Tag Archives: 20cl

Mortlach 2006 (Càrn Mòr c.6-year-old)

Bought: Morrison & Mackay, 21st June 2017

Ratings:
81/100 – Whiskybase (from 1 member vote)
6/10 – Whisky Loving

This Mortlach 2006, 20cl, forms part of the Càrn Mòr Vintage Collection produced by the Scottish Liqueur Centre (now Morrison & Mackay) between 2009 and 2012. Distilled in 2006 and bottled in 2012 (c.6yo), it was the second 20cl to represent the year of 2006. The first was a Glentauchers issued in 2009. Mortlach 2006 is a limited edition of 720, cask 9, non-chill filtered, no added colour and 46%.

Although this small bottle of Mortlach came out in 2012 it’s still available on the Morrison & Mackay website for a mere £10. It’s also being sold at Robert Graham and Whisky Castle so it goes to show how long 720 bottles can sometimes take to sell. Perhaps it’s the presentation, 20cl size, or coming from a less known independent bottler that’s kept it lingering on the shelves for so long.

Mortlach has its fans so why hasn’t this bottle sold out? I strongly suspect it’s because of its light colour, which screams ‘refill cask’. What makes Mortlach delightful is spending time in a first-fill sherry cask, soaking up all those wonderful fruity juices and acquiring a beautifully rounded flavour. Seeing a light Mortlach doesn’t necessarily mean it’s bad, you just know it’s not going to be as good as it can be.

81/100 on Whiskybase from one member is a good score but 6/10 from Whisky Loving seems rather low. They say of the palate “rough notes. Citrus and some orchard fruits. Fruity and sweet. Vanilla and almost floral notes”. They also mentioned vanilla on the nose, which makes me slightly concerned that it comes from an ex-bourbon barrel. My book on distilleries, published in 2010, makes no mention of ‘vanilla’ in the house style of Mortlach and says they exclusively use ex-sherry casks. But there have been some ex-bourbon releases recently from independent bottlers that suggest Mortlach are now mixing their barrels. It’s a shame the cask type used for this Mortlach 2006 wasn’t disclosed but it is what it is. For me it’s my 24th and final bottle to complete the Càrn Mòr Vintage Collection. Phew!

Speyside 1999 (Càrn Mòr c.13-year-old)

Bought: Morrison & Mackay, 21st June 2017

Ratings:
None as yet but listed on Whiskybase here.

This Speyside 1999 20cl forms part of the Càrn Mòr Vintage Collection produced by the Scottish Liqueur Centre (now Morrison & Mackay) between 2009 and 2012. Distilled in 1999 and bottled in 2012 (c.13yo) it was the second 20cl to represent the year of 1999. The first was a Craigellachie issued in 2009. Speyside 1999 is a limited edition of 720, cask 323, non-chill filtered, no added colour and 46%.

Although this quarter bottle was released as long ago as 2012 it’s still available for £14 from the Morrison & Mackay (M&M) website as I write this post 5 years later. Why? Possibly because not many people know about M&M or the existence of their online shop but mostly because the Speyside distillery is rather boring. The Càrn Mòr Vintage Collection releases of Macallan and Highland Park are long gone but this Speyside 20cl lingers on, unloved and not even worthy of a review on Whiskybase! But a similar 1999 to 2012 bottling by Douglas McGibbon scores 78/100, which is what I’d expect for this Càrn Mòr 20cl.

The Speyside distillery we know today is the second to bear the name. The first opened in 1895 but only lasted a decade before being closed and eventually demolished. The second incarnation began life in 1956 but spirit didn’t start being produced until 1990 some 34 years later. It wasn’t until we reached a new millennium that the first 10-year-old was released in 2001. The house style is medium-bodied, medium-sweet, malt, nutty, fruity and floral.

