Consistency in Independ Bottlings (Signatory unchillfilterd

[Jeroen Kloppenburg]

Dear SMW friends,

Had a friend over from Austria for the Whisky Festival in The Hague Holland (Awesome festival, cant wait for next year!).

I have happen to buy a Signatory Unchillfiltered 1989 Springbank 11yr, cask 501. My friend happened to have bought the same bottle, but then from cask 502. Now that was something interesting to compare in a N&T (expecting subtle differences).

When we poured the glasses I was so suprised, the 502 cask was *much* more deep golden coloured then the 501 cask, which is a lot more pale. The 502 cask looked like it have been aged on exsherry casks, while the 501 looked like you would expect from new scottish oak (as this bottling is supose to be if I am not mistaken).

Also in the taste and the nose the 502 is a lot sweeter, like you would expect with a sherry cask.

Now what I am wondering about is this; the cask number is only showed really small put away in the left downside of the label, and doesnt really attract attention at all. ie, it looks like it is not important at all.

- Wont it be much more logical for Signatory to blend the several casks they have and make a vintage that way, instead of releasing them as single casks with this much difference between them?

- Or should they release the bottles per cask, but add a more clear statement that there can be big difference between several casks?

- Do you have bought several different casks from the same bottling from a independent bottler becuase of these differences? And if not, why not?

[Rudolph Hucker]

Hi Jeroen

'Fraid I can't help much with your questions, but your posting reminded me of the competition that Oddbins ran in issue 20 of Whisky Magazine.

Basically, two oak sherry casks # 11151 and # 11167 were filled with new make spirit on the same day in October 1973, and left undisturbed just a few feet apart in the same warehouse until they were bottled on February 22 2001.

The whisky from cask # 11151 had a deep golden appearence, with a smoky bouquet.
Its thick velvety texture was matched by a rich full-blooded aromatic and spicy palate, and the finsh was long and surprisingly sweet.

On the other hand, cask # 11167 produced whisky with a light golden colour, a bouquet of leather and oak and a palate with rich, peaty mellow oak flavours. The finish was long and rich.

As Oddbins said these bottles formed just one stage of a fascinating journey into the mystique of malt whisky.

I have never seen any explanation of the differences.

Cheers

Rudolph

[Nic Rhodes]

I brought this up a few weeks ago, Whisky magazine never puts the important details like cask number on the review. The reality of the situation is there are several cask bottled at the same time and I suspect the best goes for tasting only. Signatory are not alone in this either, MMcD, DL etc all do the same.

[Jeroen Kloppenburg]

If I have a DL bottling (Old Malt Cask you are referring to?), it is a single cask bottling, not? It becomes clear from reading the label.

But with this Signatory you buy a "Unchillfiltered Collection Springbank 1989 Scottish Oak", and the "single cask" reference gets lost completely.

[Deactivated Member]

Hi Jeroen,

Scottish Oak(cask 501)? is very very rare, I only remember that Glengoyne used Scottish Oak once, and will do it again as a refill, but none of the Signatory as I can remember.

I'm not sure the reason why he bottles cask by cask, instead of blending them together, all I can think of, is that each cask is unique, and sometimes it isn't possible at all to put them together, some never match, although Signatory did some bottlings with blending various casks together for Gall&Gall, wich turned out very good.

You are right about one thing, it might be better to state, that each cask has a difference, on this you can go several ways, maybe he thinks that a lot of people are very familiar with his products and have the knowledge that he only bottle by the cask or he expects that the people who buy these casks are very knowledgaable, that each cask make adifference, as in they are not the same, it's a miracle if you have two of the same casks, with both have the same aroma and flavors!!!!!

I usually buy what I like, and I have never bought the same vintage year from the same distillery from different casks, maybe it never crossed my mind to spend some more money and see for the differences between the casks. Although it might be fun sometime, who knows I'll give it a try someday....

Erik

P.S. I had a great time there at the festival, was there the whole weekend....


[This message has been edited by Huurman (edited 27 November 2002).]

[This message has been edited by Huurman (edited 27 November 2002).]

[Nic Rhodes]

This can get even more complicated. I emailed Black adder about this one last week but have had NO reply (fishy?).

I have two bottle of BA Longmoren 29 year.

One is Rawcask at something like 56%
The othe is normal at 45%

BOTH state they are from the same cask! Surely no one is splittling cask?

[Jeroen Kloppenburg]

They both have the same labels too? (Cept for the ABV). IE, they are being sold as the same thing? Maybe one is just a s"psecial" bottling at caskstrenght, and one normal bottling?

[Nic Rhodes]

No different labelling, one the BA Rawcask and the other the BA ' normal' range.

it is only in the small print they are from the same cask no. I has assumed they would be from different casks when I bought them.

Might allow some interesting 'experiments though!'