Whisky Review: Scott's Selection Auchentoshan 21 Year 1983/2004

Scott's Selection occupies an interesting niche in the American malt enthusiast's psyche. Given relatively short shrift when they were originally released, they have since gained a stronger reputation as overlooked gems, especially since many survived on liquor store shelves into the whisky blogging era. However, some were real shelf turds, such as this Auchentoshan that was finally put on deep discount at Binny's after a decade or more. In this case it may have as much to do with the distillery's lackluster reputation among enthusiasts, especially when it comes from a bourbon cask rather than sherry. Luckily for me, older bourbon cask Auchentoshan is my jam, so let's see how this one did.

This whisky was distilled in 1983, filled into what was probably a refill ex-bourbon hogshead, then bottled in 2004 at 52.4% without coloring or chill filtration.

Thanks to Michael Kravitz for organizing this bottle split.

Scott's Selection Auchentoshan 21 Year 1983/2004

Nose: classic Auchentoshan style - fairly light, good malt/wood balance, wood shavings vanilla, hints of overripe fruit, light floral/grassy notes, faintly medicinal. After adding a few drops of water the malt becomes stronger, while the other notes retreat.

Taste: sweet malt throughout, grassy notes growing stronger and more vegetal towards the back, an acidic edge, floral and bubblegum top notes, citrus peel in the background (lemon, orange, grapefruit), bittersweet malt and oak at the back. After dilution the up front sweetness and the savoriness at the back are amplified, while the structure remains largely the same.

Finish: a little fizzy, long lightly sweet malt, vaguely medicinal, savory/grassy fade-out

This isn't a complex malt, just a solid example of a good ex-bourbon cask that's been left to sit for a decent amount of time. While not as aggressively grassy as the similarly aged Archives sample I tried a while back, it has everything I would expect from an unpeated Lowland whisky. Surprisingly the strength never makes itself apparent - if you had given this to me blind I might have guessed it was at 46%.

For a different perspective on this whisky, check out MAO's review from the same bottle.