Tag Archives: Whiskey

Liebster Award for WoW

I’ve been the blogging equivalent of a bad friend.  We all know the type – they take weeks to respond to a message, if at all, and then claim that they’ve been “super busy”.  Not good enough.  In my case it’s time to make things right.

I was recently done the honour of being nominated for a Liebster Blog Award by my fellow whisky blogger Whisky Woman.  WW: firstly – apologies for the delay in formally acknowledging the award, and secondly – big thanks for choosing me.

Cool bananas!

The Liebster, I’m given to understand, is awarded to emerging bloggers, the purpose being to spotlight their work and hopefully boost their following.

It works like this:

  1. Thank the giver and link back to their blog.  Tick.
  2. Pass on the award to 3-5 selected bloggers and let them know by leaving a comment on their blogs. See below.  Half-tick.
  3. Copy and paste the award on your blog.  Tick.

So, here are some bloggers worthy of extra attention:

Another Damned Food Blog

Magic stuff.  A class act.  This guy wields words like a hammer.  Witty irreverence at its hard hitting best, fuck you very much.

MojoDojo

I was chuffed to contribute a post to the Dojo some time ago – check it out here.  These dudes have the inside line on popular culture, Joburg style!  Prolific, and consistently witty.

South African whisky bloggers

We’re a rare breed.  There are only a handful of whom I’m aware.  These sterling gentlemen are out there flying the whisky flag in darkest Africa– please give them your support.

Whisky Brother

Whisky Tasting Fellowship

Let’s Talk Whisky.  I believe Marsh’s blog is down due to other commitments.  Here’s hoping it’s temporary.

To all you bloggers out there – keep the faith and may the dram be with you!

The whisky tasting deconstructed part 3

Wow, I’ve been so caught up by the World Cup (let’s say no more about it), by my regular work (the irksome distraction that puts bread on the table), and by my recent holiday (less irksome) that I’ve let the blogging slip.  Well I’m now breaking out of the post-vac funk.  This series on tasting was not in fact prematurely cancelled by the networks: here’s the final episode.

We left off at appearance before I meandered about somewhat gratuitously.

Next up then the nose or aroma.  In part 2 I made a strong case – or so I thought – for giving the nose its pre-eminent due.  It seems however that when it comes to my powers of persuasion a gap exists between my perception and cold reality.  My own brother – he who is flesh of my flesh, and blood of my blood – ridiculed my new whisky glasses (I can still feel the hurt 😦 ) and was generally disdainful about the whole notion of nosing.  Pretentious, he called it.  For a split second – before logic prevailed – it made me question myself: have I managed to get sufficiently far up my own arse that I’ve become one of those anoraks whom I despise?  Is nosing just the expected form for a whisky lover?  This is actually an important question to consider.  It’s easy to get caught up in ritual.  Let’s break away from whisky for a moment.  Imagine bread, freshly baked, voluptuous, just out of the oven.  A thick steaming slice is spread with rich Danish butter, which then melts into the hot bread.  You reach for a pot of ripe youngberry jam.

Yum

Freeze it there.  Now give yourself a blocked nose – you can’t smell a thing – and picture the scene again.  Hell, you might as well be eating a dog biscuit.  No, I would suggest, and most would agree I think, that nose is undisputedly important…nay, critical.  The aromas in whisky may be more subtle than those in baking, but understated charms have their own powerful appeal.  Scientists have identified multiple hundreds of distinct flavour bearing compounds in whisky.  The nose is essential to “unlocking” and enjoying these flavours.  It deserves dedicated attention.

I don’t like to oversell.  But here I’m going to chuck in a little extra – some hard-earned knowledge that I managed to prise from the internet.  Our sense of smell is derived from the olfactory bulb which is part of the brain’s limbic system, a region also closely linked with memory and emotion.  This physiological connection is the reason why smell has the ability to call up memories and emotional responses almost instantaneously.  So, on a deep and personal level aromas, or at least certain aromas to certain people, are intrinsically interesting.    The nose of my Redbreast 12yo was redolent of cut-grass and caramelised sugar.  It evoked memories of cricket games on mowed turf, of sprinting across the outfield to cut off a boundary, and of the toffee-ish crust on my Mom’s apple-bake.  Why would I or anyone else want to ignore such an evocative part of this experience?  I, we, don’t.

Those halcyon days

So how do you go about nosing a whisky thoroughly?  Do you just stick your snoot in the glass and inhale?  When it comes to whisky be prepared to be humbled.  There’s always more to learn, and sometimes it’s basic stuff.  I was recently invited to an event hosted by The Macallan – an excellent evening spent viewing fine photography and sampling even finer whisky – to which I was accompanied by my non-noseworthy brother, his wife (also unconverted), and an old friend, a local film producer of such legendary status that dropping his name would be downright gauche.  For the purposes of this post let’s call him Carson.  Carson had recently been to a tasting where he’d been prompted to open his mouth whilst nosing whisky.  I was dubious but gave it a try, and wow, what a difference it makes!  It was the equivalent of fuzzy vision suddenly being focused – everything seemed more precise, more acute, more definitive.  Cats apparently smell in this way.  There are organs in their mouths, called vomeronasal organs, that supplement their sense of smell.  These organs are also present in humans but are thought to be vestigial (i.e. like the appendix no longer serving a function).  Maybe not though.  Or maybe there’s some other simple explanation for Carson’s nosing style – Google can only get you so far.  Regardless, if you weren’t aware of this nifty little trick, give it a go – it’s easy and it works.

