IB's

by **pouranother** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:26 pm

Are there any out there to stay away from? Are there ones that are clearly better. Surely no one has tried all of the expressions from all of the IB's, so a generalization is ok.

Thanks!

by **bamber** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:41 pm

This thread might help:

http://www.whiskymag.com/forum/viewtopi ... dent#48342

I really rate Signatory. For me, they were the best stand at Whisky Live London. Every whisky I tried there was unique and delicious. I've bought quite a few of their bottlings and have not been let down yet.

People say CC is bad. I've had one bottle from them: Tullibardine 10yo 46%. It's very tasty and was cheap too. The only IB I've felt a bit let down by is Cadenheads. One great bottle one distinctly average one. The SMWS is variable, but I don't think they'd claim not to be. Their tasting notes are also pretty honest. If it says struck match on the notes, get your gas mask on

by **Wave** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:52 pm

I've had a couple bad Signatory's but for the most part Sigs are tops in my book followed closely by D. Laing, Cadenheads and one that isn't on that list, Scott's Selection of which I've had great bottlings of late. Gordon & McPhail is probably my least favorite but not to the point "to stay away from". Their Cask Strength Collection is definitely worthy!

Cheers!

by **Deactivated Member** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:29 pm

Small samples lead to skewed results--I tend to avoid Signatory based on two bad bottles. Wish I'd bought the cs Brora at LFW last year, though. And I've enjoyed all of the few Cadenheads I've had. The G&M CC's at 40% strike me as watery and weak, but some here have reported enjoying one or more of those. The moral: Don't let a bad experience based on a small sampling deter you from pressing onward in your journey into malt. And try to recognize even a bad experience as an educational one, and take something positive out of it.

by **Admiral** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:54 am

The Gordon & MacPhail Connoisseurs Choice range always seems to crack a mention when people ask about lesser IB bottlings, and I don't believe it's merited.

I suspect they suffer only because they're bottled at 40% (similar comment to Mr T above) whereas nearly all the other IB's are putting out their stuff at cask strength.

G&M have realised this, and they're now putting out a cask strength range.

I've tried quite a few CC bottlings (probably 10 or 11) and I've not been disappointed by any of them.

Cheers,
AD