Braes of Glenlivet (Braeval) 16 Year Old (Signatory Vintage 1979) Whisky Review!

My first experience with Braes of Glenlivet (a.k.a. Braeval Distillery) single malt, and it was bottled over 25 years ago!

Braes of Glenlivet, renamed to Braeval Distillery in 1994, is a relatively young distillery that was founded in 1972 in the Ballindalloch area of Speyside. Why the name change? To avoid any confusion or being associated with Glenlivet Distillery, which was and is owned by the same parent company as Braeval. It was founded by Chivas, then part of Seagrams, which became part of Pernod Ricard in 2000. As was often the case with these less famous and often neglected distilleries the new owners elected to close the distillery just over a year later, and it remained 'mothballed' for six years before resuming production. As is also often the case with these less famous distilleries, the vast majority of their production - over four million litres of spirit annually - goes in to the parent company's blended whiskies, in this case the likes of Ballantine's and Chivas Regal, and single malt official bottlings are almost impossible to find with only three examples in existence - a 25, 27 and 30-year old, released as part of Chivas Brother's "Secret Speyside" range of limited releases from their lesser known distilleries. Interestingly, despite being released within the last couple of years those official bottlings are labelled as Braes of Glenlivet, not Braeval, which seems a strange and somewhat dubious choice! Even independent bottlings aren't seen very often from this remote distillery. Braeval is not open to the public and has no visitor's centre, and it's production methods aren't particularly remarkable with six conventional pot stills, two wash and four spirit, all equipped with onion-shaped reflux balls and upward-angled lyne arms designed to produce a lighter spirit. The distillery's main claim to fame is that it is the highest in Scotland by elevation, albeit only surpassing Dalwhinnie by only a couple of metres. The latter is still often referred to as the highest in Scotland, probably only because very few people have heard of Braeval, let alone are aware of it's elevation. Does it really matter which is highest? No, of course not; it's essentially a marketing tactic. But higher elevation does have an effect on the production and maturation at those distilleries, thanks to differences in air pressure, humidity and temperature.  

There is more to the story of the name change though, since including the word "Glenlivet" was a much more common thing a few decades ago. In fact throughout the 19th Century the word was a generic term used to denote whiskies from the Speyside region, and it had started during the illicit distilling days, well before Glenlivet Distillery had been issued it's license following the excise act of 1823. Very famous distilleries like Macallan, Aberlour, Mortlach and Glenrothes were all hyphenated as "X-Glenlivet", e.g. Macallan-Glenlivet, right up until the 1980s-1990s. And this is also why Glenlivet Distillery is officially named "The" Glenlivet, which resulted from legal battles in the late 1800s. So if the distillery changed names in 1994 and this whisky was bottled in 1996, why is it labelled as Braes of Glenlivet and not Braeval? Because this is an independent bottling, and quite a few independent bottlers chose to bottle their whiskies under the original names of the distilleries that were responsible for the production of the spirit. In fact a couple, most notably Cadenheads, still choose to use the "X-Glenlivet" names that I mentioned above for many bottlings from those distilleries. The word Braes, by the way, essentially means hillside or slope, so Braes of Glenlivet means "Hillside of Glenlivet", which itself means "Valley of the Livet", as in the River Livet that runs through the area and is an offshoot of the River Spey. 

This particular bottling of Braes of Glenlivet was opened by a mate during his recent birthday celebration, and it was distilled in the year of his birth - yes, he's very old - making it a very special moment! This is a single cask bottling from independent bottlers Signatory Vintage, and it was distilled in June 1979 and bottled in February 1996 at 16 years of age. A single butt (500-litre cask), cask number 16045, yielded 380 numbered bottles at a strength of 43%. I'm assuming that was a refill sherry butt, but a reasonably active one. Having been bottled a quarter of a century ago, this certainly qualifies as what the whisky world calls a "dusty" bottle, meaning that it has survived unopened for a long time! Thankfully the cork actually came out in one piece, which was quite the surprise given the age, and the contents was showing great promise almost straight away. February 1996 was a very different time of course, Signatory Vintage had been founded back in 1988 but were still six years away from their purchase of Edradour Distillery, and the whisky industry would've been almost unrecognisable compared to the booming giant that it is today, particularly when it came to single malts. Personally I had only just started the final year of primary school back then and probably didn't even know what whisky was, so this is a real time capsule of a bottle! Despite being both distilled and bottled so long ago - don't forget, the friend who opened this bottle is very old - this bottle was actually relatively affordable, mainly because of the distillery being less widely known and less desirable than more famous names. But in my admittedly limited experience, older bottlings from this era are always worth trying, since they offer a glimpse in to a much different time in both the world and in the whisky industry. Let's do it!

Braes of Glenlivet 16-year old, Signatory Vintage, 43%. Speyside, Scotland.

Distilled June 1979, bottled February 1996. Single sherry butt #16045, assumed refill cask, 380 bottles. Unknown chill filtration or colouring, but likely natural colour.

Colour: Bronze. Quite hazy as well so I'd have to guess non-chill filtered. 

Nose: Warm, dusty & quite "old school", but also quite fresh. Herbal honey, dry grass, baked red apples with warm wood spices and a touch of runny caramel. Brown bread dough, dried orange slices and a touch of sweet under-ripe tropical fruit around the edges. Touch of dried ginger too. 

Texture: Light-medium weight, but doesn't "feel" diluted. Dusty & slightly chalky. No heat at all.

Taste: Sweeter & fruitier here. More orange slices but they're fresh now, and slightly bitter. Dusty malt, baking spices, dry grass & dried leafy herbs. Some runny caramel before that bitterness increases in volume-  think bitter orange, and with a few cloves and a touch of ginger thrown in. 

Finish: Short-medium length. Touch of liquorice and those baking spices, still that bitter orange, dry grass & dried leafy herbs. Dusty malt and runny caramel again. Some old leather and a touch of red apple skins. And that hint of tropical fruit around the edges again. 

Score: 3.5 out of 5. Edging towards a 3 though. 

Notes: A very interesting 'blast from the past' whisky this. It's both "old school", dusty & leathery, and fresh & grassy at the same time. Quite herbal too with plenty of orange & baking spices, but that bitterness that starts to show on the palate is allowed to steer the ship a little too much for my liking, and it seems to dull the finish a little. There are flashes of a nice sweet fruitiness around the edges though, and the bigger picture is quite enjoyable. Having not tried a Braes of Glenlivet / Braeval before it's hard to compare to contemporary whiskies, but I haven't come across this dusty, leathery "old" character in many modern Speyside or Highland whiskies lately. 

When trying these old bottlings you can't help but wonder what they would've been like at cask strength, or even slightly higher at 46%. But the whisky world was a very different place back in the mid-1990s, and such things were not high on the list of priorities for the majority of producers; even among single malts and even among independent bottlings. But then it also doesn't feel like it's lacking, exactly, so that's just a thought. Still a very interesting experience with this old bottling, and a great way to help celebrate the birthday boy's trip around the sun! 

Cheers!

Talisker 8 Year Old Rum Finish 2020 Whisky Review!

 The new rum cask finished Talisker! The one we've all been waiting for! 

