Category Archives: Whiskey

Balcones V Anniversary Single Malt Event

by

0

Balcones_Fifth_Anniversary_1190342I traveled to Waco, TX today with two friends and fellow Balcones fans to tour the facility and pick up a bottle of Balcones Fifth Anniversary Single Malt. There were two versions available and I sampled both of them:

  • Balcones Fifth Anniversary Single Malt Rumble Cask Reserve Finish – Finished in an ex-Rumble Cask Reserve barrel, this malt added another dimension to their already flavorful single malt. The bright fruit flavors of Rumble were a nice addition to the single malt.
  • Balcones Fifth Anniversary Single Malt Brimstone Resurrection Finish – This is actually a triple wood style release as it was first finished in an ex-Rumble Cask Reserve barrel, then again in the (only one exists) ex-Brimstone Resurrection barrel. There was a slight hint of smoke and the distinct blue corn characteristic coming through as a slightly caramel flavor.

I also sampled Rumble, Baby Blue, Single Malt and Brimstone. While all of them were good, the Rumble was better than any previous batch I’ve tasted… in fact, it was really good. Baby Blue fell a bit flat today, lacking the nice sweetness that it typically has, but still it was good.  Brimstone was like a sweet smokey Texas barbecue, just like I remember. The Single Malt deserves a bit more description, since it forms the basis for the special releases today.

I sampled my own 13-5 batch of Single Malt last night, but the 14-2 batch was quite an improvement with more balance to the woody tannins characteristic of Balcones whiskey. There was more fruit flavor and less heat in this batch (tasted with no water as opposed to the 10 drops necessary to open up the 13-3). Trusting the expertise of Chip Tate, I walked away with a 14-3 batch today. As far as the V Anniversary Single Malt, I bought the Resurrection Finish (designated SMK for sweet smoke on the bottle).

As an added bonus, I picked up a bottle of Balcones Fifth Anniversary Brimstone Resurrection on the way home that was on hold for me at a local retailer in Dallas. Now I’ll have the original Resurrection to sample next to the Single Malt finished in the same barrel.  Brimstone Resurrection is the real winner of the day for me as I’ve wanted a bottle ever since tasting it at the Balcones Event at Trinity Hall last year. All in all, this was a fantastically successful day with respect to whiskey.

StraightBourbon D/FW Meet-Up

by

0

20140322-184540.jpgThanks to the generous hosting of Eskwar, seven of us were able to gather for an afternoon of sharing and tasting.  I’d have to say that the highlight of the day was a tasting of some dusty (paper label) Weller 12 Year and Old Weller Antique and the subsequent blending into a 50/50 StraightBourbon Blend.  We were also able to do a side-by-side comparison with current bottles of each as well as the blend.  Unfortunately, this demonstrates how superior the old products were and how much better they blended.  On the positive side, StraightBourbon Blend is quite competent with the current stock and I must put these on my list to buy and blend.

Here’s the list of what I tasted for the first time:

  • Four Roses Single Barrel Private Selection OESO Barrel Proof – woody with some mild heat
  • Four Roses Single Barrel Private Selection OESF Barrel Proof – more caramel and vanilla than OESF, still the same wood with mild heat
  • High West 21 Year Rocky Mountain Rye – mild spice, mild wood, mild flavor, not much here for a rye
  • Jefferson 10 Year Rye – not much flavor or spice for a rye, more dry than sweet
  • Yamasaki 12 Year  – woody with honey, grass, bitter through to finish
  • Hookers House Bourbon – Pinot noir finished and its noticeable on the finish especially, tobacco, plum, raisin without sweetness, menthol, reminds me of wine finished ER10
  • Evan Williams Vintage Single Barrel 1998 – caramel, cherry, nice sweetness, tobacco, short finish but very good
  • Black Maple Hill Bourbon – sweet, menthol, tobacco, dark fruit, cocoa
  • StraightBourbon Blend  – definitely better than either Weller 12 or Old Weller Antique, tends more to OWA
  • StraightBourbon Dusty (Paper Label) Blend – less sweet and bit more wood than the newer blend with a longer finish
  • Tom Moore Bottled-in-Bond – really solid bourbon at around $20 for a handle

My pick of the day was Hooker’s House Bourbon because of it’s unique flavor profile.  The wine finishing really worked better than I expected it to.  This is only available in California as far as I know, so I’ll have to be on the lookout on my travels.  The other standouts were the StraightBourbon blends, Black Maple Hill and the old Evan Williams Single Barrel.  I did come home with a bottle of Four Roses Single Barrel OESF, thanks to a generous fellow StraightBourbon forum member, so that’s worth mentioning, too.  Oh, I almost forgot about my final pour of the day, Tom Moore BIB, which was very good.  I plan on looking for a bottle of this one so that I can study it a bit more, but I was very impressed with my quick introduction and the price makes it a bargain.

