Springbank 12 Year Cask Strength

Rating: 19/23 N: Sulphury farmyard with chocolate, baking spices, and fruit syrup featuring plums and oranges. It's an enjoyable, decadent nose, but the youthful sulphur is a bit too much. P: Rich and full with that farmyard hitting and unfortunately bringing a wave of sulphur. Juniper, baking spices, mellow wood, chocolate, cooked plums, and a bit of candied orange peel. I like the bit of waxiness and dungeness crab that this has. as a whole, the palate is nice and I like the richness and fullness, but the sulphur is a bit much here. Some vanilla bean in here too. A bit of oloroso nuttiness, I think. There's this nice papery grain flavor in the back with the vanilla as well. There's a lot happening. Springbank 15 and Springbank 21 suffer from having too blatant of sherry characters, with clear oloroso flavors standing out. This clearly has some sweet red fruit going on, but it isn't tart or syrupy and its sweetness only supports the Springbank funk. This also avoids the sort of timidness of Springbank 18 by being cask strength. This definitely isn't as refined, but it does a great job of showcasing the Springbank character with minimal rough edges. That said, the sherry and bourbon barrels add a big layer of sweetness that covers up some of the nice nuances. F: Farmyard, juniper, residual sulphur, chocolate, plum with a bit of a more bitter and tart nature. A little of that oloroso nuttiness too. - Conclusion - Look, this is a darned fine dram in all situations. That said, it isn't the gem that I remember. I've been savoring this bottle for a couple of years and dreading the day I run out and need to pony up the cash for a replacement. Well, based on this tasting, maybe I won't be buying a replacement. Now, it could be that the oxygen has negatively affected this, but oxygen is normally a positive influence on Springbank, young whisky, and cask strength offerings. This checks all of those boxes and the level of oxidation isn't comical, so I highly doubt that oxygen is to blame here. Furthermore, my main complaint is too much sulphur, which oxygen definitely helps with. Secondarily, I find some aspects a little imbalanced, but that's another thing oxygen helps with. My third issue with this is that some of the subtle flavors seem to be missing. That could be the fault of oxygen, but it's clear that the barrels are also a bit strong (this is definitely personal preference though considering how much I liked the bourbon-barrel-aged-only Springbank 2018, while most found it underwhelming). I can't really say that I think a different release of this would be better though because downplaying the barrels reveals more sulphur. The things I can think of that might help would be sourcing spicier bourbon barrels and maybe trying out some cognac ones. The one caveat I'll give here is that it's possible the oxidization altered the flavors in such a way that the oloroso came forward and melded with the smoke and other flavors to create the illusion of sulpur. I say this becuase I really don't remember much sulphur in this before and now it's quite strong (though not quite dominating). So where am I landing on this? Well, it's better than my bottle of Longrow (17/23), but it certainly isn't the 22 I gave it previously. A 17-21 is high praise for a whisky that I've criticized for having sulphur flavor. Sulphur is one of those flavors that repulse me, so it usually causes me to drop my rating several points. After more comparisons, I've moved into the 18 to 20 range for this. It just doesn't quite have that character to push to a 21, but that sulphur isn't always so overwhelming. Honestly, I'm surprised that I didn't notice that sulphur sooner in my tasting journey. For anyone tasting this and thinking "what sulphur?", I recommend Craigellachie 13, which I enjoyed in a similar way to this. This is still substantially superior to the Craigellachie - much like how Future Diary is superior to Deadman Wonderland - but they both have a lot of that interesting barnyard funk, but are hamstrung by sulphur. Also check out the regular Longrow if you like this. I placed this side by side with Ardbeg Uigeadail (19/23) and was really surprised by how much the Uigeadail tasted. I feel like that experience (despite the difference in spirit characters) caps my rating for this at 19. It isn't just the Uigeadail: this has been underwhelming me at the 20-21 level fairly consistently. So an 18 or 19 this is. OK, after more comparisons, my doubt that this is in the 18-19 range is minimal. OK, I'm going with a 19. Theres' a lot to love here. Still, that sulphur is a problem. This is a 19 for now, but it could fall in the future. I want to love this as much as I used to, but I just dont. This makes me really sad because considering the price I'm not sure when I'll be buying another bottle of Springbank. OK, after a mild moment of inspiration, this is a 19, but it's still hard to justify at this price. This is more like the type of unusual (but still quite good) thing I'd keep around to add variety at times. I wouldn't regret a bottle at $120 too much, but I sure wouldn't seek it out.

