Don’t say we don’t listen to you lot…we’ve done our bit, your turn. Feel free to post over at http://www.themasterblender.com what your thoughts are on it (there’s a blog post going up on Monday about it)

Yes, you are a tad late. Richard’s posting, and the reason behind it, has been well established here, because of his schedule at the time.

The good news is that he will be back later in the year and he promises more detail at that time. I’ll make sure he sees your comments.

First, I’d like to thank Richard for taking the time to stop in and say a few words on this blog. However, I’d have to agree that the original post was a bit disappointing – not much was said in regards to the whisky other than how many Americans are ruining the dram by putting ice in it. I’d have to agree with Harvey on many points – it is a bit egotistical to think that it’d be enough to just stop by and saying hi on a blog full of very enthusiastic whisky drinkers. I think the idea behind guest bloggers from within the industry is that they can give us some great insight that we wouldn’t be able to otherwise get. Which is why I appreciate Richard’s responses – these are great. The reasoning for adding caramel colouring makes sense from a marketing point of view, for reaching the broader customer base. I’ll even concede to 40% ABV if its justified as out of a desire to reach a broader customer base (or to extend stocks or avoid higher ABV tax) – who of us started out with loving the higher proof spirits. But that isn’t the reason we got. “studies have shown that people drink their whisky straight at 40% and if they were to drink anything higher they would be aneasthetising their tounge with the stronger ABV.” IF this were the case, why is it that we all get more complex and flavorful whiskies when we see them at higher proofs – it can’t simply be a continuing coincidence. In regards to ice: I think it humorous at best that this is criticized. This ruins the dram but chillfiltering and caramel colouring do not? And how does this ruin those bottled at higher proofs that are offered if the ideal is 40% ABV and consumers are encouraged to water down? There obviously is a bit of disagreement over what does or does not take away from the whisky. Richard states that chillfiltering only takes out the fatty oils – but science has revealed that lipid fats act as reservoirs for flavor. So less fatty oils, less flavor. What I would love to see from your line up Richard is something along the lines of what you currently have (for the broader customer base) and something a bit more serious (some unchillfiltered, high ABV – maybe even cask strength?- , no caramel colouring distillery bottlings; a “natural” series. I also have a question regarding refill. I’m curious if Dalmore or Jura have a standard for number of refills they run on their barrels. Also, how many times do you distill a mash? Or if Richard has signed off, does anyone else here know?

You’re probably finished with this discussion, but do you ever do presentations in Ireland? I’d love to go to one. Maybe I’ll catch one at a whisky show over in the UK some time.

John

Like BJ said, there’s a lot of passion here and it’s great to see different viewpoints. This is how we learn and mature. Keep it up!

BUT, we need to always be respectful and professional with our comments. Brief, and to the point too! And while it’s okay to not like a whisky or disagree with someone’s viewpoint, I don’t EVER want anyone attacking an individual’s character here. Let’s keep it to whisky, okay? Thanks!

As a long time subscriber to Malt advocate, I’d agree that it’s readership as well as the readership of this blog are not in need of the kind of consistency that chill filtering and caramel coloring bring to the product (or take away, if you’d prefer that interpretation) but would we provide a large enough customer base to keep our favorite distillers in business? I rather doubt it. And as Richard pointed out, there are alternatives out there.

John, keep up the great work,

Dave Gregoire

Richard is a great ambassador for single-malt and on more than one occasion I have been the beneficiary of his wit and wisdom. I love Dalmore (even at 40 ABV) and have tasted some of their new expressions including the King Alexander – Keep them coming!

I know how strong (no pun intended) Harvey feels about cask strength whisky and I also prefer whiskies at 46% and above. That doesn’t mean that a 40 ABV whisky cannot be enjoyable but it does make you wonder what that dram would have been like at 43 or 46. I think G&M has really shifted its emphasis away from the 40 ABV bottlings and I think its been an improvement in their wonderful products.

We just did a tasting of all 26 non cask strength Flora and Fauna’s at 43 ABV and it was delightful but might have been even more delightful at 46

Just wanted to say, I finally got a chance to try some of the new Dalmore expressions this weekend (12, Gran Riserva, and the 15). All incredibly good whiskies! Quite pleased to add them to the collection.

I won’t get involved in this thread’s comments after this, but you obviously have your mindset and opinion and that is that, but I did point out to you that we offer whisky which is not chillfiltered and whiskies at 40% and higher ABVs which was your main arguments and points of contention. So how can you still be “arguing”? I explained the reasons behind it and also told you that there are alternatives.

I’m sorry that some expressions don’t suit you, pleased you are fans of others. At the end of the day there are whiskies out there for everyone and it falls to us all to make sure people get the chance to explore them.

As for your constant harranging of the previous century – which you seem to constantly bring up in negative tones – where do you think your whisky comes from?