Review: Chivas Regal 18 years Blended Scotch Whisky

Snake in the Grass
You know the phrase.  What does it mean?  Someone who betrays your trust.  That's how I feel about Chivas Regal 18 years.  Please, let me explain.

I like Chivas Regal 12 years.  I am a fan.  I also like Royal Salute, the 21 year old blended scotch whisky offering from Chivas Brothers.  So naturally, I assumed Chivas Regal 18 years would be pretty good.  Ahh no!  No, it is not.

Reasons?  It's sweet, smooth to the point of being boring and worst of all: a tad bit grainy on the finish!  Yes, I used the 'g' word, the most cutting of descriptors of an amateur scotch reviewer.

I reviewed Chivas Regal 18 years about nine months ago (read that review for a precise description of the flavor profile).  I thought maybe I had been a little harsh.  So, I picked up another bottle.  Have been sipping and am still not impressed.  What really ticks me off is the high price.  At the price of Chivas Regal 18, you could buy excellent single malts at the same price or less.  For example, I could have bought:  Cragganmore 12, Dalwhinnie 15, Highland Park 18, Highland Park 15, Glenlivet 18 and Glenfiddich 15 years to name but a few fine bottles.  Naturally, if a blended scotch whisky commands such a high price you expect to taste great quality and complexity of taste.  Not so! 

Some readers may say that it is unfair to compare an 18 year old blended scotch to single malts.  It's like comparing apples and oranges one might say.  And I say: "Rubbish!"  If Chivas wants to charge the same price as single malts then it is only logical that consumers will compare their product to other products in the same price range.  Nevertheless, if we turn to 18 year old blended scotch whiskies like Johnnie Walker Gold 18 yrs and Famous Grouse 18 years, both of those competitors deliver more nuanced, complex and frankly all-round superior flavor profiles.  Move outside Scotland and other whiskies deliver more powerful and intriguing flavors like Jameson 18 (Irish whiskey), Yamazaki 18 (Japanese), and Gibson's Finest 18 (Canadian).

For the high price, Chivas Regal 18 years delivers disappointment at every sip.  How so?  Let me count the ways:

Smooth:  People who do not drink a lot of scotch, namely Dads and Grandads (ok maybe Aunt May too) at holiday time, tend to place a premium on smoothness of the spirit they drink.  If you drink scotch three times a year, you will like Chivas Regal 18.  If you drink more frequently than that then smoothness can easily move from a positive to a negative feature.  The trouble with this blend is that it is so smooth that it renders the tasting experience boring, flat, about as interesting as watching paint dry on a barnyard door.  Of course none of us want to drink sharp, bitter whisky that produces welts on our tongues.  But, hey!  I like a little challenge.  Not here.

Sweet:  Novice scotch fans love sweet whiskies.  Why?  Again, they do not offend, especially when you imbide only a couple of times a year.  Scotch for the person who hardly drinks is a challenge at the best of times and so a sweet one makes it enormously more palatable.  The challenge of every scotch and whisky is to deliver an interesting interplay of sweet yet dry or tart flavors.  That's not easy.  Typically, quality whiskies may start sweet but finish dry.  Not easy to do.  Chivas Regal 18 is sweet like Barbara Walters like her smiles and opening questions in one of her soft ball, made for TV, celebrity interviews.  It's also as sweet as Lionel Richie crooning: ""I'm easy like Sunday morning . . ."  Ugh! 

Near Total Absence of Peat:  Scotch newbies generally shy away from peat and smoke flavors.  Especially Islay weighted blends.  No worries here.  Chivas Regal 18 is sweet honey with hardly any peat.  I mean hardly any!  Did I say hardly any?  Just in case you didn't hear:  Hardly any peat!  Take a big slug of Chivas 18 and there will be the flashing glimpse of peat like a meteorite unexpectedly coming into view for a few seconds on a summer night sky. 

