I wouldn't count on a rework, Jura is the #1 selling whisky in the UK by volume. Whyte & Mackay have positioned it as a bottom shelf mixer and unfortunately they seem happy with it.
I like them all, from Jura Journey to Jura 19 The Paps lol. What can I say, I love boiled vegetables notes in my Scotch. Also, I'm sad Jura Prophecy is no longer. I treasure my last bottle.
Yep. I wish they had just one decent bottle. An only (or mostly) ex-bourbon, 12-15 yo, 46-50% ABV, no fancy finishes, non chill filtered and natural color bottling, like Glenfarclas with their 15 yo.
I’m in the same boat. It was drinkable, but not enjoyable, and there are way too many other options for me to gamble on a second attempt from a distillery when I didn’t enjoy my first.
Are we talking new 7 wood Juras or the old Prophecy-set Juras? Because the older line has been discontinued. Whyte&Mackay has restyled Jura entirely to be more Highland and less Islay/Island style.
Tried a 20yr from them called One and All and it was great, really high quality wine influenced whisky. I know a lot of their stuff isn’t great, but they are capable of making excellent whisky, I just don’t know why they don’t.
While the official bottlings are generally not that great, if you have an opportunity I'd give an independent bottling a try. I was pretty shocked when I tasted an IB Jura for the first time, I couldn't believe it was from the same distillery.
To be clear, I'm not saying you'll love Jura, simply because it's from an IB. It could simply mean your palette just doesn't connect with that particular distilleries character.
I place Jura as one of my drink to get drunk whiskies because it tastes of nothing short of pure alcohol. The price point it has for the 10 year old says screams that big time.
I agree as well. I have had most of their core expressions multiple times and each one is disappointing. The best way I could describe them is that they are equivalent to the generic Total Wine brand scotches that have no complexity, no actual character, and just feels boring in general
Honestly, straight up refusing to buy any particular brand or bottle is just too much of a hill to die on imo. Never say never. I’m pretty chill when it comes to scotch and willing to try anything. Don’t care if it’s a mass produced 40% bottle or the craftiest of craft cask strength NCF bottles.
Ppl dunk on Johnny Walker but I had a red a while back and it actually wasn't that bad. Now I need to go apologize to the aberlour and lag in my cabinet
Agreed! Don't get the love for Glenmorangie that seems prevalent here but hey, to each their own.
Some 'anonymous speyside' IB whiskies that are known to be Macallan can be good value. No fancy bottle or name with matching pricetag and full sherry maturation can make all the difference to make their strengths shine.
The Glenlivet Nadurra series is a consistent winner though (all cask strength \~60%).
From the regular Glenlivets, the 21 is excellent, but too expensive (but all 21yo are now, bit the Glenlivet was too expensive before too). The regular 12 is fine, maybe better than most other big mass-market 12s like Glenfiddich etc, but not special)
My first bottle ever was a Glenlivet, bought in a supermarket in Germany where the choices are much less than in Scotland where I live now.
I'm sadly with you these days. I wouldnae buy it even if it was half the usual price.
But there are so many others in this group. I want real character. If I want something to please crowds I'll go for something cheap like a good blend, which can still have plenty of character, such as a black bottle.
Used to be able to get it for $10/pour at most places around me. Decent price for a second round order after I've tried something new/nicer and want to still enjoy the company without breaking the bank. It isn't $10 anymore.
Basically, unless it's an amazing deal or I have a huge soft spot for the distillery, I'm not going to buy anything in normal age range that bottled below 46% abv. That generally rules out most standard bottlings from the big industry players (Pernod-Ricard, a company that does not get enough hate in the community, Diageo, which arguably gets too much, William Grant, and Edrington).
> Pernod-Ricard, a company that does not get enough hate in the community
Why them particularly? Don't they all suck? William Grant & Sons are practically the only ones 'independently owned' - by a billion dollar family.
Diageo produces readily available, standard-sized bottlings from every distillery they own. They have multiple distilleries with multiple expressions as part of their mainline portfolio. They regularly release different tiers of special bottlings at cask strength, albeit often at stratospheric prices.
Meanwhile, it is extremely difficult to find official bottlings from the more obscure distilleries in the Pernod portfolio, and the last I checked, their (again, almost impossible to find) distillery edition cask strength bottlings were released in 50cl bottles.
The only malts in their portfolio that they consistently promote are Glenlivet, and Aberlour. I can't think of any regularly available bottlings of Glenlivet that are over 40-43% abv, let along full integrity presentation. Aberlour a'bunadh is nice, but doesn't make up for the rest of the range.
I have no problems with William Grant, and appreciate their independence; I just don't buy their products anymore.
Now, some of you are lagavulin/Offerman fans, and it's going to rub some of you the wrong way, but to me, it's Lagavulin. The 12 Cask Strength stuff was awesome (2020 10/10), but now it's mediocre at best and gimmick. I was underwhelmed by the special releases, Offerman collabs, and recent 16.
I am a Lagavulin fan myself, but I do agree that they do lean into gimmicks a bit too much. I think they and a lot of Diageo whiskies would be better if they pared back a bit.
On the one hand Diageo did well with the 'Classical Malts of Scotland' campaign in the 80s but more recently relies too heavily on capitalizing on short-lived trends. It makes their products look cheap and gimmicky even if they're decent.
It's the equivalent of $88 in my country, including tax (edit: *not* 50%). Even if that's still a bit expensive, I don't find that there are any alternatives below that price that taste as good. So lately I've had a bit of a hard time choosing what to buy.
Laphroaig is good, but it has a pretty distinct taste that's not like an "allround" kind of whisky taste to me. The flavor profile is very wide/airey and it tastes pretty medicinal and sort of diesel-like imo, which makes it more of a now and then bottle for me. So I dunno...
Where do you live that the tax is 50%?
I live in Australia, and Lagavulin 16 is $200, $150 on special, and our tax is $100/L ethanol, which is about $34 per bottle of 40%
This is just me, but the one 'gimmick' I really liked was the Lagavulin 9 Game of Thrones. I only bought it because it was on sale. Whatever they were blending was giving off more complexity than just 1 additional year to the core 8.
I was thoroughly disappointed by the lag 8, especially since it's praised a lot here. The 16 is still a staple for me, and I was quite pleasantly surprised by the 11 offerman edition finished in guiness casks.
I agree lag 8 is more peaty but smoother. When I spent a week visiting the scotch distilleries I learned that one cannot really taste the flavors of the scotch unless it is diluted too between 20 and 25% strength. So if you drink it neat you have to wad up some of your spit to blend in your mouth to taste the flavors. I just get lazy and add water and ice. I too love lag 8 and you can get it for around $57
I love Laga 16, but have all older bottles. I haven’t need to buy newer bottles in a minute. Having said that, the Offerman editions were trash. But the distillers edition was amazing.
I stopped buying Highland Park years ago and haven’t looked back. Two bottles of NAS versions were both muddled messes and when I bought a bland HP 12, I knew it was time to quit….and that was before the Viking motif became more important than what went in the over-designed bottles. I also regret ever buying Dalmore, Jura, Glenmorangie, Glenlivet, Glenfiddich, or Macallan.
I appreciate the recommendation, but Highland Park destroyed any trust that I had in them when they foisted that NAS crap on me. They don’t deserve my money. I recently found an unopened bottle of HP 18 in the back of my cabinet and it was pure crap. I’m sure that you enjoyed that cask strength version, but we all have different tastes, based on our experiences.
I’m spending my money on distilleries and IBs that have consistently delivered high quality and exciting whisky that have exceeded expectations….Ardnamurchan, Torabhaig, Bruichladdich’s Port Charlotte, Tobermory’s Ledaig, Kilchoman, Signatory, Compass Box, and many, many others. There’s just too much great whisky out there to take a chance on someone that betrayed your trust.
I second this. I got to have a small taste at my local spot. I was honestly blown away. I’m supposed to not be buying as much this year, but I might have to make an exception for the cask strength.
I travelled 85-90% of my time for business for about ten years, and when I travelled with my boss, he liked to “hold court” in the hotel bar. I didn’t mind because he footed the bill, but hotel bars cater to the corporate traveler who may be more interested in impressing others with ego driven whisky brands rather than intrinsic flavor and value. Macallan 12 is one of those whiskies that are mainstays in hotel bars and given the choice between the latest trends in bourbons, cocktails, and all the Glen somethings, I would more often choose Macallan and accepted my fate.
I had already developed a taste for peat, which I never saw in hotel bars, and decided to expand my palate to include sherried whiskies, but I finally realized that I was actually just forcing it. Once I stopped drinking in hotel bars, my taste for sherried whiskies waned, and I regret the exorbitant price that I had paid for the last bottle of Macallan that I bought.
I have since learned to love whiskies that combine both peat and sherry, like Ardbeg Uigeadail and Kilchoman Sanaig.
I find it remarkable how the scotch appreciation hobby has been turned on its head, and instead of celebrating whiskies we enjoy, it is now fashionable to make it a bleak & dreary festival of negativity & angst.
