The more astute readers may have noticed that while I am still posting regular reviews my blog entries are now rarer that a Scotsman drinking English whisky on Burns Night or perhaps Edward Snowden at an NSA employees reunion picnic. I could make excuses around work and family but the truth is I simply have less to say.   Rest assured I have not lost any interest in, or my passion for, whisky.  However in a recent online discussion in a Whisky Bloggers forum I made the analogy between blog entries and the “difficult second album”. When I set my website up I had lots to say and couldn’t wait to share my passion and release all the thoughts that I had accumulated on my whisky journey. I had several years of ideas and beliefs and I now had a forum to express. Just like a newly signed band has all their life experiences to date to draw on and an entire catalog of songs to use when they record their first album I had oodles of blog matter ready to go. However when the demand for a second album of new material comes along often what is left to draw on is the stuff that wasn’t good enough for the first album and the life experiences of just the last 6 months. In short a much shallower pool of material. So I have a choice; to use the ideas that were either half-baked or not good enough for the first couple of years that my website has existed or be patient and wait for inspiration as and when (or indeed if) it comes. I choose the second option (for your sake). In the meantime I promise will keep drinking, tasting and exploring whisky.

This decision created a bit of an issue (in my mind) with the current web site structure as the home page only shows the most recent blog entry. The lack of new blog entries therefore creates the impression that nothing has changed and this site is deader than the Houston Texans season and about as lively as Matt Schaub’s throwing arm. In reality I may have posted lots of new tasting notes but how would you know? As I mentioned above I don’t want to post something for the sake of posting something so I have decided to restructure the website so that every time I write a new review and tasting notes it will update the home page. A simple change (we shall see exactly how “simple” in coming week or so) but it will keep site refreshed and then I will only feel the need to post blog entries when I am inspired and actually have something to say and you might actually want to read.

Some readers (yes I still cling, despite all evidence to contrary, to the illusion that I have some regular readers like a shipwrecked sailor clings to the wreckage of his boat) may remember that a few months ago after a trip to Tennessee I poured the best part of a bottle of Jack Daniel’s Unaged Rye whiskey into my miniature cask to see how a little aging would impact it.

http://www.somanywhiskies.com/blog/item/562-the-jack-daniels-unaged-tennesee-rye-experiment

To be completely honest I had forgotten about it. Then I attended a recent tasting event at Reserve 101 (#houstonsbestbar) with Dan Garrison of Garrison Bros (#texasbestbourbon) and he mentioned that in Texas they enjoy up to 13% “angels share” per year. That reminded me of my little rye aging experiment and when I got home that night I opened the tap on my cask with my empty Glencairn ready and waited. Nothing. Nada. The whisky was harder to find than Edward Snowden at a NSA reunion. Bloody angels or to give them more accurate title....thieving little gits. Using my University of Wales maths, I calculate the angel’s share was 100% in 4 months, so approximately 300% per year!

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.