Not a member? - Register and login now.
All registered users can read our entire magazine archive.

Lagavulin

All your whisky related questions answered here.

Postby Davide » Tue Apr 15, 2003 8:55 pm

Aaaah, now I get it! (and I can't even claim I had a nip too much as an excuse...)-Thanks WestVanDave!

Daniel, as far as I can guess, some time ago UDV (now Diageo) primarily had whiskies with an age statement and also wanted to have (more) vintages. So the Rare Malts are true vintages and the Distillers Editions got the information on when it was distilled and when it was bottled.

This might cause anybody thinking that distilled 1981/bottled 2000 is actually 19 years old... Normally that is the case, BUT: the DE is a finish!
As far as I know, the age of a whisky is counted per full year, after 3 years entitled to be called whisky in Scotland. The moment you change cask in order to finish, you're not allowed to count the age any longer. So in this case, the whisky could be 3 years old and finished 16 years or 18 years old and finished a few months...

But since I'm only an advanced novice, I'm not sure about all of the above. To all the experts in the forum: was my guess right and the theory about age correct?

Rudy.
Davide
New member
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Italy

Postby Rudy » Tue Apr 15, 2003 9:49 pm

Hello Davide,

the OB's I know of are 12y, 16y and 25y. There might be independant bottlings of Lagavulin 19y, but I'm not sure.
Do you have a special reason looking for a 19y Lagavulin?

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby WestVanDave » Wed Apr 16, 2003 4:45 am

What Davide might be thinking of was your posting Rudy - re: the 1981 Double Matured PX ... seemingly a 19 year old...

Rudy
Junior Member posted 13 April 2003 03:56 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Jon,
your experience with the double matured Lagavulin is quite the same as mine. They're both great, but the PX finish seems to add a dimension that very much suits my taste. I have the 1981, bottled 2000, haven't tasted others.

Rudy.
WestVanDave
Silver Member
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 2:01 am
Location: West Vancouver, BC, Canada

Postby Rudy » Wed Apr 16, 2003 11:25 am

Aaaah, now I get it! (and I can't even claim I had a nip too much as an excuse...)-Thanks WestVanDave!

Daniel, as far as I can guess, some time ago UDV (now Diageo) primarily had whiskies with an age statement and also wanted to have (more) vintages. So the Rare Malts are true vintages and the Distillers Editions got the information on when it was distilled and when it was bottled.

This might cause anybody thinking that distilled 1981/bottled 2000 is actually 19 years old... Normally that is the case, BUT: the DE is a finish!
As far as I know, the age of a whisky is counted per full year, after 3 years entitled to be called whisky in Scotland. The moment you change cask in order to finish, you're not allowed to count the age any longer. So in this case, the whisky could be 3 years old and finished 16 years or 18 years old and finished a few months...

But since I'm only an advanced novice, I'm not sure about all of the above. To all the experts in the forum: was my guess right and the theory about age correct?

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby lexkraai » Wed Apr 16, 2003 12:17 pm

Rudy

The Scotch Whisky Order of 1990 states that the spirit must be matured for at least 3 years in oak casks in order to be called 'whisky'. The order says nothing about changing the whisky from one cask to another and whether that has relevance to the age statement. So a whisky matured for 16 years in a bourbon cask and subsequently for another 4 years in a port pipe is a 20 y.o. whisky.

Cheers, Lex
lexkraai
Silver Member
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 2:01 am
Location: Southampton

Postby Deactivated Member » Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:22 pm

Hi Lex,

Can you explain me then, why the "Centenary Edition" from Benromach has an age statement for 17Y, while it has matured in Oak casks for 15Y at the first period, and 17Y in Sherry casks for the second period, 15 plus 17 makes 32Y old isn't it, according to your Exaple from your earlyer post to Rudy????? Now, I would like to know that the answer to that question, I know the Whisky act from 1988, wich says nothing about changing whisky from one to another..

Erik
Deactivated Member
 

Postby lexkraai » Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:04 am

Erik, the info I have on Benromach Centenary is that, as you say, of a 15 y.o. whisky re-racked into very old sherry casks. Subsequently it is bottled and sold as a 17 y.o. Appears to me that the finishing period is 2 years. If what you say is right, it can only be legally sold as a 15 y.o. (and never as a 17 y.o.). What is your source for saying that the period in the old sherry casks is 17 years (on top of the 15 years it spent in other casks) rather than 2 years (as stated explicitly by, for instance, Walter Schobert in Das Whisky Lexicon)?

