NAS vs. Aged Scotch

On Dramming.com, whisky blogger Oliver Klimek ran a blind tasting comparing entry level aged and non age statement (NAS) Scotch from the same distilleries.  It was an interesting experiment that essentially ended in a draw.  I participated in the tasting and thought I would share my own results.

I was part of tasting group A.  I was given five pairs of samples to compare that were labeled only with a code.  The only thing I knew about them was that each pair included one NAS and one age statement whisky from the same distillery.  We were asked to indicate which one we liked best.  I did so but elaborated on how much better I thought each one was.  Here is how I compared each whisky in my sample set along with the results for the group as a whole:


Sample 1: Glen Moray 12 vs. Glen Moray Port Cask Finish

I thought these were fairly comparable but had a slight preference for the age statement, though I actually thought it tasted younger.  Also, I tend not to like port finishes, so this may have impacted my preference more than age.  The age statement won this one for the group as a whole, but only by one vote.

Sample 2: Dalmore 12 vs. Dalmour Valour

On this one, I preferred the NAS Valour. I felt the 12 year old was bland and the Valour was richer with a drier finish.  This one was a draw for the group as a whole.

Sample 3: Glenlivet 12 vs. Glenlivet Founder's Reserve

I had a very strong preference for the 12 year old over the NAS Founder's Reserve, which I found raw and new makey.  It was probably the one I liked least of the entire tasting. The group as a whole also preferred the 12 year old by 8 votes.

Sample 4: Cardhu 12 yo vs. Cardhu Amber Rock

On this one, I had a slight preference for the NAS, which I found bolder and more complex than the 12 year old. The group as a whole also preferred the NAS by 6 votes.

Sample 5: Macallan 10 yo Fine Oak vs. Gold

I had a strong preference for the 10 year old which had a spicy/fruity nose, an earthy palate and a peppery finish. The Gold had a decent nose but the palate was overly perfumy and floral; it just didn't come together well.  The group as a whole, though, preferred the NAS.


So over these five samples, I preferred the age statement in three cases and the NAS in two. However, I should also note that in both cases in which I had a very strong preference between the two samples, it was for the age statement expression.  In the cases where I preferred the NAS, it was a much closer call.  To my mind, this demonstrates that while it is possible for distilleries to make NAS that is as good as their entry level age statement whiskies, it's not easy to do.

This was a fun and educational tasting. Many thanks to Oliver for putting it together.

New K&L Scotch: Old Particular

Next in my series of K&L exclusive barrels are whiskies from Douglas Laing, including one blend under K&L's Faultline label and four single malts bottled in 2014 under the Old Particular label.  Unlike yesterday's Hepburn's Choice malts, these are not cask strength.

Faultline Blended Scotch, 50% ($25)

The nose is malty in a sort of Clynelish style.  It's got some coastal notes but also some floral.  The palate opens with sweet peat.  The peat is present but not overwhelming, and the sweetness gives it a sort of candy coating.  The mouthfeel is light.  The finish is peaty and, for the first time, shows some grain whiskey notes. A minute later the sweetness is back adding a chocolate note to the grain, like Ovaltine.

This is a very solid blend with some good peat action, and at $25, it's a no-brainer.  The price to quality ratio is insanely good.

Laphroaig 16 yo, Old Particular, distilled 1997, 48.4% abv ($140)

The nose is pure Laphroaig with big, funky, peaty notes. The palate starts with big peat but gradually develops a sweet wine note, but the peat comes back for the finish along with some BBQ smoke.  This is very tasty. It's everything you would want from a 16 year old Laphroaig.

Tamdhu 16 yo, Old Particular, distilled 1998, 48.4% abv ($100)

This has a very fruity nose with pears.  The palate is malty/spicy with some sweetness. There's a nice balance between the sweet and spicy notes.  The finish is a peppery white wine, like a Gerwurztraminer.  I really like this one. It's sugar and spice and everything nice.  

Tobermory 18 yo, Old Particular, distilled 1996, 48.4% abv ($110)

The nose is malty/fruity with mild peat.  The palate is rich with light peat, growing stronger as it goes down and trailing off into the finish with a touch of mint.  This is a really nice one as well.   

Macallan 21 yo, Old Particular, distilled 1993, 51.5% abv ($250)

The nose is sweet and fruity.  The palate starts sweet but gets drier.  It then develops a peppery note that adds complexity and moves it into the finish.  This is from a refill bourbon cask, and while I haven't been a huge fan of bourbon cask Macallans in the past, this one is really good.  I'd always associated the Macallan profile with sherry, but something about this feels very Macallan even without the sherry influence.  Would I pay $250 for it?  Well, I haven't yet, but I wouldn't rule it out.

