|
|


Please note that Malt Madness is still 'under re-construction'.
During a decade of heavy dramming the website simply kept
growing and growing. In 2006 the old website finally crashed.
That was as good an excuse as any to start work on a brand
new separate Malt Maniacs website - aimed at the real 'malt
whisky anoraks' in the world. French maniac Serge Valentin
added his WhiskyFun site to our online whisky trinity recently.
Not long after I published my first rants & raves on single malt
whisky in 1995 other people started sending me their comments
and suggestions. This gradually developed into lively e-mail traffic
(I receive hundreds of messages about whisky each day), the Malt
Maniacs website, my first book and now even Malt Minions; maybe
the very first online whisky school. Once the new Malt Madness
site and the Advanced Beginner's Guide are finished, they should
contain all information a relative novice in the whisky world needs.

If this is your first visit to Malt Madness, I suggest you proceed with caution.
It might be useful to check out the introduction before wandering deeper
into this massive maze of malt mania. The site contains a few hundred
pages and it's easy to get lost in a world wide web of whisky whimsy.
Other useful pages include the sitemap to MM, answers to some of
the frequently asked questions and a selection of liquid links.
Over the years I've filled literally hundreds of pages with sense and
nonsense about whisky, so finishing the sites will take quite some time.
Join the mailinglist
if you want to stay updated on the developments around
Malt Madness and Malt Maniacs. How to join? Simply drop me a message at the
e-address at the bottom of this page - and please include in which country you live.
So, you're interested in single malt whisky, eh? What a coincidence - that goes for me too!
Actually, I'm much more than merely 'interested' in single malt whisky; you could say that I'm
quite MAD
about it - hence the title of this Malt Madness website. If you are a curious novice
taking your first shaky steps in the confusing world of malt whisky, this is the website for you.
Here you can find a Beginner's Guide to single malt whisky with all the information you need
to fully appreciate the 'water of life', the
Distillery Data section with details on all malt whisky
distilleries in Scotland and my Liquid Log (1997-2006) with tasting notes for more than 2,000
different whiskies. There's also the mAlmanac (a virtual pocket guide that might come in handy
during your next shopping spree) and the Deviant Drams section which takes a look at some
alternatives to single malt Scotch whisky - like Irish & Japanese whisk(e)y, bourbon & rum.
Well, actually...
You won't find a lot of
'new' material on MM so far.
When the old web site crashed
in 2006, I 'froze' the old site and
started working on two brand new,
separate sites - Malt Madness (with
my purely personal observations and
opinions) & Malt Maniacs (for freaks).
A lot of the links on this page still lead
to the frozen ADHD section but so far
I've updated my Liquid Log & added
a refreshed Beginner's Guide to MM.
All frozen pages will be replaced
gradually by fresh pages as
time goes by. Please
be patient...
Entry #332 - First Single & Single
It says 'limited release' on the label, but that's relative. Because the first bottling will only be available in the UK, Two last bits of trivia; the name was inspired by a book Glencadam 16yo 1991/2007 (46%, Single & Single, 75cl, Bottle #3790) So, that was one dram down - an inspiration to finish the Glencadam distillery profile today. Benriach 15yo 1991/2006 'Tawny Port Wood' (53%, OB, C#6921, Port hogshead for Taiwan) Cragganmore 1993/2006 Distillers Edition (40%, OB, Port Wood Finish) Deanston 18yo 1977/1996 (54.7%, Cadenhead's, Distilled November 1977, Bottled January 1996) So.... Reason enough to wrap up the refurbished Deanston distillery profile in the DD section as well... Sweet drams, Johannes Entry #331 - Walpurgis Spring Session 2008
