I wish I could explain better why this story has burrowed under my skin and makes me so angry that I am still seething weeks later.

http://www.thespiritsbusiness.com/2013/07/the-dalmore-paterson-collection-goes-on-sale-at-987500/

I do like Richard Paterson, he has always been charming and friendly to me on the few occasions we have met at various whisky events and shared a few of his "special drams" as well. Anyone who had read my reviews (is there anyone?) also knows I like Dalmore whisky. Perhaps that is in part why I got so worked up… these ridiculous marketing gimmicks destroy the credibility of a great product in my eyes at least. I have ranted before about whisky as an investment (the words “utter” and “bollocks” inexplicably spring to mind) and suspect anyone stupid enough willing to plonk down the best part of one million pounds for this “collection” will be someone making an “investment” and possibly never drinking it. Surely I am not alone in thinking it would better to see this liquid use sparingly in some blended products where more true whisky lovers could appreciate it than seeing it hoarded by someone just trying to make a profit, grab some publicity or prove to some girl who rejected him in College how fabulous and successful he is now?

I could feel the bile in my stomach as I typed this blog. It is “anti everything” I feel about whisky. Whisky for me is about companionship, small pleasures, shared experiences and relaxation. It is about sharing a dram (or a bottle) and taking time to smell the roses (or the lemon or the malt or whatever I find in the nose or palate). It is not about nursing a glass whose contents cost more than most people would spend on a car. I recently shared a bottle of Jameson out of plastic cups on the deck of friend’s cabin after a fishing trip. I suspect it was better tasting, at that moment in that location, than drinking some million pound collection of whisky.  Perhaps on reflection I am the richer man after all.

By the way, if anyone reading this blog happens to have 987,500 pounds to invest I have fantastic bridge in Sydney harbor I can let you have cheap.  Email me.

Forget the ridiculous recent diamond studded offerings of Dalmore, ignore old Macallans or the recent Glenfiddich releases and completely dismiss the seemingly endless supply of very rare Bowmore (If it so so rare where does it all come from? My theory is that the same bottle is being auctioned over and over again). The most expensive bottle whisky I have ever heard came from Norway and I estimate it cost, very conservatively, about $200,000,000. Yes… two hundred million dollars. I can imagine the Dalmore marketing department now keeling over with sudden heart failure and I am quite enjoying the image.

This story begins with the Ekofisk oil field in Norway. This massive offshore oil field produced on average 200,000 barrels of oil per year since its discovery in 1969 until 2005, and it is expected to continue production, albeit at lower levels, until 2050. Using a low price of $25 / barrel of oil you quickly get to a value that is eye wateringly large. Despite hours and hours of diligent efforts (OK… a couple of Google searches) I have been unable to verify this story but it was repeated in recent energy magazine blog so I am not the only one who has heard it. In short it goes like this;

A few years prior to any North Sea oil discovery in 1969 the Danish and Norwegians were negotiating over the other great maritime resource… fish. At this time countries all negotiated their borders and boundaries for their fishing fleets. It was these same maritime boundaries that become the basis for defining offshore North Sea oil and gas access and ownership in the 1970’s. The story goes that the Norwegian and Danes were in deadlock over the last area and the deadlock was finally broken when the Norwegian delegate offered the Danish delegate a bottle of scotch and the deal was struck. Within a few years the Ekofisk field was discovered in that area. If you look at the attached map you will how closely it just fits within the Norwegian boundary and how it could have been easily defined as a Danish (or at least shared) possession with a small nudge of the line. That Danish official paid a tremendous price for his bottle of whisky, I can’t help wondering what it was? I hope he enjoyed it at least!

I thought I would use the milestone of over 440 whisk(e)y reviews to analyse exactly what it is I have been drinking over last 18 months since I started www.somanywhiskies.com.  The results I have to say are not particularly surprising given my tastes and location.  440 whiskies sounds a lot (and is some ways it is.... especially when try finding a whisky I have not yet tried in a "typical" store or bar) but when you consider most conservative estimates (and I don't mean that in a Fox News sort of way) suggest the number of world whiskies is comfortably over 10,000 I still have quite some way to go.  Assuming that I could find them at same rate as I currently acquire whiskies it would take me about 32 years to get to 10,000 reviews.   To paraphrase the movie Jaws..... I'm going to need a bigger server.  And an internal digestive tract made of titanium or perhaps the same stuff they make airplane back boxes out of.  Anyway, I digress, below is a very high level breakdown of the first 440....

