What you want

[sorren]

With all the talk of NAS these days, what are your thoughts on on the other recent subjects, colour, chill filtering, cask strength, and single barrel releases, what is more important to you, over the last few years all these have been a talking point, I know it's all about the whisky but what is your order of importance..I would say..
No colour,
Cask strength,
Non chill filtered,
Single barrel,
NAS,
I don't want colour in my whisky, I want to see just how it comes out of the barrel, I love cask strength, it just gives you that something else, you drink it how you want, if non chill filtered you get that oily texture that also adds something to the whisky, I am a big fan of single barrels, you get to see the difference the cask can add, more single casks please, and last or least NAS, all I want is a single barrel, cask strength, ncf, no colour, NAS, bottle of whisky, not too much to ask .. Is it ..

[Quaich1]

Hi Sorren, interesting thread.

In order from most important to least important I would say:

-non-chill filtered
-Cask Strength
-no color
-single barrel
-NAS

I would add an important footnote here. I still am geared mostly toward age statement single malts. I have rarely been disappointed with them and have been much more disappointed with NAS expressions though some of these have been terrific but the laws of probability for success for my palate has been with age specified single malts bar none.
_________________
"Always carry a large flagon of whisky in case of snakebite and furthermore always carry a small snake."
W.C. Fields (1880-1946)

[sorren]

Murray I would agree with your notes, but I just feel the NAS is not so important to me, my perfect whisky would be a single barrel exactly as it comes... I don't really expect the list to differ too much, it will be interesting to see if anyone puts the NAS first ..

[opelfruit]

Nice one.


For me;

Non chill filtered
Natural colour
Cask strength


I find most ncf are higher abv anyway so it goes in hand with that. I don't want colour either but I'd rather not have chill filtration as that makes a tangible impact on the mouthfeel and flavour delivery. For example, Clynelish 14 is 46% and very lightly6 filtered, if at all (I know it doesnt state it but I don't think it is much) but it's coloured...The effect is good. No colouring would be better but it take no filtering over no colouring.

I've taken off NAS as there is no requirement, if it's young that's fine, just put on the age and ill still by a 4 yr old if it's good.
_________________
"Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whisky is barely enough."

[Grant M]

My order of importance would be:

Firstly both Cask strength and Non chill filtered are equally important, out of all the options they have the biggest part to play in the flavour profile.

Second would be Single barrel as no 2 casks are alike and it is always good to experience the difference from cask to cask from the same distillery but on the other hand it is always good to have consistency with a whisky you know and enjoy.

Third, NAS, i am not anti NAS, as long as it is a good whisky and priced according to the ages of the whiskies in it, there should always be a relationship between age and price but there isn't always a guarantee of a quality whisky with just age.

No colour, i can see the point of colouring in blends but there is no point of it in single malts and it should be stopped. I have never been convinced the colouring alters the flavour of the whisky with just a small drop added but there is really no need for it.

[opelfruit]

One of the reasons I have colouring is the same as you; it's totally unnecessary in most single malts. Cheap blends, yes.

The distilleries always harp on about how natural whisky is, how pure their water is and that their malt whisky is just water, malted barley and time.....and then they put colouring in it. Natural colouring I know but it's still taking something that they say is a 'raw and natural' product, allow the punters to buy into that concept and then make the end product look darker than it actually is so it appears older.


It's just cheeky
_________________
"Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whisky is barely enough."

[Alexppp]

I don't think I can really decide on an order of importance - cask strength isn't that big a deal for me for example as long as it's at least 43% and ideally 46% or above.

However, single cask would be near the bottom of my priorities - it's not only a matter of consistency, but also richness and character. Very often a marriage of two or three casks produces a more complex and rich whisky than a single cask for instance. Not to mention that it's sometimes a lottery if a cask is below par or sulphur-tainted etc. I know of course that mass-produced single malts are blends of far more than two or three casks, but technically speaking I'm not particularly set on single casks per se.

[Calder]

For me it would be great to see more standard original distillery bottlings that are non chill filtered, no colouring and bottled at a decent strength of 46% - 50%

I have found indie single cask bottlings a bit hit and miss although usually interesting but i dont buy that many of these. But the single cask bottlings from the likes of Glendronach have been very good, i would like to see more distilleries offering regular single cask bottlings as they have a huge stock to pick from and there is more chances of it being good.

[thijs100]

Cask strength would be number one for me, followed by non-chill filtered and no colour. They split second place. Then NAS and finally single barrel.

I'm slowly starting to come back from the notion that single cask is best. Surely, single casks will always be a big part of my whisky collection. But I feel that vattings (if done right), can give a whisky a lot more complexity than any single cask will ever have. Especially if you have a nice mix of ex-bourbon and ex-sherry casks.
_________________

[sorren]

I totally agree, although my opinion is with single casks it's not about the complexity, it's about the difference the casks offer, single casks give you a great opportunity to compare what is essentially the same whisky but is different 😐..that's also why I don't want colour in my whisky, I want to see the effects the barrel has had on the whisky, yes it's different with blends, most blends are bought just for the sake of drinking, not for the nosing, taste , complexity, it's such a shame many of the distillerys add colour, it always gives it away when an indie releases a single cask, that is miles different in colour to obs,

[GateToWire]

Good thread.
For me I want something that tastes unique and has a high craft quality so that means
No colour and no chill filtering.

I love whisky that is cask strength and single barrel but I don't think these are as important if you have quality from the lack of Caramel and natural filtering.

I tend to prefer age statements but it's not necessarily a sign of quality. You can have a great NAS whisky if it is presented in a craft style.

When you get all of these things together in one offering you usually have a great whisky.
Just my 2 cents
_________________
Mike