Grainy Finish:  Blended scotch uses grain whiskies in order to soften the strong personality of single malts that are blended to give a core or distinct flavor profile.  Grain whiskies have no flavor.  Well, not entirely true.  They taste like raw onions to me at their worst and at their best like carmelized onions you fry to add to your barbecued t-bone.  Chivas Regal 18 has a grainy finish.  Not good.  Not acceptable at the price point you have to pay.  If this blended scotch was 50% less than the current asking price I wouldn't complain.

Conclusion
When I drink Chivas Regal 18 I really get the sense that I am being duped.  I've been tricked into trading my hard earned cash for an inferior product that comes with flashy, social climbing, snobby, elitist packaging.  To make my point abundantly clear, consider the following:  One of the core single malts making up Chivas Regal 18yrs is Strathisla single malt.  You can buy Strathisla 12 years for nearly half the price of Chivas 18.  No heavy marketing of this decent highland malt takes place.  I bet you have never heard of it.  Guess what?  It is a helluva lot better than the blended scotch it goes into.  I suspect that the profit margin on Chivas Regal 18 (that is filled in part with grain whiskies) is far greater than Strathisla 12 yrs.  

Ouch!  What just bit my ankle?  This is getting biblical.  I gotta go . . . until next time.

Cheers!

Jason Debly

Photo Credits:  Chivas 18 in the Grass - Jason Debly; Barbara Walters photo - http://www.thehealthyeverythingtarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/barbara-walters-affair.jpg ; Barn Door - by Steffe at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/steffe/16532764/sizes/l/in/photostream/

Copyright © Jason Debly, 2009-2010. All rights reserved.

Review: Gibson's Finest Rare 18 years Canadian Whisky

Soft, light, polite, interesting and talkative, a little complex, but not overly so.  On the one hand, I could be making a generalization about Canadians. Oh hell, you're thinking Wayne Gretzky or Anne Murray crooning "Snow Bird."  Hell, even Candian rock music is polite like Rush and Neil Young.  On the other hand, I might also be making an observation about their whisky. Compared to scotch, Canadian whisky is lighter and sweeter. This is a result of blending. A lot of blending. It is not uncommon for Canadian whisky to have up to 50 different whiskies blended together. They must be at least three years old, but typically are older.

A great attribute of many Canadian whiskies is that while distilled from a wide variety of grains (ie. rye, wheat and corn) in addition to barley, it is rarely grainy in taste. You don’t have to spend a lot of money in order to get a good drink. This may be one of the reasons that Americans buy more Canadian whisky than they do of their own native spirits (ie. bourbon, Tennessee whisky). 

Probably the most famous Canadian whisky is Crown Royal. However, there are others.  One of the less known is Gibson’s Finest Rare 18 years old.  It has always been one of my favorites.  It is a great blend of whiskies resulting in a soft, light spirit with some sweet corn and spiced rye that finishes with a dry flourish. 

Getting infortmation on Gibson's is not easy.  Two books I have on world whisky fail to make any reference to it. Turning to the internet, there is scant information. So, I cannot tell you anything about how long it has been on the market or any other interesting factoid. There is a website, but it is hardly informative.  In fact, I visit the site and think it would discourage a whisky drinker.  Loud alternative rock music targeting a youthful, college age demographic that I am no longer a member of is the aim of the Gibson's site.  Never mind the website. It’s all about the flavor.

Nose (undiluted)

It seems every time I pull the cork on this bottle, I am hit with a sickening waft of pure alcohol. But don’t worry, it passes and in no way is a reflection on what follows.

In the glass, the nose is not offensive, but not memorable. I smell corn. Reminiscent of bourbon. Canadian whisky tends not to be floral on the nose and this is no exception. I am detecting some vanilla. The aromas of this Canadian whisky are very restrained.  Nothing special.

Body

For a Canadian whisky it is full bodied, but compared to Scotch, it would be considered light, along the lines of Cragganmore, Glenkinchie or Glen Scotia.

Palate (undiluted)

There is a sweetness of corn chased by some spicy rye. But, don’t worry, not too spicy. Remember, it’s Canadian eh, renowned for smoothness.  Hmmm . . . good. Oak, citrus, cooked fruit, maybe stewed apples. Vanilla is there too.

