Well, if we’re going to highlight all those benchmark whiskies over the past two decades, I suppose we should take a look at the other end of the spectrum: the defining whiskies that disappointed us.
It doesn’t have to be the worst tasting whisky you ever had. It could be a trend that was started that you didn’t like, a whisky that pushed prices to absurd levels, or something else.
For example: Loch Dhu. It wasn’t the worst whisky I ever tasted (although I must say that it was not my cup of tea, given that tasted like someone dumped some bourbon and dark rum in it), but I think it was a complete waste of good whisky from the Mannochmore distillery. I’m really glad this didn’t turn into a trend. And you can still by this whisky at specialty retailers and at auction for an absurd amount of money.
What whisky disappointed you? And why? (And let’s keep this gentlemanly, okay?)
You keep thinking up these cool topics!
Glen Grant NAS: I really didn’t like the taste of it. Thin and watery is what I remember. It ended up in some really good whisky sauce though.
Bruichladdich Black Art: Although I read somewhere it was the follow up of the Blacker Still it isn’t even in the same league. The pinkish color is more than a wee bit offsetting.
Frysk Hynder: A Dutch single malt which is just really really bad in my opinion (and many other’s)
Old Crow Bourbon: I tasted a bottle which had been open for several years at a retailer. For some reason I though it was old, probably gone bad already. Can’t imagine the taste was what it was supposed to be, but it makes me very careful of buying the brand.
My biggest disappointment is that the Whisky tasting blogosphere has stopped “reviewing” whisky (good and bad as happens in movie reviews, for example) and is now simply “commenting” on what someone else has decreed is good whisky.
Let me explain what I mean; on many Whisky blogs (at least 5 that I can remember), someone (not me) has asked the blogger “why are your marks always so high” to which the reply is always something like “I only taste good Whisky, hence the high marks”.
This begs the question: how did the blogger know what was good Whisky to start with ? And more importantly, who is this secret source of reviews of good and bad Whiskies that bloggers refer to? I’d like to get my hands on these “source” reviews of the bad stuff, as one often learns just as much from a bad review as from a good review (to come back to the movie review analogy).
BTW: the fact that I am posting this comment on this particular blog is not a negative, but rather a positive as I feel that this is one of the least elitist whisky blogs, where my comment might be discussed curteously and constructively.
I think you may be overreacting a bit. Contrary to what you may think, most of us bloggers buy our whisky, so we prefer to buy whisky with a high probability of liking it. I generally don’t like wine finished whisky, so why would I bother to buy them and review them? Does this mean all wine finished whisky is bad? Of course not, but if I would try them all, I fear the majority would get bad marks anyway. I still think a personal pre-selection is one of the reasons for having mostly whiskies you like on a blog.
By the way, someone has to be the first to publish notes. So at least one blogger should have an honest opinion, don’t you think?
On the other hand, it’s true that lately more people start blogs after having tasted a handful of standard malts. They have no clue about older stuff and their ratings tend to be too high, indeed.
I agree with @whiskynotes’ point that most bloggers only review the whiskies that they buy. For my own ratings I buy all my whisky myself as well, but I also buy and swap samples. I will only buy bottles that I might eventually like because I don’t want to be left with 65 cl of manure.
But concerning samples I have no hesitiations whatsoever to buy or swap even the wierdest stuff like Loch Dhu or the infamous Rothaus Black Forest single malt. After all I want to taste as many expressions as possible. But even so, whenever there is a large number of samples on offer, you tend to prefer those you have a good feeling about.
On my blog you will currently find ratings from 15 to 94 points, so I do use the entire scale
This is totally different from people who get review samples from all over and don’t have to care to send money on the whisky they review. Buth then you might run into some other psychological effects like not wanting to disappoint the donator by writing a bad review;-) I am convinced that this is not the case for the owner of this very blog, but the danger certainly is there.
It doesn’t stop me from doing it, but I do feel badly when I write a negative review.
I’m happy to review bad whisky if anyone wants to send me any, like the Loch Dhu
I’m disappointed in the distilleries who seek to finish everything in some obscure wine cask or try and make the peatiest whisky or whatever. I’d rather they just got on with making good whisky!
Can we please have a topic: “Why can reviewers have such radically different opinions (and scores) of certain whiskies?”
I have quite a few striking examples ( Laphgroaig 25YO, Lagavulin DE, Glendronach 15YO, Yamazaki 18YO and Chivas Regal 18YO, come to mind)
I don’t know about anyone else, but I like all of those.
Haven’t tried the Chivas 18 or the Laphraoig 25, but I like the Glendronach 15, Yamazaki 18 and the Lagavulin DE (admittedly some other Laga’s are a lot better – including the standard 16YO, but the DE’s still pretty good).
In fact, I’d rank the Glendronach 15 among the best whiskies I’ve tried of late. Then again, I love the sherry…
Why wouldn’t they? Everyone has a different idea of what constitutes a good whisky. That is as it should be.
I suppose I just never got the Bruichladdich release concept although I understand they had stock constraints. None the less, I found it disappointing and difficult to try and keep up with the overwhelming number of releases covering a wide range of styles and, to me, quality. Even with a resource like Whiskyfest, I am sure there are many Bruichladdichs I never had the chance to taste and so passed on purchasing. It became more like an independent bottlers line-up for a period of time in my mind.
Bruichladdich did what it thought it needed to do to raise cash and to do so until it could age enough whisky to create a standard 10 or 12 YO. It didn’t (and doesn’t) have the deep pockets that others had with similar stock problems who could be more patient (Ardbeg for example). I too found some of their whisky finishes less than I would have hoped but I love that they were willing to take chances and try things that others would not. I give them great credit for that – I also love their PC series and while Port Charlotte distillery is now on the back burner they have shown that excellent whisky can be made at a very young age.
I think that the new owners will have been running Bruichladdich for 10 years, starting in 2011. From there on, I think you can expect to see a more stable portfolio. (I hope so.)
