Bit of an intro
Bunnahabhain (pronounced "Bu-na-ha-venn" according to the label) is both the name of the distillery and the village where it's located and it means "mouth of the river". The village was built especially for the distillery workers in 1881 when the distillery opened. The distillery is owned by Burn Stewart Distillers Ltd, who in turn are owned by CL Finance. CL Finance are are a finance company (who'd have thought it), and I find it quite interesting that they have a distilling company on their list of holdings. Burn Stewart Distillers Ltd also own Black Bottle, Scottish Leader, Deanston, Tobermory and Ledaig. It's not as much as it sounds, there are actually only three distilleries involved in that lot. Black bottle and Scottish Leader are blends and Ledaig is peated Tobermory. I'm going to review Tobermory at some point just so I can talk about Balamory. Bunnahabhain produce several expressions, including the 12, 18, 25 and 40 year olds, plus Cruach-Monah, Darach Ur and Toiteach. The official website doesn't list Young and Feisty Provenance now, so I'd better get on and track some down if I can before the world runs out. See for yourself by clicking the link.
Bunnahabhain is the least peated of the Islay whiskies, using clear spring water instead of the peat laden whisky coloured river water that Laphroaig use for example. They also use unpeated malted barley which is very unusual for an Islay distillery. There is a peated version available which I almost bought, as I'm sure you'll remember from your careful reading of my Laphroaig 10 yo review. Maybe next month. I'm quite a fan of peated whiskies, with Laphroaig and Ardbeg being two of my favourite distilleries. (Springbank may well be my absolute favourite distillery now, but I'll have to try Longrow before I can say that for sure.) An unpeated Islay whisky promises to be something quite interesting. My old friend Mr. Tiffen once gave me a bottle of Bruichladdich Laddie Ten, which is another unpeated Islay whisky and is very nice and very interesting. Lots of savoury herbal flavours as I remember.
Bottled at 46.3% ABV, unchill-filtered and no colouring added. As I said, a proper craft presentation. Interestingly the 12 year old was originally released at 40%, with colouring added and was chill filtered. They seem quite keen to promote the new way of doing things, and rightly so in my opinion. They've changed the packaging so you know you've got the new craft version and not the old non-craft version. I haven't actually tasted it yet as I'm typing this, but theoretically, the extra alcohol will hold onto more flavour, the lack of unnecessary caramel colouring means nothing is tainted or covered up with the faint caramel flavour (which I still can't say I've ever noticed, but some do), and with no chill-filtration nothing pleasant is removed. Sounds very promising to me. I think they changed it in 2010.
Oh yeh, it cost me 550 kroner. (£55.13, $92.26, €66.73), and you can have a look at their website here, but only if you're old enough. They have 12 year old whisky available on the website for £35, which should give you a bit of a clue about Norwegian taxes. On to something a bit less depressing...
Packaging
Nice bottle
The bottle's an interesting shape and gives you that lovely glugging sound that you usually only get in the first glass or two for four or five glasses. It rather reminds me of steam engines, but in a more nautical way. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the design was inspired by the old steam boats that brought supplies to Islay in the olden days. I rather like it, just because it's different from other whisky bottle shapes. The cork says "Est 1881" on the top. I've said before that I prefer the look of a plain wood top to the cork, but this one looks like the writing is carved into the wood, which is then stained black. I quite like it and I'm rather glad I took a closer look. Again, the label's a bit fancier than I would have chosen, but it's better than the box. None of it's ridiculously fancy of course, just a little fancier than I find appealing. I like simplicity in my whisky packaging. The most appealing bottle I've ever seen was covered in dust and had an almost illegible hand written label and no box. It looked so awesome I would have bought it there and then, but it was £14,000.
Fancy bottle decoration
The blurb on the label is the same as on the box, but the box has some very vague tasting notes as well. They've gone for the "Islay is nice. This whisky is made on Islay. Therefore this whisky is nice" approach with their little introductory paragraph, which is fair enough. I can't remember what I've said about that approach before, but it's pretty typical in the marketing of Scotch whisky. If I was given the task of rewriting the label I'm not sure what I'd put. "Have a sip, see what you think" probably wouldn't do. Anyway, I think it's important to look beyond the fluff and see what information they're actually giving you about the whisky, which is that it's made at the north-eastern tip of Islay and has a much more gentle taste than most other whiskies made there.
They make a point of saying that it's not chillfiltered, which is something they should be proud of. Also that no colouring is added. I still can't say I've noticed the taste of caramel in a whisky so I might see if I can find a particularly caramelly one to try. Comment if you can suggest one.
