Any One for a Scotch? - Page 118

+1. Said much better than I could have.

Yada yada yada. You're the head jedi, man, but be careful of that group-think japery. I think this is the second time in all the time I've been posting to this thread that I've raised the issue of what Scotch is or isn't. That's my opinion. I prefer my opinions to be like my whisky--singular and well thought out. Not a blend of popular ideas and second hand supposition. How about you?

The Japanese whiskies may be wonderful, I don't know...I haven't tried them (I don't pretend to be an expert on all things...not even all things Scotch). But neither have I panned or badmouthed them. Bottom line is that they are what they are and not what you wish they were.

it's the law lulz

I've had every Japanese whisky that gets imported into the U.S. legally. Several that aren't. Been to the "best Japanese whisky bars" in Japan and tried a mess of different single barrel offerings and new-make spirits. My opinion? Not for me. So few drams I actually enjoyed and I find Japanese whisky generally lacks the inexplicable magic SMS has. In the U.S., for the money, there are so many better SMS options that can be had for less than the usual Yamazaki/Hibiki bottles.

Do I think there are people who drop the coin on this stuff just because it's Japanese? Absolutely. And I want to tell these people that Japanese whisky was found on the idea of basically replicating Scotch whisky domestically... almost to the point of neurosis. But I also believe there are true enthusiasts... but these people don't buy U.S. market Japanese whisky.

As far as nomenclature and this thread is concerned, I'd rather be having this discussion than responseless posts of people having their first dram of Macallan 12yr, coming in here, and posting "hey I just had my first scotch and i like it!".

How's that for group-think?

I'm kind of with you on all of it. Not sure what you mean about "dropping the coin"...spending the coin or dissing the product? I don't have a thing against Japanese whiskies per se, they're just not Scotch regardless of what they're trying to copy.

Now if we had a thread about Single Malts...we could include Japanese malts, Irish malts and Scotch malt. I hear there's even some Welsh and English single malts. But then what about blends? No one can be all things to all people although some people seem determined to try.

And BTW, just to set the record clear...I don't believe I've ever said that Blended Scotch is not Scotch...technically or otherwise. To quote one of my go-to experts...and I do believe he is a bona fide expert...:

[And yes, it's kind of cutesy to try to do a Scots dialog in text but if you LISTEN (those who have the capability), it's also kind of charming.]

What I have said, however is that scrambling together a bunch or probably second tier whiskies (even if they come from first tier distilleries, you know they're not going to lend their best stuff to a blend) and then adulterating even that suspect quality with what amounts to Everclear, does not do justice to the malt or the expectation.

Beyond that, I don't understand why it is so hard to give these people their due. They feel strongly about their claim to the name (whether it be Champagne or Tequila or Scotch) and they feel strongly about their contribution to the joy of being human.

To make it small or inconsequential is just politics--the art of compromise and homogenization.

--
Edited by DWFII - 1/8/13 at 8:11pm

A lot of fire in that post, eh? But I can understand that. You are passionate, thats cool. Less cool, however, that you let your passion become close-mindedness. Its unfortunate that you haven't tried some of the Japanese whiskey steal shelf space from another lackluster Glenfiddich offering, you might actually enjoy them.

That said, your general tone towards everything not SMS has historically been disparaging. Some people like world whiskeys, some people like blends, etc. and they bring their discussion of them to this thread. It a scotch thread on StyleForum, not on WhiskyMag. There is no need to be pedantic about the technical and legal definitions of scotch. We all get your opinion and you are more than entitled to it. You certainly aren't incorrect and you know that, but you are somewhat stubborn and I think you know that too.


I agree with most of that. On a whole it is clear that Scotland is miles ahead of Japan in terms of delivering an enjoyable product across the board at almost all the important price points, and probably always will be. Japanese whiskeys, to me, taste technical. They are precise, they don't vary at all bottle to bottle or barrel to barrel, and they are very clean. Scotch is more dirty tasting. There is much more bottle and barrel variation. The tastes aren't that clean. And that is great. Eight times out of ten I'll go for scotch, but for those other two times there are plenty of phenomenal and world class Japanese, Irish, American (scotch style, not bourbon or rye), Taiwanese, Indian, Swedish...well you get the point...whiskeys that can really make you sit back and take notice that there are some amazing distillations occurring all over the world. Again, none will ever take the place of scotch, but I have no problem discussing them in the same sentence as scotch either. They are aspiring and recreating and for that they deserve praise and attention.