I think they’ve done something quite good with the Resurrection 2001 bottling. Same thing with the vintage Oloroso 1998 and the Orpheus. McEwan can probably put Bruichladdich back on the track as he done with Bowmore…
B.J., John,
I agree that we should see more of a standard line-up going forward and I applaud that they did not stick to convention to overcome a difficult stock and financial situation. I also loved quite a few of the early releases like the 17, 20 and 1970, as well a rum finish (a 1986 I think) done for Bayway Liquors in NJ. But at the end of the day I tend to spend my money on what I can sample and enjoy no matter what the distilleries background story is.
Would agree on the Bruichladdichs never really got what a standard bruichladdich is.
The Macallan replicas – went too far
Balechin wine finishes – never felt it worked
All overly priced fancy boxed whiskies but Dalmore and Macallan seem to be vying for the crown
Last drop – came from nowhere – decent whisky but over egged story and hugely over priced compared with someother similar whiskies.
Blackwood distillers – enough said
Greenspot special editions – love green spot but the limited editions were just way over priced.
Glenury Royal 50yo – dissapoint for such an olds and expensive whisky
Octomore – not that it is a bad whisky just may have been the start of this over the top peat war.
Roseile – potentially the end for a lot of distilleries
Whisky Collectors – increased amount of whisky collector is good as more and more collectors means more special editions and morechoice but has raised the prices hugely.
Most disapointing to me?
Alright, this is a purely personal view (from a Laphroaig fanatic, particularly sherry-matured) but will still be considered heretical AND damnable!:
All post-eighties Ardbeg bottlings. [SCREAMS OF OUTRAGE HEARD AROUND THE WORLD!]
The bottlings strike me as disjointed. Each constituent malt seems to be on a solo run with little reference to the others in the vatting.
My yardstick in whisk(e)y is balance and in that respect I can’t detect/understand it in contemporary Ardbegs.
I’ve expressed this view to others in the past, ususally getting pitying looks or remarks along the lines of “You just don’t get it”.
I’m sure I’m not alone in this view. Or am I?
Please agree with/disagree with /correct me as appropriate.
I’m here to learn like the rest of ye!
I tend to agree that the current Ardbeg range is almost as confusing as the Bruichladdich mentioned in previous comments. But, at least in the Bruichladdich range one generally knows what’s in each bottle. In the case of Ardbeg all one has is a name cooked-up by the marketing team. Guess that’s what happens when you let marketing run amok.
I think Ardbeg has done two things – First, unlike Bruichladdich, they brought us along as they developed their new 10 YO starting with their Committee bottling of “For Discussion” – They didn’t do finishes and other things to keep product moving while they got to that 10 YO
Second, they did play around with stock they had to create expressions that generally were a balance of bourbon and sherry barrels but to a much lesser extent then Bruichladdich – At most Ardbeg has produced five or six of these expressions. Bruichladdich has produced scores more using lots of different finishes.
I do wonder sometimes why they decided to match Bruichladdich’s Octomore with Supernova but that is the only direct comparison I recall
B.J.,
My opinions re Octomore and Supernova cannot be uttered in any respectable/reputable forum.
Think back to the vituperation that erupted around the Diageo Managers Choice bottlings and you’ll have a flavour of my thoughts on these “fine whiskies”.
Luke- I think I get the drift
Hi B.J.
I partially agree with you on the Ardbeg note. I do like some of the bottles of the last decade (Corryvreckan), but compared to what they did before, they should have changed the name, since it is not really comparable to ‘old ardbeg’. The Rollercoaster, Supernova and Black Mystery bottles are just gimmicks in my opinion.
Bruichladdich is even less impressing to me with the finishes but they do what they think they have to to survive. The plan for the coming years at Bruich is to lower the amount of finishes and releases steadily as they get more whisky at good ages. A staff member there told me that recently and they are quite happy for it, since not even each Bruichladdich guy there is fond of the 378 or so releases (slightly exaggerated). There are some nice ones in there, but those are the proverbial needle in the hay stack.
I think the above can be said for most new distilleries with only young whiskies (Arran, Edradour since the Signatory take over, BenRiach since the new owners in 2004). Thusfar I think of the new distilleries only Kilchoman is more on the right track.
Sjoerd
We don’t really disagree – I do find a few of their releases more market driven and less “production” driven but I think they will be careful in how far they take that – They have a brand name now that is among the top in the industry for quality and they along with Highland Park, Glenfarclas and others have to be very careful to not lose that reputation- If folks like Mickey Heads, Russell Anderson and George Grant continue to make key calls for their distilleries I trust the products will continue to be – on the whole – superior. The danger in my view is when people not directly investing in the line operations begin to make the calls – then you risk exactly what you and I both are concerned about -
disagree
My big disappointment is also one of my favorite whiskeys!
Elijah Craig 12 year was, years ago, a hot, harsh bourbon that was a challenge to drink. Now, Heaven Hill is bottling an incredible product under that label, and at an approachable price, proof that what was a bad experience in the past may not be so in the present.
Here is a bit of a conundrum I have been saddled with recently- I’ve been drinking scotch for the past 8 years, I have followed reviews and done a fair amount of experimentation within regions and styles.. I have now drifted towards Islay and mostly concentrate on that region. I have tried a few times to get into bourbon and rye, and here is my disappointment- American Whiskies taste like ass. I have really tried to enjoy them, over and over, I keep thinking, “well, I just need to drink a more matured one, a more mellow one, a more recommended one..” and each time, across the board they taste like young vatted malts.. it’s like drinking Red Label. (not even as good as Red Label) Most recent disappointment was Pappy Van Winkle’s Family Reserve 23 Year 47.8% abv (95.6 proof) and Hudson “Single Malt” Whiskey by Tuthilltown Spirits… I know that taste is subjective, but the “Hottness” of Bourbon just immediately takes me to young /cheap scotch and I dont get it.. I want to find a decent US whisky, is this too much to ask for, or have I refined my taste and I cant go back??
