Jim Murray's Whisky Bible 2017 - The Winners

Well, At least here in Ontario we don't need to worry about rushing out and buying it. And I sense the price of this rye is too high for even some die hard Connosrs...

CR Northern Harvest wins again for best Canadian whisky, meaning that a physician would probably be justified in diagnosing Mr. Murray with hepatic encephalopathy, especially after the cover of last year's book showed him to have severe jaundice...

Speaking of jaundice, I take a jaundiced view of the whole "expert" thing. It drives up prices and decreases availability for those of us who actually appreciate the nuances of a good whisky.

luckily, there is nothing on that list that I will be sad not to buy...

I actually saw a couple of bottles of Booker's Rye still sitting on a shelf in Albuquerque three weeks ago. The several of us were suprised it was still around available to be sold, until we saw the $ 499.99 bargain price tag. Now, with Mr. Murray's endorsement I imagine those $ 500+ Booker's are pretty easy to sell.

@Victor

I take it that @Victor is not going to make this one of the 10 bottles over the next three years?

A pity, because I know of no US citizen who would appreciate its quality (if the quality is there) more than you.

@Nozinan, I have a 2 oz sample of Booker's Rye promised to me. So I hope and expect to taste it. I've tasted lots of great rye in the past. It will be interesting to see how the Booker's stacks up.

I generally find I have a palate that agrees with a lot of Jim's favourites. However, where I usually differ is on his love of very strong barrel proof whiskies and mega-peated stuff.

I tried Booker's Rye and just found it way too boozy. Had an opportunity to buy one at $399 retail and wasn't interested. Got the WLW2015 and the THH 2015 and they are beauties. I finally got a bottle of CRNHR to see what all the fuss was about and really enjoyed it. Very delicate and fragrant rye whiskey. However, it's never lived up to that first taste since I've been back to it.

@MuddyFunster you're lucky... I never liked CRNHR right from the start...

@Victor I'm happy to hear that. I will try a rye if offered but it's not one of the genres I reach for regularly, so I probably would benefit less from trying it. I know that your sample will be put to good use.

Jim Murray has lost all credibility for me; I did succumb to the hype and bought a bottle of CR-NHR (when it came available again), and...well, I'm glad I only paid $35 for it. It's one of those bottles that will sit in the cabinet for a long time, as I have little desire to actually drink it.

And for JM to award it "Best Canadian Whisky" again--WTF? Has he never tasted some of the actually good Canadians? This will simply promulgate the idea that all Canadian whisky is good for little other than mixing (largely true, but there ARE some truly good ones!).

@Spitfire I'm in total agreement with you. I think in fact there is a possibility that Jim Murray id trying to give Canadian whisky a bad name by highlighting a mediocre at best expression.

What about Highwood 90/20? Lot 40? Wiser's Last Barrels? For goodness sakes, even Gooderham and Worts 4 grain is better than CRNHR!

I still have, I believe, half of a 50 cc sample that I reviewed earlier in the year. The CRNHR bottle I was given I donated to a raffle. And I'll get a tax receipt! Yay!

Before you're too hard on Jim Murray, you should be aware that there's been reports of some pretty big batch variations with Northern Harvest Rye. Mark Bylok has a review range of 78-93 for the batches he's tried.

The long and the short of it seems to be that if you can get your hands on a bottle of N3, grab it. That's what Jim Murray reviewed, and that's what Mark Bylok rated the highest. I've only ever seen N5 (and I look every time I'm in an LCBO) so N3s seem to be exceedingly rare - if not extinct.

And the latest (also per Mark Bylok) news is that newer bottles don't even have batch numbers printed on them.

All of this is per: whsky.buzz/blog/…

@Nelom, I have wondered since Day 1 of Mr. Murray's Crown Royal Northern Harvest Rye review whether he was given, either deliberately or not, a much above average batch sample to review. That would explain a lot, and make Jim Murray look less insane. Wide batch variation is a very big risk whenever Mr. Murray gives a high grade to a mass-produced product.

I've been stung a couple of times on weird Jimmy's WOYs. Old Pultenay 21 and Ballantine's 17 yr old to name a couple. Both decent, but not worth the price I paid for either.

I've always found Wiser's Legacy a very good and reliable Canadian.

@Nelom Yes, I've really enjoyed Century's Ninety-20, Wiser's Legacy, Gibson's 18, and various premium Forty Creek releases--all of which are in a different league than the CR NHR. There are some good Canadians.

@Nozinan But the thing is, the Canadian spirits industry is always touting their consistency--how their products are the same from batch to batch, year to year. That's the whole idea behind the blending techniques they use, they start with a base spirit and add flavouring spirits, which allows them to adjust for batch inconsistencies.

@Spitfire I don't disagree, but simply wonder if you switched the names to which your comments were addressed.

@Nozinan Yes, apparently I did. This forum uses a non-user-friendly platform, and I find it confusing at times.

It's taking an awful long time for the upgrade of this site to get from promise to reality. Those 2 featured reviews have now been up for 3 years.

@BlueNote

I'll bet you a dram that this site gets upgraded before we get electoral reform in Canada!

Haha, I don't like the odds on that wager. I think our golden boy is starting to waffle on that pre-election promise. But it will probably happen before single malt prices in Canada go down.

I for one have a hard time understanding why Murray is so revered. 96 points to mediocre whisky?

@Alexsweden Once in a while he finds a good one... the Yamazaki 18 was tasty..the 2-3 sips I had of it.

I will surprised many but I really like the CRNHR. Of course, I am among the lucky ones who can taste banana in whisky and this flavor is one of the reason I like this whisky, but there is also alot more to it. I suppose Mr. murray was probably seduced by its great balance and everybody knows that Mr. Murray doesn't need a power whisky to appreciate it, not that CRNHR is small in any way.

@Nozinan I guess you kind of have to find some good ones when sampling hundreds.. I'm more skeptical towards his scoring. I'm not especially familiar with his work but to me it seems that he is overly generous

He is particularly off-the-wall when it comes to scoring blends.

@BlueNote, about Jim Murray being out of sync with the taste of others in scoring 'blends', I think that the matter is pretty simple: Jim Murray likes the taste of wheat contrasted with the tastes of barley malt and/or wine and/or peat and/or rye. Most other vocal whisky lovers do not like those combinations of flavours.

That makes sense @Victor. It must be some sort of bias of his particular taste buds. But seriously, 96 points for Ballantine's Finest? Those are some weird taste buds.