Ardmore SMWS 66.164 “I like big butts”

Oh my God Whisky, look at that butt

It is so big, it looks like

One of those good bodega’s casks

But, ya know, who understands the sherry cask industry?

They only exist, because

Those cooking vinegars and glowing red whiskies that look like a total strawberry, okay?

I mean, that cask, it’s just so big

Uh, I can’t believe it’s just so wet, it’s like out there

I mean, uh, gross, look

She’s just so wet.

Ardmore SMWS 66.164 “I like big butts” is a whisky that cheekily takes it’s name from the fact it was aged in two Oloroso sherry casks, thus the name. It’s a younger Ardmore, which is peated Speyside, so it’ll be stronger peat. Peat + Sherry is heaven, so it should be good, right?

Let’s see, shall we?

Price: $100

Region: Speyside

Vintage: April 25, 2012

Stated Age: 7-years-old

Cask type: 5 years in American oak Oloroso sherry butt than transferred to a European oak oloroso sherry butt (2nd fill)

Number of bottles: 623

Abv: 61.8%

Colour: 10YR 8/8

Nose: Earth/peat, cocoa, walnut, mothballs, apple pie

Initial earthy peat makes you want to pull up tough cause you noticed that butt was stuffed, though not in jeans and instead with sherry.

The sherry influence here means they took one look at these casks and said to hell with romancin’ she’s sweat, wet and got it going’ like a turbo ‘Vette, however the strong young peat pushes back quite a bit, leading to a good balance.

Taste: Blueberry, salt, cocoa, lemon pith, caramel

Fruity, good salt, some more earth to it, and it makes you stay and play, which a lot of simps won’t like this whisky, ’cause’ them punks like to hit it and quit it, but it needs more time to stay and play to really appreciate it.

Basically the sherry walks in with an itty bitty impact but with a name in your face and you expect more and get sprung, though the actual influence of the sherry is less than the name would denote.

Finish: Caramel, brine, cocoa, smoked meat, anise

The finish is one that the average Ardmore groupie will recognize. The finish is not short, like a hottie that’s thirty-six, twenty-four, thirty six but only if she’s 5’3.

Overall it has very few notes of the sherry, thus I have to say “You ain’t it, Miss Thang”.

Conclusion: Nice, simply, earthy peat. You want a triple X throwdown? This ain’t it. I’m not going to say my anaconda don’t want none of this whisky: It’s a simple, nice peated Ardmore. There’s others that replace it.

Somehow the one thing this whisky needed to do was not lose that butt, and it lost that butt.

Luckily this whisky is not a person, and thus we can properly judge it on the aspects it’s missing. Call a whisky out as a heavily sherried whisky? I expect one of two things: Either a sherry bomb that glows so red that bulls charge it (yes, I know they charge only because they have been stabbed and goaded, not the colour) or so balance with heavy sherry notes that you can’t doubt it’s been sherried.

So the name is just marketing. And as someone who worked in marketing for much too long, it’s sad and not surprising to see it’s still full of it.

Decent enough dram, have it if you enjoy Ardmore, skip otherwise.

78/100

Scotch review #1512, Speyside review #428, Whisky Network review #2219

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s