47 × in wishlist
446 × member ratings
2537 × in collection
Whisky Reviews for Laphroaig Cairdeas
70 users have left a review for this whisky and scored it an average of 85.62 points
- I do not know what the sissis have here. Burning iodine tincture poured over cotton candy, brine with furztrockenem white wine diluted to. Simply the full Laphipower, young and unadulterated. Please do not take this whisky too seriously, but who likes the Quarter Cask will understand what I mean. Delicious!
- I honestly can not understand the bad reviews here. I think the stuff is good and tasty. Young and not very complex, but still interesting. Yesterday I got a broken bottle from a bottle division for tasting and was biased before the first tasting because of the rating here only negative. With the tasting then came the all clear. Much better than feared! Quite different from the earlier Cairdeas and interestingly also quite different from the normal Quarter Cask. While I do not consider the Cairdeas 2017 a high-flyer, I think it's worth a meager 84 points. Especially in comparison with other whiskys, which enter significantly more points on this portal. I made a repeated comparison with the standard Laphroaig Quarter Cask OB 48 Vol.% (Filling 2016), the Laphroaig 12 yo Highgrove Cask # 3009 and the Elements of Islay Lg5 (yes, the Lg5 is not a Laphroaig, it's clear, nonetheless the comparison after the first tasting of the Cairdeas in 2017 came to a head). In a nutshell, I think the highgrove is better, because it is more complex, with more fruit flavors, more filigree and more complex. The Cairdeas 2017 seems to me less complex and has undiluted more superficial alcohol than the Highgrove, but the Cairdeas but has more of the Laphroaig-typical peat-iodine character, the flavor is very nicely subtle highlighted. Incidentally, the Cairdeas 2017 is a bit similar to the Cairdeas 2014, which I also tasted in comparison (the new Cairdeas is still very different from the previous Cairdeas, but also good). I think that the standard quartercask (as much as I like it, especially as it is an absolute value for money high-flyer with about 30 €) is qualitatively inferior to the Cairdeas 2017 (which is supposed to be the QC Cask Strength). Especially if you dilute the Cairdeas to 48 Vol.%, A direct comparison is quite possible. The Cairdeas seems to me more subtle, fleet-footed and with more typical iodine flavors of the fresh-fruity nature of the compared rather clumsy-looking standard QC (I must say, the comparison was made with the 2016 QC with the modern label, the older with the old label was, in my memory, also better than the new standard QC). The Lg5 can not deny his Lagavulin distillery profile (he should not even ;-)) and is therefore only partially comparable, but also belongs to the "clean transparent Peat Group". The Lg5 I find excellent, but not better by 4 points, as the reviews suggest here on Whiskybase.com. I have to say honestly, sometimes I do not understand the reviews here. Otherwise, they will fit very often again and for me Whiskybase.com is actually a good gauge against the sample vial or the first test bottle. But sometimes strange results come out (at least I think that's my 2 cents ...).
- New Update (as of 4th of August, 2017), (BTW 90/100 instead of 88/100, formerly):Head-to-head comparison with the CS#009 (I received the CS today), the ABV is nearly the same, so why not comparing both neat, albeit obviously having such a different character? But the retrospect may have proved me right (at least out of my very personal perspective).
The maybe quite astonishing (personal) result:The Cairdeas is excellent, and maybe more than that: it is absolutely not worse than the CS 009 (maybe even better??!).
I must admit, as I love the Laphroaig 10 y.o. Cask Strength so much, I was only keen on the CS and thus consequentially neglected to order enough Cairdeas. For my belief (without knowing it) the Cairdeas was only kind of an adjunct one had to order to get the CS 009. But the comparing tasting session from tonight taught me being wrong.
The Cask Strength (CS009) is excellent, no doubt, but it is of a quite strong and kind of warm sweet compactness, while the Cairdeas 2017 is not that sweet (other kind of sweetness, i.e. no "warm" kind of sweetness which you typically get from ex-Sherry- or ex-Bourbon-Casks) instead it is quite austere, dry, fresh, "transparent", with lovely Laphroaigian notes of austere peated and iodine "quasi-fruit", that typical "Laphroaginish in its naked form" (if you know what I mean. I know, this is quite difficult to explain and to describe in words).
