I've had my eye on Yamazaki 12yrs for a long time now and was initially put off by a couple of reviews (both internet and speaking to a person in a liquor shop) that stated it was something of an acquired taste. That it didn't have the usual flavour and feel of Scotch but something that you'd have to get used to.
Well, what rubbish! I absolutely loved this whisky (oops, almost typed "Scotch"). The nose is very sweet and aromatic. Sorry though, I'm still not good at describing flavours. But it was not only smooth as silk, it was just a beautiful whisky with wonderful flavours. That's about all I can say. Except that I possibly did detect flavours of an unusual wood used in the maturation. Certainly not something that is an "acquired" taste, but very agreeable. Would this be correct or is my tasting note off?
This is instantly for me a repeat buy whisky. So far, only 1 of 2-the only other one (for the moment) is The Glenlivet Nadurra. That is one superb whisky IMO.
It's also taken me well over a year to really figure out what whiskies I like. And I realise that I love whiskies that are straight wood matured and not heavily peated. By straight wood matured, I mean whiskies that haven't been matured in casks previously containing port, wine, sherry etc.
I was a little disappointed with The Dalmore 12yrs. I suppose simply because I admire the bottle design so much. I'm personally finding that these sherry cask matured whiskies have this sickly type of sweetness that doesn't really agree with me. The same with whiskies with large amounts of peat/smoke.
So for me, it seems that I'm going to be experimenting with things like Dalwhinnie 15yrs, Glenmorangie original etc. I find that any sweetness from these whiskies tends to be agreeable and not that syrupy sickly sweet. Almost like the feel of natural sweetness, not imparted sweetness. Am I making any sense at all?
Anyway, I've yakked enough. So how has everybody been?

