Master of Malt Tamnavulin Single Cask 16 Year Old

For people with a sweet tooth

Reviewed by
Connosr member:

WhiskyNotes

Date:

14th Jan 2010

Reviewer rating:

About this score:

The average score for this whisky is 81.

Tamnavulin samples Try before you buy >>

Best price to buy online:

Find the best price to buy Tamnavulin whiskies online

Tasting Notes by WhiskyNotes

Nose: malty start with grapey accents. Some pears. Becomes significantly more flowery and a lot sweeter after breathing. Vanilla. There’s also a vegetal side to it, like raw cabbage. That may seem strange, but it’s quite enjoyable.

Mouth: starts very sweet but grows maltier (and even sweeter). Apples and pears. Nice oak. Hints of pineapple sweets and violets. Lemon squash. Some notes of lavender. Getting slightly spirity and even perfumy in the end, but nothing too bad. More or less the same with water.

Finish: long, grainy and very sugary. Loads of honey with hints of oranges.

Too sweet for me but a decent malt overall. I prefer the other Master of Malt releases.

Whisky details

Distillery/Brand:

Tamnavulin

Bottling:

Master of Malt Tamnavulin Single Cask 16 Year Old

Region:

Speyside

ABV:

55%

Colour:

Sunlight

Master of Malt Tamnavulin Single Cask 16 Year Old For people with a sweet tooth Reviewed on 2010-01-14T11:36:00 scoring 81/100 by WhiskyNotes

Subscribe to follow this discussion

Comments

WhiskyNotes wrote:

By the way, full review on http://www.whiskynotes.be/2010/tamnavulin/tamnavulin-16-years-old-master-of-malt/

14 January 2010 11:38

Jean-Luc wrote:

Just a thought... 6 stars here but 81/100 in the full review, guess you have a personal scale to convert marks-out-of-100 to the a star rating?

14 January 2010 12:50

WhiskyNotes wrote:

I don't agree here. Since the majority of reviews is in the 75-90 range, the stars don't give enough difference. So 50/100 would be 1 star or so, to stretch the differences. Explained in another way: I only give stars for marks above 50/100.

14 January 2010 13:03

Jean-Luc wrote:

Thanks for explaining @WhiskyNotes, that makes perfect sense.

14 January 2010 13:14