JW blue? GREAT price?

US$100.

At $50 a bottle it would still be a waste of money.

I'm glad you were careful not to qualify such a remark with disclaimers about your particular tastes in whisky, or what styles you like or dislike, or why you hate JW Blue so much. Quite obviously your disdain condemns it to oblivion, and that in itself should be enough for any of us to follow.

pavane

I'll second that and lower you to $35 :-)

doug

Uh...does this store have any Islay malts that are being reduced in such a manner? If so, I have a favor to ask.

;-)

(the blue is typically around $200)

Actually, if it's an islay it's MINE, all MINE!!!

Walt

----- Original Message ----- From: "J Derby" Newsgroups: alt.drinks.scotch-whisky Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 5:13 AM Subject: Re: JW blue? GREAT price?

In taxed Sweden it is 1268 SEK - about 165 USD Anders

Previously bought a bottle for US$80, can currently find it for about US$115.

Johanna

What on earth is IN it that makes it so special. Extra Talisker? Real Cardhu?

By the way, Johanna, I have not only not seen the Murray McDavid Mortlach in all my usual haunts, I have not seen ANY MMcD products in the vivid orange box on the shelves here! d

Yeah Doug, it must be the extra helpings of Talisker and of "Real" (nice one!) Cardhu that makes this stuff a steal at $80! Never mind that none of us would ever pay that for a standard bottle of Talisker or Cardhu! Could the marketing departments be influencing us connaiseurs with ludicrous advertisements that picture JW Blue as a drink for the very (very) rich? No way! People who write here are all about tasting the stuff not posing around an expensive but tasteless bottle --right?

However, if you are interested in status when buying and serving whisky, then go ahead buy the Johnnie Walker Blue, but don't look for a bargain since getting ripped off is a crucial part of the experience!

Cheers!

Rufus

1) What makes Blue so expensive? Among other Very Old malts, Blue includes droppings of Auchtertool, a distillery closed in 1927.

2) I don't have tasting notes per se but I very much like Blue, a very deep and smooth blend that is rich with fruit notes and a nice spicy sweetness -- it is also one of the few blends in which I can barely, if at all, detect the grain whisky, it is that nicely balanced.

Johanna

Droppings?...of what? Do a few drop of an extraordinarily rare malt make a difference when they have been mixed with grain whisky? Please don't start with that verbiage about a "blender's art." It's all about dispensing with available stock.

Ah... at last, now I got it! That's why blue is so great, because you can't taste the grain! Perhaps you might want to try any single malt scotch and you won't ever have to worry about detecting grain whisky if that's your criteria for a rave review... Come on guys and gals, get a grip. this stuff is overhyped outrageously expensive and not very good -are u all out there sold out to the company, or bent on making me loose all respect for you? How can one take seriously the tasting notes on, say, a vintage Springbank written by someone who loves Johnnie Blue, because you can hardly taste the grain no less....Are you really all about fad?

No-one's forced to buy the stuff. And I, for one, am not going to. On the other hand, there is this basic economic principle linking supply and price so closely, isn't there? I mean, the inclusion of a few drops of Auchtertool is there for you (or anyone willing to pay the price) to be able to boast of "sampling" a whisky that's over 70 years old. Personally, I'm not going to shell out a penny more for this privilege, but you can't refuse the right to do so to those who want. In a way the situation is similar to those who pay a bit more to celebrate their birthday with a dram of whisky that's their age. I have done this and know the feeling. Doesn't necessarily mean the whisky will be better than, say, a dram of Highland Park 18yo.

I'm sure this is not what Johanna had in mind. And, knowing her, I'm pretty sure she's perfectly capable of doing her own defence, so I'm not going into that.

