Spirit Log: Springbank 10

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.

Good for you, Glen, good for you.

the new album by new age artist, Glen Scotia: "Aged 16 Years"

The last time I bought a single malt, you may remember I had trouble deciding what to get, and ended up plumping for another Islay. Well, after that I thought it was about time I created a system to help me explore the world of single malt whisky more fully.

What I did was identify a number of categories and then a method of rotating them (ever the geek). So the main categories were the various Scotch whisky producing regions, plus merchant, Japanese and other, after which there would be subsidiary categories, which would be based around the various expressions you can get – no age/under 10, 10-13, 14-17, 18+, cask strength etc. That way, each time I make a purchase I can narrow down my choices and make sure that ultimately I sample a bit of everything.

As my Talisker dwindled and payday came around, it was time to make my first purchase. My system decreed that it would be a Campbeltown malt, aged between 14 and 17 years. I turned to the three prominent whisky retailers The Whisky Exchange, Master of Malt and Single Malts Direct, and selected the Glen Scotia 16. I’ve never had a Campbeltown before, so I had no idea what to expect.

 Let me say first of all, if I was basing my purchase on presentation this would probably be one of the very last bottles I would ever select… what is going on there? It’s more suited to the cover of an album of new age music than to a lower-mid-range bottle of scotch. I didn’t actually know what that animal was, but the description on The Whisky Exchange informs me that it is a highland cow, and it is framed against the backdrop of aurora borealis on a metallic green bottle that is marginally too tall to go in my special cupboard. Instead it must sit on top with the rabble.

This apparently represents something of a rebranding. Yeah, can’t say I’m a fan of that. But it’s what’s in the bottle that matters, right?

Glen Scotia is actually available in 10, 12, 16, 18 and 21 year old expressions which implies to me that they have a lot of product hanging about. So the 16 is right in the middle. All the expressions are non chill-filtered and bottled at a gusset moistening 46% ABV. Good for you Glen, good for you.

This one set me back £49.45 + P&P.

So what’s the verdict? Verdict is: I like it.

To the eye, the spirit is very pale, almost clear – so you can see why the bottle isn’t. The palate brings something unique to my admittedly slim field of experience. Alongside the more gentle and familiar smokiness there is something synthetic, almost unpleasant tasting on entry, but this very quickly gives way to intriguing complexity. There are what I am going to call edges to the flavour – contrasts that keep me coming back for more. There is citrus in there and a bit of peat, but also, as advertised on the tin, a gentle spiciness. The generous alcohol content certainly makes itself felt, and (together with previous experiences) is making me determined to buy stronger spirits wherever possible.

Finally, the finish has a decent and pleasant length – er… I'll just stop there - before I say something inappropriate.

So, in summation, Glen Scotia 16 makes an interesting and enjoyable dram. I can understand that it won’t be to everyone’s taste – in fact I’m fairly confident that some people will abhor it – but I found it made a nice change, not relying too much on sweetness, and instead stimulating certain edgier tasting faculties.

At £50 it probably is a little bit expensive, but you are getting the benefit of 16 years and no chill filtration (and that 46% ABV). You can definitely get better for a similar price or less, but if you’re into your whisky, you’re going to want to expand your horizons a bit and I don’t think you’d be wasting your money here. I had enough confidence in it to make it my special occasion or guest drink for it’s fairly short lifespan (against some admittedly low prestige competition) and while I don’t think it blew anyone away (few of my guests were as into whisky as I am), it garnered at low key approval.