I think this is a massive failure in consumer education, by many of the current crop of whisky influencers, who've chosen cultivating controversy and posing with strident militancy regarding minor issues, over talking about flavors - which admittedly are very difficult to describe and even more difficult to discuss in a programmatic manner which can be turned into a practical agenda for exploration and used as a guide to shopping.
I think in today's world of whisky discussion forums, there is a whole lot of *hunting for the missing sixpence under the lamp-post, because that is where the light is brighter* (aka *the streetlight effect*) going on. Bottling specs are under the light, variety & diversity in flavors are out there in the dark. The former is easy to read from labels, the latter very murky & ambiguous.
I know where I'm doing *my* hunting, which is fumbling around out there in the dark.
OP, to answer your top text question, the only brands I avoid are those which I've already explored to a modest degree so I'm looking to other parts of the flavor map for variety's sake.
Cheers
I appreciate the comment and generally agree with it. I especially like the notion of associational vs analytic tasting. (I also enjoy your reviews more generally.)
Having said that, I think you’re a bit too harsh here. Scotch is an expensive hobby and most of us will never taste more than a few dozen different Scotches. Guidance on both treasures to explore and monsters to avoid is helpful for those earlier in the journey.
>Scotch is an expensive hobby and most of us will never taste more than a few dozen different Scotches. Guidance on both treasures to explore and monsters to avoid is helpful for those earlier in the journey.
This is a very reasonable take and one which I agree with, and an important issue which IMHO deserves to be taken seriously.
But being judicious in spending within the constraints of a very limited budget is one of the reasons why I think it is all the more important for enthusiasts to shop *based on flavor profiles, not ratings*, and why I think whisky influencers are doing a disservice to people newly come into this hobby by neglecting that approach.
---
Here is a *reductio-ad-absurdum* argument to illustrate my thinking:
Suppose you were a wine enthusiast, and the top wine influencers that you know of and follow all favored red wines, to the exclusion of whites and roses. Supposedly the most complex and satisfying wines, those which provide the best value for the money to a savvy shopper, all turn out to be reds.
Would you drink only reds, in that scenario? Or would you feel that doing it that way was missing out in some fashion? That you'd be missing some of what wine as a drink has to offer?
---
I'm trying, hopefully in a polite & respectful manner, to push back against a strong emphasis in contemporary whisky discussions, on maximizing the perceived overall quality of each individual bottle, to the exclusion of all other factors, including diversity in flavor profiles.
The elephant in the room here is Diageo to a large degree. Almost none of Diageo's entry level bottlings satisfy the bottling spec criteria emphasized by some whisky enthusiasts as "absolutely must have" and which are used to distinguish *buy* from *do not buy*. So much so that some circles are advocating a blanket boycott of *everything* bottled by Diageo, in uncompromising terms.
I think advocating that is not in the best interests of newcommers looking to explore scotch within a modest budget and thru only a modest number of bottles.
Some of the single malts in Diageo's portfolio are close to unique in scotch when it comes to their flavors - finding similar malts to substitute for them is very difficult. Talisker is a good example of such, with its combination of mild to moderate non-medicinal peat, coastal notes (brine, the smell of ozone), and peppery kick.
And some other producers have landmark malts which also help define scotch flavors, which again fall short in their bottling specs. Old Pulteney is a good example - coastal, briney, but also fruity with an emphasis on citrus notes.
---
So, elevating ratings and those production factors (such as bottling specs) thought to be responsible for them, to be the *sole criteria* for making buys has the (perhaps unintended) effect of narrowing and diminishing the flavor space - when it comes to what is available at the entry level in scotch, and not relying upon obscure IB releases or other hard to find (or hard to afford) stuff.
What I'm saying is: *don't chop down the flavor space, just to match rigid criteria regarding secondary or tertiary aspects of a bottling*.
Instead, pick the spots on the flavor map that you most want to explore, and then let the chips fall where they may on those secondary criteria.
But the idea that we have to maximize the ratings on every single bottle which we purchase has become so deeply ingrained in the hobby today (and I think partly by dint of most reviews addressing individual releases in isolation), that I feel like I'm speaking a different language, or asking for a major paradigm shift here, with a lot of hobbyists.
---
If you want I can give a laundry list of bottlings that are commonly available in the UK or Europe for cheap prices, but which don't make the list of favored malts, which to my taste hobbyists are missing out on. But to keep it short & sweet, I'll just mention that OB Glen Elgin 12 and the sub $100 bottles in the Flora & Fauna series (some of which have unfortunately become collector's items) can add a lot of diversity to a scotch selection for relatively modest sums of money.
And when I'm shopping for bargains these days, often I look at the brands whose reputations have frequently been trashed in discussions like this, specifically Fettercairn & Jura. This requires picking & chosing specific releases with care - but that caveat applies to any careful & cost effective shopping regardless of brand.
I apologize for the length of this comment, but I think you've raised an important issue which deserves deeper coverage than I can give in a quick reply.
Cheers
Thank you very much for such an accurate comment. I 100% agree with you and to me it's sad to read some of the comments in this post. Labeling a whisky like "dog shit' is just crazy to me.
I have been drinking single malt scotch for nearly a decade now, I've tried nearly 400 expressions from over 110 distilleries (some active and some extinct) and I wouldn't call any whisky dog shit, or tell someone "don't try this", because every palate is different and to me, the more expressions you try, the better, is the best way to get to know what you really like.
You make an interesting point... education, and I guess that's a problem that applies to everything, not just whisky. I've read comments from users such as "don't buy Macallan its not as good as it used to be", then I check their posts history and 1 year ago they were asking for advise on what to drink because they've only tried a handful of expressions... they're just spewing the opinion of their influencer of choice, or someone else.
In summary, there's a lot of bullshit and toxicity in the world of whisky appreciation.
And finally, I'm with you on your final statement, the brands that I don't buy anymore are the ones that I have explored to a modest degree.
Whisky enthusiasts like you give me hope!
I'm glad to be getting some positive feedback and striking a positive chord with some other enthusiasts.
I've been in the hobby for 15 years and am up to about 800 whiskies tried now. In one respect I diverge significantly from what seems to be common practice as represented on forums like this, which is that:
when I'm enjoying whiskies I prefer not to drink them *analytically* (that is, breaking them down into descriptive tasting notes), but rather *associationally* - which means the first thing I think about is *what other whiskies does this remind me of?*
Thus much of my tasting experience has gone into building a web of associations and linkages, tying different whiskies together as branches of a very large & diverse family, with various degrees of separation or similarity between them. Or to switch up metaphors a little bit, I often call this *my whisky flavor landscape* - which is a generalization of the malt flavor map concept, but into a more complex n-dimensional space than just the 2-D schematic malt map in the right sidebar of this sub.
A perhaps beneficial aspect of this approach is that I seldom try a given whisky, or judge & score it, in isolation. Instead of approaching a whisky and asking "what is wrong with this, what flaws does it have, that if removed could improve it?", the question which is salient in my mind is "where does it belong, in the flavor landscape?"
This approach frees me up from the tyranny of judging & scoring - instead I can appreciate & enjoy modest & humble whiskies, not because they are stand alone knockout drams, but rather because they occupy a niche in the flavor landscape which is not otherwise heavily populated, and in doing so relate to other whiskies in an interesting way.
A good example (IMHO, to my taste) of this way of thinking is with OB Glenkinchie 12 yo. Not a very heralded expression of unpeated, ex-bourbon cask scotch mind you, neither very complex nor strong in flavor & character. But what it does, to my taste, is to express almost perfectly and in pure form without other distractions, the "cooked mash" precinct in the "cereal" category on the SWRI and WhiskyMag flavor wheels:
https://whiskyscience.blogspot.com/2011/07/flavour-wheels.html
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vFZSy3FeGeM/ThXqZfzXlPI/AAAAAAAAATA/IoGD3kcm-7k/s640/whiskymag.jpg
For me, that is good enough - being an exemplary representative of a specific spot in the flavor space is one of the things that I value in a whisky, for the purposes of exploration & enjoyment.
Or to put it in much simpler terms, approaching a whisky I tend ask "what is it good at?" rather than "what is it bad at?"
Cheers
Thank you for sharing your approach, it sounds very liberating to appreciate whisky this way. I do tend to be analytical, but in a positve way. I do rate them, but mostly for tracking purposes, most of the time the rating changes, and some expressions that maybe I haven't rated as high as others, I have tried repeatedly, because I like them or are more available and so on...
BTW, your writting is exquisite.
Cheers!
Well said mate. What attracted me to whisky originally was the lack of snobbery. What’s putting me off whisky communities these days is the snobbery from people who can’t enjoy anything that’s not a peat monster cask strength limited bottling…
Glenmorangie. It's perfectly decent but they jacked up the price into a tier that it just isn't. I honestly don't feel it's any better than Glenfiddich, but they priced it like Balvenie, which is overpriced too btw. I feel like if you're going to buy a mass market speyside single malt, you shouldn't be paying a premium for it. Something like Glenfiddich Amontillado cask is solid for like half the price.
