Compass Box 3 Year Deluxe Blended Malt

A sample of this arrived at my door from a new acquaintance who prefers to remain unknown. I was quite eager to try it, as I possess a bottle myself and have been hesitant to open it due to its substantial price of $300. I truly hoped it would be exceptional... This blend was a brilliant response by John Glaser to the Scotch Whisky Association's regulations on whisky labeling. They maintain that it's unlawful to assign an age statement to a bottle if even a small amount of younger whisky is added. Consequently, this blend contains 0.4% of three-year-old Clynelish, making it legally classified as no older than 3 years. The remaining 99.6% of the blend consists of malt aged over 20 years. Despite this, it's officially considered a 3-year-old by the SWA. The bulk of the remaining whisky is 90.3% 24-year-old Clynelish and 9.3% 20-year-old Talisker. Setting aside the technicalities, let's assess its character... The aroma is overwhelmingly, incredibly sweet. Bubblegum, cotton candy, vanilla, honey, and floral candle wax contribute remarkable depth. It's dessert-like sweet with no oak or peat notes detected. I experienced no smoke due to the intense candy-like aromas. It was still quite remarkable. The palate continued the dessert theme with abundant oily, thick honey and beeswax, giving a chewy sensation. It reminded me of those small, wax bottle candies filled with liquid that I enjoyed as a child. I would bite off the tops and drink the contents, resisting the urge to chew the wax. I was afraid of the consequences of chewing it, so I would spit them out after a good, soft chew. This particular blend captures that same texture and taste perfectly, but is safe to consume. A nostalgic success for me. However, this is where it fell short for me: the finish. It delivered a powerful Talisker pepper explosion. I had wondered when the influence of the Island whisky would appear – and here it was. The issue is its intense spiciness. It was so peppery that it clashed with the residual sweetness, leaving an unpleasant aftertaste. The finish is also lengthy. I detected no smokiness from beginning to end, and the lingering mix of candy and pepper was quite off-putting. This dropped what would have been a 4.5-star dram down to a 3.5. I couldn't get past it. Overall, I wanted to adore it, and it began so promisingly. I now have a full, unopened bottle that I can confidently say is not worth anywhere near $300, and I have no desire to open it again. So, I'm in a predicament. I appreciate the sample from my acquaintance, but now I'm frustrated to have this bottle. Perhaps the best approach is to store it and hope that time and scarcity increase its value, allowing me to recoup my investment later. I also cannot recommend this particular expression, which is disappointing given my appreciation for most of Compass Box's offerings. Oh well, I'll be reviewing The Circus soon and hope it proves more satisfying, though at a similar price point, I have my reservations. Cheers, everyone.

I eagerly anticipated this sample all week. A couple of weeks prior, I tried the Circus and found it outstanding. Consequently, I was concerned this might be a disappointment, especially since it's essentially a well-aged Clynelish with 10% Talisker. It strongly reminds me of a dessert I had in Lyon some time ago: an incredibly rich tart made with pears, almonds, and a sprinkle of sea salt. It was rich, fruity, and a perfect end to a wonderful meal. Now, the real question: considering its $300 price tag, would I purchase a bottle? It's truly lovely. Rich, fruity, and sinfully delicious, comparable to a 2-star Michelin pear and almond dessert. However, $300 is a substantial amount of money! If price were no object, this would be a 5-star whiskey. Honestly, in the current market, a 24-year-old Clynelish costs around $300 (a 21-year-old is listed at $290 on MoM), and a 20-year-old Talisker is likely just under $300 (a 24-year-old is $310). Therefore, based on this data, $300 might be a fair price. I'd be interested to know if the 21-year-old Clynelish or 25-year-old Talisker are superior to this; if so, it would be overpriced. If not, the pricing seems reasonable. If anyone has a 21-year-old Clynelish and a 25-year-old Talisker, I'd be happy to conduct further analysis to reach a definitive conclusion...

I'm reviewing this again to see if the bottle has improved or changed over time. I have about 6 ounces left, and it's been sitting for a while. Appearance: Gold color, with a touch of finishing providing an attractive look. Nose: Smells of bubble gum and oily citrus fruits. I don't detect smoke, but there's an earthy undertone. Wow, I missed the vanilla initially; it's very prominent. Taste: Citrusy, bold, bright, and overwhelming. Some spice is present. It's oily, spicy, with a hint of oak and pepper. However, it's overwhelmingly sweet, like a dessert. Finish: Incredibly, it finishes with pure vanilla and caramel. It's amazing. The finish is a bit short considering the age and price, but it's so good. Truly excellent. Initially, I didn't think this was worth a $300 bottle, but with time and oxidation, it has transformed. Wow, this is a dessert in a glass, complex, aged, and unbelievably good. I've become a big fan now and really want another bottle! That said, it's not among the absolute greatest pours ever. It's very good if you enjoy dessert notes, fruits, and some waxy characteristics. This is absolutely worth $300.

2oz served at The Whiskey House in San Diego A joke at the establishment slightly detracted from my experience. My palate this year has been compromised by tasting budget bourbons. I detected an unpleasant, stale, oily, nutty characteristic from Larceny that I now notice in poorly aged spirits. This blend contains less than 1% of a 3-year-old Clynelish, yet its presence is noticeable. Ironically, the youngest whiskey makes the most significant impact. There's no justification for detecting that young, nutty whiskey in the aroma and taste of something so costly. The more expensive components in this blend are still quite delicious. It offers strong notes of ginger, caramel, candied fruits, and leather, quite similar to Brora from the 1980s. The 3-year-old whiskey is like an intrusive infant at a movie theater. I dislike infants. Fortunately, the finish is clean, leaving a lovely lingering taste of beeswax and dark spices. I considered purchasing a bottle. I will not be doing so now. MARK: 89/100

At 49.2% ABV, the rusty gold spirit clings to the side of the glass like honey, indicating a significant proportion of well-aged Clynelish. The initial impression of the nose is met by ethanol, appearing younger and more vibrant than expected for a blended malt averaging 23.41 years. Juicy Fruit bubblegum and candle wax emerge first, followed by vanilla, fresh orchard fruits, and hazelnuts. Despite a portion of Talisker, little hint of smokiness was apparent, likely due to 20 years of sherry butt aging. A luscious mouthfeel gives way to honeyed vanilla, baked apples, cinnamon, nutmeg, zesty citrus, and peppery effervescence. A dry, lengthy finish is dominated by more spice, oak tannins, and pepper. Being a little heavy on the pepper side (quality casks) causes this one to fall just shy of 5 stars, but it remains a tremendous Compass Box expression. A few more days of oxidation might mellow the pepper.

Nose: Old leather, followed by a pear and almond tart with orange zest, much like my wife makes. (3/3) Palate: Magnificent burst of more oranges, specifically preserved ones. It becomes richer and sweeter with time in the glass if you're patient (2.5/3). Finish: Long and very drying (2.5/3). Bonus: 1 point for boldness. Total: 9/10. Sample from Master of Malt, 02/17/17.