Chivas Regal 18yo
Scotch Gold Signature Series | 40% ABV
In Today’s Sea Of Whisky Availability, Should We Still Care About Blends?
You might have noticed that I nicked the text in the ‘Too long, didn’t read’ section from the lyrics of Radiohead’s classic ‘The Bends’, but doesn’t it just seem fitting in this context?
I mean, who cares for blends anyway in today’s sea of whisky availability? We tend to look past them, often discarding a bottle as soon as we don’t see that magical word ‘malt’ somewhere on the label - preferably with the addition of the word ‘single’ right next to it. And before you fret this will turn into yet another little lecture on how blends are the foundation on which this billion pound industry is built – I’ll stay well clear, promise. But I do want to touch upon another thing or two.
One of the biggest paradoxes in whisky is, in my opinion, the striving for consistency. On the one hand, from the business side of things, being able to offer your customer a product that is consistent in quality and flavour profile, it makes perfect sense as you’re trying to build a brand and want to establish brand loyalty. On the other hand, dealing with a product where batch production (and therefore: batch variation) is an essential element of the whole process, makes for a variable if ever there was one. Add to that a whole array of other variables coming into play like cask management, wear and tear effects, warehousing conditions, occasional changes in ownership and so on and it‘s beginning to look like a case where the ‘copy-paste’ practice simply won’t fly. And it doesn’t end there, as you’ll also have to take into account that what you’re given to work with, is subject to change, or even has a limited availability (Caperdonich being a prime example here of what used to be a cornerstone for the creation of Chivas) while at the same time you are expected to deliver a quality product that shows consistency over time as well. To top things off, chances are, you’ll be also dealing with those clever folk at finances or marketing who’ll want to have a word every now and then about things like cost efficiency or tapping into new markets … The often idealized ‘dream job’ of a master blender who gets to spend his days trying cask samples, might suddenly become a whole lot less romantic.
Even if you are producing blends, where you’ll be able to rely on a consistent product coming from the column stills, the task of coming up with a similar product every single time is daunting to say the least. For the Chivas brand alone, master blender Colin Scott works with some 100 different whiskies for the creation of the 12 year old. To use an obvious analogy: anyone who’s given a fair share of talent may well be able to master an instrument, but becoming a master blender is very much like making it to becoming the composer and director for a full-fledged symphonic orchestra. Not only will you need a profound knowledge and understanding of each and every instrument in its own right , you’ll also need to know how to make them sound good together. It takes years and years of training and practice, and even then, it truly takes the nose of a master to pull it off. Time and time again.
Review
Coloured and chill-filtered, 40% ABV
£45-£55. Available literally everywhere, anytime
The concept of consistency in whisky is a fallacy, an ideal rather than a given fact. I encourage anyone to hunt down some old 60s or 70s blends on auction sites (they’re usually not overly expensive) and hold them head to head with a contemporary sibling. If you don’t agree that there will be noticeable differences between, say, a 1970s Chivas 12 and one from last year, I’ll buy them off you. These changes in flavour happen ever so slightly and gradually of course, little by little as the years go by. But put two of them head to head with 3 or so decades in between them and chances are you’ll be surprised on how much the two may differ. Chivas Regal in particular is an interesting example to explore these things. It’s arguably one of the most established brands of Scotch whisky out there. It is also one of the oldest and longest lasting brands on the market, dating back to the early 20th century, with the 12 year old being the flagship dating back to the 1930s. (The 18 year old expression only saw the light of day in 1997, when Chivas Brothers was still under ownership of Seagram’s, as Pernod Ricard didn’t gain ownership until after the turn of the 21st century.)
Nose
There’s a floral note here, but what really speaks are the sweet fruits: baked apples, sweet pears, apricot, galia melon, with sweet baking spices, almonds and marzipan (I’m betting that would be the well-aged grain whisky in there), all covered in golden honey. Quite rich and sweet, but never sickly or overly sugared. It’s definitely scoring points here. Rich and layered, but as far away from difficult or complex as you can imagine.
Palate
Surprisingly prickly, and definitely a more grainy sweetness this time. Granulated sugar, honey and vanilla. A faint element of burnt toast going into a dry woody note towards the finish, which adds some character. But all in all a case of too little too late I’m afraid. This is far too restrained in terms of development, not getting a lot of help from a thin body and watery mouthfeel. The palate simply is a mere echo of what the nose announced.
The Dregs
This started off very promising – the nose is very inviting and pleasant, so it really is a crying shame that very little of that lovely fruit fest shines through on the palate. When you take the whole thing into consideration – presentation, experience, price – there’s little to argue about here. Yet, for a whisky sitting in a price bracket between £45 and £55, it’s facing some stiff competition. All in all, I’m happy to have this in my cabinet as the nose really is a work of art and skill. Should the palate have been even marginally more interesting, this would easily score a point more, but seeing how it left me underwhelmed…
Score: 5/10
Lead image kindly provided by Bulk Supermarket.
Tried this? Share your thoughts in the comments below. EA