Talisker Storm

@Victor. My liquor guy let me sample Talisker Storm and DE. Storm tasted like young whiskey, the pepper was more like white whiskey. I'd definitely buy the 10y over the Storm. Talisker DE is another story all together, it's great stuff, smooth, peaty, balanced. IMHO.

It seems we're on the same page here. I consider this one of the most unnecessary whiskies to hit the shelves lately. Pleasant though it may be, it fills no void and does little to compliment to the Talisker range.

Maybe we should be stocking up on 10 yr. old, guys before it disappears. Still a much preferable dram to the Storm (in a teacup). Thanks Victor for your usual concise and thoughtful review.

@Benancio, well, Storm has no age statement, so its raison d'etre is probably to use blending to meet demand in the absence of large quantities of aged stock. I was very impressed, though, by how much MORE peppery, typically Talisker peppery, this bottle of Storm was after being open for two months.

@hunggar, I am guessing that in Diageo's mind the 'necessary' is that Talisker Storm has No Age Statement. And they won't miss a step by already having Storm at a slightly higher price point now than is the 10. They will be completely ready (if and) when the Talisker 10 yo is no longer available. You have to give it to Diageo, they think ahead.

@BlueNote, as to stocking up, I think that the word is now out on age statements, WORLDWIDE. Age statement whiskies are disappearing right and left, Scottish, Japanese, and American. When you've HEARD or READ that it has happened to Talisker 10, it will alredy be too late to put in your supply. They do these things quietly, you know. NO ONE in the industry, without being forced or on the spot, will make the announcement in advance that they are eliminating a popular product and replacing it with a lesser one at a higher price.

I actually prefer this to the 10, but not for the price. However, it's more like a quality blend with mainly Talisker than a single malt. For a bit more $'s I just get the DE, which I really enjoy. Now that's a quality malt!

Yeah, I agree on the DE. It's about 10 bucks more than Storm here. It's a no brainer. I'll always keep some 10 around though.

On the continuum of 8 or 10 bottles of Talisker 10 from which I've sampled I would rate for quality Talisker Storm as being right about in the middle...which is to say I've had Talisker 10s which I've liked better than Storm and others which I liked less. My experience of Talisker 10 is that it is a very variable whisky, perhaps the most variable malt whisky which I have ever had. So, overall, Storm winds up being like a middling-not-the-best-batch Talisker 10 to me,...minus the age statement, and for more money.

I find Talisker DE to be quite variable too, depending on the release. Some releases integrate the sherry well, while others do not.

Even my second bottle of Talisker 57 degrees North tastes a good bit different from my very beloved first bottle of 57 N.

With Talisker, if there is any way I can, I want to taste from the batch offered for sale before I buy.

The consistency factor does seem to be an issue with Talisker. The current batch of 10 that we are getting here is very good. The 1996 DE was outstanding and the 2000 that I have now is good, but not as good. I'm tempted to check out the 2002 DE to see if a trend is developing. I have minimal experience with the 57N, but what I've had I liked a lot. It seemed to me to be the 10 punched up. Try before you buy is sound advice @Victor.

@Victory thank you for reviewing one of the bigger NAS releases on the market right now.

For the NAS expressions on the market that currently threaten their respective core range aged bottle, I feel this one is the better of them. Having said that, it is made redundant by Talisker 10. If this bottling where to replace the Talisker 10, then the Hague needs to get involved LOL