[net.wines] Single-malt Scotch tasting

reid@glacier.ARPA (01/19/86)

From: Wilkins@sri-ai (David Wilkins)


		Results of tasting: Single Malt Whiskey

			10 January 1986

Lowest score is best, last columns show division of votes.  Each scotch was
ranked as being first through 8th by 12 experienced tasters.  The
tasting was organized by Ross Bott.  All the scotches were 12 years in wood
except the Laphroaig which was 15, and the Johnnie Walker which likely had
some in the blend that never saw wood.

Total
Points	Scotch			Cost	Ident   1st  2nd  3rd  8th

 35	Legavulin 		24.00	 A	 3    4    3    0
 36	Laphroaig 15 years   	30.00	 G	 4    4    1    1
 61 	Highland Park           23.00	 B	 1    1    2    1
 64	Bunnahabhain            26.00	 F	 1    1    2    1
 64 	Glenfarcas 104 		27.00	 H	 1    0    1    1
 68 	Oban           		20.00	 D	 0    1    3    4
 70	The McCallum            26.00	 E	 2    2    0    4 
 70	J Walker Red            12.00	 C	 0    0    1    1 
 

Summary of Results and my personal tasting notes:

The group showed a strong preference for the top 2, but the other 6 were tied.
I liked my top 3 better than the others, those being the Laphroaig, Legavulin
and Highland Park in that order.  All three of these are very intense whiskeys
with deep flavors, lots of oak, lots of peat, lots of malt, and a great
finish.  The Laphroaig is its old shit-kicking self: very intense, with
wonderful huge flavors, complex, good balance and finish.  This one is better
balanced than the Prime Malt though much more expensive also.  The Lagavulin
is a classic, big-flavored scotch with good balance, lots of peat, and fairly
smooth.  I hadn't had it before and it was a pleasant surprise.  The Highland
Park had a more subtle nose than the other two with hints of pear/apple, and
was smooth and creamy with a great balance of flavors.

I liked my next three about equally -- the Glenfarcas, Oban, and Bunnahabhain.
The Glenfarcas had a big nose with cirtrus and orange peel.  In the mouth,
it was big and rich with some peat and a long finish, but was a bit too hot
and sharp from the alcohol.  The Oban was unique with a distinct nose of
pears and green apples.  In the mouth, smooth, creamy, rich, pears, with an
interesting finish.  Good stuff if you feel like pear brandy instead of
peaty scotch.  The Bunny had a subtle, peaty, complex nose with fruity
overtones.  In the mouth it was smooth and peaty with a long creamy finish,
but a sort of sherry overtone that hinted of some blended scotches.

The McCallum and the JW I did not like as well.  I have liked the McCallum
in the past, though it finished next to last in our previous tasting also.
It's also a biggie -- smokey, peaty, big nose, but in the mouth it lacks
the balance of the best and tonight seemed to have a very sharp taste
the marred the otherwise creamy, rich flavors.  The JW was pleasant but
was obviously not in the same category.  Nose was uninteresting with a
caramel, blended character.  In the mouth, pleasant, fairly smooth,
not peaty, fairly ordinary.
-------



------- End of Forwarded Message
-- 
	Brian Reid	decwrl!glacier!reid
	Stanford	reid@SU-Glacier.ARPA

jcp@osiris.UUCP (Jody Patilla) (01/21/86)

>               Results of tasting: Single Malt Whiskey
>                       10 January 1986
> All the scotches were 12 years in wood
> except the Laphroaig which was 15, and the Johnnie Walker which likely had
> some in the blend that never saw wood.

>  70   The McCallum            26.00    E       2    2    0    4
>
> finish.  The Laphroaig is its old shit-kicking self: very intense, with
> wonderful huge flavors, complex, good balance and finish.  This one is better
> balanced than the Prime Malt though much more expensive also.
>
> The McCallum and the JW I did not like as well.  I have liked the McCallum
> in the past, though it finished next to last in our previous tasting also.
> It's also a biggie -- smokey, peaty, big nose, but in the mouth it lacks
> the balance of the best and tonight seemed to have a very sharp taste
> the marred the otherwise creamy, rich flavors.

        First, this sounds like an unusual Laphroaig since the one most often
seen is a 10 year old, and Prime Malt is actually 12 yr old Laphroaig. (The
national importer is here in Baltimore.)
        Second, do you mean McCallan's here, not McCallum ? If this is not
the same malt, then I've never heard of it, and I've tasted almost every
malt available in the states. Many people feel McCallan is the "cognac" of
malts - it's very rich and full-bodied. I have a bottle of 12 yr old and
and 18 yr old and both are excellent. Not sure where the sharp taste you
noticed might have come from as that is exactly what this malt does not have.

