Springbank Bottling Date Characteristics

12 / 142: Springbank 10 Year, "White Label" www.youtube.com/watch

12 year old cask strength : 11/151 - surprising that this has lasted on the shelves so long. Bought input December 2013. I wish I'd known about the codes. This one is good, but not yet as good as my first 12 year CS which I bought in 2011.

Has anyone tasted the new Third Edition Springbank 18 year old? I see there seems to be a new label. It's no longer purple. I believe it is white, can't remember for sure.

Saw a few bottles in the store today. I'm curious to hear how the new Springbank 18 fares against the Second Edition (purple label).

The First Edition seems to be the best of the first two, according to most reviews. Next time I am in the store, I will jot down the bottling code on the new label 18 year and post it here in this discussion.

I think this is Serge's review of the latest Springbank 18:

Springbank 18 yo (46%, OB, +/-2011) Four stars and a half I think, but I’m not 100% sure, that this is the latest version of the 18, bottled this year (as some cool Springbank rep told me at London’s Whisky Show). Colour: pale gold. Nose: perfect, on sultanas, putty, motor oil, pine sap, ashes, grass and just a little bacon – not deep-fried! As with the previous batch, it’s no big whisky and it has rather less oomph than older versions, but it’s wonderful. Mouth: excellent, briny, zesty and salty. More so than the earlier versions. Also green tea and orange liqueur. Finish: long, on exactly the same notes. Cherry sweets and green pepper in the aftertaste. Comments: we need a version of the 18 at full proof. Signed: a well-wisher. SGP:453 - 88 points.

Springbank 18 yo 2nd Edition (46%, OB, +/-2010) Four stars and a half This is the new batch, labelled as part of the core range while the first edition had a specific ‘laurelled’ label. Colour: gold. Nose: ah. This one is a little less expressive than the 10, I must say, and probably a little less expressive than the first edition of the new 18 as well. Grains and pine resin, ashes, coal, farmyard, ham, liquorice, fresh walnuts, then more herbs, parsley and hints of wet newspaper. I just nosed the 1st edition again, it’s indeed a tad ampler than #2. Mouth: more convincing than on the nose, fat, peppery and orangey, but maybe a tad less ‘clean and straightforward’ than both #1 and the new 10 yet again. More cask influence, more orange notes, orange liqueur, cloves and liquorice. Finish: long, maybe a tad bitterer now. Traces of bubblegum, tiny-wee dirtiness that make it actually quite complex. Comments: truly excellent but maybe a little less excellent than Edition 1 in my book. Suffers a bit from the comparison with the great new 10, maybe I shouldn’t have tried that one just before. SGP:553 - 88 points.

Notice Serge tastes "bacon" in the 2010 edition, and equated the 2011 with some barnyardy characteristics, as well as "ham peper and fat." The latest 18 (white label?) however is not as farmy as the Springbank 10 100 Proof (57%)

@rigmorole According to the distillery the white label is a one off run to signal there move to a new US importer. I don't know what edition this run is considered but they are clear that the label will continue to be purple accent aside from this one run. I have only tasted the purple label (thinking it was a second edition) and thought it was wonderful with unique heavy berry characteristics and sweet smoke. I do have a bottle of the first edition (all purple box and bottle...not just purple lettering and black box like all other Springers) but I haven't opened it yet.

@indynoir Yes, I'd heard that from someone else on WC. Very interesting, thanks, Rig

Here's my review of the Springbank 10 on Youtube: www.youtube.com/watch