Caol Ila Natural Cask Strength (2008 bottling) Whisky Review!

A blast from the (recent) past Caol Ila that'll stand alongside any of the cask strength Islay monsters, and it'll give plenty of them a wake-up call!

If you ask me, the rock-solid workhorse distillery that is Caol Ila still doesn't get enough time in the limelight. While contributing to blended whiskies will always be its bread & butter, the single malts - or more often, new make spirits destined for warehouses on the mainland - that make the climb up the hill to the ferry terminal at Port Askaig have earned their spots amongst the Islay greats. But the lack of limelight is understandable, since most novice or casual whisky drinkers will have only seen the standard entry-level 12-year old official bottling from this distillery, or perhaps the Moscatel wine-finished Distiller's Edition if they've taken a closer look at the right shelf. When a whisky drinker is looking to step up in ABV and is searching for a more natural presentation - as in non-chill filtered and naturally coloured - and Caol Ila takes their fancy, they turn to the independent bottlers. And that's finally where they're spoiled for choice. Cask strength bottlings from the likes of Gordon & MacPhail, Elements of Islay, Port Askaig (albeit undisclosed), Signatory Vintage, Adelphi and North Star are well worth hunting down. But what if you want to stay with official bottlings from the distillery owners, Diageo, and you still want a higher strength, bigger texture and more natural presentation? Then you're almost out of luck. In fact, unless you're lucky enough to visit the distillery itself in the Inner Hebrides (and also get your timing right) so you can lay your hands on a Distillery Exclusive or Feis Ile bottling, or can pay enough to get one at secondary auction, then you're completely out of luck. But that wasn't always the case...

Back when I was still a newcomer myself, I spotted a bottle of Caol Ila that had been sitting on Brisbane bar Cobbler's shelf for quite some time. On a previous visit I had enjoyed my first encounter with Laphroaig 10 Cask Strength, Batch 003 or 004 from memory, and I was now tossing up between another dram of that massive whisky, or trying this stranger of a bottle that had caught my eye. I knew of Caol Ila, but like many future whisky geeks at that stage I had only tried the 12-year old and the Distiller's Edition, so I was curious to see what Caol Ila could do at a higher strength and a younger age. This bottle didn't have an age statement, but it did have a number on the label that made me look twice - 61.6% ABV. After the bottle was pulled down from the shelf, the subtle, nondescript presentation didn't tell me much about what was coming - aside from three words, printed in small red font, diagonally across the front label: Natural Cask Strength. The rest of that experience has now been lost in the blur of time and subsequent drams, but that bottle had left an impression, and it held up perfectly well against the aforementioned Laphroaig. I later stumbled on to a very early YouTube review of that same whisky from the legendary Ralfy, who scored it very highly. And that probably would've been the end of the story, had I not come across a bottle on website The Odd Whisky Coy years later, for sale at a very reasonable price. So I snapped it up, and then waited to see if it could live up to that hazy but favourable memory. Spoiler alert: it does, and then some. And now the time has come for this bottle to get the time in the limelight that it deserves!

These non-age statement (NAS) Natural Cask Strength bottlings of Caol Ila have long been discontinued, unfortunately, and they haven't been replaced - leaving a gaping hole in the distillery's official line-up. The bottling that I'm reviewing seems to have been the last batch, which was bottled way back in 2008. From my admittedly brief research, there seem to have been quite a few different batches, somewhere around eight in fact, dating back to somewhere around 2004. Each was bottled at a different ABV, and none had any cask details on the labels - but we can assume they were matured in refill casks, probably of the American oak ex-bourbon hogshead variety, since that tends to be the preferred method for these Diageo bottlings - but that's no bad thing, not at all! So, an NAS - but young-ish - Caol Ila, bottled at a hefty cask strength of 61.6%, and most likely matured in refill casks. Despite there being no such declaration on the packaging or label, this is most definitely non-chill filtered and naturally coloured. These bottlings seem to have had a short lifespan, sadly, and this is not something that you're likely to ever see on the shelves at your regular whisky bar or bottle shop. In fact they're also scarce on the usual European auction websites, which is saying something. How did I bring myself to open such a special find and such a rarity, you ask? Well, why not! I do sometimes struggle to open some bottles, particularly those that I know I won't be able to replace, but the desire & curiosity always tend to get the better of me. So here we are!