There are a few other “tricks” worth investigating, if you’re so inclined:

–        When you start nosing whisky, and even if you’ve been doing it for a while, you’re likely to be asking yourself whether you’re really smelling some of these subtle aromas, or whether they might be a figment of your over-exuberance.  You think that you smell something but you can’t quite put a finger on it.  Consider this: you met someone briefly years ago.  Unexpectedly you see the person whilst you’re out and about in a public space.  The face seems familiar, but you can’t place it, or associate it to a name.  This is the olfactory predicament.  Our sense of smell is the poor relative – deprioritized, often ignored, and mostly deprived of attention.  Recognition comes with repetition.  You may not remember that fleeting face in the crowd, but you won’t forget your wife’s.  It’s got to do with observation.  Smells can be observed just like sights and sounds.  Pay greater heed to aromas in daily life and it’ll enhance your ability to more readily identify these in your whisky.  To what extent will this amplify your enjoyment, if at all?  I’m not sure.  The optimal fun/work balance is different for each of us.

–        Alternate between two different, and somewhat polarized, techniques. Firstly focus on a particular reference point, i.e. a single aroma, and attempt to identify this in the nose.  This reference can be sourced from tasting notes about the whisky, from the impressions of others who may be tasting the whisky with you, or from a standardized model.  Secondly, make your mind blank and indulge in some free association.  Let your imagination loose.  There are no wrong answers.  I favour the latter because of its fun factor domination.

These tips above are of equal relevance for the taste of a whisky, but the next one is specific to the nose:

–        You now know about the cat thing, so try varying it up some more:  long draws, short sniffs, and, discreetly (I wouldn’t let my brother see me do this), block one nostril at a time.  Each iteration might give you a different perspective.

Although I’ve focused on this aspect of it, nosing isn’t just isolated to aromas.  You should also be aware of the nosing effects – the sensation on the epithelium or lining of the nose (like mouthfeel for taste) – and how these influence your personal impressions of a whisky.  One of the flavour standardization models which I have at hand labels these effects as any one of pungent, prickling, nose-warming and nose-drying.  I’m not convinced that it’s particularly necessary to get caught up in these details, but getting a gauge on the level of prickling can be useful in guiding reduction, since this can largely be attributed to the bite of the alcohol.     Add water gradually from neat until the prickling dissipates.

Moving on.  You’re now ready to toss it back.  This is where formal tastings can really get pedantic.  Let’s struggle through it.

First up you should evaluate mouthfeel.  I was given an old Glenmorangie tasting manual which provides some useful vocabulary to guide you through this process.  According to the venerable gentlemen who bring us this fine Highland malt (there are apparently sixteen of them, residing in a place called Tain) a whisky can either be mouth-coating (oily, creamy or smooth), mouth-warming (like Nando’s peri-peri mild to fiery), mouth-watering, or mouth-furring (astringent or dry).  Related – in that it influences mouthfeel – but separate is the body or texture of the whisky, ranging from light and watery to full and dense.  The aromatics have now been fully appraised and are nevertheless trapped in your mouth so feel free to roll the whisky about as if it were Listerine.

Secondly, you’re now finding yourself in the home-stretch, the taste.  Remember that it can be meaningful to taste both neat and reduced.  There are 4 primary tastes – bitter, salty, sour, and sweet – which may be present in a whisky, either individually or, more likely, in combination.  Other flavours, which you interpret as taste, are in fact aromas detected by the nasal passage at the back of your mouth.  Swallow and savour the finish, the persisting flavour of the whisky after consumption.  Does it linger long or is this whisky lingerless?   Is there an aftertaste – new nuances that were not initially evident but might appear after a second sip or after a few minutes have elapsed?

I copped some flak from smokers because on my comments in part 1.  I’m going to try to make it up to them.  You’ve now reached the point where you can sit back with a self-satisfied look on your face, light up a smoke, and consider your overall impressions of the whisky.

These ones are better for you. The tobacco equivalent of broccoli really...

I tend to focus on one aspect alone – balance.  Are the various flavours in harmony with each other or is this whisky wearing black shoes with a brown belt?  Is the taste consistent with the nose, or does it just talk the talk, but not walk the walk?  Weighty matters indeed…

Incidentally I found the Redbreast 12yo to be beautifully balanced, nimbly performing cartwheels on a tightrope.  I have tears in my eyes as I look at the dregs that are all that remain in the bottle.

On that bittersweet note I’m going to abruptly terminate this series of haphazard musings.  Enjoy the week ahead, and may the dram be with you.

A visit to the Scotch Whisky Experience

My promised contribution to this blog is long overdue. It’s been more than a month since my visit to Scotland, and, more specifically, the Scotch Whisky Experience (SWE) situated on the Royal Mile, a stone’s throw from Edinburgh Castle.

The slick SWE entrance set amidst old Edinburghian stone

Before I continue, let me make it very clear that I know next to nothing about whisky. What I do know has been gleaned from many a night listening to my husband wax lyrical about his favourite drink.  So any knowledge that I might have acquired has been incidental.

I was in Edinburgh to visit my dad – a very Italian whisky lover, conveniently living in Scotland.  The last time I visited we took a lovely drive through the Highlands and stopped off at a few well-known distilleries along the way.  On this occasion we didn’t have the time to travel out of the city however we had been offered a complimentary visit to the SWE, courtesy of the very friendly and welcoming team (thanks to Angela in particular!) that WoW had come to know through this post.

The SWE building is surprisingly modern, considering the historic nature of its immediate surrounds.  The tour options cater for varying needs, from those wanting a relatively quick introductory circuit, to those wanting something a bit more in-depth (with a couple of extra tastings thrown in of course!).  We were offered the Silver tour, which lasted approximately 1 hour.

It began with an entertaining audio-visual presentation: we were seated in a “vehicle”, aesthetically fashioned like a still, which then moved around like the teacups and saucers ride at a fairground.  This was followed by a ten minute browse in a room decorated with photos and information that explained the whisky-making process in some detail.  For foreigners there is a very nifty tool, resembling one of the original Motorola cell phones, which takes you through whisky-making blow-by-blow in your preferred language.  My father tried out the handset and was highly impressed with the quality of the Italian translation!  It saved me from having to explain some of the more technical English terms.

