For my 21st review, we're looking at The Glenrothes 2001 bottling. I picked up this bottle at the annual Whiskeys of the World show, albeit slightly against my will. I originally had wanted the Glenrothes Alba Reserve, as I had tasted both and liked the Alba better, but unfortunately it was sold out by the time I got to the little shop at the end of the show. So I settled for the 2001, which was the same price but is unequivocally inferior in my mind, probably by as much as 5-10%. In any case, on to tasting!
Colour: A nice amber colour. Reminds me a bit of the Macallan Amber in terms of colour.
Nose: Caramel, cereals, a bit of citrus. Quite pleasant actually. Caveat emptor: my nose is slightly stuffy tonight.
Taste: A really nice mix of spice, citrus, and general fruitiness. It's quite light and delicate, actually. No smoke or peat anywhere near this guy.
Finish: Pretty long, but smooth. Only a little bit of alcohol burn on the end of it.
This is a really fine dram. I paid $92 for the bottle, which by my local standards is pretty decent for something of this quality. I will deduct 5 points though, as the design of the lip of the bottle neck is horrendous, and whenever you pour it tends to spill scotch all over itself, which is a real drag. 80/100.
It absolutely is. Scotch is a product, just like a car or a computer. It has a number of characteristics that can be reviewed to provide an overall grade, such as taste, colour, price, and yes, packaging. Many companies have previously played on the packaging aspect of it to attract potential customers, with gimmicky bottles, fancy labels, etc.
Now more to the point, if I buy a scotch, I'd like to bee able to pour the product into a glass without wasting a bunch of it on my counter or all over the bottle. If the bottle spills all over the place, and it's the bottle the distillery specifically chose for this particular scotch, then this particular scotch has an issue, plain and simple. The distillery should have put more thought into the bottling end of things, and that mistake is worth at least 5 marks.
I'm not even sure if I should even bother making this argument, but this is absolutely ridiculous! Scotch is rated on the spirit itself, not the packaging, unless of course you are buying the scotch for the just for the packaging. Nice packaging is just a bonus. Anyone is free to rate a whisky however they want, but people don't come here to rate packaging. I'm sure there is another sub for that.
You are right in saying that your average consumer or even casual scotch drinker does look at packaging, heck, we all look at packaging and it has it's purpose. I've been lured by the occasional nice packaging, but rating a whisky on packaging is another thing all together.
You do realize that mathematically, 94% of my grade reflects the spirit itself, right? Only 5% were docked for the spilly design of the bottle, so it got 80% out of a possible 85%. So clearly your statement of "buying the Scotch for the just for the packaging" (sic) is out to lunch. I agree that nice packaging is a bonus, but packaging that functions as intended is not.
You wouldn't want buy scotch where the corks have a tendency to dry up and let the spirit evaporate away, would you? Would you want to buy scotch where the corks tend to impart a corky flavour to the spirit? No, because those would be packaging dysfunctions. This is no different.
Is it really so much to ask that distilleries package their products in bottles that don't piss all over themselves when you pour up a dram?
Also, and this is entirely separate from any arguments we may be having, but what's up with you capitalizing "scotch" all the time? Is there a reason behind it that I'm missing?
Hello Scotchit,
For my 21st review, we're looking at The Glenrothes 2001 bottling. I picked up this bottle at the annual Whiskeys of the World show, albeit slightly against my will. I originally had wanted the Glenrothes Alba Reserve, as I had tasted both and liked the Alba better, but unfortunately it was sold out by the time I got to the little shop at the end of the show. So I settled for the 2001, which was the same price but is unequivocally inferior in my mind, probably by as much as 5-10%. In any case, on to tasting!
This is a really fine dram. I paid $92 for the bottle, which by my local standards is pretty decent for something of this quality. I will deduct 5 points though, as the design of the lip of the bottle neck is horrendous, and whenever you pour it tends to spill scotch all over itself, which is a real drag. 80/100.
You're deducting 5 points from a scotch because of it's bottle design?????? It's not the scotch's fault the bottle was poorly designed.
It absolutely is. Scotch is a product, just like a car or a computer. It has a number of characteristics that can be reviewed to provide an overall grade, such as taste, colour, price, and yes, packaging. Many companies have previously played on the packaging aspect of it to attract potential customers, with gimmicky bottles, fancy labels, etc.
Now more to the point, if I buy a scotch, I'd like to bee able to pour the product into a glass without wasting a bunch of it on my counter or all over the bottle. If the bottle spills all over the place, and it's the bottle the distillery specifically chose for this particular scotch, then this particular scotch has an issue, plain and simple. The distillery should have put more thought into the bottling end of things, and that mistake is worth at least 5 marks.
I'm not even sure if I should even bother making this argument, but this is absolutely ridiculous! Scotch is rated on the spirit itself, not the packaging, unless of course you are buying the scotch for the just for the packaging. Nice packaging is just a bonus. Anyone is free to rate a whisky however they want, but people don't come here to rate packaging. I'm sure there is another sub for that.
You are right in saying that your average consumer or even casual scotch drinker does look at packaging, heck, we all look at packaging and it has it's purpose. I've been lured by the occasional nice packaging, but rating a whisky on packaging is another thing all together.
You do realize that mathematically, 94% of my grade reflects the spirit itself, right? Only 5% were docked for the spilly design of the bottle, so it got 80% out of a possible 85%. So clearly your statement of "buying the Scotch for the just for the packaging" (sic) is out to lunch. I agree that nice packaging is a bonus, but packaging that functions as intended is not.
You wouldn't want buy scotch where the corks have a tendency to dry up and let the spirit evaporate away, would you? Would you want to buy scotch where the corks tend to impart a corky flavour to the spirit? No, because those would be packaging dysfunctions. This is no different.
Is it really so much to ask that distilleries package their products in bottles that don't piss all over themselves when you pour up a dram?
Also, and this is entirely separate from any arguments we may be having, but what's up with you capitalizing "scotch" all the time? Is there a reason behind it that I'm missing?