What’s your take on Non Age Statement Scotch?

[Avi]

Correct ... for scotch. Other countries have other rules.

Surely it can't be much further away than common sense I hope? The scotch rule seems pretty commonsensical. That said there was this article recently:

Some Japanese Whiskies Aren’t From Japan. Some Aren’t Even Whisky. (Published 2020)

Though the spirits have won praise and high prices, Japan has few rules for what those bottles should contain.

www.nytimes.com

So nothing should surprise me

Avi

 

[The Knize]

Age means years in the barrel, of course. Time in the bottle does not count.

 

[TexLaw]

Remember, they are mostly very small and have to be ahead of the market, so to speak. If there's an increase in demand for 18 year old Laphroaig they can't just make an extra batch of 18 year old scotch.

In fact, Laphroaig dropped the 18 year a few years back and (sort of) replaced it with the NAS Lore.

Other countries have other rules.

The USA rule is the same, in that any age statement must be true (i.e., the youngest whiskey cannot be younger than the age statement. In addition, an age statement is required for any whiskey that is younger than 4 years. After that, an age statement is voluntary (but still must be true if made).

If anyone is so inclined, they can check out 27 CFR s 5.40 for the gory details.

I looked into all that during the discussion about bonded whiskey, wherever that thread is, but I forgot to put it in there.

 

[TinyT]

In fact, Laphroaig dropped the 18 year a few years back and (sort of) replaced it with the NAS Lore.

What does the Lore mean?

 

[Doc4]

Age means years in the barrel, of course. Time in the bottle does not count.

True.

 

[TexLaw]

What does the Lore mean?

It's just what they named that expression. It's actually quite good, but I really miss the 18.

 

[TinyT]

It's just what they named that expression. It's actually quite good, but I really miss the 18.

Thanks.

 

[Abula831]

As far as NAS scotch, I usually don't go for it first. However, Ardbeg has released some great NAS scotch such as Grooves, Kelpie, An Oa, etc....Talisker Storm was also pretty good. Highland Park Dark Origins was tasty. Several bottlings that are NAS that have turned out great! While I might not buy a bottle, I do not shy away from trying them at my local bar. Cheers!

 

[Avi]

Age means years in the barrel, of course. Time in the bottle does not count.

right the bottle would not make sense..

 

[JCarr]

Older scotches can be very good...but because they stay in the barrels longer...they soak up more of the qualities of the wood. I tend to prefer 12 year old Single Malts. Glenfarclas 12 year is one of my favorites. You have to ask yourself, do I want to pay an additional $30-$50 for a scotch that's sat six more years in the wood? Don't get me wrong...some of them can be very good. I've had 18yr Glen Livet that was very enjoyable. But...you have to weigh it.

 

[The Knize]

right the bottle would not make sense..

Wine evolves in both the barrel and the bottle, of course. They say that spirits only evolve in the barrel. I personally am not entirely convinced that spirits do not change some in the bottle, but what do I know.

As to 12 versus 18 year old Scotch, I have a theory I have expressed on B&B before that I have never quite seen confirmed anywhere. I assume that the barrel that is aged 18 years is likely selected by the maker as being a better barrel(s) of whisky to the barrel(s) from which 12 year old whisky is sold. Additional aging is expensive--but I do not think it is as expensive as the price difference between 12 yo and 18 yo whisky. I would imagine that the maker chooses his better product to undergo that additional aging and command the much higher price. We know from the single-barrel offerings of various whiskeys/whiskies that individual barrels vary greatly. For that matter, why pick an inferior barrel to put the additional effort into.

I do not think that another 50 percent more in time in wood would account for the generally large difference in quality between 12 and 18 year old Scotch from the same maker.

Also, for what it is worth, I do not find that additional time in the barrel for bourbon above, I do not know, say, eight years is helpful. Perhaps it is the char that bourbon barrels get.

I have drunk very little Scotch aged more than 18 years. I cannot speak to Scotch aged longer than that.

Cognac does seem to get better and better the longer it is aged in the barrel.

 

[TinyT]

Wine evolves in both the barrel and the bottle, of course.

That's the real beauty of wine. The most memorable drinks I've ever had have been red wines, and not necessarily expensive ones either. I generally used to have half a bottle one night, the rest the next. I drink far less these days and whilst I could have, say, a bottle a month, once the obsessive part of me takes over I expect it'd soon be a bottle each weekend, then the slightly more pricier ones etc. You know how it goes. Still, as I said, red wine is the best thing I've ever drank.