After all, I think that even the price tag is alright. I had first been bashing the too high price. The price/performance ratio of the CS009 is so extremely good and better of course. But compared with other Islay whiskies and Laphies in the market, I think the price for the Cairdeas is absolutely OK.
It seems that I have to re-order it (fortunately the Cairdeas is still available, while the CS is aleady sold out).#########################################Old note from before:
I made a head-to-head comparison with Laphroaig Standard Quarter Cask (bought in 2016, new label, https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/42887/laphroaig-quarter-cask ) and with Ardbeg Ten (bought in January 2014, https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/306/ardbeg-ten ).
Here is my personal ranking:
1. Laphroaig Cairdeas 2017, 88/100 (revised on 4th of August, 2017: 90/100)
2. Ardbeg Ten, 88-/100
3. Laphroaig Quarter Cask (2016), 86/100
The Cairdeas 2017 exhibits a very tasty clean peaty profile, very fresh, light and fruity, and partly sweet. A nice peaty summer dram with an underlying typical Laphroaig layer. Very nice, very quaffable!
The Ardbeg Ten is less sweet, less fruity, less fresh. But also an excellent peated dram. Of course, as everyone knows ;-). Different, but same quality (I ranked it slightly lower than the Cairdeas). However: The price is more than different ...
I perceive the standard Laphroaig Quarter Cask (48% ABV) to being more dump, more simple, more of a compact brute than the fresh lightweight Cairdeas 2017. Even when I dilute the Cairdeas to 48% ABV, the impression remains (the perceived difference in quality does not origin from the difference in ABV). The Cairdeas does "swim" very well, BTW, the addition of water is recommended. With respect to overall quality, the Cairdeas outperforms the standard Quarter Cask, this is at least my personal opinion. This hypothesizes that Laphroaig might have used better casks for this "QC Cairdeas" than for the mass market product, the standard Quarter Cask. Maybe the same practice as obviously applied for the excellent 10 years old Cask Strength, compared to the 10 y.o. (40%ABV) standard.
By the way, I remember that the Quarter Cask (48% ABV) with the old label from some years ago seemed to be of better quality than the current release. I loved that old one very much. The new one seems to be more compact, more "modern", more simple (maybe, I'm wrong as it is only in my memory).
The general ranking of the three above mentioned whiskies - here at Whiskybase.com - is as follows (1st of August, 2017):
3. Laphroaig Cairdeas 2017, 84.10/100
1. Ardbeg Ten, 86.40/100
2. Laphroaig Quarter Cask (2016), 85.05/100
What is suprising for me is that the Laphroaig Cairdeas is rated lower than the standard Quarter Cask (with the new label). Seems quite strange to me.
OK, the price ...
Together with international shipping costs from UK this is too high for my feeling. However, look at the high prices of many IB's, today. This maybe relativizes the price (of course if one compares it with the price/performance ratios of an Ardbeg Ten, a Laphroaig QC or especially a Laphroaig 10 y.o. Cask Strength, then it looks different).
P.S.: I used "presentation=96" in order to compensate for the "price tag" as I wanted to adjust the overall rating to be influenced by taste and nose, only, but not by price or presentation.
- After the fancy and special finishes of the last Cairdeas bottlings, I am actually disappointed with this finish. Sure, this year's Cairdeas offers all that I expect from a Laphi, but in my eyes it's nothing special. A typical Laphroaig just, no more and no less.
Immediately mineral peat aroma rises from the glass. A subtle smoky note joins and becomes more intense and more phenolic over time. Iodine and a hint of salt exude this typical Laphroaigaroma, slowly spicy wood elements come to light. Subtle fruit flavors such as oranges and citrus fruit fight through the cold smoke and the dominant peat. Mineral, peaty, cold smoke and iodine, some fruit and wood, more I do not expect of a Laphi.
Spicy wood and soft peat dominate briefly, then cold and sharp smoke in the mouth explodes. Powerful and powerful, these aromas hit the palate and make the entire mouth glow. Peppery sharpness lays over the tongue, it tingles and bizzles on the tip of the tongue. Ash and extinguished coal pieces show up shortly before earthy clay and subtly fruity peat mix with spicy and dry wood elements. Again comes iodine and a pinch of salt to light. Gradually, only the spicy and creamy wood tones dominate.
Dry wood and a cold cloud of smoke start the finish. Slowly the ashes and the burned wood come back. Fruity echoes appear for a moment, then dominate only the pleasant cold smoke, loamy peat and spicy wood. These aromas stick to the palate for a long time, leaving a cozy warmth.