Glen Moray 1992 (Càrn Mòr c.20-year-old)

Bought: Morrison & Mackay, 21st June 2017

Ratings:
80/100 – Whiskybase (from 1 member vote)

Glen Moray 1992 forms part of the Càrn Mòr Vintage Collection produced by the Scottish Liqueur Centre (now Morrison & Mackay) between 2009 and 2012. Distilled in 1992 and bottled in 2012, this c.20yo was the second 20cl to represent the year of 1992. The first was a Glenallachie issued in 2009. The Glen Moray 1992 is a limited edition of 480, cask PP001, non-chill filtered, no added colour and 46%.

80/100 on Whiskybase is a good score albeit from only one vote. This Glen Moray is finished in a port cask, which makes it quite unique (more so in 2012). Of the 640 releases of Glen Moray listed on Whiskybase only 6 of them have a port cask finish (although some may be missing the word “port” in their title). The earliest release is from 2009, which is a 14yo cask strength scoring 90.5/100. A distillery bottled 17yo ‘port wood finish’ at 40% scores 87.2/100 from 7 votes, which is an excellent score. I’ve got a good feeling that when more votes come in for my 20yo at 46% they will be greater than 80/100 rather than less. It seems that a Glen Moray with a bit of age goes nicely with some port maturation.

In 2018 I intend to visit the Glen Moray distillery, which is within easy walking distance of Elgin town centre. Elgin is also where the Gordon & MacPhail shop is situated so I’d better make sure I take a full wallet! Glen Moray have a ‘bottle your own’ option at the distillery shop, which is not to be missed. In recent years they’ve been quite experimental with their cask finishes. Not only port and chardonnay but also cider, which sounds intriguing!

Spey ‘Chairman’s Choice’

Bought: Aberdeen Whisky Shop, 27th March 2017

Ratings:
77/100 – Whisky Bible 2017
79.68/100 – Whiskybase (average from 30 member votes)

You have to give the Speyside Distillery credit for trying. I was very impressed with the presentation of the Spey Tenné and now the Chairman’s Choice brings a very stylish box into the mix AND a scroll! Although I only bought a 20cl the salesman at the Aberdeen Whisky Shop almost convinced me to get the full 70cl based on the packaging alone. If I were buying it as a gift for an occasional drinker with a Speyside preference I would have gone for it, especially at £60. But for drinking something different with my brother I knew the 20cl would suffice. It’s good whisky but not scroll-worthy whisky.

Scoring 77/100 in Jim Murray’s Whisky Bible classifies this Speyside Distillery NAS (non-age statement) as “average, and usually pleased but sometimes flawed”. Mr Murray’s review is incredibly brief and consists of “Their Chairman’s choice, maybe. But not mine”. Well that was very informative wasn’t it!

Scoring nearly 80/100 on Whiskybase is a reasonably good mark but nothing special. Comments include “the nose left a bit to be desired, but the palate was okay. Nevertheless, this Spey is a bit of a disappointment”, “not a bad whisky but not really good either” and “a clean and well crafted single malt with a gorgeous nose and a delicate sweet and fruity palate. Easy to drink, not really complex with a relatively one-dimensional finish. A delicate all-day dram.”

Here’s Horst Luening of Whisky.com with his thoughts about the Spey Chairman’s Choice (May 2015):

Bruichladdich ‘The Classic Laddie Scottish Barley’

Bought: Auriol Wines, 8th August 2016

Ratings:
78.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2016
89/100 – Whisky Bitch (video review below)
83.41/100 – Whiskybase (average from 19 member votes)

This 20cl version of the Classic Laddie was an impulse buy because you can’t go wrong with Bruichladdich – or can you? Jim Murray in his Whisky Bible isn’t impressed and 78.5/100 classifying this dram as “average and usually pleasant though sometimes flawed”. 83.41/100 on Whiskybase might seem good but those members that leave comments have scores ranging from 70/100 to 85/100 so it seems it’s not to everyone’s taste. At least the Whisky Bitch likes it so it has one fan and counting.