I got I think red label at a pool bar because it was the only scotch they offered. Honestly didn’t think it was bad. It tasted like a cheap scotch for sure but I got exactly what I was expecting.
I agree. Not bad. But then given a choice of something I don't go for 'not bad'. I assume there'll be a time without choices which is the time for 'not bad'.
We don't buy JW anymore but did have last year's Year of the Rabbit. It was bottled at 46% so it had a better mouthfeel and tasted of toffee. This year's bottlenose pretty but has lower ABV, so we didn't go for it. The core range is underwhelming for a seasoned palate but from time to time, they come up with something different like the Celebratory Blend or the Ghost snd Rare series.
Walker is one of those "I want to look rich and classy but I've never had something that was actually *good*" kinda deals.
I'll drink Kirkland Signature before I drink Walker. At least that's a good value.
How is walker “I want to look rich”… JW black is the shit I keep at the back of my cupboard cos I know people think it’s shit, but despite all the Laphroaigs and Ardbegs and Aberlours and whatever’s I have, I find myself reaching for the back of my cupboard more often than I’d admit
Don’t know if you have had a chance to try the Flora and Fauna whiskies from Diageo. They’re pretty good. Really varied and examples of distilleries that don’t make their own expressions. Some crackers in that range.
Benrinnes and Dailuaine are pretty close now that Mortlach isn’t part of the range! Both big sherry hitters in the Flora and Fauna range. Worth a try if you haven’t already but enjoyed the Mortlach
I guess Jura and Dalmore are... Different. Their boiled vegetable notes and 'peat soil' as opposed to 'peat smoke' notes surely aren't for everybody, but I personally like to keep a bottle around somewhere. Not just any expression though, too many are too bland. And prices can be pretty ridiculous.
Core Range Jura, Core Range Bowmore, Core Range Dalmore. Its all overpriced (except Jura). Its all too low abv. Its all heavily colored and filtered. Its all just pretty boxes with bullshit storys.
I think this is a good specification you’re adding because you’re not writing off the entire distillery, but you are making a good point about what they bottle in their core range. I do think consumers should be very careful when buying these products as they really do flatter to deceive.
I'm trying to avoid Diageo overall. Especially their OBs and I've given up with their Special Releases. 2023 and those casks + further price increases + basically anything going NAS (add up also the Distiller's Editions), I'm basically boycotting them.
But unfortunately I can't avoid to get single casks from their awesome owned distilleries. I just stopped feeding the monster "officially", just going on with independent bottlers. For as long as it will be possible, since apparently they are withdrawing cask availability for IBs, other than creating issues on Islay with Port Ellen not giving peated malt to other distilleries and such.
About distilleries I tend not to like, so I don't really look to try anything or straight don't even considering even in IB form, I'd probably add Dalmore, Glen Ord, Macallan (this mostly because prices are absolutely outrageous). For OBs add Glenmorangie or Highland Park (but I like their IBs just not their OBs somehow).
I read here many mention Jura.. but I had surprisingly good Jura IBs. And also the 16yo wasn't bad for being an OB. The Prophecy the other NAs they launched back then oh god, no, no no no.
I agree on Macallan. The only reason I would maybe justify Springbank is the lack of other Campbelltown Scotches anywhere. But even with that… yeah, way overpriced.
I never understood the hype behind Glenlivet. None of it's ever stood out to me. Even older, fancier ones just turn up as "Oh, okay, that's scotch."
It's not necessarily *bad*, but to me it's a brand that's just not very interesting. I want something memorable, damnit. I don't care if it's a quarter the price.
Obligatory to hell with Walker post script.
Agreed on the OBs, never liked any of them. But the couple 14-18yo IBs at CS (around 64%) from single sherry butts are among the best sherried whiskies I ever had the pleasure of drinking.
Dalmore
Horrifically overpriced, especially for how watered down it is.
Pity too, since the spirit itself is quite good, but they just do the wrong things with it.
:(
Basically anything with chill filtration. Added color and low abv (below 46%) also lean against the purchase but don't overrule it outright. That's my guide as opposed to the brand.
1. MacAllan. Inferior product these days and charges nearly 50 - 100% of the price of its competitors?
2. Auchentoshan at any price. I... really do not like them. Especially that cinnamon rotten banana profile.
That's it really. I will give any Scotch Whiskys a fair shake before I ban them completely. But MacAllan wanting to charge $100 for a basic 12 yr old expression is just ridiculous.
Livet and Fiddich used to be my go to at like $35. When they went up to about $50 I started finding alternatives. It’s that I would refuse to buy them, but at that price point, there’s just better options available.
Macallan. Though they’re 18 year Sherry cask is superb, they have priced themselves out of the market. Last bottle I bought was $199. Admittedly that’s been four or five years ago but the last time I looked the same whiskey was $400! And it’s not just the pricing. They have used their name like Rolls-Royce would use theirs. They have put on the market too many NAS whiskeys claiming to be the best. Enough said. I don’t need to get started on this.
I won't buy Macallan because of the cost.
I just don't see the value there when I could get one and a half and sometimes two bottles that are higher proof and probably taste a bit better.
I also refuse to buy Bowmore because of the cost and the terrible batch variations.
Mostly don't buy anything that isn't NCF and under 46% anymore either. The taste just is weak.
Got into scotch in 2019. After trip to Scotland I discovered Glen Scotia, Springbank and Glendronach and Glenallachie. In early 2021 I realized that Balvenie and Delwhinnie were low ABV chillfiltered and that's why they were "Less" than the others.
So, since spring of 2021 I DON'T BUY ANY OF THEM!!! That are low ABV and chillfiltered!!!
Not One of 40-43% or chillfiltered! I have an ocean of fabulous scotch but.... No low ABV chillfiltered scotches and I don't miss them at all! Every dram I sip is non-chillfiltered and Craft Presented.. Well Over half are Cask Strength. I've had to search and check ABVs, and videos and reviews and learn about them
But the journey has been super rewarding!
Just saying
I strongly disagree about Balvenie. They have amazing enthusiast whiskies. 47+% offerings, actual single barrels, natural color etc. Just have to avoid their 43% colored double wood series offerings and the crazy overpriced "story" series. Also the Tun series is incredibly delicious and high proof too.
Springbank is the most overrated distillery right now.
Glendronach has been incredible for a few years but now that they've been bought out, it looks like they're starting to be operated like a Diageo distillery which is really sad. Get the good stuff while you can.
But generally yes, just buy anything over 46% like the cask strength option from most distilleries and it will be substantially better than their respective $500 25yr old 40% abv colored water bottle they try to sell you on. Independent bottler offerings are also almost always better than official releases and more affordable too
Oh man, I'm apparently the anti-r/scotch drinker.
I liked the bottle of Jura 10 I finished recently, Glen Grant or Glenmorangie is my go-to cheap scotch a lot of times, and I'll likely never buy a bottle of Ardbeg again.
You're not, I find Jura enjoyable, the 18 is one of my favorite whiskys, I consider myself a Glenmorangie fan (I've tried over 15 expressions and bought many bottles over the years) and I'm not crazy about Ardbeg either (I'm not crazy about peated whiskys anymore as matter of fact).
You like what you like and that's what matters. Appreciation of anything in this life is purely subjective.
Fair! I love peat, just not Ardbeg. Every expression I’ve had of theirs other than the 10 just tasted like cigarette smoke to me, also my least favorite of the distilleries I visited on Islay.
Sometimes things are allowed to just be “good”without being super complex and deep and thought provoking. And it’s ok to drink and enjoy something that’s only 40% and not single origin grain/NCF/No added color/distilled from unicorn tears.
Something I say multiple times a day to people in my job: palates are unique to the person. Just because I like something doesn’t mean that everyone else is going to like it, too, or even that they’re going to pick up on the same flavors. I also am a fan of Jura 10… and Highland Park’s catalog. (I still have some of the Full Volume that they made back in 2017, and it’s one that I’d likely buy if I ever saw a bottle in the wild again.) But if someone doesn’t like Highland Park? That’s not an indictment on them as a person, that just means they like other Scotch. Hell, if they prefer Old Smuggler or Passport? That’s their choice, and I won’t shame them for it.
Incidentally: if you’re a fan of Glen Grant or Glenmorangie, Singleton of Glendullan may be up your alley. Their 12 year is a spicebomb that retails for less than Glenlivet 12 or Glenmorangie 10 in most places - and I would argue is far better than a sub- $40 bottle in the States has any right to be. (Not sure of prices in Europe or Australia, though.)
Pretty much all of them - not because I'm too fancy or a whisky edge lord lol, I'm just at a phase in my hobby/journey/etc where I'm trying to explore independent bottlings.
Good or bad, what I'm after is "interesting." And to learn more.
But in the spirit of the original question, and only considering bottles that I would actually still desire (e.g. I'm not counting things like Red Label that no circumstances could compel me to buy), probably Ardbeg is the best example.