Caol Ila Natural Cask Strength, NAS, 61.6%. Islay, Scotland.
Bottled 2008, and discontinued the same year. Presumably matured in refill casks, non-chill filtered and natural colour.

Colour: Very pale gold.

Nose: Grassy, sweet (from spirit, not cask) and coastal. Very Caol Ila. Salty smoked BBQ pork with extra salt, green grassy malt, lemon pepper and smoked red chilli flakes (chipotle). Hints of crisp red apple, dry aniseed (fennel?) and sweet shellfish. 

Texture: Medium-heavy weight. Oily & rich. A little heat, but I wouldn't call it rough or harsh - it is 61.6% to be fair! 

Taste: Clean cooking oil, lemon pepper and smoked chilli flakes again. Lovely big chunky peat that alternates between spicy, dry & earthy and sweet & oily peat. Dry aniseed, fruit syrup sweetness along with that BBQ smoked meat. Very slight flashes of dry honey and subtle floral vanilla around the edges. 

Finish: Medium-long length. Grassy malt, oily sweet peat, dry aniseed and smoked pork. Sea salt, a slight touch of of roasted root vegetables, smoked chilli flakes and lemon zest infused in that clean cooking oil. 

Score: 4 out of 5. 

Notes: Delicious. Why did they discontinue this series?? It's just not fair! I imagine it was due to pressure on the blending stocks at the time, so they had to slim down the range - and that slimming left us with just two core range official bottlings, remember. Which is a shame. If you've not had the pleasure, a cask strength refill cask Caol Ila is something like the lovechild of a Lagavulin 12-year old and a Port Charlotte 10-year old. The oily, sweet, peaty & coastal notes tying in with the BBQ smoked meat and smoked chilli. All very Islay, and all very Caol Ila. That grassy malt, coastal saltiness, smoked pork and and spirit-led sweetness are the hallmarks of a good example of what this distillery can do when it's allowed to shine. It's a rounder, richer example than many of the independent bottlings that I've come across, but without any overt cask influence - which is no bad thing at all. 

This cask strength Caol Ila absolutely belongs on the upper shelves with the Islay heavyweights, and - discounting the unpeated releases - it's a bit of a shame that the same spot now goes to independent bottlers, when this and other official bottlings (e.g. the Feis Ile and Distillery Exclusive releases) clearly shows that the distillery's owners can easily do just as well. Let's hope that Diageo reconsider at some point in the future and fill that gap in this great distillery's official offerings. Wouldn't it be great to see a peated cask strength Caol Ila sitting in the Special Releases line-up, alongside the Lagavulin and Talisker examples that are kicking so many goals lately. We can only hope!

Cheers!

Bowmore 10 Year Old Devil's Cask Inspired Whisky Review!

A travel-exclusive Bowmore that is 'inspired by' the legendary & dearly-departed Devil's Casks series that were all fully-matured in sherry casks. But make no mistake, this is not a Devil's Cask Bowmore. 

Maybe they just ran out of names for ideas? But a cynic might infer that they're trying to "cash in" on the success of the dearly-departed Devil's Cask bottlings by using the name to sell more of this new, rather different whisky - and no doubt confusing plenty of naïve duty-free buyers in the process. The real Devil's Cask bottlings, of which there were three, were all cask strength Bowmores that were fully-matured in sherry casks. The first two were very reasonably priced on release, were age-stated at 10-years, and were fully-matured in first-fill Oloroso sherry casks, while the third release lost the age statement and was matured in both Oloroso and PX sherry casks, while also bringing a massive price increase - roughly double that of the first two releases. I've only had the privilege of tasting the second release in the series, which I reviewed here, but it's still one of my absolute favourite Bowmore official bottlings that I've tasted to date. Although there have also been quite a few independent bottlings that have equalled or even beaten it. It's not all about the sherry bombs either, with plenty of cask strength ex-bourbon cask bottlings proving to be very enjoyable - particularly the Tempest series of bottlings that are also discontinued. 

