Do I feel Lucky?

In the classic 1971 film, Dirty Harry, Clint Eastwood's character, Harry Callahan, utters one of the most famous lines in the history of cinema:

". . . you've got to ask yourself one question:  Do I feel lucky?"

"Well, do ya punk?"

My answer would be:  "Yeah!  I do because I received a great email the other day."

Here it is:

Jason,


Just wanted to drop you a quick line thanking you for being a beacon of refreshment in the otherwise pretentious laden arena of scotch reviewing.

Within the past month or so, I have delved into the wonderful world of scotch - primarily driven by the direction of my professional life (got tired of being the odd man out when it came time for a dram as my earliest memories of scotch was back in high school when me and a buddy sneaked some of his father's one night - needless to say it was a mess and I never had tried to recover from it).

As I started looking into the various distilleries, types, ages, etc - my eyes glazed, then went bloodshot trying to figure everything out. So I figured the best approach would be to read reviews... I figured that if I could find a "generally accepted" scotch that, that is where I should start.

Well, after reading, oh I don't know, about 150 reviews - all which used terms like "hints of silicone, leather, and blackmary (is that even anything?)" My eyes started to glaze over again.

I finally got a foothold after going to a local liquor store and speaking with an employee. He started me on a sample box of small JW black, gold, and blue. It took a while to get through them, but as I did - I found your blog and have used it as a rough guide and it has truly served me well. The reviews just plain makes sense and I seem to have a similar tastes. I now have a very rudimentary understanding of locations and distilleries and also feel that I am starting to appreciate all the varying subtleties that lay within the drink.

Now that I am about 6 different bottles in I am really starting to enjoy the process and more importantly the taste of scotch.

Thanks again,

Chandler
 
. . .
 
When I receive an email like that, I do feel lucky.  Hell, it "makes my day"  (to borrow another well worn Eastwood line from another one of his films: Sudden Impact).  It validates the experience I went through when I first started to develop an interest in whisky.  It is also exciting to meet someone who is starting to develop a keen interest in whisky!
 
I will receive an email of this nature every couple of months, which means that readers have a need for scotch whisky (and other whiskies of the world) to be de-mystified.  We are not talking rocket science here.  It's all about likes and dislikes . . . your likes and dislikes.  My aim is to get you to trust your own judgment! 
 
Read scotch reviews on the web and out of books, but if a reviewer consistently praises whiskies that you dislike, then stop reading his or her reviews.  Their tastes are not congruent with your own.  Find a reviewer's whose tastes match your's.  In my case, I find that I agree mostly with the reviews of the late whisky expert, Michael Jackson (not the late entertainer who needed a check-up from the neck up).  Conversely, I do not agree with many of the scotch reviews of Jim Murray, the world's current, best selling whisky authority.  Hence, I don't bother to read his reviews.  Mr. Murray is an enormous fan of the Ardbeg distillery.  Clearly, he enjoys the peat bombs.  While I like peat in scotch, it is not the most important aspect of the flavor profile. 
 
Anyway, you get my drift.  If my reviews and recommendations miss the mark for you, tell me so, and stop reading them.  Find a reviewer who can provide a road map of sorts during the scotch whisky journey that you are a part of.  Don't let some snobby SOB (how's that for alliteration!) in your workplace or at the golf club make your purchasing decisions for you.  Have faith in your own judgment.
 
My only caveat would be that over time, it is very possible that your tastes will evolve.  Be open to other points of view, but not dogmatically accepting them.
 
Until next time . . .
 
Cheers!
 
 
Jason Debly
 
Photo Credit:  Screenshot from the DVD version of the 1971 film Dirty Harry, extracted from Harry's infamous "do ya feel lucky" monologue



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

The Greatest Consumer of Scotch Whisky?

I am not what you would call a 'soldier of the mind' nor an intellectual.  But, I do try to keep abreast on what the hell is going on in the world, and so I do on occasion pick up The Economist.

I know, I know, you're thinking who the hell is he trying to impress?  Like who cares?  I hear ya brother.  Most of the time I read the articles not understanding what I am reading, but hoping by reading it some sort of osmosis action will take place and maybe I can drop an interesting tidbit at a party or get-together with other psuedo intellectuals.