255 Scotch whiskies

89 American whiskies

31 Irish whiskies

19 Canadians

14 Japanese

Which by my University of Wales maths means 32 fall into the category of "Others”

222 single malts

175 of 202 Whiskies to Try Before I Die (just 26 to go.... then what?)

90 blends

52 bourbons

15 Rye whiskies

15 blended malts

As I mentioned in a recent blog entry “Tennessee; The Perfect Birthday Gift” (http://www.somanywhiskies.com/blog/item/538-tennessee-the-perfect-birthday-gift) I recently picked up a bottle of Jack Daniels Unaged Tennessee rye. As I tried it and made some tasting notes I realized this was a bottle I was not going to dipping into frequently and while interesting there was high likelihood of it gathering a lot of dust in my already overcrowded whisky cabinet. As problems go, not having enough room for whisky, is very much a first world problem and not something any one reading this is likely to get concerned about, but nonetheless I found myself pondering what to do with it.

One answer is of course mixing it and making cocktails. Afterall that is the main market for this product. Except that I don’t drink cocktails and it woudl require buying more bottles of sweet vermouth and angostura bitters that would take up similar amounts of whisky storage real estate and besides who can be bothered to make simple syrups and squeeze limes. One reason I enjoy whisky is its simplicity… open, pour, drink, repeat. No faffing. I am not big on faffing. However I do have a small oak cask I bought for home blending and it occurred to me to “age the unaged”.   So I updated my tasting notes (link below) to include reference to clear color (and took picture above which is perfectly dreadful I know but this is a whisky blog not a photo blog) and then on March 18^th I poured a little of the unaged rye to “rinse” out any residue from previous blending experiment as best I could and then emptied it. Then I poured the rest of the crystal clear fluid into the cask. It filled about two thirds of the cask. I now have an alarm in my calendar for June17^th (approximately 90 days) and at that time I will pour a sample and take a picture and compare tasting notes and color. Perhaps I will drink it then or decide to age it for a further 90 days. I will keep you posted.

http://www.somanywhiskies.com/reviews/item/545-jack-daniels-unaged-tennessee-rye

It goes without saying I had a great time at WhiskyLive London last week.  Highlights for me included meeting fellow bloggers Dave Worthington and Kat Pressly (aka Whisky Discovery), trying Glenlivet new make with Ian Logan, a quick chat with Richard Patterson of Whyte and MacKay and a Kavalan Masterclass with distiller Ian Chang.  There were of course some very good whiskies (and a few rums) being poured as well and some of my favorites of the day are listed below.  I somehow managed to miss fellow Texan Chip Tate of Balcones, a man much in demand right now, but I am sure we will meet soon.  I also visited The London Distillery Company and had a chance to catch up with Darren Rook and taste some of their new Dodd's gin before the show... more on that in a later blog.  All in all, not a bad way to spend a snowy Saturday in March.

Grant's 25 year old http://www.somanywhiskies.com/reviews/item/546-grants-25-year-old

The Glenlivet New Make http://www.somanywhiskies.com/reviews/item/548-the-glenlivet-new-make

Penderyn Portwood http://www.somanywhiskies.com/reviews/item/549-penderyn-portwood

Kavalan Solist http://www.somanywhiskies.com/reviews/item/551-kavalan-solist

Dalmore Millenium http://www.somanywhiskies.com/reviews/item/553-dalmore-millenium

Enjoy!

