Whisky Connosr
Shop Join

Hazelburn 12 Year Old 2012 Release

Average score from 2 reviews and 3 ratings 85

Hazelburn 12 Year Old 2012 Release

Product details

Shop for this

What next?

  • Add to cabinet
  • Add to wish list
Hazelburn 12 Year Old 2012 Release

The Hazelburn 12 is no longer produced by Springbank. It has been replaced by the 10. I lucked out when I popped in to a wine merchants I was passing in Dudley and found this bottle and a 2009 Benromach cask strength. I think I paid just under £50 for it.

It's a typical Springbank in that it's quite complex and changes a lot in the bottle. It's difficult to pin down.

It can be drunk neat but I find it's at it's best when it has sat for a good 30 mins or so and then has a little water added. A teaspoon in a 50ml pour is about right for me.


The nose on this is very interesting. It is both sweet and sour. Bees wax, oranges, maple syrup, honeyed cereal and leather.


Mouthfeel is not especially oily. Arrival is initially sweet but quickly goes sour. Similar flavours as present on nose initially bitter oranges, some leather, tobacco and the shadow of peat (it feels like it is peaty but it is not, it catches in the throat like a peated malt).

Arrival and development are close together. There is a fleeting note of peaches on the development.

The finish goes on and on and is generally sour. With tanins and tobacco.


A typical Springbank really. Complex. Almost too complex for it's own good. I wonder what casks were used? It doesn’t seem like a typical Bourbon or Sherry cask whisky. So I'd guess at a mixture of both.

Challenging and enjoyable but I didn't love it. It tries to tiptoe the line between sweet and sour but probably leans just a little too much towards sour to be truly wonderful.

Still to think this retailed for less than £40. It's a lot of whisky for the money at that price.

@Wierdo - Just having a nip of this now and considered doing a review until I double checked the label and saw it was 12 not 10 which puzzled me, so did some digging and saw your review.

I would agree with all those notes, even the little bit of peach on the development and that catchy throat finish with water added. Feels quite salty too. On first contact I might prefer it neat. 89 sounds about right - a very rich and full malt this.

A great find!

@Wierdo, so Hazelburn has the most water added to it. Makes sense.


Arguably the most traditional of Scottish distilleries, Springbank continues to surprise with its somewhat paradoxical commitment to innovation and pushing the whisky envelope. In addition to the Springbank malt, which is released at varying ages and with varying wood conditionings, the distillery makes a peated malt, Longrow, and now a triple distilled malt, Hazelburn.

While there might be some expected similarities between this triple distilled malt and some Irish malts, Hazelburn retains its Campbeltown character.

Color: Probably the least important of all judgment categories - but I would like to comment on the color of this malt: it has a slightly tarnished copper hue.

Nose: Lush sherry. Coconut cake frosting with some mint in the background.

Palate: Quite light body with a nice sherry wood/malt interplay. A bit oily; salty as well. It dries quickly with late spice buzz.

Finish: Quite long and dry with sherry, spices and menthol.

I like notes on the color—when the color's natural! I don't care what fake JW looks like, but if Springbank's whisky earns a tarnished copper hue entirely from its cask maturation, well that's good stuff.

Yes indeed. Sure wish consumers would stop automatically equating quality with darker whiskies.

Popular Hazelburn whiskies