Cragganmore 12 Year

Cragganmore 12 Year Old starts quietly, inviting you in from the Scottish landscape. The aroma is a soft prelude, a subtle scent of heather and wildflowers from a Speyside field, its smooth feel hinting at gentleness. Underneath this floral welcome, a down-to-earth smell of grassy hay and smoked nuts suggests a more solid nature, while a bright mix of apples and pears hints at sweetness to come. ​The taste continues the story, with rich, honeyed flavors taking the lead. It's a story of plenty, the smooth, medium body carrying notes of ripe stone fruits, ending with the clear warmth of honey and caramel. This sweetness is perfectly matched by a quiet background of toasted nuts and a light touch of cinnamon and vanilla, keeping the drink easygoing and refined. The character is a blend of tastes, each present without overpowering others, creating a balanced experience that is both straightforward and deeply pleasing. ​As the story winds down, the finish is a refined, lasting impression. The first warmth of fruit and honey gradually disappears, making way for a faint hint of wood smoke and a subtle, spicy kick that adds a final touch of depth. This gentle end shows the whisky's balanced character, a smooth and satisfying conclusion that makes you want more, confirming its status as a respected, accessible, and classic Speyside malt.

Finally, it's time to open some of the bottles in my collection before my wife starts cataloging them. A single malt comparison: Auchentoshan 12, Cragganmore 12, and Nikka Miyagikyo. All were tasted in a glen cairn glass and allowed to rest for approximately 30 minutes. Next up is Cragganmore (or less): Nose: Honey and mead; I couldn't detect much else. The packaging claims it has the most complex aroma of any malt, which puzzles me. If anything, it seems like the least complex I've encountered. Palate: An oily and thick mouthfeel. Interestingly, it's predominantly malty, with some grain and just a hint of honey. I can't detect any smoke or bitterness. There's some complexity here, but it's certainly not groundbreaking. I suspect the marketers at Diageo might be overly impressed with their own product regarding this one. Finish: Short, returning to honey with increasing sweetness. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the intensely honeyed aroma, and overall, this is a solid, if unremarkable, dram. I suppose I was anticipating the nose to provoke an existential crisis, given the hype. I'll revisit it in a few months to see if it develops into more than just an overwhelmingly sweet experience. Final results of the comparison: 1st place: Miyagikyo 2nd place: Auchentoshan 12 3rd place: Cragganmore 12

If you appreciate Johnnie Walker Green Label, you'll find Cragganmore familiar. Johnnie Walker accurately described Cragganmore as the primary malt for Green Label. I estimate Cragganmore constitutes a significant 75% or more of that blended malt. Talisker, Linkwood, and Caol Ila are barely detectable in JW Green. I genuinely fail to comprehend how numerous retailers can price a 40% ABV bottle of Cragganmore 12 at up to $80, while JW Green Label offers both superior aromas and flavors to Cragganmore, with a higher 43% ABV and a 15-year age statement for only $65. I reside in a regulated state where Cragganmore 12 has recently been removed from sale and consequently heavily discounted. This was literally the final bottle remaining in my state's entire liquor inventory, compelling me to purchase it. I will provide a comprehensive review after allowing the bottle time to develop. Primarily, I wished to inform consumers about the potential savings by choosing JW Green instead. Frankly, in my view, Cragganmore 12 seems like a complete rip-off when sold at its suggested retail price, or even worse, at certain secondary market prices (in physical stores or online). Now I can understand why this single malt sold so poorly here.

Having nearly finished this bottle, I have some strong opinions. This is the finest 80-proof spirit I've ever had, and also the best Speyside I've encountered – a double win! As many know, this is a key component in a popular blended Scotch, and it's evident this is its core malt. It's incredibly clean and delicious; any Scotch enthusiast should try it. The nose presents fresh Speyside fruit – crisp, juicy apple and Bosc pear – along with rich malt and toasted oak, all touched by a wisp of smoke. This profile carries through to the palate with substantial flavor and quality. The fruity malt is succulent, the wood notes are refined, and the gentle smoke softly frames the experience... truly outstanding. The finish lingers with tasting notes echoing like a Jimmy Page guitar solo, full of sustain. I mention JP because this dram is a classic. It's not overly intricate, but it provides such pleasure that I'd be surprised if most didn't find it delightful. If you appreciate Scotch and classic rock, you'll enjoy this. Is it overpriced for a 12-year-old Speyside? Perhaps in isolation, but this expression transcends typical expectations... rated 94/100. Even at 80 proof, it handles dilution exceptionally well if you like to experiment. After this, I must acquire another bottle of that popular blend.

3.5 stars - From a 200 ml bottle in a gift set. The label claims: “The finest of Speyside…an elegant, sophisticated Speyside with the most complex aroma of any malt.” This is essentially marketing fluff, meaning: “Kiss my Cragganass.” Despite the bravado, the aroma is excellent, and this whisky is surprisingly good. The finish is a bit too oaky and slightly astringent. Flavors include honey, vanilla, hints of citrus, smoke, and malt. The aroma aligns well with the taste. It's clearly well-made. I'm somewhat puzzled by its local price of $70-85 USD per bottle. I prefer Johnnie Walker Green and Clynelish 14 Year Old. Both offer a similar flavor profile, are more satisfying drams, and cost less.

Compared with Alaskan water, consumed from a plastic cup by the pool Nose - honey, pear Taste - black peppercorns, oak Finish - medium duration, some woody and vegetal notes, and fish sauce? Score - 3.5 Scoring Guide 5.0 - Outstanding, unmatched by others 4.5 - Excellent, I will always keep a bottle in stock if possible 4.0 - Very good, quite enjoyable to drink, can be considered a solid choice 3.5 - Good, would taste again 3.0 - Average 2.5 - Acceptable, still drinkable 2.0 - Inferior, able to drink but not enjoyable 1.5 and below—wouldn’t drink again unless I am desperate