It’s officially 2022 and I’ve decided to “Spring”bank into it with a series of samples. Continuing on my Springbank series, I have three different batches of the 12-year Cask Strength. Batch 17 comes from @ContemplativeFox and was matured in 70% ex-Sherry casks, 30% ex-Bourbon and bottled at 56.2%. The nose starts with light funk, toasted barley, dark chocolate covered raisins and dehydrated apricot followed by a smoldering campfire by the ocean that fades into the background of fruits of persimmons, charred tangerine and red grapefruit that transitions to candied ginger, light leather and moderate oak with high ethanol burn. The taste is a medium mouthfeel starting with light funk, toasted barley, dark chocolate covered raisins followed by a moderate peat smoke with light drying spice that slowly fades to fruits of apricots, charred tangerine and red grapefruit juice that transitions to ocean brine, light minerality, candied ginger, light leather and moderate oak with high ethanol burn. The finish is medium length with shortbread cookies, dark chocolate covered raisins, ocean brine, candied ginger, light leather and mild ashy oak. A very enjoyable dram with the sherry barrels front and center, but they play well with the traditional Springbank funk, fruit and smoke without overpowering or giving too much of a sulfur influence followed with the bourbon barrels adding some enjoyable creamy citrus notes. Final Score: 4.0 Batch 19 comes from @ctbeck11 and was matured in 65% ex-Bourbon casks, 35% ex-Sherry casks and bottled at 57.1%. The nose is big and rich starting with a mild funky butterscotch pudding and caramelized apples followed by light sherry then a soft and delicate pipe smoke that fades to the background of creamed corn, maraschino cherry, and sun baked salted orange that transitions to ocean sea waves crashing over seaside rocks and antique leather wrapped oak furniture with high ethanol burn. The taste is a rich creamy mouthfeel starting with a mild funky butterscotch pudding and caramelized apples followed dark chocolate raisins then a mild spice that quickly fades to soft and delicate pipe smoke, creamed corn, maraschino cherry, and orange creamsicle that transitions to ocean sea waves crashing over seaside rocks and antique leather wrapped oak furniture with high ethanol burn. The finish is medium length with orange creamsicle, dark chocolate covered raisins, shortbread cookies, light ocean brine, and antique leather armchair. Wow, this one is incredible! The flavors are bold, rich and creamy with a near perfect balance that can easily beat bottles that cost several times more than it. The bourbon influence really brought a lot to these with the sherry flavors adding additional complexity to slightly elevate it to near perfection without either overpowering those traditional Springbank funk, fruits and moderate peat smoke. Final Score: 4.75 Batch 21 was matured in 45% ex-Sherry, 25% ex-Bourbon, 25% ex-Burgundy, 5% ex-Port casks and bottled at 56.1%. The nose starts with bales of hay and dark cherry cordial followed by a moderate peat smoke with fruits of fresh picked strawberries, caramelized apples and Sunkist raisins then ocean sea waves crashing over seaside rocks, light leather and moderate oak with high ethanol burn. The taste is a viscous mouthfeel starting with big and bold orchard fruit followed by burnt bales of hay and dark chocolate cherry mocha followed by a moderate peat smoke and drying spice that then fades to fruits of fresh picked strawberries, caramelized apples and oatmeal raisin cookies then ocean sea waves crashing over seaside rocks, light leather and moderate oak with high ethanol burn. The finish is medium length with burning hay, a dark chocolate cherry mocha, ocean brine, cinnamon oatmeal raisin cookies, strawberry jam, leather and moderate oak. Overall, a great dram that manages to bring in citrus, dark berries, along with Springbank funk, moderate peat and minerality, but the balance seems off to me with a higher spice on the palate and finish overpowering some of the flavors. Side by side with the 10 year old, I like this one slightly more for its bolder flavors and red berry fruits, but I could easily prefer the 10 year on days I don’t want a high proof whisky and want an easy sipper instead. Final Score: 3.75 Conclusion: What a fun experience to try three different batches and compare them to each other. Springbank seems to keep you on your toes with these different batches and each one brought a unique spin to complement those traditional Springbank notes. Personally, I found that the high bourbon influence with a light sherry for additional complexity to be my Springbank match, but I can see how either one of the other batches could fit a person’s palate better. Overall score for all: 4.25

Batch 21 56.1, yes this is the new CRAZY one. I should create a new one but I have to use the ap and I hate the ap. Nose - so I'm getting a coffee cake with savory cream cheese on it. Then smoke and oak followed by rich intense gritty sweetness. Almost a reduction sauce meets a cooking wine with bread hearty savory full grain bread baking in the background. This is absolutely nothing like the first springbank 12 I had nor is it that similar to the 57.1 which I will say the likely first fill bourbon casks on that did a lot. Taste - The taste brings me back to springbank with the salty and savory notes coming out, but it's different. The wine is huge here but while the burgundy wood i found rich and earthy and meaty, this isn't that. It's sweet, very sweet. It's like the sherry casks were super sweet, the port enhanced it to ll and the burgondy just kinda added some new notes but let the sweetness keep going. These weren't even tired bourbon casks to add oak without vanilla, as there's vanilla here. The odd part is that it then hits with some spice and alcohol kick that wasn't expected or really wanted. The alcohol feels almost drying to the point the overall rich and creamy body comes off too drying and closes what should have been a really nice mouth feel. I keep going back to this and I keep coming to the same conclusion, this isn't a good springbank 12. It not bad either but if you're chasing that classic 12 profile this has gone a weird direction and one I hope they don't do again. I bought 2 and I'm ok with it. But yeah, A for effort but C- for execution. 2.50 which feels criminal for a springbank 12 but I have to be honest with you guys. The sweetness could work without the spice and alcohol notes. And trust me water isn't the solution either. Did one last sip and it come off a bit more traditional sherry with port and less spicy but then I was able to really notice the lack of finish or depth. A complex whisky that is just too disjointed and frankly just falls flat. I think springbank tried to add too many casks to what is still a relatively young whisky. This kind of blending is best saved for the older expressions where perhaps some secondary casks or active casks can wakeup a tired cask with age. Not for younger casks.