Garrison Brothers Tasting

by

0

VoorhesBotleCropped1Trinity Hall Irish Pub in Dallas hosted a Garrison Brothers tasting tonight with Charlie Garrison and their master distiller, Donnis Todd.  This was a different kind of tasting… we had 3 vintages of the same whiskey, providing an opportunity to compare releases and observe any trends represented by them.  This was the lineup… all vintages of the same Garrison Brothers Texas Straight Bourbon Whiskey:

Fall 2012 – A sweet nose of caramel and vanilla. A briefly sweet and bright flavor followed by grass, straw, honey, then becoming tannic and astringent.  The finish is leathery, spicy and woody.  Water lessens the astringent quality (only took a drop) and brings out more of the sweet flavors to produce more balance, while notes of lemon and pear appear.

Spring 2013 – Similar sweet nose with a hint of menthol and pecans.  Also, a similar flavor profile, but less astringent and the finish is less bitter/tannic.  Water produces a nuttier and spicier profile, but the balance isn’t maintained and the finish has more burn, bitterness and a less leathery mouthfeel.

Fall 2013 – Another great, sweet nose with more menthol.  The sweetness is more subdued compared to the Fall 2012 release with less bitterness and more spice (but less of the latter than the Spring release).  This one has a nicely balanced finish. Water did not bring about any appreciable change to this one.

This was a very interesting exercise and here’s how I ranked them:

  1. Fall 2012 – Without water, this was the worst of the bunch.  With just a drop or two, a nice balance was achieved and it just edged out the Fall 2013 release with a bit bolder flavor and an added sweetness that carried through to the finish.
  2. Fall 2013 – Least impacted by water, this one maintained a nice balance with a bit of menthol that the Fall 2012 release lacked.  Still, a bit more sweetness to balance the woody characteristic was missing from this one.
  3. Spring 2012 – Although it improved significantly with water, this one was far behind the other two.

At $75, I can’t recommend any of these whiskeys, but I can offer this buying advice if you want to try one… stick with the Fall releases!  If you like heavily wooded bourbon (like Woodford Reserve Double Wood), then you might like this style.  It’s too woody for me.

Tom’s Scotch Party

by

0

Tom Caughran hosted a Scotch whisky tasting at Total Wine & More in Dallas tonight.  For me, it was their best tasting to date with a nice mix of independent bottlings and a French single malt.  Here’s what he served with some brief notes:

  • Arran 16 Year Old Oak Cask 1997 (Exclusive Casks) – $90

This one was a cask strength bottling (51.2%) with notes of bright fruit, honey, ginger and a woody, bitter finish.  A bit of water exposed some nuttiness.  I’d say it was decent, but I’d pass on this one.

  • Glen Garioch 23 Year Old 1989 (Exclusive Casks) – $130

Another cask strength bottling (54.1%), this one was also fruity with a bit of spice and the fruits carried over into the finish, being joined by a mild nutty flavor.  Water really opened the fruit flavors up and revealed a slight creaminess.  This is a solid whisky, but not worth the asking price.

  • Bruichladdich 20 Year Old 1992 Cask #3793 (Berry’s) – $130

The first peaked whisky of the evening with notes of dried fruit, clover, ginger and herbs.  The finish was herbal and leathery with a touch of cocoa.  The nose was mellow with touches of fruit and grass.  Unfortunately, this was another solid whisky that was overpriced… another pass.

  • Longmorn 20 Year Old 1992 Cask #71735 (Berry’s) – $100

This was only my third Longmorn (the first one was a younger expression, also from Berry Bros and Rudd and the second one was another 20 Year Old from Master of Malt… both disappointing) and it was the first eye opener of the evening.  This one smelled and tasted a bit like bourbon with notes of caramel and vanilla on the nose, then adding dark fruit, lemon and honey flavors.  The caramel carried through to the finish, which became slightly leathery and peppery, mostly of white pepper.  While this one was well done, I’m not a fan of white pepper and that was enough to put me off of this one and on to the next one.

