Glenlivet 16 Year Old Nadurra, 53% (Batch 0911P)

The Glenlivet Nadurra, particularly the early batches, gets a lot love from whisky geeks. While I've not had too many different examples, those I have tried I have enjoyed. It's about 100 bucks here in Australia, so while that doesn't make it quite the bargain it seems to be in the US and Europe, if you get a good batch it would still seem to be money well spent.

I picked this 2011 iteration up relatively recently - late last year - from a major booze chain store where it was collecting dust on the shelf along with some other, more recent, bottlings. Serge has since quite enjoyed this particular batch, so I thought it might be time to have a look myself.

This review is from the very first pour of the bottle.

Glenlivet 16 Year Old Nadurra, 53% (Batch #0911P)

Nose: Something green and pickled gherkin-like (reminiscent, to me, of notes I found distractingly all through the Redbreast 12 CS) leaps out at you at first. Pretty boozy and sweet too. The greenness fades a little given some time, and some nutty malt comes to the fore.
Water draws out some stonefruit and tempers the greenness and booze a touch. It also tones down some of the overt sweetness a little, morphing into something like sweet soy sauce.

Palate: Hot, textural, with thick honey sweetness first up. After a little time in the glass, some fruit emerges - ripe stonefruit and maybe even some mango - layered over some nice clean malt.
Water makes it less fiery, while releasing more of that tropical fruit that time in the glass gave us .

Finish: Quite long. Warm and luscious, with some spiciness - and a little astringency - developing and lingering on the tail, once the fruit fades.
Water thins out the texture somewhat but, for me, increases the drinking pleasure. The numbing spice on the tail remains, and perhaps even lingers a touch longer.

A really nice Glenlivet that I think was vastly improved with the addition of water, which sees some lovely fruity notes finally taming that initial overt greenness. It will be interesting to see what happens to those green notes as the bottle empties.

Hanyu Ichiro's Malt Ace of Spades

Not being an adept in the sometimes mind-bendingly complex (for me anyway) world of Hanyu/Ichiro bottlings and releases, I got myself all confused trying to work through the apparent discrepancies in accounts and details of this one, having purchased a sample from whiskysample.nl.

Long story short (and as I'm sure many are well aware), there were two releases - a year apart - from the same barrel, with this, the second one, coming in 0.7% stronger than the first.
Both were from a hogshead (#9308) that was transferred around 19-20 years later (at some point in either late 2004 or 2005), to a Spanish Oak Sherry Butt for finishing. So this release got 15 months in the butt (bottled 2006), and the 1st (bottled 2005) got 4 months.

Thanks must go to Dramtastic and Whisky Saga whose reviews clarified all that for me.

Hanyu 1985, Ichiro's Malt Ace of Spades 2nd Release, 21 Year Old 55.7%

Nose: At first pour there's a strong scent of warm cola. This is followed quickly by orange, dates, sweet toffee and sherry spice. After more time, some roasted nuts emerge too, with a touch of leather. It's pretty huge. Water doesn't do a whole lot to the nose, beyond toning things down a fraction.


Palate: Spicy, mouth coating and thick, but the palate still feels pretty lively. There's a heap of sweet dried fruit, along with licorice, exotic spices and (brazil?) nuts. A touch of sulphur too. It becomes increasingly expansive with time, searching and warming.
Water broadens the palate a little, and brings out even more toffee sweetness.


Finish: Numbing and slightly astringent but still quite sweet with toffee and dried fruit. Long. A bit of sandshoe-rubber right at the tail. Water increases the sweetness here on the finish somewhat too.

A big old sherry monster, but jam-packed full of interest in that uniquely Japanese way. Readily drinkable without water despite its strength, it's very nice and eminently satisfying. The closest thing I've had to this recently would have to be a SMWS bottling of Karuizawa (132.5), with which I reckon it shares several characteristics.

Hazelburn 2003, 10 Year Old, Rundlets and Kilderkins 50.1%

Hazelburn - Springbank's triple distilled whisky.
It can be big and sweet. And it can also sometimes be a little light on complexity. But we don't always want or need super complex drams, so this is not necessarily a bad thing.

This is the third (and apparently final) Rundlets and Kilderkins release, which sees the whisky matured in very small barrels for the duration of its life. This extra wood contact is supposed to hasten the ageing process and thus give it a sense of maturity beyond its (relatively few) years.

I've tasted the earlier Longrow and Springbank R&K releases - and have got some bottles tucked away too - and found them to be pretty good examples of the distinctive style of each.