I've said it before, and I'll gladly say it again: I absolutely loved the 2018 Talisker 8-year old. It's still my favourite Talisker to date, and one of my favourite bottlings from the Diageo Special Releases to date. So when I heard about the 2020 Talisker 8-year old, I was very excited to get amongst it. And after the wait of nearly a full year after this whisky was released in Britain and Europe, it's finally here! There's a slight price increase, with the new addition sitting at around $160 AUD on the retail shelves, compared to $130 for the previous iteration. But that's fine, it's been two years (actually more) and there was an older 15-year old released in between the two at a higher price, so that's certainly not a deal-breaker. It's also slightly lower in strength at 57.9% compared to 59.4% ABV in the 2018. But that's really not all, folks. This is the first Talisker official bottling to ever spend time in rum casks! Carribean pot still rum casks to be exact, and while I assume the finishing period was relatively short, it's certainly had a marked effect on the finished whisky - pun intended. If I'm not mistaken this is also the first time that any of Diageo's single malts have been finished in rum casks, so this is quite the leap forward! Despite being one of the world's largest spirits corporations, don't let anyone tell you that Diageo is not willing to try something new. This is a very professional and very savvy company, and despite what the bitterer whisky geeks will tell you they really do know what they're doing when it comes to whisky. 

Rum cask finishes, when done well, can make for excellent drams, adding tropical fruit, dirty rum "funk" and brown sugar sweetness, but they do also seem to be quite hit & miss. While it's a growing trend, only a handful of distilleries have so far dabbled in this territory. Limited releases that I've tried such as Kilchoman's Australian Exclusive Single Cask, the Ardbeg Drum Committee Release, Springbank 21-year old 2018 and a Springbank single refill rum cask have been excellent, while others like Springbank 15-year old Rum Wood didn't quite meet my expectations, and the standard version of Ardbeg Drum (at 46%) didn't come close to my expectations. As you can see from that list, it does seem to mostly be peated whiskies that are filled into rum casks, perhaps because producers are worried that unpeated whiskies would become too sweet if put through the same treatment. Even the larger Scotch whisky industry's wild card entry, Bruichladdich, have only dipped their toe in the water when it comes to rum casks, although it's entirely possible that more are in the works for the future. I'm only guessing here, but from what I have observed one of the issues could be provenance - rum casks are very rarely traceable that like of the bourbon, sherry and wine industries - and by that I mean the quality of the rum that the casks have held, and the length of time that they held rum, and where that rum came from, and if those casks had previously held something else before they were filled with rum (usually bourbon). Not to mention if there was sugar added to the spirit, which is a very common thing in rum production, and what the base ingredient was i.e. molasses, sugar cane or demerara. Diageo does own Don Zapaca rum, which is produced in Guatemala, plus a Venezuelan rum called Pampero and also the lower-end rum brand Captain Morgan. But the rumour mill - the same rumour mill that was wrong about virgin oak being used in the 2019 15-year old, mind you - says that these rum casks were sourced from Jamaica. So who knows!

It's great to see the Isle of Skye's Talisker Distillery getting some time in the spotlight from the owners. The last three batches of Diageo's annual Special Releases have featured a cask strength Talisker, from the 2018 8-year old that was matured in deep-charred first-fill ex-bourbon barrels, to the 2019 15-year old that was matured in re-charred refill American oak hogshead casks (not virgin oak as many blogs and media releases incorrectly stated), and now the ground-breaking latest release with it's tropical twist. Since the cask strength 25-year old that was last released way back in 2009, prior to these three Special Releases there hasn't been a cask strength Talisker official bottling that was reasonably obtainable. The 57 North expression, which wasn't exactly cask strength but was close enough at 57% ABV, was discontinued a couple of years ago, and even the most recent distillery exclusive bottling was bottled at 48% ABV - only a slight boost over the distillery's standard strength of 45.8%. It's not easy to find a cask strength independent bottling of Talisker either, since there are very few independent bottlings in general from this distillery. So the debuts of these three special release bottlings over the last three years has been very exciting, and let's hope they keep it up! Right, enough talk. The 2020 Talisker 8 Year Old Cask Strength, bottled at 57.9%, non-chill filtered and natural colour, and finished in Carribean pot still rum casks. Oh and I have to add, the packaging on these last two batches of Special Releases really has grown on me. Very pretty, and it's great to see clear glass bottles in use for most of the bottlings. This young Talisker has some big shoes to fill after the 2018 8-year old, but it's also going to be a distinctly different experience, so I'll try to put that out of my mind!

Talisker 8 Year Old Cask Strength 2020, 57.9%. Isle of Skye, Scotland.

Finished in Carribean pot still rum casks. Non-chill filtered, natural colour. 

Colour: Very pale gold.

Nose: Sweet & sour and lighter than expected to start with, herbal and peppery. Opens up quickly with fresh green chilli, grassy dried herbs and a whiff of fresh petrol (which is a good sign!). Warm sea salt, a little printer ink and green peppercorns, then tropical fruit that quickly moves from green & sour to just under-ripe and sweeter - think green banana and under-ripe pineapple. Touch of toasted coconut around the edges as well? That would certainly be Carribean!

Texture: Medium weight, very oily, rich & peppery. Slight heat but it's very integrated and works well.

Taste: Clean engine oils and more fresh petrol (not that I've tasted petrol lately...), followed by charred green chillies, green & black peppercorns and warm baked sea salt. Touch of seaweed, a little pineapple & crystallised brown sugar. Fresh oily paint and a little burnt bacon. 

Finish: Medium-long length. Charred bacon, baked sea salt and fresh green chillies carrying through, followed by the banana, pineapple & petrol. Then the peppercorns return to dry things out, with a touch of lemon juice. Mouth-watering!

Score: 4 out of 5. 

Notes: Delicious. This is the only Special Release from the 2020 batch that I've tried so far, but even so I think it's safe to say that this Talisker could be the star of the show. Particularly when you factor in value for money. As expected it's very different to the 2018 8-year old, although the rum cask influence is relatively subtle - which is a good thing! In fact this is quite a balanced whisky overall, still showing plenty of distillery character with just a touch of extra sweetness, tropical fruit & rum "funk". They could've gone heavier on the rum influence here, like other distilleries have done before, but I'm glad they didn't. Maybe Talisker's spirit profile helped there, but then Ardbeg & Springbank's spirits aren't exactly wallflowers either. Undiluted, uncoloured and non-chill filtered Talisker is a glorious thing!

Talisker may no longer be the only distillery on the Isle of Skye, thanks to Torabhaig releasing their first single malt earlier this year, but they will always be the original, and any future newcomers are going to instantly face comparisons to drams like this. The 2020 8-year old certainly deserves its spot in the Special Releases, which comes as no surprise, but let's hope the success of this whisky helps keep the cask strength Taliskers coming in future batches. I look forward to seeing what they come up with next!

Cheers!

The Fate of the Godfather's Legacy?

It's been an interesting time for the Australian whisky industry in the last year or so. While dealing with the ongoing pandemic and all of the associated challenges takes the lion's share of our attention, some rather concerning things have been taking place. Unfortunately these seemingly small issues add up to the very real possibility of dealing significant damage not only to the Australian whisky industry, but specifically the Tasmanian whisky industry - the island that started it all, the genesis state, the spark of life for Australian whisky. If these issues were to reach the global whisky audience in the same way as previous Tasmanian whisky controversies have, then that damage could have an impact on said industries' future growth, both in potential and current export markets, and domestically. Am I helping the situation by writing about these issues and broadcasting them over the internet? Perhaps not, although I don't think that this humble little whisky blog has such a reach or such an audience, but I feel that these issues have gone on too long without being addressed or discussed beyond social media.

