When the pandemic started, people who were spending more time at home than they had planned were often admonished to take a training course and acquire a new skill. I will reveal something meaningful about my household if I mention that in response, my wife completed a course in nutrition while I completed a WSET course in spirits (with a focus on whiskey-tasting). I used to write whiskey reviews and interview distillers for another website, but I haven’t done a blind tasting in quite a few years. I was surprised and delighted then to recently receive a sample out of the blue from the great Whiskey Nut, who runs the very excellent Westmeath Whiskey World.
Before tasting it, this was my first question to Whiskey Nut:
I’d like to give it some proper consideration, but on the nose can I ask if it is a blend with a peated component?
I got the following answer back pretty quickly:
The sample isn’t a blend and the peated element is the one in question. If you’re already picking that up on a nosing, it confirms my thoughts on the liquid. Having said that, it would require a full olfactory and taste analysis to be positive!
So I got off on the wrong foot. I had the initial impression that this was a blended product, with one component of the blend being a peated whiskey. That’s not so uncommon but this sample was in fact a single malt. With no other information than that, it was time to sip slowly and ruminate deeply. This is what I came up with:
The colour seems like a healthy golden hue, but not so deep as to suggest a caramel additive. Not much legs, and the mouthfeel is clean and crisp. I tend to prefer that to whiskey that is like buttery syrup. I’d say it tastes like a young whiskey. Like the nose, I struggle to get past the smoke, but the broader flavour suggests maybe pine nuts or rosemary to me. Smooth and gentle and fresh, and not at all like the harsh old rust flavour of some scotch. The finish is not too strong in alcohol but mostly peat smoke to me also … but that’s probably more me than the spirit. I’m not sure I’ll ever be a big fan of peated whiskey but I’ve definitely had much more objectionable products. Is it a Silkie?
With apologies to the wonderful James Doherty, this was not in fact a Silkie. In truth I’m not a fan of peated whiskey, but if I were to make an exception it would be for a Sliabh Liag product. It turns out I was closer when I said that the flavour was smokey, but not like a normal scotch.
Malted barley is made by first soaking the grain until it begins to sprout, then drying it out to stop the germination. Traditionally, scotch distillers have dried their barley over smouldering peat, whereas Irish distillers have not exposed their grain to any smoke at all. There are exceptions though. The Silkie brand includes a range of top quality Irish peated whiskey, with varying blends that include peated components for all tastes. It turned out I had been tasting an exception in the other direction though:
Thanks for tasting notes, which capture for me the essence of this whisky – a soft kiss of smoke over a warm and rich body. The conundrum appears on the label of this whisky – Non Peated Islay Single Malt.
Technically that might be true. No barley has been smoked to get the ppm – parts per million measurement of smoke in the grain – rating. Yet other whiskies made at the same distillery are Heavily Peated – 55ppm and off-the-charts Peated – 250+ppm. It would appear to me this 0ppm offering was distilled after one of the former and picked up the smokiness from the stills, lyne arms, pipework and associated machinery during the run.
The sample you tasted was Bruichladdich Laddie 8 at a lovely 50% ABV. Bruichladdich also do Port Charlotte and Octomore for the peat heads like me. This residue peat phenomenon also was evident in the now discontinued Lockes Whiskey, which was put through the stills after a distillation of the peated Connemara offering. I think Kilbeggan Black is the new replacement for Lockes.
Interestingly when looking up reviews for Laddie 8 most bloggers failed to mention the very element that defines this whisky for me – smoke. Was it out of fear to question the Non Peated label? Did they not pick up the smoke?
Either way the whole transparency & honesty debate works both ways for me. Bruichladdich have been neither in explaining how the smoky element appears in Laddie 8 and consequently a whole host of bloggers have also been caught out by failing to mention the smoke.
Meanwhile you clearly did find it, along with myself and a small group of tasters at a Burn’s Night bash I did recently. For me Laddie 8 has been a thoroughly entertaining Single Malt, not only to taste but also for exposing the paucity of many a whisky blogger. The joys of whisky never cease to amuse me.
That is some really fascinating background to what is an incredibly interesting product. In their own tasting notes, Bruichladdich describe the character of the classic Laddie as “clean and fresh” with a finish that is “smooth and well rounded”. Whereas I was definitely way off on the alcohol content, overall I’m reasonably satisfied with my first blind-tasting effort in quite a few years:
Firstly, I got the alcohol content completely wrong. I perceived that spirit as mild and gentle, without much legs. I would never have guessed it was a near cask-strength whiskey. So many products that are over 50% ABV just knock your socks off at first sip. Compliments to the distiller. It must be difficult to produce this kind of “whiskey turned up to eleven” without being at all imposing or overpowering. How do you think they achieve this? Less heads and tails versus more hearts?
I’m pretty satisfied with the rest of the blind-taste though. I picked out the peat smoke residue, even though it is more subtle than most. I guess it would be a surprise if any given pot still had been used to make heavily peated whiskey for decades, then the same equipment was immediately able to produce a spirit without any smoke remnant.
Needless to say, the great Whiskey Nut had some more useful insights on alcohol content:
The strength is another interesting feature. It doesn’t define it and nor would you guess it from the tasting. Sign of a good whisky to me. So many whiskies are made to satisfy the cask-strength-crusade that actually lacks any intrinsic value apart from being strong.
I’ve had my tastebuds obliterated by other offerings also at 50%. Not good. Having said that each individual tastes in a different way, yet this Laddie 8 does appear to be held in high praise among a broad church of followers.
That was a lot of fun and I’m incredibly grateful for the blind sample. Now, I guess it’s back to the important business of selecting the most appropriate malt to accompany a victory over the English in the big game at the weekend … right, Whiskey Nut? 🙂