The first single malt on my list came from the Glenora distillery in Nova Scotia, Canada. Glen Breton 10yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007, Canada) So, at the moment I'm not really charmed yet by this Canadian product. Phillips Union (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2006, Blend of Kentucky Bourbon & Canadian Whisky) That was most certainly not boring - and more to my liking than most of the bourbons and Canadian whiskies I've tried so far. But it has such strong aroma's and flavours that I'm wondering if they perhaps added some 'secret ingredients' - which is allowed in Canadian whisky. So let's move South for three purely American products... Bernheim NAS 'Original' (45%, OB, Kentucky Straight Wheat Whisky, USA) Stranahan's Colorado Whiskey 2001 (47%, OB, Bottled +/- 2006, USA) Old Portrero 11yo (50%, OB, Bottled +/- 2006, USA) Still, plenty of interesting stuff going on in the America's at the moment, it would seem. Murree 8yo 'Malt Whisky Classic' (43%, OB, Pakistan, Bottled +/- 2006) Murree 12yo 'Millennium Reserve' (43%, OB, Pakistan, Bottled +/- 2006) So, I preferred the 12yo Murree over the 8yo by quite a wide margin. And that's it for this tasting report. Tasting these exotic whiskies briefly inspired me to get back to work on the refurbishment of the 'deviant drams' section - but then I remembered that I still have some 75 Scottish distillery profiles to finish for the distillery data section. So, I'll get back to work on the profiles for Glencadam (because a bottle of the new independent bottler Single & Single is 'en route' for review) and Laphroaig (because I've just received the excellent book by Marcel van Gils on the distillery). Watch this space for the reviews as they arrive... Sweet drams, Johannes Entry #330 - No Comment...
No further comments... Well, wait... I had no comments when I first posted this screenshot - around 11:00 PM... 13:30 Update - About an hour after I had posted the screenshot, I refreshed the page with the poll results and the percentage of 'no' votes had suddenly dropped to 64%! That was extremely weird to say the least. I had received a message about the poll yesterday and forwarded it to the other malt maniacs after casting my own vote - a heartfelt 'no', of course... Some of the other maniacs cast their votes as well, and over the past day or so the percentage of 'no' votes has hovered around the 75% mark (see the screenshot.) It seems that Robin Tucek was right when he suggested possible 'shenanigans' from the SWA and/or 'big whisky' to manipulate the results of the poll. So, I quickly sent a message to the members of the MM Mailinglist and asked them to submit their votes as well. Just in time too - within half an hour after I sent the message the poll closed. Fortunately, the 'no' votes had crawled back up to 75% - and I've already received complaints from mailing list members that were too late to cast their 'no' votes. Interestingly enough, the number of 'don't know' votes had dropped from 8% around 11:00 PM to just 3% by the time the poll was over. The number of 'yes' votes had grown from 15% to 20% during the same time. That means that around half of the votes in the poll on this issue (which lasted a week) were cast in the last two hours - and there's 2% of the votes unaccounted for ;-) Meanwhile, I've added three fresh profiles to the Distillery Data section; Balblair, Balmenach and Balvenie. Sweet drams, Johannes Entry #329 - Baby Steps...
Yet more 'news': the results of last year's Malt Maniacs Awards are still trickling through the cracks of the international whisky world. Our Taiwanese maniac Ho-cheng sent us this picture of a six page article in a Taiwanese whisky magazine. I can't actually read it, but I'm enjoying it nonetheless... Meanwhile, Serge has just published a fresh version of the matrix and the monitor on WhiskyFun. There are now more that 10,000 different whiskies on the monitor! Serge also played around with some statistics. By now well over a dozen maniacs have crossed the 1000 malts mark on our individual 'track records'. It seems that the average malt maniac (well, at least Davin, Ho-cheng, Michel and myself) samples an average of exactly 33 new malt whiskies each month. In fact, if we're talking 'collectively', we have hundreds of years of whisky drinking experience. Anyway - that was the 'news' for now... An Cnoc 12yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - an affordable malt whisky for less than 30 Euro's. Benriach 12yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - my favourite of the day, but not everybody agreed. Fettercairn 12yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - quite a drop down from the 'Old' Fettercairn. Glen Moray 12yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - used to be an affordable 'benchmark' malt. Tamdhu NAS (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - the most affordable good malt in our local cornershop. Tamnavulin 12yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - admittedly, this was never a real favourite of mine... And that's it for now - I'll cover a few more 'exotic' drams in my next log entry... Sweet drams, Johannes Entry #328 - An Open Consultation
