Fable & Folly 14 Year Whiskey

Diageo's endless marketing funds at work. What have I done now? This is some aged Heaven Hill distillate, with who knows what else... but likely some MGP product. It's not a bourbon. Bottled at a frustrating 45% ABV and chill-filtered excessively, seemingly to annoy whisky lovers. Yet, it's very old whisky, containing 20+ year old Heaven Hill. At $160, I suppose I'm foolish enough to take the chance. Nose - A classic bourbon aroma immediately. Clean, intense vanilla, a hint of oak, and some caramel character. Closer inspection reveals a trace of oak smoke, a surprising note of rye spice, but not much more. There's some fruit, but it's hard to describe older, lower-proof bourbons better – those that used to list older whiskies than they contained but were chill-filtered and diluted decades ago. Taste - It lacks character; the chill filtering and low proof destroyed it. However, letting it linger reveals some spice, good vanilla, good caramel, and yes, a pleasant rye spice on the finish (which isn't from the Heaven Hill). It even leaves a decent finish. Overall, this is the most uninteresting Orphan Barrel I've experienced, but it's fundamentally good whisky ruined by the company's poor decisions. 2 stars. Excellent spirit quality, but forced into mediocrity by the incredibly low ABV and the utterly foolish chill filtration. Seriously, offer it at 50% ABV and non-chill filtered, and you'd have a winner, able to charge more without hesitation. Is this neck pour underdeveloped? Perhaps... but I see no evidence to suggest that. So, the big question: should you buy it? If you want to taste old-school style whisky and don't mind the low proof and absence of oils and fatty acids, then yes, get 3 or 5 bottles. But if you prefer something like the New Riff 6 Year Malted Rye, which I enjoyed... pass. This is simply too muted and stripped of its character. Upon further tasting and review, I'm upgrading this to 2.75 stars. The rye spices are becoming more apparent, adding body and bite. It masks the youth and highlights the older bourbons. Overall, I genuinely appreciate what they've achieved here. It's not groundbreaking, and it's a total gimmick, but the whisky itself is actually good.

Oh dear. I was lucky enough to find a store that stocked certain special releases. Generally, I've found them to be excellent. I personally have consumed multiple bottles of two specific brands, several bottles of another, and multiple bottles of two other aged selections, plus one other. I also tried a bottle of a different brand. I have also tasted one other, which was delightful, and another which was mediocre at best. This particular expression is disappointing. I had heard that these special releases sometimes incorporated older stocks from various brands, along with a specific type of rye whiskey. Upon learning about this project, I promptly ordered two bottles. I've just opened my first and am quite let down. While the whiskey itself is good and better than average, all I detect is that specific rye. It dominates the palate, and I don't perceive any of the older whiskies in the aroma or taste. It's pleasant and has a nice finish, but you wouldn't convince me it contained aged components like those mentioned unless you informed me, as those characteristics aren't discernible in my initial tasting. I'd be interested in knowing the proportions, as I suspect there's a high percentage of younger whiskies and not enough of the older reserves. It's good, but not worth the premium price. Not by a long shot.

I finally opened the bottle that had been waiting for months. The aroma presented a note I typically associate with rye – slightly grassy and minty. This was unexpected given that, according to various sources, the blend includes whiskeys with a mash bill containing approximately 6% rye. I detected some oak, but not excessively, along with notes of vanilla or brown sugar, and perhaps tobacco or leather. On the palate, the mint was present but subtle; a touch of spice and pepperiness, balanced by a sweetness that mellowed the experience. The finish was smooth, though a bit light and brief for my preference. At 45% ABV, it's neither harsh nor overly warm, making it easy to sip. The whiskey clung to the glass quite well. Does this signify anything important? I'm unsure, but discussions about "coating" and "legs" sometimes lead people to believe that thicker legs indicate a higher quality dram. Overall, I'm not let down by this whiskey, considering its price. I find it unique, good, and easy to drink – what more could one ask for? If the finish were a bit longer, it would have earned a higher rating from me.

Opening this bottle finally. Tried it neat. It's a lovely pale amber. The aroma is peppery and sweet, with hints of red pepper, pencil shavings, plastic candy wrappers, pecan, vanilla, butter pecan ice cream, candied ginger, and as I continue to detect scents, I get fruit and blue raspberry candy. The first sip is initially smooth, leaving a slightly warm finish on the tongue with notes of fruit, spice, vanilla, oak, and a char that finishes it off. A wonderfully intricate bourbon.

This one is intriguing. On my palate, it deviates from the usual vanilla and caramel notes, offering oak and some citrus on the nose. The initial taste is sweet, followed by a hint of apricot. The profile is clean and not overly complex, as I didn't detect much in the mid-palate, but it has an exceptionally long and dry finish with added sweetness and orange notes. It contains a significant amount of tannins. An enjoyable pour; it might evolve after being open for a few months. After some time, the barrel char becomes more noticeable.

Neat: The aroma presented vanilla, oak, and then a light fruit sweetness, possibly apple or pear. The palate is dominated by leather and barrel spices, transitioning to a strong tannic sensation at the end that remains on the tongue for an extended period. With Ice: I also tried it with an ice cube to see if it would enhance the subtle sweetness detected in the aroma. The oakiness remained, just slightly subdued.