Which bottle did you just buy and why?

Picked up this Deanston 10, 57.5% ABV (unknown if this is cask strength, does not say). The why is, I am a sucker for sherried cask strength (?) and this was $79.95 cad, tax in at the LCBO. FWIW, very good stuff. The LCBO website shows this to be the 46.3% ABV version but it is not.

@Astroke I also picked up a bottle of this but have to open it. From the little research I did it seemed to be more of a European release, which would make sense as most of the reviews I saw were not in English. I think the abv that is listed is for the standard 10, a mistake on their part and I only hope that a correction wouldn't change the price. Happy to hear you enjoyed it, I'm looking forward to it!

@Mancub I read that 1200 bottles are destined for the US. Appears the UK may get shutout on this release. Whiskybase states only 5,160 bottles total.

Has anyone tried it? Is it worth picking up one or 2? Any mention of Sulphur?

@Nozinan If you are referring to the Deanston 10, no sulphur for me. Malty/sweet sherry and toffee. An absolute steal at $79.95 and more so at the LCBO.

The bottle above is the second one I purchased after 2 drams from the first bottle.

@Astroke I picked one up because of FOMO. Luckily it was a gift card purchase. I almost sprang for 2 in case they disappear.

On first sniff and sip (no water yet) I get a vegetal, low pitch quality that I remember from my Bladnoch 12. It's not too offputting, and I suspect some air will do this one good so I'm not adding water yet.

10 min in the fact that it's a PX finish (last 2 years) and not 10 years in sherry is becoming more noticeable. I'm getting some hints from the bourboncask, and a slight effervescence that wasn't there before. Very sweet, very rich. If this evolves well, I may yet regret not getting another.

@paddockjudge, this one will not be helpful for your Legacy work.

@PeatyZealot I found this at Charles' place for a pleasant $55 without tax. I've been collecting these barrel proof ECs since my first taste. Note the new bottle and label. B517 indicate a May release, the second in 2017. The proof seems to be the lowest in the continuing series. Hopefully the wow factor is not diminished!

Never had the pleasure of a Deanston cask strength but if I saw one I'd certainly buy it. Lovely distillery.

@plattvillepeat Only 62.1%! What a ripoff!

@plattvillepeat, I am happy to read that despite the new bottle and new label that the Elijah Craig Barrel Proof still retains its 12 year age statement. I wonder how long that will last.

@Victor Unless they plan to make the quality lower they would be best keeping it at 12. Though in this climate they can pretty much get away with anything. I man, would you buy an NAS ECBP? If I had the opportunity, I probably would.

@Victor The 12 yr age statement is on the small side label with the UPC. Maybe getting into the position preceding its future demise?

@plattvillepeat Try again:slight%5Ffrown:

Just replaced my Tamdhu 10. A very decent daily driver in a really nice retro looking bottle, and $15 off at BC Liquor Stores.

@BlueNote really? I guess if the bottle is driving it's ok, since it's not the one drinking.

@Nozinan @Victor but will EC retain the ABV statement? I hear whisk(e)y makers everywhere are preparing to "liberate their blenders from the shackles of ABV statements" and go with "flavour-led" expressions. I, for one, am excited to try NABV whiskies. "Stating the alcohol percentage on the label was a marketing strategy" said one PhD-wielding industry insider who wished to remain anonymous. "It's essentially meaningless, but it was a guarantee of quality in the minds of some consumers, so I guess we are partly to blame. But these new NABV releases are really great and allow us to be more profitahhhhh, more creative, so everybody wins." Dr Anonymous also said that "those who criticize this move are ignorant, know-nothing hot-heads." The SWA fully supports the move to NABV Whiskies....

@Nozinan HaHa, I meant daily drinker.

@plattvillepeat, that labeling certainly looks to me like Heaven Hill wants to make it easy to re-label the back side of the bottle of Elijah Craig Barrel Proof in the future. Not a good sign. I think that the whiskey would still be very nice as an 11 yo, a 10 yo, a 9 yo, an 8 yo, or a 7 yo. No age statement at all makes connoisseurs nervous, of course, and they/we often tend to expect the worst. A 7 yo EC age statement would take the brand down into its sister label Evan Williams' former age range. I think that a 7 yo Evan Williams Barrel Proof would be a dandy idea too. Even a 4 yo Evan Williams Barrel Proof would be fun. By contrast, in the world of Beam bourbon 7 years uncut/unfiltered = Booker's.

Just picked up Glendronach 21 and Port Charlotte 10yo 2nd Edition. I had the 21 when in Speyside and thought it was incredible. Creamy and fruity, lingering long after the last sip. I'm taking a flyer based on reviews for the PC. Here's hoping.

@Victor it's a good thing we have enough to last forever with much to share. So we don't have to buy anything if the terms are not acceptable.m Though you may run out of a specific expression.

But as Sheryl Crow sings..."it's not having what you want, it's wanting what you got."

@OdysseusUnbound , NAVB whiskies and NPS (no peat statement) will be the death of the modern industry. Just you wait. Whisky fans will definitely muster the cajones to boycott that stuff.

@MadSingleMalt I disagree. I think NPS will strengthen the industry. It's about flavour and many consumers are afraid of peat for no good reason. They will buy it, and like it, and then look for peat stated expressions, for which the distillers can ask even more money.

I just ordered two bottles to be shipped from a shop in NJ, just because I checked out their site on a whim after remembering how they were randomly still stocking the Springbank Madeira cask a couple years ago. These were 10% an impulse buy, and 90% a "recognize a value when you see it" buy according to the timeless principles espoused by one @Victor. Old, desirable stuff still at old, desirable prices:

•Kilkerran WIPX (by which I mean they didn't know which edition it was—but I'll be happy with any of them, and really stoked if it's 1, 2, 3, or 4): $43

•Bruichladdich Black Art 3.1, the one that's supposed to be the best: $200

I decided to go and pick up my first bottle of Macallan. I decided to go with an NAS. I am sure I paid a bit of a premium price for it, but I decided to buy this one out of curiosity. If I like it, I might just buy a second bottle to keep for the future.

Macallan Edition No. 1

@ajjarrett I've heard hood things about this. It's not available here but the edition #2 is priced at $175 so it's a no-go.

@Nozinan Oh, I see. I have read many good things about No's. 1 and 2, as well as a few not-so-good things, so mixed reviews. I got Edition No. 1 for 113 USD, and that is including tax. I am not sure if I payed a reasonable price, since I haven't tried it yet, but I will report about it once I do.

I don't think I would pay 175 dollars for this though. Definitely out of my price range, especially with other to choose from which are either under that price or close to it, that I would rather have.

@ajjarrett I've got a bottle. Great stuff. Enjoy

@nooch Thanks for the reply. I am looking forward to opening it up. A quick question, have you had the either Edition Nos. 2 and 3? If so, how do you like them in comparison with the No. 1?

@ajjarrett I haven't. I strongly considered getting the 2 because the reviews are great and I've heard from a few people that it's quite good. If I saw it for $100 I would pick it up. I haven't heard much about the 3.

@nooch Well, I know a shop not too far from that is selling the No. 2 for 95 USD, not including tax. It is definitely on my list, of whiskies to consider buying.