Committee Release | 50.2% ABV

Score: 5/10

**Average.**
***TL;DR***
*Good, but not great - still too expensive*

Is this the release that breaks a bad run?

So, here we are again. The time has rolled around for all cult members to digitally punch in our card numbers, refresh online sales portals and sweat the same stale sweat that can only belong to an imminent Ardbeg Day bottling. This torture turns monotonous, and I am all the more bitter for it.

Why participate in such an expensive sadomasochistic ritual? For the same reasons I outlined in my review of the Ardbeg Hypernova. To summarise - this was for the edification of myself and my whisky club, with the intent that only one bottle need be bought for a dozen or two to sample this year’s publicised mediocrity.

Those most corrupted by marketing and thus ardent to the brand will likely never be dissuaded from purchasing, regardless of flavour, and hence buy bottles as soon as they become available. For the rest, getting to taste the committee release first should offer some direction as to the decision of whether or not to buy the later released general populace bottling, having had the burden of curiosity alleviated.

On that cheery note, shall we get on with the specifics? I’ll try to keep it short and sweet here since I’m sure most of you are well familiarised with the Ardbeg Day rhythm by now, as well as the borderline tedious call-response nature of most reviewer’s reactions - evidently, myself included.

Tyree’s Review

Ardbeg Heavy Vapours, Committee Release 2023, 50.2% ABV
AUD$255 paid

For this year’s release, the story goes that Dr. Bill Lumsden removed the purifier from Ardbeg’s still to remove any premature condensation of lower volatility components before being sent through the condenser. The idea, I’m sure, was to create a more viscous spirit with some organoleptic properties commensurate with the lower volatility compounds. Sounds fair enough on face value, though it ought to be pondered how large the difference in new-make composition is as a result, as well as how much of any potential new-make differences propagate significantly into the final whisky’s qualities after maturation.

According to an interview Lumsden participated in for WhiskyCast, the experiment which gave birth to this year’s release was conducted 12 years ago. Even allowing for time of year and the time taken to dump casks, blend, reduce ABV, package and distribute, it’s safe to assume this bottling is at least 11 years old, given that Lumsden claims the experiment was only ever conducted in one batch. That gives us a useful timeline to infer some other pieces of data based on comparative observations - things like relative maturity and phenolic retention for instance.

Nose

Young for the age. Blind I would probably peg this around the six to eight year old mark, with a similar blend of casks as those used to mature the 10yo. Smoked almonds, slightly vegetal greenery plus menthol and some hot plastic reminiscent of mezcal. Behind the peat there’s strong lime peel, a touch of the residual acetic components, a wee bit of roasted cacao nib and hints of rock pools at low tide plus iodine disinfectant (ie bromophenols). The usual tarry and medicinal cresols continue to develop, but the new-make spirit characters still smother their expressiveness substantially.

Palate

More of what’s promised from the nose; the citric elements are punchy with huge lemon and lime oils. The youthfulness is slightly more tame - though there is some new-make implied sweetness - allowing more of the medicinal phenolic notes to come forward, but there’s still a pronounced mezcal accent tinged with youthful menthols. There’s apple flesh, more light cacao nibs, farm-like lanolin, savoury green herbs, something vegetal again and then some cigar ashes and more smokey phenols in the finish, the tarriness growing steadily throughout. The texture is perhaps slightly more viscous than the 10, but that could well be the ABV difference.

The Dregs

As a quick refresher from my stance on the Ardbeg Hypernova, I really don’t mind peated new-make notes; mezcal is great fun. For most people’s palates though, I think this is probably an improvement on the Hypernova for two reasons. First, the new-make tones aren’t as bold and the Ardbeg DNA is more clearly heard as a result. Second, and I think much more importantly, the price has come down significantly. This is still too expensive for what it is, and still loses a full point in the score as a result. Does that mean I think this juice is objectively worth a six? Yes, I’d argue it’s better than average. There’s a lot I like in this release, but there’s huge room for improvement at the asking price. Another few years in cask, released at a true cask strength and for $50 or so cheaper, this might have been a very good bottling.