- [June, 2017] I had this dram during a Feis Ile tasting at Bonn.
This is a very young, immature and sometimes nice, sometimes diabolic whisky - exactly my definition of a paedophilic dram...
The colour is pale straw and the texture shows many fast legs and small tears that later get bigger. The nose is mighty malty and just a little phenolic, I would call this immature. And there is a minor astringent feeling in the nose (I know this sounds really strange, but it is as it is...).
The taste is malty sweet, phenolic and very peppery from new woods, again it is a little immature. With water the whole dram improves a lot: the nose shows some additional herbal aromas, the mouthfeel gets smoother, the taste is sweeter (but still somewhat immature) and the finish is not that bitter and drying. I scored this whisky 2 points lower when neat (e.g., just 81 on the finish).
The mouthfeel is very hot and again slightly astringent (cold ashes, metallic). The finish is quite long but gets bitter and drying from heavy tannins.
- No finishes no 5 different barrels or other experiments. An honest, good and solid Laphi with a lot of Brennereicharakter. I really like it!
directly typical phenolic Laphi smoke, the 57% are not felt at all and beautifully integrated. In addition, a great iodine-rubber note reminds me somehow of Springbank. I can find fruit notes apart from a hinted rassberrie which probably comes from the sweet gum, but I still like the nose very well. from the nose I would have estimated at 40%
on the tongue you can feel the slight sweet-salty biting on the tongue but still not intrusive. the flavors from the nose are also on the tongue at first, then it changes into tenderly bitter oak flavors. the second sip makes it a bit saltier.
The finish very nicely fills the entire mouth, is medium in length and slightly dry. with iodine and salted seaweed. Above all are the wood flavors
- Nose: Starts quite sweet and creamy, with Scottish Tablet, caramel , vanilla fudge, and some white pepper to balance it. There’s also a nice salty Caramel touch, with the Laphraoig smokiness. charcoal, and maybe tar, but don’t expect a lot of medicinal touches on this one.. It’s quite mild peat wise , but still packs enough peatiness.
Palate: Good mouthful all in all on this one, with an initial peppery attack, moving to old style caramel candy , vanilla fudge, sweet smoke, salt and maybe a bit of sea spray , tar and soot, and quite a bit of warm wood smoke.
Finish: Sweet smoke, toasted oak, pepper, and more Tablet.
- Nice, it must be said. I emptied a bottle of the standard Quarter Cask some time ago and actually liked it. Nothing overly complex, but robust and quaffable. Sure, the maturation in quarter casks does have a simple reason: compared to standard barrels the spirit gets more flavour in a shorter maturation period thanks to the quarter casks' surface-volume-ratio (but isn't more mature). Meaning Beam Suntory are getting earlier yields while we are getting a younger, feisty whisky (which isn't a bad thing in this case, but must not be forgotten, especially in terms of pricing).
Though the 10 year old (especially the cask strength edition!) remains my favourite, this cask strength edition of the Quarter Cask from the Cairdeas range is a real treat, but in my opinion the price is a tad too steep.
Iodine, slightly bitter smoke and sweet grains are the first impressions, followed by vanilla, green apples, and heather. Spent bonfire. The alcohol prickles on the nose, but isn't pungent at all. After a while there's samphire, leading into light notes of frankincense.
Very sweet and intense, no burning despite cask strength, oily mouthfeel. Typical slightly dry Laphroaig-smoke with iodine, sweet apples, caramel and honey, juicy fruit bubblegum. Soft oaky spiciness, no bitterness at all thanks to the wood type (-> Quercus alba).
Very nice and smoky long finish with iodine and mocha. Apple juice and heather honey keep lingering in my mouth, only outlasted by the lovely smoke of Laphroaig.
Buttered malt, fine smoke. The pepper that goes up. Everything grows while remaining quite austere despite a noticeable note of vanilla. With a little water, rounder with herbs, oregano ...
Clearly on the ground of Lap QC, but in raw version of barrel. Marked by spices, it remains soft. It's even more blatant with water, very sweet and fragrant.
Very mellow, on liquorice, coffee, leather, smoke, pepper. With water, spices are more diverse and softer.
Nose & Mouth 3/5
Whisky n ° 1824