This 8-year-old was launched in 2009, and was the first broadly available bottling from Armstrong & Co from Bladnoch. Let’s see if it comes across as mote mature than the 6-year-old.
Nose: Spirit, lemon, lilacs, vanilla and malt. With water I get mealy, but still tart apples, heather and brushwood.
Palate: The vanilla is apparent, the malt hiding behind it. Dry wood and yeasty dough. With water it turns to fruit; lemon and apples. Oaky bitterness on the finish, which is middling to short.
Comments: Surprisingly drinkable at 55% for such a young and light whisky. If adding water, add more than just a few drops as with just a drop or two it turns a bit wild. Chemistry is odd stuff, but you obviously release congeners of some sort. With a bit more water it’s quite pleasant.
A light whisky, it still shows its age, but is far more promising than its younger brother.
On another note entirely: Notice the nice colours refected in the bottle in the picture above. It’s caused by the fact that I went out on the veranda to snap a picture, and this is what the sky looked like:
This is one of three Bladnoch bottlings from 2008, released to showcase the spirit made after Raymond Armstrong & Co purchased Bladnoch. The two others are Sherry Matured and Lightly Peated, tasting notes to follow. As the fate of the distillery is uncertain again, it seems an appropriate time to taste these. I hope a serious buyer turns up soon; that there is potential for great whisky to be made at Bladnoch is beyond doubt.
Nose: Young spirit. Citrus, especially lemon, and a somewhat chemical whiff, which leads the mind to lemon-scented cleaning solutions. There is also a flowery note. With water vanilla makes an appearance, and I am strongly reminded of the lemon-flavoured vanilla cream filling our local Italian cafe favours. I’m not such a big fan (I like my vanilla cream filling to taste of vanilla), but in a whisky it’s not all wrong. Unfortunately there is also a sweetish off-note and a whiff of barnyard (the sort of notes likely to be polished off with a few more years in the cask, though).
Palate: The malt is apparent on the palate, but the main impression is again young spirit. Vanilla bitterness and a light oaky note, as well. With water it turns undefinably nicer.
Comments: It’s not undrinkable, but it’s not a stirlig advertisement for Bladnoch, either. First and foremost 6 years is obviously not long enough for this spirit, but I’m also missing some complexity which is normally evident in young whiskies aspiring to be great when older.
Distilled 14 Desember 1973, cask number 15933. First Cask is a series of bottling from Direct Wines Ltd.
Nose: Lemon and lemongrass, goosberries and oak. With water my mind turns to jasmin and incence, but there is still quite a bit of lemon.
Palate: Oak, heather and mildly rotting fruit. More bitter with water, but also more vanilla and fresher fruit.
Comments: This must be ex bourbon, and not a very active cask, either. Not bad, but not so good that I will mourn its passing, bottle kill will happen this evening, there are only about two drams left in the bottle.
Drikkelig.no has been on a tour of Sweden this summer, well, parts of Sweden, anyway, and we’ve visited several interesting places. First stop: Jämtlands Bryggeri. They normally don’t offer tours during the summer, since there are fewer people at work (even – or perhaps especially – people who make good beer need a summer vacation), but since there were only two of us, we got an appointment anyway.
When you arrive at Jämtlands it might be useful to know that what looks like the main entrance is on the opposite side to where they want guests to announce their arrival.
Håkan received us in his very becoming “Hell”-t-shirt. Come to think of it every employee we met had some variety of Hell design on their t-shirt. Does this mean it’s the only beer Jämtlands promotes on t-shirts or does it say something about the employees’ preference?
We were first shown the malt store. Jämtlands purchase their malt from England, specifically from Thomas Fawcett. They buy 500 kilos bags of the base malts and 25 kilos bags of the more specialised malt types. They use 800 kilos per batch, so they get through quite a few bags in a week. Hops they source from whereever they can get the right sort, though they hardly ever use American hops. Currently they get a lot of hops from Bulgaria. If you’ve had a few of Jämtlands beers, you will know that they are not taking part in the the-hoppier-the-better race, but some hops are neccessary nonetheless.
We were then introduced to the mash tun and the boiling vessel. They boil for an hour and a half for dark beers, a bit longer for light beers. The most notable feature is perhaps the external electrical heater for the worts, the vessel is not directly heated.
The brewery has recently expanded, and in the fermentation room there are now nine fermentation tanks, each holding 5000 liters. The oldest tanks were the shiniest, of an English make, the new tanks were of a duller finish, and are from Hungary. Lager, Steamer and Ale are fermented at 15, 17 and 21 degrees respectively and it takes from 5 down to 3 days.
Fermentation tanks all lined up.
At the time of our visit they are brewing at the rate of one 5000 liter batch a day. The mash tun is a bottleneck in the production line and they are pondering whether to procure another one to enable further expansion.