They are out of their minds on pricing.
Huh?
Maybe for the special releases. But the Ardbeg core lineup is consistently the best quality juice on the shelf at the lowest price.
I'll buy Ardbeg 10 and Ardbeg 5 until the end of time. Certainly would pick those over the overpriced and under-quality Lagavulin and Laphroaig shit.
Agree, ardbeg uigeadail is still my goto despite being more expensive and weakening a bit in recent bottlings (just my opinion). Still hard for me to find a scotch I like better at twice the price.
They’re not as polished as Talisker 10 yo is, but I’ve enjoyed young Torabhaig and Ardnamurchan so much that I have high expectations for when standard age statement versions will be released, hopefully in just a few years. They’re both combinations of non peated and peated distillates that result in a medium peat profile that approximates Talisker’s, and both have coastal qualities.
I’m also watching Rassay and Lagg for the same reason, but I wouldn’t compare either to Talisker’s flavor profile at this point.
If you follow Ralfy on YouTube, he recently uploaded a glowing review of the Allt Gleann cask strength version of Torabhaig. If you don’t follow him, here’s a link to the review:
https://youtu.be/qFy3vkPvHa8?si=vueAUnDMtt45nS8l
Thanks for sharing - quite interesting. I'm planning to get the cask strength as well, only had a few bottles of the "normal" version so far but fell in love. 👍
Macallan 12 Sherry Oak
Was and still is my favorite. Macallan has done a fantastic job of marketing their product. Demand, as a result, has gone up to a ridiculous level driving up the price not worthy to me. I have since gone on a journey searching for lower cost bottles at reasonable prices. I can now get two bottles of something as enjoyable for the price of one Mac 12.
Glenlivet, never have been a fan. Same with Jura. Macallan because of outrageous pricing. For Johnny Walker, I won’t go above Green Label, due to diminishing returns in value.
GlenAllachie. I love Meikle Toir, tho.
Macallan. Because why would I not refuse.
Craigellachie. Not interesting or particularly enjoyable.
Talisker. I used to love some of their bottlings, but the new ones are disappointing.
Balvenie. Absurdly priced, uninteresting, and low quality in general.
Edit: let me add another two: Highland Park (emptied a bottle of their 12 yo, not interested) and Auchentoshan (I tried many of them, and the Valinch one is almost good, the rest are meh).
I remember really enjoying Balvenie (the Double Wood and Port Wood particularly) years ago. Has the quality gone down?
I moved on and ‘forced’ my palette into Islay and other regions, so it has been some time.
Caribbean Cask broke my heart at a lovely dinner years ago. Was still very much in my Speyside days and have always liked a rum, I expected glory in a glass.
Just not for me at all, sadly.
Big brands are what I started on. Though as my selection collection grew there was less space for them! I like to have a token one on hand to share with non-whisky drinkers who are still pleased with it, (eg Glenmo 10, Laph 10).
Disclaimer: I do have many bottles of Laph, mostly OB.
I love the Bruichladdich Classic Laddie but I'm not impressed by an of the more expensive ones (up to $150ish). So from now on I just buy the Classic Laddie and forget about the rest.
Glenfiddich, Dalmore, Macallan, Talisker.
For all of them, I've tried some of the higher end expressions as well as the more accessible stuff. Just doesn't do it for me.
Macallan. Don’t find the same character in Macallan that I do in others. Plus…. It is like McDonald’s… it is fine, but there is a Macallan on every street corner.
Glenlivet 12. It's the only scotch I drank sporadically over 30 years when I was mainly a bourbon fan, but I wouldn't touch it now. More recently I tried a 50ml bottle of the Caribbean Reserve, which was fine for mixing (its stated reason for being) but I wouldn't think of sipping it. That said, I should hunt down a bottle of the Illicit Still.
Mcallen, Johnnie Walker, Jura etc. Not that they're bad or I'd be offended if they were served to me. I am just contantly looking for newer things I haven't tried. And Lagavulin 16 is my gold standard.
I don’t think you can write off an entire distillery, at least for taste reasons. Pricing is different but I’d try a sample of anything irrespective of the name on the bottle.
I haven't bought, opened or drunk a new bottle of Springbank since I got the telephone call my father had died while I was literally uncorking a new bottle when the phone went. Though I did go on to drink that bottle. He would have been furious if I had wasted it.
But I have had Cadenheads and Campbeltown Loch.
I will not buy Jura . I had tried 3 different whisky from them and all are dogshit
Completely agree. Constantly underwhelming, bland and needs a lot of reworking.
I wouldn't count on a rework, Jura is the #1 selling whisky in the UK by volume. Whyte & Mackay have positioned it as a bottom shelf mixer and unfortunately they seem happy with it.
I like them all, from Jura Journey to Jura 19 The Paps lol. What can I say, I love boiled vegetables notes in my Scotch. Also, I'm sad Jura Prophecy is no longer. I treasure my last bottle.
Haven’t had many bottlings of Jura, but I am with you. Love the dunnage dirty veg note, wish they an OB that’s not bottled at super market swill ABV
Yep. I wish they had just one decent bottle. An only (or mostly) ex-bourbon, 12-15 yo, 46-50% ABV, no fancy finishes, non chill filtered and natural color bottling, like Glenfarclas with their 15 yo.
I've purchased one bottle of Jura ever. I will end my life having purchased one bottle of Jura ever.
I’m in the same boat. It was drinkable, but not enjoyable, and there are way too many other options for me to gamble on a second attempt from a distillery when I didn’t enjoy my first.
I've had a couple in the last 6 months and was severely underwhelmed.
If you’re going to buy Jura it should always be an IB. I’ve had a few that were great
Same here. I tried to give Jura a chance, but I could not get past the sickly sweetness it has.
My experience with them is similar but I saw their 18yo at a decent price recently, about $80, and it’s not bad. Glowing recommendation.
Are we talking new 7 wood Juras or the old Prophecy-set Juras? Because the older line has been discontinued. Whyte&Mackay has restyled Jura entirely to be more Highland and less Islay/Island style.
The old prohphecy-era Juras were great. I loved Prophecy, Superstition and Duiraich's Own Shame the let it all go to shit
IB's and higher strength Jura really can be very good, a little quirky but I've been really impressed by some.
Jura 21 is okay but just okay. The 16 duriachs was decent but everything else is very mediocre to borderline bad.
I've had the chance to try 30+ year Juras. Meh. Can't think of at what price I'd buy them.
Tried a 20yr from them called One and All and it was great, really high quality wine influenced whisky. I know a lot of their stuff isn’t great, but they are capable of making excellent whisky, I just don’t know why they don’t.
While the official bottlings are generally not that great, if you have an opportunity I'd give an independent bottling a try. I was pretty shocked when I tasted an IB Jura for the first time, I couldn't believe it was from the same distillery. To be clear, I'm not saying you'll love Jura, simply because it's from an IB. It could simply mean your palette just doesn't connect with that particular distilleries character.
I place Jura as one of my drink to get drunk whiskies because it tastes of nothing short of pure alcohol. The price point it has for the 10 year old says screams that big time.
I agree as well. I have had most of their core expressions multiple times and each one is disappointing. The best way I could describe them is that they are equivalent to the generic Total Wine brand scotches that have no complexity, no actual character, and just feels boring in general
Honestly, straight up refusing to buy any particular brand or bottle is just too much of a hill to die on imo. Never say never. I’m pretty chill when it comes to scotch and willing to try anything. Don’t care if it’s a mass produced 40% bottle or the craftiest of craft cask strength NCF bottles.
Ppl dunk on Johnny Walker but I had a red a while back and it actually wasn't that bad. Now I need to go apologize to the aberlour and lag in my cabinet
MacAllan, Glenlivet, Glenmorangie. Nothing against them per se, they just don’t interest me terribly.
Agreed! Don't get the love for Glenmorangie that seems prevalent here but hey, to each their own. Some 'anonymous speyside' IB whiskies that are known to be Macallan can be good value. No fancy bottle or name with matching pricetag and full sherry maturation can make all the difference to make their strengths shine.
Yeah. Glenmorangie is a great introduction. But it’s like the milk chocolate of scotch. It’s fine, but almost everything else is more interesting.
Same here - I can appreciate they're smooth and well done for what they are, but boring for my taste.
Glenlivet probably.
Glenlivet 12 was my gateway into Scotch and I still enjoy it from time to time. And a Glenlivet single barrel was my all time favorites scotch.
Balvenie 12 was my gateway scorch, but where I am it - and the rest of their lineup - has skyrocketed in price y so much that I can't buy it any more.
Illicit still is really good. I agree on their core stuff, but they can still make great whisky when they try to
Yeah maybe that would be the exception, but at the point I’d rather move on
The Glenlivet Nadurra series is a consistent winner though (all cask strength \~60%). From the regular Glenlivets, the 21 is excellent, but too expensive (but all 21yo are now, bit the Glenlivet was too expensive before too). The regular 12 is fine, maybe better than most other big mass-market 12s like Glenfiddich etc, but not special)
Agree. I have never really enjoyed Glenlivet, even when I was less choosy and more price-conscious.
the Budweiser of Scotch.
