Aidan wrote:Most distillers say it makes no difference. Most professional blenders I have talked to say it makes no difference. In fact, all of them so far - not that this represents a huge number. These would have their own agenda, though, maybe.
Quite right about the agenda thing--I got quite a laugh reading one of WM's excellent round table discussions, wherein numerous whisky business persons vehemently defended chillfiltering, saying non-chillfiltered whiskies were "different, not better". Anybody want to buy the Forth Rail Bridge? They defend both of these practices because they do them, and they do them for what most of us here would consider a bad reason: cosmetics. But a marketer of whisky has a different perspective than you and I do, and deals much more with casual whisky drinkers than with supremely discerning aficionados such as we
. The question is whether they are turning a blind eye (a deaf ear? an untasting tongue?) to the detrimental effects these practices may have, purely for the sake of catering to the larger number of less discriminating consumers.
We all here recognize chill haze and inconsistent color to be the hallmarks of natural and unadulterated product. We must make it our mission to get that idea across to the mass of malt drinkers. Only when consumers expect and demand these characterisitics will distillers be motivated to provide them as a matter of standard practice, and possibly, hopefully, even codify these standards in their definition of single malt Scotch whisky.