January 30th, 2008

Update on Wild Turkey

John Hansell

I just had a great lunch in New York with Andy Nash, the global brand director for Wild Turkey whiskey. (He hasn’t been put in charge of the rest of the galaxy yet, but give him a few more years…)

Anyway, among other things, we discussed the current Wild Turkey portfolio and any impending changes. The most important thing to pass on to you is that the newest release, Wild Turkey American Spirit 15 year old (which I rated a 94 in the current issue of Malt Advocate magazine) is flying off the shelves. It is a one-time offering (suggested retail about $90) and he informed me that once the existing inventory is depleted, that’s all there is.

I love this whiskey for the way that it expresses all the positive characteristics of an older bourbon (depth, complexity, etc.) without carrying all the baggage of too much oak.  Do yourself a favor. Go out and get a bottle before they’re all gone.

The new Wild Turkey Russell’s Reserve Rye 6 year old is a bit of a different story (score: 88, price $25). According to Andy, it’s not a one-time release, but you can expect it to always be in limited quantities and fairly difficult to find. It’s mellower, more rounded, lower in alcohol, and more approachable than the standard WT Rye, and a great way to ease into the rye category.

I asked Andy about the possibility of an older WT rye, say 15 or 18 years old. I would love to taste an older expression of WT rye. Well, if they’ve got some rye in their WT deck of cards, he wasn’t willing to show his hand.

My gut feeling is that Wild Turkey, like most other American whiskey distillers, got caught off guard with the all this new interest in rye whiskey and they just don’t have a whole lot of older stocks. I hope they prove me wrong. (This is something to ask Jimmy Russell, Wild Turkey Master Distiller, when I see him at WhiskyFest Chicago in early April.)

I must admit that I was saddened when they took Wild Turkey Russell’s Reserve and lowered the alcohol level to appeal to more of the masses. However, they more than make up for it with all the exciting new releases they keep sharing with us. Keep ‘em coming, guys.

Category: Bourbon,Rye whiskey 6 Comments

January 29th, 2008

Six days to the new Black Bowmore

John Hansell

I don’t normally announce when I’m going to taste a new whisky. But then again, they usually don’t cost $4,500 and carry such a legendary name as “Black Bowmore.”

This Monday, in New York City, I’ll be with Iain McCallum, Bowmore’s Whiskymaker, and Jimmy Robertson, Bowmore’s U.S. Brand Ambassador. The purpose of our meeting is to taste the new Black Bowmore, which is about to be introduced.  They tell me that I’ll be the first one in the U.S. to taste this whisky. So, now you know why I am counting the days.

I still fondly recall the original Black Bowmore trio, distilled the same time as this new release, on November 6, 1964. Those were bottled in 1993, 1994 and 1995. Back then, a bottle only cost around $300–or at least that’s what I paid in Chicago for my bottle of the first release.

That bottle is long gone now. I remember the night I opened it. My wife was watching the Tony awards, and we were in a very boring stretch of it. It was sort of a spontaneous thing. I still don’t know why I picked that bottle, but I did. And I put a decent dent into it. (The show ran late.)

I loved that whisky so much, the night I opened it was the only time I ever drank it alone. From then on, I always shared it. It was the proper thing to do.

So here we are,  more than a dozen years later. Bowmore decides to release a 42 year old version from the same lot. And I have the privilege to taste it. How will it taste? As good as the original three? Better? Worse? I don’t have any more from my original bottle, so, unless there is a collector/drinker out there who has a sample and wants to send it to me, I will have to rely on memory. (The distillery doesn’t even have samples from the original bottlings for us to compare.)

So I will have to bide my time until then. I think I can find one or two things to drink in the meantime to keep me entertained. But I can’t help getting a bit excited about the whole thing.

Naturally, I will pass on my thoughts to you right here when I get back to my hotel room that night–or the first thing the next morning if the evening goes a little late. (I get this feeling that there will be additional Bowmore whiskies to drink that night, and I don’t want to get a TUI–typing while under the influence.) 

Category: New Releases,Scotch whisky 2 Comments

January 28th, 2008

Is Glenmorangie 10 yr. the best of the line?

John Hansell

I think so. And if you ask Dr. Bill Lumsden, the whisky-maker behind all of the Glenmorangie whiskies, he will agree.

How do I know this? I was with Bill for two hours this past week, and I asked him.

How refreshing it is to taste a line of whiskies from one distillery ranging from 10 years old to 25 years old (and from $45 to $875) and decide you like the youngest and least expensive one the best.

But what makes the 10 year old so special? It’s not even bottled at the higher strength of 46% (and non-chillfiltered) like the wood finished expressions in the range. I love it for its subtle complexity, surprising depth, and excellent balance.