Much has been said recently about issues surrounding Japanese whisky, and "Japanese" whisky, and Japanese "whisky" that despite a long history have only recently gained enough attention to actually spur that industry into action in some small - but hopefully growing - way. If I can summarise that controversy in very brief terms, there is very little regulation in Japan surrounding what is and is not whisky, and what is and is not Japanese, and what is and is not Japanese whisky. Imported spirits and whiskies are being labelled as sold as 'Japanese', often with some kanji on the label, and/or an evocative image of a Samurai or Geisha, which is targeting the naïve and/or ignorant and taking advantage of the continuing 'boom' in the demand for Japanese whisky around the world. For more on this I would suggest reading this excellent article written by one of the greatest whisky writers, Mr. Dave Broom. But essentially, through the lack of strict labelling standards, the lack of definitive regulations and the lack of an effective governing body, loopholes have been found and thoroughly exploited. Why am I talking about "Japanese" whisky in this article? Because unfortunately I can draw multiple parallels between those issues & shortcomings with what is happening right now in Australia. Not yet to the same extent, thankfully, but we do seem to be heading in the wrong direction. 

While there are other concerning examples, such as imported whisky that is being passed off as an Australian product, dodgy distilleries going under, processes being patented and more, I'm going to focus my efforts on one particularly concerning set of examples: Lark Distillery, or more specifically now Lark Distilling Co., the ASX-listed company formerly known as Australian Whisky Holdings who purchased the distillery in 2013. Before I do, a disclaimer: this is in no way reflective on the production staff at Lark Distillery, or indeed the other distillery that falls under that same banner, who's name has become something of a four-letter word: Nant. I have had the pleasure of touring both distilleries, and both distillery teams can and do produce great whisky, some of the best in the country in fact, so their hard work should not be discounted by the misdeeds of others. This article also does not consider the quality of the whiskies that we're discussing, it isn't relevant to this discussion. Nor is this reflective on the hard work of Bill Lark, the Godfather of Australian whisky, and the Lark family, all of whom have Tasmanian whisky running through their veins and have put a huge amount of work into both Lark and other brands - Bill was not a one-man show! It was my concern for Bill's legacy and that of the Lark family that initially set the cogs in motion for this article, along with the recent Lifetime Achievement Award that he was awarded at the recent inaugural Australian Whisky Awards. I have only had the pleasure of meeting Bill once in person, all too briefly, but his continued impact on the Australian whisky industry cannot be underestimated. I cannot think of a single more deserving recipient of that award. Aside from his family's hard work with Lark Distillery itself, 'The Godfather' has been and is instrumental in setting up and supporting many successful distilleries both in Tasmania and on mainland Australia, and it's safe to say that without his pioneering efforts the Australian whisky industry would look very different today. I have not consulted Bill in any way before writing this article, and I do not know his personal opinions on these issues. This is merely my personal opinion and personal observations as an outsider looking in, and it seems to me that the distillery, brand and company that carries the Lark name is doing no favours for his legacy. 

What's in a name?

We'll start with the raft of limited release Lark Distilling Co. whiskies that have hit the shelves over the last year or so, including two very recent examples. Firstly, the whisky that the owners have decided to name 'Lark Distilling Co. Legacy' that is pictured above. This is a 19-year old single malt whisky, distilled in Tasmania by Bill Lark. But it was NOT distilled at Lark Distillery. It was distilled at another famous Tasmanian distillery while Bill was consulting there, filled into two single casks, and presumably was matured at Lark Distillery before being bottled by Lark Distilling Co. It could not be labelled as the distillery where it was distilled, nor could it be labelled as a Lark Distillery whisky. So that, folks, is an independent bottling, plain & simple. And I'm not even bothered that these bottlings were priced at $1950 AUD each. I'm bothered that they were marketed as a product of the Lark Distilling Company. Even many stores and resellers, who really should know better, are listing and promoting this bottle as a Lark single malt. Smack-bang in the middle of the bottle's front label, you'll find the words "Tasmanian Single Malt Whisky from the House of Lark". And the company's own marketing material states "containing some of the rarest, oldest single malts to emerge from the House of Lark". Naturally this particular whisky received plenty of media attention, which of course was mostly barely-altered versions of the company's own press release, but this has only really been openly discussed in whisky groups on social media. There's also been a subtle change to the distillery's round logo: no longer "Lark Distillery" as pictured on the cask above, but now "Lark Distilling". So what is "the House of Lark", exactly? It seems to be the brand that is now applied to any whisky product released by Lark Distilling Company, formerly Australian Whisky Holdings, that was not distilled at Lark Distillery. And I'm sure it's legally perfectly acceptable. After all, what's in a name? Well, regardless of what entity owns the legal rights to the name, in this case it just happens to be the surname of the distillery's founder, Bill Lark, and his family, and that name is absolutely synonymous with Lark Distillery. 

This same thing has happened with a number of different 'Lark Distilling' and 'House of Lark' products over the last year or so. When the same company purchased the infamous Nant Distillery in 2017, they also inherited the maturing stock - well, the maturing stock that actually existed and was actually whisky, anyway! Some of this stock continues to be sold as single malt whisky labelled as Nant. But AWH/Lark Distilling Co. have also bottled some whisky distilled at Nant Distillery but labelled under this 'House of Lark' label. And the only hint of the source of these spirits / whiskies is found at the bottom of the front label, where you'll find the words "From our Bothwell distillery" or simply "Bothwell Distillery". There's only one distillery in the small town of Bothwell in central Tasmania, and it's of course owned by Lark Distilling Company, but it's name is Nant. Likewise with Overeem Distillery, which they acquired in 2014 but which was thankfully sold back to the Overeem family in early 2020. The fine print on those particular "House of Lark" bottles? Old Hobart Distillery, the former parent company of the Overeem whisky brand. And sentimentally, what's arguably worse is that the products of the actual Lark Distillery are now labelled as 'Coal Valley Distillery', along with the round "Lark Distilling" logo pictured below. You won't find any mention of Lark Distillery on those bottles, and even the distillery team seem to now refer to themselves as "Coal Valley" or "Coal River". Would it really be that difficult to come up with a new name for this larger group / company? Of course not. Or couldn't they just do separate logos for each distillery's products? Of course they could. But the company would rather continue to benefit from using the Lark name and the history and reputation that it carries. I think it's safe to say that the majority of the target market, even amongst whisky enthusiasts, aren't aware that the Lark family no longer owns or runs the distillery, and that Bill himself is only involved in a minor ambassadorial role and is no longer on the board of directors.

Let's imagine for a second, purely hypothetically of course, that Ardbeg Distillery released a whisky that was distilled at Laphroaig, but they labelled it as "House of Ardbeg" and made a small adjustment to the Ardbeg logo and packaging artwork that most people wouldn't even notice. The internet would explode, all social media sites would collapse under the weight, the world's computer keyboard manufacturers would see their share prices quadruple as the sudden demand for replacements outstripped supply, and there'd be a delay of approximately 13 seconds before the Scotch Whisky Association's lawyers unleashed a torrent of emails and letters and phone calls, and the product would be recalled, lest the distillery owners would be hauled before the courts. That's an extreme example of course, but is also basically what's happening here. If you ask your average whisky drinker / buyer / collector (even one with a spare $1,950-$3,900 lying around) where the above Legacy whisky was made, there's a solid chance that some or most of them are going to tell you it's a Lark whisky. And therein lies the problem! 