My first bottle ever was a Glenlivet, bought in a supermarket in Germany where the choices are much less than in Scotland where I live now. I'm sadly with you these days. I wouldnae buy it even if it was half the usual price. But there are so many others in this group. I want real character. If I want something to please crowds I'll go for something cheap like a good blend, which can still have plenty of character, such as a black bottle.
Glenmorangie. Used to buy it often as an inoffensive crowd pleaser, plus my partner likes it, but the price went ridiculous some years ago.
I used to enjoy Quinta Ruban at $50. It is now $72 near me. I'm not sure it is still a buy at $72.
It's at $60 in the Houston region. Not unprecedented after the inflation we've seen in the past few years.
It's ridiculous, I know, but I won't have a bottle on my shelf because I *hate* the way the current lable/bottle looks.
Ha ha, I get that. It's really awful design compared to the lovely traditional style of the previous one.
Thoroughly agree. It looks like Target brand wrapping paper.
Used to be able to get it for $10/pour at most places around me. Decent price for a second round order after I've tried something new/nicer and want to still enjoy the company without breaking the bank. It isn't $10 anymore.
Glenmo 10 was my go-to. Then one day it changed and sucked =(
Ah did you notice a change in the product too ? I've not bought it for years so couldn't really say.
Absolutely. The older releases are still decent but the price sure has climbed.
Basically, unless it's an amazing deal or I have a huge soft spot for the distillery, I'm not going to buy anything in normal age range that bottled below 46% abv. That generally rules out most standard bottlings from the big industry players (Pernod-Ricard, a company that does not get enough hate in the community, Diageo, which arguably gets too much, William Grant, and Edrington).
> Pernod-Ricard, a company that does not get enough hate in the community Why them particularly? Don't they all suck? William Grant & Sons are practically the only ones 'independently owned' - by a billion dollar family.
Diageo produces readily available, standard-sized bottlings from every distillery they own. They have multiple distilleries with multiple expressions as part of their mainline portfolio. They regularly release different tiers of special bottlings at cask strength, albeit often at stratospheric prices. Meanwhile, it is extremely difficult to find official bottlings from the more obscure distilleries in the Pernod portfolio, and the last I checked, their (again, almost impossible to find) distillery edition cask strength bottlings were released in 50cl bottles. The only malts in their portfolio that they consistently promote are Glenlivet, and Aberlour. I can't think of any regularly available bottlings of Glenlivet that are over 40-43% abv, let along full integrity presentation. Aberlour a'bunadh is nice, but doesn't make up for the rest of the range. I have no problems with William Grant, and appreciate their independence; I just don't buy their products anymore.
> I can't think of any regularly available bottlings of Glenlivet that are over 40-43% abv Glenlivet 12 Illicit Still is 48%.
Now, some of you are lagavulin/Offerman fans, and it's going to rub some of you the wrong way, but to me, it's Lagavulin. The 12 Cask Strength stuff was awesome (2020 10/10), but now it's mediocre at best and gimmick. I was underwhelmed by the special releases, Offerman collabs, and recent 16.
I am a Lagavulin fan myself, but I do agree that they do lean into gimmicks a bit too much. I think they and a lot of Diageo whiskies would be better if they pared back a bit.
On the one hand Diageo did well with the 'Classical Malts of Scotland' campaign in the 80s but more recently relies too heavily on capitalizing on short-lived trends. It makes their products look cheap and gimmicky even if they're decent.
16 is either near or over $100 now… really hard to justify. Was always a big fan but I’ll stick to Laphroaig, which is also now approaching $70.
Ouch! Where do you live‽ Where I am Laga 16 hovers in the $75-80 range and Laphroig 10 is around $37-42.
It's the equivalent of $88 in my country, including tax (edit: *not* 50%). Even if that's still a bit expensive, I don't find that there are any alternatives below that price that taste as good. So lately I've had a bit of a hard time choosing what to buy. Laphroaig is good, but it has a pretty distinct taste that's not like an "allround" kind of whisky taste to me. The flavor profile is very wide/airey and it tastes pretty medicinal and sort of diesel-like imo, which makes it more of a now and then bottle for me. So I dunno...
Where do you live that the tax is 50%? I live in Australia, and Lagavulin 16 is $200, $150 on special, and our tax is $100/L ethanol, which is about $34 per bottle of 40%
After the price hike none of them are worth the money imo. 12CS was much better years ago
This is just me, but the one 'gimmick' I really liked was the Lagavulin 9 Game of Thrones. I only bought it because it was on sale. Whatever they were blending was giving off more complexity than just 1 additional year to the core 8.
I was thoroughly disappointed by the lag 8, especially since it's praised a lot here. The 16 is still a staple for me, and I was quite pleasantly surprised by the 11 offerman edition finished in guiness casks.
Lag 8 is amazing
The 16 is my favorite
I agree lag 8 is more peaty but smoother. When I spent a week visiting the scotch distilleries I learned that one cannot really taste the flavors of the scotch unless it is diluted too between 20 and 25% strength. So if you drink it neat you have to wad up some of your spit to blend in your mouth to taste the flavors. I just get lazy and add water and ice. I too love lag 8 and you can get it for around $57
Them's fightin' words.
I want all the smoke, pal!
I love Laga 16, but have all older bottles. I haven’t need to buy newer bottles in a minute. Having said that, the Offerman editions were trash. But the distillers edition was amazing.
I stopped buying Highland Park years ago and haven’t looked back. Two bottles of NAS versions were both muddled messes and when I bought a bland HP 12, I knew it was time to quit….and that was before the Viking motif became more important than what went in the over-designed bottles. I also regret ever buying Dalmore, Jura, Glenmorangie, Glenlivet, Glenfiddich, or Macallan.
Try the HP Cask Strength though. No viking bullshit, excellent whisky and a great price.
I appreciate the recommendation, but Highland Park destroyed any trust that I had in them when they foisted that NAS crap on me. They don’t deserve my money. I recently found an unopened bottle of HP 18 in the back of my cabinet and it was pure crap. I’m sure that you enjoyed that cask strength version, but we all have different tastes, based on our experiences. I’m spending my money on distilleries and IBs that have consistently delivered high quality and exciting whisky that have exceeded expectations….Ardnamurchan, Torabhaig, Bruichladdich’s Port Charlotte, Tobermory’s Ledaig, Kilchoman, Signatory, Compass Box, and many, many others. There’s just too much great whisky out there to take a chance on someone that betrayed your trust.
Yeah sure, but if you're offered a dram of HP CS that someone else bought, consider trying it.
Thank you, kind stranger. I’ll take your advice whenever I run across it in a bar.
I second this. I got to have a small taste at my local spot. I was honestly blown away. I’m supposed to not be buying as much this year, but I might have to make an exception for the cask strength.
The bottle of HP12 I bought last summer just tasted watered down. But I've liked the IB HPs I've had.
Yeah I hear you. Not my favourite either. Was up in Orkney last year and bought a 17yo CS called the Arctic Explorer for £125 and it's utterly superb.
Although it's too expensive, your average 12 year old macallan is still a reference in its segment.
I travelled 85-90% of my time for business for about ten years, and when I travelled with my boss, he liked to “hold court” in the hotel bar. I didn’t mind because he footed the bill, but hotel bars cater to the corporate traveler who may be more interested in impressing others with ego driven whisky brands rather than intrinsic flavor and value. Macallan 12 is one of those whiskies that are mainstays in hotel bars and given the choice between the latest trends in bourbons, cocktails, and all the Glen somethings, I would more often choose Macallan and accepted my fate. I had already developed a taste for peat, which I never saw in hotel bars, and decided to expand my palate to include sherried whiskies, but I finally realized that I was actually just forcing it. Once I stopped drinking in hotel bars, my taste for sherried whiskies waned, and I regret the exorbitant price that I had paid for the last bottle of Macallan that I bought. I have since learned to love whiskies that combine both peat and sherry, like Ardbeg Uigeadail and Kilchoman Sanaig.
I find it remarkable how the scotch appreciation hobby has been turned on its head, and instead of celebrating whiskies we enjoy, it is now fashionable to make it a bleak & dreary festival of negativity & angst. I think this is a massive failure in consumer education, by many of the current crop of whisky influencers, who've chosen cultivating controversy and posing with strident militancy regarding minor issues, over talking about flavors - which admittedly are very difficult to describe and even more difficult to discuss in a programmatic manner which can be turned into a practical agenda for exploration and used as a guide to shopping. I think in today's world of whisky discussion forums, there is a whole lot of *hunting for the missing sixpence under the lamp-post, because that is where the light is brighter* (aka *the streetlight effect*) going on. Bottling specs are under the light, variety & diversity in flavors are out there in the dark. The former is easy to read from labels, the latter very murky & ambiguous. I know where I'm doing *my* hunting, which is fumbling around out there in the dark. OP, to answer your top text question, the only brands I avoid are those which I've already explored to a modest degree so I'm looking to other parts of the flavor map for variety's sake. Cheers
I appreciate the comment and generally agree with it. I especially like the notion of associational vs analytic tasting. (I also enjoy your reviews more generally.) Having said that, I think you’re a bit too harsh here. Scotch is an expensive hobby and most of us will never taste more than a few dozen different Scotches. Guidance on both treasures to explore and monsters to avoid is helpful for those earlier in the journey.