Here’s Bill’s take on it:

“I wanted to go back to the way the 10 year old tasted back when I first tasted it in 1994. At that time it was about 50% 10 year old and about 50% 13-14 years old.

To get a similar effect with our current 10 year old, we started introducing “Artisan Cask” whisky into the 10 year old blend. The Artisan Cask line of Glenmorangie comes from slow growth, air seasoned, heavily toasted, lightly charred, American White oak bourbon barrels.

The Artisan Cask whisky provides more roundness, more depth, more vanilla, and a longer aftertaste. We started introducing it in 2005, with about 10% of the whisky being Artisan Cask. Now we’re up to about 30-35%. The rest of the whiskey comes from standard first-fill and second-fill bourbon casks.”

I really enjoy the entire line of the new Glenmorangie expressions (with one exception–I’ll save that for another posting). And with the trend for Scotch whisky distilleries to adopt 12 year old as the entry point for their line of whiskies (Glenfiddich, Aberlour, etc.), it’s impressive for Glenmorangie to show that you don’t need to go to 12 years old to make a good whisky.

But, the key point for you to take from this posting is this: if you haven’t tried Glenmorangie 10 year old lately, you really should. And at $45, how can you go wrong?

Category: New Releases,Opinions,Reviews,Scotch whisky 3 Comments

January 25th, 2008

Friday’s Pick: The Glenrothes, 1975 vintage

John Hansell

The Glenrothes, 1975 vintage, 43%, $500
A polished, very elegant expression with subtle complexity throughout. Notes of squeaky-clean fruit (tangerine, peach, nectarine, kiwi) in light syrup. Vibrant spice (cinnamon, white pepper, anise), creamy vanilla and almond evolve on the palate, leading to a gentle finish. Surprisingly lively for a whisky more than 30 year old.

When I think of great Glenrothes vintages, I go back to the 1972 vintage for comparison. Both are comparable in quality, with the 1972 vintage showing darker sugars, more weight, and more roasted nuts.

Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 93

Category: Friday's Pick,Reviews,Scotch whisky 1 Comment

January 23rd, 2008

An Ardbeg Renaissance: at 55.9% ABV

John Hansell

Finally, after the limited releases of Very Young, Still Young, Almost There, and the other whiskies leading up to a 10 year old Ardbeg distilled–and bottled–by the current owners, our wait is over.

Ardbeg will be releasing, in equally limited quantities, a 10 year old (definitely there!) cask strength Ardbeg in the very near future, which they’re calling Renaissance.

I spent two hours today with Dr. Bill Lumsden, the master behind all the Glenmorangie and Ardbeg creations. Yes, we went through all the new Glenmorangie whiskies (I’ll save that for a later date–lots of good stuff), but I just want to focus on this new Ardbeg today.

[Side note: I'm a lucky guy. Not only do I get to spend time with brilliant people like Bill, but he pulls out cool whiskies like this from his 200ml sample bottles that he brings over in his luggage. I am fortunate to taste this with him months before it gets bottled.]

The verdict of this Ardbeg? Great stuff. I love an Islay whisky that balances its smoky notes and brash youthfulness with a soothing sweetness, and this is a great example. The whisky is aged exclusively in first-fill bourbon barrels, which contributes to this whisky’s sweet, vanilla underbelly.

Bill told me that the ABV may change slightly by the time it gets bottled, but you get my point here. Track down a bottle and get one if you are an Ardbeg enthusiast–or just love smoky whiskies. Bill eluded to the fact that it might be an “Ardbeg Committee Only” bottling (check their website at www.ardbeg.com for more information). The logistics, and the whisky’s price, is still up in the air. But, you now have a mission.

Category: New Releases,Scotch whisky 11 Comments

January 20th, 2008

Will 2008 be a “breakout” year for Irish whiskey?

John Hansell

Not much has being going on in the Irish whiskey category over the past few years (particularly here in the U.S.). But, as Grace Slick said at Woodstock, “It’s a new dawn!” The stars are aligning properly to make 2008 the most exciting year this decade.

All the new whiskeys I mention below have already been reviewed for publication in Malt Advocate magazine’s Buyer’s Guide later this year and all have ratings of 90 or higher. The quality of these new whiskeys, from all three distilleries, is very high.

I mentioned most of these new whiskeys in my blog last year, but the time has come for them to finally start showing up on our retailers’ shelves. So it’s a good time to recap.

To start with, Bushmills, now comfortably under the Diageo umbrella, will be introducing to the U.S., in February, Bushmills 1608, a premium blend to celebrate the 400th Anniversary of the Bushmills area (not the distillery) being granted a license to distill back in 1608. The unique selling point for this whiskey is that it was made with a portion of crystal malt, rather than the standard malt used by distillers.  Brewers will tell you that crystal malt adds some caramelized sweetness and color to their beer. Cost? About $100.