That slightly altered Lark 'Distilling' logo has also been applied to a blended malt whisky, pictured above. But it's labelled as "Lark Symphony no. 1, Tasmanian Malt Whisky, and it carries that same round logo that now says "Lark Distilling" rather than "Lark Distillery". It's only in the fine print at the bottom of the label that you'll find the words "The first blended malt from the House of Lark". Going back to our hypothetical example, just imagine that instead of that imaginary single malt, Ardbeg Distillery decided to tip a cask of Laphroaig into a batch of one of their core range whiskies. Of course they would remove the term 'single malt' from the packaging, and they'd give the whisky a pretty new name, and they'd change the "Ardbeg Distillery" logo to "Ardbeg Distilling". Islay's ferries could not safely hold the hordes of pitchfork & torch-wielding peat-heads that would immediately march to the distillery gates thirsty for blood. A very similar thing actually happened around 20 years ago with the Cardhu brand of Scotch whisky, when they suddenly changed from a single malt to a blended malt, then known as a pure malt, with very minor packaging & branding changes, and it did not go well for them. Andrew Derbidge has covered that and Lark Distilling's Symphony blend perfectly well here on his site Whisky and Wisdom, and it's an interesting piece of modern Scotch whisky history.

I'll move on to the latest concerning 'innovation' from the 'House of Lark': a whisky that has been finished in casks that were seasoned with soft drink (soda to the American readers). Specifically Chinotto, which is unfortunately not some exotic type of Italian wine. It's a dark brown carbonated beverage that is made with oranges and flavoured with added herbs, spices and sugar. I had hoped that this was an elaborate April fool's joke, but no, it's real, and it's for sale on the distillery's - sorry, I mean the distilling company's - website. That of course would be entirely illegal in Scotland, since that product would not be able to use or carry the term 'whisky' in any way. I don't want to get into the "regulation stifles innovation" argument here, so I'll sum it up by saying that in my opinion this is taking a very large step too far and in the wrong direction, way beyond using a different type of wood or a hybrid still, or distilling from a hopped beer/wash, all of which are permitted under the Australian regulations. I'm all for exotic cask finishes and wacky experiments, but in my view this product is not whisky and should not be able to use the term. If anything it's closer to a pre-batched barrel-aged cocktail - and there's nothing wrong with those, since they aren't whisky!

If this product is allowed to be labelled as whisky, what's to stop someone using Mountain Dew seasoned casks? How about a single malt whisky finished in coffee seasoned casks? Or red bull? It's only a step behind adding something like honey, chocolate, maple syrup or even straight sugar to your spirit and still calling it whisky. Once again, the distillery / company is not doing anything illegal, they are operating within the very loose and vague Australian regulations - which is really little more than a loose definition from the tax office. The reason that the Scotch Whisky Association governs what casks can and cannot be used for Scotch whisky maturation, and in fact the reason that their whisky regulations exist as a whole and are enforced, is that they want a product labelled as whisky to taste like whisky. It's essentially protecting a brand and that brand's reputation, helping to keep consumer faith in that product for the benefit of the industry. And there is no such governing body in Australia. History in Scotch whisky alone has shown that these measures are necessary to avoid major crises. And those regulations still allow for a huge scope of variety, experimentation and innovation. Why don't we use mezcal, calvados and tequila casks like the Scotch whisky industry is now doing since the cask regulations were widened? How about more white wine barrels or sweet wine casks? Lighter & drier sherry casks? More ale / stout casks? All of those are produced in Australia in large amounts. Why don't we use different yeast varieties, barley varieties, peating levels (and more peat in general!) and spirit cut points? What about using some different still shapes and lyne arm angles, or direct-firing, or worm tub condensers? Thankfully there are some distilleries that are looking into these areas and some that are putting in the hard work and doing things differently, but they're the minority, and most are on the mainland of Australia where there is more variety, rather than in Tasmania. Unfortunately I suspect the answers are quite simple: because it's easier, cheaper, more efficient and commercially safer to just copy what someone else is already doing. Most of our whisky distilleries, particularly those in Tasmania, are still based on the formula that Bill Lark designed and implemented in the 1990s-2000s, from fermentation right through to distillation, including the design of the still or stills themselves. It's easier to set your distillery up using that same formula, using the same equipment and ingredient suppliers, thereby producing a very similar spirit, and you then throw it into a small (often too small) red wine or fortified wine barrel for a couple of years before selling it - often as a single cask bottling so consistency is less important. Then rinse & repeat.     

Since I've mentioned worm tubs above, one final point - and it was the observation that spurred this article, the straw that broke the camel's back, if you will. I had noticed a rather significant change in production at Lark Distillery / Coal River Distillery / Coal Valley Distillery that seems to have gone completely undiscussed or even unnoticed. Since the early days of the distillery in its current guise, Lark has used two copper pot stills, a wash still and a smaller spirit still. Both are similar in shape, but there was one key difference: a worm tub condenser was fitted to the wash still, shown pictured above. Worm tubs are an older, less efficient type of condenser that result in a heavier, weightier, oilier and thicker spirit through faster condensation and reduced copper interaction when compared to the more efficient and far more common shell & tube condensers. To my knowledge, Lark's worm tub condenser was the only one used in the Australian whisky industry, since everyone else uses the shell & tube condensers, as does Lark on their spirit still. I'm sure you've already picked up that I'm using past tense here, because if you venture in to the distillery today you won't find a worm tub condenser. At some point in 2020 it was replaced with a shell & tube condenser, apparently because the worm tub was getting old and was close to leaking. Such a change would have a drastic effect on the low wines that this still produces, and in turn on the new make spirit. For what it's worth, the distillery has altered their processes to allow for this change and to get closer to the original character by changing the temperatures on the condensers and also the cut points on the spirit itself, and I'm sure they've effectively hidden the changes. But if those steps were needed, why not just replace the condenser with another worm tub? I could be wrong, but I suspect the answer goes back to what I talked about above: because it's easier, cheaper and more efficient. A commercial decision, saving on downtime or costs or both, and one that moves away from the formula that Bill & his family, and also the distillery team, have worked with over the years to great success. Which makes that yet another part of the Godfather's legacy that is under threat. 

I still believe that Lark can and do produce great whiskies, many of which belong on the world stage and deserve the accolades that they receive - some of the greatest Australian whiskies ever made have come out of their sheds. As I stated early in this piece, this article does not consider the quality of the whiskies that have been mentioned - good or bad, that's not the issue we're discussing. But I also believe that they should be safeguarding and caretaking the real legacy that is that lifetime of achievement more closely, and that some more respect needs to be given to the family name that is printed on those labels and boxes. 

Cheers!

Cragganmore 12 Year Old Special Release (Peated) Whisky Review!

A peated Cragganmore? Yes! And it's served up at cask strength, non-chill filtered and with no added colouring! Could this be the hidden gem from the 2019 batch of Diageo's Special Releases? 