The next stop was a small auditorium, where all the seats were accompanied by a tasting glass, and a colour and taste chart.  A short presentation followed, which took you through key information about the whisky industry, the difference between single malts and blends, the defined whisky regions in Scotland, and the styles of whiskies that emanate from each region and why.  This presentation is great for novices like myself and even for the more informed I would imagine that it would be very entertaining, if not terribly educational.

Our colour charts were divided into the 4 whisky regions and as we were introduced to the characteristics of each region we were prompted to scratch the corresponding section on the cards to release aromas typical of the whiskies from that region.  This was a very interactive and engaging way of demonstrating the various flavour groups.  We were then given the opportunity to choose the profile that most appealed to us so that we could have a tasting of a whisky from that region (if you were fortunate enough to be on the platinum tour you got to have a dram from each region).  I chose a whisky from the Lowlands, because whiskies from this region were described as being light and fragrant, and more palatable for those of us who are not yet accustomed to drinking whisky.  For the first time in my life I can honestly say that I thoroughly enjoyed a whisky!  I fell in love not only with the whisky, but with its lyrical name – “Auchentoshen”.  The distillery is actually owned by the famous Japanese whisky company Suntory.  Unfortunately I haven’t come across it again since returning home to Cape Town.

Triple-distilled Lowland Scotch whisky

Our final destination, and the real highlight of the tour, was a viewing of the worlds’ largest whisky collection.  Previously owned by Claive Vidiz of Brazil, who had amassed over 3300 bottles during the course of many years, in 2009 the collection was sold to Diageo, the world’s largest distributor of whiskies.  To be in a room surrounded by so many different, special whiskies was awe-inspiring.  Claive did not discriminate and his love of whisky led him to collecting all sorts from blends to malts – some young, some very old.  The collection is very well looked after with the bottles cleaned regularly (I would hate to be entrusted with that responsibility – I recall not too long ago knocking over what remained of my husband’s Chivas Century of Malts, much to his dismay!).  The tour pretty much wrapped up as we finished our drams, while looking on in awe at the incredible collection of bottles that lay before us.

The well preserved Claive Vidiz Collection

The experience managed to be highly informative, without being overwhelming.  As I already mentioned, there are a number of tours to suit one’s specific needs – the silver, gold and platinum tours which are 50mins, 1h10 and 1h30 long respectively.  Each tour offers slightly more value, although the 50min tour was just perfect for me, as a relative newcomer to the world of whisky.  I would imagine that the gold and platinum tours would suit those of you who are already passionate.  The staff were extremely knowledgeable and although Diageo is a major player supporting the SWE, there was no bias at all (except toward Scotch whisky in general!).  All in all, well worth the visit.   Don’t miss out if you happen to be in Edinburgh.

A journey to the heart of whisky

A good while back I was having dinner with a friend at his home when he pulled out an unusual-looking bottle of whisky.  It had a distinctive hand-applied wax seal, and it didn’t have the type of slick label that big brands spend thousands developing.   The thing radiated an authentic old world charm. “You’ve got to try this whisky”, he urged, “it’s made by Michel Couvreur”.  “Who?” I replied.

Michel Couvreur, that’s who!

Fast forward a couple of years and I’m at another dinner – just outside the city of Beaune in Burgundy – with none other than Monsieur Couvreur himself.  He’d invited me to an amazing restaurant.  Aperitifs and amuse-bouches on a pagodaed terrace to the dulce sounds of a string quartet.  Three courses of lobster, each paired with an exquisite wine.  A cheese trolley of astounding proportions and variety.  Grand Marnier soufflé with sorbet.  Coffees (of the civet variety no doubt).  An audience with the head chef.   If he’d set out to impress he’d succeeded in spades.  Next time someone mentioned Michel Couvreur I wouldn’t be hooting like an owl.

That epic dinner was the culmination of events put in motion at the previous dinner.  We had ruminated deep into the night about the sorry selection of whiskies in South Africa.  You’d struggle to find a regular independent bottling, but something like this – an artisanal whisky, of the style that was originally made by the doyens of Scotch whisky before their names became mass brands, something truly special and out of the ordinary – was completely beyond grasp.  So, motivated by nothing other than the love of this fine whisky and a thirst (pun intended) for the adventure, we decide to seek out Michel Couvreur and convince him to ship us his goods.

Checking out Michel Couvreur’s Special Vatting

Eventually I ended up in the small village of Bouze-les-Beaune, iconically midway between Scotland, from whence Monsieur Couvreur has “clerach” (a fancy name for new-make) distilled to his personal specifications, and Andalusia, where he sources many of his casks.  The whisky philosophy of this deeply philosophical man is simple – it is based on the conviction that 90% of a whisky’s character and quality can be attributed to the wood in which it has been aged.  This has raised some ire amongst certain whisky commentators.  The influential Malt Maniac Serge Valentin had this to say in 2008: “Indeed, twelve years ago or so, I attended a Michel Couvreur session where they claimed that the distillery didn’t matter, that only the casks did, thus implying that displaying the distillery’s name on a Scotch single malt whisky was useless.  No need to say that that did really put me off, and that anything branded ‘Michel Couvreur’ used to make me frown – at best – since that very session”.  It may be an extreme position – and I’m not sure that Monsieur Couvreur uses the word, or even implication, “useless” – but I don’t know of anyone who argues against wood as the dominant influence on the flavour of a whisky.  I personally wouldn’t put a number to it, the specifics would vary I’m sure from whisky to whisky, but I’ve seen it done:  the guys at Glenrothes have it at 60%.  Is 90% categorically unreasonable?  I’m not so sure.  My host during the tasting at the Couvreur cellar was Jean-Arnaud Frantzen, a young guy with an advanced science degree (I forget the discipline) who decided to pack it all in to study whisky at the feet of this master.  He presented me with the results of an experiment – identical new-make aged for 7 years (if I remember correctly) in two separate casks, one bourbon, one sherry.  I’m a taster-in-training, and I will be for many years to come.  I don’t claim any extraordinary talent.  Nevertheless it was obvious that the two were significantly different.  60% different?  90%?  Why quibble?  Michel Couvreur has focused his efforts on indisputably the most important aspect of whisky-making, and in doing so he has forged a reputation as a maturation specialist of incomparable skill.  In fact, despite his conceptual misgivings, Serge went on to hand out impressive scores of 88-90 points to the flagship Couvreur malts.