For some distilleries, travel retail a.k.a duty free seems to be something of a dumping ground for average stock in fancy packaging. There's a distinct lack of age statements, decent bottling strengths and natural presentation in this market, and the pricing is no longer as reasonable as it once was. Some distilleries do treat it differently though, with Bruichladdich coming to mind, and also Bowmore's sister distillery Laphroaig - aside from their 40% ABV 1-litre offerings which in my experience are to be avoided. On the one hand, this "Devil's Cask Inspired" bottling has a few points in it's favour: firstly, the age statement has returned at 10-years, and it has been bottled at 46% ABV - which if memory serves is actually a first for Bowmore. Those two boxes are not often ticked in the 'travel retail' / duty-free sector, where apart from a few exceptions most offerings are missing many of the details that more discerning whisky buyers look for. But they've stopped short of officially stating that this bottling is non-chill filtered and colouring isn't mentioned, so we can't be sure on either of those fronts. It is quite reasonably priced, particularly in the 1-litre bottle, and thanks to the worldwide situation at the moment it's accessible in normal retail, forgoing the need to visit an international airport that by now must resemble a filmset for your typical post-apocalyptic efforts from Hollywood. On the other hand, though, it's matured in a combination of Oloroso sherry casks and red wine casks and is obviously not cask strength, so this is going to be a very different experience to what supposedly 'inspired' it. Personally I've not been blown away by the three-or-four examples of red wine cask-matured/finished Bowmores that I've tasted, even at cask strength. They just don't seem to shine like their ex-bourbon and ex-sherry counterparts, which can be truly excellent- especially when the Bowmore tropical fruitiness is still evident. But I'm always happy to be proven wrong!

Wine cask Islay whiskies can be excellent though - look at Bruichladdich's efforts for example, or even those from Ardbeg e.g. the Grooves Committee Release and to a lesser extent the recent Blaaack Committee Release. Bruichladdich are of course the most prolific users of wine casks on the island, and have been since their re-opening almost 20 years ago. So they really do know how to make the most of them, and that applies to all three single malts that they produce - unpeated, heavily peated and super-heavily peated. Bowmore though uses a light-to-medium peating level, and is very different in profile to the whiskies made on the opposite side of Loch Indaal. What's interesting here with this 'Devil's Cask Inspired' Bowmore is that it's not a wine cask finish, it's a marriage of fully-matured wine and Oloroso sherry casks. The type of wine that those casks previously held isn't mentioned either, but we can safely assume that they were red wine casks. Can we have a bit more information please Bowmore? Three simple details would change this whisky in the eyes of the whisky nerds: is it chill filtered, is it artificially coloured, and what type of wine did those wine casks hold. It doesn't seem that difficult to me, you've done these things before with other expressions, and your sister distillery (Laphroaig) already ticks these boxes semi-regularly. Without this sort of information and a bit more differentiation this whisky will just blend in with the myriad of other vaguely-described travel exclusive whiskies that are sitting on the shelves. Which seems to be exactly what has happened, since this is still widely available (present international travel situations notwithstanding) and is now spilling over into regular retail. But let's give this Bowmore the benefit of the doubt, and see what sort of devil we're dealing with!

Bowmore 'Devil's Cask Inspired', 10-years old, 46%. Islay, Scotland.

Matured in Oloroso sherry and (presumably red) wine casks. Unknown chill filtration or colouring. Travel retail exclusive. 

Colour: Bronze / copper. Possibly (probably) artificially boosted. 

Nose: Seems a little muted and muddled. Dark & dank red grape skins, a few sweet sultanas and currants, and one cherry. Some red wine tannins and a slight tinge of sea salt. Slightly meaty (game meats), with caramel, cinnamon and oak. Very slight hint of tropical fruit out in the ether. 

Texture: Light-medium weight. Seems a little flat & muted again. Slight touch of heat but it's subtle.

Taste: More caramel and cinnamon, some brown sugar and ground black pepper too. A couple of raisins & currants again, drying red grape skins and dried orange slices. Wine tannins again too but they're more subdued here. Subtle hints of dried mango and a touch of earthy peat.  

Finish: Short length. Artificial caramel syrup, slight grape must and wine tannins. Slight hints of dates, salt and tropical fruit in the background, and a touch of powdery red apple. But it's that artificial caramel note that hangs around. 

Score: 2 out of 5. 

