Balvenie doublewood

I think almost everybody likes the Balvenie doublewood. I'm a major peat/smoke/Islaydine fiend, and *I* like the Balvenie.

Have you tried anything in the island style? I'm not sure where you'd start, but you should give one of them a shot some time. Maybe the Talisker 10. It's very good at what it does. If your palate completely disagrees with it, you can rule out Lagavulin, Ardbeg, Laphroaig and Caol Ila, and perhaps Bowmore as well. If you find it intriguing, you'll have all those others to explore.

bill

I used to like it, but the more I had it the more it started to taste a little cloying. I'm going to leave it a few months then try it again - it may just be an 'occasional' malt with me.

Balvenie Founders 10yo. Kind of a toned-down version of the Doublewood.

Jim

Doublewood is one of the few scotches that I really like.

Also like Macallan 12, Aberlour A'bunndah, Aberlour 16.

Gladys.

There are so many different good whiskies to choose from. But I would suggest some of theese: Scapa 14, Cragganmore 12, Glenfarclas 12, Longmorn

Gunnar

"mah" skrev i melding news: snipped-for-privacy@netins.net...

I too like the Balvenie line but often think that the Doublewood doesn't really justify the extra cost over the Balvenie 10. Sweet and, yes, rich, the Doublewood lacks the intangible peat of a Glenfarclas 12 or a Highland Park, both my current drinking favorites along with Macallan.

Ken

mah wrote:

What is the Glenlivet like? Thought about taking one but weren't able to decide whether it would meet my taste or not.

Have got both of them. Glenmorangie isn't really my taste; Jameson is an "easy" one to enjoy.

Talisker definitely would be worth a try - my 2nd favorite ...

... right behind Bowmore Legend ;o)

Regards,

Christian

It's bland.

To be a bit cynical about it, the Glenlivet is for people who want the social prestige of drinking a single malt, with the taste of a blend.

I find the Glenlivet 12 to be a fresh, fruity, light summer dram. The 18 yr. is a totally different bottle, with a great deal of complexity, body and holds up to the best of the Speysides. Bland, to be sure if you're looking for smoke, peat and phenols, but excellent in its own way. In a recent interview on WhiskyCast.com with the master blender at Glenlivet, when asked the question of what your last dram would be if you could only have one last dram, he answered the 18 yr. Glenlivet. I don't know that I agree, but it is an excellent bottle.

I agree about The Glenlivet 12, although I drink it year round. I also have a bottle of their Cellar Collection, French Oak Finish, 1983, 20 year old, which I only bring out when real SMS aficianados drop by or on other very special occasions.

Slainte!

Distillery Glenlivet bottlings can only be considered bland if you don't have a wide-ranging appreciation of whisky.

That sort of limitation is just as much a handicap as not being able to appreciate Islays; it's common in the latest generation of macho-man newbies.

To more experienced and expert imbibers, such as Michael Jackson, Charles Maclean, and virtually every other well-known whisky writer, Glenlivet is an outstanding and complex Speyside.

-- Larry

This is very astute. About 10 years ago when I "decided to start drinking SMS," Glenlivet and the more readily available whiskies were not what this newly minted SMS expert considered worth his time. After all, if that was what was available in every bar it was not good enough for an expert! There is a built in snobbery that you buy into according to cost.

Ten years later, the Glenfarclas 10 is not the most expensive, but it is what I really like. A Glenlivet is good sometimes. Laphroaig is not nearly as costly as most others, but it is great (but only for some!). Macallan, Glendronnach, or Aberlour are also on top of my list.

The thing is that I'm finding it OK to not base the value of a dram on how much it costs.

Old saying - variety is the spice of life.

Few wine connoisseurs would restrict their palates to just cabernet or chardonnay styles. In SMS, the basic styles run from light, unpeated lowland to the more complex speysides with their myriad of "hidden" flavors, to the subtle peat smoke of the "in-betweeners" like Springbank, Highland Park, Bruichladdich, to the balanced peat-sherry of Lagavulin and older Islays, to the full sherry of Macallan and Abelour, to the real peat-smoke monsters of a young Ardbeg, Laphroig and the like. None of these fits all occasions and situations. While I may prefer an Islay as a final desert island dram, my cabinet contains some of all styles in nearly 50 bottles. My mood changes with the weather, the food, the company. I pick what sounds good for the day, usually moving from the lighter to the Islays as a final dram. But start with a Laphroig 10 yr. and keep it throughout the evening? Never. For me, it's the contrast in styles that brings the fascination and appreciation.

Well put. And don't forget Calvados, Armagnac, Cognac, Salignac, bourbon, anejo rum, etc.

About the only thing my wife and I don't care for is most Irish whiskey, strangely enough.

-- Larry (Of course, if I only like one style of whisky I'd have many fewer bottles in the house to contend with... 8;) )

"mdavis" skrev i melding news:rAHoi.27660$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...

Eh, what sort of islands do you have in the desert? :-) Anders

I've made a decision this year to stop buying scotch whisky aged in sherry barrels.

No more MacAllan, no more Balvenie.

To sweet...

Old bourbon barrels are still OK.

No more Lagavulin? No more Talisker? No Aberlour a'bunadh? Jack! Don't do it!

bill

I guess we won't be sharing what we got of yours. :-)

Gladys.