Talisker Storm

A Light Squall

Reviewed by
Connosr member:



27th May 2015

Reviewer rating:


About this score:

  • Nose: 21
  • Taste: 21
  • Finish: 21
  • Balance: 20

The average score for this whisky is 82.

Best price to buy online:

Tasting Notes by Victor

The reviewed sample of Talisker Storm is compliments of @Jonathan, and is from a bottle open for 2 months

Nose: lots of Talisker sea brine, and some of the characteristic Talisker distillery black pepper, wine around the edges, and malt in the background. There is fairly light peat and smoke. Medium intensity. Nice enough

Taste: goes quickly to very strong black pepper on the palate,...and salt. The other nose features remain but are overshadowed. This bottle has magnified the pepper since the bottle was opened. Peat and smoke are a little stronger on the palate than in the nose

Finish: strong pepper and salt last medium long, then fade to a soft brine on sweet background

Balance: Storm isn't very balanced, but has all the classic Talisker distillery flavours, with good intensity on the palate

I don't see any improvement by Storm over a good batch of the Talisker 10 year old. I see Talisker Storm as very drinkable, but not a bottle to lust after

Water added mellowed the nose, and enlivened the malt flavours on the palate. I prefer Talisker Storm with a little water added, and would rate it 3 points higher that way


Whisky details









Young Sauternes



Benancio wrote:

@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.

27 May 2015 04:06

hunggar wrote:

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.

27 May 2015 04:55

BlueNote wrote:

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.

27 May 2015 07:01

Victor wrote:

@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.

27 May 2015 16:20

Taco wrote:

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!

28 May 2015 16:13

BlueNote wrote:

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.

28 May 2015 16:37

Victor wrote:

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.

28 May 2015 17:58

BlueNote wrote:

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.

28 May 2015 18:18

Frost wrote:

@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

31 May 2015 03:17

Add a comment

You must be logged in to comment if you don't have an account why not sign up?

Whisky reviews by distiller (A - D)