The bulk of this review comes from the very first pour after the bottle was opened - significant, as we shall see, due to the appearance, and subsequent disappearance, of a somewhat surprising note.

Hazelburn 2003, 10 Year Old, Rundlets and Kilderkins 50.1%

Nose: Wow, very heavily perfumed at first - it smells like a rose petal bath bomb (not that I've ever used such a thing, you understand. The better-half uses them. Honestly). After quite a while in the glass it dissipates a little - not entirely though - and some of that Campbeltown salt emerges. After even more time the perfume does eventually get taken over - by salted caramel, apricots and sweet vanilla.

[A second pour from the bottle two days later and the floral perfume notes have disappeared entirely. It comes across immediately as very Spingbank-like. Think early batches of 12 YO Cask Strength. A lot sweeter here, obviously, and less leathery, but the family resemblance is clear.]

Palate: Intense. A bit fiery at first. A burst of sweet honeycomb, followed by ripe papaya, honey and then ash. It's quite oily and slippery too.
With the addition of water the fruit comes to the fore. Something like heather comes out too. The oil becomes more viscous and rich as well. It's unmistakably Springbank-distilled.

Finish: Quite spicy. Ginger, honey, ash and smoke. A lingering sense of dry smoke persists for a very long time after the sweetness fades.
With water the finish becomes much sweeter and richer, extinguishing the ash and smoke somewhat.

It will be interesting to see how this whisky evolves over time. That floral perfume nose from the first pour was pretty bizarre. I've never encountered anything like it in a Springbank-distilled whisky before.
A belter of a malt otherwise, though. The small casks have done their job well here. Quite complex and full of interest, its oily mouthfeel ensures that this Hazelburn is also lovely to drink.

Mortlach 1995, 18 Year Old, C&S Dram Collection 56.2%

A single bourbon cask Mortlach from German bottlers C&S Dram Collection.

Mortlach has gained the majority of its renown through its interaction with and maturation within sherry casks, but there are of course a few bourbon cask incarnations floating around as well. Maybe not so many in the near future, though, as the distillery's owner "re-positions" the Speyside whisky into a "super-premium" "brand".

I've ranted about this before - elsewhere - and don't think I can muster the requisite outrage to do so again at this point in time, what with the ongoing slaughter of children in Gaza and such.

Anyhoo.


Mortlach 1995, 18 Year Old, C&S Dram Collection 56.2%

Nose: Nice and fruity from the outset, bourbon-derived fruits like peach dominating at first, with further time in the glass seeing the emergence of something like orange. There's cream, too, coupled with some sweeter custard notes. A dash of soy sauce lurking in the background as well.
Water doesn't add too much to the nose.

Palate: Pretty aggressive at first, a spike of intense heat and fruit on the front of the palate. Spicy pepper, with a hive-load of sweet beeswax and honeyed peaches. There's spiced (cloves) orange here as well. A hint of bitterness emerges, too, after a while.
The addition of water tones down the spice, but the palate becomes more mouth-coating and generous.

Finish: Lemon and apple develop on the finish, joining the honey and pepper. It's reasonably long, with some astringency emerging towards the end, along with a bit of wood bitterness.
Water abbreviates the finish somewhat, though makes it slightly less astringent and bitter.

Enjoyable whisky this. The bourbon cask brings out the lighter-and-brighter fruit aspects of Mortlach that you might not immediately recognise or find in a sherried version, and the finish offers enough complexity to hold one's interest to the bitter (sorry!) end.

Kilkerran Work In Progress 6, Bourbon Wood, 46%

It took this bottle three days (from the time of ordering from whiskybase) to arrive in Australia. It then took another 25 to reach my house. This is extraordinary incompetence, even by Australia Post's standards.

Anyway, the tyranny of distance and all that.

Kilkerran. From Glengyle. Working their way to a 12 Year Old release. This one (it is assumed, but we are nowhere actually told that) comprises 10 year old whisky from bourbon barrels. Like last year, there is an accompanying Sherry Wood release as well.

I have really enjoyed previous Kilkerran releases. Last year's WIP 5 proved to be popular among many others too - Serge in particular loved it - but I know there are others who have yet to fully warm to it. Florin, for example, has told me on Twitter that he likes it but finds it too sweet - (SPOILER!) this one aint gonna be changing your mind on that front, alas, Florin.

Kilkerran Work In Progress 6, Bourbon Wood, 46%

Nose: A very immediate nose, it jumps right out at you from the first pour. Initially sweet, with something savoury and herbal going on in the background. There's lots of lush, heathery peat too. Some salt and oil as well. Soot develops and begins to assert itself after further time in the glass. A touch of malt vinegar and soy sauce too, perhaps, after even more time.