Finish (undiluted)

Long, lingering, velvet finish of brown sugar and a spiciness that dries expansively with the warmth of a woodstove. The flavors really hang for a long time. Impressive.

A sign of many great whiskies is the ability to start out sweet, but gracefully transition to a dry as tumble weed, tart finish. Gibson’s Finest does this beautifully.

Ice?
Ice and Canadian whisky go well together and are particularly refreshing during the summer months.  This whisky is very smooth and inviting.  Ice is not needed to tame the flavor profile.  It's a personal decision.  Neat or with ice, you will definitely enjoy it.

The Price is Right!
Don't worry Bob Barker is retired and I am not taking Drew Carey's job.  For an 18 year old whisky, I think the price is reasonable.  Not a steal of a deal, but a fair price.

General Impressions

Gibson’s Finest Rare 18 years is an excellent whisky and would make the perfect gift for the person you know likes whisky in general, but knowing nothing more as to likes or dislikes. Gibson’s manages to be instantly likable, but not boring. There is a complexity of flavor that reels the drinker in for more and more.  There's no fancy marketing campaign, just the quiet, humble Canadian way.  Give it a try!  You won't regret it.

Cheers!

Jason Debly

Copyright © Jason Debly, 2009-2010. All rights reserved.

Whyte & Mackay "Special" Blended Scotch Whisky

On a wickedly cold February night, in my hometown, somewhere in Canada, I went to a scotch tasting.  After sampling many fine and some not so fine single malts, the bar owner tossed an inebriated me and my friend, George, tiny 50ml bottles of Whyte & Mackay Special Blended Scotch Whisky.  Now you thought the previous sentence would end differently like: "the bar owner tossed an inebriated me and my friend, George, on to the street."  Not! 

As I was saying, we sampled quite a few drams and by the time the Whyte & Mackay was proffered we were well on our way.  We drank the tiny bottles (ya know, those airplane minis) and thought they were very good.  Matter of fact, I scribbled a tasting note and made a mental note to investigate this blend further when I had some semblance of sobriety.

I am now returning to Whyte & Mackay with a clearer head and can now provide you with a tasting note that has not been clouded by a steady succession of other malts traversing my palate and besotted brain.

Nose
Strong whiff of sherry and nutmeg.  Very malty too.  Smells cheap and simple.

Palate
The body is rounded but not in a good way . . . kinda like Roseanne Barr in a thong.  Plenty of sherry to start.  This is sweet though it tapers off a little, but not to the point of drying.

Finish
Cocoa turning a little green to the point of ginger; over ripe tangerine sherry oakiness with black pepper linger like a stray cat on your doorstep.

General Impressions
I was not expecting this to be incredible.  I mean this is bottom shelf blended scotch whisky.  However, I did expect more.  Big disappointment is what this is.  This blend is totally devoid of peat and what the distiller calls "smoke" is actually (in my opinion) poor quality whisky that has spent too much time in refill sherry casks.  In the same price point, Teacher's Highland Cream is clearly superior to Whyte and Mackay.

What astonishes me is that if you visit the International Wine and Spirit Competition website and do a search of Whyte & Mackay Special (just use the search term "Whyte") it scored a silver medal in the no age stated blended scotch category.  How?  If they are giving silver for this, then I would imagine Hawkeye Pierce from MASH would get a bronze for his enema bag distillate in his musty army tent.  Such a ranking draws into question the reliability of the International Wine and Spirit Competition ratings.  From my visit to the site and Wikipedia's write-up on it (click here), it appears to be an organization populated by whisky industry types.  Much is made of blind tastings but doesn't seem to translate into accurate reviews.  In fact they handed out ten (10) silver medals in the no age statement blended scotch category!  What kind of a competition has ten second place winners other than in kindergarden?  Don't believe me?  Click here.  Anyway, the problems with the IWSC is a subject for another discussion or rant in the learned tradition of Dennis Miller.

