Ailsa Bay Sweet Smoke Release 1.2

Ailsa Bay is a Lowland distillery owned and operated by William Grant & Sons and is used to produce whisky in the style of Balvenie. WG&S opened the old Girvan site primarily to make whisky for their blends and reduce their need of Balvenie and Glenfiddich malt. They also switch runs and produce a peated whisky several times a year. This is their newest, peated release: Sweet Smoke. This is also release number 1.2, whatever that means. The PPPM level is 22 and they also have assigned a weighted number to the SPPM (sweet parts per million): 19. So, now they have created a new way to quantify flavor? Yawn. This release is straw gold and makes tons of watery legs and large drops in the taster. I don’t believe it has been chilled filtered, nor do I think color has been added. It’s bottled at 48.9% and I paid around $60 for this online out of the UK. Ailsa Bay does not release any malts in the North American market. The nose had a really high, minty peat note: menthol and eucalyptus leaves lead the way along with tree bark and the faintest bit of honey. The sweetness isn’t very noticeable on the nose and there’s little to no cask influence either. The palate is also minty and bitter with youthful spirit driving the bite. There is some nice sweetness from honeycomb and vanilla, but I have a hard time believing there’s an actual way to quantify it with a specific number. Holding the liquid on your tongue causes it to function more like a mouthwash than a whisky and the watery feel really pushes that home in a bad way. The finish is short with almost no lingering notes. It does feel a bit more oily at this point, but the bitterness really had me scrambling for some water to wash away the acetone flavor. I think the biggest problem here is the whisky is just too damn young. I’m assuming it’s under 4-5 years of age and I think maybe Ailsa Bay should just focus more on producing blend-able juice and quit with the single malt bottlings. That’s just my $0.02, though. This was a tough bottle to finish and the inaugural Ailsa Bay I had a year or so ago wasn’t something I’d seek out either. This manages just 2 stars. I’d recommend looking elsewhere for non-Islay, peated whisky. This stuff is rough. Cheers.

Review #027 Type: single malt scotch Proof: 48.9% Comments: NAS, ex-Hudson Baby Bourbon Barrels (25-100 liters) maturation, finished in virgin, first-fill, and refill American oak Tasted after: first up Appearance (no score): Amber color. Unable to look for legs due to water-repellent coating on the glass I was tasting with. Nose: 15/20 True to name, the nose is both sweet and peaty, reminiscent of campfires on cool fall nights, some vanilla and floral notes too, pleasant but not overly complex. Palate: 34/40 Nice oily mouth feel. Honey dominants, but there’s also caramel, green apples, semi-sweet pastries, and just a hint of vanilla. Finish: 32/40 Medium-long finish. This is where the campfire smoke makes an appearance, and it smolders down to ashes as a mild peppery ethanol burn carries through to an ending which reminds me of the flavor left behind in your mouth after eating a heavily buttered piece of bread. Th finish seems to mostly be a continuation of the palate, not a roller coaster for your taste buds but builds well on the palate. With Water: No major changes adding a drop of water, maybe just tones down some of smokiness Total: 81/100 Final thoughts: Grabbed this at the Edinburgh Airport duty free store in 2022, it’s not overly remarkable in flavor profile or complexity but well balanced and easy to drink, and a good value for the price I paid then. If someone who is a beginner with peated whiskies asked me to recommend a bottle, I’d point them towards this one. Price: £50 Would recommend: maybe Would buy: yes Scoring Legend: 96-100: The perfect dram, absolutely exceptional, nectar of the gods, I will savor this bottle and make it last, 5 stars. 90-95: Near perfect, there is something truly special about this whisky, 4.75 stars. 85-89: Very good to amazing, almost the complete product, 4.5 stars. 80-84: Quite good, very enjoyable to drink, but doesn’t wow me, 4.25 stars. 75-79: Good, enjoyable but ultimately flawed, unlikely to purchase again, 4 stars. 70-74: A solid dram, but wouldn't go out of my way to get it, 3.75 stars. 55-69: Drinkable, 3.5-2.75 stars. Below 55: Suitable for cooking or direct contribution to the kitchen sink drain, 2.5 stars or less.