Jim Murray says “despite some obviously complex and promising moves, the usual infiltration of sub-standard casks has undone the good of the local barley.” And summarises with “if you manage to tune out the off-notes, some sublime moments can still be had.”

There are no comments in English on Whiskybase but a member from the Czech Republic says (translated) “very tough and sharp” and “when compared with Port Charlotte this is a flop”. The 70cl version scores slightly less than the 20cl with 82.71/100 and again none of the comments are in English. Perhaps this bottling was mostly for the mainland Europe market. Nevertheless, 83.4/100 is a very good mark so clearly a lot of silent Whiskybase voters like it.

Here’s the Whisky Bitch with her review on You Tube (Dec 2014):

bruichladdich-the-classic-laddie-scottish-barley-nas-20cl

Big Peat – 20cl

Bought: Master of Malt, 3rd August 2016

Ratings:
96/100 – Whisky Bible 2011
8.5/100 – Jo from Whisky Wednesday (video below)
84.83/100 – Whiskybase (average from 25 member votes)

Big Peat first appeared in the Whisky Bible in 2011 with a fantastic score of 96/100. In the latest edition batch 30 scores 92/100 and batch 31 scores 90.5/100, which means quality has slipped a little (according to the author) but not by much. Unfortunately my 20cl bottle doesn’t have a batch number on it but according to Whiskybase this quarter bottle first appeared in 2009. I’m hoping my version dates back to that time and the epic 96/100. The author concludes with “had the Caol Ila been reduces slightly, and with it the oils, this might well have been World Whisky of the Year”. Praise indeed.

Big Peat is a vatting together of Islay single malts. Douglas Laing who make Big Peat describe it as “Caol Ila spirit bringing sweetness, Bowmore the perfect balance, Ardbeg the medicinal, earthy quality and Port Ellen, a degree of elegance”. But as the price of Port Ellen rises you have to think there’s very little going into the Big Peat mix. I bet I won’t be able to identify it. Nevertheless Big Peat is a classic of its time and a dram that every whisky enthusiast should try eventually.

20cl tasting notes provided on Whiskybase:

Nose: Earthy, mossy and briney. That smoked kipper quality. Some ripe fruits lurk.
Taste: The smoke coats and fills the mouth. A decent oak roasted salmon oiliness. Leaves a little salt as well.
Finish: Long with plenty of smoke and sweet honey.

Here’s Jo from Whisky Wednesday with his review on You Tube (June 2015):

Big Peat NAS 20cl

Hazelburn 12-year-old

Bought: Whisky Galore, 23rd May 2016

Ratings:
85.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2016
88/100 – Ralfy (of www.ralfy.com. His review below)
83/100 – Whiskybase (average from 14 member votes)

Hazelburn is a brand of whisky by Springbank distillery that’s unpeated and triple-distilled. It first appeared in 2005 as an 8-year-old but there are now 71 different versions listed on Whiskybase. The majority (55) have been released by the distillery. Scoring 83/100 is a respectable mark with one reviewer saying “good whisky”. Others remark “a lively, rich and full-bodied whisky with an impressive balance of sweet, fruity and spicy flavours” and “interesting, engaging and complex. It has a lovely balance and nice sherry cask influences” (regarding the full 70cl – mine is 20cl).

85.5/100 from Jim Murray in his Whisky Bible classifies this Hazelburn 12yo as “very good to excellent whisky definitely worth buying”. He says about the taste “at times nutty. At others, oily. And is that the vaguest hint of phenol I spot bouncing around at one stage?” And summarises with “some lovely moments of lucidity but at most part it’s an interrupted work in progress.”

