January 27, 2016

Tasting ultra-rare Lomond

A little while ago, I got an old Inverleven from a friend (through another friend), which I had never tasted before. Very cool, isn’t it? Sadly, I hadn’t got any other Inverleven left in WF’s sample library, so it was impossible to do a duet, let alone a trio or a quartet. So there was a kind of dilemma, either wait until we found another Inverleven, or break our rules and choose other sparring partners. You got it, that’s what we’ll do today, and to keep some kind of consistency, I thought we should stay in the Lowlands, and only select old whiskies from closed distilleries. For instance, one old Rosebank and one old St Magdalene. How does that sound? Well, fine I’m sure, but not so fast, that’s not what we’re going to do, mind you. Because in fact, it is not just any Inverleven that we’ve got, it’s a Lomond (no, not a Loch Lomond)! Lomond’s only been bottled as a single malt twice or thrice, so it’s extremely rare. And I think we’ll rather try to find another Lomond still malt whisky as the sparring partner. Sounds good?

Ballantine's Dumbarton distilling complex, demolished in 2006

Lomond 1972/1992 (58.3%, Scotch Malt Whisky Society, 98.1)

This is that rare bottling of Lomond, one of only two ever done by the honourable SMWS. Lomond was made at Dumbarton, alongside Inverleven, in a Lomond still that’s now at Bruichladdich, where it’s used to make gin (the still is nicknamed Ugly Betty), while Inverleven’s pot stills are in use at Waterford Distillery in Ireland. In a way, Lomond was to Inverleven what Mosstowie was to Miltonduff (more about Mosstowie later). In case you don’t know, a Lomond still is more or less a column fitted to a pot still, and it seems that the one at Inverleven/Dumbarton, so the very one that was used to make this whisky, was the first ever built, although Littlemill had already been using a similar set-up (reflux column). Colour: gold. Nose: starts both quite oaky and a little floral and perfumy, with scents of rose petals and, perhaps, lilies of the valley. That’s the path it’ll follow all along, with whiffs of orange blossom water, and perhaps cranberries and gooseberries. I find it relatively discreet, but water might help. With water: it’s rather oak that comes out more, and it would come with some grass and some, well, some sawdust.

Mouth (neat): it is a whole pack of liquorice allsorts mixed with jelly babies or beans. All flavours are there, but citrus dominates. Orange drops, marshmallows, bubblegum… In a way, it reminds a bit of light style rum, such as some Cubans, but with more fruity flavours. There are even strawberry bonbons. With water: once again, the oak comes to the front, but the fruits won’t give up. All of Haribo’s products, beans, babies, crocodiles, banana or strawberry-shaped sweets, all that. It’s not unpleasant at all, quite the contrary, we’re somewhere between a malt and a grain, if you like. Finish: short to medium, on more or less the same flavours. There’s still some oak, but I do not find the aftertaste too drying. That’s good. There’s a little coconut, though. Comments: it’s extremely rare, but it’s neither Malt Mill, nor Stromness. I mean, I wouldn’t say this whisky’s got a huge personality. But it was very fine, finer than many grain whiskies if you ask me. I’m really glad I could taste this utter rarity, thank you Andrew B.! SGP:630 - 80 points.

Ugly Betty at Bruichladdich

And now, a new Mosstowie…

Mosstowie 35 yo 1979/2015 (48.1%, Signatory Vintage, bourbon barrel, cask #25756, 171 bottles)

Isn’t it great that Signatory keep issuing some Mosstowies, even if the general public do not seem to have any clues? Mosstowie was distilled at Miltonduff only between 1964 and 1981 (Lomond/Inverleven had started in 1956 - some rather say 1959, forgot to say), but the name became kind of famous because of some Italian gentlemen who imported and distributed a few Mosstowies that they had sourced from G&M. Once again, the Italians were pioneers. G&M keep issuing some from time to time, but sadly, they seem to go relatively unnoticed. Maybe because the average whisky lover isn’t curious enough? Colour: straw. Nose: there are similarities and differences with the Lomond. On the one hand, it’s got the same kind of fruitiness, albeit toned down and a little more citrusy. On the other hand – and maybe that’s the older age – it’s got many more herbal notes, including fresh mint and lemongrass. After a few seconds, you’d almost believe you’re nosing an old chartreuse or Bénédictine, which I find lovely provided the palate won’t be totally in keeping with the nose. Let’s see… Mouth: lovely indeed. The oak seems to have imparted piny, sappy flavours, while the spirit remained very citrusy and herbal. Imagine a blend of pastis, chartreuse, and limoncello, plus a drop of coconut liqueur. Perfect body and strength. Finish: quite long, fresh and mentholy (as when you just brushed your teeth), with a sweeter and fruitier aftertaste? Oranges. It’s interesting that after all these years, the oak never managed to taint the spirit. Comments: it’s a very excellent truly rare and genuinely old whisky at a very fair price, I think Signatory deserve our loudest applause! SGP:661 - 89 points.

Good, we’ll stop here. We could have had some Scapa as well, as they still have an ex-Lomond still that was modified later on and became a strict pot still, or a Loch Lomond indeed. Or a Glencraig from Glenburgie, but sadly, no Glencraig in the house at this very moment.

(Many thanks again, Andrew!)