This was a very good set of malts.  As a whole, I liked them better than yesterday's selection, though they are also more expensive.  My favorites were the Macallan and the Tobermory followed by the Laphroaig, but they were all quite good.

Tomorrow: Scotch Single Grain Whiskies

Thanks to David Othenin-Girard for the samples.

The Big Mac Daddy - Macallan 30

Macallan is one of the most storied single malts. The consummate sherried malt, it's one of the only widely popular malts that is also well respected among whisky geeks. Now, personally, I've never been a huge Macallan devotee, but I generally like the stuff, so when one of my whisky pals and blog commenters, the Regular Chumpington, offered me a sample of the 30 year old, I was more than happy to accept (he also took the professional quality bottle shot to the right - and see his own thoughts on Mac 30 on his new blog).

The Macallan 30 is 43% and goes for a whoppin' $1,000. Needless to say, I was looking forward to it. Unfortunately, I was disappointed.

The nose had grape juice and sweet sherry. The palate was quite sweet with sherry and soap and the finish went fruity. The whole thing was rather thin and lacking in complexity. When you pay $1,000 for a bottle of whisky (well, even when someone else pays $1,000 for it), you expect something profound. You expect to take pages and pages of notes, trying to document the complexities, the deep flavor profile, the ethereal notes that are hard to pin down. None of that was here. In fact, while I didn't do a side by side, my recollection is that the 18 year old is more complex on the palate that this one.

Now don't get me wrong. It wasn't a bad whisky. It was perfectly drinkable, but when you get up to the four figures (or even the three figures), you demand a lot more than something that is unobjectionable.

It seems like Macallan just phoned it in. Hey, they know people will pay huge bucks for a Macallan 30, so dump whatever old, imperfect casks they've got and bottle it up. Very disappointing. Come on Macallan, you can do better than that.

Whiskey Wednesday: Calling a Spey a Spey

Set along the Spey River in the Scottish Highlands, the Speyside district is the center of whiskey production in Scotland. It includes one of the greatest concentrations of distilleries in the world. Many of the biggest names in Scotch are made there, including Glenfiddich, Glenlivet, Macallan and Balvenie. For people who have only tried one or two single malts, most of them have tried a Speysider.

My problem is that I've never really been a fan of Speyside whiskies. I like the intense smoke of Islay or the rugged wood and malt of the northern Highlands. Speyside is known for its smoothness, not something I find all that interesting.

Of course, the regions of Scotland (Highlands, Lowlands, Speyside, Islands) are merely geographic designations and don't really tell us anything about style. While there are popularly accepted regional styles, there are exceptions to all of them.

Given the importance of Speyside whiskies and the lackluster attention I've paid to the region, I decided it was high time to dip my toes in the River Spey and do some tasting. So, over the next month, I will review a series of Speysiders, and what better place to start than one of the world's most respected whiskies: The Macallan.

Macallan, owned by the Edrington Group, is known for its deeply sherried taste, which comes from aging in old sherry casks. I should admit up front that I am not, generally, a fan of sherried Scotches, so you need to take that into account. Rather than go for the regular line, which I'm familiar with, I decided to dive into a cask strength Macallan.

Tasting

The Macallan Cask Strength, no age statement, no color added, non-chill filtered, 58.6% abv, aged in sherry oak casks from Jerez, Spain. (Owned by Edrington Group)

From the minute you move your nose over this Scotch you get bowled over with that traditional Macallan sherry. I identify sherry flavor in Scotch with tastes like prune, raisin and other sweet, dried fruits. The taste of this Scotch is strong on the sherry but not as much as I expected given the smell. A few drops of water really balances out the sherry, bringing in some malt flavors and making it quite pleasant.

The fact that this Macallan doesn't carry an age statement means that there is very likely some young whiskey in it. Despite that, it has a beautifully developed reddish-amber color which denotes that enough of it has been in wood long enough to soak up some of that sherry wine red.

Despite my predilection against sherry, with water, I have grown quite fond of this Scotch, and it's one to which I will certainly return. I actually like it more than some of the traditional Macallans with age statements.

Next Wednesday: Linkwood

Whiskey Wednesday: Costco Goes Macallan

Recently, while shopping at my local Costco (Los Feliz Blvd.), I noticed that they are now selling an 18 year old Macallan under their Kirkland label. The Macallan, which was going for $60, was bottled by Alexander Murray & Co., the same bottler which bottles for Trader Joe's. As you may recall, I was not a fan of the Trader Joe's bottlings by Alexander Murray, so I passed, but it peaked my interest about this independent bottler who seems to only bottle for American supermarkets.

Anyway, if you've tried the Costco Macallan let me know, because at $60, if it's good, it's still a good deal for an 18 year old Mac.