from the Hazelburn.

HAZELBURN 9yo 2007 single Sauternes cask
Availability - America, somewhere
Pricing - $115ish
Rating - 82

LONGROW 9yo 2007 Sauternes casks
Availability - Springbank Society only
Pricing - ???
Rating - 86

Killing Whisky History, Episode 12 - Old Charter 13 year old Proprietor's Reserve

Before Diageo was Diageo, it was United Distillers. And Guinness. And Grand Metropolitan. And The Distillers Company Ltd. And John Bald & Co. More to the point, at one time that big company acted like it cared about those who were enthusiastic about their products. For instance, in 1994 they released the Bourbon Heritage Collection, to which Old Charter 13 year old Proprietor's Reserve belongs. This is my episode about this very bourbon.

And if Dylan can keep Ballad of a Thin Man under six minutes, then I can keep one episode of Killing Whisky History under six minutes. Enjoy!


Now take that time you've saved and spend it with your loved ones. And by "loved ones" we all know I mean "more episodes of Killing Whisky History".

Fail...er...Adventures in Blending: Improving Kilkerran Cask Strength?

It pains me to write this, but I was disappointed by the first batch of Kilkerran 8yo Cask Strength. I'd waited and waited for them to release something like it. Then they did, and I bought it. And I found it to be just fine, which is (for me) a letdown because I'm very big fan of their whiskies. Also, the key to making it "just fine" was by diluting the whisky down to 46%abv, which is the strength of their regular releases. Yet, even then it wasn't as good as their regular releases.

At the end of my review of that whisky, I said it "could have used a small percentage of the distillery's good sherry casks to lift it up a bit". After additional sips, I realized it was so raw that perhaps it needed some sherried whisky with more age and less alcohol. This called for my new blending friend: Famous Grouse 18 year old blended malt.

While visiting another one of these United States this year, I found the oldest of the vatted Grouse on clearance for $49.99. So I scooped one up and opened it immediately (but not in the parking lot).

I'll review it on its own another time, but I'll say here that it's deeply sherried and very approachable. As it was bottled in 2011, it contains quality ingredients from the early nineties, possibly Macallan and Highland Park, though more likely it's mostly Glenturret.

Its individual parts were chosen for blending purposes so that the end result would be a good blend. And that good blend, in turn, seems to blend well when applied to other whiskies. Would it work with the fiery Campbeltown youngster?

---

I made two vattings and let them marry for three months. A Vegas marriage, if you will. Here's the resulting Taste Off:

K8CS - Kilkerran 8yo Cask Strength batch 1, full power (56.2%abv)
K46 - Kilkerran 8yo Cask Strength batch 1, diluted to 46%abv
KILL GROUSE, THE YOUNGER - (4:1) 4 parts K8CS to 1 part Famous Grouse 18yo (53.6%abv)
KILL GROUSE, THE ELDER - (2:1) 2 parts K8CS to 1 part Famous Grouse 18yo (51.8%abv)

K8CS
Nose - Yeasty, bready. Citronella candles and fresh apricots. Simple peat. A hint of raspberries.
Palate - Very hot. Sweet and malty. Unsmoked tobacco, chocolate milk, black peppercorns, yeast and paper.
Finish - Heat, peppercorns, sugar, yeast and paper.
Commentary: I'm sad to report that this bottle has gotten less interesting in the eight months it's been opened. While it's of interest to try something that seems like a barely legal Glengyle, it's not worth more than one try at full strength.

K46
Nose - Cocoa, flowers, a few more fruits. Dough and wet cardboard. It fades fast, becoming just yeast and peat.
Palate - Still hot, though creamier and peatier. Peppery and grainy. Hints of tobacco and flowers. Fades quickly here too.
Finish - Hot sauce and apples. Sense memory: unflavored prescription cough medicine from the '80s.
Commentary: My notes here are different than they were in the November review. The dilution also doesn't work as well as it did before. It's still a minor improvement over the neat version.