Notes: It would've scored higher without that dull caramel note that seems to flatten and mute everything else. Is it coming from excessive e150 colouring? I can't say, but it wouldn't surprise me. And it's not something I remember finding in many Bowmores - and certainly not in the Devils Cask series. There are glimpses of Bowmore's tropical fruit, earthy powdery peat and sea salt here, but they're fleeting glimpses and if you blink you'll probably miss them. Which is a shame. I'd actually recommend reaching for the regular 15-year old Bowmore (previously known as 'Darkest', unfortunately) instead, despite it being bottled at a lower strength. And yes, even with the 1-litre travel retail bottle and reasonable pricing taken into account. Kudos must be given for the 46% bottling strength though, let's hope the distillery makes that a trend! 

Based on the smell & taste I can't help but feel like the wine casks have either been too assertive or too numerous - or both - in this one, and the presumed artificial colouring and chill filtration haven't helped either. Disclaimer though, I do tend to compare all sherry cask Bowmores to both the second Devil's Cask bottling and Elements of Islay Bw7 - one of my all-time favourite Bowmores - and that's obviously not a fair fight. Those two delicious drams are some of the best examples of what this distillery can do, and they're very, very distant cousins to this 'inspired' Devil. 

Cheers!

Ardbeg 21 Year Old Whisky Review, plus a bonus!

The 2016 bottling of 21-year old Ardbeg that was quite ground-breaking at the time, followed a bonus review of an independent bottling of Ardbeg from the same era!

As mentioned in my recent review of Airigh Nam Beist, Ardbeg was going through a rough time in the early-mid 1990s. The distillery had only re-opened in 1989 after spending eight years with the doors closed, and then rather than being given the attention it deserved it was relegated to just three months of production per year - which continued right up until its final (and thankfully much shorter) closure in 1996. Under the ownership of Allied Distillers at the time, Ardbeg was operated by a small crew - including recently retired distillery manager Mickey Heads - that would sporadically make the short trip up the road from said company's other Islay distillery, Laphroaig. And while that crew don't seem to have "phoned it in" during those three-month periods, for the remainder of each of those years the distillery was largely neglected in all other areas, and fell in to a serious state of disrepair. This period of low production and relative neglect, coupled with the willingness of the then-owners to sell casks and spirit to independent bottlers and blenders, put pressure on the existing stocks when the distillery was rescued by Glenmorangie in 1997. Which meant that the remaining stock then had to be carefully managed following their purchase, and any special bottlings needed to avoid causing any detriment to the distillery's core releases before they made it across the line. Just over a decade later when the news came that the 1990-distilled Airigh Nam Beist was discontinued and was being replaced by the younger Corryvreckan, many lamented that the days of older, age statement Ardbegs were over. But they were wrong!

Back in mid-2016, the year after the distillery's 200th anniversary, Ardbeg made waves by suddenly releasing an older whisky with an age statement. But it was not a 15-to-18-year old as you might reasonably expect given the distillery's timeline. It was a 21-year old, which meant that the casks were laid down circa 1993-1994, when the distillery was still under Allied ownership and was only producing spirit for three months of the year. That also means that it was produced in the retired pot still pictured above, which now sits in the carpark in front of the distillery's visitor's centre! This 21-year old Ardbeg was fully-matured in 200-litre ex-bourbon barrels - so not larger re-coopered hogsheads, but presumably also not first-fill casks given the age - and was non-chill filtered and naturally coloured, with a relatively small number of 8,268 bottles released. The casks for this release were actually bought back from Chivas Bros., who had purchased them during the Allied era with the intention of using them in blended whiskies - which is another factor which leads me to believe they were refill casks. This is not a new phenomenon, many distilleries have 'bought back' casks from independent bottlers and blenders during the current 'whisky boom' to sell as official bottlings. Nobody would've expected this whisky to be a cheap proposition when it was released, but it did sting when the retail price of $500 AUD hit home. That seems more reasonable here in 2021, but five years ago it was still a bit of a shock - in part because it was bottled at 46% ABV rather than cask strength. But nobody should've expected the distillery to bottle this at it's full cask strength - this was their oldest release in a very long time, so there had to be plenty of bottles to go around. And don't forget that a higher bottling strength would've incurred a higher price! 

