 ABV) and she shared her Macallan with the rest of us. She was heavily disappointed in hers and didn't think it was a reputable whisky brand worth the money she had paid. When I told her how much I paid for Stalk & Barrel she was even more adamant it was a much better whisky for the value then the "other" stuff (I won't say what she actually called it after that). Does it prove that a large brand name and expensive means better quality? I don't know but it certainly makes me wonder sometimes as to what some people think that means. I'd rather pay for quality vs name brand and don't get me wrong sometimes they do go hand in hand.  I.E. -> Tuesday of this week someone paid 401 Euros for a 50ml sample of Ardbeg Ardbog on E-Bay. 
So to those of you who don't see the value in paying $100 for a whisky that isn't even 4 years old move along and continue to enjoy your expensive or very old bottles after all it's your dime. BUT if you are someone who has an appreciation for quality then by all means at least try some and decide for yourself if you think it's quality for value.
It's available in Ontario, soon to be released in Alberta, New Brunswick and in some of the USA.
http://whiskycast.com/episode-424-may-12-2013/ - At the 26:00 minute mark of Mark Gillespie's episode as well Still Waters website has Mark's notes/score.
http://t.co/TPNBmq49Mo He also visited the distillery. I will post his interview with Barry & Barry once he airs it.
I am proud to buy and drink the whiskies I like. Stalk & Barrel Cask Strength is very good. Not only am I happy to have it in my personal collection, I look forward to sharing it and getting more.
Thanks Barry & Barry. Oh.... and Phaedrus!
Psssst! Oh good, you are still here. So another funny thing sort of happened while I was at the distillery. I thought I was picking up a small 50 ml sample for a fellow whisky writer, to which Barry & Barry obliged happily. When I got home and told the friend I had his sample, he advised he had already picked up his own bottles. So I ended up with a free sample... If you are still reading and would like to win that sample, please retweet my story and I'll be drawing a name at random on Sunday May 26th.
The honesty about honesty, honestly...
LASSIE: Ever stop and watch serendipity place things right in your lap? Maybe you might not notice right away but then something clicks and you say: Hey, what a minute and suddenly you piece everything together. No? Well, it happens to me quite often. Case in point: Honesty.
Honesty situation #1: What did she just say?? It began last week while I was in Toronto. We were fortunate enough to tour two whisky distilleries. One fairly established in the Canadian Industry and the other brand new. While I was at the newest distillery I sampled several things: Single Malt new make, 2 different cask strengths and a 46% ABV. The new make was, well "new make'ish" for a lack of a better term: Hot, very young and white. However, something a bit odd trickled into my head. It reminded me of gin. Yup, gin. Did I want to tell Barry & Barry that I felt like I was smelling a gin when I should have been using whisky words!? Well I could have as that would have been the most honest of answers but I stopped myself from blurting that out and tried to deconstruct what exactly made me think of gin.
Distilled Gin: Re-distillation of 96% ethyl alcohol, juniper berries and botanicals (I'm keeping that definition really simple). Breaking it down on the nose it was really green (chlorophyll) and herbal. The word herbaceous popped into my head and that really seemed to fit, so I said it: "This new make smells herbaceous". We were 6 people standing around and everyone sort of looked at me. I don't remember who spoke up but they repeated the word I had used as a descriptor, then a few jokes were made and we moved on. The point I'd like to make is no whisky maker wants to hear their product smells like gin (well at least I don't think they would, I could be wrong?) so I was hoping in my own way to state what I thought was different about the new make. I have never smelled a new make like it before so I'm hoping it's proof they are making something quite unique and that's reflected once it goes to sleep for a few years. I think I handled that in a good and honest way.
Honesty situation #2: Some people just can't handle the "truth". Two weeks ago we had a team building exercise (groan...) and at the end of the session we all agreed that we could speak to each other in a very honest way without repercussions or taking the information personally. Well, that lasted exactly 8 business days. I despise ineffective and wasteful meetings. Tuesday of this week, a 30 min conference call had drug over 2+ hours. A rambler... The kind that likes to share every detail right down to what time they stopped to talk to someone in the hallway at 8:22 had the table. After trying to remain patient for almost 15 minutes, I interrupted and asked if "we" still needed to be on the call. It wasn't so much what I said that hurt that person immensely, it was how I said it.  Some people left crying and my boss was dumbfounded. Fuuuudddddggggeeeeee. My delivery sucks, I've known this for years. I come across as very abrasive, direct, aggressive, etc.. Great for project management, not so good in a "team environment". My boss called me later on in the day and advised I had probably burned a few bridges, hurt some people's feelings quite badly and I should probably learn to keep my mouth shut (didn't exactly say it that way, but I got the just of it). So, in situation #2, I realized even though people agree you can be honest, you can't be sometimes or at least you have to be really careful how you say it. So, with that coworker, I know I need to be more "gentle" in a rounder way as to not "punch them in the face" with my brutal honesty. Lesson learned.
Honesty situation #3: Twitter tastings, are you being honest, honestly? This one, really has me perplexed as I play devil's advocate on the subject in my own head, often.
Balblair TT I recently participated in - DELISH!
I've been on twitter for one year now. I've been lucky enough to have been invited/chosen for a few whisky twitter tastings, but on average I'm just a little league player compared to some who seem to be on the panels regularly. Here's where I struggle so I'm trying to write this as honestly as I can: I follow about 75% of the twitter tastings that go on. I also pay attention to details. Some of the regulars who tend to get on most of the panels (very small number) have a tendency to LOOOOOVE every single nose/palate from every sample bottle they receive and are tweeting about (Spoken like Captain Kirk, emphasis on every.. single... word... as its own sentence, of course...) Hmmmm, doesn't that make you wonder about the validity of some of these whiskies?
Where is the integrity? Where is the honesty in that? Why would someone play up every single dram they are tweeting about like it's the nectar of the whisky Gods?! How does the help the people making the whisky or any of us that might want to buy it? Ok, yes.. nobody should say #fail!? This is utter crap... etc.. But surely to those of us who are quite serious and are truly passionate, isn't it our responsibility when we are chosen for these types of panels to be honest? If there's something unbalanced about the whisky, why not say so? If it's hot/young, wouldn't we all expect to see that in a tweet somewhere? How about it's a great whisky but I don't think the common person would afford to pay $350 for it? No, you don't see those types of comments - really rare. Are some people scared to say honestly what they think for fear the organizers won't pick them again?
Ok, so what's the purpose of the twitter tasting to begin with? Well obviously (I think anyway) to get the whiskies read about, some global attention, publicity, sales... So it only makes sense that the organizers as well as the whisky companies want great remarks, amazing reviews! Right?? Would I invite people to try whiskies and then have them say "these are terrible"? Of course not. But do I or you want a bunch of hyped up and in some cases (not all) untrue comments about what's being nosed/tasted? I would certainly hope not. Don't the whisky makers want comments that are truthful especially if there is room for improvement on a whisky they are making?
descriptors are not necessarily the truth and the credibility of these types of tastings will go down the tubes... Now that is my opinion, doesn't mean it's right or wrong it's