A generous pour from my neighbour. I had tried this quite some time ago, but failed to write anything down about it. So it’s good to come back and see what’s going on here. I like the notion of a “scientific whisky” but all whisky is chemistry really so this does have a marketing over substance feel to it. N: Crisp, juicy and bright. The nose feels clean and delivers a fairly straightforward soft peat with a little campfire and apricot sweetness. Simple and too the point. Well done, but nothing to write home about. P: Heavy, granular texture. Dry peat that reminds me of a stubble field (harvested wheat) in dry hot summer. There’s a toasty vanilla, some struck matches, and some subtle orange oil spritz (maybe). Water is needed in my opinion it softens the grainy feel brings forward lots of ashy smoke (this tastes a little like a wood smoke now instead of a peat smoke) and unlocks some malty character. F: The finish is a mild reflection of the palate that is exiting to vanilla and ashy peat. A little pepperiness too. It’s medium, but then it’s gone. It gives me flash backs of my judo days. One second your upright next thing you know you are staring up at the ceiling wondering what just happened. In a flash, this is but a memory. I don’t really get the point of this. It’s ok. Nothing is particularly wrong with it, except maybe what I found to be an initially granular texture. As I adjusted to the ashy peat though, I acclimatised and that texture lessened. I really don’t get the point though. There is no real character, it’s not a competitive price point. Nothing new is offered by the “science based” approach and smoke and sweet ppm branding. Simply put, it’s boring. Distiller whisky taste #105

Nose: A pleasantly soft bonfire-style peat-smoke with some sweet citrus and stone fruit notes hiding in the background. Not a lot more but what is there is well done. Palate: A mild peaty and sweet citrus arrival, very much following on from the nose. A little sweet hay, vanilla and light cereal tones appear as it develops. Some green apple flavour peeks through towards the finish and adding water considerably develops the sweet malty and fruit notes. The texture is agreeable. Finish: Medium, but very abrupt. The sweet citrus and orchard fruit notes fade first and the smoke lasts a little longer - then stops dead in its tracks as though a light switch was flipped off. This is a brief note as I tried this at a local liquor store today and didn't have a lot of time to dwell on the tasting (but at least they served it in a glencairn). Very young and simple in profile, but pleasant nonetheless. It has precision and is clean but lacks complexity. It has less character than some of the equivalently priced peaty blended malts from independent bottlers (like Six Isles or Big Peat) and it is also bested by almost all other peated single malts in this price range. However it's well made for sure and the only real fault I found was in the finish which was perplexingly curtailed. One moment it's there, then suddenly it's gone. One notably good thing is that there is no intrusive ethanol presence - I would have sworn that this was 40%. I'm glad to have tasted it but even on special ($85 down from $99) I wouldn't buy it - maybe if it was half price ... "Average" : 78/100 (2.75 stars)

2019 lowland whisky of the year is not always a super great price, since there are only a handful of distilleries in the Scottish lowlands. A relatively new distillery, that uses peat in their expressions. Can the lowland resurrection be true? Lets see... First, this is a technological whisky. What??? Yes. This bottle has a new anti-piracy system that lets you know exactly the cask, the year and the batch of the bottle, giving you the capabilty to say "this one is not fake whisky". Bottled at 48.9%abv. Amber color. On the nose, Peat smoke very dim. Pineapple; Very sweet yellow Apples, Fresh apple juice. Juicy, fruity with hints of smoke, Very interesting. Most accurate pineapple aroma note ever. Lemon has appeared after a while. Very, very fresh and juicy. Peat has become earthy and peppery after a couple of minutes. Apricot after first sip with some saltiness. Pretty complex. On the palate, it wasn't as complex but fairly good. Peat, Toffee, Ashy, Bonfire; Caramel but very watery. Last sip was all toffee. Aftertaste has a nice peat kick. Sulphuric, Burnt grassy fields. Salty and smoky. The pineapple gives it a tropical feeling overall. The empty glass smells like pineapple marmalade its amazing how accurate that aroma is. Overall this is quite surprising and i truly recommend it. 91 over 100.

Nose: Coastal shrubs, salty sea mist, honey, damp campfire that was just put out, slight brine, floral, egg whites? Palette: Honey, vanilla, crisp yellow pears, light smoke, angel food cake? Finish: Short to medium bodied, coastal, sweet Liquid smoke! Reminds me a bit of Highland Park 12 and Talisker 10, both which I adore. However the smoke on this is smoother and more gentle to the palette and without water much sweet than those two. Does not taste as complex though nor does it have many hidden notes that appear after multiple sips. Overall a fanatic dram that I knew I had to buy from a sample tasting at the airport. Great for beginners that want to get explore some smoke.