Review by: TOModera

You know what’s great about ordering a SMWS? You don’t know what distillery you’re ordering if your phone doesn’t have the Internet. And my phone doesn’t have any Internet at all right now.

Also I noticed there were very few whiskies from this distillery compared to the last one (30 versus 159) and thought that was a little odd. So I ordered it.

My friend was nice enough to play a guessing game with all of us, and was shocked we couldn’t guess it after she gave copious hints. I had never had a Mannochmore, so the Attention-grabbing SMWS 64.30 would be my first.

Mannochmore has had an odd past, with drams that have angered people and others have called “Unique” and “New”. They closed for a brief time, then reopened with 12 months on and 12 months off. They’ve since reopened, and are now going full time once more, though now they aren’t releasing their infamous “Loch Dhu”. I believe they are typically used in blends.

---

Distillery: Mannochmore Distillery.

Bottler: SMWS.

Region: Speyside, Scotland.

ABV: 49.5%. Cask strength.

Age: 22 years. Distilled in 1988. Bottled in 2011.

Cask type: Refill ex-bourbon hogshead.

Price: N/A in Canada.

Color: White sparkling wine.

---

Nose: Sour, medicine, plums, floral, mango, lemon

Very sour medicinal at first, and you have to let this sit, otherwise it smells foul. Very sweet flavours slowly come out after awhile, matched by some floral undertones. Like if Caol Ila tried to make a Lowland.

Taste: Plum, honey, lime salt, peat, fruit sprinkles, almonds, coconut cream, grapefruit

So, so SO fruity. I almost want to call this fruity pebbles. There’s a little peat so match with the sweetness, though this does live up to its name.

That being said, it’s almost too sweet for me. Needs some more… something to give the fruit some time to shine. You can’t just have a sea of fruit, otherwise no one looks at the apples.

Finish: Cream, honey, peat, dry gravel, peanuts, faint orange

I wish parts of the finish were evident in the taste, as the finish, though simpler than expected given the whisky statistics, would have done well with it, as it would have contrasted the taste well. Now that they are separate, it just doesn’t pop like it should, and seems disparate to the rest.

---

Conclusion: Individually, the parts of this whisky seem to fall apart. It’s good (heck, some might even say great), yet the main issue that one has with this is it needs some connectivity. Something to tie it all together. And the cream and honey elements try, yet not enough for me. I’d still order this and I wouldn’t say it’s bad by a long shot, yet the separated nature of everything just leaves me wanting a more balanced, cohesive dram.

Final Score: 83.

---

Scoring Legend:

• 95-100: As good as it gets. Jaw-dropping, eye-widening, unforgettable whisky.
• 90-94: Sublime, a personal favorite in its category.
• 85-89: Excellent, a standout dram.
• 80-84: Quite good. Quality stuff.
• 75-79: Decent whisky worth tasting.
• 70-74: Meh. It’s definitely drinkable, but it can do better.
• 60-69: Not so good. I might not turn down a glass if I needed a drink.
• 50-59: Save it for mixing.
• 0-49: Blech.