The point is, in my opinion, with both grain and malt whiskies it is the matter of quality. I rarely drink blended whiskies because I do hate the burning, spirity, tasteless aspect of poor grains. On the other hand, there are superb grains around. Hedonism from Compassbox, for one, is a grain whisky that I will have before a lot of your malt whiskies. It will probably be the matter of cask selection, length of maturation, etc. And I think (correct me if I'm wrong) the casks for maturing grains are not selected according to so strict rules as is the case with malts, which makes good grain even more rare. Despite the volume of production. And again the economy of supply and price tag comes into play.

The only time I had Johnnie Walker Blue (at somebody else's expense), I thought "what a nice whisky". Still, I think you can get considerably more - both quality and quantity-wise - for the same money, so you will not see me buying a JW Blue. Though there's no denying there are some absolutely fabulous and rare whiskies in it.

Cheers, Rajmund

How 'bout free? I got two bottles as gifts last Friday, and I am enjoying them immensely. If you can find it for under $100, and are so inclined to pay that much for a bottle of whisky, I don't think you would be disappointed.

Well, the word "droppings" conjures up an unpleasant image in my mind, but we shouldn't nit-pick.

Probably not, I would think. But then again, try adding a few drops of Ardbeg 10yo to a glass of Bushmills. How much do you have to add to taste the difference? I find that it doesn't take very much of a strongly flavored malt to alter the character of a fairly mild one. So it's possible a little Auchtertool does have an effect - it would depend on the character of Auchtertool and how much we are talking about. You do have a right to be skeptical, though.

I don't agree with this. If they wanted to get rid of it they could have dumped it in any of their blends 60 years ago, or anytime since. If they wanted to get the most money for it they could have bottled it as a single - look what other pre-war malts are going for at auction - and the buyers of JW Blue would probably never know the difference. Either they believe it's a real flavor component or they do it to add to the "prestige" of the product which seems to me the likely reason. Gives buyers something to brag about.

[snip]

Johanna can answer for herself if she wants to, but I can say she is not all about fad, didn't say she loves JW Blue (well, likes it very much), and her opinions (which I don't always agree with) are definitely her own.

I agree with you, Rufus, that JW Blue is outrangeously expensive though - here in Texas it sells for around $200 a bottle and I could wear out my keyboard listing malts (and even blends) I'd rather try for that kind of money.

Rajmund,

This makes a lot of sense to me. Good old grain whisky seems to be harder to find than good old malt whiksy. Bushido has suggested that this is the reason why good blends tend to be more expensive than good malts of the same age. When I'm spending that much though, I'll reach for the malt over the blend, so I haven't tasted many of the best blends, including JW Blue. For the same reason I have yet to try the Hedonism despite "almost" getting it several times.

I don't know much about cask selection for grain whisky. I imagine there are a lot of old plain wood casks so the grain doesn't become too oaky, or develop a character that would be hard to blend with. But from my reading on the Scotch Whisky Act and SW Order there isn't a distinction between grain and malt whisky except the obvious one. So grain whisky must be at least 36 months old and aged in oak casks, etc...

With few exceptions malt distilleries bottle only their best casks as single malts and sell the rest (including any off-casks) for blending. Very little grain whisky is bottled this way. So we know the malts from the best examples the owners can find and mostly know the grains from very young examples of their average production, and only after it has been mixed with the lesser examples of malts, which are themselves often very young. It's no surprise the grains and blends have a bad reputation. Maybe unfairly...

Bart

enjoying them immensely. If you can find it for under $100, and are so inclined to pay that much for a bottle of whisky, I don't think you would be disappointed.

Two? Don't you just hate duplicate presents!? Now start dispensing the

2nd one into 50ml miniature bottles and dispatch them to all of us toot suite--Xmas is four days away!

Defence against whom Rajmund? Someone who thinks his back issues of "Whisky Magazine" are worth something and who claims that the greatest whisky he's ever tasted is a 12yo Speysider? And then he talks about losing respect -- seems pretty obvious that this individual knows nothing more about whisky than what he's been reading in that glossy advertorial called "Whisky Magazine". Hardly worthy of a response IMO.

Johanna

Actually, I believe he was merely "loosing" respect,,,