After the recent expansion they now have 11 storage vessels. Håkan tells us that in the pre-Christmas rush they manage with nine days from mash to bottle, but the rest of the year the beer is given a little more time.
Once the beer is ready to be bottled it is filtered through cellulose filters, which takes about two hours for a 5000 liter brew.
Bärnsten hot off the presses, so to say? Don’t mind if I do.
The bottling plant is also pretty recent, it was installed about a year ago. The greatest improvement on the old plant is the lift which lifts a whole “layer” of bottles off the pallet. They used to have to feed the machinery manually. The only manual task left now is lifting the crates off at the end and stacking them for shipment. One batch fills approximately 7300 bottles, and they are all shipped off to Östersund immediately.
For non-Swedes the most interesting piece of information Håkan gave us is that they are currently considering changing bottle size from the current 0.5 liters to 0.33 liters. In order to do so they would have to change large parts of the bottling plant, so we’re looking at at least a year befor anything happens, but the crucial point is that if they make the switch they can start exporting their beers. The bottles they are currently using are part of the Swedish bottle return system and it is consequently illegal to use them for export (it’s useful to note this, by the way. Even though the bottles are not marked with the return mark you can return them in most supermarkets and get your deposit back). If they switch they will switch completely, they do not feel it’s worth the trouble to have two bottle sizes.
On the second floor they have a reception area where they have all their diplomas on display. It’s an impressive display, even if Håkan admits that the number of awards have dwindled once the microbrewery boom took off. They also have a bar made from an old pan from Till Bryggerier in Umeå, and they can receive parties here for tastings. Food can also be arranged as they have a roof-top terrace with a barbeque. I must suggest it for our next kick-off at work.
Distilled 21 August 1996, bottled 26 April 2005, bottle number 158 of 240.
Nose: Malt, a hint of menthol and juniper berries. After a while in the glass tart raspberries appear. Water opens for black pepper and tart pears and a hint of fruity chewing gum.
Palate: Malt, Vademecum, oaky bitterness. Water lessens the impression of Vademcum and develops into something vegetal.
Comments: I can’t remember the herby and spicy character being so strong before, but this is another bottle that has been left less than half full for a while. In this case, though, it’s a beneficial development. Very nice – and intriguing – nose, somewhat less interesting taste.
Nose: Citrus, bonfire, a lot of alchohol. With quite a bit of water I get more fruits; melon and sweet pears.
Palate: Cold smoke, lemon drops wrapped in waxed paper, oak. With water a warm spicyness develops, rather a lot of oaky bitterness and yeasty dough.
Comments: This has been left as a dreg for too long, unless my memory of what it used to be like betrays me. It needs quite a lot of water before it’s drinkable, and I guess it’s been matured in fairly inactive casks since the alchohol is still so obvious after 20 years. It has a lot going for it, but the bitterness on the palate is too overwhelming. I can’t remmeber it from before, so I suspect we must take this bottle as a sign that we really should have a spring clean (ok, a summer clean) in our whisky cabinet to make sure any dregs we want to keep are rebottled into sample bottles to minimise oxidation.
Nose: Dried fruits (apricots, cranberries), acetone and wood varnish, banana, vanilla and rosemary. Obvious alchohol at full strength. Water tones down the alchohol and brings out pine needles and menthol, milk chocolate and black pepper.
Palate: Menthol, acetone, dried apricots and ginger. With water I also get dried banana, a little oak and sauna – as well as orange peel on the finish.
Comments: It just doesn’t get much better than this. You could spend hours picking through the nose and flavour on this one. It demonstrates just why Rare Malts used to have such an impeccable reputation (though the last couple of years of Rare Malt releases did not seem to live up to it). A very clever purchase, if I may say so myself (it was a birthday present for Arve quite a few years ago).
Nose: Malt, tart citrus, newly baked bisquits (shortbread). With water it leans more towards pear ice lollies, newly mown grass and lemon cake.
Palate: More punch than expected. Malt, vanilla, vanilla bitterness, cream. A little milk chocolate on the finish.
Comments: Quite nice. A pretty example of how Dailuiane may turn out in a bourbon cask (I am 99% sure that this is from a bourbon cask). Cask strenght would have been preferable, and it lacks a little complexity, but it’s a nice whisky for everyday wear.
Comments: Not nice. The nose is ok, but faint and not very exciting, and the palate is simply off-putting. I poured most of my dram down the drain, and passed the bottle to Arve, who drank a couple of drams while enjoying a pipe. However, once the pipe was done and he had a sip, he discovered just how horrid the whisky really was, and stopped drinking. The conclusion, therefore: Dinkable with a pipe (a cigar probably works as well), but generally not drinkable.