  • Linkwood 15 Year Old 1997 Cask #7182 (Berry’s) – $70

Another nose that reminded me of bourbon, but with a light delicate characteristic.  The taste was also light and fruity with a bit of pecan.  The finish was long and light, eventually adding some spice while the nuttiness lingered.  There’s nothing bitter about this one and the operative word for me was, “delicate.”  I thought this one was fantastic!

  • Imperial 17 Year Old (Battlehill) – $100

The sherry influence was immediately noticeable on the nose.  Flavors of plum, hazelnut and anise were joined by dark berries and sage on the finish, which lasted quite nicely.  This is a big whisky with lots of flavors lining up to be noticed.  None of them overpower the others, which keeps me interested and searching for more.  This is one I’d like to spend some additional time with.  In fact, this one was so good that I was still reflecting on it when the next sample arrived and had a hard time shifting my attention away from it.

  • Strathmill 22 Year Old (Battlehill) – $120

While this was a good whisky, it had the unfortunate distinction of following the fantastic Imperial.  It was hard not to keep reflecting on what had just happened, but I finally managed to focus and give it a fair shot.  I’m glad I did as it was another solid offering.  This was the second, more mildly peated whisky of the evening with a mildly fruity nose and a nutty, slightly medicinal flavor profile.  Also present were notes of marshmallow and nuts as a light and spicy finish was unveiled.  This was my first Strathmill and it was very good.

  • Michel Couvreur Pale Single Malt – $100

I had learned about the two offerings from Michel Couvreur recently and was interested in learning more.  I was pleasantly surprised to see their more expensive offering on the slate tonight.  This was a very unique whisky that reminded me of Earl Grey tea, with it’s notes of lavender, heather, bergamot along with light fruit and ginger.  The lavender was present from nose to finish, providing a consistent context for the other aromas and flavors.  I don’t know if I would want to drink this often, but it might be a nice whisky to have once in a blue moon.  If you like Earl Grey, then you should definitely try this one; conversely, if you don’t like Earl Grey, then I would stay away from it.

The clear winner of the night was the Imperial, which I took home with me.  A complex, bold amalgamation of fruits, nuts and spices, it grabbed my attention immediately and held it throughout the (unfortunate) next pour, which it overshadowed by a mile.

Runner-up was the Linkwood with it’s delicate profile.  I was amazed at how complex it was while remaining delicate and very approachable.  This would be a great summertime whisky for a clear, calm night under the stars with the one I love… except she won’t touch the stuff. 😮

Honorable Mention goes to Michel Couvreur’s Pale Single Malt, which was true to it’s tasting notes of lavender and heather.  The unique flavor profile intrigued me; however, at $30 less I’ll probably have to pick up their Overaged Single Malt.  It’s a blend of sherry casks up to 27 years old and I hear that it’s the better of the two.

Blind Whiskey Tasting

by

0

tastingTonight, I attended a different kind of tasting at Trinity Hall Irish Pub in Dallas.  This one included 4 pairs of similarly styled whiskey, which had to be identified as either the named flagship offering or a specific premium offering.  Here was the lineup:

  • Bulleit Bourbon ($20) or Bulleit 10 Year Bourbon ($35) – The 10 Year is a new offering from Bulleit that was introduced in 2013 and I haven’t read any favorable reviews or received any favorable recommendations on it.  I had tasted their regular Bourbon almost 2 years ago and wasn’t impressed.  I approached the judging by expecting the flavor of the 10 year to reflect it’s age, but I was duped. The 10 Year is worse than the original and a definite waste of money.
  • Crown Royal ($18) or Crown Royal XO ($45) – I’ve not had many Canadian whiskeys, so this was new for me.  The cognac influence of the XO was subdued (as was the general flavor of both whiskies), but discernable. I didn’t find either one very interesting, so I would pass on both of these.
  • Bushmills Black Bush ($30) of Bushmills 1608 400th Anniversary ($100) – This was the most difficult to identify because both of these blends have sherry influence.  Black Bush is finished in sherry casks, while 1608 includes whiskies which have been aged in sherry casks.  For me, the 1608 had an added depth of flavor and richness that caught my attention more.  Both of these were good, but I prefer Jameson 12 Year ($39) or Jameson Gold Reserve ($63) over either of them.
  • MacAllan 10 Year Fine Oak ($38) or MacAllan 17 Year Fine Oak ($150)  – This was probably the easiest to identify even though both of these are good.  I had tasted both of them at a previous Trinity Hall event and this helped as well.  The 17 Year just had enhanced flavors and complexity over the 10 Year, but it’s still not worth the price difference.