I've only tasted a few examples of Cragganmore in my time; the standard 12-year old, the port cask-finished Distiller's Edition and an SMWS cask strength single cask. That list isn't too far from the norm for many of these less-common Speyside single malts, where most of the distillery's production goes into their parent companies' blended whiskies. In Cragganmore's case, that would of course be Johnnie Walker, with particular emphasis on the Green Label, although the distillery is also one of the six that make up Diageo's 'Classic Malts'. Cragganmore was founded in 1869 in Ballindalloch, Speyside, roughly a 30-minute drive west of Dufftown. The location was strategically chosen for it's proximity to both a natural spring, the Spey river and the Strathspey railway line that would run very close to the distillery. Cragganmore's setup is a very interesting one to us whisky geeks - wooden washbacks and four unusually-shaped pot stills - the two large wash stills have sharply downward-angled lyne arms, while the two smaller spirit stills have flat tops, with their more gently-curved downward-angled lyne arms making their exit from just below the tops in the neck of the still. Oh, and all four stills feed in to our old friends: worm tub condensers! Those stills are also intentionally run relatively quickly, so there's less reflux and less copper contact, which coupled with the downward-angled lyne arms and worm tub condensers gives Cragganmore a heavier, spicy, oily and almost-meaty (sulphurous) character. That sulphurous character is not on the level of a meaty Mortlach or vegetal Craigellachie for example, but it's adding an extra depth and richness that is very enjoyable. 

There is often one or two hidden gems in each batch of the annual Diageo Special Releases. Whether it's something we haven't seen before or just haven't seen for a long time, or it's from a distillery that doesn't often get the attention that it's due, or it's a new release at a more approachable price point to previous iterations. In 2017 I'd say that gem was the Lagavulin 12-year old - not exactly hidden of course, but these cask strength Lagavulins tend to be stuck in the shadows of the older and more expensive releases in each batch. And while the recipe doesn't change much with each year's release, the 2017 stood out to me as one of the best versions in recent years. In 2018, that hidden gem was of course the outstanding Talisker 8-year old, although that one didn't stay hidden for very long at all and swiftly gained a well-deserved cult following! And in 2019, with some stiff competition from the 15-year old Talisker, I'd wager that this Cragganmore holds the title. The 2020 releases haven't arrived in Australia yet - we typically have to wait for at least a year after Britain & Europe get theirs, but with the worldwide crisis & chaos this time around that delay could be even further extended. 

Credit must be given to Diageo for keeping the pricing on the younger Special Releases quite stable over the years - while the older and rarer bottlings are going for very serious money, the likes of the aforementioned Lagavulins and Taliskers have stayed very reasonable over time - consider that way back in 2014 the Lagavulin 12-year old could be found for around $160-170 AUD, and six years later the 2019 could be found for around $200. That's a very fair increase over that length of time for a limited release cask strength single malt, and there are many other companies and distilleries who's pricing has climbed far more steeply over the same period. Forgive the digression, but the recently released second batch of Ardbeg Traigh Bhan comes straight to mind here. The first batch of this 19-year old Ardbeg was priced at $290 AUD in mid-2019, while in January 2021 the second batch is priced at $400. For a whisky of the same age, same bottling strength - reduced to 46.2% remember - and a very similar mix of cask types, that's a ridiculous leap in pricing over a short period of time which has pushed this whisky out of the reach of many whisky fans. I had to laugh when I spotted an unfortunate and possibly foreshadowing phrase written on their packaging, which said "The Turn of the Tide" - that's a very apt statement - I couldn't have said better myself! And let's not mention the pending release of a 25-year old core range Ardbeg, bottled at 46%, which is expected to be priced at over $1,200 AUD - almost double that of the 25-year old Laphroaig which is bottled at cask strength and released in sporadic batches. Between those two, I know exactly where my money would be going... But back to the subject at hand! 

You'll notice that I haven't yet talked about something that really makes this 12-year old Cragganmore stand out - the peat! The story goes that back in 2006 with a severe drought impacting the west coast of Scotland, production at Talisker on the Isle of Skye was under threat. So for a short experimental period of only a couple of months some of the medium-peated malted barley that would normally end up at Talisker was also sent over to Cragganmore! This scenario might sound similar to what happened at a fabled distillery called Brora in the 1970s, which produced a now-legendary heavily-peated spirit to be substituted for Islay's Caol Ila while the latter distillery was being rebuilt. There was a bit of confusion around this Cragganmore when it started doing the rounds on the internet, with a number of reviews and resellers stating that it was only matured in casks that had previously held peated whisky, rather than the whisky itself being distilled from peated barley. That didn't seem right to me, since ex-peated cask maturation tends to be very subtle - or just plain ineffective in some cases - and details like that are very important to a unique malt like this. So I reached out via Instagram to none-other than Ewan Gunn, Diageo's Senior Global Brand Ambassador for Scotch Whisky, to clarify. Ewan kindly confirmed that the malted barley itself was peated, to a level similar to Talisker (so around 20 ppm), and also that it was malted on the mainland of Scotland - most likely at Glen Ord Maltings which is north of Inverness. That very interesting change to the norm means that this Cragganmore is one of the few contemporary examples of a properly-peated single malt that has been fed through only worm tub condensers - in fact until Islay's Ardnahoe releases it's first whisky when it comes of age, the aforementioned Talisker and Edradour's Ballechin range are the only other examples of such a beast (pun intended), with even the mighty Springbank and it's even-mightier Longrow spirit only having a worm tub on one of their stills. So this Cragganmore is a very exciting proposition! This 12-year old has been matured in refill American oak casks, most likely 250-litre hogsheads, and was bottled in 2019 at a cask strength of 58.4% ABV - and it's non-chill filtered and naturally coloured. This cask strength, peated special release sells for around $160 AUD, which is very reasonable. Lovely packaging too. It's still available in Australia at the time of writing, but don't expect it to last much longer! Let's get to it. 

Cragganmore 12-year old Cask Strength, 58.4%. Ballindalloch, Speyside. 

Distilled from medium-peated malted barley, around 20 ppm. Matured in refill American oak casks. Non-chill filtered, natural colour. 

Colour: Pale gold. Beautiful! 

Nose: Oily, malty, earthy with touches of sweetness. Clean machine oils, dry wood spices, barley husks. Tangy brine, soft & gentle earthy peat and hints of baked red apple. Salted lemon and clean, oily dark mud. A touch of orange rind and subtle fruit syrup around the edges. 

Texture: Medium weight, but very oily. Spicy, earthy and lightly dry. Slight touch of heat, but pleasant. 

Taste: More clean machine oils, barley husks and dry wood spices. More salted lemon, but with extra salt this time - baked salt in fact. Black pepper and earthy, dry, spicy peat, and that orange rind again. 

Finish: Medium-long length. A touch of heat but fades quickly, then a drying astringency that the oiliness carries beautifully. Then the dry wood spices, muddy peat and touches of icing sugar around the edges. Sweet fruity syrup and malty barley husks to finish. 

Score: 4 out of 5. 

Notes: Delicious. I'm really loving this dry / semi-dry, earthy, oily style of whisky lately, and this Cragganmore is right in that wheelhouse. With extra oil! There are definitely shades of Kilkerran Heavily Peated in here, which I love - so I love this one too! The Cragganmore is a little cleaner and a little sweeter than the Campbeltown though, and doesn't have the smoked meat either, perhaps a more subtle style. But it's lovely. This peated cask strength doesn't have the overt sweetness of the flagship Cragganmore 12 year old, and there's very little overt cask influence - which is certainly no bad thing! In fact I think you'd find it hard to pick that the two came from the same distillery. But that's not surprising when you consider that this is the first peated Cragganmore released, and it's also the point of the Special Releases. These aren't just cask strength versions of the respective distillery's standard single malts, they're different takes, like twists on the formula. And that makes them great fun. 

The peat level here is somewhere between Talisker and Benromach, and that very oily texture, carrying flavour with it, is a testament to the magic of worm tubs - without being overtly meaty or vegetal like some. It may be a mainland peated whisky, but that saltiness and muddy-ness is verging on coastal, with the whole shebang meeting somewhere in the middle. Highly recommended!

