Excellent Article on "The Five Things Malt Drinkers Do Wrong"

[artificer]

In general I agree with everything the writer (Andrew Derbidge) says on the topic, which can be found HERE.

Luckily my local St. Andrews' Society has 3 (yes, 3) Whisky Masters who delight in making out bi-annual tastings real adventures.
We've had a number of Independent Bottler tastings, so we can really experience the sometimes wild and surprising expressions
coaxed out of our favorite distilleries' malts.

It's funny the presumptions we can sometimes have based on a maker and age.

ith:

[ForresterModern]

I can agree wholeheartedly with all 5 of these enlightenments, particularly the first and last.

Although I enjoy trying and drinking numerous various whiskies, some whch may not particularly suit my palate, I think I am not the typical scotch whisky lover, who can find a few or maybe just one brand that meet their needs, and stick with them, except perhaps for special occasions. Jock and his Talisker stockpile is a great example. He found what meets his needs and desires and needs look no further for satisfaction.

The last is one mistake that intermediate level whisky afficionados commonly make, believing that everything labelled Auchentoshan or Glenlivet must be as good tasting or better than the original because it is older or single cask or small batch. Wrong, dead wrong. most of the major brands work in large batches and after casking a huge number of barrels with each distilling, they have to monitor the ongoing aging for flavor so that the endpoint product tastes consistently year after year the same. As such there will be outlier barrels at either end of the spectrum that will not be able to be married with others of that or nearby caskings to end up with that "standard" flavor that we expect when we buy a regular bottle of one of the common favored whiskies. These outliers, along with some over-runs, are what is sold off from a distillery to the secondary bottlers to do with as they please. These are far more likely to NOT taste anything like the mainstream whisky of the same name than they are to be a "better" version of it. Think about it---if a distillery had some outlier barrels that were especially tasty, wouldn't they consider bottling those themselves for a premium rather than sell them off and let someone else gain from that extra special taste. So it is more likely that these outliers are so far off the standard that there is no way they could be married into the mix to achieve the "standard" flavor without finding an equally far outlying barrel in the opposite direction to balance out the extremes in flavors that each brings to the table. So, those secondary bottlers are likely starting with LESS than optimal raw materials and will need to do something to garner a profitable value from them. Many play off the panache of the distillery name for their sales and usually higher prices, or hold onto the barrel for several more years knowing that many folks will pay a lot more for an 18 or 25 year old whiskey than they will for a 10 or 12 year old, regardless of the flavor. Others may re-rack one distiller's whiskey into some secondary finishing cask for a few more years, to gain that extra age value, change the flavor of what might have been a dog of a brew before into something a bit more palatable, also again upping the percieved value by playing on the secondary finishing cask. Add to that the rise in price that many think is deserved by the rarity of these secondary bottlings, and some of the high ratings achieved by them in tastings by "famous" experts. Buying a secondary bottling is basically a crapshoot unless you get to taste the whisky before you buy it, from a bottle out of the same batch as the one you are buying. If you like it pay what you feel is an appropriate price for it from a drinking and taste standpoint, rather than from a rarity or age standpoint, because its value once opened will only be in the enjoyment you gain from imbibing and maybe sharing it with a few others. That $300 25 year old secondary bottling of Glenlivet is still only going to last as long as an equally sized 12 year old off the shelf Glenlivet once you start drinking it. So decide for yourself if it is really worth the premium price before plunking down your hard earned cash on a big, bad, rare, old, secondary bottling.

I have a 25 year old Auchentoshan secondary bottling which tastes far stronger and stiffer with more bite than any of the other 10 or twelve Auchentoshans I have tasted or owned. Flavor bordering on a true highland or island style rather than the lowland heritage you expect just from the name. I have tasted a single cask 20 year old Glenlivet that was very sweet, clear and colorless as water that had none of the robust flavors of the standard Glenlivet 12 or Oakwood or 15 or 18, but was still quite tasty and enjoyable all the same.

And remember that if you buy and find you love a particular secondary bottling, by the time you finish the bottle and go looking for another it is unlikely that you will find another from the same batch, and every different batch is going to taste different. A secondary bottling, besides being a crapshoot of flavors from orphan casks despite their distillery name on the label, are pretty much a one time deal that will be hard to find again. If you do get to taste a significant sample and you like it, a lot, and it is at what you consider a reasonable price for its level of enjoyment, consider buying a couple bottles to insure a longer run of time over which you can enjoy that "sure thing" you had the luck and pleasure of sample tasting before buying. There can be some real winners in the "mutt" group of secondary bottlings, truly unique and tasty, but there are a lot of other real dogs hiding behind a distillery name, or high number age, or second finishing cask flavors, and with high price tags attached that lead many to believe that they must be extra special tasting just because it costs so much. Don't believe it if you haven't tasted it. You may be better off sticking with a more available cheaper younger standard dram that you know you like and can find in most any liquor store to drink whenever you desire. Kinda like Jock and his Talisker.

[David]

The two that were omitted from the list are, in order of severity:
Putting ice in it. ARRRGGGHHHHHH, what a waste
Not putting water in it. Slightly less shocking, but only just. I have often had to stop bartenders pouring water out of the jug in order to give me fresh, i.e. cold water, little better than ice.

[artificer]

The two that were omitted from the list are, in order of severity:
Putting ice in it. ARRRGGGHHHHHH, what a waste
Not putting water in it. Slightly less shocking, but only just. I have often had to stop bartenders pouring water out of the jug in order to give me fresh, i.e. cold water, little better than ice.

I agree wholeheartedly with the ice issue. Even in the dead of summer here ice KILLS a good Whisky.

Water is a slightly greyer issue for me. If I'm at a tasting I usually have the first two or three small tastes without water, and then add a drop or two to see if/how the malt opens up with it.
There are some malts that really wither under even the smallest amount of water, and some that really blossom. As a rule if I'm just having a dram of an old favorite I might add a drop or two, but
never more than that.

ith: