Linkwood 16 year old 1998 Signatory for Binny's, cask 5121

Next up is a Linkwood from Signatory's Cask Strength Collection, sold exclusively through Binny's. Though its alcohol content is parked right in my favorite ABV zone (46-50), I am a little concerned that it dropped this low at this whisky's age. The small outturn also points to considerable evaporation. But the very tiny (and probably very drunk) optimist on my brain's shoulder is reminding me of my good experience with Binnys's's's cask selections in the past.

Mr. Amiable Opinions picked up a bottle of this stuff for a nice price less than three years ago. Thank you, sir, for parting with this sample!

Distillery: Linkwood
Owner: Diageo
Region: Speyside (Lossie)
Independent Bottler: Signatory
Age: 16 years (4 June 1998 - 8 April 2014)
Maturation: Hogshead
Cask#: 5121
Outturn: 165 bottles
Alcohol by Volume: 49.3%
Exclusive to: Binny's

NEAT
The nose stocks all the fruits up front: peaches, bananas, applesauce and something exotic. There's also a level of savory-ish things, like BBQ-flavored chips and ground mustard seed. It all gets meatier with time, while also picking up oak spice and bubblegum notes. The palate is warm but never hot. It has tart citrus, white fruit juices and a bright bitter bite. After some time the citrus gets sweeter, a little bit of vanilla sneaks in and a Talisker-like cayenne pepper note appears. Lots of citrus in the lengthy finish, along with zippy fresh ginger and oak spice.

DILUTED to ~43%abv, or ¾ tsp of water per 30mL whisky
Citronella, orange candy, barbecue sauce and bubblegum on the nose. The palate has become gentler and fruitier, but tannins keep interrupting, drying things out. It finishes with oak spice and malt, like a Compass Box creation.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
Nope, nothing wrong with the abv here. With its fruits, the palate is vivid without ever feeling hot. But the real picnic party is in this Linkwood's nose, all fruity, meaty and spicy. Though oak is always present, it never intrudes......while neat. Adding water turns the palate much too tannic and constricts the nose.

So 49.3%abv is indeed its money spot. This is another low-hype, high-quality pick by Binny's. (This cask is long gone, but Binny's has a murder of Signatory Linkwoods right now. But tough noogies for folks outside of Illinois. And most of us are folks outside of Illinois.) I'm having a difficult time picturing another contemporary Linkwood topping this one. Though the tiny optimist likes the challenge.

Availability - all gone
Pricing - they put it on clearance for $69.99 at the end
Rating - 88 (neat only!)

Linkwood 16 year old 1995 Signatory, cask 648

I realized while filming this month's Killing Whisky History episode I've posted very few Linkwood reviews so...

WELCOME TO LINKWOOD MONTH!

Just kidding. It's more like Linkwood Week and a Half. There are three of these critters this week, one from each of Signatory's ranges. First up is a 1995 single cask from Signatory's Vintage 43%abv line. Thank you to Jordan of Chemistry of the Cocktail for the sample!

Distillery: Linkwood
Owner: Diageo
Region: Speyside (Lossie)
Independent Bottler: Signatory
Age: 16 years (30 January 1995 - 8 August 2011)
Maturation: Hogshead
Cask#: 648
Alcohol by Volume: 43%

NOTES
The nose starts off with toasted grains and a mild cheddar note (likely from the yeast). Then comes lemon and baked pear, with hints of vanilla, metal and mushrooms. A pretty floral new make note appears after 30 minutes. There's something old school blendy about the palate. It's slightly salty and savory, with small notes of honey and metal. Tangerines and pears, then an aromatic note that's somewhere between flower blossoms and flower kiss candy. The finish has a good warmth and length to it considering its alcohol content. Honey and tart citrus, a balance of salt and sweet, then a whiff of coal smoke.

WORDS WORDS WORDS
This Linkwood was what was expecting to find (without success) in those Glenfiddichs last month, with its pears and citrus along with a balance of sugar and salt, though the spirit provides a bit of an edge that 'Fiddich's blenders would never allow in their mega batches. The Linkwood comes across younger than its age, due to a casual cask, but it never feels raw. It seems like it might just blend well, so I saved a few mLs for one of my terrifying mini vattings. I'll report back on it in a couple weeks.

Availability - ???
Pricing - it was around $70 back in the day
Rating - 84

Killing Whisky History, Episode 22: Linkwood Distillery "A" vs Linkwood Distillery "B"

A Mad Men episode started me down the path that led to this episode. The set designer's effort was thoughtful, though the bottle was an anachronism. In any case...


In 1971 a newer modern distillery (B) was built adjacent to the original Linkwood distillery (A) that had been constructed 150 years earlier. In 1985, Linkwood A was closed, never to reopen. In this episode, I try a Linkwood single malt from each distillery. SPOILER ALERT: On the March Lamb-Lion Meter, they're both delightful lions.