Score: 5/10

Adamh’s Review

Ardbeg Heavy Vapours, Committee Release 2023, 50.2% ABV
€125 at launch

According to the marketing blurb on the official Ardbeg website: “Something weird has been going down at the distillery. The legendary purifier on the still – responsible for Ardbeg’s exalted balance – is nowhere to be seen. And this whisky is the consequence. The familiar harmony between peat and floral fruitiness has been disrupted. What have risen are the untamed darker flavours and notes, gathering and filling the senses. It is an ominous dram of dramatic, aromatic pungency. Heavy Vapours will rise.”

So, it’s all about the missing purifier with Ardbeg’s most recent committee release. But what is a purifier? And how has this one become the stuff of legends?

Purifiers are rare. Besides Ardbeg, you can find them at distilleries such as Glen Grant, Strathmill, Talisker and Tormore, among others. They were engineered in the 19th Century when industrial distilling became the norm and producers tried to distinguish their whiskies from those of the others.

Purifiers are cylindrical copper vessels installed mid-way on the underside of the lyne arm which transports the freshly-distilled vapours from the spirit still to the condenser. The purifiers are cooled from the outside and hold a copper plate on the inside which makes the vapours take a detour through their bottom.

As the purifier is cooler than the lyne arm, it condenses some of the heavy vapours that cannot remount it and thereby extracts higher fatty acid esters and sulphurous compounds from them. These extracts are then reinserted into the still through a small copper pipe. As purifiers thus increase reflux and copper contact, they serve to extract undesirable heavy congeners from the spirit. Hence, they are generally assumed to make the spirit lighter. I’m sure that the actual chemistry is more complicated than this, but this should do for the time being.

At Ardbeg, the purifier is installed on the lye pipe of their spirit still. On the Islay Whisky Academy website, Mickey Heads, Ardbeg’s former manager, reports he doesn’t remember a time when Ardbeg didn’t use a purifier and it lends the whisky its light and fruity character. Its removal should result in a more robust and heavy spirit.

This release gets its name from the heavy vapours which should have made it into the spirit due to the absent purifier. The Heavy Vapours was matured in ex-bourbon casks and bottled at 50.2%. It’s non-chill filtered and has not been coloured. As other committee releases, the whisky comes without an age statement, but Tyree provides us with some compelling clues about the likely age of this liquid.

My review is based on a community-sourced sample and a taste from the bottle of a friend for comparison. I tasted the whisky on three different occasions.

Score: 3/10

**Disappointing.**
***TL;DR***
*Devoid of aromatic vapours*

Nose

The whisky is young and prickly on the nose. In a blind tasting, I’d have guessed its age to lie somewhere around the five-year mark, not least because I find some metallic notes on the nose which I usually tend to get from very young whiskies. The aromas are anything but heavy on the nose, but the marketing blurb is certainly right about the missing balance. The profile is peaty-maritime with some fruity and herbal aspects. The peat is on the ashy charcoal side while the maritime notes are towards the fishy end. Green apples and pears with a dash of lime lend the nose a fruity undertone. I also find some liquorice and lovage, and there’s a candy-sweetness to it.

Palate

The spirit has a creamy mouthfeel, but the taste is flat, watery, and lacking balance. As on the nose, the arrival is prickly and young with a metallic note. The charcoal and the maritime notes continue to dominate. The pears and apples are gone, but the dash of lime, candy sweetness, and the lovage remain and lend the whisky aromatic undertones. The finish is medium and comes with sweet liquorice and ashy smoke. Green apples and lovage as well as a slightly metallic note linger on.

The Dregs

Sometimes, situations become so surreal that you don’t really know what to make of them. This holds as much for great art as it does for marketing. Calling this whisky Heavy Vapours verges on the absurd – at least when it comes to the delivery.

This whisky is devoid of aromatic vapours and there’s nothing heavy to it. It’s young, flat, and dull, but nonetheless manages to be somewhat unbalanced. Contrary to the Ardbeg 10 (which comes at less than half of the price), the Heavy Vapours is not worth the money. This is yet another disappointing Ardbeg committee release.