If you’re keeping track, then you know that I correctly identified 3 out of 4.  I don’t know of anyone at the event who correctly identified them all (like I said, Bulleit duped everyone with their 10 Year Bourbon by making it worse than their original).  This was a good test of whether premium offerings really offer anything special and it was a fun event to attend.  In general, premium offerings need to be approached carefully.  There are those who will offer inferior products with a premium label (e.g. Bulleit), while others will price their premium offering far too high to make them worthwhile (e.g. MacAllan).  Still others, take mediocre products and enhance them to create mediocre premium products (e.g. Crown Royal).  What you’re looking for is the honest producer who will masterfully or cleverly work to create a superior product that is worthwhile.  The closest example of that tonight was Bushmills 1608… even though it’s not a whiskey that I would seek, the premium blend definitely demonstrated a richness, depth and complexity that I expect in a premium offering.

Advent Failure

by

0

Well it should be evident by now that I completely failed at completing my custom whiskey advent calendar.  I did review 10 whiskeys and as a result of the attempt, I have several lined up that I’ll try to get to soon.  Stay tuned….

Glenlivet Tasting

by

0

Glenlivet XXVTonight I attended a tasting event hosted by the great people at Spec’s in Dallas. Pernod Ricard’s Master if Scotch, Craig Vaught, sampled three whiskies from the Glenlivet line:

  • Glenlivet 18 Year – $85
  • Glenlivet Archive 21 Year – $130
  • Glenlivet 25 Year – $400

All of these Speyside whiskies were decent, but none of them were great. The 18 Year was fruity, woody and spicy, but none of it well integrated. The 21 year brought more balance to the flavor profile and improved with a few drops of water. Of particular note is that it pairs well with chocolate. The 25 year had the most pronounced influence of sherry and was quite enjoyable, but it was a toss-up with the 21 (for $80 less). Glenlivet is the top selling brand of Scotch whisky here and its easy to see why: easy name to pronounce and remember, good but not too challenging flavor, age-based progression that’s easy to understand, great history and broad availability. For me, the one Glenlivet that I’m looking forward to trying is their 16 Year Old Nadurra, which is non-chill filtered and bottled at cask strength.

Knob Creek 9 Year Old Single Barrel Reserve Kentucky Straight Bourbon

by

0

Straight Bourbon, 9 Years,
50% ABV, $34

Knob Creek Single Barrel Reserve is a hand-selected higher proof offering of their flagship bourbon.  This barrel (#464) was selected by Simon Taylor of Spec’s in Dallas and it’s #10 for this year on my advent list.  I talked about this whiskey with Simon and that discussion convinced me to try his selection (I even had him sign it for me).  There was another barrel selected by Spec’s that day and I may have to try that one as well, since Simon said that it was a close second for him (he described it as “caramel fruit salad”).  Hold on a minute… I’m getting ahead of myself.  I haven’t even poured the whiskey yet.

Okay, it’s in the glass smelling grand!  There’s straw, caramel and a good spicy burn with notes of vanilla, cherry, cocoa, black pepper and pear.  The aroma is fairly bold without water.  A bit of water tones down the burn and brings the pepper and other flavors into balance; however, I don’t notice any other flavors.

The taste is hot and bold, with plenty of vanilla, cinnamon, honey, caramel, tobacco, lemon and apple.  Adding a bit of water causes the peppery spice to mellow and persist into the finish.  Additional notes of cherry, ginger and overripe pear arrive and the tobacco becomes more a hint of powdery cocoa.  The finish persists very long with a good chewy feel and a spicy, woody flavor with just a hint of that cocoa I mentioned earlier.  There’s a mild lemon sourness midway through that retreats about as quickly as it arrives – over a couple of seconds – and works well with the spices.

This is a very good whiskey and one that I enjoy quite often.  I don’t expect that it’ll last very long, so I’d best secure that other bottle before they disappear.  It offers a lot to keep your interest and is easy to drink without demanding too much attention.  I recommend a splash of water with this one as well.

