Whisky Connosr
Menu
Shop Join

Lagavulin 16 Year Old

Yeah, it's good

0 489

cReview by @canadianbacon

21st Jan 2014

0

  • Nose
    ~
  • Taste
    ~
  • Finish
    ~
  • Balance
    ~
  • Overall
    89

Show rating data charts

Distribution of ratings for this: brand user

I don't have much to contribute to the science of Lagavulin-tasting. I'm sure the world does not need another review describing the peaty iodine blast of the nose or the smoky finish. But in the interests of attempting to say something, here is an observation.

I am just getting to the end of my bottle, which I purchased some 3-4 years ago. There has been some chance for oxidation although it was probably over half full for about 60% of the time I had it. While I have been enjoying the final glasses, I've also occasionally been out and about and enjoyed a glass off a "fresher" bottle, since I'll often opt for Lagavulin or Talisker if it's on offer.

What I notice is that my older bottle loses some of the aggression of the nose, and that sweeter notes appear much more readily. The smoke, the peat, and the iodine are all still there, but it seems milder, particularly on the nose, almost like my Talisker 10. I compared it to a newly opened Laggy 12 the other night, and it was like candy in comparison :).

What I would take from this is that Lagavulin is not a bottle to fear drinking too slowly. In my case it seems to have revealed a different character as it went. Maybe oxidation is the death of a milder whisky, but in this case it just turns into something different, and no less enjoyable.

The rating is for Lagavulin 16 in general. We all know it's good, but I wanted to try and find something to contribute before finishing the bottle.

Related Lagavulin reviews

4 comments

@WhiskyBee
WhiskyBee commented

An example of how not all reviews have to include nosing-and-tasting notes to be good reviews. You're right--most of us here know this one well. Nevertheless, you've provided some fine observations on how bottle aging affects the much-beloved Laga 16.

5 years ago 0

@Nolinske
Nolinske commented

Well said! Great review!

5 years ago 0

@Aulay
Aulay commented

Interesting point CB, as I've found considerable variance in the Lagavulin 16 as well. I've had the honey sweet Lag-16's and Iodine dominant ones too. I wonder if this was a product of time mellowing or just variances from batch to batch. We must drink more to investigate thoroughly. Slainte Mhath!

5 years ago 0

Taco commented

The L3183 bottle I have is the worst Lagavulin I've ever had, and close to the worst single malt (which was Jura 10). Very disappointing as I love Laga in all versions! Has the nose of saddle leather, but tastes like licking the inside of pleather shoes that have been worn without socks on a warm summer day. Seriously! I've tried letting it sit for extended periods, but it hasn't helped. Please tell me the rest of 2013 bottles aren't like this! The previous 2012 was wonderful, one of the best I've had.

5 years ago 0

You must be signed-in to comment here

Sign in