A nice friday night

That was already a world-class tasting spectrum. From one winner to the next, really!

How about some Ardbeg? The Macallan seems to be missing too. For lighter whiskies but still very fruitily enjoyable whiskies Glengoyne and Dalwhinnie are nice. Then there are the Signatory un-chill-filtered line--any of these are worth trying (I really love my Ardmore in particular!). For distinctive whiskies with interesting peat&fruit profiles Mortlach, Clynelish, and Bruichladdich are always fascinating--and in that vein I'm still really enjoying the new Jura Superstition. Life's too good!!!

(but watch out in the Bowmore line--there can be some unusual surprises still)

Thank you for your advice.

I think I probably will go for a Macallan Cask Strength next time, and another Bowmore. (Sure, I'll watch out!). But I *could* chose a Bruichladdich instead of the Bowmore, or maybe an Ardbeg 17... as you say: Life's too good!

Signatory unchillfiltered; yes I would love to try, but nothing like that is available here in Norway. Will have to order from abroad then, or travel some more.. But the hunt and the waiting adds value, it's probably a good thing not to have so much available just around the corner.

Gunnar

"Douglas W. Hoyt" skrev i melding news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com...

fascinating--and

Great tasting notes! And it sounds like a lovely evening.

When Bowmore is "on" it's a great whisky. I've always thought the 17yo was one of the best commonly available whiskies out there. FWP will be a concern for a while, but even in its heyday there were bottles that lacked it (perhaps because it takes a good long while for bottles to work their way through the system?).

I have a weakness for Glenfarclas. They produce some mighty fine whisky, and the 12yo is a handy example of a big sherried Speyside which shows just how much flavor can be packed in a 12 year old whisky. But there must be some intentional selection involved, because the difference between the 12yo and the 10yo is bigger than could be accounted for by just two years.

I love this whisky! This was long my favorite choice as a "sherry monster", until the A'bunadh was introduced. (I like it as much as I ever did, but the Aberlour is just a little cheaper locally.) Very drinkable undiluted, despite the high proof. I dont know whether this is artificially coloured, but if it is the adjustment can't be very big, since there is a noticible difference in colour between batches - look for a full red colour. No age statement is given, but Michael Jackson claims this whisky is significantly younger than the 12yo, at around seven or eight years old.

It's hard to go wrong with a Caol Ila, and I can vouch for some of Bowmore's line...

What a lovely evening. Malts are even better when shared with a good friend.

Bart

More for us non believers :-)

Hi, Bart!

This I find interesting. I have noticed that OB Cask Strength whiskys often are rather young, and that age statement is often absent. And I'm not really surprised the Glenfarclas 105 is younger than the Glenfarclas 12 yo. Still, as you saw, I felt 105 to be "more grown up". I also found it more powerful, and more complex. I can't believe it is just the alcohol strength that does this. I tried comparing the two again today, and I find the 12 yo to be rounder, but also less complex. Well, I am rather new in this game. And another reason my nose isn't very trained yet is that I quit smoking just 5-6 weeks ago. Maybe it's like this (?): A younger whisky tastes and smells more of, well, whisky... Sharper, more pronounced. And even my untrained nose notices many aspects - and I say: "complex". Whereas in an older whisky the tastes and aromas from the whisky itself (as just destilled) are more rounded off/ tuned down; and the cask is contributing more but perhaps in a tender, delicate way. And my untrained nose doesn't distinguish between these fine nuances - and I say: "less complex". Or maybe I'm just confused because of the difference in alcohol strength? Or maybe others do share my impressions? If so, what would make the younger 105 more complex? Different destillations? Different types of casks? Just wondering and trying to learn!

Gunnar

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. The 105 does seem to have more complexity. And a lot of sherry, but not (in my opinion) too much sherry. It's just a big "grown up" whisky.

I don't have any special information about the 105, but I suspect that the casks to be bottled as the 105 are chosen carefully, with a particular flavor profile in mind. That would be my best guess.

But the higher alcoholic strength can make a difference. I had a Cadenhead Glen Garioch that wasn't very different from the current OB production, but when diluted just a little - much higher ABV than the standard 43% ABV - it was like a different whisky: much more interesting than the standard production.

Another possibility is that Glenfarclas adds an occasional older cask to the vatting of mostly young casks when they make the 105. A little older whisky could add complexity to a vatting of a lot of younger whisky.

Just a few thoughts...

Bart

My understanding is that high alcohol content of the cask strength releases can deliver much more of the "top notes" of the whisky to the nose. I am a fan of the Glenfarclas 105 too. This is 105 in the British proof system. It equates to 60% alcohol or 120 standard proof.

Some of the Cadenhead cask proof releases I have had also tweak my senses more than the lower proof whiskies. To me this is a positive thing.

I probably also gravitate to the higher alcohol too. Just a personal preference I guess.

Joe

Welcome to the conversation!

With the high proof bottlings you can tweak the ABV and get it just right for your own palate and style of drinking. At first I never added water to any whisky - with a Cadenhead I just took smaller sips. But I've come to appreciate what can be gained by adjusting them. Still some, like the Glenfarclas 105, hardly need adjusting despite the whopping 60% ABV.

The same whisky can be a completely different experience at

Bart

With the high proofs, I still only rinse and shake my glass. A few drops is all I usually want in my single malt. I guess it really is the alcohol with me!

Joe