Today most industrial whisky producers favour Bourbon barrels because they are dramatically less expensive than sherry casks (from which traditional whisky flavours evolved).  Monsieur Couvreur has resisted this impulse.  Over the course of decades he has unwaveringly dedicated himself to seeking out the highest quality casks, personally visiting small bodegas in the great sherry producing regions of Spain, particularly Andalusia, to individually select the best of the best.  These are then transported to his estate, filled with whisky (or whisky-to-be), and placed in his subterranean cellar.  This cellar, a maze-like structure with a couple of casks around every corner, mostly sherry but some bourbon and a smattering of the exotic (notably the Jura Vin Jaune), offers the ideal conditions for ageing whisky.  Down there, guided through passages hewn from the rock, I felt transported back in time to a golden age of whisky, captivated by the aura of the man, by his passion for his craft, and by the almost holy setting.

MC in the cellar

It is no surprise then that his small-batch whiskies, unheralded and unadvertised, have found their way from his legendary cellar to the four corners, promoted by nothing more than word of mouth and a recognition of their excellence, in the process making him a cult figure amongst connoisseurs and aficionados.  His premises, whilst impressive, are inconspicuous, un-signposted, just another elegant building in the elegant French countryside, and yet, whilst I was visiting, a group of whisky fans had managed to track him down and were knocking on his door requesting a visit.  He shrugged and asked to be excused – apparently this was a standard occurrence.

I was lucky enough to be offered a taste of his Ever Young Pristine 35yo during my visit – as was my wife, not the most avid whisky drinker, so from whom I then inherited a second dram.  I’m not one to ascribe the descriptors “best” or “favourite” to a whisky but if I were then this would be a strong contender.  It was utterly magnificent.  Sadly, I’ll be one of the last few people to have the honour of tasting this whisky.  Like many Couvreur single malts, this is a vintage single cask, of which few bottles remain.

The Big Daddy

Whether you agree with his ideas or not, in this era when the industry is defined by rampant corporate proliferation, when it is the trade and not the craft that calls the tune, Michel Couvreur and his small team of successors truly stand apart.  Hailed as “the last of the Mohicans”, a moniker bestowed on him by the Danish press, he is a hidden treasure and the heir to an endangered heritage.    He adds colour, heart and charm – and damn good drinking – to the whisky landscape.

The whisky tasting deconstructed part 2

If you missed it, part 1 can viewed by clicking here.

So what is flavour?  Most people think of flavour as taste.  In general language we would equate taste with flavour and aroma with fragrance.  In a whisky context however it is an umbrella term referring to both taste and aroma (or nose).  And whilst it’s easy to get side-tracked by peripheral discussions to do with casks, chill filtration, stills, and so forth – all admittedly interesting and all impacting on flavour – this, the actual flavour itself, is where you’ll find the real action.

You’ll have picked up by now that I’m not huge on rigid protocol in whisky tastings.  The alphabet aside, fun should come above formula.  Nevertheless, as you get down to the business end, there are some important basic “rules” to bear in mind.   Allow me a little soliloquy then before I continue on with the ritual of the thing.

Rule #1:  Don’t ignore the nose (or your other senses).  People tend to become fixated on the taste of the whisky – probably because taste is the pre-culminating moment in the consumption process, and it’s the act of consumption that gives satisfaction.  However, on a sensory level, taste is relatively limited when compared to smell; there are only 4 primary tastes but 32 primary aromas.   In fact, calling the whole experience a “tasting” is a bit of a misnomer, since smell is integral and indeed all the other senses – feeling (texture), sight (appearance), and sound (hearing others’ impressions) – should be involved to some extent or another.  So, savour the nose – it’s a “hidden” dimension of enjoyment waiting to be discovered.  With just this in mind I’ve recently invested in some new, nose-accentuating whisky tumblers.  In fact I liked the look of them so much that I bought a few sets for my whisky loving friends as well, and now I’m getting some for my twitter friends too.

Cool bananas!

Rule #2:  Use water.  If you want to be pedantic, and strictly conducted whisky tastings are pedantic, nose and taste the whisky neat first.  I don’t really bother with this anymore, but I’ll concede that it can on occasion give you an added perspective on the flavour.  Nose with restraint – the alcohol fumes coming off neat whisky can be lightly anaesthetizing.  Some people prefer to drink their whisky neat as a matter of course.  All power to them – I fully endorse their right of individual choice.  Some people also choose to believe that the earth is flat.  In both cases however there’s reason to suggest that the alternative is better.  Adding a splash of water to your dram is what’s known as “releasing the serpent”- the water reacts with the flavour-bearing congeners in the whisky and in doing so unlocks its aromas.  It’s meaningless to prescribe how much water should be added.  The rule of thumb is equal parts water to whisky, but this can and should vary according to individual taste, and the nature of the whisky and its alcohol content.  Water also softens the alcoholic edge of the whisky, which can otherwise be numbing and/or obstructive, although die-hards will tell you that saliva does the same job.  I think not.