I think this is the 2018/2019 edition. It’s 54.8% abv (and based on what I’ve read it’s 50/50 burbon/sherry cask mix). Nose: Surprisingly fresh! I certainly pick up sherry notes, but also grapes, apples and pears. It also has a dry chalk-like/limestone character to it which is really nice. The peat is certainly there but not cloying. Palate: Lighter than expected. Decently refined with fruity notes (red and green apples mainly) and a slightly malty character. Sooty peat - rather light. Signature Springbank ”funk” (think rubber hose and synthetic oil…) though less than in other Springbanks I’ve tried. After a while just a tad of darker fruits. Finish: More of that chalk-like character from the nose. Green apples. Touch of sweet broth. Sooty peat. Just a tad of rubber. Overall: On the one hand it’s well-crafted and offers decent complexity. On the other hand it’s not the sledge-hammer you expect from a Springbank at CS, and in that regard it feels a bit underwhelming. Also, the more Springbanks I try the more I realize that I am not that exciting over those funky notes as some are. That said I actually appreciate the overall style of this whisky (lightly peated, burbon/sherry mix). Overall I score it 3.75 on the back of it being well-crafted and aligned with many of my preferences, and it’s not far away from a higher mark. That said I did swing back and forth with this one and at some points I wanted to score it lower (tried it heads-up against Lagavulin 16 and it suddenly tasted like the sweet-like odour of burning/melting plastic…), but sometimes also higher. It does balance on a thread…

Side-by-side of Springbank 12 Cask Strength, batches 19 and 21, courtesy of the generous @ctbeck11 The nose of the 19 stands out as more interesting and appealing to me. Not getting a lot of sherry - seems like I'm getting more of the Springbank funk and peat shining through. The nose on the 21 seems to have a stronger fruit component, along with a floral note, while the peat seems more muted. On the palate, the 19 comes across like an amped up version of the 10-year, which is exactly what I was hoping for in this dram. There's some sherry in there, but it takes a back seat to the delicious Springbank funk and peatiness. The second sip I actually notice more sherry. I'm finding now this has a great balance between the bourbon and sherry casks, but also seems to let the funky peaty spirit show its stuff. The 21 is no slouch, but it's much more fruit forward. The funk and peat are in the backseat on this ride, but this is still quite nice. Added a little water to both. Before, I was strongly favoring the 19, but after I may actually prefer the 21. I'm now noticing how thick and mouth-coating it is. The 19 now seems thinner and a little hotter after adding only a splash to each. So, neat I prefer the 19. With a splash of water I prefer the 21. It's actually pretty tough for me to pick a winner now. I think I may be slightly more drawn to the 19, but honestly I'd be thrilled to have either of these in my cabinet. Scores: Batch 19 - 4.5 Batch 21 - 4.25 Thanks CT for the opportunity to try these. Was really a pleasure.

Nose - oily peat, dark chocolate, charred orange, lemon, red berry, strawberry jam, nutmeg, yeast, hay, apricot, hazelnut, glazed ham, moderate ethanol burn. Taste - red berry, ginger, lemon oil, charred orange, oily peat, allspice, brine, green apple, red wine, burnt chocolate chip cookie, ginger, tangerine, rich malt, spicy oak, moderate to high alcohol bite, finishing medium long with oily peat, citrus pith, ginger, and spicy oak flavors. The last of my Springbank 12 Years is this Batch 21 matured in 45% sherry, 25% bourbon, 25% burgundy, and 5% port casks and bottled at 56.1%. Whereas my last two were simpler combinations of sherry and bourbon, there’s much more going on here. The wine casks come through loud and clear on the nose. If I didn’t know better, I’d likely guess this was a tamer Longrow Red expression. The Springbank DNA is intact, but jammy red fruits and dark chocolate are showcased alongside the more traditional aromas. The palate is similarly darker and fruitier than its earlier counterparts’. Unfortunately, it also tastes a bit hotter and more bitter as well. Overall, this is excellent whisky. While not my favorite batch, it is a strong contender and offers more jammy complexity than you usually find with these 12 Year releases. At the $115 price point I paid for this bottle, I’d happily do it again.