As a primarily American whiskey guy, I found it really interesting that the two American whiskeys you mentioned were the Pappy 23 and the Hudson malt. I agree that neather of them are very good, but for very different reasons. The Hudson is too young, hot and overpriced, and the Pappy 23 is too old, boring and overpriced. What else have you tried and disliked? Have you tried any of the young Van Winkles or anything from Four Roses?
My Benchmark disappointment is that there are still some distilleries that do not get the attention they deserve:
Ben Nevis
Glengoyne
Glen Ord
To name a few. Whatever the reasons be (and I know a few of them), it still seems that in the face of growing demand for malt whisky, high malt whisky profits etc, some malt whiskies are still ‘bit-part’ players in the malt whisky world. Whilst others (Glen Grant?) get loads of attention and are quite frankly not that interesting – I’m talking proprietory bottlings here of course.
My other benchmark disappointment is when I get a press release from a whisky company stating ‘We are The Best’ (or something similar) – because someone has written, published, whatever, that they think such and such whisky is the best in the world. As if anyone is qualified to make such a statement. I’ve sat on numerous panels trying to decide what is the best whisky, and quite frankly most of these panels were absurd taking whiskies from a short list so smalll as to make the average contributor here chuckle ’cause their drinks cabinet is bigger!
Ben Nevis is really a curious case isn’t it? We visited the distillery in 1998 and it seemed this odd mix of tourist destination and disorganized distillery. Their bottlings were not very good and they seemed to have no interest in making them better. This last trip I picked up a 25 YO they had just released because the price was reasonable and I simply had no Ben Nevis in my collection. Not a bad whisky but reflective of the seeming disinterest in making this distillery stand out.
For me the Glenlivet 18, I found it a little bit “unflavorful” for my expectations. I mean I started with the 12yo, then the 15 yo and as older as I was getting on the range the better it was until 18yo. Maybe it was my expectations that went the other way around and I didn’t understand the nature of this good whisky.
I agree about Glen Grant NAS, It is like tasting some kind of whisky tea.
It certainly speaks volumes that, post-tour, the folk at Glen Grant leave visitors unsupervised to have as much (read little) of this as they want.
For me it’s Macallan. I never had Macallan prior to 2008, but for all the hype and all the price each one I have had has been hugely disappointing. At a restaurant recently they tld me they had Macallan 25 for $35…at that price I took a shot. I would not have paid $35 for a bottle of that stuff. When we received the bill the waiter told us that the bartender had made a mistake and the Mac 25 was $75..but they were still charging me $35. I was flabbergasted when I got home and checked and saw the Mac 25 was $670 a bottle!! For all the talk about Diageo and pricing I think Macallan is the worst offender. Ridiculous prices for middling product.
Many years ago, I was “let go” from a business and was poured a dram of Macallan 25 to soften the blow. Maybe the context didn’t help the whisky, but that was the drink that taught me that age, price and hype have no bearing on taste.
My biggest disappointment would be the “Masters collection” from Woodford Reserve. I liked the Chardonnay cask bourbon, the four grain was good and I really dont care for the sweet Mash at all. Don’t get me wrong, all are quality products but with a $90 price tag per bottle I would have expected more from Chris Morris.
What’s interesting to me is how much I love the Old Forester Birthday Bourbons that are released every year. At about $40 a bottle I think these bourbons are amazing and a great value.
They are hit & miss. The Four Grain was one of the best whiskeys I ever tasted, but the Sonoma-Cutrer Finish is one of the worst I ever tasted. The Seasoned Oak was good also. Very inconsistent.
Vince, I also love those Birthday Bourbon releases. For me, they show up a lot of the more expensive and higher proof, not to mention harder to find, bourbons out there.
John — this should lessen that “bits being chomped” sound.
McClelland’s Islay. Smoke on water — similar to Gllaguno’s whisky tea @ 9. So bad that I won’t give the other McClellands a try.
Diageo. Arrogance, allocation, and anti-social (just try to get them to answer the mail).
Texas @ 10: the Macallan 12 is second on my list for the worst I’ve tasted (with apologies to Lucas @20 on yesterday’s topic).
Glenlivet 21.
And most recently Glenlivet in general — a 75% increase in production capability? Indeed!
I had a dram of Macallan 12 at Pappa’s Seafood in Houston…absolutely ruined the whole meal. Only dram I have never finished. It was like chewing on a piece of bark.
Wow, while I’m not the biggest Macallan fan, I’m shocked to hear the 12 getting blasted by you guys. Personally, I enjoy the 12 (and 18 even more, but not the Fine Oak series as a whole), but I do agree that the pricing (for the 18 especially, but others too) is hyperinflated. That said, valuewise, I believe, Springbank, Bruichladdich,and Edradour are some of the worst values in the whisky world. Quality is decent enough, but the pricing is outrageous.
Whoops..I need to correct myself..that was Macallan 10 FO I had..never had the 12.
My big disappointment is: a lot of distilleries now lower their whisky strength on their core bottling and now bottling at 40% abv… They pledge the search for the perfect whisky bottling, everybody know that’s pure s**t, cause lower the strength of whisky (by adding more water (?) ) allow them to make more profits…
Bad industry move: Diageo for a lot of reasons… closing a lot of distilleries, cutting jobs, their Manager’s serie (are you kidding me ??? – 500$ for a 10yo bottle ?!), most of their distilleries don’t have any web site (hey guys, were in 2010, wake up !!!)
