Deanston Virgin Oak, 46.3%, $45 for the bottle (very cheap around these parts). I had never heard of Deanston before a few weeks ago when I tried this at a whiskey show. I wasn't overly impressed with it, and was about to move on, when I noticed that it was going for that little. So I gave it a second try, and found it was pretty good value for the price. It's a highland scotch technically, but it really at the border between the highland and lowland regions. Sitting just 35km away from Glasgow and the Auchentoshan distillery, it's hard to really qualify it as a "highland" scotch.
Nose: Dried raisins, citrus, almonds. It's very fruity and light, not much "alcohol tickle" (unlike the Tomatin 12 I reviewed yesterday). Overall, pretty tame for a scotch, particularly with a higher ABV. Colour: Extremely pale yellow. One of the palest I have seen except for a horrible "silver" scotch I tried years ago that was basically a 1 or 2 year old single malt that was absolutely colourless. Taste: The oak is strong with this one. It's very oakey, but unfortunately there isn't a whole lot more there. What's there is nice, but I'd just like more complexity or variety. There's a bit of citrus, no smoke, no peat, no nuttiness. It's pretty one-dimensional. Finish: Almost non-existent. A bit burny, but not too bad. Its flavour doesn't linger very much.
It's far from a bad scotch, and at this price it's actually attractive. But honestly, I would spend the extra $5-10 and get a bottle of Strathisla 12, Aberlour 10, or Aberfeldy 12. Is it better than Glenlivet 12 or Glenfiddich 12? Sure. And it's cheaper and potentially more interesting too. But it is a bit of a one trick poney, and the fact that it relies so heavily on the oak flavour doesn't make it a good contender for a "gateway scotch" or "introductory scotch": it's way too specific for that. So it sits in this weird spot where it's inexpensive, but also incredibly specific in taste, and I don't think it's doing itself any favours. Maybe if it was aged for an extra 2-5 years it would become something more complex and interesting. But who knows as it's a NAS scotch, which has been a new trend largely promoted by the Scotch Whiskey Association. Thanks SWA, you bunch of twats!
I just posted this (more or less) in another review today of this one, but I just tried this myself and also felt the the youthfulness really hurt aspects of this whisky (my wife's word for it was "clunky," which I think sums it up quite well). A bit disappointing because Deanston often does stuff right, but I think you're right that this one needs some more time.
Also, I really hope Compass Box's next whisky is labeled "Thanks SWA, You Bunch of Twats" over their recent row with them over labeling transparency.
Deanston Virgin Oak, 46.3%, $45 for the bottle (very cheap around these parts). I had never heard of Deanston before a few weeks ago when I tried this at a whiskey show. I wasn't overly impressed with it, and was about to move on, when I noticed that it was going for that little. So I gave it a second try, and found it was pretty good value for the price. It's a highland scotch technically, but it really at the border between the highland and lowland regions. Sitting just 35km away from Glasgow and the Auchentoshan distillery, it's hard to really qualify it as a "highland" scotch.
Nose: Dried raisins, citrus, almonds. It's very fruity and light, not much "alcohol tickle" (unlike the Tomatin 12 I reviewed yesterday). Overall, pretty tame for a scotch, particularly with a higher ABV.
Colour: Extremely pale yellow. One of the palest I have seen except for a horrible "silver" scotch I tried years ago that was basically a 1 or 2 year old single malt that was absolutely colourless.
Taste: The oak is strong with this one. It's very oakey, but unfortunately there isn't a whole lot more there. What's there is nice, but I'd just like more complexity or variety. There's a bit of citrus, no smoke, no peat, no nuttiness. It's pretty one-dimensional.
Finish: Almost non-existent. A bit burny, but not too bad. Its flavour doesn't linger very much.
It's far from a bad scotch, and at this price it's actually attractive. But honestly, I would spend the extra $5-10 and get a bottle of Strathisla 12, Aberlour 10, or Aberfeldy 12. Is it better than Glenlivet 12 or Glenfiddich 12? Sure. And it's cheaper and potentially more interesting too. But it is a bit of a one trick poney, and the fact that it relies so heavily on the oak flavour doesn't make it a good contender for a "gateway scotch" or "introductory scotch": it's way too specific for that. So it sits in this weird spot where it's inexpensive, but also incredibly specific in taste, and I don't think it's doing itself any favours. Maybe if it was aged for an extra 2-5 years it would become something more complex and interesting. But who knows as it's a NAS scotch, which has been a new trend largely promoted by the Scotch Whiskey Association. Thanks SWA, you bunch of twats!
70/100.
I just posted this (more or less) in another review today of this one, but I just tried this myself and also felt the the youthfulness really hurt aspects of this whisky (my wife's word for it was "clunky," which I think sums it up quite well). A bit disappointing because Deanston often does stuff right, but I think you're right that this one needs some more time.
Also, I really hope Compass Box's next whisky is labeled "Thanks SWA, You Bunch of Twats" over their recent row with them over labeling transparency.