Palate: A whole lotta honeyed-fruit sweetness. But it's spicy and salty too. A lovely slippery mouthfeel, building in waves from front palate to back. Clean. Very clean. A strong background note of peat lending solid support. And after a while a waft of smoke, too.
Water smooths out some of the spice, while brightening up some of the fruit.

Finish: A seamless transition. There's a bit of ginger ale as it develops, together with chocolate and orange. It's quite long and intensely focused. Smoke actually builds through the finish, while a wisp of ash finally carries it out.

I really like this. In fact, I think I may even prefer it to last year's. It does seem sweeter to me though - but this may just be Florin's Jedi mind powers.

It's got such great depth of flavour and character for a 10 year old malt. It certainly bears a lot of the familial traits of its bigger Campbeltown brothers - the peat profile is eerily (and deliciously) similar to Longrow (although not, I hasten to add, as heavily peated), while the oily maritime notes take you instantly to Springbank - but ultimately it's just a very, very good drink in its own right.

Littlemill 1989, 24 Year Old, Archives, 53.0%

Another recent (though now no more, I think) Littlemill from Whiskybase's own Archives label, this one apparently a joint bottling with a Dutch whisky club called CasQueteers.

I really need to become a member of a club that bottles its own whisky.

Littlemill 1989, 24 Year Old, Archives (Voyage dans l'Amérique Méridionale) with CasQueteers, 51.9%

Nose: Lots of sweet malt upon opening. Soon after, there's green apple and vanilla - quite a lot of vanilla actually, after a while. A little note of Baileys develops as well. Acetone. Seems to be a smidgeon of stone fruit lurking back there too, giving it a bit of lift and trying to make its way out.
Water brings some of this fruit out - peach.

Palate: A bit of heat upon entry. Underneath, there's honey and malt again, along with a good dose of toffee. There's plenty of apple juice here as well, with perhaps the slightest suggestion of grapefruit. Almonds. Water doesn't add too much, beyond levelling out what is already there.

Finish: Sweet, long and expansive. It begins slightly nutty and winds it way around the palate becoming increasingly peppery as it tails off.

Good drink this.

I immediately prefer it to the 1988 Littlemill from Archives I tasted a little while back, which was much drier on the palate, although similar in many other respects. It has that extra layer of fruit that I was searching for in the previous one, making it highly, enjoyably, drinkable.

Springbank 1967, 35 Year Old, Duncan Taylor Peerless, 40.5%

Single (bourbon) cask Springbank from the '60s?! Bloody hell, yes thanks.

The regular reader of this blog (Hi mum) will know that Springbank remains one of my favourite distilleries, so when I saw this sample for sale at Whiskysample.nl I had to get me some.

How different would it be to the modern day releases? Not too much has changed in the distillation process at Springbank over the intervening years, but I expect we'll still find some interesting differences and divergences.

Springbank 1967, 35 Year Old, Duncan Taylor Peerless, 40.5%

[You'll note that the label states the vintage as 1965, but it is fact 1967, from cask no. 1943. This is a labelling error. There was in fact no DT Springbank from 1965, as far as I can tell.]

Nose: Straight out of the bottle there's sweet grassy peat. Wow, interesting. Soon, lovely (and readily recognisable) salty notes develop, and these begin to dominate as time passes. Later still, stonefruits emerge, along with some leather and tobacco notes.

The addition of water does little for the nose.

Palate: A little spicy upon entry, creating a lively front palate. There's peach and honey at first, followed quickly by leather, meat and smoke. It hasn't got a massive presence in the mouth, but neither is it too light nor hollow. (Looking at the ABV, they've obviously bottled this as late as they possibly could, just making it to that 35 years). There's a real ebb-and-flow quality to the palate. It changes back every time you think you've got a handle on it.

Water levels things out somewhat. It's not exactly flattened, more a cessation of that aforementioned tidal quality.

Finish: Lovely transition here, as those notes from the palate are joined by lit cigars and spice, with that stonefruit lingering in the background. The medium-long, dry finish trails off in a wisp of smoke. Nice.

Quite a complex, changeable beast, this one, with hints of peat and smoke that recall Brora and even Caol Ila. Yet it's clearly Springbank, in all its dry, salty, leathery glory.

This aged malt just feels and tastes old school. Comfortable but challenging. Familiar but exciting. And so enjoyable to drink.