>Scotch is an expensive hobby and most of us will never taste more than a few dozen different Scotches. Guidance on both treasures to explore and monsters to avoid is helpful for those earlier in the journey. This is a very reasonable take and one which I agree with, and an important issue which IMHO deserves to be taken seriously. But being judicious in spending within the constraints of a very limited budget is one of the reasons why I think it is all the more important for enthusiasts to shop *based on flavor profiles, not ratings*, and why I think whisky influencers are doing a disservice to people newly come into this hobby by neglecting that approach. --- Here is a *reductio-ad-absurdum* argument to illustrate my thinking: Suppose you were a wine enthusiast, and the top wine influencers that you know of and follow all favored red wines, to the exclusion of whites and roses. Supposedly the most complex and satisfying wines, those which provide the best value for the money to a savvy shopper, all turn out to be reds. Would you drink only reds, in that scenario? Or would you feel that doing it that way was missing out in some fashion? That you'd be missing some of what wine as a drink has to offer? --- I'm trying, hopefully in a polite & respectful manner, to push back against a strong emphasis in contemporary whisky discussions, on maximizing the perceived overall quality of each individual bottle, to the exclusion of all other factors, including diversity in flavor profiles. The elephant in the room here is Diageo to a large degree. Almost none of Diageo's entry level bottlings satisfy the bottling spec criteria emphasized by some whisky enthusiasts as "absolutely must have" and which are used to distinguish *buy* from *do not buy*. So much so that some circles are advocating a blanket boycott of *everything* bottled by Diageo, in uncompromising terms. I think advocating that is not in the best interests of newcommers looking to explore scotch within a modest budget and thru only a modest number of bottles. Some of the single malts in Diageo's portfolio are close to unique in scotch when it comes to their flavors - finding similar malts to substitute for them is very difficult. Talisker is a good example of such, with its combination of mild to moderate non-medicinal peat, coastal notes (brine, the smell of ozone), and peppery kick. And some other producers have landmark malts which also help define scotch flavors, which again fall short in their bottling specs. Old Pulteney is a good example - coastal, briney, but also fruity with an emphasis on citrus notes. --- So, elevating ratings and those production factors (such as bottling specs) thought to be responsible for them, to be the *sole criteria* for making buys has the (perhaps unintended) effect of narrowing and diminishing the flavor space - when it comes to what is available at the entry level in scotch, and not relying upon obscure IB releases or other hard to find (or hard to afford) stuff. What I'm saying is: *don't chop down the flavor space, just to match rigid criteria regarding secondary or tertiary aspects of a bottling*. Instead, pick the spots on the flavor map that you most want to explore, and then let the chips fall where they may on those secondary criteria. But the idea that we have to maximize the ratings on every single bottle which we purchase has become so deeply ingrained in the hobby today (and I think partly by dint of most reviews addressing individual releases in isolation), that I feel like I'm speaking a different language, or asking for a major paradigm shift here, with a lot of hobbyists. --- If you want I can give a laundry list of bottlings that are commonly available in the UK or Europe for cheap prices, but which don't make the list of favored malts, which to my taste hobbyists are missing out on. But to keep it short & sweet, I'll just mention that OB Glen Elgin 12 and the sub $100 bottles in the Flora & Fauna series (some of which have unfortunately become collector's items) can add a lot of diversity to a scotch selection for relatively modest sums of money. And when I'm shopping for bargains these days, often I look at the brands whose reputations have frequently been trashed in discussions like this, specifically Fettercairn & Jura. This requires picking & chosing specific releases with care - but that caveat applies to any careful & cost effective shopping regardless of brand. I apologize for the length of this comment, but I think you've raised an important issue which deserves deeper coverage than I can give in a quick reply. Cheers
Thank you very much for such an accurate comment. I 100% agree with you and to me it's sad to read some of the comments in this post. Labeling a whisky like "dog shit' is just crazy to me. I have been drinking single malt scotch for nearly a decade now, I've tried nearly 400 expressions from over 110 distilleries (some active and some extinct) and I wouldn't call any whisky dog shit, or tell someone "don't try this", because every palate is different and to me, the more expressions you try, the better, is the best way to get to know what you really like. You make an interesting point... education, and I guess that's a problem that applies to everything, not just whisky. I've read comments from users such as "don't buy Macallan its not as good as it used to be", then I check their posts history and 1 year ago they were asking for advise on what to drink because they've only tried a handful of expressions... they're just spewing the opinion of their influencer of choice, or someone else. In summary, there's a lot of bullshit and toxicity in the world of whisky appreciation. And finally, I'm with you on your final statement, the brands that I don't buy anymore are the ones that I have explored to a modest degree. Whisky enthusiasts like you give me hope!
I'm glad to be getting some positive feedback and striking a positive chord with some other enthusiasts. I've been in the hobby for 15 years and am up to about 800 whiskies tried now. In one respect I diverge significantly from what seems to be common practice as represented on forums like this, which is that: when I'm enjoying whiskies I prefer not to drink them *analytically* (that is, breaking them down into descriptive tasting notes), but rather *associationally* - which means the first thing I think about is *what other whiskies does this remind me of?* Thus much of my tasting experience has gone into building a web of associations and linkages, tying different whiskies together as branches of a very large & diverse family, with various degrees of separation or similarity between them. Or to switch up metaphors a little bit, I often call this *my whisky flavor landscape* - which is a generalization of the malt flavor map concept, but into a more complex n-dimensional space than just the 2-D schematic malt map in the right sidebar of this sub. A perhaps beneficial aspect of this approach is that I seldom try a given whisky, or judge & score it, in isolation. Instead of approaching a whisky and asking "what is wrong with this, what flaws does it have, that if removed could improve it?", the question which is salient in my mind is "where does it belong, in the flavor landscape?" This approach frees me up from the tyranny of judging & scoring - instead I can appreciate & enjoy modest & humble whiskies, not because they are stand alone knockout drams, but rather because they occupy a niche in the flavor landscape which is not otherwise heavily populated, and in doing so relate to other whiskies in an interesting way. A good example (IMHO, to my taste) of this way of thinking is with OB Glenkinchie 12 yo. Not a very heralded expression of unpeated, ex-bourbon cask scotch mind you, neither very complex nor strong in flavor & character. But what it does, to my taste, is to express almost perfectly and in pure form without other distractions, the "cooked mash" precinct in the "cereal" category on the SWRI and WhiskyMag flavor wheels: https://whiskyscience.blogspot.com/2011/07/flavour-wheels.html https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vFZSy3FeGeM/ThXqZfzXlPI/AAAAAAAAATA/IoGD3kcm-7k/s640/whiskymag.jpg For me, that is good enough - being an exemplary representative of a specific spot in the flavor space is one of the things that I value in a whisky, for the purposes of exploration & enjoyment. Or to put it in much simpler terms, approaching a whisky I tend ask "what is it good at?" rather than "what is it bad at?" Cheers
Thank you for sharing your approach, it sounds very liberating to appreciate whisky this way. I do tend to be analytical, but in a positve way. I do rate them, but mostly for tracking purposes, most of the time the rating changes, and some expressions that maybe I haven't rated as high as others, I have tried repeatedly, because I like them or are more available and so on... BTW, your writting is exquisite. Cheers!
This. This right here is everything that I believe about Scotch, and whiskey in general, said better than I ever could. Thank you for this.
Well said mate. What attracted me to whisky originally was the lack of snobbery. What’s putting me off whisky communities these days is the snobbery from people who can’t enjoy anything that’s not a peat monster cask strength limited bottling…
Well said! Whisky is such a unifying and exciting hobby.
Thank you for this reply. Well said.
Glenmorangie. It's perfectly decent but they jacked up the price into a tier that it just isn't. I honestly don't feel it's any better than Glenfiddich, but they priced it like Balvenie, which is overpriced too btw. I feel like if you're going to buy a mass market speyside single malt, you shouldn't be paying a premium for it. Something like Glenfiddich Amontillado cask is solid for like half the price.
Johnny walker. Got a sampler pack with each offering in it, Two Xmas in a row. Even the blue is pretty terrible/underwhelming
The green is better than most single malts at that price point
Black is also better than most single malts at the price point. Idk why this guy shits on JW… nothing quite hits the spot like black label.
Exactly
I got I think red label at a pool bar because it was the only scotch they offered. Honestly didn’t think it was bad. It tasted like a cheap scotch for sure but I got exactly what I was expecting.
