Damn it Arran

@OdysseusUnbound Agree, I think we're basically saying the same thing. Though, isn't it a bit unfair to write all non-age-statements off as shady marketing?

My impression is that there does seem to be a trend whereby distilleries mix things up just to be able to jump on the current whisky bandwagon. I think e.g. Arran has compromised their brand with all these new NAS and cask-finishes... I'd be bold enough to say that also Benromach has fallen into that trap with recent CS varieties that felt too young (whilst discontinuing the venerable 100/10)... and Balblair's recent redesign and shift from vintage to age statements (with accompanying price-hike) seems to have gone down like a led balloon.

Then again... I don't see many US / Canadian whiskies fronting with an age statement, and people still seem pretty happy.

So, maybe we don't dislike "non-age-statements", but rather "abandoning-age-statements-just -to-be-able-to-cram-out-too-young-whisky-that-may-or-may-not-have-it's-youth-hidden-by-overkill-cask-finishes"

All this talk of Arran. I feel left out because I don't own any of it, though I get my Arran fixes at my sister's house. She owns a couple of them, Sauternes and Amarone (a good batch of Amarone, Ontarians). As to the 10 yo, I'll have to try it again. I was never at all impressed with it the first 2 or 3 times I tried it. Maybe another batch. I posted about tasting a whole bunch of Arrans in around 2012, but at that time no one else on Connosr was drinking or getting excited about Arran. I remind myself that we are all doing this at our own paces.

@RikS I don't think the non-age-stated whiskies themselves are "shady". Age is one variable in the final character of the product, and there are many other variables. The shady aspect, to me, is the idea propagated my many distilleries that NAS is a way to give consumers mostly older stock brightened up with just a touch of younger whisky at a price point lower than if it had an age statement. The marketing speak is disingenuous, but many of my favourite whiskies (scotch, Canadian, American) don't carry an age statement. Taste and perception are separate things. I can love one and hate the other. That's my only real point.

It's no secret that Wild Turkey Rare Breed is a mix of 6-12 year old bourbon, but we don't know how much of each is in a given batch. And that's fine; the product is excellent and the price point is fairly consistent. I'm a fan of Laphroaig Triple Wood, and after watching John Campbell explain it in a video, I'm fairly certain that the final product is a vatting of 8-13 year old whisky. But I'd still like to know the exact proportions. And that video is several years old. It's possible that the more recent batches of Triple Wood are 5-9 years old. Without an age statement or full disclosure, there's no way to be sure. It's fairly well-documented that earlier batches of Uigeadail were richer (or perceived as richer and better) than more recent batches, allegedly because of the older stock that earlier batches contained and new ones don't have. Is there any truth to this? Is it just internet rumour? I have no idea; and without any age statements or batch "recipes", very few people know the truth. That said, I've enjoyed every Oogie I've tried, but maybe I'd be singing a different tune if I'd been a fan of it for over 10 years...

@OdysseusUnbound i can say with absolute certainty that I was richer before I started buying lots of whisky. Money wise that is. Now I'm richer in experiences.

@RikS True dat! The value which my sister holds which I have taken most to heart is that experiences are more important than possessions. To my self from 40 years ago hearing that, it was a shocking idea at first. But now I am a full subscriber. "You can't take it with you."

@RikS ‘So, maybe we don't dislike "non-age-statements", but rather "abandoning-age-statements-just -to-be-able-to-cram-out-too-young-whisky-that-may-or-may-not-have-it's-youth-hidden-by-overkill-cask-finishes"’. Very well said.

although I would prefer if more/all whiskey came with an age statement. As @OdysseusUnbound mentioned it is just one variable but a pretty big one.

It seems as if Arran have gone about this back to front: By that I mean, they started out with mostly age stated whiskys that many thought weren't quite 'there' yet but had potential. They stuck to it and seemed to 'come of age' about 5-6 years ago, with many critics celebrating their style and quality. Just as their reputation seemed to be cementing and further growing they then drop some of their most popular expressions and go on a NAS binge?!

Hey ho - wish I'd bought some more of the 14 but no way I'm paying secondary prices for it. There's much out there that is better at that price. I may have to pick up a Bothy QC at some point though.

@RianC is the 14 shooting up on secondary??

@RikS - I've seen a few bottles recently (which may suggest not that many are biting?) for under £60 but most are that or higher. It's not that much of a hike and the RRP of £45 was good value but even so, I would rather put my cash elsewhere.

@RianC Yea, it seems it's still available on Amazon too +£5 delivery. I do have one in stock, which I intend to drink(!) but if it becomes Glendronach 15 madness, then I may reconsider lol

@RikS I have 1 opened and 2 unopened. We’ll see after the one is gone in a few months what the market looks like.

@RianC What's the price of the 18 over there? It's such an unusually good price here, or at least in Alberta, that I am not having too much trouble getting over the loss of the 14.

They have a full range of Arran with age statements at Shawan in Baltimore for those who are interested. The Sauternes cask, which was my fave when I sampled it, was there too.Under 100$, if I recall. I was too busy with the Amrut Peated cask and Springbank 12 CS to pay the Arran any mind.

@casualtorture were you playing on the Rocky Horror Picture Show in your thread title? www.youtube.com/watch