On Sep 26, 9:05*am, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:30:49 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Sep 21, 12:14*am, George Cleveland
wrote:

I bought a bottle of 10 year old Lamphroaig a few months ago and have
consumed about 3/4 of it in that time. The other day I came across a
bottle of Irish 1995 Knappogue Castle single malt on sale, and while
different than the Lamphroaig, I found myself really liking that too.

So my question to the ROFFians here is what else is there that is
tasty and less than $50/bottle? Anyone have a favorite?

The Knappogue Castle is an Irish Single Malt WhiskEy while Laphroaig
is a Single Malt Scotch Whisky (no "e"). There are distinct
differences between the two other than the insertion of the vowel
before the "y".

The malts of Scotland are distilled in different areas of the country
and have distinct characteristics.

Glenn Livet, Glenn Farclais, even the macallan 10 and 12 year olds are
kind of the "entry" level malts in that one or the other is carried by
most any restaurant or bar and in your local mart's liquor sections.

Howsabout Glenn Frey and Glenn Close...? *Most seem to be comme ci comme ca on
those...but be careful with Glenn Beck - from what I hear, you'll either become
an instant rabid fan or violently ill...

In the 10-15 year pairings I am partial to the following in order -
Highland Park 12, Bunnahabhan, Bruichladdich, and Glenn Rothes. But if
you one remembers the simple rule that there is no such thing as a bad
single malt whisky, they should all be sufficient for your growing
interests. BTW, I had the Bunnahabhan when we met up at the cabin in
the UP and John took a particular liking to it. Tow other lower priced
malts i can recommend are the Arbelor and the Glen Moray.

Um..."Arbelor"...? *A favorite of gardeners and morticians...?



Does this make *me another elite, snobbish, flyfishing poseur, the kind I used to
pity and mock? And how should I feel about that?

Write down "Glenn Livet" and "Arbelor" on a piece of paper. *Go to the fanciest,
snobbiest whisky purveyor in your general area. *Hand it to the manager and say
you'd like those. *



Never understood the pity and mock thing but you should feel ashamed
for it and lucky that you have the opportunity now to make up for past
transgressions AND that you have people out there who have no problem
helping you dislocate the green stuff from your wallet.

Seriously, though, Wayne does know his whisky and offers some good
suggestions...apparently, however, he might have been...um...doing some
testing... prior to posting...

About the least-expensive single malt I know of is the McClelland's line. *It
is/was (I'm not sure what it'd be with the dollar) under $30USD a liter. *They
have one from each of the regions. *Some like one or more of them, some don't
like any, but no one AFAIK claims it's anything more than what it is -
inexpensive, young whisky. *I have no idea whether you'd like any of them, but
trying them won't be too expensive. *And if you also like scotch mixed drinks,
there's an place to use what you don't like neat.

IAC, whisky is pretty subjective, so what I might think is great, you might
think is not. *I don't think I've ever even heard of a whisky that is
universally agreed to be perfect on all counts. *In fact, I don't think I've
even heard of one that even _most_ agree is "great" on all counts - it's just so
subjective.

If you're trying to educate your palate and don't have a
knowledgeable source to turn (in person), I'd start trying various bottlings,
reading up, attending tastings, etc. *If all you want to do is find a whisky you
like and stick with it, just find a bar with a pretty good selection of "the
main suspects" of commonly-available, under-$50 bottle whiskies. *Darned few
whisky drinkers (at least "normal" ones) would say most of the common "Glens,"
Highland Park, etc. are "bad," and Aberlour has, IIRC, a couple of under-$50
bottlings. *Of the "commons," Highland Park is a (generally) highly-rated
choice, if that means anything. *

Another thing to _possibly_ consider, if you plan on "adopting" a "go-to" and
drinking that choice "out" much - Glenlivet and the like are going to be
_significantly_ less across-the-board and in relation to the cost per bottle
than some of the more expensive or just uncommon choices (uncommon as to being
ordered in all bars, rather than "uncommon" as to whisky). *IME, if a given
booze is common, the markup is proportionally less and/or priced more in-line
with its actual cost - for example, Glenlivet might be just another "call" or
"premium," but Laphroaig and Lagavulin might be "menu" items, so that Glenlivet,
etc., is, say, $6.00 and the leapfrog and Lagavulin $12.00 and $15.00. *Some
places that cater to a whisky crown do tend to price according to actual cost,
but most don't, IME.


Hm.....so, try some. You'll maybe like some and maybe not some
others. And the cheap ones cost less than the expensive ones. And the
common ones appear to be more common than the not so common ones.
Well......gosh.....who'da thunk it?

Imbecile.

g.