What do you give the man who has everything (well everything he wants) for his birthday?  If you are my wife you allow him to take his family to Tennessee for his birthday / spring break and visit both of the major distilleries working today.  Below are the links to my distillery tour notes and I have to say while Tennessee whisky has largely failed to impress me to date, I think that is changing now.  Some of Dickel products in particular impressed and I will post some tasting notes shortly. 

http://www.somanywhiskies.com/distilleries/item/537-george-dickel-cascade-hollow-tennessee

http://www.somanywhiskies.com/distilleries/item/536-the-jack-daniel-distillery-lynchburg-tennessee

Like many bloggers I followed the recent furur, forur, furora excitement around the announcements by Maker’s Mark with great interest. For those of you interested enough in whisky to be reading this rather obscure whisky blog but who do not know what I am talking about I can only assume you spent the last few weeks sealed inside a sherry butt. For your benefit the short version is, based on sales growth, Maker’s Mark announced they were going to cut the alcohol by volume (ABV) of their whisky from the traditional 45% to 42% to allow them increase output by about 6% and better meet the demand for their product. The uproar that resulted from the announcement led to Maker’s Mark changing their mind and hastily reversing that decision.

I am on the record as big Maker’s Mark fan so I was certainly interested but hardly alarmed. I felt like I should hold off until I had tried both samples side by side. I immediately acquired a 45% ABV bottle and stood by for my 42% bottle. I thought it would be fun to do, a nice test of my palate and an objective way to assess the change. Could I tell the difference?  Fun times.

Others took a different approach (hysteria might be a good word) based on what I can only assume is the  desire to have a higher ABV product. Apparently what it tasted like was irrelevant because not one of them ever tried the slightly lower ABV product.   This "higher ABV is better" is a phenomenon I see manifested in Scotch as well where something is often annointed desirable because it is “cask strength”. There is a subtle (but definitely tangible) culture around strong whisky being better whisky. I also see (with the help of Ding’s Beer Blog) similar behaviors in the beer world… higher ABV means better beer... more alcohol is good. FrankIy I can do without this immaturity and lack of understanding infecting the whisky scene like noro virus.

Occasionally I have 'humbly' suggested that bottling whiskies at 60%+ ABV doesn’t help the product and I end up having to dilute anyway. Someone will often try and argue that is a good thing because I can “dilute to my personal taste”. I can hear them now chanting the mantra of the ABV obsessed “you can put water in but you can’t take it out, you can put water in but you can’t take it out”. But it is a silly argument. This is whisky, usually expensive whisky, not orange squash. I don’t want to buy concentrate of whisky that I can easily screw up. I want to buy the product presented to me by the people who created it at the ABV they feel best showcases their product. Many chefs don’t have salt on their restaurant tables because they want the diner to enjoy the food as they think it is best seasoned. They want the food to be judged that way and I feel whisky should be the same. I am not saying a few drops of water to open up a dram aren’t necessary, they often are, but presenting me with 60% ABV spirit (often at cost of $100 or more a bottle) and then expecting me to guess the right water content to add to their whisky is a little asinine.  I dont care what the ABV of a whisky is.... I just want it to taste good.  if it does, then I am happy.

This is a first... a wine review on a whisky blog.  On recent trip to Texas wine country (yes there really is one!) near San Antonio we visited Bending Branch Winery in Comfort, Texas. This annual special edition is a picpoul (picpoul is french for lip stinger) based white that is finished in an ex-bourbon cask.  The lady who poured this for me at their very nice vistors center insisted that it was not finished in just any bourbon barrel, but a Pappy Van Winkle barrel!  Apparently they do this one special bottling every year for their Kentucky Derby party.  These are my kind of wine people.  I have come across lots of whisky finished in wine casks (Glenmorangie like to do this with expressions like Artein and Nectar D'Or), but this was the first time I have seen a wine finished in a whisky cask.  The nose was at first crisp green apples, tart, but some sweetness as well (the bourbon influence perhaps).  The taste has the first same clean fresh and tart notes from the nose (the reason this grape variatel is called lip stinger).  As wine warms in the glass the sweetness comes through as creamy marshmallow and even taffy.  The finish has some vanilla, oak and even creme brulee.  Very interesting, I can't say for sure if I would have picked this as "whisky finished wine" if I don't know, but some very familiar elements were definately on display. 

