Technophobe wrote: » Generally drink my whiskey neat, occasionally adding a drop of water but mostly just neat.. Glenfiddich was one of my first Speyside whisky experiences all those years ago and is a whisky I like alot and probably have a certain affinity to now...Now, this may be just an ingrained habit/belief at this stage but I just feel it tastes better with one ice cube... It can't be 2 or 3; always has to be 1:D So probably not as interesting as you hoped but there you go
Black Sheep wrote: » I completely defend the right of people to take their drinks how they like them... Even the lunatic who blends his top shelf whiskys at home. I can't remember which of you that is, but I kind of admire it. "**** it, I'll add some Talisker 10 year old to this and see what happens".
If it's a matter of having the whisky at a lower temperature then it strikes me that if a large ice cube or ice ball from a silicon mould was used then you get the low temperature you're after but you don't get that relatively fast occurring dilution of the whisky that occurs if you use just one ice cube. At that rate is there something to be said for actually chilling the bottle the way Johnny Walker suggest you do with their White Walker, or the way Dalwhinnie suggest with the Winter Gold? I think the general consensus is 'no', but for someone that does want their whisky cold then arguably wouldn't it be as good a way as throwing ice in? If you actually want dilution to occur, as you do when you mix an Old Fashioned or a Negroni sometimes, depending on how you like it, then that's a different matter and I can see how a single ice cube works well, perhaps even stirred a bit. I personally wouldn't like to be drinking something where the ABV is kind of sliding down from one mouthful to the next, depending on the heat of the room, how much ice is in there exactly and how much the glass is in my hand, I think I would prefer consistency.
the beer revolu wrote: I really wish this desire for whiskey in boxes would just go away. It is pointless extra packaging and cost that provides no purpose whatsoever.
adrian522 wrote: for me it just goes straight to the Bin as soon as the bottle is opened. I can understand wanting the box if you plan on keeping or gifting the bottle though.
odyssey06 wrote: » Something a bit different tonight. Templeton Rye Signature Reserve 6 year old, a sample via Dick Macks. Lovely stuff. . Good review here:https://whiskeyconsensus.com/templeton-rye-6-year-rye-whiskey-review/
1901Rory wrote: » I think they are under new ownership but the previous owners of the Templeton brand were one of the most dishonest purveyors of sourced Whiskey. The class action lawsuit is mentioned in the review link you included. If anyone’s interested a google of “Templeton Rye controversy” will get you the full story.
Indestructable wrote: » Some Nikka tonight, courtesy of my brother at Christmas. Legend.
LollipopJimmy wrote: » Yes, it's delicious
Hogzy wrote: » The Double Oak is a lovely whiskey. Id get it over anything from Waterford.
Ivefoundgod wrote: » I'd echo these sentiments. Its the nicest of their range outside of the Mizunara Cask Strength IMO. I haven't had the Waterford yet but in terms of value if nothing else the Double Oak is a winner. I almost always have a bottle of it on the go, worth the extra few quid compared to the copper pot IMO.
dobman88 wrote: » Has anyone got an opinion on the Roe and Co 13 year old?https://www.celticwhiskeyshop.com/Roe-Co-Cask-Strength-Batch-2020-13-Year-Old
odyssey06 wrote: » I had a free sample. I preferred the curators series or the previous cs bottling. I think there are better ways to spend the 75e imo.
dobman88 wrote: » Tried this tonight and I dont like it at all tbh. Tried it neat, over ice and with water and nothing makes it any good for me. Real pity as I really wanted to like it since it was a gift. Oh well.
ElektroToad wrote: » Hi all - finally took the plunge on a bottle of Red Spot tonight. Just trying it out now and I do like it, it certainly has a lot going on, but overall I cannot help but think I'd prefer the Yellow Spot. Thoughts? Am i mad with no appreciation for the 'good stuff'? I admit I'm still a newbie and haven't tried many whiskeys beyond the mainstream stuff, but at a 50 euro price difference I would've assumed the Red Spot would be somewhat objectively better than Yellow?
accensi0n wrote: » Just opened a bottle of aberlour a'bunadh that I bought at Christmas. Lovely initial hit of cherries on opening. The rubber seal is a nice touch on the bottle.
limnam wrote: » Price has no real direct link to what you're going to enjoy imo Reminds me when Jim Murray's whiskey of the year was some sainsburys branded bottle at about 18 quid. From a guy who tastes about 4k whiskeys a year In fact price is probably more like to hinder your enjoyment if expectations are put in the price point.
BonnieSituation wrote: » What? Roe and Co can retail up to 45 quid in some places. There's numerous other whiskies I'd rather in and around that price point. At 30 though, it's a lovely drop. The price doesn't affect the taste, but it does affect whether you'd bother with it or not and whether it makes it to your shelf. I've a bottle there I got for 25 in Tesco at Christmas. Not a hope I'd ever own it at 45. Best whiskey pound for pound I had last year was the Kilbeggan 8yo single grain. Best whiskey I had last year was the Barry Crocket or the Ratheadon 1.1. Cost merely affects whether you'd own it and thus able to taste it, rather then in the tasting itself. It was fairly obvious what the poster was inferring with his comment about the price.
limnam wrote: » I'm not sure what you disagree with to be honest. "what?" to what? I think i see the problem. I wasn't replying to cadilac.