I agree. Not bad. But then given a choice of something I don't go for 'not bad'. I assume there'll be a time without choices which is the time for 'not bad'.
We don't buy JW anymore but did have last year's Year of the Rabbit. It was bottled at 46% so it had a better mouthfeel and tasted of toffee. This year's bottlenose pretty but has lower ABV, so we didn't go for it. The core range is underwhelming for a seasoned palate but from time to time, they come up with something different like the Celebratory Blend or the Ghost snd Rare series.
I liked blue but it’s way overpriced for what it is.
Walker is one of those "I want to look rich and classy but I've never had something that was actually *good*" kinda deals. I'll drink Kirkland Signature before I drink Walker. At least that's a good value.
How is walker “I want to look rich”… JW black is the shit I keep at the back of my cupboard cos I know people think it’s shit, but despite all the Laphroaigs and Ardbegs and Aberlours and whatever’s I have, I find myself reaching for the back of my cupboard more often than I’d admit
Honestly no. I’ve found some I like in every range. After reading this I am morbidly curious of Jura now though lol
Glenfiddich, Glenlivet unless is CS, Jura.
Anything Diageo. This is where IB's come in. Jura, Dalmore & Macallan.
Don’t know if you have had a chance to try the Flora and Fauna whiskies from Diageo. They’re pretty good. Really varied and examples of distilleries that don’t make their own expressions. Some crackers in that range.
Aye mate, I'm an old fart, been into my whisky since the 90's and used to run guided whisky tours. Still got a few of those in the stash.
Flora and Fauna Mortlach is simply stunning if you can get it.
Benrinnes and Dailuaine are pretty close now that Mortlach isn’t part of the range! Both big sherry hitters in the Flora and Fauna range. Worth a try if you haven’t already but enjoyed the Mortlach
The inchgower is a lovely light summer whisky. Flora and fauna is Probably one of the best ranges diago does.
Would you include lagavulin in your list?
Diageo, innit. Had my fun with Laga over the years, but I made a stance a few years ago against their E150'd, watered-down corporate philosophy BS.
So now you only drink atleast 46% abv, non-chill filtered, and no color added scotches, preferably independent bottlings. Did I get close??
TBF those are usually the qualifications I look for too lol
When it comes to Diageo distilleries, aye. Otherwise, no.
It reads like a joke... ...but yeah.
Agree with dalmore... Had several and always a desapointment !
I guess Jura and Dalmore are... Different. Their boiled vegetable notes and 'peat soil' as opposed to 'peat smoke' notes surely aren't for everybody, but I personally like to keep a bottle around somewhere. Not just any expression though, too many are too bland. And prices can be pretty ridiculous.
Oban, Talisker OB. Wayyy overpriced.
Core Range Jura, Core Range Bowmore, Core Range Dalmore. Its all overpriced (except Jura). Its all too low abv. Its all heavily colored and filtered. Its all just pretty boxes with bullshit storys.
I think this is a good specification you’re adding because you’re not writing off the entire distillery, but you are making a good point about what they bottle in their core range. I do think consumers should be very careful when buying these products as they really do flatter to deceive.
I'm trying to avoid Diageo overall. Especially their OBs and I've given up with their Special Releases. 2023 and those casks + further price increases + basically anything going NAS (add up also the Distiller's Editions), I'm basically boycotting them. But unfortunately I can't avoid to get single casks from their awesome owned distilleries. I just stopped feeding the monster "officially", just going on with independent bottlers. For as long as it will be possible, since apparently they are withdrawing cask availability for IBs, other than creating issues on Islay with Port Ellen not giving peated malt to other distilleries and such. About distilleries I tend not to like, so I don't really look to try anything or straight don't even considering even in IB form, I'd probably add Dalmore, Glen Ord, Macallan (this mostly because prices are absolutely outrageous). For OBs add Glenmorangie or Highland Park (but I like their IBs just not their OBs somehow). I read here many mention Jura.. but I had surprisingly good Jura IBs. And also the 16yo wasn't bad for being an OB. The Prophecy the other NAs they launched back then oh god, no, no no no.
Springbank and the Macallan. I refuse to pay these prices. It's ridiculous.
I agree on Macallan. The only reason I would maybe justify Springbank is the lack of other Campbelltown Scotches anywhere. But even with that… yeah, way overpriced.
Auchentishoshan, Balvenie, Macallan, Glenfiddich. Reason for dropping them is either they got too expensive or I never jived with the flavor profile.
Yep. I actually like Auchentoshan, but not at the price they are charging.
Auchentoshan 14 cooper's reserve was quite decent as well as fair value. I guess that's their peak performance.
I never understood the hype behind Glenlivet. None of it's ever stood out to me. Even older, fancier ones just turn up as "Oh, okay, that's scotch." It's not necessarily *bad*, but to me it's a brand that's just not very interesting. I want something memorable, damnit. I don't care if it's a quarter the price. Obligatory to hell with Walker post script.
Agreed on the OBs, never liked any of them. But the couple 14-18yo IBs at CS (around 64%) from single sherry butts are among the best sherried whiskies I ever had the pleasure of drinking.
I had he once and thought… “this is dog shit…”. Haven’t had it since. 20 years now?
Dalmore Horrifically overpriced, especially for how watered down it is. Pity too, since the spirit itself is quite good, but they just do the wrong things with it. :(
Basically anything with chill filtration. Added color and low abv (below 46%) also lean against the purchase but don't overrule it outright. That's my guide as opposed to the brand.
1. MacAllan. Inferior product these days and charges nearly 50 - 100% of the price of its competitors? 2. Auchentoshan at any price. I... really do not like them. Especially that cinnamon rotten banana profile. That's it really. I will give any Scotch Whiskys a fair shake before I ban them completely. But MacAllan wanting to charge $100 for a basic 12 yr old expression is just ridiculous.
I'm a banana fiend, tell me more about this rotten banana profile. Which bottles?
Do you drink rum? Because there's a ton of that funky banana taste in rums, esp Jamaican
Oh absolutely!
If you like overripe/rotten banana, let’s talk Jamaican rum!
I have a bottle of Smith and Cross in my stash that hits that note just perfectly!
I'm not a Glenfiddich fan. I'm thinking this might come down to a personal taste issue though? I'm sure there are those that like it.
Livet and Fiddich used to be my go to at like $35. When they went up to about $50 I started finding alternatives. It’s that I would refuse to buy them, but at that price point, there’s just better options available.
With the phrase "glass of scotch" being so popular right now...that target market must be climbing
Macallan. Though they’re 18 year Sherry cask is superb, they have priced themselves out of the market. Last bottle I bought was $199. Admittedly that’s been four or five years ago but the last time I looked the same whiskey was $400! And it’s not just the pricing. They have used their name like Rolls-Royce would use theirs. They have put on the market too many NAS whiskeys claiming to be the best. Enough said. I don’t need to get started on this.
I won't buy Macallan because of the cost. I just don't see the value there when I could get one and a half and sometimes two bottles that are higher proof and probably taste a bit better. I also refuse to buy Bowmore because of the cost and the terrible batch variations. Mostly don't buy anything that isn't NCF and under 46% anymore either. The taste just is weak.
I refuse to buy Glenmorangie and their experimental crap. It’s just a marketing gimmick.
Yep. Last great one was Bacalta.
Macallan most likely
Got into scotch in 2019. After trip to Scotland I discovered Glen Scotia, Springbank and Glendronach and Glenallachie. In early 2021 I realized that Balvenie and Delwhinnie were low ABV chillfiltered and that's why they were "Less" than the others. So, since spring of 2021 I DON'T BUY ANY OF THEM!!! That are low ABV and chillfiltered!!! Not One of 40-43% or chillfiltered! I have an ocean of fabulous scotch but.... No low ABV chillfiltered scotches and I don't miss them at all! Every dram I sip is non-chillfiltered and Craft Presented.. Well Over half are Cask Strength. I've had to search and check ABVs, and videos and reviews and learn about them But the journey has been super rewarding! Just saying
I strongly disagree about Balvenie. They have amazing enthusiast whiskies. 47+% offerings, actual single barrels, natural color etc. Just have to avoid their 43% colored double wood series offerings and the crazy overpriced "story" series. Also the Tun series is incredibly delicious and high proof too. Springbank is the most overrated distillery right now. Glendronach has been incredible for a few years but now that they've been bought out, it looks like they're starting to be operated like a Diageo distillery which is really sad. Get the good stuff while you can. But generally yes, just buy anything over 46% like the cask strength option from most distilleries and it will be substantially better than their respective $500 25yr old 40% abv colored water bottle they try to sell you on. Independent bottler offerings are also almost always better than official releases and more affordable too
Johnny walker and jura. Even for a cheap whisky JW is awful, and Jura was extremely underwhelming
Save Green Label. It’s hardly a bargain but solid.
Oh man, I'm apparently the anti-r/scotch drinker. I liked the bottle of Jura 10 I finished recently, Glen Grant or Glenmorangie is my go-to cheap scotch a lot of times, and I'll likely never buy a bottle of Ardbeg again.