I am writing this entry whilst in the middle of a long business trip. I am very fortunate because these trips always provide some opportunities to find and try new whiskies. This can take many forms including airline lounges, duty free shops, whisky shops and bars, hotel bars and even hotel mini bars (See my Cardhu review). It rare that I come home from a trip without making a new friend or two along the way and this trip, so far, is no different. I was delighted to find behind the bar of anonymous city center chain hotel a bottle of the recently reproduced Mackinlay’s Rare Old Highland Malt. Even better they were down to last dram and when he went to pour my double (50 ml to exact; don’t get me started in standard UK measure of 25 ml!) the barman rather than put back an almost empty bottle (I don’t think was a big seller for him) generously topped my glass up.  

However I have to say such finds are becoming rarer for me now, it is getting harder to find whiskies that I haven’t tried and make these new liquid friends. So instead on this trip I took the time to reintroduce myself to some old friends; Glenfiddich 12 year old and Dalwhinnie 15 year old. I am glad I did. I have a real soft spot for Glenfiddich and have always felt it was overlooked and underrated in the whisky community. I know it isn’t trendy but, I tell you what, it is bloody good. If you don’t believe me PLEASE go back and try it again. As for the Dalwhinnie, I spent a lovely evening at the house of an old friend, in snowy Scotland catching up and doing severe damage to his only bottle of single malt. Context is of course everything, but at that moment, in that place, the Dalwhinnie was the perfect dram.

Just before I left for this trip I found myself in the Container Store in Houston and spotted the JetBag™ in the photo. What I love about this bottle protector (apart from fact it pretty cheap at just $3.99) is that not only does it protect the bottle but it also contains an interior that will absorb the full 750 ml of fluid if bottle does break. Touch wood, I have never had a bottle break in my luggage but I can travel with a little more confidence because one day I know it will happen! So I guess that makes JetBag my first official www.somanywhiskies.com product endorsement. Right now, as I write this, it is protecting the bottle of Longmorn 16 year old I bought in Scotland, another one of the 101 World Whiskies To Try Before You Die and so I need to get on with posting that review (and the Mackinlay’s).

As a confirmed blend-o-phile I often find myself explaining (or at least trying to explain) why I like blends and the differences in style between blended and single malt whiskies.  People like to use analogies when they are describing complex or difficult concepts and one that I have heard many times, and I know Mark Gillespie of WhiskyCast uses, is to compare great blended whisky to an orchestra and single malts to a jazz soloist.  Both produce complex and often brilliant music, but of course in entirely different ways.  But I have never really liked this analogy for the one, rather pedantic, reason. I love single malt and I hate jazz.  There I said it.  I can't stand jazz.  I find it to be extremely self-indulgent and I confess to calling jazz in the past “musical masturbation” (but without the rhythm).  When it comes to music I have always been a Beatle fan (to the extent my daughter is named, in part at least, after the song Eleanor Rigby) and I think there is a great analogy for blended whisky in the songwriters John Lennon and Paul McCartney and their music. 

I think of John Lennon as the malt whisky.  His song writing is usually more powerful and stern and his melancholy reflects the maturity of single malt.  Single malts provide the depth, complexity and richness of a great blend just as John Lennon provided those qualities to the Beatles music. Paul is of course the grain whisky. His songwriting tends to be more positive and upbeat. He brings an air of lightness and freshness to Beatles songs just as grain whisky brings to a great blend.

At its best, the music of The Beatles often (but not always) captured and harmonized both of those elements.  Their singing was often so closely harmonized it could create a new voice, just as a great blend captures and builds upon the best of the component whiskies to create a new product, not just a composite.   I think it is also interesting that while single malts (and to a much lesser degree grain whisky) are still incredibly popular, just as John was and Paul still is as solo artists, blended whisky is still by far the most popular in the world (still 95% of global whisky sales perhaps) and the Beatles still remain the pinnacle of their musical careers, certainly from a commercial success aspect anyway.

As with many analogies you can take them too far and the obvious weakness in my argument is of course Paul McCartney has had great success as a solo artist and yet grain whisky remains by far, the least developed of the whiskies, while single malts have grown in popularity (ironically since the time of the Beatles first single in 1962).   However we will know what John’s true potential as a solo artist as we were robbed of his talent in 1980.  As I said; no analogy can stand too much scrutiny and mine is getting stretched beyond breaking point now so I will, like Ardbeg's latest release, call it a day.