Now what can I say about Whyte & Mackay Special that is positive?  Well, if I really stretch the bounds of my imagination and abandon my personal moral compass I could point out possible attributes that some scotch novices might find attractive:  (1)  There is no bite.  (2)  For those who dislike peaty or smoke flavors, this blended scotch will get points.  (3)  You will taste smooth sherry and a maltiness that is ok.  (4)  It's simple but that's ok I suppose if you just want to put your mind in neutral and watch TV.  (5)  Not offensive but that spoiled tangerine flavor on the finish does border on the repulsive.  (6)  It is very cheap and I would imagine would make a good ingredient in a mixed drink that called for blended scotch.

Bottom Line
Would I buy this again?  No.  Never.  Under no circumstances could I, in good conscience, recommend it.  When I am shopping for a bargain basement blended scotch, I would first reach for Teacher's Highland Cream or Johnnie Walker Red Label.  Stay away from Whyte & Mackay "Special" Blended Scotch Whisky because there is nothing 'special' about it.

Cheers!

Copyright © Jason Debly, 2009-2010. All rights reserved.

Review: Dewar’s 12 years old “Special Reserve” Blended Scotch Whisky

Lately, all I seem to purchase are single malt scotch whiskies. What about a good blended scotch whisky? I like Johnnie Walker Black Label. Green Label is very good.  Chivas Regal 12 years works too. What about Dewar's 12 years? Me thinks I need to try it. So, a bottle was procured from my local liquor store by yours truly, and so here we are.

Nose (undiluted)
Muted dandelions and malt notes. No strong aromas here. Very gentle scents.

Palate (undiluted)
Very sweet entry onto the palate followed by some feeble attempt to dry or evaporate, but this is mostly a failed attempt. Instead of drying there is a warm graininess. As for flavors, you will be greeted by sugary, cloyingly so, honey, followed by some malty notes and dark chocolate. There is a slight barnyard funkiness, something spoiled going on here. Not easy to put my finger on it. Think of the taste of rinds of tangerines left in the fruit bowl too long by the kitchen window, as the sun beams down day after day.

Finish (undiluted)
Artificially sweetened cereal. Think Captain Crunch and Lucky Charms in a bowl of chocolate milk with saccharine liberally sprinkled on top. That’s the very brief lingering taste. The saccharine really is a distinct and unfortunate (like a car accident) flavor on the finish. Yuck!

Nose (diluted)
Add a teaspoon of water and the pleasing undiluted nose disappears. In its place is the scent of damp leaves.

Palate (diluted)
The disappointment continues. The addition of water just punches up the NutraSweet levels to near diabetic coma conditions. Flavors? I dunno. I guess you could call it honey, Dollar Store honey, way past expiry date that was safe for human consumption.

Finish (diluted)
Graphite, cheap and short like Madonna's mini skirts from early '80's music videos.  This is junk scotch.

General Impressions
Please avoid at all costs. Drinking Dewar’s 12 years evokes childhood memories of bouts of car sickness on the long drive to Grandma’s house.

If I were to sum it up in a few words, I would say: grainy sweet with some malt notes on the finish. The taste is cheap. Reminds me of something rummies would drink. I am surprised it is a 12 year old blend. Also reminds me of J&B, which is not a good thing. I am still emotionally scarred from the last J&B tasting. Both are ridiculously sweet with simple, unadulterated flavors of artificial sweetener, honey and some malty cereal. Probably the best feature of this blended scotch whisky was the undiluted nose. It was subtle and pleasing and consequently provided no warning of the huge pedestrian crosswalk disappointment that awaits the unsuspecting and trusting fool.

Value for Money?
Me thinks not.  The price is within $1 of Johnnie Walker Black Label, another 12 yr old blended scotch, and it is the same price as Chivas Regal 12 years.  Dewar's tastes more like an economy blended scotch and they (ie. Johnnie Walker Red Label, Ballantines) are better.  Dewar's 12 years old is too expensive for what you get.  It is similar to J & B Rare, another terribly sweet blended scotch that is better consumed as part of a mixed drink.  Dewar's may work as mix, but the trouble is one should not have to spend that much for mix!

I still have about half a bottle. I am not going to finish it. I will give it to someone, but the questions is: Who do I dislike that much?


Jason Debly



Copyright © Jason Debly, 2009-2010. All rights reserved.