Cheers, Lex
lexkraai
Silver Member
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 2:01 am
Location: Southampton

Postby Deactivated Member » Thu Apr 17, 2003 9:27 am

Hi Lex,

My source at that time was "Verhaar"(Februari 2000), quite some time ago, now I'm getting curious in your story, and what they told me, two differend stories, because if what you say it's right, then then what I've heard is wrong, so wich is wich on this one? I have verified this some time ago about this subject, about the 15Y in lets say cask A, and spend 17Y in cask B, their answer was, that you can't speak of a finish anymore after 17Y, but about a full maturation, wich means 17Y... Hmm strange don't you think so Lex...

Erik
Deactivated Member
 

Postby Iain » Thu Apr 17, 2003 9:35 am

I have never heard of a whisky being "finished" for 17 years. That sounds very odd indeed. Is "Verhaar" a trustworthy source of whisky info?
Iain
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Postby lexkraai » Thu Apr 17, 2003 10:43 am

Erik, what is the legal line between 'finishing' and 'maturing' and where can I find the source that says finishing does not count towards the age of a whisky whereas maturing does?

I've certainly never heard of a legal distinction between the two, so please fill me in on this one!

Cheers, Lex
lexkraai
Silver Member
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 2:01 am
Location: Southampton

Postby Deactivated Member » Thu Apr 17, 2003 1:14 pm

Lex,

I'm not sure if there's a legal definition between a finish and a maturation, however I won't be surprised if there is one. By the time I found out about this, my source was a person from the industry, he said that after three years you can't speak of a finish, but more about a maturation or perhaps even better a double maturation, but are there some guidelines too for double maturation? I don't know. All I know is that a finish usually goes from 3 months up to 2 years, but even after 2 years you would call it a double maturation(see for example Aberlour 12Y old Double wood). So where's the guide line? Perhaps each company has their own regulations, and thougts about this... It's clear that, for example, the Benromach stated 17Y, while I have heard that before the 17 long years it allready has matured for 15 years. But then again might it have been a 15Y old with a 2Y finish? Then say it's a 17Y old? Can you fill me in on this Lex?

Erik
Deactivated Member
 

Postby lexkraai » Thu Apr 17, 2003 1:28 pm

Erik, I contacted Benromach about their Centenary and got a very clear and open reply within hours: 15 y.o. whisky re-racked into very old sherry casks for another 2 years, making it a 15+2=17 y.o., which is the age stated on the label. So time in both casks contributes to the age statement.

Well, at least that confusion is cleared up!
Lex
lexkraai
Silver Member
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 2:01 am
Location: Southampton

Postby Iain » Thu Apr 17, 2003 1:48 pm

Hats off to Benromach.

Their prompt and authoritative reply to Lex puts a certain sulky and uncommunicative distillery to shame Image
Iain
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:01 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Postby Rudy » Thu Apr 17, 2003 6:36 pm

Aye!

Rudy
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby Deactivated Member » Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:24 pm

Thanks Lex, that shines a differend light to this matter, so technicaly they put the ages all together, and there you have it, a 17Y old Benromach Image
Deactivated Member
 

ARDBEG 1973 Connoisseurs Choice

Postby r0b » Fri Apr 18, 2003 1:16 am

Royal mile sells this one at £87. Anyone tried it? It's one helluva nice price.
r0b
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Sweden

Postby Rudy » Fri Apr 18, 2003 6:48 am

Hello rOb,

absolutely right, but I haven't tried it. BTW, RMW is the only shop I know of offering this bottling.

I just wonder why G&M have bottled their 1974, then 1975 and then the 1978 prior to this 1973.

