Ardbeg 10 Year Old

What? No bottle code? How will we be able to tell the players without a progam? 700 or 750 ml?

Wel excuuuuuuuse me! 750mL, bilingual English/French label for the Canadian market, bottle code L12 184 07 45 6ML.

Thank you for the information, @talexander. How knows? We may one day get Ardbeg 10 batch comparison discussions in motion.

I knew that I risked marginalising my Ardbeg 10 yo review by labeling it as a 750 ml bottle (exiled to the colonies). I decided to take the chance.

Thanks for the bottle code!! Avoid the L13 003 XX:XX 6ML.

I don't consider the 10 an entry level dram. It is craft presented at 46% with no evidence of caramel nor chill filtration -please correct me if I'm wrong - my bottle is still sealed, I tried a miniature I bought.

I agree it's one of the cheaper ones (except at the LCBO), and can be found for 30% less in other provinces, but from quality and "overpower a newbie palate" points of view I don't put it in the same category as Glenfiddich, glenlivet, or something of that nature.

@Nozinan, I started to internally react the same way which you did when I read "entry-level" in the review. The words "entry-level" carry a lot of negative baggage around here on Connosr. In reading the review, however, together with the 95 point scoring, it seemed to me that @talexander is using the term descriptively and without a trace of negative connotation. Within the context of the Ardbeg distillery, the Ardbeg 10 year-old is indeed where one typically 'Enters' the world of their product line, because it is the least expensive and most available among their products.

'Entry-Level' is a descriptor which can be used not only as a patronising derision, even dismissal, but it can also very much be used in a descriptive non-connotative way, as, I would say, it is being used here.

Note that the Ardbeg 10 (as with, I believe, all Ardbeg products) is non-chill-filtered. But it doesn't say non-coloured on the bottle...however, the very pale colour tells me that it is likely non-coloured and they just felt that they didn't need to advertise that.

Thank you @Victor - yes that was my point of calling it Entry-Level. And, as I often do, I was being a little cheeky, knowing that many connoisseurs might balk at my describing it as such! But yes, it is absolutely entry level Ardbeg, which puts it in the same general category as your Glenfiddichs and Glenlivets 12. You may not like my lumping those three together, but I know some discerning whisky connoisseurs who prefer those two Glens over Ardbeg. It's all a matter of taste.

i can accept that the 10 is an entry level for Ardbeg. But to say it's an entry level "scotch" suggests it's as simple as a glenlivet/fiddich 12, and that simply is not the case. It may be an entry level Ardbeg, but by price or flavour profile it is NOT an entry level scotch.

Correct, @Nozinan - I wouldn't recommend it to anyone as their first single malt ever. I don't think anyone on this thread suggested it was an entry-level scotch, for the novice drinker.

Loved this review talexander. The Ardbeg 10 is a dram that I loved the very first time I had it. It has recently become one that I consider a favorite. I've purchased many bottles of this during my whisky journey!

@Nozinan, I respect and understand your view point, but I very much disagree. I have hosted a number of tastings for non-whisky drinking friends where I take them through 4 or 5 single malts. I always try and have several "accessible" drams (Glen "whatever") and a sherry matured whisky, and I usually always end with a peaty guy (like Ardbeg 10yo, Lagavulin 16yo or Laphroaig Quarter Cask). And I am always shocked at how many people prefer the peaty beast at the end over everything else. Truly, that was not my personal experience. BUT many people find the peat to their liking at their first go-round. And where I live Ardbeg 10yo is only a few dollars more then Glenfiddich (and cheaper then many other so called "entry level scotches." So I will always include it in a lineup for a new-to-whisky drinkers. You never know what they are going to connect with.

I've had the same experience as @Nock, only I may be taking the absolute noobies through 15 to 25 whiskies of all types and national origins on their introductory run. Some individuals are "That's ok" through everything until they have some Uigeadail or Airigh Nam Beist (or Thomas Handy, or George T. Stagg). Then they come alive. I have never held to the idea that anyone needs to start with the lesser-flavoured stuff. No one need enter the whisky portal through anyone else's idea of "Entry Level". There is always a process of self-discovery in the actual doing of the tasting...and that's why people should go out and taste a lot of whisk(e)y rather than just talk about it. There is no substitute for the actual experience of drinking and sniffing the whisky. The more whisky experience, the better.

Points taken, @Nock and @Victor!