A few weeks ago, my wife asked me to pick up a really nice bottle of single malt to give to her boss as a going-away gift. So I trundled off, and found what looked like a nice specimen, on a bit of a sale -- a Cragganmore "Special Edition", distilled in 1973, bottled in 2003, at 52.5%. We enjoy Cragganmore
12-yr. quite a bit, so I expected this bottle to be similar to most older bottlings -- more mellow, pronounced cask character, with a very long finish,perhaps a bit muted.A picture is at
Yesterday, her boss came down to her office around 6pm with the bottle. They opened it, and sampled it -- from china coffee cups, sad to say 8;) -- and boht their jaws dropped. Next thing I know, my wife comes home with the bottle, for me to have a taste. So we sampled it after supper (braised lamb arm chops, accompanied by a nice Cahors).
My expectations were turned upside down! This whisky had all the rich, spicy, slightly briny character of Crag 12, but even more so, with a very long, tingly finish. There is no deterioration whatsoever, unless Cragganmore was unbelievably huge in the early seventies. It is anything but muted, with no evident cask flavor.
I've sampled a lot of bottles in the 30 to 43 year old age range since 1975 or so, and never come across one this spicy and vigorous. This might be the best single whisky we have ever tasted.
Has anyone had such an experience with a whisky of such age?
-- Larry (doomed to spend another $229 soon...very soon. 8;( 8;) )