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby Spirit of Islay » Fri Apr 18, 2003 7:37 am

Hi r0b/Rudy ,
I've got this one , when i first opened it i was very disappointed in it .It had the "ardbeg" nose for that period of whisky (the iodene smell that must come from their own malting at the time )but it was very weak and timid especially put Head to head with the now all but gone 30yo O.B. i've revisited several times over the past few weeks and its improved a hell of a lot but still not a great Ardbeg , don't get me wrong its a fantastic sipping whisky but not an all time great (nowhere near the 1974/20yo C.C.).
Regarding the release order if you check Martins site ( http://www.whisky-files.com/ ) you'll see that theydon't do them in Chronological order , which is a good thing as it makes it more interesting .
The 1978 is one of the worst Ardbegs i've tasted it was totally bland IMO .
What i would like to know is why don't G&M release ardbegs in the Caskstrength range so we can appreciate them in all their Glory ?
Slainté
Gordon

The Site - http://www.spirit-of-islay.co.uk
The Club - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spiritofislay
The Chatroom - http://www.spirit-of-islay.co.uk/chatntime/chatmain.html


[This message has been edited by Spirit of Islay (edited 18 April 2003).]
User avatar
Spirit of Islay
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Usually somewhere with Whisky......

Postby hpulley » Fri Apr 18, 2003 11:02 am

Gordon & MacPhail must work it out so they make more money selling more bottles at 40% than by selling less, though more expensive, bottles at a higher strength. It often makes me think twice about picking up a Gordon & MacPhail bottling but a recent CC Bladnoch pickup shows me that 40% can be good enough when the whisky is fine and hard to find elsewhere. A bottler of last resort, I suppose. Listening G&McP? Higher ABVs please!

Harry
hpulley
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2503
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Postby Davide » Fri Apr 18, 2003 8:35 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rudy:
<B>Hello Davide,

the OB's I know of are 12y, 16y and 25y. There might be independant bottlings of Lagavulin 19y, but I'm not sure.
Do you have a special reason looking for a 19y Lagavulin?

Rudy.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank's for your answord, I know only 16y Lagavulin but 15 days ago a my friend has promise that he has found that bottle and I don't belive. SORRY FOR MY BAD ENGLISH
Davide
New member
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Italy

Postby Rudy » Fri Apr 18, 2003 9:14 pm

Hello Davide,

I'm happy to contribute in this forum and do not care for anybody's English.

What matters here most is your taste, the whiskies that you enjoy and your opinion you want to share.

Have fun!

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby Rudy » Fri Apr 18, 2003 9:47 pm

Hello Gordon,

just discovered your work on the Internet. Looks great and very interesting! I wonder though when I've read the 1278 messages overthere...

I would also encourage G&M to releae cask strength and unchill-filtering and no colouring etc. But haven't they started already? Under their trademark Speymalt they released Ardbeg under the Spirit of Scotland label. (and Port Ellen for the US? haven't seen any in Europe...) 58.4% is cask strength indeed! So, G&M, keep up the good work! You must have noticed overthere in Elgin that my friends and I have bought your bottles, haven't you? :-)

Rudy.
Rudy
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am
Location: the Netherlands

Postby r0b » Fri Apr 18, 2003 11:21 pm

Hey Gordon,

"The 1978 is one of the worst Ardbegs i've tasted it was totally bland IMO ." you wrote. Do you mean the OB? Because lately I've been at pains deciding which to spend £ 120 on: The 1978 OB or a Douglas Laing from 1972. I've been leaning towards the latter as many have said Ardbeg from that year is very good. The 1975 is as good as can be (of the ones I've had) and the 77 is nearly equal.
r0b
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Sweden

Postby Spirit of Islay » Sat Apr 19, 2003 10:27 am

r0b, the 78 i refer to is the C.C. bottling ,the 1978 O.B. bottlings are great.
Rudy , regarding the choice £120 is a lot tho i have paid just under a £100 for a O.B.75 and 78 bottling .The DL 72 (i take it your talking OMC Here)isn't one of my top bottlings , tho other people do rave about them .I prefer the DL OMC 73's and 74's they seem to have the trademark Ardbeg taste i look for ,the new 74/28yo OMC is the nearest one i've had to the Provenance O.B. bottling at a faction of the cost .

Regarding the SOS bottlings they arn't available here in the UK ,i've only seen them on sale on mainland europe , where i must say they seem to get a better deal on Ardbeg releases i.e. the number of SOS 70's bottlings and the O.B. specials in the Black packaging .Perhaps they (G&M and the distillery )don't think we can handle it in the UK ?
Slainté
Gordon

The Site - http://www.spirit-of-islay.co.uk
The Club - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spiritofislay
The Chatroom - http://www.spirit-of-islay.co.uk/chatntime/chatmain.html
User avatar
Spirit of Islay
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Usually somewhere with Whisky......

Return to Questions & Answers

Whisky gift and present finder