Mr Fjeld wrote:Good evening all! . Oh, I should perhaps mention that the single cask is not the same as the single cask calvados finished - it would be illegal and classified as a narcotic substance due to strength over 60 %.
Lord_Pfaffin wrote:Mr Fjeld wrote:Good evening all! . Oh, I should perhaps mention that the single cask is not the same as the single cask calvados finished - it would be illegal and classified as a narcotic substance due to strength over 60 %.
So Glenfarclas 105 is a narcotic Wow it's a good thing my garden isn't in Norway!
Ardaíonn ár ngrá muid féin níos airde i gcónaí!
Lawrence wrote:If I remember correctly in another 3 or 4 years, it's currently residing in the warehouses at Springbank. I'll keep you in mind for the bottle,
WestVanDave wrote:Big party at Lawrence's house...
Mr Fjeld wrote: For me an island/coastal whisky doesn't need peat to be good! Actually, it doesn't even need to be "islandish" at all!
kallaskander wrote:Hi there,
very interesting. An island whisky which does not need to be islandish? So pray tell me what is islandish? I love Brora and Clynelish which are definitely coastal and compared to all I know of Arran - und more I do not say nor claim - more islandish than Arran. Has anyone tried the "Six Isles" yet, the vatted malt containing whisky of all six producing scottish whisky islands? I have and my first reaction was "There is too much Arran in there." Which would be understandable cause I would think that of all the malts in it the Arran is the least expensive and the easiest to be had. The Arrans I know taste more of Speyside than an Island. A Jura or a Bunnahabhain taste more of an island whisky than any Arran I tried. So if an island whisky has not to be islandish what about making it in the Lowlands? You prefer the Eastern Highlands? As well. A whisky can come from just anywhere as long as it is good. Conceded. But where does that lead us to? I mentioned Talisker earlier in another thread Mr. TattieHeid said that Caol Ila is 100% not Islay-matured. Come on, now. Naturally the world of all the whiskies has more to offer than peat or salt, much more. I know that and I live that. But if it does not matter where a malt comes from, if you can not taste where his place of birth was, why you could call a malt made anywhere in Scotland "Ferintosh", "Craignure" or "Kincaple" and claim it was made there like they have already done. No. You can´t do that. A malt should taste of the place it comes from anything else is pure arbitrariness.
No thank you, not for me. I do not complain about that Arran hype elsewhere, greetings from Macallan, by the way. As I said, I´ll give it another chance when it is 12 years old.
Or perhaps Bruichladdich tastes less maritimey than other Islays because it's across the street from Loch Indaal....
MrTattieHeid wrote:It's even arguable whether Arran is above or below the Highland Line (and I've just spent 45 minutes trying to find out--if anyone here can link us to a map showing the commonly accepted placement of the line, I'd appreciate it). Arran could certainly proclaim its own unique appellation, anyway! So after all is said and done, I wouldn't worry too much about whether an "Island" malt tasted "Islandy" or not.