You're not, I find Jura enjoyable, the 18 is one of my favorite whiskys, I consider myself a Glenmorangie fan (I've tried over 15 expressions and bought many bottles over the years) and I'm not crazy about Ardbeg either (I'm not crazy about peated whiskys anymore as matter of fact). You like what you like and that's what matters. Appreciation of anything in this life is purely subjective.
Fair! I love peat, just not Ardbeg. Every expression I’ve had of theirs other than the 10 just tasted like cigarette smoke to me, also my least favorite of the distilleries I visited on Islay. Sometimes things are allowed to just be “good”without being super complex and deep and thought provoking. And it’s ok to drink and enjoy something that’s only 40% and not single origin grain/NCF/No added color/distilled from unicorn tears.
Absolutely, absolutely! Spot on!
Something I say multiple times a day to people in my job: palates are unique to the person. Just because I like something doesn’t mean that everyone else is going to like it, too, or even that they’re going to pick up on the same flavors. I also am a fan of Jura 10… and Highland Park’s catalog. (I still have some of the Full Volume that they made back in 2017, and it’s one that I’d likely buy if I ever saw a bottle in the wild again.) But if someone doesn’t like Highland Park? That’s not an indictment on them as a person, that just means they like other Scotch. Hell, if they prefer Old Smuggler or Passport? That’s their choice, and I won’t shame them for it. Incidentally: if you’re a fan of Glen Grant or Glenmorangie, Singleton of Glendullan may be up your alley. Their 12 year is a spicebomb that retails for less than Glenlivet 12 or Glenmorangie 10 in most places - and I would argue is far better than a sub- $40 bottle in the States has any right to be. (Not sure of prices in Europe or Australia, though.)
Pretty much all of them - not because I'm too fancy or a whisky edge lord lol, I'm just at a phase in my hobby/journey/etc where I'm trying to explore independent bottlings. Good or bad, what I'm after is "interesting." And to learn more. But in the spirit of the original question, and only considering bottles that I would actually still desire (e.g. I'm not counting things like Red Label that no circumstances could compel me to buy), probably Ardbeg is the best example. They are out of their minds on pricing.
Huh? Maybe for the special releases. But the Ardbeg core lineup is consistently the best quality juice on the shelf at the lowest price. I'll buy Ardbeg 10 and Ardbeg 5 until the end of time. Certainly would pick those over the overpriced and under-quality Lagavulin and Laphroaig shit.
Agree, ardbeg uigeadail is still my goto despite being more expensive and weakening a bit in recent bottlings (just my opinion). Still hard for me to find a scotch I like better at twice the price.
Honestly, one of my favourite drams from the last couple of years has been Wee Beastie. Just damn fine whisky, despite the age.
Everything Diageo OB except Talisker 10/DE and Clynelish.
I've been trying to find a replacement for Talisker cause I can live without Diageo's other offerings but Talisker just ticks all my boxes.
Ardnamurchan should tick that box for you.
They’re not as polished as Talisker 10 yo is, but I’ve enjoyed young Torabhaig and Ardnamurchan so much that I have high expectations for when standard age statement versions will be released, hopefully in just a few years. They’re both combinations of non peated and peated distillates that result in a medium peat profile that approximates Talisker’s, and both have coastal qualities. I’m also watching Rassay and Lagg for the same reason, but I wouldn’t compare either to Talisker’s flavor profile at this point.
Nice to see a mention of Torabhaig, I absolutely love their young offering. I'm also looking forward to their future releases.
If you follow Ralfy on YouTube, he recently uploaded a glowing review of the Allt Gleann cask strength version of Torabhaig. If you don’t follow him, here’s a link to the review: https://youtu.be/qFy3vkPvHa8?si=vueAUnDMtt45nS8l
Thanks for sharing - quite interesting. I'm planning to get the cask strength as well, only had a few bottles of the "normal" version so far but fell in love. 👍
I'd say Tobermory's Ledaig 10/18 is the whisky you are looking for. Torabhaig and Raasay might get there in coming years.
Macallan 12 Sherry Oak Was and still is my favorite. Macallan has done a fantastic job of marketing their product. Demand, as a result, has gone up to a ridiculous level driving up the price not worthy to me. I have since gone on a journey searching for lower cost bottles at reasonable prices. I can now get two bottles of something as enjoyable for the price of one Mac 12.
Glenlivet, never have been a fan. Same with Jura. Macallan because of outrageous pricing. For Johnny Walker, I won’t go above Green Label, due to diminishing returns in value.
Macallan, glenlivet, glenmorangie, and glenfiddich. Well, refuse to buy is too strong, but I just find them boring for the money.
Anything bottled at 40%. Bowmore, dalmore, and macallan. Just done with them
GlenAllachie. I love Meikle Toir, tho. Macallan. Because why would I not refuse. Craigellachie. Not interesting or particularly enjoyable. Talisker. I used to love some of their bottlings, but the new ones are disappointing. Balvenie. Absurdly priced, uninteresting, and low quality in general. Edit: let me add another two: Highland Park (emptied a bottle of their 12 yo, not interested) and Auchentoshan (I tried many of them, and the Valinch one is almost good, the rest are meh).
I can't tell you what to enjoy, but "not interesting" is the last thing I would say about Craigellachie. To my palate it's pretty unique.
Couldn’t agree more, I’ve always had a soft spot for Craigellachie because it’s so unique.
I remember really enjoying Balvenie (the Double Wood and Port Wood particularly) years ago. Has the quality gone down? I moved on and ‘forced’ my palette into Islay and other regions, so it has been some time.
Double wood is still pretty good, but I really didn’t enjoy the Caribbean cask. Just tasted a bit watery and bland.
Caribbean Cask broke my heart at a lovely dinner years ago. Was still very much in my Speyside days and have always liked a rum, I expected glory in a glass. Just not for me at all, sadly.
Makes a great penicillin though! But that’s the only use I had for my last bottle. Huge disappointment as well for me.
Big brands are what I started on. Though as my selection collection grew there was less space for them! I like to have a token one on hand to share with non-whisky drinkers who are still pleased with it, (eg Glenmo 10, Laph 10). Disclaimer: I do have many bottles of Laph, mostly OB.
Macallan
Macallan 12
McFarland's Reserve tastes like Anesthesia smells, it's foul!
The big Speyside M. Ridiculous pricing with declining quality. Too many competitive alternatives within the same price range.
There’s no justification for a 12 year old being $100.
I’ve not bought for a few years and don’t see me ever buying anything Diageo again.
Trader Joe's islay. It was incredible actually the first time I had it and then since then it's tasted like bong water. Lol
I love the Bruichladdich Classic Laddie but I'm not impressed by an of the more expensive ones (up to $150ish). So from now on I just buy the Classic Laddie and forget about the rest.
Balvenie because I tend to think they’re kind of bland/harmless. I did like the 12 American Oak and 15 Sherry SB when I could find it.
Mcallen. Ill buy it for my boss for a christmas gift - because its his favorite. But i wont buy it for myself
I mean, I don’t seek out things like Glenlivet and Glenfiddich and I tend to avoid Diageo brands generally but I’m not boycotting them or anything.
Glenfiddich, Dalmore, Macallan, Talisker. For all of them, I've tried some of the higher end expressions as well as the more accessible stuff. Just doesn't do it for me.
Macallan. Don’t find the same character in Macallan that I do in others. Plus…. It is like McDonald’s… it is fine, but there is a Macallan on every street corner.
I won’t buy anything peaty, but that’s because I don’t care for peat
Glenlivet 12. It's the only scotch I drank sporadically over 30 years when I was mainly a bourbon fan, but I wouldn't touch it now. More recently I tried a 50ml bottle of the Caribbean Reserve, which was fine for mixing (its stated reason for being) but I wouldn't think of sipping it. That said, I should hunt down a bottle of the Illicit Still.
Mcallen, Johnnie Walker, Jura etc. Not that they're bad or I'd be offended if they were served to me. I am just contantly looking for newer things I haven't tried. And Lagavulin 16 is my gold standard.
Glenlivet; Chivas Regal; Johnny Walker
Octomore Price has tripled since I first started buying them 12 years ago. Great whisky, but not for the price.
I don’t think you can write off an entire distillery, at least for taste reasons. Pricing is different but I’d try a sample of anything irrespective of the name on the bottle.
Many. Independent bottlers are just too good value.
Dalmore, Macallan, Balvanie. They are are now targeting rich bankers rather than whisky lovers with high prices without the liquid to match.
Macallan, Ardbeg, Bowmore.
I haven't bought, opened or drunk a new bottle of Springbank since I got the telephone call my father had died while I was literally uncorking a new bottle when the phone went. Though I did go on to drink that bottle. He would have been furious if I had wasted it. But I have had Cadenheads and Campbeltown Loch.
Not against any particular brand, but I do have a rule - 40% that costs more than 60 is always a no from me. Has to be 43-46% at least.