The SWA (Scotch Whisky Association) is a lobby organisation Are they trying to 'pull a fast one' and 'sneak one by us'? In fact, there WAS little confusion until they came up with the phrase. It's strange how the results of our 'market research' (over 98% opposed to the phrase 'blended malt') are so radically different from the SWA's. When we dug a little deeper we found that the phrase originated within a mysterious 'work group' that's operation mostly behind the scenes. Many whisky lovers working in 'the industry' have already informed us that the 'extensive consultation process' didn't include them, so this looks more and more like an effort of the major whisky producers to diffuse the lines between single malts and blends. The SWA invited some maniacs to come to Scotland to discuss the issue after the dust had settled, but as a lobby organisation they are not in a position to change their position - so I'm not sure what good that would do. Instead, the maniacs have taken it upon themselves to step forward as representatives of a small part of the consumers in the world - and offer an alternative classification in five easy to understand categories in the public arena of the world wide web; Single Malt Whisky Easy as pie - at least 98% of our focus group seems to think so ;-) Today is the last day to send feedback about the proposals to the SWA. As I said, I've actually received many 'adverse comments of confusion' myself. SWA: info@swa.org.uk There are numerous other interesting points for debate in the proposed legislation, but for now this is the issue
that has ignited the largest controversy and debate amongst the certified malt maniacs... Sweet drams, Johannes Entry #327 - Bruichladdich versus the SWA
I didn't need to browse through my stack of samples for very long, actually. Bruichladdich 16yo 1979/1995 (43%, Signatory, C#834-35) Bruichladdich 1990/2003 'Valinch Flora McBabe' (55.2%, OB, C#3666, 700 Bts., D. 09/'90 Btl. 12/'03) Bruichladdich 1989/2004 (57.9%, G&M Reserve, C#1957, 275 Bts.) So, with some Bruichladdich in my stomach I was inspired to delve into the debate again... "Johannes, I understand that you have been writing to fellow whisky lovers and circulating copies of Mark Reynier's paper 'Recipe for Confusion'. If I may, I should like to offer the following observations on Mark's claims, and hope that having read these comments you may feel that not all is as troubling as Mark has made out; whilst Mark acknowledges much of the proposed legislation brought forward by DEFRA is worthwhile, he suggests 'some feel it's a smokescreen to further enhance the commercial interests of a self-regulated industry'. The whole point of legislation is that it is not self-regulation, but law." Ah, that's where my brain first stumbled... <snip> "Mark 'paraphrases' the new Regulations in his note to editors. What this means in reality is that he has selectively missed out important provisions which contradict his argument." Erm, yes..., well... <snip> "Mark is concerned about customer confusion, so it is strange that he is selling a product distilled and matured at Bruichladdich, but labelled Port Charlotte at the same time as talking up the reopening of a separate distillery to be called Port Charlotte, also to sell a product called Port Charlotte." Ah - I would say Campbell DOES make a good point there. "Likeable fellow that he is, Campbell is being disingenuous here as his role inevitably necessitates. I think from the SWA's reaction, here and elsewhere, it is clear that I have touched a raw nerve, perhaps a subject that they had hoped in 5 days time would have slipped by with out any one noticing. The usual tactic of the SWA when faced with the impertinence of any one daring to criticise them, is to immediately discredit/patronise the critic, and exert their power over the media and influential parties, in a realpolitik way. Par for the course I am afraid along with the usual sniping from the cowardly picadors on the sidelines. My interest in this issue is not only as a distiller, but as an observer (the only person it would appear) of the SWA and it's mighty paymasters, and what they get up to. Scotch Whisky does not belong to the SWA." <snip> "It is the SWA that has put forward these proposals to Defra to consult on, as it says in the intro to the consultation but there seems precious little consulting going on. I've had two distillery brands call me up saying they knew nothing of the whole process! All I can get out of Campbell is "we will have to agree to disagree" that there is even a potential issue here. Firstly, let's be clear that Campbell is commenting on emails we have exchanged, a press release that I sent to a few interested parties, and various comments here. <snip> The regulation, taken together, would indicate that Campbell's assertion is not so clear cut: The inference is that I paraphrased the regulation in an unfair way. However I indicated that I had paraphrased the regulation, and this was for clarity. I also added a supplementary paragraph about 10 (2) C in the accompanying notes. The relevant text of the regulation is below: Regulation 10 (2) The name of a distillery must not appear on any labelling or individual packaging of