Bad whiskies… Murray McDavid bottling never quite impressed me so far. Aberlour 10yo (my god help me), Arran St-Emilion finish, Glenlivet range (returned all my bottles for refund), Highland Park 25yo new edition (well, even HP can make a bad whisky…what a deception), Macallan Fine oak range, 10yo specially and 30yo -900$ a bottle for that ?)…
Whilst not a great or challenging whisky, the Arran St Emilion is a nice and very fruity drop. It goes down easily at 50% too. Not brilliant, but I wouldn’t put it in the category marked ‘great disappointments’.
Glenrothes Select Reserve – in my opinion, a whiskey that never measured up to the vintage releases.
I agree with this one. I enjoy the vintages; don’t care for the Select Reserve at all.
I agree, but I fear this is true for other distilleries as well. Once you’ve tasted the more expensive stuff, cheap entry-level malts are sometimes hard to enjoy.
Not at the same level, though. I enjoy Macallan 12, Weller Antique, Highland Park 12, Dalmore 12, Bowmore Legend, etc.– all fairly “entry level” – but none are so disappointing when compared to the upper end of their respective product lines. The disparity between the Glenrothes vintages and the Select Reserve seems more dramatic.
I have not found that to be the case with myself. I like HP 18 a lot..better than the 12, but I still like the 12 and especially the G&M 8 year. I also like Laph 10 better than the 15, and Tali 10 better than the 18.
Texas, I agree on all those points. Especially, I think what seems to drop out of Tali 18 somehow comes back in the 25, but I like it best in the 10.
Consider, though, that Glenrothes entered the market on their vintage releases, and then introduced the select reserve as a way to maintain market presence between vintage releases. That’s a very different situation than the distillery that has a steady presence of several levels (i.e. a 12, 15, and 18). I don’t pick on Glenfiddich for bottling their 12 year old, even though I can’t bring myself to drink it (I like the 15). Glenrothes, on the other hand, should not have bothered with the select reserve.
As an interesting data point – I just now tasted the Select Reserve BLIND and thought it was even worse than when I first tasted it.
I’d definitely drink any other entry-level single malt before this, even the mystery malts.
I agree, but I fear this is true for other distilleries as well. Once you’ve tasted the more expensive stuff, cheap entry-level malts are sometimes hard to enjoy.
Where I live, Italy, the biggest disappointment might be Macallan. I probably need not mention the universal complaint of the disparity between price and product. I certainly could mention the significant drop in the quality of their sherry whiskies among the OB bottles I can afford. Anyone who has had the Giovinetti imports, be it the 12yo, 18yo, and/or ‘Full Proof’ (to say nothing of the Rinaldi imports), know that today’s sherry bottles don’t measure up.* Finally, mention needs to be made of the disappointing Fine Oak series which, it seems to me, hardly rises to the standards Macallan used to hold. I think the Macallan brand stood for excellence twenty years ago. They had it both ways: they produced a good product and had a reputation for producing a good product. Now, it is not clear to me that they want people to drink their whisky on its own merits.
*I was not drinking Macallan (or any other whisky for that matter) fifteen years ago, but the Giovinetti bottles that I have had over the past eight years from that time were all quite good. I’m not prepared to argue ‘bottle aging’ as to why they tasted so much better than the sherry today.
Unfortunately, I have not enjoyed the American single malts I’ve had. Perhaps glowing reviews and my own excitement led me to expect too much.
Glenfiddich Cubaba Reserve or whatever they called that cuban rum 21-yr-old before it was imported tot the US. Picked up a bottle in duty free at Heathrow back in the early 2000s for around $100 US. It wasn’t bad but for the price I thought it was less than exciting
I have to disagree here – The Havana Rum Cask and the one that followed were nice whiskies and considering how terribly wrong some rum cask finishes can go these are/were pretty good – Now I cannot account for the price but when I bought mine it was reasonable for a 21 YO.
Fair enough. I just thought it was far too subtle. Particularly when the retailer at duty free gushed about how wonderful it was and the fact I could have purchased a far more challenging whisky that day for the $100 I spent on the Havana Reserve.
That would be the Cubana Reserva.
Nearly every American craft distilled whiskey, save Old Potrero and Charbay, has been a huge disappointment. The craft distillery movement has all the hallmarks of greatness (enthusiastic proprieters, innovation, creativity, tec.) except in product quality.
Canadian Whisky continues to disappoint as a general category. There’s lots new but not so much good.
90% of Bruichladdich’s massive output is disappointing, but 10% is brilliant.
The failure of the Tennessee Whiskeys to do anything innovating. There is some good whiskey there, but they could be doing a lot more for the whiskey consumer.
Ardbeg, as others have stated, they have fallen far, a mish mash of odd names and NAS whiskies. Massively over hyped IMHO. As with most things this too shall pass…
I know we aren’t supposed to call out the walk of shame, but….
Tormore, it should have gone to blenders, or as paint solvent
Old Ballantruan, it makes you think all peat should be left to Islay
Woodford Chardonnay Finish – you follow up Four Grain with that – look around its still easy to find on shelves
Wild Turkey Sherry – my mistake, i shouldn’t have risked my tastebuds on it.
The main conceptual problem I have is with bourbon/American whiskey marketing. Think of the Templeton backstory with Al Capone, Iowa etc. and its distilled in Indiana, the Bulliett marketing while being made by Four Roses, and there are countless others – its borderline deception, and sanctioned by law. It makes bourbon look like vodka – all gimmick and no there. How about listing mashbills and/or warehouse shape and location within the warehouse as way to differentiate and market? Just a thought.
Bravo to your last paragraph.
Yes yes!
-Anything from Tobermory!
-Bruichladdich is a very inconsistent line with no identifiable character. They need to have a core range and stick with it. Some are great (I had a Sassicaia finish that was amazing!), some are not good at best.
-Benromach Organic: Organic should be kept to fruits and vegetables. Not good.
-Usquaebach 15 yr.: Are you kidding me for $80!
-ry1: Not worth the $$$.
-Snow Grouse: A hot mess.
