Laphroaig 10yo prefered by non whisky drinkers

by **Matt2** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:34 am

Held a mini tasting session over the weekend with a couple of friends. The whiskies on offer were :

Laphroaig 10 year old
Jura 1984 George Orwell special edition 19 year old sherry cask
Jon, Mark, Robbo - Rich and Spicy one

None of the people were whisky lovers and can't really stand the taste of an average whisky you would get served in a pub.

I found it quite interesting that the Laphroaig went down well with everyone, the Jura came second with JMR lagging behind in 3rd. Two of the girls couldn't finish their JMR or Jura but came back for more (and more) Laphroaig.

The general opinion was the Laproaig was much easier to drink and people enjoyed the range of flavours it gave, while the others appeared as variations of a standard whisky.

So in this tasting session 4 out of 4 people loved the Laphroaig over the Jura and JMR. Not what I expected at all.

by **hpulley** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:12 pm

Could be a new ad campaign for Laphroaig! :wink:

Harry

by **Admiral** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:45 pm

Were your friends all smokers?

by **Matt2** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:41 am

I think Laphroaig has a whole new market waiting to discover their whisky. And yes they were all smokers, and we had a fire going. It was a smokey evening.

by **Laphroaig** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 7:31 pm

Matt my first single malt was Talisker. I really liked it. I became acquainted with Laphroaig when the bar tender (a good friend of my uncle) at this jazz supper club informed me that they were fresh out of Talisker, but try this... I remember my first look at the bottle and I thought in the darkened atmosphere, ohh great, looks like a bottle of steak sauce LOL...

The next thing I know the bar tender switched venues, and I spent about 4 or 5 months trying to figure out what the bottle was! I suppose I had a natural taste and knack for Island styled drams. Perhaps your friends and samplers are the same wierd sort!
:shock:

by **Jeroen Kloppenburg** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 7:38 pm

In my personal experience I found that new-whisky drinkers get hooked once they can taste the difference themself between malts.

Often the strong ABV is overwhelming and masking the subtle flavours. Pouring them malts wich are very pronounced then helps them to still taste the difference.

Lahproaig 10 is a classic for that, never failed me to introduce new people to single malts

by **hpulley** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:02 pm

Yes, nothing like large differences to show them the not so subtle flavours. A wine connoiseur was over the other week and said the high ABV masks the flavor differences in whisky so I poured him a glass of 9yo Ardbeg and a glass of 12yo Bladnoch and the differences could not have been more clear! Said the Ardbeg smelled like a bog while the Bladnoch was described as fruity among other things (this was just a casual thing).

Harry

by **bamber** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:32 am

Laphroaig 10YO was the first single malt I ever tasted and I never looked back.

I have had exactly the same experience when introducing others to quality whisky. Nearly everyone likes Laphroaig (and Talisker).

The question is why is such a distinctive and pungently flavoured whisky seemingly so accessible. Possibly the good balance between sweetness and peat ?

BTW what do you think of the John Mark and Robbo's 'rich spicy one' ? - I tried it, and the other two (peaty one and smooth one), at a local offlicence and thought it was distinctive and tasty (the other two were
a bit average).

by **Jeroen Kloppenburg** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:43 am

bamber wrote:The question is why is such a distinctive and pungently flavoured whisky seemingly so accessible. Possibly the good balance between sweetness and peat ?

Like I said in a above post, I think it is because the palate of a beginning whisky drinker is not yet developped enough for the more subtile flavours. The high ABV is just overwhelming and numbing the tongue. Over time when the palate develops people will appreciate less pronounced whiksies too.

Just my experiences

by **Matt2** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:10 am

I would have to agree Jeroen, people struggled to identify flavours in the other whiskies but it was easier with the Laphroaig. It was good to show them not all whiskies taste the same.

I've only tried the JMR Rich n Spicy one soo far, maybe I will give the others a go. I quite liked it, certainly had alot of 'spice' to it, a nice winters day dram I think. The other people weren't too impressed, but as people have said here it takes time and experience to pick up on some of the qualities.

According to one person the Jura was like drinking whisky from my nans sherry glass before she had finished with it. :lol:

I think next time we will try an Ardbeg, maybe a dedicated Islay tasting session (or should that be 'drinking' session). Any suggestions ?

by **bamber** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:38 am

I don't know if other people do this (am I crazy ?) but I produce 3-4 sets of tasting notes for each whisky (from JM, MJ etc) and make little handouts for everyone. They can then add their own notes and really try and sniff out the different flavours.