 

[The Knize]

red wine is the best thing I've ever drank.

Ha! I fortunately or unfortunately seem to love, at least, seriatim, many different types of beverages. There is an awful lot to love about good red wine. "I do not remember the name of the village. I do not even remember the name of the girl. But the wine was Chambertin!"

 

[Avi]

Wine evolves in both the barrel and the bottle, of course. They say that spirits only evolve in the barrel. I personally am not entirely convinced that spirits do not change some in the bottle, but what do I know.

I am definitely not a super posh connoisseur but I always thought wine was just rotting in a bottle due to temperature dependent degradation? I’ve learned this the hard way keeping wine in non air conditioned homes with heat waves I think spirits just have such a high alcohol content it’s acting as a preservative. That said I think you are right, those volatile aromatics would be expect to decay in a bottle the same way. With 40% alcohol perhaps no one can tell

regards
avi

 

[TinyT]

"I do not remember the name of the village. I do not even remember the name of the girl. But the wine was Chambertin!"

Exactly!

 

[TexLaw]

Additional aging is expensive--but I do not think it is as expensive as the price difference between 12 yo and 18 yo whisky.

It's more expensive than you might think. The 18 year whisky has to pay 50% more rent in the warehouse, and that ain't cheap. A roughly 2% loss per year to the angels increases the cost per final unit quite a bit, as well.

In the end, though, it's all about supply and demand and what price the market will bear. As just about anyone around B&B knows very well, the price curve tends to steepen as a product becomes more scarce (or is perceived that way). Just look at how prices have increased over the last several years. That's not because the production cost has gone up that much.

 

[Zipslack]

Reading this thread reminds me how "pedestrian" I am. If I'm out, I just get Dewars...it's cheap and familiar. Otherwise, I might splurge for Glenfiddich single-malt.

 

[Doc4]

Reading this thread reminds me how "pedestrian" I am. If I'm out, I just get Dewars...it's cheap and familiar. Otherwise, I might splurge for Glenfiddich single-malt.

Pedestrians don't waste money on expensive sports cars.

 

[tankerjohn]

There's a wonderful documentary on Amazon Prime called "Scotch: A Golden Dream". Its mainly about Jim McEwan and the Islay distilleries, but also contains a lot about scotch and the industry in general. The doc pretty much confirms what @The Knize and @TexLaw wrote:
- distillers save the best barrels for longer aging
- the "Angel Share" is much greater on older scotchs, meaning less whisky in the barrel for us mere mortals (lucky angels)
- many of the whisky experts interviewed preferred 10-12 years over older one exactly due to influence of the barrel wood. Very YMMV.
- people are willing to pay big $$$ for really aged scotch - its a status thing. (there's even a companion industry for custom hand-blown bottles to put the high $$$ scotch in)
- the UK government taxes the begezzus out of the scotch industry and we consumers pay for it

Anyway, great doc. Highly recommended. Worth the watch just for the sweeping visuals of Islay and the Highlands. Damn, I need to go to Scotland!

Sorry, I don't really have an opinion on NAS scotch just yet. I've bought enough cheap scotch to know that I prefer cheap bourbon. But watching that doc has me itching to spurge on a better bottle.

 

[The Knize]

Thanks for the report and recommendation of that documentary tankerjohn. In particular, I am glad to know there is some basis for me saying distillers save their best barrels for aging. Also, I have probably glossed over the cost of the the loss of the Angel share in aging.

<the UK government taxes the begezzus out of the scotch industry and we consumers pay for it >

It sure does and I think more so for what is sold domestically in the UK. As I recall, Scotch is more expensive in Scotland than in the States. And, Scotland is a nice visit.

On this general topic, I have never read anything that explains how Peerless distillers produces a product that seems like it has had quite a bit of barrel age, when at least most of their products are only aged two or three years.

<I've bought enough cheap scotch to know that I prefer cheap bourbon. But watching that doc has me itching to spurge on a better bottle. >

I have probably written this previously, but it seems to me that the Scotch industry, like Cognac producers, has a tight rein on the quality of goods and what they sell for. As a result, there is no really good cheap Scotch or Cognac. (Some is more bearable than other, of course.) And the really expensive products generally deliver, not that some are not more wonderful than others. I am not sure how they manage that, but I think it comes from tight regulation and oversight. A strong guild, if you will. Whereas bourbon is a more variable thing. I definitely think the potential bang for the buck is better with less expensive bourbon over less expensive Scotch. Not that many years ago the difference was even larger.