This 21-year old Ardbeg ended up heralding the arrival of the later "Twenty Something" series of official bottlings, of which there were two; a 23-year old released in 2017 and bottled at 46.3%, and a 22-year old released in 2018 and bottled at 46.4%. Both of those ended up being priced significantly higher than the 21-year old, both in the range of $750-800 at the time of release, but in fairness there were significantly fewer bottles released in both cases, and in the case of the 23-year old there were a few sherry casks added to the mix which would've added to the cost. I'm yet to try either of those myself, and the chances are getting lower with each passing year, but by all reports they are very good whiskies - albeit also expensive, particularly now on the secondary market. I did however have the chance to try a 15ml of this 21-year old when it was first released at Brisbane whisky bar The Gresham, and remember it fondly - so I'm very much looking forward to finally taking a closer look four years later! Older Ardbegs are very special things, with a stark difference between the whiskies produced in this era and the more modern style that was made under the current ownership. Generally, any peated whisky will lose some of that peatiness over its period of maturation, particularly once the age extends past the early-mid teens - although the extent to which that occurs does depend on the casks that are used, and a myriad of other factors. The sample for this review came from a generous donour, who also provided the sample for the bonus review that is coming later in this post. But first things first!

Ardbeg 21-year old, 46%. Islay, Scotland.

Distilled 1993-1994, matured in 200-litre ex-bourbon casks (presumably not first-fill), bottled 2016. Non-chill filtered, natural colour. 8,268 bottles. 

Colour: Pale gold. 

Nose: Tarry and lightly coastal, but also refined. Tar, old cooking grease, fatty smoked bacon and sweet freeze-dried strawberries. Dry, earthy peat, dried lemon slices and dry saltwater-washed old ropes. A touch of oily smoked fish and black pepper. Touches of green melon and apple around the edges too. 

Texture: Medium weight, peaty and coastal but still refined and somehow even clean. No heat. 

Taste: Sweet, juicy tropical fruit on entry, then a lovely wave of earthy, deep peat and tar immediately moves in over the top. The peat does fade quite quickly though. Cracked black pepper, fatty bacon and freeze-dried strawberries again. A touch of vanilla, heading towards creamy but stops in its tracks. Some clean, lemon-y olive oil as well. 

Finish: Long length. Touch of aniseed, drying black pepper and fatty smoked bacon rinds. The tar and old saltwater-washed ropes still there as well. Flashes of tropical fruit in the background. 

Score: 4 out of 5. Not miles from a 4.5 though. 

Notes: Delicious Ardbeg! For something that was presumably matured on the mainland, the tar, old ropes and coastal salt are still very much there. The peat is still there too, it hasn't lost too much of it's initial power, but it has lost it's endurance - the peatiness doesn't hang around long. The pepper and tar do though, and in-all-all it's quite a deep, earthy and coastal example with a more subtle sweetness compared to the modern Ardbegs. The fruit is more in the background too. I would definitely say that they were refill casks, but that's no bad thing by any means - they've done their job perfectly well. This is a starkly different whisky to Airigh Nam Beist, and of course also the younger stuff that was distilled under the new owners. Which does beg the question, they've had control of the distillery for roughly 23-years now, so when are we going to see an older age-stated Ardbeg that was distilled under Glenmorangie / LVMH? Hopefully it won't be too far away. Even the forthcoming 25-year old pre-dates the purchase of the distillery, which is a surprising move. Surely there can't be much of that older stock left!

Had I had the foresight (and the funds) to buy a bottle of this 21-year old at the retail pricing when it was available, I would certainly not have been disappointed. It's a great example of an older Islay whisky that has not lost any of it's character, or any of it's spirit - pun intended!

Now, on to the bonus review! This is an independent bottling of Ardbeg from Gordon & MacPhail, that was distilled in 1996 and bottled in 2005. But unlike many of the "G&M" Connoisseurs Choice Ardbeg bottlings from this era - of which there are many, the vast majority of which were vattings that were bottled at 40-43%, this is a single cask that has been bottled at 46%! So it was distilled roughly one year after the 21-year old official bottling that we've just looked at, but it was bottled at just nine years of age, way back in 2005. 1996 was the year that the distillery was once again closed, until it was purchased & rescued by Glenmorangie around a year later. Since the new owners had a very different approach to the distillery and arguably had more respect for it's output, casks of Ardbeg then became much harder for the independent bottlers and blenders to source. This one, cask number #914, was apparently bottled for French whisky store La Maison Du Whisky, which is one of the most highly-regarded specialist shops in Europe. This is actually the first of these G&M Ardbegs that I have seen bottled at 46%, and it's the only one that I've seen presented in this "dumpy" shaped bottle, but Whiskybase (the source for the below image) tells me there were actually a handful of examples bottled in the same era for various recipients. Regardless, don't plan on walking into your local bottle shop and finding one sitting on the shelf. The bottle that this sample came from was found at auction in Europe by the same generous friend that shared the 21-year old, and this one was quite reasonably priced considering the scarcity. Let's see how it compares to it's much older officially bottled cousin, shall we?