To each their own

A corollary to this rule – use still mineral water, or something similarly pure.  Water purifying chemicals such as chlorine do not belong in your expensive whisky.

Rule #3:  Remember to enjoy yourself.    I mentioned earlier that tastings play out on an enjoyment-education continuum.   On the one end you get the serious – the people who do this for a living:  industry professionals, heavyweight reviewers, and the like; and sidling up to them the anoraks – those pseudo-expert whisky fans who’re slightly too far up their own arses.  The latter are easy to spot: they’ll swirl the whisky about dramatically, peer at it intently, nose and taste it ponderously, and agonise over each nuance of flavour, with suitably meaningful pauses in between, and the odd, highly focused, introspective stare into the distance.  Don’t be one of these guys.  Stick to (or at least towards) the other end.  Drinking whisky should be fun.

I’m satisfied much of the time with contemplating just a single nugget of flavour, the one that floats unprompted to the top and builds my overall impression, and that distinguishes that whisky from others.  In Bushmills 10yo it was turkish delight, in Bain’s it was overripe fruit, in Highland Park 12yo the gentle honeyed smoke.

I write about whisky, so often I’ll persevere, concentrate, tease out a greater array of flavours – but when I do I can feel myself shifting on that continuum – my day at the beach takes on that heavy Sunday evening cloudiness.  The fun starts to seeps away.

Rule #4:  Learn something.  Hang on, you’re telling yourself, what’s with this dude?  Ok, it might seem like I’m contradicting myself but give me a chance.  As you’re aware, when you love whisky, you want to know more about it.  And no matter how expert you believe you may be, there’s always more to learn.  A certain measure of incremental learning is essential, and each tasting presents an opportunity to add to your knowledge, and with it your affinity.  Your goal here is to understand the whisky relative to others – so that you can continue on your epic journey.

We can all identify the same basic flavours – admittedly to various degrees of proficiency – but we may not be able to describe them in a way that makes sense to or resonates with others…or reference them in relation to other flavours.  The answer is standardization.   There are various models – the Pentlands Wheel, the Diageo/Dave Broom inspired Flavour Map and its associated Flavour Camps, Serge Valentin’s SGP system, and I’m sure many others – all of which seek to standardize the flavour describing lexicon and get some sort of order and classification in place.  It’s worthwhile to be familiar with these models, or at least with their vocabulary, so that you can identify whiskies that you may want to try.  I’m all for prolific experimentation but premium whiskies cost long dollars – so unless you have a wallet built like a prop forward (the World Cup’s starting today, here’s my contribution to the rugby excitement) some discrimination may well be necessary.

Pentlands Wheel - courtesy of Whisky Magazine

Rule #5: The T in tasting is for team.  Share your whisky, share the fun, share your impressions.  Enough said.

Ok, that’s my bit of preaching done.  Part 3 – the rest of the formula for an optimal tasting (coming soon to Words on Whisky) – will conclude this series.

Fellow rugby fans – we’re caught in a bastardly time zone predicament.  I’m quite partial to sipping on a dram whilst watching my team pound others into submission, but not at 10h30.  How early is it reasonable to start drinking whisky?

To the Springboks – may the dram be with you!  Preferably after the games though.

The whisky tasting deconstructed part 1

Recently, after a not inconsiderable amount of effort, I finally acquired that bottle of Redbreast 12yo for which I’d been pining for so long.

As they say in my home town - kiff bru!

My immediate instinct, as someone who writes about whisky, was to conduct a “tasting”, because that’s just what’s expected.  A tasting is one of those serious sessions where one follows a very particular process to tease out one’s impressions of a whisky.  Serious enough in fact that one finds it necessary to resort to the third person.   Too serious.

After thinking about it for a while I favoured the lose-yourself-to-the-moment drink when you don’t have to concentrate on anything other than your own pleasure.

Don’t get me wrong.  I like tastings.  I’ve attended some awesome tasting functions, notably those put on by my friends at the College of Whisky.  I’d suggest however that on the education-enjoyment continuum these things are inclined towards the former. Tastings are a bit like school, or work.  They may be useful.    They’re frequently necessary.  They may even be interesting.  But when it comes down to it you’d rather be at the beach.

Let’s consider what’s involved in an optimal tasting:

Firstly, you don’t just uncork on a whim and start chugging.  You have to build the context if you want to do this right.  Our senses are most acute – and hence most receptive (but certainly not most appreciative) – in the morning and when we’re hungry.  In what seems like a past life I worked for a brandy manufacturer, one where the management team was expected to take part in tasting panels…first thing in the morning.  Once a week, the bare minimum, I’d reluctantly haul my arse over to the bottling plant and douse my palate with young, blended brandy – mmm!  Luckily they hadn’t cottoned onto the hunger aspect, or if they had they graciously let us off the hook.

Personally I reckon we should keep mornings for champagne, preferably accompanied by croissants and eggs benedict.

Say NO to hunger

The spartan theme of the thing doesn’t end there – the formula dictates that the tasting area should be well ventilated and free of distracting odours: food, cleaning solutions, dubious personal hygiene, and, ironically, also scented soaps and toiletries.  A smoker would have likely impregnated his or her clothing with cigarette smoke – don’t invite these dodgy buggers to your tasting.

Secondly, you need to be properly equipped.  A tasting should be done using a nosing glass – a tulip-shaped vessel, usually on a stem.  These glasses have a narrowly tapered rim to concentrate the aroma or nose of the whisky.  Sometimes, for blind tastings, or particular sessions where the taster doesn’t want to be influenced by the whisky’s appearance, they might be opaque.  There’s no doubt that they’re fit for purpose, but, in my opinion, they’re also a bit poncy.

