Thanks to ScotchGuy_TO for pouring this for me.
I’m bad at a few things in whisky, as I don’t have a lot of money, as I’m not secretly one of checks notes the 53 billionaires in Canada. Or at least I don’t remember being one, and if someone could remind me and tell me where I stored it, that’d be cool.
What does money have to do with it? Well if you want to do the full spectrum of whiskies, you end up looking at very rare ones, random trips, and dusties, which is the one particular area I’m detailing my loss today. Why? Is this some weird 12 step program but I’ve forgotten the part about not drinking? No, today we’re reviewing a dusty, because as usual, someone poured me a dusty and I reviewed it.
Miltonduff 12 Glenlivet Malt is from either the very late 1970s or the 1980s. I’m basing the era on what I was told and the picture of the bottle versus pictures, if you know more than me, correct me.
So we have an original bottling of 12-year-old Miltonduff that was released specifically for the Italian market, a market that had their own tastes and preferences at the time. We get to see a snapshot of this time and their flavour preferences. Or should I say, preferenze di sapore?
No, I really shouldn’t, let’s get to the whisky, shall we?
Price: Auction, many dollars, most of your kidneys.
Colour: 7.5Y 9/4
Nose: Banana, almond butter, cream, floral
Fruity, sweet, a bit nutty and fatty, and floral. This is Miltonduff, definitely, we’re not seeing a vast difference there, it’s the distillery profile (based on my past reviews). That said, it’s way stronger here. Blind I’d be thinking it was a lot higher abv. You can pick out the different aspects.
It’s almost like someone was trying.
Taste: Cashew, coal dust, lemonade, melon
Nutty, a new flavour note I recently discovered “coal dust” and realized it’s not just me, someone who worked on a coal ship, and a nice light acidity/fruitiness.
Nothing is going to blow your mind, unless you realize that it’s just an ob that was released for everyday consumption yet it’s quality is up there with standard single cask whiskies.
Finish: Mineral, smoke, pepper, orange pith
Simple, solid finish. Could it have been sweeter? Maybe? I don’t know, at the time of writing this I had too many overly sweet whiskies, so it’s tough to say something was missing sweet aspects, but I didn’t mind it.
Conclusion: Very solid and nice whisky. It’s unique and interesting and flavourful enough to make you happy. Not “blow your mind” happy, but more so what people used to describe standard Scotch offerings back in the day. The people behind this must have been quite good at vatting and aiming for a very, very good whisky.
Which of course probably took more time, increased the costs, and thus are equivalent to the worst sin ever in our capitalistic world. Which is frustrating.
I can’t say go out and find this, because it’s hard to find and the auction will be costly. On the other hand, as a whisky, this is a solid offering from the distillery and showcases it in a positive light. And that doesn’t always happen (See SMWS 72.65).
Scotch review #1574, Speyside review #449, Whisky Network review #2298