 

Gordon & MacPhail Ardbeg 1996, bottled 2005. 46%. Islay (via Elgin), Scotland.

Single ex-bourbon cask #914, 8-9 years of age, bottled for La Maison Du Whisky. Presumed natural colour & non-chill filtered. 

Colour: Pale white wine. Far paler than it appears in the above photo. 

Nose: Richer & fuller, not as passive as the 21-year old, but still quite refined and gentle. Fruitier too, with lots of fresh apple skins and some under-ripe green melon. Sweet lemon zest and a spicy, soft & gentle peat. No tar or pepper on the nose in this one, a touch of the fatty bacon though. 

Texture: Medium weight. Creamy, sweeter and softer. Much less coastal and lighter too. No heat again.

Taste: Creamy vanilla, a little green peppercorn, green melon again and a floral, almost soapy sweetness around the edges. A touch of tar, but it's subtle, and a nice smoky, gristy malted barley. 

Finish: Short-medium length. Cleaner and more subtle & refined, which from what I've tasted is typical of the G&M whiskies that were bottled in this era. A touch of black pepper here, a little dry hessian sacking / bung cloth, lemon juice, and the apple skins and green melon again. 

Score: 3.5 out of 5. 

Notes: Cleaner, softer and sweeter, but also more fruity, less peaty and less coastal. Less recognisable as a "typical Ardbeg" too, but that's to be expected in a younger bottling from this era. And the G&M bottlings, while delicious of course (don't get me wrong!) are always more gentle, more refined and subtle, in my experience at least. But it needs to be said that this young bottling was freshly-opened on the day that the sample bottle was filled, and it had been cooped up in the bottle for 14-or so years. So while I gave it over 15-minutes in the glass before touching it, as I always do, it's certainly possible that the bottle will have more to offer given more time after the initial opening. And that's not just me angling for another taster, either!

Cheers!

Springbank 21 Year Old (2018) Whisky Review!

Starting 2021 with a bang! The oldest Springbank that I've tasted to date, and 70% of it has been fully-matured in rum casks. This should be fun!

Sitting at the upper end of this legendary Campbeltown distillery's core range, Springbank 21 tends to be very difficult to find on Australian shelves at regular retail prices. In fact Springbank in general is as well, with the exception of the 10-year old, since shipments are sporadic and few & far between, and we just don't get enough stock - not helped this year by Covid, of course. A newly arrived batch of the 12-year old Cask Strength can be expected to last a couple of days online, with a few slower-to-react physical bottle shops taking a little longer - usually another couple of days! And the 21-year old is a slower yet similar story, despite the serious price point: you're looking at $450-500 AUD, and this is not a cask strength or single cask bottling. There are 3,000-4,000 bottles released with each annual batch, although a tiny proportion of those ever make it to Australia, and they're always bottled at 46%. Each batch varies in their cask make-ups, with the 2018 batch that I'm reviewing today coming from 70% rum casks and 30% first-fill bourbon casks (all fully-matured and married together), while the 2019 was 45% port casks and 55% rum casks, and the 2020 which is yet to make it to Australia is a more complicated mix of bourbon, rum, sherry and port casks. This is the first example of Springbank 21 that I've tasted, but from all reports quality is generally very high. Prior to this the oldest Springbank official bottling that I've tasted was the regular 18-year old, also bottled at 46%, which while again high quality is also quite an expensive proposition here at around $250-280. It also tends to stick to conventional cask recipes, usually a mix of sherry & bourbon casks. There is also a 25-year old Springbank in the range, again bottled at 46% and usually released in annual batches (but all bets are off thanks to Covid), and you'll need to save up around $800-900 for that privilege. 

