Coal Ila 10yr old '91...YUK!!

[TheLiquorBaron]

I am wondering if anyone else out there has had this...
Coal Ila 10yr old '91 Vintage 43% Alc/Vol - Signatory

This is my first experience of an Islay and I do hope it is not a signatory(pardon the pun) flavour...I really didn't like this at all! I would say that is tastes like soap. It really is just foul!!(Not Fowl!! )

I am going to take the 2 bottles I have and see if reaging it in my oak barrels provide some more tasty flavours!! I will empty them into my barrel which is ex-port(1st fill) - ex-bourbon(just need to dump the remaining spirit)

[peergynt323]

There are two indies that I've heard are "hit and miss": G&M Connoisseur's Choice and Signatory Vintage. I'm currently enjoying a lovely 15yo Caol Ila by Signatory, but I find it easy to believe that they have some below average bottlings.

[les taylor]

My experience of G&M's connisseur's choice has not been good. I tend to stick to OB's that way you can rely on the characteristics of the the product. Not tried the Signatory, normally Caol Ila's are very good.

[Scotchio]

GM and Sig have done plenty of excellent whiskies but maybe it's worth doing a little research before buying. Any single cask bottling can be exceptional or substandard,it's the nature of the beast. I don't think CC are generally single cask but when they put together a bottling they are not going to have the range of casks available that a distillery has to choose from which has to be a disadvantage. I have the current CC Lochside and Tullibardine , they are both excellent, and a GM Inverleven,also very good, so I wouldn't write them off. As for Signatory they do appear to be one of the more hit and miss independents but they have produced some superb affordable Brora's over the last few years.

[TheLiquorBaron]

I'm suprised that a number of people here don't speak that highly of CC, however it is a 'budget' malt and may appeal more to those not so much in the know(meaning taste experience)...?!
I'm sure a 30yr old in the CC would be close to half the price of something similar in an OB or a higher quality malt from an IB...??

Looking at it from an IB's point of view...if finances are running low then casks have to be bottled and I would think that the cheaper costing casks, i.e. What the IB paid for the spirit, would be bottled first and as has been said it may not be the best bottling.

I have just got hold of a bowmore darkest so I'm looking forward to trying that!!
Anyway I will still re-barrel the Coal Ila and I will report back on my findings in a few months...

[Drrich1965]

Also, sometimes bottle need some time to breath. It is amazing how a bit of oxidation (or whatever other processes may be occuring) allows some of the more difficult elements to subside.

Caol Ila is not a typically Isla (whatever that means). I am very much a fan, but the olivy, peppery taste takes time for some. Younger Caol Ilas usually are nice.

What everyone says about the batch variation of Indys is spot on.

[kallaskander]

Hi there,

Caol Ila is not a typically Isla (whatever that means). That is an interesting statement and well worth explaining. Caol Ila is overshadowed by the thre south coast Islays but they do kno how to handle peat, too. So how is Caol Ila not a typical Islay malt?

Greetings
kallaskander

[Drrich1965]

Notice, I said I very much enjoy it, so my saying it is not typical is not a knock. To me, the peat has a very different quality than the other Islays, perhaps more olivy and peppery, as i stated, than smoky or medicinal. Port Ellen was the closest in profile, IMHO. My point is that one can not like Caol Ila, but that it should not stop anyone from the others; they are very different. Of course, easy to argue that they are not all very different from each other, which would than mean that there is no such thing as a typical Islay, which is easlily a defensible statement.

Of course,my experince is limited to the ones below, so I am no expert, as i have only tried 8 expressions.

Caol Ila 9yo 1996/2005 (58.1%, G & M for Binnys, Cask 1691, 1/320 bottles)
Caol Ila 7yo 1989 (43%, Signatory)
Caol Ila 10yo 1993/2003 (43% Dun Bheagan, UCF) Rum Cask, cask #90221
Caol Ila 12yo (43%, OB, 2005)
Caol Ila 13yo 1988 (40%, G & M Connoisseurs Choice)
Caol Ila 15yo (43%, OB, Flora & Fauna)
Caol Ila 18yo (43%, OB, circa 2005)
Caol Ila 1981 19yo (43%, McGibbon's Provedence)

[Scotchio]

I suppose when people talk about Islay style they usually mean that peat plays a big part in the flavour profile. 3 are heavily peated 3 are medium peated and 2 are almost unpeated so you cant really say any one is typical. It always amazes me that each distillery is so distinctive in the nature of it's peat flavour even when using the predominently the same peat and ppm but that's what makes this drink so interesting.

[vitara7]

thats the beauty though, if they were all the same, then there would be no need for as many distilleries are there is.

[Wave]

Until a couple of years ago or less you couldn't get Caol Ila OB's in the States, before then all you could find were Independant Bottlings and Signatory seemed to the majority of them. The Caol Ila Sigs I've had have been good for the most part with several being exceptional! As for their UCF Collection there hasn't been a bad in the lot.


Cheers!