Had this the other day, with a friend and it was after lunch

Black Bottle
Bowmore 12YO
Talisker 10YO
Lagavulin 16YO
Laphroaig 10YO cask strength.
Ardbeg 10YO

---------------------------------------------------

Put away tasting notes, then repeat this cylcle:

Lagavulin 16YO (insist this is the best one)
Laphroaig 10YO cask strength (insist this is the best one).
Ardbeg 10YO (insist this is the best one)

Order take away.

Go to pub.

by **Admiral** » Thu Apr 29, 2004 4:31 am

I used to do something similar with handout notes, but I learnt that once people have such notes in front of them, they tend to go searching for what they think they're supposed to find, rather than to decide for themselves what they smell & taste.

Give people a few minutes with each whisky to make up their own minds, and then perhaps hand out the JM & MJ tasting notes whilst emphasising, "This is what some other people got".

Cheers,
Admiral

by **Eightball** » Wed May 05, 2004 7:21 pm

The store I worked at only had two kinds of this malt- the 10 year old and the 15. I'd like to compare and contrast them for you all.

Laphroaig 10yo
Color: orange gold
Nose: peaty, sweet, smokey, medicinal, and rich
Palate: light spice, cream, slightly medicinal, viscous, touch of bitter
Body: light, crisp
Finish: medicinal
Comments: This ten year old noses much like a Speysider in the crispness. However it is not very floral has a peaty taste.

Laphroaig 15yo
Color: pale gold
Nose: sweet, leafy, medicinal, smoke
Palate: huge spice, rolling hay
Body: heavy, slight cream, hot
Finish: very medicinal, long, not as warming as others
Comments: I would like to comment on the medicinal factor above all else. It was pronounced with a menthol quality.

by **Admiral** » Wed May 05, 2004 10:44 pm

Interesting that you describe the 15yo as the paler of the two in colour.

I haven't compared the colours side by side myself, but given that the 15yo supposedly contains more sherry, one would have thought it would be the darker of the two.

Or perhaps the 10yo is getting some artificial assistance? :wink:

Admiral

by **Jeroen Kloppenburg** » Thu May 06, 2004 8:17 am

It says on the back of the botte is has E150

by **Eightball** » Thu May 06, 2004 2:10 pm

Admiral,
Possibly some artificial assistance...what is E-150?

by **hpulley** » Thu May 06, 2004 2:52 pm

E-150 is spirit caramel used for colouring.

Harry

by **Deactivated Member** » Thu May 06, 2004 3:23 pm

And there are 4 different E 150's to make it easy on you :wink:

Erik

by **Eightball** » Thu May 06, 2004 5:10 pm

Wow. Four different artificial ingredients. I thought whisky was made with only water, grain, and yeast. You learn something new everyday...

by **hpulley** » Thu May 06, 2004 5:56 pm

Not all contain it but E-150 is the only other thing allowed in scotch whisky.

Most that don't mention that they DON'T add colour have colour added. In some countries it must be listed on the label.

Uncoloured whiskies are usually quite pale compared to coloured ones. At times I wonder which old time whisky was dark enough to start the present trend where people only think dark whisky is good whisky?

Harry

by **Eightball** » Thu May 06, 2004 6:13 pm

Hmmm, I would have to say I like them both. Sorry to ride the fence on this one. If caramel is added I can't tell.

by **Laphroaig** » Thu May 06, 2004 9:16 pm

I'm certain that Laphroaig 10 has some added features. I didn't realize it stated as such on the bottle (you learn something new everyday) or perhaps that is something new all together.

Personally I pondered this before because independent bottles I've tasted in the vicintity such as the Leapfrog, I've felt tasted significantly cleaner

by **Jeroen Kloppenburg** » Fri May 07, 2004 7:47 am

The only additive can be E150, which is said to contribute nothing to the taste..

There is a long thread on the use of caramel/E150 somewhere on this forum. For people new to caramel/E150 I recommend diving into that thread

by **Matt2** » Fri May 07, 2004 10:54 am

http://www.whiskymag.com/forum/viewtopi ... light=e150 :shock:

by **Lawrence** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:43 pm

I'm always disappointed to learn about the addition of caramel/E-150 as I feel that's it's usually not needed. I think we'd still like Laphraoig if the color varied thru the years. A simple explanation on the back of the bottle would be enough for most people. I know that Bowmore Darkest has some. I've tasted Laphroaig right from the cask at the distillery and it seemed to be the color I was used to and I'm presuming that there was no additional coloring. Does anybody know if any other bottlings in the Laphraoig line up are colored with E-150?

Laphroaig 10yo prefered by non whisky drinkers

Laphroaig 10yo prefered by non whisky drinkers

Laphroaig 10YO

Re: Laphroaig 10YO

Laphroaig 10

Here are some of my tasting notes for Laproaig...

E150