In any case, I did come across an interesting article worth drawing your attention to.  It's entitled:  Whisky Galore: Which Countries Import Most Scotch  Whisky?   Without looking at the article, try and guess which country imports the most scotch whisky.  The United States, Ireland, Scotland, Hong Kong, China, Singapore?  Go on. Guess.  What about Russia?  They have a market economy (ok, with some growing pains) and a growing middle and upper middle class.  Who do ya think?  You'll never guess correctly.  Go ahead try anyway.

And the answer is: France!  What?  Yup! that's no typo mate!

The above chart was taken from the aforementioned Economist article.  Pretty shocking!  I mean who would a' thunk it?  If I had to guess it would have been the United States as they have the population and wealthy middle and upper middle class consumers.  Guess I was wrong. 

The article also goes on to discuss the emerging middle classes in South America that is responsible for the greatest amount of growth of sales.  It's a good thing in my opinion.

I gotta go but read the article.  Don't worry it's short and there is no test.  Ain't it great when I'm the teacher?

Cheers!



Jason Debly

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

Whisky Blogs - Unbiased or Spirits Industry Influenced?

Before I started this blog, I would conduct a little online research regarding single malts or blends that I was considering buying.  I am sure you, as I have, purchased a scotch or other whisky, took it home, poured a dram, had a sip, and quickly realized the purchase was a huge mistake. 

During my research, I quickly discovered that all single malts and blends are glorious.  None were bad, poor, weak, etc.  They were all just a great ray of sunshine.  How can that be?  Well, it can't be.  I can appreciate that I might dislike intensely a whisky that you like a great deal.  I have no problem with that.  We all have our respective likes and dislikes.  What I have a problem with are reviewers or sites with whisky reviews that praise all whiskies, finding no fault in any.  That, I say is impossible.  So, how do I explain this peculiar phenomenon?

Here's my theory.

Free Samples
A lot of the whisky bloggers are posting reviews of the latest releases from distilleries.  Some of these whisky releases are very expensive.  How do they do it?  Simple, they don't.  I mean they do not purchase the whisky.  They are supplied free samples by the distiller or more properly by the multinational company that owns them, and asked to do a review.  That's like Pablo Escobar handing a kilo of cocaine to Keith Richards and asking him for his thoughts! 

In my view, the trouble with free whisky samples is that it will taint the ability of the reviewer to provide an impartial opinion.  You can't be a little bit pregnant.  If I take a free bottle or whatever, there is a pressure on me to write a positive review or at least take a bad whisky and put a positive spin on it as much as possible or downplay what I dislike.  If a reviewer writes too many negative reviews, he or she jeopardizes access to freebies in the future, as well as invites to exclusive tastings, etc.

So, I asked a couple of these reviewers what their thoughts were and they said I was wrong.  They said that they could give unbiased reviews.  Hmmm.  I don't buy it.  When I posted comments on this subject on other blogs, the bloggers often deleted my comments.  If I posted a comment that I didn't agree with their review of a whisky, my comment got deleted.  There were some exceptions but not many.  All of this makes me wonder if some apparently amateur whisky blogs are not actually owned or heavily subsidized by industry players.  I wonder.  I also find it very interesting where one blogger seems to have multiple websites and presence on Youtube with respect to his/her reviews.  Why so many sites.  How about just one?  Are you in this for the money or for the whisky?

The Multinationals
Whisky is big business.  A multi-billion dollar business.  Marketing is extremely important to maintaining and/or expanding market share.  These multinational drinks companies have no problem supplying free samples to reviewers, inviting them to dinner, maybe paying their expenses to travel to a tasting or even be a consultant for one of their distilleries (it has happened to one reviewer).  It is perfectly legal for these companies to do that.  There is nothing wrong with marketing by whatever means.  I think they are trying to encourage "organic" marketing on the internet, create a "buzz" that causes people to buy their product.  Hey, that's fair for them.  I am a capitalist too.  Go for it! 

The trouble for you and I though is that we don't get the straight goods on the merits and flaws of a whisky if the reviews we read are by reviewers who lack impartiality.  So, when reading another blog or website, how can we tell the reviews or idiotic ramblings (especially true in the case of myself) are of a total outsider of the industry or a person who is very much a part of the industry or essentially "in bed" with the whisky industry?

Here are some tell-tale signs:

• Reviews of very expensive scotch or other whiskies that are beyond the wallet of the average consumer.  One blog reviewer was reviewing a bottle that cost nearly $1,000.00.;
• The reviewer is travelling all over the world to whisky tastings in the trendiest places and have the professional photos to back it up.
• The reviewer seems to review a different whisky for each day of the week.  Something the average joe cannot afford.
• The website is so slick that you think you are in the embrace of a used car salesman.
• There are no negative whisky reviews!!!!!!!!!!!! 