Cheers!

Octomore 8.2 Whisky Review!

A wine cask-heavy 8-year old travel exclusive official Octomore, released back in 2017 - those years have passed quickly!

It may feel like the Octomore 8 Series has been relegated to the archives since the 11 Series has now appeared in Australia. This constant stream of new releases is getting hard to keep up with - both for the collectors and Octo-heads and also for the importers and distributors! The 8 Series was unleashed upon the world back in 2017, during my maiden voyage to Islay in fact,  the surprising news that three of the four bottlings were actually eight years old! That was a first for an Octomore series and a substantial age difference over the 'regular' five year olds, and aside from the 10-year old releases and unobtainium like Event Horizon and OBA, isn't likely to be beaten. In fact Bruichladdich went straight back to the standard ages with the 9 Series, which also carried lower ppm numbers and far-less explorative cask recipes, and thus didn't get anywhere near the attention that its predecessor enjoyed. Aside from the increased ages in the 8 Series, there was of course one special drawcard in the four bottlings - Octomore 8.3, which carried the highest ppm count of any Octomore at 309.1 ppm - on the malted barley, remember - and was the 8-series release that stayed at five years of age. Naturally release received the lion's share of the attention, but the other releases in this series were also very good - 8.1 is still my favourite _.1 Octomore since the mighty 5.1, and while the virgin oak-influenced 8.4 wasn't as "out there" as the ground-breaking 7.4 it was very tasty regardless. While every bottling series in the world of whisky will always have highs and lows, I'd have to say that the 8-series was one of those rare cases where all of the bottlings were definitely winners. 

One of the four bottlings had proven a little harder to track down, however. As it always is, since the _.2 releases have been "travel exclusive" - only available from duty free stores - from 6.2 up until 11.2 at least, and we can thank COVID for that recent change in approach since the world's airports and ports aren't what they once were, and won't be anytime soon. Let's hope this global tragedy sees a few distilleries and brands re-think their approach to duty free bottlings, hopefully towards making them more readily available without the need for international jet-setting. Bruichladdich's Australian distributors have actually done that with the Laddie Eight that is normally travel exclusive, with it replacing the entry level Laddie Classic in many stores. And I'd argue that the delicious Eight is a significantly better deal, so that's certainly a win for the 'laddie fans! The _.2 releases have always stood apart from the rest of the Octomore range. That's partly due to the availability of course, but also due to their maturation - mostly due to wine casks being involved to varying degrees. The first of these, the legendary 2.2 Orpheus, was finished - Additional Cask Enhanced in Bruichladdich-speak - in Chateau Petrus red wine casks, while the highly-regarded 4.2 Comus was finished in Sauternes dessert wine casks, followed by the Cognac / Brandy cask-finished 6.2. Then the delicious and wildly-unappreciated 7.2 arrived, which was a mix of ex-bourbon and ex-Syrah red wine casks, matured separately and married together rather than a cask finish. 8.2 is much more complex, so it'll be covered in the next paragraph, while 9.2 was finished in second-fill red wine casks with the use of second-fill being a first for a _.2 Octomore. While tasty, in my opinion it is or rather was the low-point in the _.2 Octomore history. But the sauternes cask finished and 8-year old 10.2 was the redeemer that also broke the mould, since while easily the least-peaty Octomore I've tasted to date, is an absolutely delicious whisky in it's own right. 

My first encounter with 8.2 was on Islay, in the Laddie Shop at the Distillery, and it had only just been released - so recently in fact that there was only one bottle available to taste, and it was kept hidden away from the thirsty punters until the bottling hall had caught up. I must admit here that my memory of this particular dram is a little hazy - after a distillery tour and warehouse tasting, followed by a couple of other samples in the shop including the hand-filled Valinch bottlings and the delicious 7.2 for posterity's sake, adding in the sheer emotion and excitement of the first visit to these hallowed grounds, so I had not given 8.2 the attention that it deserved. But now, nearly four years later, and thanks to a generous sample from a fellow whisky nerd, I'm able to right that wrong! This 8-year old travel exclusive Octomore has had a very complicated and very wine-heavy upbringing. With the barley peated to 167 ppm and the spirit distilled back in 2008, the spirit was filled in to three different types of wine cask: French Mourvedre, an intense, tannin-heavy and peppery 'full-bodied' red wine, un-named Austrian sweet wines, and French Sauternes sweet wines. The spirit spent around six years in those three varieties of wine cask, before being married together and finished / additional cask enhanced for a further two years in another type of wine cask: Amarone, which is a dry Italian red wine. So that's basically six years in three different types of wine cask, and another two years in a fourth type of wine cask. I told you it was wine-cask heavy! Bottling strength on this one was 58.4%, with a generous 36,000 bottles released, and no chill filtration or added colouring involved of course. The sample for this review came from a sample swap with a generous fellow-whisky nerd. Let's do it!

Octomore 8.2, 8-years old, 58.4%. Islay, Scotland.

167 ppm barley, distilled in 2008. Matured in French Mourvedre, Austrian sweet wine and French Sauterne sweet wine casks for 6 years, finished in Italian Amarone red wine casks for 2 years. Travel exclusive, 36,000 bottles. Non-chill filtered, natural colour.

Colour: Deep copper. 

Nose: Smoked bacon, black pepper and stone fruit. Sweet apricots & nectarines in syrup, with a couple of sour cherries and a few peach skins thrown in for good measure. Buttery over-cooked pancakes with smoky maple syrup. A little spicy oak & green chilli heat. 

Texture: Heavy weight. Very rich, oily & syrupy. Lightly ashy and a touch of heat. 

Taste: Sweet & smoky entry with that smoked bacon and black pepper, then that syrupy stone fruit comes through to soften things up. That's followed quickly by an ashy, earthy peat, green chilli heat, black pepper & wood spices, plus blow-torched orange rind. 

Finish: Long length. The green chilli heat & ashy peat carry through, then the black pepper with a touch of astringency. Torched orange rind again, then the stone fruit in syrup with the smoky maple syrup sweetness, and warm, spicy toasted oak. 

Score: 4 out of 5. 

Notes: Delicious. It's different, and it's slightly hot, but it's packed with flavour, and the texture is wonderful - even with that slight heat. And to be fair, Octomores are rarely gentle! In 8.2 the peat & smoke are tamed slightly by the fruit and syrupy sweetness, while the chilli and oak spices are still assertive, but it all works very well together. There was something special about the 8-series of Octomores if you ask me, and the 8.2 shows a sweeter and fruitier side to the foursome. All four bottlings did set the bar quite high, and subsequent series' have certainly had some big shoes to fill! While there have been some excellent stand-out bottlings in those more recent series', and while I'm yet to taste any of the 11-series bottlings, I'd say that the 8-series was a rare case of all four releases being absolute winners!

Untasted, I was a little wary of the amount of wine casks that were involved in 8.2's maturation - even more so since it had spent eight years in those casks rather than the usual five. But I should've known better, because Bruichladdich are basically the masters of wine cask maturation, and Octomore tends to work very well with them. It's just a shame that most of these extra-unconventional _.2 bottlings are exclusive to travel retail / duty free stores. Octomore and Bruichladdich fans are being deprived of a different, but no less essential, aspect of Octomore and Port Charlotte, especially given the current global situation. The distillery did take steps to correct this with the recent 11.2, which was sold directly from their website - although neither DHL or Australian Customs are shy about taking advantage of those situations! As for these older bottlings, I suppose the advantage is that they're likely to still be available from some Australian airports, despite being bottled a few years ago now. So maybe that's an advantage? We'll have to wait for a certain virus to finally bugger off to find out...