[Deactivated Member]

I had a Sig CI that was just awful--like an ashtray. I'm not home now, so can't check to see if it's the same one, but that rings a bell. Some others here had similar experience with the same or similar bottles.

CI not a "typical" Islay? Well, I can't say that's wrong, if that's what you think, but given that CI was rebuilt in the '70's to provide large quantities of Islay-type malt for blends, I'd say it was quite intentionally typical. The problem with thinking about the typical or quintessential Islay (or Speysider or lowlander or whatever) is that the whiskies we really love are exceptional, and therefore anything but typical. In this context, being "typical", or "according to type", implies a lack of distinctiveness, or mediocrity. Not to say that applies to Caol Ila specifically, but the owners didn't think to bottle the stuff as a single until fairly recently, and only because malt-lovers like us discovered it via IB's and created a market for it.

[peergynt323]

Mine does have a bit of ashtray in it, if that's what you prefer to call it. It's more like if you sniffed the smoke that comes out of your barbecue when it's covered--kind of charcoal briquette like but in a good way.

The scent I don't like is when it smells like that "liquid smoke" stuff that you add to barbecue sauce or marinade or whatever.

[TheLiquorBaron]

Great to see such topical discussion on a particular region's flavour profile...!!
In regards to this topical discussion, I would think an Islay whisky(and more specifically speaking, the whisky being matured on Islay and not just distilled) would have more distinctive flavours being...salt/brine/seaweed, etc...

Don't forget to let us know Mr. T. what your bottle is...when you get home of course

I have another IB in CI so I look forward to seeing what that is like...
- Coal Ila 12yr old '92 DT Whisky Galore range

Thanks for the input too people...Cheers!!

[Mr Fjeld]

I've only tasted two different Caol Ilas and the've both impressed me (OB 12yo and Dun Bheagan single cask 12yo) .
I agree with Drich about the typical taste of peppery olive oil (like a good Kalamata oil) but I also think it smells of smoked cod. As for the smoke character I would say I find it fairly similar to the Ardbeg Ten. I think they are fairly similar actually.....

The Bruichladdich 3D Second Edition however really smells like ash and not phenolic medicinal.

[lexvo]

My first expierence with Caol Ila wasn't that good either. I tasted a 11yo from an IB (can't remember which). But after that I tried the 12y, CS and 18y OB's and I find all very nice.

[badams]

My first expierence with Caol Ila wasn't that good either. I tasted a 11yo from an IB (can't remember which). But after that I tried the 12y, CS and 18y OB's and I find all very nice.

they are VERY IMPRESSIVE, compared to some of the flavor coated BS coming out of islay these days like Buggadulaveg Cottoncandy spun whisky double matured in Dill Pickle barrels.

[jimidrammer]

The Signatory Caol Ila I had was a '90 12yo and it opened fine then turned ashy/sulphur about midway. The other Signatory bottlings I've had bad experiences with are Glenrothes '90 and Linkwood '89. Good ones were Ardmore, Bladnoch, and Mortlach. A couple still unopened are Clynelish and Strathmill.

[Ardbeg311]

I have only had a tasting of one Signatory Caol Ila. It was the 11yo 1991/2003 (46%, C#14148). It was pretty good (which is all I remember about it) and I wanted to buy a bottle but the manager said he had sold out of them.

The only other independent Caol Ilas I have had were:
14yr Cognac “Private Collection” Gordon MacPhail
Caol Ila 1992/2002 (50%, Wilson & Morgan, Extra Strength)
Caol Ila 1993/2003 (50%, Wilson & Morgan, Extra Strength)
The best of these was the GM Private Collection bottle.

Of the OBs I have had the 12, 18, Cask Strength, and 25. Very few whiskies scored higher for me than the Caol Ila 25yo 1978/2004 (59.4%, OB). That was mind-blowing stuff ... at lot of everything and all good.

[Lawrence]

I suppose when people talk about Islay style they usually mean that peat plays a big part in the flavour profile.

I think that's an interesting statement and I think some of those same people miss the other part, that there is a maritime quality to Islay whiskies that is simply missing from peated Speyside whiskies (for example, which is not a bad thing they just taste different). If you look at Springbank and Glen Scotia you'll detect some common characteristics with Islay whiskies but not to such a degree. Current Bruichladdich's like the 10 and the 15 are in some ways the 'missing link' between Islay peated whiskies and Campbeltown.

[Deactivated Member]

Don't forget to let us know Mr. T. what your bottle is...when you get home of course

Cask #13947, 27/10/90--27/8/03. The only really bad Caol Ila I've ever had. If I recall correctly, someone here--jimidrammer, I think--had the same, and someone else--MGillespie, maybe?--had a sister cask, and had similar opinions. How's my memory, guys?

I remember thinking that it must have been a tired cask--very little color and wood influence.

Edit: Not Mark, but Crieftan, who had cask #13944 and said it was good. It was unfortunate that the bottles were all gone at time of discussion--a swap of samples would have been an intriguing study of the effect of wood on spirit from a single distillation (if I can make that assumption).