Not to be outdone by Bushmills, the Jameson brand, distilled at the Midleton distillery, has introduced Jameson Rarest Vintage Reserve. As I mentioned in my blog back in October when I visited the distillery, this is a new whiskey which completes the newly organized Jameson portfolio (12 year old Special Reserve, Gold Reserve, 18 year old Limited Reserve, and now Rarest Vintage Reserve).

Side note: those of you who have been drinking Irish whiskey for a decade will notice that they’ve brought back Jameson Gold, a great whiskey (part of which is aged in new American oak) that was available in the U.S. back in the late ’90s, but was then limited to Travel Retail (a.k.a. Duty Free).

In brief, the new Jameson Rarest Vintage Reserve is a blend, like the other Jameson whiskeys, consisting of older grain whiskeys in addition to pure pot still whiskey (containing both malted and unmalted barley), some of which was aged entirely in ruby port casks (with the rest matured in second fill bourbon casks). I was told that the grain whiskey is 23-24 years old, with the pot still component being slightly younger. The whiskey is bottled at 46% and is not chill-filtered! Expect to pay around $250 for the Rarest Vintage Reserve and about $60 for the Gold Reserve.

Then there’s the Cooley distillery, with whiskey on the market finally reaching 15 years old. For years, the whiskey at Cooley has been good at best, because of young stocks and limited supply of stocks. The peated Connemara releases a few years back hinted at their potential greatness. Now the distillery has some amazing whiskeys of the non-peated variety too!

They are the Tyrconnell 10 year old Port Cask Finish and the 10 year old Madeira Cask Finish, both bottled at 46%. I was blown away by the quality of these whiskeys, especially the Madeira Cask Finish. I don’t have a price for them yet, but I can’t imagine they will be too expensive, given their relatively young age.

There are more Irish whiskeys coming out too, which I will elaborate on at a future date. But these five new/reintroduced whiskeys (Bushmills 1608, Jameson Rarest Vintage Reserve, Jameson Gold Reserve, Tyrconnell 10 year old Port Wood Finish, and Tyrconnell 10 year old Madeira Wood Finish) should help bring Irish whiskey out of the mothballs in 2008.

Category: Irish whiskey,New Releases,Opinions 9 Comments

January 18th, 2008

Friday’s Pick: Willett Single Barrel Estate Reserve Bourbon

John Hansell

Willett Single Barrel Estate Reserve Bourbon, Barrel # A-4614, 47%, $35
Bottled in a really cool glass pot still decanter. Soft and elegant on the nose and palate, and very well balanced. An incredibly drinkable whiskey. There’s no age statement on the bottle, but it was bottled at just the right time, based on its great balance of flavors. Notes of vanilla, coconut, and crème brulee, provide a base for emerging notes of cedar wood shavings, cinnamon, soft mint and a hint of fennel. A very graceful bourbon.

Advanced Malt Advocate Magazine rating: 90

Category: Bourbon,Friday's Pick,Reviews 21 Comments

January 17th, 2008

Buffalo Trace….Rum?

John Hansell

That Mark Brown. He’s a clever one. During my December visit to the Buffalo Trace Distillery, Mark (the President and CEO of Buffalo Trace) thought he would have a little fun with me.

I don’t think it was even 9 o’clock in the morning. But there I was, sitting in the conference room next to his office, with a “Who’s who?” of Buffalo Trace distillery workers sitting around the table. On the table were more than a dozen sample bottles, with the labels facing in the other direction so that only they could read them.

I knew what was going to happen next.

Mark told me that he has more than 1,500 different experiments going on right now, and he thought I would like taste some of them. But, he wasn’t going to tell me which experiment it was until after I tasted the whiskey and told him what I thought of it (with everyone else looking on, of course).

I nosed and tasted my way through malt whiskeys, oat whiskeys, whiskeys with different setbacks, whiskeys with different oak board “heat” treatments, etc. He pours the next whiskey for me and says:

“What do you think this one is? If you had to make a guess, what would it be?”

I nosed, I tasted. I nosed again and tasted again. It smelled like rice to me, but they’re no way I’m going embarrass myself in front of everyone and say that it smells like rice whiskey only to find out that it’s a traditional bourbon recipe spirit that was put into toasted oak barrels and infused with bamboo shoots, or something like that.

So, I just say, “Mark, with over 1,500 different experiments, there’s no way I’m going to identify what it is. Why don’t you just tell me?”

“It’s rice whiskey, John,” he said.

Great…so much for my fifteen minutes of fame.