Jason, I agree with Ri1, as it’s seems to be an example of marketing/packaging being emphasized over the actual whiskey. I’d like to add Basil Hayden to the mix. For me this was a disappointing bourbon that stood out. Any bourbon bottled under 90 proof would make me think twice.
I’m going to give a nod to the first comment here and throw out Old Crow (which I actually did throw out when I tried it on the off chance it would be a palatable cheapie). It’s the first time I have actually poured whisky down the drain. My only regret is that I didn’t think to make a marinade with it or something instead…
My recent disappointment is Rittenhouse Rye Bottled in Bond. It’s not that it’s bad, it just is very unexciting and tastes much like its price point. For the money, I would have been happier with some entry-level Four Roses…or even a run-of-the-mill blended Scotch. Perhaps a bottle of Tamdhu would have done the trick (not by any means a single malt competitor but a pretty good bang for the buck). Unfortunately, I can’t afford my palette so I have been on a futile quest to find a decent bottle of whisky for a cheap price. So far, I haven’t found much. Suggestions are welcome since I’m really still a newbie by comparison.
Mitch
I dont know if you have tried Old Grandad Bottled in Bond or Old Weller Antique 107. Both are very reasonable and very good. If you can afford the Old Grandad 114 I would go there as well. Also, Old Forester Signature is a very good bourbon under $20.
Ditto on the Weller..for bourbons my favorite moderately priced bourbon is Wild Turkey 101 for around $20. Wild Turkey rye for $22 is great as well.
Ditto again on the Weller; mighty fine stuff.
But we’re talking about disappointing whisky: Tangle Ridge. The first Canadian specialty I tried; the first whisky I spit out because it was so wicked sweet.
Some good but inexpensive single malts (prices are in the Houston, Texas area)
Tomatin 12 yr $29 (good)
Macphail’s Collection Highland Park 8 yr $32 (very good)
Glen Garioch 8 yr $28 (decent)
Aberlour 12 $36 (very good)
Mitch,
Give Old Pulteney 12 years old and Strathisla 12 years old a try. Depending where you are, you might find them for high $30s to low $40s.
Evan Williams Single Barrel comes in for under $30 and is an outstanding (and to me very easy drinking) bourbon.
I’ll add voice to the GlenRothes Select Reserve folks, and add:
Springbank tokaji finish.
I received free drams on several occasions and just couldn’t drink them. I say this as one who robustly appreciates Springbank/Longrow.
Mark, I dont know about this but have tasted the Longrow tokaji finish and felt the same, and I’m also a Springbank/Longrow fan.
Yes, yes, right. I was hasty; it’s a Longrow. Odd on the nose, strange taste, and a finish I wanted to give back. Presumably, other folks took to it. In fact, from the Binny’s site:
“An amazing bouquet that oozes with scents of pears, banana bread, figs and toasty malt. The palate entry is rich, salty and dense; the midpalate features succulent flavors of dates, grapes, sautéed bananas, sweet malt, sea breeze, sweet oak and honey. Ends up sweet, compelling, and idiosyncratic. Worth every cent and more.” 96-100 pts.
Reviewed by: The Wine Enthusiast 96
$84.99
I agree with the “idiosyncratic” part. Whatever the wood finish brought seems to me to have totally overwhelmed the whisky.
Hey, those wine guys…they’re all about great whisky!
A most peculiar whisky. Very much a mood whisky.
Alas, none of my moods were appropriate.
A Hungarian friend of mine was shocked at how bad the Tokaji finish was, so was I. (we’re both huge Tokaji fans).
I just remembered one whiskey which I could not drink at all. It was a mesquite-flavored American whiskey called McKendrick. I don’t think it’s being made anymore. (Thankfully.) Has anyone else ever tasted this stuff?
Never even heard of it before. Probably glad that I hadn’t!
Hi John,
I had a bottle of this and you are right, it wasn’t a drink, it was a synthetic concoction. Never did finish it and can’t remember what happened to the bottle – probably still cleaning a drain somewhere as I type.
David
Yes and I agree, it was undrinkable. The sad thing is that they probably took some perfectly good bourbon and ruined it with their mesquite treatment.
Missed opportunity: Having a great appreciation for the Scottish heritage of east-coast Canada, I have really, really wanted to see Glenora of Nova Scotia make a malt that could at least stand with basic serviceable Scottish malts. So far they have disappointed badly.
The Bandwagon: Islay, Islay, Islay. Yes, it’s a special place, and a lot of great whisky is made there. But there’s more to malt than the Kildalton coast. Drinkers who can’t get out of that rut are a bore.
I generally like the Islay’s but I have to exclude Bowmore.
I really don’t like the stuff, sometimes soapy, perfumed nose and palate. Horrible.
Heard it is a bit better now, but I don’t dare to try it.
Heartily agree. Bowmore Darkest is one of two bottles I’ve used to clean the drains, and the 15 years old Darkest isn’t any better. Tried the 12 with the same palate response.
i like the bowmore 12 a lot–it’s richer/warmer on the palate than the other entry-level islays and on cold minnesota nights that’s a good thing. but i have to agree that the 15 y.o darkest is not up to snuff.
For something to be a big dissapointment there will have to be some kind of expectations involved.
At Limburg this year I went to a few masterclasses and one was the Diageo Manger’s Choice masterclass. I wasnt really expecting anything from these, they weren’t particular exciting whiskies but as I didnt pay much nor expected anything I wasn’t dissapointed, and the masterclass was well lead.
Just as an example- the same weekend I joined a couple of masterclasses with Cadenhead and AD Rattray, two of my favourite IB bottlers and was a bit dissapointed with the whiskies they choosed for their Limburg masterclasses. Why not serve better whisky at an anorak festival, when you got loads and loads of good stuff. I can’t figure that out
Just for the book, I only put those two masterclasses up as slighlyt dissapointing, I been to much worse tastings expectationwise – and things that did dissapont me most over the years WERE tastings mainly – tastings I went to with high expectations and that showed up to be dissapointing, some has been excused for as a mistake and we got part of the money back. Worst example was a masterclass that was 55£ and was supposed to be the best that bottler have in their stock (and they have loads of real good and real old stuff), but we got 2 “cheap” supermarketshelf bottlings and 3 of their own label from the cheap end. What a dissapontment.
