Water

Most bottled water is relatively free of odor and flavor, although some have "minerals" added. Cheapest is to buy distilled water which should be free of any contaminants. My own tap water is tasteless if allowed to stand for a day or two at room temperature to evaporate chorine. Purists want to add the same water that the distillery uses in making the malt, but that isn't an option for most of us.

Personally, I use commercial bottled water or distilled water at room temperature.

For cryin' out loud, Baruch. Pour some in a glass, take a sip, swirl it around in yer mouth ta get some saliva flowin'. When it no longer has that CS fire, swallow it and enjoy the lingering flavor. Then add a few drops of water and repeat as necessary. Distilled or de-ionized water should be fine. Ya could always go to

A very fine and controversial malt, the a'bunadh. Mine is the Batch #16. Heavy sherry and dried fruit with a strange sweet/sour character, some toffee and slight smoke/peat. Start with the whisky neat, then add very small splashes and it reveals lots of new stuff to the senses. Some malts, I've found, are better with little or no water, others need thinning to release elements in the nose. Every one seems different to me. Fun to determine the best combination.

It is impossible not to concur, although that is against the typical behavior that one sees in some single malt evaluations. But those people usually have an intimate knowledge of the single malt from previous experiences. Otherwise, it is certainly more rational to try it straight up. You can always add water afterwards. Otherwise, it is equivalent to sitting down at the table to eat and immediately reaching for the salt shaker without tasting the food.

Controversial? I've never met anyone yet who didn't like it, and I don't recall anyone ever expressing a negative opinion here.

-- Larry

"You can always add water afterwards. Otherwise, it is equivalent to sitting down at the table to eat and immediately reaching for the salt shaker without tasting the food." Perfect analogy!

The taking a sip and swirling it around in yer mouth ta get some saliva flowin' and bring the abv down, I think of as "mouth aging". Several of my drinkin' buddies now do that.

I dunno what's controversial about it !? Mine is Batch #8, 60.2% abv. I don't know from sherry, fruit, toffee or smoke. I do recognize the peatiness. All I know is that I really like it. I drink it neat and mouth age it to bring it down and leave me with a woderful aftertaste.

As others, I don't believe it is controversial in the sense of its reputation as one of the great whiskys, and it happens to be my favorite. But do you mean in terms of consistency from one batch to the next? I don't remember which batch I first had, but it seemed more special than any that have come after. I wonder, did the novelty wear off, or was the first batch that much different?

John

Malt Maniacs have several batches reviewed. As would be expected, batches differ. #16 is the only one I have tasted, but it is excellent.

Which brings up a point. The goal of big name distilleries and their blended customers is to make reproducable casks that can be relied upon to provide the blending characteristics they need to maintain the same whisky year after year. This is both difficult and frustrating to whisky fans who enjoy the adventure of seeking out new casks and vattings that show the best of the brewer's art. It is one thing to know what to expect when you buy a can of (your favorite beer), it is quite another to maintain interest if every bottle of Mac 12 is identical year after year. It is the excitement of the unknown that fuels the whisky fan, not the promise of the same whisky every batch.

Agreed. I have a bottle of Aberlour A'bunadh, which I bought a few years ago. I enjoy it very much. I recently bought a bottle to bring to a friend in Florida (his first). We both enjoyed it very much. Different? Probably. Excellent? Definitely!

I got a bottle from an early batch three or four years ago, and it blew me away. It was a sherry monster. I got another a few months back and while it is good drinking, it doesn't seem to be as dark and overpoweringly sherried. Could be the memory playing tricks, of course.

bill

Personally, I'll take the consistency, so long as there are an appreciable number of distilleries in operation. I don't want my HP, Mac, Longmorn, Linkwood, etc. to cary all over the landscape; I want to know what I'm buying.

-- Larry

I have not been into whisky all that long, and my experience is greatly limited. But I have been a serious wine fan for many years, and there are many simularities. No two vintages from the same house are the same. They may be a similar style, but always different.

There are too many variables to distill a reproducable single malt, I think. Sure, there are "house styles" that are the result of the shape of the stills, and the various methods of handling malting, washback, etc. But it is impossible to buy exactly the same ageing casks every year from the same sources. Some sherry casks from Spain, if I recall, are no longer available at any price. And a very large part of the final product is dependent upon the casks used in ageing. So the single malts will vary from year to year and batch to batch, and cask to cask. In addition, no one truly knows the long term effect of ageing to the point of being able (either blending or time-wise) to accurately predict what that 1985 malt will taste like in

Cutty Sark, J&B, Chivas Regal, Johnny Walker, Famous Grouse are all consistent for the most part. I prefer taking my chances with single malts. Much more interesting, and, yes, there is a risk. Alas, if I find a fantastic bottle of SM, and I don't go immediately buy a case before the batch is all gone, I'll never taste that whisky again. Mac 12 is different every year (if they make it), because it was all made 10 or more years ago under conditions that can't be exactly reproduced again in today's stocks, and I've seen reviews of Mac 10/12 vary from average to fantastic depending on the batch.

-- vary --

Sorry -- Larry (bad fingers, no biscuit...)

It could be, but our memories are tricking us in the exact same way! Less mildew than before, too (and I mean that as a criticism of the newer). Still my favorite, however.