Not a member? - Register and login now.
All registered users can read our entire magazine archive.

Is no whisky actually bad?

Your tastes and our tastes are discussed here, so make sure you share your pleasures with us.

Is no whisky actually bad?

Postby EdipisReks » Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:15 am

i've changed my eating habits, so i'm not drinking a lot lately, but i indulged in some Arbeg Uigeadail and Laphroaig 15yo tonight, which i very much enjoyed. as i'm a bit tipsy, i started drinking Rebel Yell bourbon, which is my mixing bourbon of choice, and it isn't bad at all! i haven't had it neat from a proper glass before, and i'm quite surprised. it isn't any worse than Maker's Mark, which is generally my go to bourbon. is there such a thing as truly bad whisk(e)y, or am i just spoiled?
EdipisReks
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Postby Scotchio » Wed Feb 14, 2007 11:43 am

I've had 3 truly bad minis; Glen Keith 83, Littlemill NAS and Tormore 10, but considering the number I have tried lately there are not many that could be called bad.
Scotchio
Gold Member
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: devon uk

Postby EdipisReks » Wed Feb 14, 2007 11:52 am

i haven't had any of those. i find even the Litttlemill OB 8yo to be drinkable, though, so i guess that categorizes my tastes.
EdipisReks
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Postby Scotchio » Wed Feb 14, 2007 12:05 pm

They could be bad examples of a potentially good whisky. I liked the Sig Littlemill 93, the NAS mini had a lot of caramel in it so although it nosed like the other Littlemill I'd had very little came thru on the palate and finish. The Tormore was an old bottling(river label) and was hot and bitter. Again I'm sure Tormore can be good, I think Lawrence was praising some recent bottlings. Likewise Glen Keith, my old mini tasted of vomit and licorice allsorts, the current CC93 sounds fine according to Murray.
Perhaps it's reasonable to say that all distilleries are well capable of producing the exceptional aswell as the awful. What sets apart the better ones is the consictency and quality of their standard output
Scotchio
Gold Member
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: devon uk

Postby Elagabalus » Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:50 pm

Since taste is subjective I wouldn't say any whisky is bad. Unless they've bottled a ruined batch, but how often is that likely to occur?

Some whisky is merely preferred by a larger portion of people than others are.

Also what one likes in one's youth might change with experience and age. :shock:
User avatar
Elagabalus
Gold Member
 
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:48 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby Deactivated Member » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:47 pm

True enough; someone must like even the awful Littlemills I've had. But from what I've heard, Littlemill was rather lax in its quality control in its last years, and I think it's fair to say that if that is truly the case, such inconsistency (as opposed to normal variability) qualifies as bad whisky-making.
Deactivated Member
 

Postby vitara7 » Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:03 pm

id say there is no bad whisky. yes, theres a few that are rather rubbish, but if you had the choice between a dram of the stinker that is loch dhu, or no whisky at all, im sure youd go for the loch dhu.
vitara7
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:54 am
Location: central scotland

Postby Deactivated Member » Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:30 pm

I'm not so sure. Dunglas, anyone? I know that, on the beer front, I'll go without rather than drink Budmillercoors. I'd rather drink a nice Ohio rosé.

And even if I did take the Loch Dhu, that doesn't mean it's not bad!
Deactivated Member
 

Postby vitara7 » Wed Feb 14, 2007 8:55 pm

your right tattie, there is bad whisky, but id change what i said to theres no undrinkable whisky.

bad whisky is better than no whisky..

as for dunglas, never tried it. might need to get a mini the next time i see one on ebay.
vitara7
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:54 am
Location: central scotland

Postby Mustardhead » Wed Feb 14, 2007 9:16 pm

Even the plain white label supermarket "Scotch Whisky" is better than nothing.