So, I work my way through more samples until we get down to the last two. I nose and taste them twice and say: ” I don’t like these at all. ”

That’s when Mark told me: “They’re aged white rum samples.”

Talk about bending my mind. I hesitated for a moment, recalibrating my brain cells. They make terrible whiskeys, but they are fairly decent rums!

Both were distilled in 1991 from a column still in the Virgin Islands. One was aged in a new charred oak barrel. The other was aged in a used charred oak barrel. It was an experiment to see what rum aged in bourbon warehouses and Kentucky climate would taste like.

One was very clean and fairly light in flavor. The other was rich and full-bodied, but lacked subtly and refinement.

We joked about the whole thing for a while. But then I had a thought: “What if we blended the two together?” So that’s what I did.

Bingo! This stuff tasted pretty good. Certainly good enough to bottle. The Buffalo Trace team sampled the rum blend, and agreed.

But how? When? And where will it be sold? At the distillery gift shop? Specialty retailers?

According to Mark Brown, the current plan is to release the rum under the Buffalo Trace Experimental Collection line. This, I am looking forward to.

Buffalo Trace Rum. What next, I wonder?

Category: New Releases,Other spirits 10 Comments

January 15th, 2008

Sazerac Rye 18 yr. old, Part II

John Hansell

Expanding on my blog posting last Thursday regarding the past two vintages of Sazerac Rye 18 year old being stored in stainless steel tanks, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the reasons why this is happening.

The obvious one is to keep the whiskey from aging longer, which would increase the risk of the whiskey getting too old and woody. But, why would Buffalo Trace do this in the first place? Why not just bottle more of it? (They could bottle ten times the amount they currently bottle and it would still sell.)

Because you don’t have any more, that’s why. Excluding the 18 year old stock currently in stainless, the oldest rye destined to be Sazerac Rye 18 year old is only 11 years old. That stash of 18 year old in stainless , as President and CEO Mark Brown told me, “will trickle out over the next 7 years” until a new and consistent supply of 18 year old rye whiskey is fully matured.

So, Sazerac Rye 18 year old will continue to be in very short supply for several more years. If you find some, and you like rye whiskey, stock up!

And one final note, before you ask. Yes, according to Mark Brown, the Sazerac Rye 18 year old stored in stainless is, indeed, 18 years old, not older (which it could legally be).

Category: Opinions,Rye whiskey 13 Comments

January 13th, 2008

I helped pick a cask of whisky. Don’t buy it.

John Hansell

When was the last time you ever heard me say that?

First off, let me say it’s not that the whisky I helped to pick is bad. In fact, I think it’s quite good. It’s just that I think there’s one even better. And if you are on a limited budget (these whiskies are fairly expensive), you should get the one I didn’t pick.

Allow me to explain.

This past July, I was part of a group of six people invited to the Glenfiddich distillery to help pick this year’s single cask vintage. (A complete write-up is in the 4th Quarter 2007 issue of Malt Advocate magazine.) The group consisted of drinks writers, chefs, and perfumiers. We were given samples from six different casks to nose and taste (two from 1974, two from 1975, and two from 1976).  We chose one from 1976, Cask #516. Indeed, it’s a nice whisky from I believe was a (refill?) sherry butt. The Spanish oak is very evident, with its crisp oak spices peppered throughout, along with vibrant fruit.

The previous vintage, which you can still find on the shelves from some retailers, is a 1973 vintage, Cask #9874. It was chosen by seven coopers, along with master blender David Stewart, back in 2006. This whisky is from a second fill sherry cask. This is a beautiful cask of Glenfiddich. I rated it a 93 back in the 3rd Quarter 2007 issue of Malt Advocate. I think it’s the best of the Glenfiddich vintage releases over the past several years. Those coopers should change careers and become whisky nosers!

While we were at the distillery, I wanted to compare the whisky we chose from 1976 to the previous 1973 vintage, but they didn’t have any of the 1973 vintage at the distillery. (Not even the gift shop!) So, I had to wait until I got back home to compare the two samples.

The verdict? Compared to the 1976 vintage, the 1973 vintages shows more ripe fruit, a wider variety of flavors, with a softer underbelly. If I had to pick between the two, I would pick the 1973 vintage. Sad part is, I don’t even have a bottle of the 1973 vintage, just the last few drops from  the 100 ml review sample I was sent. ( And, with a price tag of about $600, it’s quite possible I never will.)

But don’t let that stop you. If you have over $1,000 to spend, then by all means buy both, enjoy both, and do your own taste comparison. But if you can only buy one bottle, buy the one I didn’t help to pick.

Category: Opinions,Scotch whisky No Comments

Older Posts »


Whisky Advocate magazine is America's leading whisky magazine. It's the number one source for whisky information, education and entertainment for whisky enthusiasts.