I wouldn't disagree with most of what you said, but it's worth noting that the self-acclaimed Yodas in this discussion often forget that they're not the only ones in the conversation.

As Bacon suggested, some people come here with no real sense of what is being talked about. It is a blatant misrepresentation to suggest that I am "knuckle rapping" anyone because I present some inconvenient facts. And they were facts--information, not just subjective opinion. I said, quite clearly that I didn't care if people talked about Japanese whiskey. I just want it to be clear for those who aren't jedi what is being talked about. It doesn't hurt anyone to come back to the beginning every now and again. To touch base, so to speak.

I agree that level of discourse in this thread often wanes pretty far off my interest level, but then again, everyone needs to start somewhere. I think the way that you sometimes present your "inconvenient facts," as you call them, is rather aggressive and has tones of speaking down, not education. I don't think that you indent to speak down to people, but the highly technical way in which you sometimes present information often betrays your intentions.

Again, I know that you are precisely correct, but I suppose I'm not bothered at all by the imprecise terminology often used, as I think that the actual, not legal, lines as to what is a scotch have been blurring rapidly in the last decade. That also seems to be the tone of the thread and of the world whiskey communities. Even some people in the Scotch community, like John Glaser, can't wait for the the strict terminology to be done away with.

I don't think that will ever happen, though it does make for an interesting discussion.

I don't subscribe to the grunt and ground-slap theory of communications, true enough. Nor the hit and run tactics of the Twit generation who cannot sustain their focus for more than 20 seconds or 144 characters, whichever comes first. I am who I am. I have a certain reverence for knowledge and a certain disdain for unsubstantiated speculation. The one thing I can't abide is the almost stereotypically "feminine" penchant for turning a discussion into a critical examination of how something is being said rather than what is being said.

This will never happen to me. Perhaps because I have a deep reverence for Tradition, perhaps because I'm part Scots...the better part...and perhaps because I think all such blurring/dumbing down is, well...dumb. And, beyond that, I believe we'll all be poorer if it does come to pass. Part of what makes Scotch so appealing (a small part...but exploited avidly enough in commercials and advertising) is the Traditions and the culture that gave it birth.

"Blur" is the stand-out concept in your above remarks. IMO, that's exactly what is wrong and exactly what I object to. Ideally, we don't experience any part of the world with just our nose or our palate. Ideally, Scotch engages our emotions and our intellects, as well. IMO, blurring those lines is, again, lowest-common-denominator thinking and leaves us with something that is the liquid equivalent of meaningless pap. Blur the definitions=blur the distinctions=blur the taste and the uniqueness. Why?!!! What's to be gained? The ability to seem to communicate without the responsibility or the commitment of actually communicating?

And after all this blurring, what have you got?! More importantly, what will you have you lost?

There are lots of wonderful tipples in the world...some old, some new. The best part of wisdom is to enjoy them for what they are and not, from some misplaced sense of modernism or liberalism, what you wish they were or what they're pretending to be.

IMO...
Edited by DWFII - 1/9/13 at 6:33am

The discussion is making me want to drink. Can we get back on topic, this is a pretty cool thread.

Well since I stared this discussion let me restart another one.

I just recieved a bottle of Glenffidich 21 Grand Reserve finished in rum casks as a gift.

Has anyone tried yet?

I liked it a lot, very smooth and a little sweet

Sounds nice, I like rum or sherry cask finishes.

So glad to see some Mortlach drinkers on here, I've never met anybody in person (at least in the States) who knew what it was. I picked up two bottles on my last trip to Scotland at the recommendation of a waiter at the Ubiquitous Chip, couldn't be happier. Another good Speyside distillery is Ben Romach...but I prefer the living waters of Islay myself. I did take a tour of the Highlands Park Distillery, which was fantastic, although I haven't sprung for a bottle of their 18 yet.

Am I the only one that doesn't really get whiskey? The only whiskey I can stand drinking on the rocks is Jameson (it is somewhat enjoyable to me). I have some Makers Mark (not scotch I know) but I need to put like 10 ice cubes in there and let it melt a fair amount before I can even begin to sip and taste the different flavors. Otherwise it just tastes like straight hard alcohol.