Yes, those are some high prices compared to the younger limited releases from the same distillery, and when not at cask strength (nothing wrong with 46%, though), but the rarity factor is quite high with these, and demand for older Springbank bottlings is always very high. And that difference merely shows what a good deal the distillery's limited bottlings tend to be at their initial retail pricing - and I'm including both the un-peated and triple-distilled Hazelburn and heavily-peated and double-distilled Longrow there. As you can see from the photo above, only 10% of the distillery's already-small annual production goes to each of these other spirits, with the remaining 80% going to the namesake Springbank spirit, which is lightly-peated and 2.5-times distilled. The 2.5-times comes from a complicated distillation regimen where (in layman's terms) some of the low wines that result from the first distillation are combined with some of the feints from the second distillation, and the resulting liquid is distilled a third time. Adding to the complexity of this regimen is the fact that the first of the distillery's three stills is direct-fired, and the second uses a worm tub condenser for less copper contact and a heavier, oilier spirit. As a quick side note, the heavily-peated and double-distilled Longrow spirit uses only these two stills, which is partly why it can be so pungent and powerful (and delicious) even in comparison to the Springbank spirit; which is hardly a wallflower whisky in itself!

Both of J&A Mitchell's distilleries (Springbank and Glengyle, which produces Kilkerran single malts) are surging in popularity these days, and the 2020 factor has not helped them keep up - we can expect more shortages and delays in the near future thanks to this small, privately-owned distillery being shut down for a large chunk of the year. Time will tell what sort of a dent that has made, and many other distilleries were in the same boat. In fact many were worse off, and plenty are not out of the woods yet. So, a 2018 bottling of Springbank 21-year old, 70% matured in rum casks and 30% in ex-bourbon casks (matured separately and vatted/married together), with a total of 3,700 bottles released circa March 2018. Naturally it's non-chill filtered and naturally coloured, as is the case with all single malts from the distillery. 21 years is quite the time capsule really (roughly back to 1996-97 in this case), although unlike most distilleries not much will have changed at Springbank over those two decades. Don't forget that this is one of very few malt whisky distilleries in the world that floor malts 100% of their barley on-site, and also one of the few in Scotland that bottles on-site. They also floor malt the barley that is put to use a couple of hundred metres up the road at Glengyle, and they also bottle both the Kilkerran single malts and also most of the independent bottlings from Cadenhead's at Springbank. Quite the busy little operation, that bottling hall! The sample for this review came from a generous mate who stumbled across a bargain-priced bottle recently, at a store that obviously did not realise what they had! Let's see how it goes.

Springbank 21-year old, 2018 bottling, 46%. Campbeltown, Scotland.

Matured in 70% rum casks and 30% ex-bourbon casks. 3,700 bottles released circa March 2018. Non-chill filtered, natural colour. 

Colour: Gold.

Nose: Soft, sweet & dusty. Demerara sugar (coffee crystals / natural sugar crystals), fresh red apples and a little spearmint. Tropical fruit - banana and melon, a little pineapple, and some vanilla. Almonds, black pepper and that Springbank dusty, dank dunnage warehouse note (a.k.a. funk!) coming through. A nice chalky minerality too, like warm baked salt. 

Texture: Light-medium weight, but absolutely no shortage of character or flavour. Silky, no spirit-y heat at all. 

Taste: Black pepper & sweet tropical fruit, that lovely baked salt minerality. A little savoury honey, some marzipan and a soft earthy peat. The demerara sugar again (not white sugar and not quite brown sugar) and that lovely farmyard-y dunnage note. 

Finish: Long length. Sweet vanilla, fruit syrup, and that delicious drying salty, mineral, oily & damp stone, Campbeltown loveliness. A little oak towards the end which is verging on bitter, but it's balanced and kept in check by everything else. 

Score: 4 out of 5. 

Notes: Very delicious stuff this! As usual with Springbank, there's loads of character and flavour on offer. This is a deep & complex whisky that also shows a slightly softer, sweeter and more refined side in this older example. It's relatively gentle and soft, yet very complex and entertaining - this 21 does not sit still either, it's constantly changing and keeps things interesting. I don't even wish it was bottled at a higher strength, I'd say it's spot-on at 46% - although I must admit I still wouldn't turn my nose up at a cask strength version!

The rum casks do show themselves here, but they've worked in harmony with both the bourbon casks and the spirit itself - which was not the case with 2019's 15-year old Rum Cask release if you ask me - that one was a little muted by the over-assertive rum casks. But in this case everything has worked very well together, and the result is greater than the sum of it's parts. Expensive, yes, but you do get what you pay for!

Cheers!