     
--
jcpatilla

"If we can send a man to the moon, why can't we send all of them ?"

ted@bcsaic.UUCP (ted jardine) (01/24/86)

In article <631@osiris.UUCP> jcp@osiris.UUCP (Jody Patilla) writes:
>> 		Results of tasting: Single Malt Whiskey
>> 			10 January 1986
>> ...
>
> First, this sounds like an unusual Laphroaig since the one most often seen
> is a 10 year old, and Prime Malt is actually 12 yr old Laphroaig. (The
> national importer is here in Baltimore.)
> Second, do you mean McCallan's here, not McCallum ? If this is not the same
> malt, then I've never heard of it, and I've tasted almost every malt available
> in the states. Many people feel McCallan is the "cognac" of malts - it's very
> rich and full-bodied. I have a bottle of 12 yr old and and 18 yr old and both
> are excellent. Not sure where the sharp taste you noticed might have come from
> as that is exactly what this malt does not have.

Must add a large Amen to Jody Patilla's comments.  I consider that a taste for
Whisky, particularly the single malt variety, is an individual thing.  I would
not object if someone said my favorite malt beverage tasted like the by-product
of equine kidneys.  But I must agree that Laphroaig is generally available in a
10 year vintage in the U.S.  The characterization of The McCallan as having a
sharp taste is indeed surprising, as The McCallan is aged in Sherry barrels that
are selected for the mellowing effect they have on the aging whisky.  I've had
the good fortune to taste a 25 year old McCallan.  At 100 proof it slides down
with a mere whisper.  A favorite from my short sojourn in Edinburgh is a 15 year
old J. G. Smith single malt.  That's the name of the original owners of
Glenlivet.  Of the ten year old single malts, Glen Morangie provides a good
value and an excellent finish for its age.

I'd certainly like to encourage reports of tastings, whisky, wine, or whatever,
and appropriate discussion following them.

TJ {With Amazing Grace} The Piper
(aka Ted Jardine)  CFI-ASME/I
Boeing Artificial Intelligence Center
...uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!ted

guy@slu70.UUCP (Guy M. Smith) (01/30/86)

In article <3326@glacier.ARPA>, reid@glacier.ARPA writes:
> 		Results of tasting: Single Malt Whiskey
> 
> 			10 January 1986
> 

I don't know if scotch strictly belongs on this net but I can't think of a
better place and, as a scotch fancier I'm glad to see some discussion of
the subject. A couple of single malts (is there any other kind worth
drinking:-)) that I like that are worth mentioning are Tallisker and
Arberlour Glenlivet. Tallisker has nice peaty flavor but not nearly as
heavy as Laphroaig. I find it a bit smoother and more complex as well but
I haven't run across any 15 year old Laphroaig. Arberlour Glenlivet (not
The Glenlivet, it comes in a short square bottle) is lighter but has a
lot more character than a lot of mild scotches. If you ever get to Minn-
eapolis, check out Surdyk's liquor store for an outstanding selection of
single malts at very reasonable prices. Unfortunately, St. Louis has
nothing comparable, sob.

vsh@pixdoc.UUCP (Steve Harris) (02/06/86)

In <144@slu70.UUCP>,  Guy M. Smith writes:

> ... I haven't run across any 15 year old Laphroaig....

Prime Malt is a 12 year old single malt scotch made by the Laphroag
distillery.  It even costs less than Laphroag, which is only 10 years old.

To your health!

-- 

Steve Harris            |  {allegra|ihnp4|cbosgd|ima|genrad|amd|harvard}\
xePIX, Inc.             |               !wjh12!pixel!pixdoc!vsh
51 Lake Street          |
Nashua, NH  03060       |  +1 605 881 8791

reid@glacier.UUCP (02/07/86)

I am holding in my hands a bottle of 15-year-old Laphroaig, which I bought
last week for $30 at a nearby liquor store. It is not the 12-year-old, not
the prime malt, not the 10-year-old. It is exactly what I said it was in the
original posting, namely 15 years old. I think I'll have a shot of it right
now. Ah, wow! Rich, peaty, almost floral nose. Much more refined flavor than
the regular Laphroaig, and less peaty than the Prime Malt. You can really
taste the wood, and aren't knocked out by the peat.  Don't get me wrong--I
absolutely love the Prime Malt--but this is a more dignified and complex
whisky.
-- 
	Brian Reid	decwrl!glacier!reid
	Stanford	reid@SU-Glacier.ARPA