Last comment on the packaging is that it seems confused as to its identity. They have "XII" on the label because it's 12 years old, but it looks a lot like where they put XO on cognac. The sailor bloke on the label makes me think rum. Maybe they're trying to trick rum and cognac drinkers into trying it, an good luck to them if they are. I've said far too much about the packaging. The whisky's what's important.
Smell in the bottle
First opening - salty, iodine, seaweed, cooked banana, nuts but hard to say which ones, malt
Later - Red wine after a few days which was quite unexpected and faded away after a few seconds, although there is a kind of red grape juice quality to the after taste if you wait a few minutes. After another couple of days I was getting dark brown muscavado sugar.
Appearance
It looks a bit like this
Surprisingly dark considering there's no caramel added. The colour here is all from the casks. I'd say amber +1 if I was that way inclined.
Neat
Surprisingly easy to drink neat, especially considering it's 46.3%
Nose - nutty malt, burnt rubber, I think iodine (not as salty as in the bottle on first opening it, so I'm not going to call it seaweed this time), cooked banana, possibly a touch of medicinal type phenols (not a phenolic whisky though, it's about 1-2 parts per million according to something I read on a whisky forum a while back. For comparison Laphroaig has 40-43 PPM), green apple, raisins
Arrival - quick, sweet, salty, iodine
Development - nuts, malt, cooked banana
Finish - nutty, malty, quite long with a bit of iodine creeping in at the end
Water - 1 tsp, maybe a tiny bit more
Nose - Oddly enough I smelled nuts which after the bottle was open a while became a bit more cerealy or biscuity, cooked banana, bit earthy, something like raisin but a bit fruitier (Ralfy mentioned sultanas so I assume it's that, but it's been a long time since I had a sultana), Haribo jelly bears (gummi bears if you insist, they were jelly bears when I was a kid), vanilla, something pleasantly burnt like or maybe caramelized, something sweet and dry (Ralfy mentioned icing sugar in his review and I think he's right), burnt rubber (quite distinct but not unpleasant), digestive biscuits, sea salt, touch of seaweed or iodine (probably both, seaweed contains iodine), cinnamon, The icing sugar gets a little stronger as it develops with the water, possibly very faint marzipan, fennel or liquorice appears a bit later on, hazelnut, chocolate (like a cross between milk chocolate and raw cocoa), angelica
Arrival - Quite a short arrival, oily mouth feel sweet, salty, slightly nutty, salty liquorice (they have it here in Norway, it's like normal liquorice but salty. Would you have guessed that if I hadn't explained? Usually it's a bit too salty and I'm not a fan myself, but the taste of it in the whisky is not too strong at all and is very pleasant), fresh herbs (not sure which ones), sherry, chocolate became more prominent as it develops with the water, kind of a mellow mineral taste (maybe a pebble beach but not quite), oak, just the faintest hint of chlorine
Development - Quite long but longer when you drink it neat, savoury, iodine, a hint of fennel, faint peat, a touch medicinal, faint nutmeg, caraway, oak coming back, honey (I want to say heather honey but I'm not sure. It's like the honey taste in Stags Breath Liqueur which I now realize I still have half a bottle of in the cupboard which I'll review at some point), kind of organic earthy taste, nut shell (nutty tannin kind of flavour), juicy berries arrive later as the water does it's thing (not quite black current but in that kind of area. I might say coffee berries if I was more sure of myself.), tobacco (I'd say virginia if I had to but not certain, and it's the tobacco not the smoke), kind of a cognac quality comes in near the end
Finish - Pretty long lasting but delicate, nutty and woody, bit of dry tannin like nutshell, bit minerally, faint nutmeg and maybe cinnamon, red grape appears after the bottle's been open a while and if you wait long enough.
With Ice!
I wouldn't normally have ice with my whisky, but the picture on the website was of scotch on the rocks in a tumbler, so I had to try it. They appear to have two ice cubes so that's what I've gone for. I'm using a small tumbler like glass rather than a big super wide tumbler. This one has very slightly tapering sides which in theory should concentrate the smells a little bit, which is important as the coldness of the ice is likely to reduce the smelliness. Here's the proof that I actually did it:
Not worth it.
Nose - Faintly cerealy, not much smell to it really
Arrival - cold, sweetish, tastes kind of cheap
Development - bit cerealy, bit of sweetness coming in towards the end making a bit like sugar puffs
Finish - sweet, dryish, still long
When the ice cubes have melted a bit and it's all a bit watered down and very cold it doesn't really taste of much. You still get an aftertaste that's a bit nutty and cereally. Not much to the taste at all and so it seems like a bit of a waste. Sort of refreshing though, and I can kind of see the appeal on a summer's evening, but I'd choose a glen cairn and a drop of water over a tumbler and ice cubes every time. It's not that it tastes bad, it's just that I know there's so much more to this whisky than I'm tasting when it has ice in it.