Randy Brandy drinks Chateau de Pellehaut Armagnac twice

Wow, that was riveting.

Diving for Kravitz spent an entire month on Glenfiddich 12. Have you ever seen someone try so hard to lose his readership? Well, hold my brandy (or whatever it is that the idiot-adults-who-want-to-be-cool-like-the-idiot-kids say).

After many trips to France on the company dime, K&L's Didactic Duo brought Armagnac to this great country to slake the thirst of their destitute devotees during the Obama years. Two "blog" posts later, every whisky nut with a chile in his ass bought every bottle because they were told to do so by Jesus Driscoll. Or was it "Jesus, Driscoll"?

Now Randy Brandy's going to rewrite the Chateau de Pellehaut introduction that the ginger cartoon formerly known as Sku once composed:

In France there's a place called Armagnac. In Armagnac there are three places called Bas-Armagnac Tenareze, and Haut-Armagnac. In Tenareze there is a brandy producer known as Chateau de Pellehaut. Tenareze is near Condom.

Florin, the Pappy of Armagnac sample givers, sent Kravitz two samples of CdP because he wants him to go Haut'ing. Don't tell me that's not how it's pronounced. Both Armagnacs were distilled from the Folle Blanche grape emissions and were both K&L blue light specials.

Photos of sample bottles are very important

Here are my notes.

Chateau de Pellehaut 16 year old 2001, 48.6%abv

Nose - Dark chocolate, black cherry ice cream, lemon, cinnamon, toffee. That's the first glass. The second glass smells like milk chocolate, vanilla bean, apples and anise.
Palate - Cherries, oranges, toffee and cloves. Kinda sweet. Lots of cask, but good cask. More ginger powder and black cherry soda in the second glass.
Finish - Cherries, mint, oranges, oak spice and dirt.

More Notes - This is brandy for bourbon drinkers, and I'm definitely the first person who has ever said that. But you can keep your bourbon, I'll take this instead. It tastes good, it smells good. The oak knows its place. Meanwhile 16 year old bourbon costs as much as John Edwards' haircut. Remember that? That was great and it's still funny.

Chateau de Pellehaut 17 year old 1996, 50.4%abv

Nose - Dried cherries, apple skins, peach skins, flowers, cinnamon, almond fudge and brine.
Palate - Dominican cigars, almonds and lemon cake. Salted caramel candy, candied peels and candied ginger. There's something between cocoa and leather going on in the second glass.
Finish - Warm baked orchard fruits, oak spice, mint. It's long. Long as......well, you've seen the pictures.

More Notes - Pour this for your whisky friends and tell them it's a 30 year old sherry cask single malt. Or don't pour it for them and keep it for yourself because it's better than whisky.

There were my notes.

How whisky were these armagnacs? My wife, Brandy, walked into my man cave after this tasting was over and said, "Gross. It smells like whisky in here." That's how whisky they were. Jesus Driscoll knew his market.

RATINGS:
Chateau de Pellehaut 16 year old 2001: B/B+
Chateau de Pellehaut 17 year old 1996: B+/A-   (the A- is for the whisky people who didn't buy this bottle)

7 Thoughts About Glenfiddich Month

1. I am forever cured of Glenfiddich 12 and its ancestry

Trying many versions of the same whisky expression over a period of three weeks is the most direct route for this writer to lose all interest in the subject matter. Though other whisky writers/bloggers would knock out all eight whiskies in one night, I am not in a social position wherein that behavior is appropriate. Also, I wouldn't trust my compromised senses after the fourth whisky. It's not that I judge those who choose that approach.

Who I am kidding? Of course I judge those people. Look at this website. I rate inanimate objects.

2. I am forever cured of Glenfiddich 12 and its ancestry

The trouble began when the current version of Glenfiddich 12 turned out to be mediocre. Then four out of seven of its predecessors proved to be at the same level or worse. The palate's the problem. The eight palates average out to a C- range of ratings.

Lessons #1 and #2 should have been taken to heart years ago when I spent a month reviewing nothing but middle-shelf blends. In fact, that month permanently changed my approach to this blog. You don't see me searching for bargains in sub-$20 dollar scotch anymore.

3. Bad fill-levels were not the source of the problem

All eight bottles had excellent fill levels. None of the bottles had the faded label tell-tale signs of sun damage. All, except the 2017 bottle, had screwtops, so there was no damage caused by warped corks. And every bottle came from a different source.

4. Mini bottles were not the problem

In my Killing Whisky History series I've consumed the contents of numerous minis much older and with worse fill levels than this month's whiskies, and none — except, perhaps, one from 70 years ago — were as off in the palate as 3/4s of the 'Fiddich minis.

