Time
to delve a little deeper into the Campbeltown region, and add another
10 year old to the spirit log.
This
one was £41.44 (incl P&P) for 46 ABVs, and as such, is my new
most expensive 10 year old, narrowly edging past Ardbeg by 65p. It
will have its work cut out to beat that on quality.
Starting
out with aesthetic considerations, I don’t feel the producer has
tried too hard with this one. It isn’t a very attractive bottle or
label – all a bit underwhelming really, with no information at all
provided, though I understand there is supposed to be cask and
bottling information under the label. It will take a bit of time to
be able to see that, I think. (Postscript – I forgot to look
when the bottle was empty).
If
you compare the packaging to Ardbeg, there isn’t really that much
difference. The bottles are a similar shape (though Ardbeg’s hides
the spirit’s natural colour by being tinted green), both labels are
black and composed in a similar fashion, even utilising similar
fonts. Even the boxes are of similar dimensions and the card they are
constructed out of is of a similar grade. There’s just an
indefinable quality about Ardbeg’s. You might disagree and prefer
the Springbank. That’s up to you.
I
think that’s enough direct comparison with Ardbeg. Any spirit
should be judged on its own merits – maybe with a conclusive
comparison at the end.
Springbank
is aged in bourbon and sherry casks and the distillery malts all its
own barley, actually producing 3 malts on one site. The distinction
between the three seems to depend on whrether the malt is dried over
a peat fire (Springbank), hot air (Hazelburn) or a combination of
both (Longrow), and how many times the spirit is distilled – two
and a half for Springbank. I’m not sure, and the distillery’s
site doesn’t specify, how you can distill something half a time.
So
let’s have a look at some critics and customer reviews. It receives
glowing reviews from Jim Murray (89.5 points), and especially
from Ian Buxton, while it’s unbridled enthusiasm from the
reviewers at TWE.
I
think I’m starting to realise what it is I want from my whisky
these days – and what I don’t. And finally, all those flavour
lists that whisky reviewers delight in are starting to be useful.
This one, for example, from MoM sounds like just what I’m
looking for:
“The
nose is big-bodied with oaked aridity. The peat is present and quite
pungent with an earthen rootiness. Notes of exotic fruits and a hint
of salinity. The palate is full-bodied with a good helping of cereal
sweetness. There is a richness to the peat, with a dark nuttiness and
whirling smoke. The finish is long and crisp with a coastal tang and
a trailing peat with oaked dryness.”
Peat,
earth, salinity, sweetness, smoke, dryness… elsewhere I’ve read
that it is oily and creamy – this could be the one to renounce all
other whiskies for. It might even eclipse long time favourite Caol Ila 12…
Not
sure how much credence I should give this next one though, also from
MoM; “No doubt a wonderful whisky for those who drink it but it can
make the drinker rather nasty and argumentative.” How much are they
drinking?! Anyways, that’s just alcohol in general, as far as I’m
aware.
Enough
with the prevarication then, and on to the experience.
Peaty
and sweet, warming. The flavours are strong and the sweetness lingers
for the finish. It is briney, oily – even a bit squeaky in
the mouth - and full bodied. I enjoyed it, but in spite of all those
positive features,I can’t say it made the impression on me that I
was hoping for (as is suggested by how little I have to say about the
experience of it overall). It just didn’t feel special enough, and
given a choice between the Springbank 10 and the Ardbeg 10, I’d
have to choose the Ardbeg every time.
Against
single malts in general, I’ve only placed it at number 20 in my all
time list, while in specific competition with other 10 year olds,
I’ve placed it behind Ardbeg, Bladnoch, Ledaig, Laphroaig and
Glenfarclas – but above Talisker, Glenmorangie and Aberlour. That’s
not bad really, because I really enjoyed all the ones I’ve placed
above it, and the ones that are below it are still favourites to many
though a little changeable (Talisker) or uninteresting (the others)
to me.
The
whisky exploration continues apace then, and next time we discuss
whisky on these pages, I believe it will be to take a look at the no
age statement Talisker Skye. That should be in a couple of weeks.
Next week I think the focus is on tequila. See you then.
No comments:
Post a Comment