Little experiment
I poured a dram into my shiney new Bunnahabhain glen cairn before pouring the scotch on the rocks. I decided to add a drop of water and let it develop while I was tasting the whisky with ice which I reckon took about 20 minutes. Here's the tasting notes from the dram that had been developing with the water for 20 minutes. (I had a whisky tube lid on the glass to keep everything in. I'm thinking about buying a little glass thingy to use instead, which is a little extravagant but only a very little because they're only a couple of quid if that.)
Nose - sweet, savoury, salty, fennel, something floral that I don't think I noticed before, just a hint of red grape juice
Arrival - sweet, herby but in a kind of confectionary way, icing sugar, maybe vanille sugar (the powdered kind we have in Norway
Development - complex, seems like there's a lot going on that I don't recognize, then very distinct and quite sweet liquorice, powdery feel, cinnamon, kind of a nutty flavour too
Finish - dry, kind of nutty, long as before,
Interesting thing to do, but I prefer it the normal way. I reckon it's worth trying this with any single malt just to see what a big difference time and water make to the flavour. With this whisky it seemed to make the biggest difference to the development
A few more comments
I've been looking at some other reviews and it seems this is a bit of a marmite whisky, people seem to love it or hate it. The ones who didn't like it mostly said it was a bit too strong or that it tasted like burnt rubber. To the ones who thought it was too strong I'd say "Add a drop of water like a sensible person. Your machismo is hindering your whisky experience." To the ones who said it tasted of burnt rubber I'd say "Fair enough." It does have a bit of burnt rubber in there, but I rather liked it. I think it's a feints type of taste, like the tobacco flavour I picked up.
It's very easy to drink neat, but the water really opens it up. You don't need a lot of water, but a bit is well worth it. It becomes a fair bit sweeter with the water, and the full complexity of the flavour is released. It's very pleasantly complex, although not quite as complex as the cask strength Springbank I reviewed. A little more alcohol strength would increase that. I appreciate the lack of chill filtering as it gives a more complex and interesting whisky.
I read one review that suggested that all Bunnahabhain's casks have been used three or four times and don't have a lot of life in them anymore. Apparently you can age whisky in a barrel a couple of times, but each time the effect is slightly different. It's a bit like using a teabag several times. The first time you get a lot of flavour coming from the tea into the liquid. The second time isn't too bad, but it's doesn't have the same vibrancy it did the first time. The third time you wish you'd used a new teabag, and the fourth time if just unpleasant. Aging whisky is kind of similar if you can stretch your imagination a little. The flavours in the wood infuse into the liquid. If you use the same bit of wood too many times all the good flavour goes away and you get a drop in quality. If what I bought represents a drop in quality then it must have been amazing a couple of years ago. The same review said there weren't problems with the 18 year old yet, so maybe I'll give that a go if I can afford it.
I had a drop with some Gawith and Hoggarth's Dark Plug in my pipe a few days ago. It was a very nice combination and the sweeter flavours in the whisky seemed more prominent. I was very tired at the time too, having just finished a week of night shifts which probably affects the flavour experience in some way.
Conclusion
This is a really nice whisky. I very much appreciate the non-chill filtering and the no added caramel colouring. The complexity is there if you're interested, but if not then its still a very pleasant drink. I'm not convinced by scotch on the rocks and never have been. It's not a bad drink but the cold temperature and the extra water totally kill the flavour of the whisky, especially after ten minutes or so. If you're in an over heated pub that only has rubbish whisky and for some reason you don't fancy a pint then maybe. I once tried with actual rocks that had been in the freezer over night and that was ok, but not with ice cubes. Would I buy it again? Absolutely! This is a very enjoyable whisky, plenty of body and a character half way between Islay and Speyside. Kind of like a Speyside malt has had a holiday on Islay and got a kind of Islay tan. Did that make sense? Not sure. Anyway, a very nice whisky and well worth the price, especially if you're paying UK prices. On the standard one to ten scale I'd call this a winner. I'm well up for trying some other expressions from this distillery, so Toitech could well be on the cards soon and I'm still hoping to pick up a bottle of Young and Feisty Provenance. My only criticism is that the glass I ordered from them took a month and three days to arrive, but that could well be the fault of the Norwegian postal service.
Merchandising isn't all bad
If you have enjoyed the experience of this review, why not share it with your friends?
Related Reviews
Whisky review No. 14 - Bunnahabhain Toiteach Scotch
No comments:
Post a Comment