So where am I in all this?

Do I make money off this blog?  Ahh no.  To date, nearly a year online, Google owes me a grand total of $9.42.  I am not in this for the money.  Money is generated when a visitor clicks on the advertising.  For example, Amazon has an ad for whisky books on this blog.  If you click on that ad, I will earn around one cent.  Yup, you read that correctly.

Anyway, that is my rant for this evening.  I hope I do not sound to holier-than-thou or sanctimonious because that is not the intent.

Readers, if you read any review on this blog that you do not agree with, fill your boots and give me an earful.  I will not delete your comment.  The only exception is for libelous or profane comments.

Ok that is the rant for tonight.  Comments?  Please, I welcome them. 

Now, I need a drink!

Cheers!

Jason

P.S. I guess the bottom line is that you have to consider the perspective of the person writing the review.  What is their association with the whisky industry?

Copyright © Jason Debly, 2010. All rights reserved.

Review: Ardbeg 10 Year Old - Single Malt Scotch Review

Bonfire on a Bluff?

Having a glass of Arbeg 10 year old in your living room is like building a bonfire made up of tree branches, scrub brush and peat freshly cut from a Scottish bog, lighting it and watching the smoke swirl upwards as it is carried away by the unpredictable winds of the Isle of Islay, Scotland. The smoke at times will fill your nostrils followed by the peat, charcoal and a whiff of salty sea spray. Ardbeg 10 year old is uncompromising like a lazy wind blowing off the coast of the Isle of Islay. It's so cold and 'lazy' that it feels like it blows through you rather than around you. Such is the experience of a dram of this single malt scotch whisky.

Isle of Islay

Ardbeg is one of eight distilleries on the Isle of Islay, an Island off the coast of Scotland that can have wind, rain and a crashing sea on a regular basis. The geography is rocky, relatively flat, with plenty of bluffs, jagged outcroppings of rock, and cliff faces above a churning white-capped sea below. Whiskies distilled on this island are often very peaty, smokey and kind of like the flavor of a menthol cigarette. Peat actually plays a large role in the smoke flavor of this scotch whisky and the others of the Isle of Islay.

What is Peat?

On the Isle of Islay there are bogs and wetlands with plenty of partially decayed vegetation like scrub brush, tall grass, and other low lying vegetation. It is cut out in blocks and when dried is used to fuel fires to dry the malt used in scotch. The interaction of the smoke from the peat imparts the unique smokey flavor that is termed "peat" or "peaty" when describing scotch whiskies especially from the Isle of Islay.

Suggested Stemware

Glencairn would be best.  Don't have that?  Try a brandy snifter. The bowled shape with the opening at the top traps the aromas to be enjoyed as you nose it. A crystal tumbler doesn't 'trap' the scents of this whisky. Nevertheless, the tumbler is better than nothing and drinking from one will certainly not affect the flavor profile, just not deliver the full bouquet on the nose.

Ice? Water? Neat?

Decisions, decisions, decisions . . . If you are a novice scotch drinker, I would recommend adding an ice cube or two, it will dampen the pronounced peaty flavor profile and take away some of the 'bite.' If you enjoy scotch and consider yourself quite serious about it, I would recommend a teaspoon of distilled or spring water be added to a single or double pour (you will have to experiment to see what works for you).   The water will add a lot of complexity.  I find 'neat' it is just too over the top.

If you are a veteran drinker, well then pony up and get ready to ride this flavor profile like "Seabiscuit."

Nose (undiluted)
Beautifully strong peat, wood smoke and salt air. The aroma of peat is so powerful, that often after having had my drink, washed my glass, returned it to the cupboard, gone to bed, up and off to work, back home, late evening retrieve my glass, and wow! I still smell peat in my glass! And not just any peat, but rather distinctively that of Ardbeg.

Palate (undiluted)
Starts sweet, mid palate fills with damp wood smoke before moving to drying black pepper and more billowing smoke like a big Cohiba. 

Finish (undiluted)
White cheddar to salt to fresh ground black pepper. Slight burn remains on the throat after it is swallowed.