Score 3/10 AC

Bonus Review

Ardbeg 10, 08/11/2021 batch, 46% ABV
AUD$90 (AUD$85 paid)

We all know the Ardbeg 10 and there’s almost no point in me reviewing it. However, I think it’s an important yardstick for both my own palate and preferences and for where this new limited release stands so far as maturation goes.

The two are fairly similar age ranges and when we consider that technically the 10 might include some older stock in the vatting - I doubt it though - they could be even closer on average. This means we can use the comparative ages to gauge the maturity the Heavy Vapours has attained in its time.

Score: 8/10

**Something special.**
***TL;DR***
*The single best bang-for-buck in my collection*

Nose

Classic Ardbeg in all the best ways: tar, ointments, ash, camphor and halogenated phenols, smoked citruses (again dominantly lime) with importantly a better developed sense of the malt. Soft orchard fruits and light melon rind contribute a fullness of profile too, with subtle bourbon casks rounding off the edges ever so slightly by comparison.

Palate

Ticks all round. Reflects the nose back immaculately with more citruses, ash, tar, embrocations, some lanolin again, disinfectants and smoke. The fruits and malt are there again with a touch more vanilla, and there’s even a twist of black pepper to go with the citrus and smoke through the finish. Just delicious.

The Dregs

This bottle would indicate via comparison that the Heavy Vapours utilises a much higher ratio of refill bourbon casks and I think it suffers as a result. Possibly there are other variables at play and I’m not being fair, but regardless of cause I think most of us will come to the consensus the Heavy Vapours is another release which is just too young.

Perhaps the differences between this distillate and the usual Ardbeg recipe with the purifier diminishes over time, so it was decided this should be bottled earlier to highlight such. If that’s the case, then the experiment has better indicated that the differences are minor enough so as to be unworthy of attempted replication.

That said, it’s generally the less volatile components of new-make (fusel oils, long chain carboxylic acids, lower volatility phenolics etc) which are comparatively better at surviving the impact of maturation. We don’t know the team’s motivation for releasing the Heavy Vapours. If I had to guess, it would be for the same reasons as so many other poor moves in the industry; the bean counters. Perhaps this was the most ready, the most mature of the upcoming Ardbeg projects left, so it drew the short straw for earliest release. If that’s the case, we’re in dire straits regarding future releases.

The Ardbeg 10 remains, for my palate and preferences, the single best bang-for-buck whisky in my collection and it gets a full bonus point for value. How much of that is personal history and nepotism I really can’t say; I think the value in this bottle is objective, but my sceptic philosophy maintains that true objectivity is essentially a theoretical phenomenon. So please, tell me if I’m off base with these assertions.

For my money, the Ardbeg 10 remains the guardian of Islay by a country mile; let’s look at the competition.

Port Charlotte 10: As I’ve made note already, it has butyric issues. Lagavulin 16 is too expensive, and I prefer the Ardbeg 10 both in flavour and presentation. The Lagavulin 8 is better value than the 16, but a smidge less mature and complex than the Ardbeg 10 to my mind.

I’m not going to mention any official Bowmore with any credibility. Bunnahabhain 12 is a solid whisky last time I tasted it, but it’s not exactly representative of the phenolic profile Islay is so renowned for. Kilchoman’s core releases are good, but still need more time to develop, while the Laphroaig 10 is good, but the presentation lets it down and none of the other affordable core releases do as much for me (too much modern era cask management) and certainly not as well priced here Down Under. Finally there’s Caol Ila which suffers the same problems as Laphroaig, and who knows what the future holds for Caol Ila as Diageo continue to restructure the distillery’s utility.

As long as the pricing and quality stays relatively consistent, the Ardbeg 10 will always be on my shelf, and I will always advocate for it.

Score: 8/10 TK

Tried these? Share your thoughts in the comments below. TK

Dramface is free.
Its fierce independence and community-focused content is funded by that same community. We don’t do ads, sponsorships or paid-for content. If you like what we do you can support us by becoming a Dramface member for the price of a magazine.
However, if you’ve found a particular article valuable, you also have the option to make a direct donation to the writer, here: buy me a dram - you’d make their day. Thank you.
For more on Dramface and our funding read our about page here.