First up the Black Velvet - initially quite nice on the nose, like walking into a sweet shop, lots of marshmallow and confectionery smells. After a while it becomes a bit soapier and some strong sandalwood, not too unpleasant but just not as good over time.
More sweets on the palate, gets quite fizzy and soapy as well, not undrinkable but am happy that it was a fairly small sample... Score-wise it's about an 80 to nose, 72 to taste/finish, overall 76.
Then the JW Double Black, for me the best value of the JWs I've tried - the nose is a bit thin but still pretty good, smoky as expected and quite salty.
The palate is better than the nose, again a bit watery but overall the decent level of peat sort of masks it, and gets sweeter/honeyed on the finish. Nose/palate get an 82/84 so overall an 83. At a higher strength this would be great.
Finally the Campbeltown Loch - an old blend with unknown components. Nice to dream that it could contain some old Springbank, but probably not in reality. This page (http://scotswhiskey-community.de/forum/index.php/Thread/342-Campbeltown-Loch/) suggests that the more modern Campbeltown Loch contained a bit of Longrow, but who knows what went in back when this was released.
The nose is pretty interesting, quite fruity and malty but also something a bit funky and artificial. The colour is quite dark for a (presumably) young blend, so guessing there's a fair bit of E150 gone into this.
On the palate you get the fruit and also a bit spicy, fuller-bodied than the JW, but again the slightly artificial note prevents it from being that pleasant to drink too much of. Overall (nose 83, palate 79) gets an 81.
So the modern blend takes it, but no real winners - here's hoping that Diageo in a fit of madness, decide to up the ABV of Double Black to 46%.