Is life too short to drink bad whiskey?

They don't call this club, "Whisky Connoisseur" for nothing.

Touche Victor. Excellent point, I guess my long winded way to acknowledge what most of you already have come to realize.

Yes! A resounding yes! I myself don't mind trying bad or mehish whiskies, but purchasing full 700+ml bottles. No way. I'd rather spend my whisky money on something my wife, my friends and myself will all enjoy.

I purchased a bottle of Canadian Club 12 yr old on the basis of the 2012 Whisky Bible. It tastes and smells like permament marker. It still smells and tastes of marker after 3+ months of leaving it open to oxidize. I can't even bring myself to make whiskies and cokes with it.

The $45 bucks I spent on it would have been better spent on an entry level bourbon such as Makers Mark or saved up for a nicer bottle.

I'll always purchase quality over quantity any day because I think for most of us here, we're not drinking to get drunk or buzzed. We're drinking for the flavors of the whisky. That's the point. If it tastes bad I can always go drink moonshine and usually pay a whole lot less.

I strongly agree with RobertH, however, I am also glad to have cut my teeth on many 'inferior' blends and cheaper stuff in the my earlier whisky drinking years, so that I can better appreciate the finer quality drams now. When I first got bitten by the single malt bug, I tossed all the cheaper stuff to the side and spent the first year seeking out increasingly superior (and costlier) brands, as my palate developed increasing sophistication. That was not good for my budget nor my enjoyment I've come to find out! I tend to acclimate to things quickly, and I was jonesing for older more premium brands fast - if the Glanfarclas 12 is good, the 25 must be better, and the 30 must be excellent, and must be tried, and so on. I'm still relatively young and plan to enjoy whisky for a lifetime. So I dip into my Teacher's every now and then to keep my tastes from evolving too far into the 'hedonic treadmill' so that when I try the high-end stuff it blows my socks off.

I have struggled also trying to find the balance of cost and drinking stuff you enjoy. I started drinking bourbon a few years back basically just to "have a drink," if you know what I mean. I could pour a couple ounces of an inexpensive bourbon like Elijah Craig 12 and be perfectly content because it was just a good drink. Then as I started trying the expensive stuff like single malts, I started really appreciating the flavor of good whisky. That, combined with getting older and more mature, I have tried to gravitate away from the "having a drink" mentality and just focusing on appreciating the whisky in small amounts, which I really enjoy. But, it's still too expensive for me to buy the really good stuff all the time. So I find myself buying the cheaper stuff and just drinking it so I can buy a good bottle next time. But, I am wondering if I should just cut out the cheap stuff, drink less, and then buy the stuff I really like. I don't know - it's a tricky balance, because I certainly enjoy drinking often too ;-). SquidgyAsh is mostly correct though I think he's understating the value of a decent "buzz" from a moderate (~1.5 oz) glass of whisky! Who doesn't like that? MarsViolet is absolutely right too - you can easily get sensitized to drinking only good stuff and lose your appreciation. So, I agree you need to not get carried away, and drink some cheap(er) stuff occasionally.

Basically, I don't know the answer, but I'm trying too figure it out too. I'm trying to decide on a budget and rate of consumption that finds the optimum balance. It's extra tough if you actually have a bit of disposable income; I mean I currently could afford to spend a little extra on my bottles of whisky, but just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I think I got lucky on this topic. My oldest friend introduced me to good entry-level single malts off the bat with the Balvenie Doublewood and Bowmore 12. Since then, I only tasted two bad whiskies (Glengoyne 10 and a horrible McClelland). I honestly don't want to downgrade!

Valuewhisky made a good point , I too stopped "having a drink" and gravitated from drinking crap beer to investing time and researching my next dram. Each time I take a sip, I enjoy the multiple facets of this wonderful nectar of the gods.

Plus, I can't afford hangovers anymore since I have too much damn work to do!

Since I don't drink much, I can buy one good bottle every month or two and not blow too much money. In theory anyways. In practice, I struggle to not buy a bottle every two weeks. It's just so good!

So just drink what you like, do what you like. We'll all be dead soon enough so why not have pleasant experiences until then?

It all depends on experience and what you are looking for - life is too short to waste time with bad company, be it people, circumstances or whisky. I rather buy less and better quality than quantity but there are some reasonably priced whiskys (JW black label, Laddie Ten, Redbreast 12, laphroaig 10 cask strength, Old Granddad 114, BNJ... etc) which offer bang for the buck. Young and well made whiskys can be very satisfying and even if they lack the complexity of older bottles they have a lot to offer. My way is to taste as much as I can and I regularily do blind tastings (cover my eyes not to be influenced by the colour) which I highly recommend as it is both entertaining and great education.

I believe after getting off the single-malt escalator (where each bottle of whisky is more expensive than the last), one can settle down a bit and keep in stock a few very good lower-priced brands (like Highland Park 12, Talisker 10 or Macallen 12) for everyday drinking, and then occasionally dip into the pricier stuff.

