WhTN: Caol Ila, Islay, Connoisseur's Choice 12y

(WhTN: = Whisky Tasing Note)
A half-bottle of Gordon & MacPhail's Connoisseur's Choice bottlings. Distilled in 1994 and bottled in 2006. Bottle strength 40%, tasted unwatered. Distinctly smoky but still with a refined elegance and even some orange zest in the background, adding a slight highland note. Smokey and distinctly fruity taste, a little sweet, hints of ripe peaches and dried figs. Ending with smoke and fire but still refined and not overly powerful or smoky. Very nice indeed. I think I need to get the normal bottlings to be able to compare.

Img_5999.jpg

Cheers,
Anders

I adore single malts, but will admit to being a bit underinformed re the particulars of scotch language. Would "Distilled in 1994 and bottled in 2006" make it a 12 year old?

The bottle of Caol Ila I had last winter was quite good. I don't remember the particulars though.

Nice to see I'm not the only one that posts single malt notes once in awhile!

I wonder how that bottling compares to the regular one. Let us know if you find out.

[Jenise]

I love single malt scotches but am not well-versed on the lingo. Does "distilled in 1994 and bottled in 2006" make it a 12 year old?

I love single malt scotches but am not well-versed on the lingo. Does "distilled in 1994 and bottled in 2006" make it a 12 year old?

Yes, Jenise. The age of a whisky is determined by the time it has spent in the barrel(s) (mostly used American Bourbon casks). This practice is because it does not develop much after it has been bottled. So the fact that this one was distilled in 1994 and bottled in 2006 makes it 12 years old.
This particular bottling might come from a single barrel that was selected and bought by the "independent bottlers" Gordon & MacPhail. Normally, what's in a bottle of whisky is a blend of several barrels.
Cheers,
Anders

[Jenise]

Yes, Jenise. The age of a whisky is determined by the time it has spent in the barrel(s) (mostly used American Bourbon casks). This practice is because it does not develop much after it has been bottled.

Exactly what I thought, which is why I didn't immediately grok their more complicated way of saying so. Doesn't matter which 12 year span it was, just that it was 12 years, right?

Doesn't matter which 12 year span it was, just that it was 12 years, right?

That's right, Jenise, since vintages are of less importance for Whiskies.
/A

Exactly what I thought, which is why I didn't immediately grok their more complicated way of saying so. Doesn't matter which 12 year span it was, just that it was 12 years, right?

I think it's just their way of distinguishing this special bottling (as Anders says, probably from one barrel) from the regular Caol Ila 12 year old, which would be blended for stylistic consistency across a number of barrels. Some of these special bottlings remain on the market for years, so it also helps distinguish those from each other. A whisky distilled in 1994 and bottled in 2006 might be quite different than one distilled in 1995 and bottled in 2007, perhaps not because the distillery changed practices but more likely mostly because of barrel variation. Both 12 year old Caol Ilas, in other words, but different from each other and from the regular bottling. And the exclusivity and relative rarity of the dated special bottling probably helps the marketeers charge more

Actually, I've noticed that the bottlings from the independents are generally cheaper than those from the distillers. As an example, the Macallan 25 year old retails for $549 in my area, while the Prime Malt bottling of the macallan 30 year old is $499. Of course, it all depends on the relative rarity of the particular Scotch. Rosebank last distilled in 1993, so the remaining stocks are all there is ever going to be of Rosebank, which is one of my favorites.

I was pretty much a strictly highland drinker until my first Caol Ila, I thought it the most unrepentant smoke and peat sip that somehow managed to pull it off. I think the one I had was an Adelphi bottling. I used to buy quite a few of the Adelphi's but that all came to an end when Chadderdon picked up the portfolio and the prices doubled.

Kevin

Actually, I've noticed that the bottlings from the independents are generally cheaper than those from the distillers.

That can be true. It can also be true that the bottlings of the independents might not be as good as those from the distillers, depending on both your palate and luck of the barrel, of course. By the way, I found a site with a list of Caol Ila bottlings. I don't see Anders' listed but the list of different bottlings is mind boggling. It well illustrates my point of why distillers put dates on bottles but I had no idea: http://whiskyfun.com/Caol-Ila.html

Damn. That's more complicated than Burgundy!