Cheers!

Tamdhu Batch Strength Whisky Review!

Tamdhu has recently popped up in Australia, and at very reasonable prices from a certain large retailer. So this cask strength, sherry cask-matured example was hard to pass-up - and if memory serves it's my first dram from this distillery!

At first glance, Tamdhu (Gaelic for "little dark hill" and pronounced "tam-doo") seems like many of the lesser-known Speyside distilleries where most of their production goes to blended whiskies - it's not a very interesting one. In fact even the distillery's own promotional material puts almost 100% of its focus on the casks use for maturation, with almost no mention of the distillery itself or the spirit that it produces. But once you delve a little deeper, there is actually a little history there. Founded in Knockando, east of the town of Craigellachie in 1897 by none other than William Grant himself, it was designed by famous distillery architect Charles Doig, who was responsible for the "pagoda" roofs (real name Doig Ventilators) that have become synonymous with whisky distilleries in Scotland - although they seem to be missing from this distillery! It wasn't exactly smooth-sailing from there, with the distillery closing in 1927 while under the control of Edrington-predecessor Highland Distillers, and staying that way for twenty years. Soon after re-opening the distillery's original floor maltings were replaced with ten Saladin malting boxes, which explains the lack of Doig ventilator / 'pagoda' roofs. Saladin boxes are large open-topped containers that can hold over 20 tons of barley each, and use a mechanical system of pulley-driven screws to turn the barley as it germinates, thus cutting out most of the manual labour from the malting process. Tamdhu was among the first to adopt these Saladin boxes, and put them to good use by supplying 100% of its own malt requirements, and some of Edrington's other distilleries as well - notably Highland Park and Glenrothes. This also meant that Tamdhu was for a long time one of the few distilleries of the modern-era to supply 100% of its own barley requirements in-house, although that ended with the most recent change of ownership, when the maltings were decommissioned and the barley externally sourced from commerical malting companies, as is unfortunately the modern way. 

Edrington closed Tamdhu again in 2009, before it was purchased by Ian McLeod Distillers in 2012 - who also own Glengoyne Distillery, and produce a multitude of blended whiskies and independent bottlings such as Isle of Skye, Smokehead, Six Isles and Sheep Dip. They're also now the owners of the mighty Rosebank, which they are bringing back to life after its closure back in 1993. Since Tamdhu changed hands in 2012 the distillery has been rebranded with more emphasis put on a larger range of single malts, along with new updated packaging, a new visitor's centre and additional warehouses. Their current annual capacity is around three million litres of spirit, produced in nine wooden washbacks and six copper pot stills, and stored in a mix of dunnage, racked and palletized warehouses. While the decommissioning of the maltings facility is a shame, Tamdhu that was distilled prior to 2009 - so a good portion of the bottlings that are available today - will have been distilled from this in-house malted barley, so it's not out of reach just yet. These days the distillery's main point of difference is that they exclusively use sherry casks to mature their spirit, mainly of the ex-Oloroso sherry variety, including both American and European oak. The current range of single malts include a 12-year old entry-level bottling, a limited release 15-year old, and the NAS 'Batch Strength', along with some scarcer limited releases. There are still quite a few independent bottlings around, mostly from the likes of Gordon & MacPhail and Cadenheads, although that's likely to dry up after the change in ownership. 

The Tamdhu that we're looking at today is one of many non-age statement, cask strength sherry cask-matured Speyside single malts that you'll find on Australian shelves these days - think along the lines of Glengoyne Cask Strength, Glenfarclas 105, Glendronach Cask Strength and Aberlour A'Bunadh, with Glenrothes and Macallan also dabbling in the same territory at times. These are all batch releases, with the number of bottles per batch being undisclosed, and using different varieties of sherry casks - or more accurately, sherry seasoned casks, usually refill. This Tamdhu is no different, although they do state that a "high proportion" of the Oloroso sherry casks used were first-fill casks, and that both American and European oak casks have been used. Based on the smell and taste though, I'm going to guesstimate that the majority were refill American oak sherry casks. This bottling is from Batch 004, bottled in 2019, which was the first to be officially imported into Australia and was bottled at 57.8% ABV. It's non-chill filtered and naturally coloured, which also applies to the aforementioned 15-year old. This Batch Strength bottling is priced very well in Australia at $114 AUD, although it's only available from a certain large retailer which has directly imported the brand for its own distribution. That price does put this Tamdhu in line with the likes of the Glenfarclas and Glengoyne options mentioned above, and quite a way below the current pricing of the Aberlour and Glendronach examples - both of which are now sitting north of $150 AUD. The Tamdhu Batch Strength has been getting quite a bit of attention since its arrival, and it makes for a very interesting comparison between those other high strength 'sherry bomb' options. Time to get into it, then!

Tamdhu Batch Strength, Batch 004. NAS, 57.8%. Speyside, Scotland.

Bottled 2019, matured in ex-Oloroso sherry casks of both American and European oak. Non-chill filtered, natural colour.

Colour: Medium amber. 

Nose: Apricots & vanilla cream, with sweet nectarine and white peach in syrup on the side. Spun brown sugar toffee, white pepper, clove and ginger spice. A touch of orange zest, vanilla fudge and some fresh oak. A bit of nippy heat still there as well. 

Texture: Medium weight. Syrupy and sweet, still a bit of heat here too. 

Taste: More syrupy sweet stone fruit - nectarine, peach and apricot again. Fresh ginger chunks, vanilla cream and punchy spices - clove and pepper again plus some dried red chilli flakes here. Charred oak and that brown sugar toffee in the background. 

Finish: Medium length. More vanilla cream and charred oak, a nice touch of coffee grounds. Then spirit-y heat - even 3-ish months after opening. It does fade though, leaving more dried fruits now - currants and dried orange slices. Toffee again too. 

Score: 3 out of 5. 

Notes: It's a tasty whisky, but it's hot in places and bordering on harsh on occasion - particularly on the finish. And this bottle has been open for more than three months, with the level being below the shoulder almost the whole time, so it's had plenty of time to breathe and settle down. And it has calmed down a little, but there are still flashes of rawness at times. It actually feels like it's been rushed, which is a shame, but it's not uncommon in this style of high ABV non-age statement sherry cask / "sherry bomb" scene. Glenfarclas 105 in particular can be downright harsh & fire-y in the right batch - or rather in the wrong one! And even contemporary batches of A'Bunadh can be very hot at times. While it's at the top of the price scale, I still think Glendronach's NAS Cask Strength series are the pick of this bunch - but I'd have to suggest that you skip Batch 7, unfortunately it was the low point of the batches that I've tried to date. I'm yet to try its replacement in Batch 8, but from the reports I've seen things seem to have picked up again to where they left off with Batch 6, which is a relief. 

This Tamdhu is certainly a pleasant experience though, and the value for money is commendable - this bottle is around $40-50 AUD cheaper than the Glendronach I mentioned above. Luckily there's still plenty of flavour alongside those (temporary) flashes of spirit-y heat, with delicious sweet fruit, vanilla and bright sweetness showing through nicely. I still think it was mostly American oak casks in the mix (but all ex-Oloroso, remember). And the stone fruit on the nose and palate are the highlights of the show. If you're a fan of these high ABV, rough & ready sherry cask whiskies then this one won't disappoint - in fact it's sweeter and brighter than most of it's stablemates. 