Other dissapointment has been bad lead masterclasses, I can’t taste 4 whiskies in 15 minutes which I have been forced to a few times. What a dissapointment
Back to the subject..is there any whiskies that dissapointed me over the years ?
Longrow Takoji finish. I bought 3 bottles and have had 2 bottles for sale for years, no customer queue there
Scapa, price and age keep going up, but the whisky ain’t improving for me
Ardbeg Committee bottlings..well the stuff they put out 10 years ago were a lot more exciting and lot less expensive from what we see these days. Supernova and RC are not bad whiskies but they are sold at the same prices as some of the initial Committee bottlings like Kildalton, 23yo’ish sherry single casks, The 21yo etc.. Guess I (and everybody else) shouldn’t have told the world how great Ardbeg is and just kept it secret
The list is longer, I’d often bought a bottle that wasnt as good as expected, but the positive surprises are happening a lot more so I see it as part of the excitement of being a whisky drinker!
Macdeffe
Littlemill 8yo
Loads of Bowmore IB’s (unless you like old lady perfume)
Balveni 17 New Oak, way to astringent.
Benchmark disappointments –
Mackmyra – found it really quite unpalatable. I find the prices incomprehensible.
Kilbeggan Distillery Reserve – I was lucky enough to try some of the single casks that went into this, so I’m baffled at the end result.
Edradour Tokaji finish – love Tokay and quite like Edradour, but this was impossible to swallow.
Price escalation on Irish whiskey – Green Spot limited editions (hundreds for whiskey that’s the same age or less than Redbreast 12), Jameson RVR, and the daddy of it all, Midleton VR.
Non-Irish distillers abusing the term pure potstill.
I don’t know if it qualifies as a ‘benchmark’ but I was disappointed with the bottle of Blanton’s that I bought. It wasn’t that it was horrible, I just don’t think it was worth the $50+ that I paid for it.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t mind cheap tasting whiskey so long as it comes with a cheap price tag. I just dislike overpaying for a product that isn’t worth it.
I am relatively new, as far as whisky tasting is concerned (although I had my first single malt, when studying in Scotland, in 1982) but I do not really like experiments and marketing trends that seem to be so prevalent these days. Bruichladdich is one of good examples of what I do not like about the “whisky business” these days. I also think that, in a sense, NAS trend is an easy way for some distilleries without mature stock to “punch above their weight” and undermine old, more traditional distilleries (I do have and like some of those young whiskies, including Corryvreckan). Why can Lagavulin (or to some extend Laphroaig) “survive” without following those trends? Even the bottle design is simple and elegant. So far Kilchoman is one of my favourite distilleries and I am collecting Karuizawa.
Michael, Bruichladdich is trying to survive as an independent distillery and has to bring out as many expressions as they can to raise cash.
Some are excellent, some are good and some are not up to scratch.
The bottle design of Lagavulin is the standard of Diageo. Look at Talisker and other brands like Caol Ila and you see the bottle design is the same.
I actually like Caol Ila (both whisky and label design) very much. The simpler (both whisky and design), the better.
Michael, what you like, and I do too like CI and Laga, is another thread.
This thread is about what you dislike….
One example: I heard about some Turkish whisky, so I asked a friend to get some.
Well, I got one: a Teyla 3 yo 40 % abv.
What a drain cleaner I got. Full of all sorts of chemical enhancements.
People asked my friend, why he bought the Teyla and not a Johnny Walker at the same price?
I have taken a sip and abandoned the bottle to the back of the drinks cabinet.
I have kept it as a conversation piece , but I will pour it down the drain when it outlives it usefulness.
Anybody want to try a Turkish Whisky?
Cu Dhub was propably one of the worst whisky I ever tasted. Tasted like artificial flavours
Laphroaig 25 YO 40% Diluted peated water for a lot of money
Tokaij finished/ACEd whiskies
and more generally the very young and immature single malts
Laphroaig 25 YO 40% Diluted peated water for a lot of money
Absolutely spot on!!!!!
And and I forgot these 2
the Glenrothes Select. Just a horrible whisky.
and finally the speyside 12, I think someone got a little overzealous with the caramel.
I agree on both counts – except price point on The Speyside is a bit more forgiving than the Glenrothes.
Besides bottlings (the black whiskies, the tokaji finishes, etc etc), for me the following are the most dissapointing benchmarks.
1. The Macallan policy, especially in my country (Greece). Snobish as far it goes, they just want to sell to millionaires, not the real whisky fans.
2. The “collector mania”. Companies took advantage and prices have been raised to the upper limit, a classic example being the “Managers choices” series from Diageo.
I’m a bit late on this topic, and much has been said that I agree with.
My number one benchmark disappointment from a single distillery was the introduction of the Macallan Fine Oak range. The dwindling supply of good sherry casks was turned by the Macallan marketing machinery into the best thing since sliced bread which in fact I would prefer over the FO malts in most of the cases.
My biggest gripe about whisky in general is the the tendency that whisky releases are driven more and more by marketing decisions instead of by thinking about how to produce the best possible whisky.
I’m an American whiskey drinker only so I can’t comment on any other whiskeys. I tried Dewars once and almost threw up. So that’s my extent of knowledge on “the foreign stuff.” Now, my budget is tight and I’m a young, blue-collar dude so I’m all about the bottom-shelf and mid-shelf stuff- or of course anything that’s a good pour for the money. My disappointments?
—Jack Daniel’s (Sewage tastes better!)
—Old Weller 107 (All burn and no flavor. My OGD 114 is 100 times smoother).
