PuckJunkie wrote: beating out some high-quality malts like Springbank and Laphroaig. I couldn't say the same of the Talisker 18, which I've tried a few times now.
Puck, I was almost offended by this statement
Now, the following is not meant to be offensive, even if it may be sounding like that! It is also not meant as a personal attack on you or your opinions... I just jumped on this wagon because it highlights something I am increasingly weary off, because it does injustice to the work of the people in the industry who are doing the best they can....
What do you mean: 'high quality malts'?????
Is that to say that Talisker is not that?
Would you like to elaborate on that?
Is that a personal opinion or is this official?
If it's a personal opinion? on what is it based?
If it's an official opinion... On what study is it based?
I mean: How do we determine "the quality" of a malt? Every single malt has it's highlights and stunning expressions... who are we to say that this or that malt is of High or less high quality? If it's a official opinion I would like to learn what scientific grounds are used to determine quality...
I sincerely hope we are not using a personal opinions to benchmark "quality"! If I am saying; I like this malt better than that...does that say anything about quality? No! It expresses a personal opinion...
If 10 famous whiskywriters agree with my statement...is that a reason to say malt a is of better quality then malt B? I think not.
To be able to determine quality, you have to define what quality is in a whisky.
After more than 20 years of appreciating whisky's (and a malt mileage that far exceeds 3000 expressions) I am more and more convinced that every whisky has the ability to stun ... if it did not untill today...you probably have not come across the right expression...
Be carefull about expressing opinionated generalisations.... they may be right for you... but does that mean the same for all?
My personal opinion as far as the 18 and 10 is concerned: 18 is 'old' style whisky (1950-1960 style), very different from the recent 10yo whitch is a very powerfull vibrant and good dram, BUT, if you have the chance, try a 10yo or an 8yo bottled in the 1980-ties, and you'll find that they to have the sweetness of the current 18yo.
So, both of them are exellent whiskies, but they are different! One is young powerfull and vibrant, the other more sophisticated, smoother and rounder... but both are absolute stunners in the category they are competing in! Better or worse? equally good... but different!
(hope I did not offend... but this was heartfelt!