While I have a complex relationship with Bruichladdich, there are just enough expressions that I really enjoy to keep me on the lookout for more, however many of them end up being stinkers. So I was pleasantly surprised when The Party Source had a well-aged Bruichladdich at what looked like a killer price (subsequently jacked up significantly). After working my way through a number of other expressions without any kind of fussy cask finishes, this seemed like the next one to try.
This whisky was distilled on November 20th 1992, filled into an ex-bourbon hogshead (probably refill) #3627, and proofed down to 46% without coloring or chill filtration on March 5th 2012 in an outturn of 342 bottles.
Signatory Un-Chillfiltered Bruichladdich 19 Year 1992/2012 Cask #3627
Nose: malty, green, a touch of seashore and vanilla, honey, distant oak. After adding a few drops of water the oak becomes a little more present, some banana and berry notes emerge, and the malt becomes more grainy.
Taste: malt and wood sweetness up front, trademark Bruichladdich salinity with honey and mild bourbon cask fruit esters in the middle, fades out through malt with a touch of bitterness, citrus, vanilla, and oak. After dilution it is largely unchanged, though possibly a little smoother and sweeter.
Finish: fresh malt, a touch of seashore/salinity, vanilla, hints of oak
The best I can say for this whisky is that there's nothing to actively dislike about it. Well, except for the part where I shelled out ~$90 for a whisky that is kind of boring. While I had hoped that Signatory was slipping us a bargain in comparison to OB Bruichladdichs of comparable age - usually double or triple what I paid for this - it appears that they decided to bottle it to catch the Laddie hype with something that wasn't going to get any better if they continued to sit on the cask. Just goes to show that sometimes a deal that seems too good to be true actually is. Unfortunately at the time I bought it the TPS review "It's a great study in malt character, if a bit basic in that regard." hadn't been posted or I might have more wisely given it a miss.
For a slightly different take on this whisky, check out Michael Kravitz's review.
2 hours ago
Post a Comment