Tell me I'm wrong

If I wanted to be doing little pinky salutes with every sip I’d be drinking tea from a china cup.   Admittedly Glencairn’s version – with its satisfyingly masculine foot – has dialled down the pratt-factor somewhat.

Cooler tasting glasses

Nevertheless, give me a solid crystal whisky tumbler any time.  Well-balanced and comfortable in the palm of your hand, this is the ticket to a legendary whisky drinking experience.  These days you get them with an appropriately tapered rim so the nuances of the nose don’t just pass you by.

Glenfarclas 30yo in a Schott crystal tumbler

Thirdly, there’s appearance…which, as they say, can be deceiving.  It’s no different for whisky.  Here you’ll be looking at colour, texture and clarity.

When it comes to colour the basic rule of thumb is that whiskies aged primarily in sherry casks should be darker and more coppery, and those aged primarily in bourbon barrels should be lighter and more golden.  However after you’ve thrown in the possibility of refill variations, finishing in exotic woods, virgin casks, and caramel colouring (the wolf in sheep’s clothing effect), it just becomes a waste of time for anyone other than the keenest expert to extract any kind of meaningful insight.

In evaluating texture (and later the nose) the tasting presents a Shakespearean dilemma: to swirl or not to swirl that is the question.  A conventional tasting guide will encourage you to swirl the whisky about in your glass so that you can ogle the “legs” of the whisky (sometimes also called “tears”, less fun).  These are the little rivulets that form as the swirled whisky runs down the sides of the glass.  These can be long or short, and fast or slow-moving – from which you can draw inferences about alcohol content, and texture.  There’s another camp that suggests that whisky should not be swirled.  SA wine and spirits guru Dave Hughes, a man worth calling for his answering machine message alone, was quoted as follows on the subject:  “don’t vigorously swirl the whisky in the glass as you would wine.  Leave it idle since the aromatics are important – and delicate – and you don’t want those escaping as you agitate the glass violently”.  I’m going to answer the Hamlet question with another question.  This gimmick is quite nifty, especially at a promotional tasting.  It has an impressive feel about it.  Novices sense they’re learning something – they’re virtually on their way to becoming master distillers.  But take a step back.  Does it really add value?   The alcohol strength can be gleaned far more precisely from the label.  And texture is only important once the whisky’s being drunk, at which time you should feel free to swill it about with gay abandon and get a good gauge of the mouth feel.

The last element to consider in assessing appearance is clarity.  This is actually more meaningful, and it’s worthwhile doing.  Here you’ll be trying to deduce whether this whisky is chill-filtered or not.  You may remember from this post that chill filtration essentially removes flavour from the whisky, so for the true whisky lover it’s an abomination.  Lift the glass to the light and scrutinize the whisky for any cloudiness.  If it’s crystal clear it means that the whisky has likely been chill-filtered; if you can pick up a bit of haze then it’s likely to be what’s called a “non-chill filtered” whisky, or possibly a whisky that’s been less aggressively chill filtered.  You’ll be able to do this more reliably by chucking in a bit of ice or some cold water since this will precipitate the congeners that form the haze.  I wouldn’t encourage this though – unless it’s a warm day.  Cold inhibits the flavour of the whisky on your nose and palate.

In the next post we get down to brass tacks – the flavour.  Until then, may the dram be with you.

Hitting some Black Bush

I’ve made a sort of loose commitment to myself that I’m not going to drink tequila anymore.  Actually shoot is more apt because I don’t plan on depriving myself of the occasional margarita – that would be needless overkill.  My rationale?  Why chuck back cactus juice when I could be sipping fine whisky.  It’s taken me a while to unearth this pearl – age it seems has its merits – and to appreciate its simple beauty…but now that I have long may its lustre last.  Tequila buzz, pah…it’s a myth.

Usually occurs after shooting tequila

I recently had the opportunity to put my resolve to the test – during the bachelor party of an Irish friend.  The chaps in attendance had been known to pursue Mexican gold with the enthusiasm of modern-day conquistadors.  Once, crazed by tequila feva, two of them pinned me down whilst I was asleep, and a third squirted tomato sauce into my mouth till it seeped out of my nose.  True story.  Anyhow, on this occasion I steeled myself, ignored the taunts, and meandered towards a bottle of Black Bush.  It proved to be validation indeed – of the highest order.

Black Bush along with its little brother, Bushmills Original, is an unusual specimen amongst blended Irish whiskeys in that its component parts come from different distilleries.  This is common practice in Scotland, but in Ireland, with its mere handful of distilleries, blend composition tends to stay in-house.  Given that Bushmills has no column stills and thus cannot make its own grain whiskey it sources this instead from Irish Distillers’ Midleton distillery.  Black Bush is a malt/grain blend, so it contains no single pot still – that special nectar which I suggested in my last post as being central to the Irish whiskey identity (and of which I now have a bottle, hooray!).   Nevertheless the Bushmills brothers can truly claim to be the most representative of Irish whiskeys – the malt comes from County Anheim in the North, where the Bushmills distillery is located, and the grain comes from County Cork in the South, home to Midleton.   I can well imagine that this would have been the dram served during the Good Friday peace talks.

This is some light-hearted conjecture on my part of course.  But I thought I’d throw it into the mix.  I’m reasonably confident that I’m toeing the party line.  Whisky makers in my opinion are deliberately cagey about the makeup of their products; this both encourages positive conjecture amongst consumers and it keeps their options open.   Marketers will tell you that mystique adds to the allure.  This is all somewhat self-serving.  I’m pretty sure it’s not in the consumer’s best interests to be left in the dark.  When you’re shelling out hundreds of rands and more for a bottle of whisky you deserve to know – as precisely as is reasonable, and as is the case with most other product categories – what it is that you’re getting.