KILL GROUSE, THE YOUNGER
Nose - Very fudgy. Some dunnage notes and funkier peat. Mixed berry jam. How about brownies with a raspberry ribbon?
Palate - Starts with honey, oranges and lots of fresh ginger. But then the K8's heat comes blasting in. It turns tangy and peppery. With port-like berries and pretzels?
Finish - A gingery sizzle on the tongue. Tangy and sour citrus. Pepper. Less heat.
Commentary: It's an improvement. It's also sort of a mess on the palate. The nose works though. Fascinating how just a little bit of the 43%abv 18yo malt totally turned the nose around.

KILL GROUSE, THE ELDER
Nose - More grapes. Cocoa and baked blueberries. The peat fades into a soil-like note. Chocolate malt, nougat, graphite and a hint of lime.
Palate - Softer heat and more graceful peat. Limes, berries, light florals, milk chocolate. Mothballs. Less ginger. A bit winey at times.
Finish - Big. Ginger, pepper, citrus candy and peat.
Comments: Best mouthfeel and longest finish of the foursome. It's the closest to a complete product, though again the theoretically thinned out older malt still knocks the younger stuff right over in the mix. More of the 18yo would have hidden the Kilkerran entirely. Though that's not the worst thing, it also wouldn't result in a balanced blend.

KILL GROUSE, THE ELDER wins the battle, and that was entirely due to the surprisingly muscular Famous Grouse 18yo malt. But. Kilkerran Work in Progress editions 5 through 7 (all woods) would beat all four of these contestants by some margin. So I'm going to steer clear of the Kilkerran CSes until they pick up some age or a few sherry casks.

Bowmore 15 year old 2001 Cadenhead Authentic Collection

Yes, a review from one of my own bottles! This thingy was purchased during our July 2016 Scotland trip. One recommendation: If you perchance visit Campbeltown, get thee to the Cadenhead shop. What you actually do there is up to you. Just, you know, keep your pants on.

Of all the Authentic Collection whiskies in the store, why did I choose this one? Firstly, I tend to adore indie Bowmores from this era. Secondly, Serge gave it a rave review. Now — I've probably stated this before — the more whisky experience I gain, the less I concur with Whiskyfun's reviews and tasting notes. But I thought I'd risk this one, since I really enjoyed the only other Authentic Collection Bowmore I'd tried up to that point. (To balance things out, the other Authentic Collection bottle I bought was one that WF didn't like. I'll keep that whisky a mystery for now.)

Did I set myself up for disappointment with this Bowmore? There's only one way to find out.

Here's all the usual whisky info!

NEAT
Its color is very very pale. The nose begins with smoked fish and dirty hay. Fresh lemons and a just a hint of asphalt. Meaty and savory, like a stew with bay leaves and potatoes. Pennies! There's still a sizable barley note beneath the peat. The palate leads with herbal liqueur, asphalt and mossy peat. Charred fish. Or rather, blackened fish loaded with cajun spices. Fresh lemons, again. Apple cider vinegar, but in a good way. It's warm but never hot. It finishes with a mild sweetness. Citrons and Meyer lemons. Tangy smoke and smoked fish.

DILUTED TO ~46%abv, or >1tsp water per 30mL whisky
The nose gets farmier. Savory and salty. Dried thyme. Rock candy. Adding water keeps the sweet and peat in perfect balance in the palate, making it very drinkable, while NOT dumbing it down. It gains a perky bitterness. Lots of lemons and dried herbs. A little bit of the asphalt, again. The finish is lightly sweet with bitter herbal smoke, tart lemons and peppery aftertaste.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
Oh yeah, this is the stuff.

It's exactly what I'm looking for in an indie Bowmore. There's just enough age to it to calm the rawness. Cask influence is low, but it's not dead wood. Great balance of seemingly dissimilar elements. The combination of smoked fish and fruit is a knockout when done right, as it was here. And, despite the strength of its peat and ABV, it is a very relaxing drink that vanishes from the glass much too soon.

Kristen just asked, "Do you have buyer's remorse?" I replied, "I do not."

Availability - Cadenhead shops, but I don't know if it's still in stock
Pricing - £78 (w/VAT)
Rating - 89