Colour: The Moon is around 2-3 shades darker than the much longer matured TWA.
Nose: The Moon has a quite shy nose that is very complex on a lot of
different aromas mainly on honey, fruits (oranges, apples) and some
very fine peaty notes. The TWA is stronger in the nose due to its
higher abv of 51,4% with again honey and fruits (lemon, apples) but
almost no peat at all. So it is a comparable profile (no wonder as the
stills are still the same) but with a significant difference in the peat
levels. Nevertheless both are very nice and I vote for a draw.
Arrival: Very bold and instantly mouthcoating with the Moon, a
little less rich but very creamy with the TWA. The TWA's heavier
alcohol level demands its toll on the tongue with some hot moments. But
due to its incredible boldness the Moon is the clear winner in this
Body: The TWA adds to the honeys and fruits some medical notes
(eucalyptus, antiseptic) that get a little bitter over time. The Moon
stays smooth but with a significantly stronger peaty profile (than in the
nose) that is nicely imbedded in the sweet malt sugar and honey base and
topped with delicious exotic fruity flavours (a hint of banana besides
all the citrus). The Moon takes this round again due to its higher
complexity and greater harmony of all the flavours and aromas.
Finish: The TWA's finish is substantially longer than the Moon's and
it adds surprisingly some new flavours to the party, most prominently
lemon grass. The Moon simply extends its beautiful mouthfeel into the
finish what is great, but too short (for me). So here the TWA is
Surprisingly the distillation profiles are quite similar (except the
peating level) but this will change during the next decade. So probably
the setting at the end of the crisis remained unchanged from the
seventies whisky boom and it was changed at a later point in time. I
will check with later releases...
But nevertheless the Moon is the clear winner in this head-to-head
despite almost 10 years less maturation time. Could bottle
maturation possibly played a major role here? Not sure, maybe it was
simply the peat that transformed the spirit into a more mellow and
Glen Garioch 24 yo 1989/2014 (51.4%, The Whisky Agency, The Perfect Dram, refill hogshead) Isn’t it great that the Agency could find a pre-1990 cask! Colour: white wine. Nose: well, it seems that there were still echoes of GG’s former mineraly, if not smokiness. In truth, this is very mineral and quite medicinal, and notes of chalk, aspirin tablets, limestone, eucalyptus and antiseptic do abound. After a few minutes, we find more apple and walnut peelings, as well as an unusual ‘grassy’ smokiness. Garden bonfire, broken branches… The whole is quite austere, but it’s got some great character. With water: some dry barley and other grains come out. Smoky porridge, perhaps? Mouth (neat): all the fruits that weren’t in the nose are here, together with a perfect old-style-ness that would involve raw wool, chalk, ink, grass, even vegetables, walnuts… The medicinal side is there too, but it’s rather more discreet. With water: yes, grapefruits and limes. Great bottle. Finish: relatively long and beautifully lifted by citrus and lemony grasses. Not just lemongrass! Comments: I simply say ‘kudos’. Not a style/expression of Glen Garioch that’s easy to find as a new bottling anywhere else these days. Right up my alley! SGP:463 - 91
Der braucht Zeit im Glas. Anfangs nur ein leichter Zest und etwas Malz. Später kommen florale und Kräuternoten dazu. Etwas Butter und Karamell. Der Zest bleibt. Der Alkohol sticht ein wenig in der Nase. Jetzt kommen Fruchtnoten dazu. Orangen und weiße Trauben. Mit Wasser geht der Zest, die floralen Noten werden stärker.
Sehr süß, Honigtopf, kaum, eigentlich gar keine Eichennoten. Mit Wasser nicht mehr ganz so süß, jetzt ist auch die Eiche da.
Auch im Abgang sehr süß und eher kurz. Mit Wasser deutlich länger und herber.
Ein eher einfacher, sehr süffiger Malt. Mir persönlich einen Tick zu süß. Gewinnt aus meiner Sicht mit Wasser deutlich!