General Impressions
Not what I would call “smooth” scotch if consumed neat. On the other hand, I would not describe it as “rough” either. Instead, I would describe this scotch having a flavor profile that involves an “abrupt” transition from sweet smoke to sharp black pepper and coarse salt. Not a flavor profile that I would describe as "complex" when consumed neat.  You need to add water (ie. teaspoon) to bring out the complexity and magic of this dram.  Really, water is a must!

This single malt enjoys a large following among serious scotch drinkers, and I do understand the fascination. The flavor profile is unique and a very powerful, yet elegant explosion of smoke and peat upon all the senses. You will come back to this whisky again and again, as you analyze its secrets.

Initially, I didn't understand what was all the fuss about this spirit. But that first tasting haunted me. It beckoned me back. The nose of peat and wood smoke, a promise that was fulfilled on the palate was fascinating. I must say I like this, but not my favorite. I like it, but not the way I am obsessed with Cragganmore 12 yr old, a scotch that I systematically bought all remaining bottles where I live upon learning the distributor was cutting my liquor store off.

This is not a mainstream spirit. It is for the scotch connoisseur seeking a very unique flavor. If you are considering purchasing this as a gift for someone, and not knowing their individual tastes, I would recommend choosing another single malt that is more pleasing to the average drinker.

Water really needs to be added to this malt to bring out a more complex display of flavors.  Teaspoon to a double pour I find is just enough.  One must remember that it is bottled at 46% abv.  I find that over 43% many malts benefit from the addition of some water.  Ardbeg 10 is not an exception to such a general rule.

I am surprised by my conclusion on this scotch. I thought I would enjoy it more given all the praise I have read in books and elsewhere online. It's more than ok, but I would not buy it again. I certainly do not agree with the praise rendered by the scotch expert, Jim Murray, who wrote: "Unquestionably the greatest distillery to be found on Earth. If perfection on the palate exists, this is it."

Cheers!

© Jason Debly, 2009-2012. All rights reserved.

Johnnie Walker Blue Label

Johnnie Walker Blue Label is the most expensive and presumably finest of the Johnnie Walker blended scotch product line offered by the multinational company Diageo plc.

The price is high. For the same price, you could choose from a wide variety of 18 year old single malts at half the price. Moreover, at the price of a bottle of Johnnie Walker Blue, you could have a 25 year old single malt like Highland Park. All of this leads up to the question of: "Is it worth it?" Not an easy question to answer. I will return to it at the end of this post.

Marketing/Packaging

The marketing folks at Diageo plc are geniuses. The packaging of Blue Label is impressive and no expense is spared. The blue/green glass bottle rests in a satin lined box complete with a booklet about the scotch. The booklet advises that this scotch was blended with the aim of recreating the flavor profile typical of the 19th century blends old Mr. Johnnie Walker would have created. The bottom line is the presentation is impressive.

No Age Stated

The marketing genius of Diageo is exemplified by their ability to command such a high price for a blended scotch that makes no age statement. The website (johnniewalker.com) and the packaging advises that the rarest of the whiskies owned by Diageo go into this blend. So rare and old that some whiskies used in the blend come from distilleries that are no longer in existence. The implication is clear that some of the whiskies in this blend are more than 18 years old. I have not read on the Walker website, but elsewhere I have read that the ingredient whiskies include malt whiskies that are upwards of 40 yrs old. Certainly a claim that I would like to verify at some point. In any case, for blended scotch whisky to have no age statement means the distiller is free from the constraints of only working with whiskies of a particular age. Aged whiskies are better than young ones but only up to a point, in my opinion.

Serving Suggestion

This scotch is so smooth that there is no need to add ice or water to soften any rough edges. There are no rough edges. Even if you always drink your whisky with ice or water, I encourage you to at least try this neat. Pour a double into a whisky glass or crystal tumbler and take a small sip. A tiny sip. Once swallowed and the taste no longer lingers, have a sip of water to clean your palate.

Nose

Pull the cork stopper on this bottle, have a pour and nose your glass. You will enjoy scents of perfume, peat, smoke and fresh bread. Very nice. I compare this to the Gold Label and to my surprise, the Gold Label is considerably nicer on the nose. Mind you, in my opinion, the Gold Label has the finest nose of any scotch I have ever tried.

Setting

Your taste experience can be affected by what you ate at your last meal and how long ago that meal took place. My recommendation is that you try this scotch three or four hours after dinner, in a quiet place with a fireplace, a nice window to look out and consider the flavors offered up by this dram. I would not recommend eating anything with this fine scotch as the flavors of the food may conflict or dull the palate from the full flavor range offered by this wonderful dram. All you need is a quiet place, some privacy, a tall glass of cold water and a tumbler or whisky glass of this whisky.

