The scheme received unanimous praise and the initiative was widely saluted. Here was a company that would sacrifice more than £50k to pour whisky for enjoyment. Of course, I entered the ballot. And did not win.
Last Friday, out of the blue, I received an email from idealrichard, once a regular at our tastings, who has been sucked into other duties for the past three years. He had been chosen and asked me if I wanted to be his guest. How nice is that?
And here we are tonight, waiting to be taken downstairs at Milroy's for the tasting. Once there, in a cask-shaped alcove, someone realises we have not had the introduction upstairs. Thinking it will be a five-minute affair, I leave my stuff in the alcove (that will trigger some teasing from all, later on) and proceed upstairs, to a hidden room behind a curtain. There, a brand ambassador whose name I cannot recall tells us a little about Craigellachie and pours the 13yo and 17yo. I take no notes (my notebook is downstairs), but like them quite a bit. The 17yo especially, which is much more refined and complex. The other two attending with us admit they have never tried Craigellachie before, which surprises me. I am also surprised that the girl promptly tells us what we are supposed to smell and taste in these two, as I know suggestion is almost impossible to overcome. The bits of history she tells are more interesting to me, as is the information that Craigellachie gets its malt from Glen Esk Maltings and that it is oil-fire dried for them -- the only distillery in Scotland with such a requirement. I ask whether the fact their age statements are prime numbers is a deliberate choice: it is. Just do not mention the 33yo and, now, the 51yo. ;-)
It is only ten to fifteen minutes before we are back downstairs for the main act. Georgie Bell introduces the bottle: it was a single cask of whisky distilled on the 22nd December 1962 and bottled in 2014. There is a chance the proprietors wanted to wait another couple of years, for this to be a prime-number age, but at 40.8%, the ABV in the cask was too low to take that risk. As it turns out, it was even lower by the time they actually bottled it: 40.3%. Bell then talks us through the idea of having a draw and pouring this for the lucky winners for free, instead of selling it "for hundreds of thousands of pounds," which is extremely optimistic for a Craigellachie, even at that age, I think to myself (compare with Glenglassaugh 53yo, RRP £5300 or Bowmore 50yo, RRP £22000 -- even the almighty Black Bowmore 50yo had an RRP of £25000, and Craigellachie is not Bowmore, in terms of desirability -- but I digress). Bell gives us some tasting notes as well, which I do my best to ignore: I am after my own impressions, not a list of nuances that an employee of the producer's tells me I should find in this whisky, thank you very much.
The liquid.
Craigellachie 51yo 1962/2014 (40.3%, OB Single Cask, Refill Bourbon Hogshead, C#001940, 51b): note the number of bottles! Nose: ha! The unmistakable depth of something very old indeed and, more precisely, a depth that is seldom felt in anything distilled on this side of the 1960s. All sorts of flowers, starting with jasmine and lilac, but also fresh paint and new match sticks. Soon, satsuma foliage joins the dance, as well as dried satsuma peels and citrus jams. It is a very complex nose alright, and I am delighted to be here, already. Mouth: soft, mild, almost weak. It is gently grassy, with a pinch of ginger, perhaps rose-petal jam and squashed apricot, too. Good enough palate, but probably too soft. Those two youngsters upstairs at 46% now appear to have been a terrible idea, numbing the mouth in a way that this old and frail juice cannot shake back into shape. It feels tired, with the texture of watery peach nectar. Finish: fresh, but also dry, it has bay leaves, crushed lemongrass, frankincense and rose-petal jam. It grows fruitier with each sip, and the whole is long and bold, very long, in fact. The lasting impression is that of rose-petal jam on balsa wood, sprinkled with lychee juice. An excellent dram, somewhat let down by a rather weak palate. I had it at 8 because of that, but the growing finish note encourages me to push it up a bit. 9/10
Was it worth it? Well, yes, of course. What an opportunity! Thanks, idealrichard.All the same, if the initiative is laudable, I thought the implementation, although very corporate (branding everywhere, goodie bags, complimentary cocktail and all), was a little clumsy, in parts.
- Of course this is a publicity stunt to promote the core range, yet serving two core-range drams prior was a huge mistake that desensitised the taste buds before the frail old lady. A mere look at the ABV pretty much makes that clear
- A publicity stunt, by its very nature, is meant to attract new customers; that worked, since some had never had a Craigellachie before. The unfortunate downside is that many who have tried Craigellachie and like it did not have a chance to try and like this special one. Perhaps those newcomers may not have appreciated it as much as others would have
- Crucially, if having a maximum of eight guests per session makes it a more intimate event, it means that sessions have to be short to roll guests in and out quickly, so all can attend over the course of two evenings. Result: we spent less than twenty minutes with a dram that, given its age, would have required an hour or two
- Finally, the cask-shaped alcove is an attractive novelty, but not the most comfortable
- I will not talk about the incense, lit at the entrance of the venue; it could have ruined the nosing, but did not -- phew!
Still, the above is very minor discontent to balance what was a good experience, nonetheless. I am sure a move like this one will attract attention and respect for a distillery that, not ten years ago, was completely overlooked. Considering the quality of their products, I say it is deserved.