W. L. Weller 12 Year Old Kentucky Straight Bourbon

by

0

Straight Bourbon, 12 Years,
45% ABV, $20

Due to a slight mishap, I have some tasting time on my hands, so I’m going to attempt to make some major progress in catching up on my advent tasting.  We’ll see how that goes.

First up is Weller 12 Year Old Bourbon, a reasonably priced wheated bourbon (like Pappy Van Winkle).  Price-wise, this offering from Buffalo Trace is slotted in-between Weller Special Reserve and Old Weller Antique (107°), but many prefer it to the latter.  In fact, members of the Straight Bourbon Forum have created their own blend of 50% Weller 12 and 50% Old Weller Antique as a compromise (or is it improvement?).  If you’re really serious about your whiskey (I am), then Buffalo Trace also offers William Larue Weller Kentucky Straight Bourbon as part of their Antique Collection (a limited annual release of 5 whiskies).  It’s a barrel-strength offering (my 2012 bottle is 123.4°) that is quite popular and very hard to find in most parts of the country.  Enough background, it’s time to smell this baby.

There’s a bit of straw in the mix, but it’s more subdued than the malts I’ve been drinking lately.  A spicy ginger and pepper reach my nose with a bit of burn while the sweetness of the honey, caramel, dark cherry, vanilla and sweet tobacco provide balance.  This is a decidedly different experience than nosing a rye-forward bourbon (most of them out there) and I enjoy it a lot.  For me, it’s the dark fruits that come out in the wheated offerings that I like so much and this $20 whiskey provides an ample demonstration.  It’s a less spicy and sweeter aroma that I find more enjoyable (not that I don’t enjoy the rye-forward bourbons or rye whiskey… some of those are coming up).

That this is a different kind of bourbon, is immediately evident.  The dark cherry, overripe apple, vanilla, caramel, honey and plum arrive first along with a bit of lemon drop tartness.  The spices arrive next as ginger, cinnamon and black pepper and are accompanied by the onset of the wood tannins, which build as the mouthfeel becomes somewhat chewy.  The finish is spicy and mildly leathery with a bit of charred oak flavor that linger for a long time.  The black pepper fades very slowly and I’m left with remnants of sweet tobacco and oak.

I really enjoy this bourbon and highly recommend it if you’ve never tasted a wheated bourbon (for me, Maker’s Mark doesn’t count… this is much better).  For me, it’s the best wheated bourbon value out there and, yes, I do prefer it to Old Weller Antique.  If you end up liking it as much as I do, then you’ll be pleased to know that it’s offered in handles (1.75l) as well.

Ranger Creek Rimfire

by

0

Single Malt,
No Age Statement,
46% ABV, $35 (375 ml)

For #8, we’ll add a bit of smoke from Ranger Creek. It’s a single malt whiskey distilled from their Mesquite Smoked Porter and is the 2012 release from their Small Caliber Series.  The porter is smoked over Texas Mesquite before being distilled and aged.  This is the first whiskey of theirs that I’ve tried… here goes nothing.

The color is a golden color, but lighter than the earlier Buffalo Trace. The nose is mildly smoky with a hint of sulphur. It’s also spicy, stemming mostly from ginger and black pepper, but there’s little else going on here. It’s hard to detect the other aromas because they’re so distant: menthol, honey and caramel. This is perhaps the weakest nose on a whiskey that I’ve encountered.

The taste is equally diminished up front, but builds a bit on the way to a finish of dark chocolate (very distinct) and mild smoke (more like flint). Up front there’s vanilla, honey, black pepper and caramel, but the chocolate becomes more and more prominent and the black pepper compliments it well. This is the most chocolatey whisk I’ve ever tasted. Eventually, the finish settles into a spicy, tart and bitter dark chocolate flavor. The flavors that started things off become more and more muted as the pepper in the finish grows and are joined by a mild spearmint. After spending a while trying to figure this whiskey out, I settle into a tart, spicy vanilla entry… a spicy chocolate interlude… and finally a mildly spicy bitter chocolate finish.

This is an odd whisky and the name, Rimfire, hardly fits it. Cocoa Powder might be more appropriate. With an uninteresting nose and a mostly chocolate flavor, this whisky is pretty boring. If you love dry dark rustic chocolate, then I can recommend this; otherwise I would pass. There’s not enough going on here.