Not quite scotch, not quite irish whiskey, and not quite that interesting. Nose smells like a discouraging, pissy and slightly apppley scotch. Palate is bland, slightly sweet with smoke. Very smooth, weak body. Finish is smoky but unremarkable.
Palate: There is some Irish in there, with the fruit and a slight maltiness. The peat is stronger on the nose than on the palate, but it's there as well. The late palate through the finish is pretty unpleasant: bitter, medicinal in a bad way.
Malts like this and McCarthy's demonstrate that making good use of peat may be a lot harder than it seems.
UPDATE: Retasted a new bottle several years later and the late palate and finish had lost the edge so raising the grade from C- to C+.
Tasted and scored this blind as a 78/100 which makes this a borderline c/c+. I would need to re-taste it to further refine the letter grade but nothing in the LAWS reserves even implies that I would grab this bottle before so many, many other bottles. Therefore, a re-taste is not likely.
I did not taste this in a LAWS meeting so there is no "bias" eminating from the other members. This simply doesn't measure up to the standards of what I (or most of the other members) want to drink....or own.
A decent smoker. Youngish and thin (and least it came off that way), but achieves it's goal of delivering peat. I reviewed this a long time ago, perhaps before I'd had many better peated malts. I've also thought it was worth drinking. C+/B-
F: Warming but quickly fades; not much peat on the finish at edges of maltiness. Faintly medicinal.
There's just not much to this at all. It's uninteresting. There's nothing here that'd cause me to order this or buy a bottle, but there's nothing offensive either. It just is.
Thanks for your comment.
As a first-time poster, your comment is awaiting approval to verify you're not a spammer, or crazy, or both.
After that, your posts will appear immediately.
