Here’s a bottle I deliberately didn’t buy when it was released earlier this year. This Benromach 2003 21 Years is perfect for me on paper. It’s just that the timing wasn’t quite right.
Longtime readers will know about my penchant for Benromach. It has been and remains one of my favourite distilleries in Scotland. Reopened in 1998, these days single casks older than 20 years regularly hit the market. The distillery truly has left its teenage years behind. Adulthood suits Benromach.
The Benromach 2003 21 Years Cask #45 was bottled for Whiskybase (a sister cask of this German release). Usually I would have snapped up a bottle, but… I don’t know. There are times when I don’t think twice about spending a ridiculous amount on whisky. (The curse of being a whisky geek.)
This wasn’t one of those times. I had already been on a bit of a spending spree. Like I said, the timing of this Benromach was off. But having not bought it kept nagging at me. That sounds stupid, but I’m sure many of you can relate. I’m always looking for the next transcendent whisky experience, as I’m sure lots of whisky enthusiasts are. What if this Benromach would’ve been such an experience?
When I recently placed an order at Whiskybase, they surprised me with a complimentary sample of their Benromach. I was happy at first, but also hesitant. Glad to have the opportunity to taste it at last, but strangely afraid to like it too much.
Benromach 2003 21 Years (57.4%, OB for Whiskybase, C#45)
Nose: All the elegance you’d expect from a mature Benromach. The (bonfire) smoke we know from younger expressions is still there, but subtler. It makes place for hessian, melted butter, waxes and a tinge of citrus fruits as well as some tropical notes. It’s modestly farmy, somewhat malty, but there’s a tinge of mint leaves too and the leafiness is very agreeable.
Taste: Good oily mouthfeel, which is only enhanced after adding water. Rather classic Benromach – almost truly old-school. The wood smoke is slightly more prominent now, while there’s also a few wood spices upon arrival. Even close to medicinal. Then minerals, herbal teas, camphor and waxes too. More honeyed with water. Chocolate notes appear as well.
Finish: Long. The fatty, greasy mouthfeel remains. More of the above.
Photo: Whiskybase
> I’m sure many of you can relate
I can relate!
> Also, it would not surprise me if this develops very well in the bottle.
This is an effect that I’ve become very aware of starting last year – despite being a single malts fan since 2007. Quite a few bottles are very closed at first, and open up more and more over the months, improving as the bottle empties and has more aeration. An extreme example was the Ben Nevis from the Whisky Show 2019, the one with the label that needed ultraviolet light to read properly. So closed at first, stingy, ungiving, nothing there… but developed so beautifully with more and more bottle aeration. It makes me wonder how this effect might adversely affect the likes of you, Serge and Ruben when reviewing whiskies…
It’s something I’ve been wondering as well, but probably won’t ever find a conclusive answer to. However, I don’t generally pay too much attention to the discussion regarding neck pours and the like. Does a whisky improve after opening, and deteriorate once it falls below a fill-level of say 25 percent? Or once it has been open for X amount of years? I suppose that’s all very subjective. I just leave it at this: A whisky develops after opening. Could become better, could become worse. And that’s fine by me.
Btw, regarding your example, I loved that Ben Nevis from start to finish. From the first drops from to bottle to the very last. Which only goes to show.