5. Where's the pears?

Pear is (or was) my favorite nose/palate characteristic of young Glenfiddich. It was the one way I could pick Glenfiddich out in a blind tasting. You'll find that note listed just once in my reviews of the eight Glenfiddichs. Was that note getting filtered out by better (or worse?) maturation? Or was it all psychosomatic in the first place?

6. Whisky from decades past wasn't always better than whisky made now

Yes, I have often been a Luddite when it comes to whisky. Hell, that's why I keep seeking out dusties. But my real experience, as often demonstrated in many Killing Whisky History videos, is that a lot of the old stuff wasn't always great either. Mediocrity is timeless.

7. This has nothing to do with Glenfiddich. Or does it?

I did a Taste-Off between Jeppson's Malort and high-strength baiju.

Notes:
Malort - Tire-smoked turpentine
Jin Liu Fu baiju - Urine-soaked rotting socks filled with hazmat garbage and banana candy.

Malort wins. I lose.

— Resting Kravitz Face (@kravitz_hubris) February 24, 2019

Glenfiddich 8 year old Pure Malt, bottled 1979

I end this Glenfiddich voyage forty years ago. Alas, we finally have a bottle date on the bottom.

Glenfiddich Pure Malt had an 8 year age statement from near the brand's birth until the end of the 1970s. After that it went NAS for nearly two decades of darkness, aside from a short stint as a 10-year-old in Japan.

I obtained this mini as some point within the past two years, but I don't know how or when. But as you can see from that top photo, the fill level is money. I'm fairly excited about this.

Distillery: Glenfiddich
Owner: William Grant & Sons
Region: Speyside (Dufftown)
Age: at least 8 years old
Maturation: ???
Bottle Date: 79

Alcohol by Volume: 43%

Dunnage, malt, limes, peaches, smoked almonds, salty pork, sesame oil and a hint of butterscotch on the nose. The palate is different. Burlap, soap, greasy rags, chalk dust, limes, vanilla simple syrup and a lot of metal. There's some dingy smoke in there, among the acids and peppercorns. It gets violently, chemically sweet by the 20 minute mark. Soap, burlap and metal in the finish. Again, it gets so cloying so quickly.

What a nose. What a palate. What a mess. It's not often I find a Grade A scent attached to a Grade D- taste. When I first smelled the whisky, I thought, "My god, there's going to be a 90-point Glenfiddich on Diving for Pearls!" I was mistaken.

Unlike Wednesday's whisky, it didn't take time for the soap to take over. It was there from the start. So was a literally bloody amount of metal. It was a matter of *sniff* "Awesome" *sip* "Awful", *sniff* "Awesome" *sip* "Awful", and so on until I dumped a quarter of it down the sink. And that is how Glenfiddich Month ended.

Availability - one can find these minis at auctions
Pricing - ???
Rating - 72 (once again, the nose is all that keeps it out of the 60s)

Glenfiddich Pure Malt, bottled early 1980s

Before it was Our Signature Malt, it was Special Reserve; before it was Special Reserve, it was Special Old Reserve; and before it was Special Old Reserve, it was Pure Malt.

There was a short phase of Pure Malt when Glenfiddich removed some color and texture from the label resulting in a flatter, though aged, look. Within this period, there was even briefer moment when the abv dropped to 40%. How lucky am I to get to experience it?

Distillery: Glenfiddich
Owner: William Grant & Sons
Region: Speyside (Dufftown)
Age: no age statement
Maturation: ???
Bottle Code: none?

Alcohol by Volume: 40%

At first burst, the nose is all moldy clothes, sand, clay and metal. Some chemical reaction begins at the 20 minute mark and the nose keeps opening further and further with time, in approximately this fashion: vanilla, whipped cream, mixed berry jam, roses, fruity cinnamon, lemon zest and fermenting apples. Twenty minutes later the musty notes are gone. The palate begins rugged as well. Cork (though the bottle has a screwtop), dust, metal, ethyl, black pepper and tobacco. Beneath that is a simple sweetness and tartness. It gets sweeter and soapier with time, picking up some plastic notes. With the first couple of sips, the finish is cleaner than the palate with a lemon and funky honey combination. But then comes the cork. And the soap. It keeps some sweetness and lemon. But the soap.

With time in the glass the whisky's nose ascended, while the palate crumbled completely. The palate was challenging to begin with, but the soap and plastic notes that start to take over become unnerving. This mini had a perfect fill level so I didn't anticipate this problem. Perhaps the whisky wasn't great when it was bottled? It's certainly a different creature than the 1986 bottling. I have no idea what to expect from Friday's whisky.

Availability - Auctions
Pricing - ???
Rating - 75 (but don't linger over the stuff)