—Eagle Rare 10yo (Another harsh, nasty product)
—Old Overholt (What the heck happened? I thought this stuff was excellent PA-style whiskey!?!)
—Maker’s Mark ($15 a bottle would keep it on my shelf, but not $25)
—Michter’s whole product line (As some of you know, I’m sitting on GALLONS of the original stuff from Schaefferstown, PA and even though it was technically a tourist-oriented product, it was some mighty fine whiskey! Chatham Imports/Kentucky Bourbon Distillers should be ashamed of the prices they are peddling their whiskey at!!!)
Many mentions of the Glenrothes Select Reserve and I’m gonna have to add my name to those. I absolutely adore the few Glenrothes vintages I’ve tried, but the SR is shocking.
I’d also add:
Bowmore 15 Darkest (I REALLY wanted to like it as I’m a big fan of sherried Islays)
Auchentoshan Three Wood (Just. Doesn’t. Work)
Elijah Craig 12 (lots of hype; no delivery)
Rock Hill Farms (see above – it’s not a ‘bad’ drink, just not worthy of the hype)
I’m rather glad I haven’t tried many bad whiskies of late. My main ‘disappointments’ this year have been great whiskies being beaten in awards by what I consider inferior whiskies.
E.g. at the WWA:
Rittenhouse 100 Rye (not by any means a bad drop) beats off all comp to be best US whisky overall. WTF? Are people mad? It’s not even the best cheap rye! (I’d give that the 6YO Sazerac). And there are tonnes of better US whiskies out there: Van Winkle 13 Rye, Stranahan’s Colorado, George T Stagg, Saz 18, Thomas H Handy Saz, etc…
Big Peat wins best vatted malt at the WWA. I reckon the Sheep Dip 1990 Old Herbridean is worlds better.
Etc…
I was perplexed too, by Rittenhouse Rye getting the World Whisky Award. That’s our competition, so I really don’t have a clue…
Same here. I ranted about it at the time (i can’t even call it a blog, it was a rant) and couldn’t understand it in the least.
I’ll second in on the CURRENT Bowmore 15 Darkest – it just lacks the character that the previous Darkest had. I kind of feel funny picking on a whiskey I like, but it truly falls in the “disappointment” category.
i said above that i agree that the 15 year old bowmore darkest is not up to snuff; however, i would not say that it is a bad whisky (which seems to be the consensus developing here). it disappointed me because i was expecting much better based on some things i read, and because it doesn’t seem to me to be a big step up from the regular 12 year old which i can get for almost half the price–but i would not call it a bad whisky or refuse it if offered.
Yeah, the Darkest is not awful – it’s drinkable, just a big disappointment (this thread is about disappointments, right?). Something really ‘artificial sweetner-y’ in the finish. I wouldn’t clean the drains with it though (as two-bit cowboy might).
On the plus side, a whisky I was expecting to disappoint turned out to be great. A 4 and 1/2 YO Berry Bros cask-strength bottling of a sherried Ledaig. Sounds awful right? After all, Tobermory/Ledaig have a poor reputation. Wrong! It’s a great little whisky. It’s young and takes no prisoners, but the sherry and peat are great together and given a (hefty!) drop of water and a little time it’s a cracker. The new make must’ve been of great quality…
I ‘m glad you like the Old Heb – we are happy with it as are many so good luck!!!
For me, from rank and file the OB of the Tobermory 10 and Ledaig 10, Glenrothes Select Reserve, Singleton of Glendullan, Speyburn (anything I’ve tasted so far) and the entire Glenlivet core range with the exception of the Nadurra. Higher end disappointments, Tomintoul 27, Macallan 18 and I hate to concur with the Bruichladdich Black Art comment…such high hopes.
and the entire Glenlivet core range with the exception of the Nadurra.
I totally agree with this one, for me Glenlivet deserve the trophe of being one of the worst distillery in Scotland… I’ve bought the full core range of Glenlivet. A friend of mine did a blind tasting (Glenlivet range) and following this, i got back to the store and ask a refund of all my Glenlivet collection. What a piece of s**t… Never tasted the Loch Dhu, but can it be worst than the Glenlivet range ?…
I may not be a big fan of Glenlivet either (apart from “Nadurra”), but you can’t be serious comparing such a historical distillery with the joke called “Loch Dhu”, right?
There are many Glenlivet marks that I enjoy, with the Nadurra being a particular favorite. And some of the Cellar Collection whiskies are outstanding.
A distillery with such history had more time than most of the distilleries to increase their quality and they didn’t with their core range except for the Nadurra. I didn’t get a chance to taste the Cellar collection so i can’t comment on these ones.
Same for Loch Dhu, didn’t get a chance to taste it, but by reading the comments can we say “chance” ?!
I mention core range which for me was the 12, 15 French Oak, 16 Nadurra, 18 and 25. Some indie Glenlivet and the Cellar Collection bottlings I’m sure are top drawer but unknown to me.
i don’t think the glenlivet 12 and 18 are bad at all. i think they get a bad press among some malt drinkers for being very well known and cheap (relatively), and also perhaps because they’re not extreme whiskies. along with glenfiddich they may be the burger king and mcdonald’s of the single malt world (in terms of name recognition among people who’re not aficionados), but they make better whisky relative to the best distilleries than mcdonald’s or burger king make burgers relative to the best diners.
Benchmark disappointments over last 20 years:
Shutdown of any distilleries or related production facilities.
S.W.A. defining terms of what is….
Air Travel limits on amount of liquid aloud as carry on.
Import regulation.
Blackwood
Wheres my Muckle Flugga !!!!!
Other than that all is fine, we still have a cornucopia of spirits to love or hate.
“Air Travel limits on amount of liquid aloud as carry on.”
Never a truer word…
In the UK you’re only allowed 1L of spirit per person. So, basically, it’s one bottle. Pain in the balls when so many producers have travel retail only bottlings – especially if they’re of the quality of the Highland Park 21…
I think it is also a matter of taste.