I think the worst single malt I have tried has to be the old Glen Garioch 8 year old. Like drinking your way an old lady's perfume collection :cry:

But I've never encountered a Scotch which I wouldn't drink again.
Mustardhead
Gold Member
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, UK

Postby BubbaC » Wed Feb 14, 2007 9:20 pm

I think I'm gonna have to go against the grain here... Jim Beam, the one with the white label. If I had a choice between that and nothing, I may actually go with nothing. Haven't had it in a decade though. Who knows, maybe it's better. Not willing to venture out and try it though.
BubbaC
New member
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Postby vitara7 » Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:10 pm

bubba - i bet if someone gave you a free dram you wouldnt turn it down :wink:
vitara7
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:54 am
Location: central scotland

Postby TheLaddie » Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:58 am

I'm sure there are plenty of bad whiskies, but one hopes there is always someone between the warehouse and the bottling line with the integrity to stop it reaching the bottle. Hopefully lessons were learned from Dunglas etc.
TheLaddie
Gold Member
 
Posts: 739
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:00 am
Location: Bawtry, South Yorkshire, UK

Postby Elagabalus » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:06 am

There are people who will drink anything. Alcoholics have been known to reach for perfume bottles.
User avatar
Elagabalus
Gold Member
 
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:48 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby Ardbeg311 » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:42 pm

Actually, I wouldn't drink a Richardson's Traditional Blend even if offered for free. I have gotten sick on more than one occasion with this bottle. I am not saying one has to be an alcoholic to find something in Richardson's Traditional Blend, but I am at a loss as to why somebody would make his liver work for it.
Ardbeg311
Gold Member
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 2:36 am
Location: Roma, Italia

Postby xcel » Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:00 am

Anyone try the Tomatin 12 yo? This was the only whisky at a recent party and I had a dram of it. I thought it was horrible, it was the worst whisky I've ever had. I don't know why it just really didn't do well with me.

I wouldn't drink it again if you paid me
xcel
New member
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:19 am
Location: USA

Bad whisky

Postby Muskrat Portage » Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:51 pm

I got into a discussion about this last year, simply because my signature said "There's no such thing as a bad whisky" After subsequent discussions with my learned friends from across the pond, it was amended to include the suffix ..."but indifferent may apply"

Finally, I had to admit there are certain whiskies which I would only drink for effect. Edradour 10 yo; Vintage Malts' Islay; Glen Breton 10 yo all spring to mind. I have no doubt that others will be discovered and derided but I actually found the Tomatin 12 yo tolerable as compared to the above, although I scored it in the low 80's (out of a possible 100). By way of reference Glen Breton received a 65 and Vintage Malts Islay a 05. :twisted:
Muskrat Portage aka Peter
User avatar
Muskrat Portage
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2384
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:47 am
Location: Jan says the North Pole, Ontario, Canada

Postby DramMeister » Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:21 pm

I'm surprised Creiftan hasn't posted. I agree with him anyway.
DramMeister
Silver Member
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: Houghton on the Hill, Leics, England

Re: Bad whisky

Postby Quaichuser » Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:26 pm

Muskrat Portage wrote:I got into a discussion about this last year, simply because my signature said "There's no such thing as a bad whisky" After subsequent discussions with my learned friends from across the pond, it was amended to include the suffix ..."but indifferent may apply"


Mea Culpa MP. I'm still new and didn't realize I had cribbed you signature. :oops:

Many years ago I tasted Dalwhinnie for the first time and immediately decided it was not a scotch I would drink again. (Cue passage of time graphic) About a year ago someone offered me a Dalwhinnie. Never one to turn down a freebie I decided to see if I still felt the same about it. I don't....it was better than I remembered...still not one I would go out and buy though.

Now..to work on that new signature. :lol:
Quaichuser
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 244
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:35 pm
Location: Brantford Canada

Re: Bad whisky

Postby Muskrat Portage » Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:41 am

I maintain that 3 year old whisky should stay in the cask for a few years longer, as any I've come across in the 3-5 yo bracket is pretty terrible.

Quaichuser wrote: ...Mea Culpa MP. I'm still new and didn't realize I had cribbed you signature. :oops: ...
Now..to work on that new signature. :lol:
Qauichuser:
Not to worry -continue to use it as I've already cleared all the flack you'dve received for it. (I've got a new one in mind once 2007 is over anyways.) This illustrates that the Ontario school system punches out like-minded individuals...should we worry?
Peter
User avatar
Muskrat Portage
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2384
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:47 am
Location: Jan says the North Pole, Ontario, Canada

Return to Whisky Tastings

Whisky gift and present finder