Cadenhead's (was Re: [MM-MALTS-L] Good & Bad whisky)

[djrussobik at aol.com]

And the "Chairman's Stock" selections for the Millennium (in the orange wood boxes) were amazing drams as well (in particular, there was an old?Glen Grant as dark as black coffee that was "to die for").? But there was CLEARLY some "selection based on quality" there!? :)



? Slainte!

??? Dave


-----Original Message-----
From: whiskyhill at att.net
To: MaltManiacs operated former 'MALT-L' Whisky List <mm-malts-l at grsnet.net>; MM-MALTS-L at grsnet.net
Sent: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 6:43 pm
Subject: Re: Cadenhead's (was Re: [MM-MALTS-L] Good & Bad whisky)






And then there were the 5 star Cadenhead bottlings.? In late summer of 2000, Dave Russo, Tim Bachelder and I were sampling our way through the treasure trove in the Ardsheil Hotels pub (Campbeltown) and came across a 1965 Springbank, I think it was 30 years old bottled at 50.5%. We killed it. Dave was so impressed with it that he had a bottle shipped back to the US (I think from a German retailer) and generously donated it to the thirsty masses at the Whisky Hill Dram Jam the following spring. Tim and I attended the Limburg Whisky Fair with a few of the other PLOWEDsters in 2006 and one of the retailers had a bottle at his table. I had a full dram (Danke Sehr?Gregor!) and found out later on that Tim had found it as well and killed it off in proper PLOWED fashion. Well done Tim!

?

I've sampled dozens of Springbank bottlings over the years and this one was definitely one of the best.


-------------- Original message from "Ethan Prater" <eprater at yahoo.com>: -------------- 


I was taken aback by the wildly variable quality of Cadenhead's bottlings when I started digging deeply into single malts around 2000-2002? - to the point where I now don't even consider them, and only rarely stop into their shops when I visit London. 

Starting in the late '90s, D&M Liquor, a high-end shop in San Francisco, offered several Cadenhead bottlings as part of their whisky clubs. I recall a horrendous Glengoyne, also an undrinkable Glen Grant, maybe a way-too-young Bladnoch followed by an admittedly-interesting super-young Ardbeg, and at least one distinctly average Bowmore (still better than the endless flow of FWP OB Bowmores that came shortly after). 

These repeated experiences flew in the face of the unanimously positive reviews Cadenhead bottlings received in whisky publications, and the sort of cult-like admiration, presumably originating from association with Springbank, lavished by the online international whisky commu nity. 

I've still got a Benrinnes and "Braes of Glenlivet" from that period that I'm far too scared to open.

Anyway, the owner of D&M acknowledged how bad these whiskies were, and actually contemplated that Cadenhead ended up bottling different whiskies from what he chose from the samples they sent for his club. Then Cadenhead wasn't distributed in the USA for a while, but I've never paid attention to see if it has come back. I occasionally spot the laudatory Whisky Magazine review of a Cadenhead bottling and shake my head. Definitely a case where you can't trust the bottler to give you a product they stand behind - I won't spend time with a brand whose motto is caveat emptor. 

-Ethan in San Francisco



On Nov 12, 2007 10:46 PM, Peter Wood <st.peter at paradise.net.nz> wrote:

When any discussion turns on what is the best or worst malt whisky ever
bottled, the arguments about which are the best are legion. Applying
reductionist principles, the definition of the worst usually oscillates
between the infamous Talisker and the FWP Bowmore. I take it we are all old
enough to understand FWP, if not in practice, then by association (think
Newquay, Grimsby, Peterhead)? I was unfortunate never to have had the 
Talisker, and have led a pure enough life not to have fully appreciated the
Bowmore perfume. But the great range of bottlings that lie within the reach
of normal people (those that spend less than 35% of their disposable income 
on malt whisky) are acceptable.

I respect the Cadenhead attitude of "if we bought it we bottle it" because
that increases the available range of maturations in varied casks of varied
ages. Maybe most people wish to find the perfect malt and stick with it, 
but I would have hoped that those on a list such as this would think beyond
the trivialities of perfection, and take pleasure in the endless variabilty
that single cask bottlings provide - crap to sublime. Anything beyond that 
and we are engaging in religious sophistry.

Peter Wood

_______________________________________________
MM-MALTS-L mailing list
MM-MALTS-L at grsnet.net 
http://lists.grsnet.net/mailman/listinfo/mm-malts-l









_______________________________________________
MM-MALTS-L mailing list
MM-MALTS-L at grsnet.net
http://lists.grsnet.net/mailman/listinfo/mm-malts-l


________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.grsnet.net/pipermail/mm-malts-l/attachments/20071113/ec05a204/attachment.html