Thread: Scotch/whiskey of the day

Glad I'm a small batch bourbon guy - looks like you folks are sucking the well dry on the Scotch

World Running Low On Old Single Malt Scotch « CBS Philly

Originally Posted by Ezekiel81

Just been given a bottle of 16 yo balvenie triple wood. Reviews look good but I haven't opened it yet. It's in the queue. Anyone familiar with it?

Sounds good. I'll be interested in your take on it. I certainly like their Double Wood!

Originally Posted by JMcRae

Glad I'm a small batch bourbon guy - looks like you folks are sucking the well dry on the Scotch

World Running Low On Old Single Malt Scotch « CBS Philly

Interesting article. It's too bad investing in whisky with age statements isn't practical for the single investor IMO and, in my case I can't convince my wife that it would be good investment. Finding a company to insure the investment would be problematic, it takes up space, fragile and prone to theft. Too bad. Almost assuredly the value of age statement single malts will increase.

For those like me that enjoy whisky aged in sherry casks, I would think the supply of good sherry casks is limited and wonder if cask supply will further decrease as time goes along. Generations ago I believe many more people globally consumed sherry. I don't think that's the case as much now. A pity. A nice glass of sherry can be a fine thing. I don't think it's considered "hip" in the present age. Maybe I'm wrong on the supply of sherry casks?

I do think over the long term, scotch quality will change over time if NAS (No Age Statement) whiskies become the norm. I say quality will "change" rather than "decline" because those of us who still drink and are familiar with whisky aged for traditional periods of time (10 years or longer) have that as a reference point and find characteristics such as metallic tastes of "young" whiskies, lack of complexity, etc as undesirable. Someone young who is not yet enjoying single malt scotch may not have what we do to compare...

ChrisL

Tonight's dram

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Sounds good. I'll be interested in your take on it. I certainly like their Double Wood!

It's been awhile since I last had the double wood, but I remember it being very pleasant. I have a friend who usually has a bottle on hand, I'll have to pay him a visit.

I had some Balvennie double wood at my friend's place yesterday. It's better than I remembered, really rich, lots of dried fruit and vanilla balanced with a woody tannin bitter note. A drop of water brought out an array of caramel and brown sugar notes. I think I need a bottle.

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Interesting article. It's too bad investing in whisky with age statements isn't practical for the single investor IMO and, in my case I can't convince my wife that it would be good investment. Finding a company to insure the investment would be problematic, it takes up space, fragile and prone to theft. Too bad. Almost assuredly the value of age statement single malts will increase.

For those like me that enjoy whisky aged in sherry casks, I would think the supply of good sherry casks is limited and wonder if cask supply will further decrease as time goes along. Generations ago I believe many more people globally consumed sherry. I don't think that's the case as much now. A pity. A nice glass of sherry can be a fine thing. I don't think it's considered "hip" in the present age. Maybe I'm wrong on the supply of sherry casks?

I do think over the long term, scotch quality will change over time if NAS (No Age Statement) whiskies become the norm. I say quality will "change" rather than "decline" because those of us who still drink and are familiar with whisky aged for traditional periods of time (10 years or longer) have that as a reference point and find characteristics such as metallic tastes of "young" whiskies, lack of complexity, etc as undesirable. Someone young who is not yet enjoying single malt scotch may not have what we do to compare...

ChrisL

Yes prone the theft, hic. That's what I'll tell the wife it was those darn whisky thieves.. hic Drinking up all my good stuff! hic

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Interesting article. It's too bad investing in whisky with age statements isn't practical for the single investor IMO and, in my case I can't convince my wife that it would be good investment. Finding a company to insure the investment would be problematic, it takes up space, fragile and prone to theft. Too bad. Almost assuredly the value of age statement single malts will increase.

For those like me that enjoy whisky aged in sherry casks, I would think the supply of good sherry casks is limited and wonder if cask supply will further decrease as time goes along. Generations ago I believe many more people globally consumed sherry. I don't think that's the case as much now. A pity. A nice glass of sherry can be a fine thing. I don't think it's considered "hip" in the present age. Maybe I'm wrong on the supply of sherry casks?

I do think over the long term, scotch quality will change over time if NAS (No Age Statement) whiskies become the norm. I say quality will "change" rather than "decline" because those of us who still drink and are familiar with whisky aged for traditional periods of time (10 years or longer) have that as a reference point and find characteristics such as metallic tastes of "young" whiskies, lack of complexity, etc as undesirable. Someone young who is not yet enjoying single malt scotch may not have what we do to compare...

ChrisL

I missed this post somehow or I would have replied sooner. I think you're right about the supply of good casks. I've heard there are companies who make sherry, leave it in a barrel for a while, then pour the sherry down the drain and sell the barrel to the scotch industry because the demand for sherry is low and the demand for barrels for aging whisky is very high. Something interesting I've noticed in a couple of bottles of whisky recently has been that the first dram doesn't have a lot going on in terms of flavour and aroma, but then the next day it's got a lot more to it. Apparently this is because the cask was somewhat below par, usually just used too many times. I think lack of decent casks also accounts for more and more whiskies being finished in flavoursome casks like sherry or port or whatever, rather than aged entirely in them. If you can reuse a barrel after two years instead of fifteen then you can get a lot more whisky through it, but the flavour influence on the whisky won't be as much. Like dipping one teabag in fifteen cups of hot water for a minute each rather than letting it stew in one cup for fifteen minutes. Something like that anyway. Not sure, it's the middle of the night here so I'm not thinking in straight lines right now.

I think you're right about the quality being different rather than worse to an extent, but I remember Talisker from 15 years ago so I'd have to say that in some cases and in my subjective opinion "decline" might be an accurate word to describe the change in quality, although not such a tactful one. Here in Norway there are a thousand different kinds of tea, each flavoured with some kind of fruit or herb flavouring. The Norwegians like them, but I'm English. I like tea that tastes of tea. Ideally brewed strong enough for the spoon to stand up. Norwegians don't necessarily like the tea I drink, even though it's better. Or not. I'm not sure what I'm saying here. Er.... whisky!

Jura Durach's Own! For a 16, not very good!

Originally Posted by Ezekiel81

I had some Balvennie double wood at my friend's place yesterday. It's better than I remembered, really rich, lots of dried fruit and vanilla balanced with a woody tannin bitter note. A drop of water brought out an array of caramel and brown sugar notes. I think I need a bottle.

Try the 15. It's wayyyy better!