any blended malt, blended grain, or blended scotch whisky, or be used in connection with any advertisement or promotion of such whiskies, unless - Now I am no lawyer, but this indicates to me that the name of a distillery CAN appear on a label if a scotch whisky that has been distilled at a named distillery has been included in the blend making up the the final whisky and as long as a reference is made that there are several whiskies in it (obviously blended malt alone does not explain this!) so for example Bruichladdich Blended Malt could have 99% other malts in it as long as it says "a rare selection of single malt whiskies from Scotland's finest distilleries"? Or "Malts Galore!", or "Rent a Malt" etc etc.? Is that what it means? We have the potential situation that the category is 'blended malt' but Glen Other SINGLE MALT is plastered all over it. Incidentally, in sub clause (a) how do you define the difference between a distillery name as a description of a whisky and a distillery name as a brand?" <snip> At this point in the discussion it occurred to me that things may have grown a little 'technical' (or perhaps even boring) for the average reader of Malt Madness. So, for now I'll point you to the Malt Maniacs & Friends group on facebook for further arguments in the discussion. The next issue of Malt Maniacs will delve a little deeper into the topic. I'll finish this log entry with Mark's response to a point made by Campbell; (Campbell) "As regards the description 'Blended Malt Scotch Whisky' and 'Blended Grain Scotch Whisky', Mark's suggestions for alternatives were 'Pot Still Scotch Whisky' and "Patent Still Scotch Whisky". In addition to the fact that these descriptions will be meaningless to 99% of consumers worldwide, it appeared to ignore the fact that it did not distinguish between Single Malts and Blended Malts, and Single Grains and Blended Grains, as Single Malt Scotch Whisky is also 'Pot Still Scotch Whisky', and Single Grain Scotch Whisky is also 'Patent Still Scotch Whisky'. It is all very well criticising the description which has been chosen, but Mark has not been able to come up with an appropriate alternative." (Mark) "Any one who has had the misfortune to wade their way through these regulations is bound to be as
confused by all the blended this and blended that's let alone the consumer. Since the SWA want to introduce 3 new titles, why not go the whole hog and try and choose names that while being visually distinctive and
therefore not open to misinterpretation - either deliberate or subconscious describe what the whisky is about:
Blended whisky speaks for itself of course. But we have single malt. What's so single about it? the grain or the distillery? And what does malt mean to most consumers anyway? (Campbell) "I suspect we are going to have to agree to disagree on the compulsory sales categories. Our Working Group, representing a variety of companies in the industry, discussed this issue for months before they reached a view , and they went over every conceivable option and considered suggestions put up by others. I very much doubt they are going to change their position now." Indeed - and that's the part that concerns many of the malt maniacs... Sweet drams, Johannes |
|
|
70 - An Cnoc 12yo (40%, OB, Bottled +/- 2007) - Fairly chemical in the nose (banana), but nice enough. After the big overhaul of this website in 2006 and 2007 I've switched to a 'seasonal' rhythm for the HTML pages in my Liquid Log. At the end of each season I send my scores to our French malt maniac Serge who adds them to the Malt Maniacs Monitor and Malt Maniacs Matrix - along with the most recent scores of the other maniacs. So, you don't have to take my word for it; the matrix and monitor offer tens of thousands of scores for thousands of different whiskies. The new 'Specials' section on Malt Maniacs (scroll to the bottom of the home page to find it) offers tasting notes for a few dozen recently released single malts. As far as my personal ' Track Record' is concerned; I've stopped updating it after I passed the 2000 malts mark, but the last time I checked malt mileage was +/- 2400 single malt Scotch whiskies seriously sampled & scored... |
|
|
|