Life IS too short to drink bad whisky, yes. But don't get hung up on price == "quality"!

Price can be quite variable: take Ardbeg Corryvreckan for example - WMP lists it for about £61-£80ish whiskymarketplace.co.uk//… however you can routinely pick it up at Heathrow for £45 if you happen to be on the way through.

As some people have pointed out here already, there's loads of "supermarket" whiskies which are magnificent: e.g. (IMHO) Talisker 10, Lagavulin 16, HP 12, Laphroaig 10, Glenlivet 18. Then there's great stuff which is still reasonably priced but might mean a trip to a liquor or whisky store: Glengoyne 10, Arran 12yo CS, Redbreast 12, Bowmore Tempest, and so on.

A connoisseur is someone who knows what they like and can articulate why they do or don't like something - not someone necessarily who has an extensive and obscure collection.

And the last thing you want to do is go splurge hundreds on a 40yo rarity from a distillery you love only to find that though it's prestigious as hell, it just tastes too woody for you.

There are some great points made here, from Maltster's quality over quantity to jasonbstanding's definition of what it means to be a connoisseur to dag's point about getting sucked into a marketing frenzy of escalating obscurity and expense in the latest single malt/small batch products. To a certain extent we live in the golden age of whisky with the extreme choices we have, yet some have pointed out that having too many choices can be paralyzing. I read somewhere that Winston Churchill's favorite whisky was JW Black (or perhaps red). How pedestrian that would seem today?

While we have a ton of choices, a cynical part of me thinks that while 10 different expressions from a particular distillery (insert your favorite distillery, e.g., Highland Park, Ardbeg, etc., etc.) is great, the marginal differences in quality are not that profound to justify the extreme differences in price. Take Highland Park for example, if they made nothing but 12, 15, and 18, that would be enough for me. I understand there are some that get obsessed by trying every expensive expression. If people can afford it and want it and distilleries make it, that's fine. At some point in my life (say when I am older and the kids are grown and I have more disposable income), I will definitely feel like rewarding myself with the latest and greatest product. However, you emphatically do not have to lust after the latest obscure expression to drink outstanding whisky. I hope people don't get so caught up in the latest and greatest expressions that they think they are somehow drinking bad whisky if they only every drink HP 12 or Ardbeg 10 rather than say the most obscure new "thing" like Thor that costs much more but may not have a significant increase in quality. Lusting after the obscure expressions is definitely not typical given sales figures I have read, heck most people in the world would be fine just having Famous Grouse (made in part with HP) rather than having HP which they may not have even heard of.

There is also a a geographic element. Supermarket whiskies in the UK are not the same as supermarket whiskies in the US. I personally think Scotch prices might be setting up for a bubble in the US. I can literally buy two bottles of outstanding US whiskies for the price of one good bottle of Scotch. If production capacity increases and demand does not keep up, global prices could really tumble. It has certainly happened with other comparable products like wine and pu erh tea in the past.

@JeffC: Well said! Most entry level Whiskies from the major players offer good value and quality, albeit on the first rung of the Whisky ladder and it makes sound business practise: If a 10yo. Aberlour doesn't do anything for you, you are unlikely to fork out a much larger sum for an 18yo.

Some of the value for money Whiskies I enjoy (still) come from the aforementioned Aberlour, from Glenmorangie, Highland Park, Glen Grant Major's Reserve, Glengoyne and many others incl. the entry level Ardbeg 10yo. which is a little more expensive than most but what a wonderful introduction to the majesty of Islay!

Cheers.

Separate your blends into regular and high end blends (12yo +). Keep these for people who don't know about sinlge malts. Keep your sinlge malts aside for friends who would savor them & yourself.
It's bad to see a good whisky covering 4-5 cubes of ice, or even worse in a tall glass with 70% cola. Remember, you have a good chance of receiving good wiskey from friends when you give them good whisky yourself. If you run out of good whisky quickly then focus on a favorite 12 yo sinlge malt which costs usualy the same as a premieum blend.

@bourbondrinker "Separate your blends into regular and high end blends (12yo +). Keep these for people who don't know about sinlge malts."

...or make sure that you give decent whisky to people who don't know much about whisky so they can experience new things and find out that they do want to learn more? Share and enjoy etc.

@cowfish: I guess you're right. Good whisky for all then!!!!

jasonbstanding has a good point about the price/quality equation. The question says bad whisky, not necessarily cheap whisky and the two don't always equate.

I bought a bottle of The Ileach recently, the 40% version not the cask strength. I bought it on the strength of a gushing Jim Murray quote on the box. It is the only whisky in many years of whisky drinking that I can truly say is undrinkable. It will be the first whisky I have ever dumped down the drain. It is just smoke, no other flavours whatsoever. And it cost about the same as a Tal. 10 or an HP 12. Apparently the quote is from a Murray review in '08 and he has since changed his opinion. He should tell them to stop using it on their packaging.

Life is definitely too short for crap like that.