In this game it seems that Bushmills is no exception.   The label claims that it is “matured to perfection in sherry casks” and indeed the sherry influence is its defining feature.  However, I’ve struggled to definitively confirm whether it is exclusively or just predominantly matured in sherry casks.  Frustratingly there are other grey areas; notably its age, and the proportions of grain and malt.  Withholding the latter is hardly unusual, and indeed this may need to vary to maintain flavour consistency from bottling to bottling.  In fact I really don’t mean to single out Black Bush.  I’m for the moment bottling in a full-blown tirade – but springing a few leaks in the process.

Anyhow, as much as I was distracted by picking over these details, I didn’t let it deter me from fully and unreservedly appreciating this exceptional product.  From the first glance at its rich maple syrup colour this whiskey exalts the sherry womb from which it (mostly?) sprang.  The nose is big and fruity with a spicy undertone – I could picture a mince pie made with delicate phyllo pastry.

Inside every bottle of Black Bush

The liquid has a full, but slick mouthfeel, with the intense fruit persisting on the palate, and the spice, identifiably cinnamon, more prominent than before.  The oak is restrained, imbuing the whiskey with a well-rounded, smooth, balanced character without ever taking centre stage.    Fine stuff from start to the finish – which incidentally reminded me of something that I couldn’t quite place at the time: a high quality Turkish Delight.  It was only after sampling some Bushmills 10yo, in which this flavour resonates, that the penny finally dropped.

Pronounced in the 10yo

Black Bush has undoubtedly deepened my love of Irish whiskey.  To coin those famous lyrics “the pipes the pipes are calling”.  I’ll be sure to answer as regularly as I responsibly can.

I love Irish whiskey

And to anyone who doesn’t I have this to say – don’t be an eejit man!  Tree times distilled, you canna go wrong…

One who does not like Irish whiskey

In many ways the history of Irish whiskey reflects the very soul of Ireland itself: tragic, principled, enduring, resurgent, and throughout it all, ebullient, and abundant in lyricism and warmth.  The Irish story is bittersweet, having travelled a course of buoyant victories and bitter setbacks.  It led the charge of whisky in the nineteenth century, but passed on the trend to blend, much to its commercial detriment.  Scottish corporate interference then stunted the industry’s capacity to produce grain whiskey.  One hindrance followed another.  Independence and separation from the Empire deprived it of vast markets.  The industry shunned bootleggers and then was insufficiently prepared for the revocation of Prohibition, leading to severe reversals in one of its most successful markets.  Later post-war government policies further limited development, bringing the once flourishing industry to its knees, ravaged and barely hanging on with only 2 distilleries still operating.

But hang on it did, and in the last 20 odd years it’s been progressively emerging from the darkness.  There are now two new distilleries, independent and Irish-owned to boot.  And then there’s Jameson, the leading Irish whiskey brand and spearhead of the recovery, today logging sales of over 3 million 9-litre cases annually…and still growing.    As the more perceptive amongst you may have gleaned from the title of this post, I’m a big a fan of Irish.  So I couldn’t be happier about this turnaround.  There’s still some way to go but I’m starting to believe that it’s on its way to reclaiming its rightful place in the whisky pantheon – which is important, not only because Ireland is the birthplace of whisky, but more so because Irish offers whisky lovers an astonishingly good, and meaningfully distinct style of whisky.  The more it thrives the richer our whisky adventure becomes.

What makes Irish Irish?  As with Scotch any such analysis is general at best.  The industry may be more limited than that of its celtic cousins, but its whiskeys are significantly diverse.  Nonetheless, certain signature features have evolved over the centuries which on a broad level may be considered representative.  Most people know about triple distillation.  Whether this makes a whiskey “twice as smooth” is debatable, but it certainly does have an effect.  The original strength – i.e. before reduction – is higher than a twice-distilled whisky and this will influence flavour.  Furthermore the stills are notably and consistently larger than those of the Scotch industry.  You’ve probably heard stories of distillers replacing old stills by putting dents in a new still to match those that were on the original: it’s not scientifically quantifiable but it’s accepted as fact that the size, shape, and surface area of a still impact flavour.  They affect the “conversation” of the spirit with the copper.  These are the subtle differences – more tangible is the difference in ingredients.  Irish generally uses unpeated malt in its mashbills, whereas Scotch (very generally) uses peated malt.  And whereas the single malt is the bastion of Scotch, the heart of Irish is the single pot still (previously known as the pure pot still), made from a mixture of malted and unmalted barley (and sometimes a sprinkle of oats).

Peat. Lots in Ireland, little in Irish.

Single pot stills are still scarce, although this is changing as the industry prospers again.  Until recently there were only 2 brands, Redbreast and Green Spot, available…but sparsely distributed.  Two new brands – under the Midleton and Powers umbrellas – were introduced this year.  These are all produced at Irish Distillers’ Midleton Distillery, however there are rumours that Cooley, the aforementioned independent distiller, is now also producing and laying down stocks of single pot still.  Hooray!

The Single Pot Still family

I’ve got to come clean.  I’m trumpeting this news and singing the praises of Irish despite having never tasted a single pot still.  This will imminently change.  A bottle of Redbreast soon will be winging its way to me.  Irish blends can be made with a combination of any or all of single pot stills, single malts, and grain whiskeys.  The grain whiskey is usually lightly flavoured so as not to interfere with the “master” component. I’m very partial to brands such as Jameson, Tullamore Dew, and Powers, but recently, when biting down on my regular-ish Jameson, I’m left with the impression that it’s over-diluted.  I like the flavour tremendously but I’m not getting enough of it.  The more premium versions, like the Gold Reserve, which obviously have a greater proportion of single pot still (and also benefit from longer maturation), go some way to solving the problem, but I want more.  I need to take my appreciation of Irish on a journey, and there can only be one destination – single pot still.  So I’m as familiar with and as confident about this style of whiskey as it’s possible to be without actually having tasted it.