Although on the surface the Hazelburn 12yo scores well it seems that most reviewers have one or two issues with it. 88/100 is an excellent score from Ralfy. Here’s his review of the Hazelburn 12yo on You Tube (January 2011):

Hazelburn 12yo 20cl

Longrow ‘Peated’

Bought: Whisky Galore, 23rd May 2016

Ratings:
82/100 – Whiskybase (average from 9 member votes)

This NAS (non-aged statement) bottle of Longrow first came out in 2012 and there are now 13 different versions of it listed on Whiskybase. My 20cl came as part of a Springbank distillery set of three 20cl bottles, which also included the Hazelburn 12yo and Springbank 10yo. I already have a similar set that Springbank did of their ‘CV’ range. A 20cl bottle is a nice size to give you a proper taste of a whisky whilst keeping the cost down and not outstaying its welcome.

82/100 on Whiskybase for this peated Springbank is a reasonable score but the main 70cl version scores nearly 84/100. It’s effectively the same stuff and it’s in the range of ‘very good’ in terms of Whiskybase ranking. The CV, also NAS, seems to be a step up with a score of 85.5/100 but the path ultimately leads to the Longrow 18yo, which scores 88.5/100.

Here is ‘Scotch 4 Dummies’ review on You Tube (March 2016):

Longrow Peated NAS 20cl

Benromach 10-year-old 2014

Bought: Whisky Galore, 23rd May 2016

Ratings:
89/100 – Ralfy (of www.ralfy.com. His You Tube video below)
85/100 – Whiskybase (average from 11 member votes)

I have a 20cl bottle of the previous 2009 version of the Benromach 10yo, which is the one mentioned in the Whisky Bible 2016 scoring 87.5/100. This new Benromach 10yo came out in 2014 but it’s yet to be reviewed by Jim Murray for his bible. When Ralfy did a video for the 2009 edition he scored it 85/100. An excellent mark indeed but he gives this latest version 89/100 and the honour of his ‘Whisky of the Year 2014’. For the price and quality it’s a tough one to beat in Ralfy’s opinion.

85/100 on Whiskybase is a fantastic score, which is for my 20cl version. The full 70cl scores 85.38/100 from 289 votes so a lot of people seriously rate this single malt. Comments include “well balanced and full bodied”, “good value and very drinkable”, “very pleasant, very round, enjoyable” and “you want bang-for-your-buck? This is it. Big recommendation to anyone, but surely not for the complete novice (as this would be just too tough to get your head around).”

Here are Ralfy’s thoughts on You Tube (January 2015):

Benromach 10yo 2014 20cl

Benromach ‘Peat Smoke’ 2005/14

Bought: Whisky Galore, 23rd May 2016

Ratings:
88.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2016
92/100 – Whisky Bitch (her You Tube review below)
82.7/100 – Whiskybase (average from 55 member votes)

In the Whisky Bible 2016 the author, Jim Murray, gives the 2006 edition of ‘Peat Smoke’ 90.5/100, which is two points ahead of what he thinks of my 2005 bottling. But the good folk of Whiskybase give the 2006 version 82.6/100 (from 50 member votes), which is 0.1 behind the 2005. So make of that what you will, which is probably nothing since there really isn’t anything in it.

88.5/100 classifies this dram as “excellent whisky definitely worth buying” and Jim Murray says of the taste “light oils and slightly over sugared barley. The smoke, surprisingly, takes a bit of a back seat while gentle oak calm the over zealous maple syrup; a fair chunk of marmalade in there”. A comment on Whiskybase is “a fantastic combination of sweet fruit explosions, big smoke and loads of earthy peat.”

This version of ‘Peat Smoke’ has a 67ppm rating, which is ‘parts per million’ relating to the phenol level, not ‘pancakes per minute’ like I first thought. The 2006 edition is 62ppm so a slight step down in terms of peatiness but I doubt anyone will notice. My phenol receptors aren’t that finely tuned. Jim Murray says of the 2006 bottling “a more measured malt than the previous vintage” but that’s very much his opinion.

Here’s the Whisky Bitch with her review of the 2004 version of ‘Peat Smoke’ (June 2014):

Benromach Peat Smoke 2005 NAS 20cl