Palate (undiluted)

I take a little sip and am surprised by how weighty this scotch is in the mouth. A medium to full body that rolls on the tongue while it is being savored. The initial flavor is very soft peat. I am surprised how much peat the flavor profile delivers. Smooth, rich, corona cigar smoke, a spice box with ginger follows against a malty background.

Finish (undiluted)

The sign of a great scotch is how long it lingers upon the palate once it is gone. Blue Label does not disappoint. Flavors of smoke, very restrained peat, malt, fresh chopped mint leaves, and faint peppercorns linger. Maybe a little echo of English Stilton cheese at the very end. The length of flavor is moderate.

What happens if we add a splash of water?
Add water and you will enjoy more complexity of flavors. Having sampled this both undiluted and with a little water, my preference will depend on my mood. The water (a little! like a teaspoon at the most to a shot) livens the flavors. You will taste more peat, carmelized onion and pepper. On the downside, the water takes away some sophistication. I know the last sentence borders on the meaningless, but that's the best I can do.

General Impressions

It's a decent scotch whisky that will not offend. 'Smooth' and 'rich,'  are words that come to mind when I think about it. No flavors are too strong, bitter or burn, even when consumed neat. I enjoyed this spirit, but have to say that I am not obsessed with it or its biggest fan. A word of caution here. I prefer scotch that is more honey, caramel, chocolate, nutty in flavor. In a word, I am a fan of the stereotypical Speyside scotches (Cragganmore, Glenfiddich, etc.). I am by nature, not an Ardbeg fanatic. For those of you who do not know Ardbeg, it's a peat bomb. Johnnie Walker Blue has an Islay component that dominates the Speyside whiskies that are also a present, but the domination is done in the most elegant way possible.

Is It Worth the Price?
In order to answer this question you have to first determine what it is being compared to? Ultra premium blended scotch whisky or single malt?

Compared to other very high end blended scotch whisky, 'no,' it is not worth the price. The peer group for ultra-premium blends includes: Royal Salute, Ballantines 17 yr old and Chivas Regal 18yrs and 25 yrs. Johnnie Walker Blue is a weak player in this group, probably the weakest.  Chivas 18yrs and Royal Salute are both priced lower but offer up superior, more fragrant flavors than the Blue Label. At this level of likes and dislikes it's fairly subjective. If you like peat and smoke to dominate the flavor profile, Blue Label might be your choice, as it is stronger than the others. However, if you like the classic Speyside flavors of honey, cinammon and caramel, you should opt for Chivas 18, 25 and Royal Salute.

If you compare Blue Label to single malt scotch, it is definitely not worth the money.  There are several single malts which present greater complexity of flavors at half the price! Which ones? Lagavulin 16 yrs, Glenlivet 18 yrs (add a little water), Cragganmore 12 yrs (add a little water), Dalwhinnie and Highland Park 15 or 18 yrs (great neat or with the addition of a splash of water) to name just a few. All of the aforementioned single malts are at a minimum 50% cheaper and offer a more intricate and pleasing flavor profile. If you visit the Johnnie Walker website, Blue Label is promoted on the basis of the "layers and layers of flavor . . ." (at the time of writing this post this was in the website. However, Diaego is constantly updating the site and so this comment about 'layers' may disappear in the future.) And this is where it fails when compared to the previously mentioned single malts. The single malts weave a tapestry of flavor that Blue Label cannot hold a candle to.

But if it fails the value for money test when compared to ultra-premium blended scotch whisky and single malts (which is kind of like comparing apples to oranges) then why does it enjoy such great success in terms of sales? Marketing.  Masterful marketing.  I think for many people, purchasing Johnnie Walker Blue Label is about making a statement:

"I am rich!"

"I spent a lot of money on your gift."

"I have a fat wallet and a very limited knowledge of scotch."

I have no understanding of the phrase 'value for money.'"

Conclusion
Price and value for money considerations aside, if you are looking for a smooth, inoffensive ultra-premium scotch, Johnnie Walker Blue Label will not disappoint, but it will not impress much either.


Cheers!

PS:  An updated review on Johnnie Blue is available by clicking here.

© Jason Debly, 2009-2011. All rights reserved.