I recently told a mate of mine who works for Diageo that Bushmills wasn’t a real Irish whiskey, because it doesn’t have a single pot still component.  He was seriously unimpressed by this opinion.  Admittedly I was being unfair, and exaggerating my point (I like to stir).  The truest of Irish, the heart of its tradition, is the single pot still, but that should by no means exclude the other fine whiskeys produced on the island.  To make up for this slight I’m going to follow-up on this post with a review of Black Bush, an unfortunately named (try an unfiltered image search on google), but superbly constituted whiskey.

Until then may the dram be with you!

Indian whisky part 2

Finally I’m getting pen to paper so to speak, after promising the rest of this review some time ago.  Last week was extremely rough, and this week has been a blur.  I find myself in China, about to return home, and running on the last fumes of my energy after multiple flights, countless hours on the road, and a bit of business thrown in for good measure.  I’ll try to make some sense nonetheless.

Amrut Fusion derives its name from the malted barley that is used in its mashbill.  A portion of it is sourced from Scotland and the remainder is local, from the foothills of the Himalayas, thus a “fusion” of West and East.  The former is peated, and this is evident in the flavour, which exhibits a delicious, fragrant, gentle smoke.  I’ve tried to establish the origin of this malt but there’s no specific information about it.  It’s a personal gripe of mine that whisky makers are often purposefully vague if not altogether evasive when releasing specifications about their product.  But more on this some other time (soon).  The best I can do is hazard the guess that the malt comes from an inland source – I couldn’t pick up any of the notes indicative of coastal peat.

The ingredients are a notable feature, but despite the name billing they’re strictly support cast.  The ageing process is what’s creating the buzz around this product.  Fusion is 5 years matured but tastes like a whisky far better and longer acquainted with a cask.  Some punters have even suggested that it’s equivalent in maturity to an 18yo whisky.  I’m not sure how one would go about coming to such a specific conclusion, but it makes the point.  Fusion has a complexity that’s typically only found in whiskies more advanced in years; it’s a prodigy.  This unusual occurrence is due to the prevailing climate (at altitude in Bangalore, where the distillery is located) which is hot and dry pretty much year round, thereby accelerating maturation.

This may seem like a boon, and in this case there’s no doubt that it is, but it does comes at a cost and with some risk.  Evaporation is far higher than in Scotland, so annual losses are significant.  It’s also all too easy to overcook the whisky.  Leave it a few months too long and it’ll likely become excessively wooded.

The risks of rapid maturation

Amrut however has graciously paid the angels their due and walked the fine line with great poise.  It is simply beautifully balanced.  Smoke, biscuity malt, barley fruitiness, and toffee – they’re all swirling around in there, alternately brash and subtle, jostling boisterously for position one moment, in an orderly line the next.  Fusion is clearly Scotch inspired but also somehow not Scotch.  And through it all there’s only the faintest hint of oak – the turbo charged maturation clearly evident, but felt and not “seen”, like gravity, ever present and holding everything together.

This whisky has a certain individuality of style that’s perceptible yet difficult to describe.  Perhaps, and hopefully, it is the birth of something wonderful, of the chosen one that will bring balance to the force and lead the world’s largest whisky-loving nation into the fold.    I’ll drink to that…as soon as I get back to my remaining half-bottle that is.

The Skywalker of whiskies?

My flight is boarding, home beckons, so farewell for now.  Until the next time may the dram be with you.

Indian whisky part 1

A while back I pulled out both pistols and let loose at the Indian whisky industry – see Whisky and all.  Today I’m starting off by reloading.  I’m a say-what-you-mean, do-what-you-say kind of person…or at least I try to be.  So I find it intrinsically offensive, nay incensing, that these guys are bottling cheap liquor – much of it made from molasses, unaged, and artificially flavoured – and calling it whisky.

Indian barley

The situation is of course a source of some controversy, for two reasons:

Firstly, this Indian product cannot be sold in the EU (and elsewhere) under the name whisky, despite the vigorous protests of whisky-magnate Vijay Mallya, and others of his ilk.  The basis for their objections seem spurious to me, justified more by their obvious agenda than by any logic.  A name is important.  It is the source of identity, and the means by which we define the world around us.  In a sense names are the foundation of all meaning in the world.  Indian “whisky” is a con-job and an identity theft.

Secondly, foreign whisky imported into India is taxed at astronomical levels, flouting the agreements and the general spirit of the World Trade Organisation.  Supposedly this has its roots in the cultural attitude towards liquor in India.  Whilst I don’t have enough insight into the subject to convincingly dispute this point of view, I can’t help but wonder.  It sounds like a conveniently nebulous cover story.  India is the largest whisky market in the world, and it’s also the world’s most corrupt democracy – connect the dots.  I’m picturing Indian politicians in upmarket villas…and to add insult to injury they’re certainly not drinking Bagpiper.

There’s little incentive to make genuine, quality whisky in this market, given that one would be competing in the same arena as opposition with a significant cost advantage, and yet the talk of the whisky town for the last year has been none other than an Indian whisky (note no inverted commas).  So much for preconceived notions then.  This whisky has been garnering awards and plaudits from the four corners, such is its merit.  It is so far removed from its cousins that it’s insulting to imply any familial relationship whatsoever.  They may share geographical origins but that’s where the similarities end.

The distillery is Amrut, and the whisky is Amrut Fusion.  It’s a glimpse into the future.  I managed to get hold of a bottle and before I could blink half of it was gone, my guests (Indian whisky?!?) making light work of their scepticism.

Surf over to WoW tomorrow for my review of Amrut Fusion.