Cheers!

Daftmill Winter 2007 Whisky Review!

My first review of Scotland's smallest whisky distillery, which is sadly impossible to find in Australia.

Daftmill is a relatively young distillery located in the upper reaches of the booming Lowlands whisky region, roughly an hour's drive north of Edinburgh near the town of Cupar, Fife. I say relatively young because the distillery was actually built in 2003 and began distilling in late 2005, which puts it at roughly the same age as Islay's Kilchoman. But Daftmill waited until mid-2018 to release their first single malt whisky, at 12-years of age - which is positively ancient for any distillery's first release! This tiny farm distillery is owned by two brothers, Fraser & Ian Cuthbert, who decided to start keeping a small amount of their barley crops aside for use in their own distillery. That makes this one of the few 'farm distilleries' in the world that is growing their own barley on site, although the barley is sent away to Alloa to be malted before the milling and mashing takes place back in Fife. This really is a tiny distillery, since they only produce for two three-month seasons per year, one in winter and one in summer, in order to fit in with the peak farming seasons. Combined with just two washbacks and two small copper pot stills, that gives the distillery a capacity of roughly 90,000 litres of spirit per year, with an actual production of around 20,000 litres - which makes even Edradour look massive in comparison! That's closer to the output of a distillery here in Australia, and is absolutely tiny in Scotland - to give you a frame of reference, Bruichladdich has a production capacity of around 1,000,000 litres of spirit per year, while monster Glenfiddich hits around 13-14,000,000 litres with plans afoot for further expansion. The seasonal production at Daftmill would've been much more common in the early days of distillation in Scotland, since the farm distilleries had to fit in with the farming seasons that provided the bulk of their livelihoods, and used the leftover grain from their fields in their spirits.  

This very small production has had an unfortunate effect on the  worldwide pricing and availability of Daftmill's whisky. Despite being distributed by relatively large company Berry Bros & Rudd, there is no Australian importer for this much-lauded Lowlands single malt, so the closest option at the moment is Whisky Galore in Christchurch, New Zealand, who receive tiny allocations directly from Britain, and to their credit also keep the pricing quite reasonable. Even if you are quick enough and lucky enough, when coupled with shipping across the Tasman and the ever-looming greed and malice of the Customs department here in Australia, that price does escalate, and the same goes for personal imports direct from the UK - again, if you're quick enough and lucky enough. Some liquor stores in the UK have kept their pricing in the rational realm, while some have taken advantage of the huge demand and tiny supply and have increased their profit margins. But we can't really blame those resellers, because the secondary market for Daftmill, in the European auction sites, eBay and both licensed and unlicensed flippers, is disgusting. While the original retail pricing in the UK ranges from roughly 85-125 pounds depending on the bottling and cask type, which is not cheap to begin with, on the secondary market you're looking at 200-450 pounds, and even beyond in many cases. The buy-in point for a vatted release (as in, not a single cask) at 46% in the recent auctions tends to be around 160 pounds, and that's not including the buyer's premium, handling/storage fees, shipping charges and local customs charges. That's a massive leap over the original pricing, and just goes to show what a massive demand there is for this tiny operation's single malt, and I can't see it changing any time soon. 

I must admit that having watched this unfold over the last couple of years, plus the lack of an Australian distributor, I had resigned myself to missing out on tasting any of Daftmill's whisky for the foreseeable future, if ever, and had become a little jaded about the whole situation. But thankfully, a good friend was lucky enough to nab a bottle from the aforementioned store in New Zealand, and he was also generous enough to share it! Daftmill's wash is fermented for 72-96 hours, which is quite a long period, followed by slow distillation in those small stills that promote reflux, and the resulting spirit is very much suited to the expected style of the Lowlands region, with a light, delicate, floral profile - despite being double-distilled rather than triple-distilled, comparisons have even been drawn to the mighty Rosebank - that seems to show a great deal of maturity at relatively young ages, which is a sign of both good quality spirit and the use of good quality casks. The release that we're looking at today is the Winter 2007 batch, meaning it was distilled somewhere in November-February 2007. This bottling was drawn from six first-fill ex-bourbon barrels, and was bottled in 2020 at 46% ABV, with an outturn of 1,685 bottles. Rather confusingly there are multiple releases of each batch, i.e. multiple different releases labelled Winter 2007, and there don't seem to be designated batch numbers, but on the back label you'll find the individual cask numbers that made up the vatting for that particular release. In this case they were 40-42/2007 and 44-46/2007, making this the Winter 2007 batch for Asia, which makes sense since the bottle was sourced from New Zealand. All of Daftmill's single malt is non-chill filtered and naturally coloured, and most releases to date have been matured in first-fill casks of either ex-bourbon or ex-sherry varieties. Shall we?

Daftmill Winter 2007 (Asia Release), bottled 2020, 46%. Fife, Scotland.

Distilled 2007, matured in first-fill bourbon barrels, bottled 2020. Cask numbers 40-42 & 44-46/2007. 1,685 bottles. Non-chill filtered, natural colour.

Colour: Gold.

Nose: Grassy, floral, sweet & sour. Fresh cut grass, touch of natural yoghurt, cream cheese & lemon juice. With more air the grass becomes dry and the yoghurt fades, leaving lemon icing / frosting, vanilla custard and a little charred oak. 

Texture: Rich, oily & buttery, but also delicate and floral. Very easy drinking. No heat at all. 

Taste: Dry grass and cream cheese again. Sweeter vanilla and less citrus here. Hints of sweet dried flowers (pot purri), light wood spices - sandalwood & cinnamon. Some buttery fresh oak and a touch of dried leafy herbs. 

Finish: Short-medium length, but tapers off quickly - there's the delicacy we were talking about! A touch of spirit here, but not at all in a hot or harsh way, rather a pleasantly light & floral spirit. Hints of that buttery oak and dry grass, a touch of honey and those dried sweet flowers again, followed by subtle vanilla and lemon cream cheese icing / frosting.

Score: 4 out of 5. 

Notes: Delicious stuff. It's aired nicely since that initial opening, with the cask influence fading nicely it's now showing a great balance. Is it "the new" Rosebank? I suppose I can see a couple of similarities if I squint, but they're two different spirits - double distilled vs. triple distilled, and old refill casks vs. young first-fill casks, plus different eras of production, so it's a moot point really. And they aren't competing with each other anyway, both have plenty of merit, and both do stand out among most of their Lowland brethren - some of which are nothing short of forgettable. Although this is my one and only experience with Daftmill so far, the quality is evident. Despite essentially being a part-time operation, they obviously aren't taking any shortcuts - although we could already tell that by the fact that they waited twelve years before releasing their first whisky! 

I can see the Daftmill hype being justified at the original retail pricing, but not at the ridiculous secondary / auction pricing. If you can get a bottle at the RRP, I would suggest grabbing it. But if you can't, don't pay the current rates at auction and retail or private flipping. Paying 2-3 times the original retail for anything that is essentially a current release is just crazy. Hopefully that situation will calm down over time - hopefully! But there's only one way that it will stop, and that's if people stop buying those bottles and stop paying those prices. Then the people that are buying these bottles and immediately putting them up for sale might actually have to keep them and drink them. Oh, the horror!

Cheers!