I really love the bowmore darkest (not the one with 15 years on the bottle)but never spotted these soapy notes.(maybe not the same batch). The tempest is a very nice fruity peated whisky also.
On the other hand, my worst whisky by far is the caol ila 12 years OB(I didn’t like much better older expressions but didn’t try many as I have no motivation to).
I like also a lot the scapa 14 years old. One of the best supermarket whisky for me.
Not all macallan OB are bad, the 10 years old cask strenght is a very good and afordable whisky.
But the recent other expressions are not impressive at all. The Ib’s on the other side give us some very nice expressions!
Bruichladdich is really a problem for me, most of the time it is on the average side(if not lower) but they are some nice things too. I believe they are way more than 350 expressions (by far) as somebody guess higher.
Highland park is also going in the wrong direction. More and more whisky at 40° and the quality going down at regular speed. (it’s sad as I like highland park a lot)
i really like the caol ila 12….
Me too.
The Caol Ila 12 is a good drop if you ask me.
I love Caol Ila (although I do not like practices of this distillery). I actually prefer Caol Ila to Ardbeg (with the exception of Airigh Nam Beist). This just shows that any reviews are pretty much useless unless you match your preferences with the reviewer.
Hmmm… CI is among my favorite of all Whiskys…
“greatness” is subjective for sure, and I could see how it may not be a fave or even a preferred drink – but the quality, IMHO, is there – without subjectivity. I think they make good drinks! They don’t all hit it out of the park (Distillers in Moscatel dissapointed), but mostly they are at least “OK”.
CI cask strength is one of my standard bottles in the cabinet.
When i’s empty, I just buy another.
The same with the Lagavulin 12 yo cask strength 2008 or 2009 bottling!
Yes, Caol Ila Distillers Edition in Moscatel finish was a disappointment. The finish just obliterated the Caol Ila smoke.
The CI 12 is one of my always stocked bottles. I also find that Caol ila 6 year SIG (binny’s release) to be one of the most spectacular fiery drams I have ever had.
I, too, rank the Binny’s 6 year among my all time faves… Still have an unopened bottle. It’s explosive, to say the least. Wish they could find a replacement that matches this one…
Try – before you buy – Binny’s newest CI offering from a Ballechin Burgundy cask – it’s probably one of the most unique drams I’ve had. I admit, however, to some it may be loathsome… too much gunpowder & sulphur (drinks like inhaling fireworks smoke).
Macallan Fine Oak
Go on… the 15′s pretty good.
I totally concur Jazz. I thought the entire fine oak line was a disappointment. A very overpriced disappointment attempting to ride on the coattails of “The Luxury Brand”.
Someone once told me that the only people who like the Fine Oak range are the whisky writers. I liked most of the range, so I guess I am the poster child for this.
I have no issue with you liking it..but if you try to convince me that the price of the range is reasonable.. the 10 year is truly terrible though
I think the Fine Oak 17 is quite a good whisky. It is the only one of the range I go back to (I’m with you regarding the 10, especially), but I believe the 17 is an outstanding dram. It is over priced; it is a Macallan.
I concur. The 17 year fine oak is the only one I have enjoyed.
I must say that my biggest disappointment the amount of “sulphurish” sherry cask releases out there. For me it’s totally undrinkable when the sulphur kicks in with the smells of rubber, old eggs and all the other bad things.
I’ve said this before to John and he is not generally too happy about it ,but I find the large majority of Heaven Hill products that I’ve sampled to be quite inferior to Trace and Beam efforts… I also think all this focus on Malts of Asia and India is tiresome… I’m sure that there are many good examples of whisk(e)y over there,but — who cares ?
Sorry, that you so tunnelvisioned, but you lose out of some of the best single malts, like Amrut and the Japanese.
A lot of people care, if you are not.
Open up and enjoy what other countries can contribute. There are some good ones there.
What a useless comment … a lot of people don’t care also about what is made in usa… they are also missing good whiskies.
I think what can make a good whisky fan is to stay aware of new products, from various places, just to be aware there is good stuff anywhere on the planet…Amrut, Kuruizawa, Ardbeg, Mackmyra, Nikka, Sullivan’s Cove, Forty Creek, Alberta Premium, Finger Lakes, McCarthy Oregon, Woodstone Creek…
I have been making beer ,mead and various types of stronger potables since 1970,so I am not without some background… Thank you Andre and bgulien for putting down someone who doesn’t share your marvelous enlightened attitudes…The World of the Malt Advocate Group is no longer fun— just a lot of ego clowns…. Bite Me………… Here Endeth The Lesson.
Cool down man, just telling i think it’s wrong to say there’s nothing good outside usa. This isn’t a fair comment.
And btw the fact you are making beer of other stuff since 30 years don’t make you the GOD of spirits (im not either, but i dont pretend to be the truth itself)
btw2 don’t be unrespectfull vs others, no matter ideas are different from what you think.
Yes, Jon. You crossed the line. We can debate why we like one whiskey and why we don’t like another whisky. And we can disagree with each other.
BUT, I will not allow anyone to attack the character of another commenter (or blogger) here.
Let’s focus on the whiskey, okay?
Maybe I should not have been told FIRST that “what a useless comment”… isn’t that kind of a character attack ?…. I don’t consider myself a God of anything…. either way John does not have to worry about me crossing the line anymore as I deleted whiskey notes and wil not be re- subscribing to the magazine…. I have been a loyal reader since before you had a color format….For the last 4 years all it has done is irritated me….bye bye…
I think Andre was good enough to clarify and explain his comment. He meant no insult. You had a chance to recognize that and respond in a positive way, but you chose the opposite.
I really do appreciate your loyalty (and I mean that most sincerely). But, I certainly do not want to irritate you any more, so I wish you all the best and will say good-bye.
lighten up, francis.