Hazelburn 12 Year

Rating: 16/23 Another release from Hazelburn. I'm optimistic, but not overly confident. Aroma: Stone fruit with a peculiar funkiness and an interesting bitterness. It's very grassy, with much of the grass being dry. There's also a faint scent of baked chicken. It has a dry aroma that's difficult to pinpoint. Unfortunately, it lacks complexity. Palate: Stone fruit quickly gives way to wood and smoke. There's a trace of phenols suggesting peat. The peat character is intensifying, though smoke remains dominant. Yet, it doesn't feel particularly rich, and there's a clean water taste. I detect ginger and clove, along with a bit of cinnamon. A subtle, syrupy hint, like spiced rum, is also present, adding to the complexity. A touch of wax emerges from the smoke. Thankfully, the smoke isn't overly ashy. The complexity is good, and the balance is acceptable. I notice a slight Springbank character, but it's minimal. Regarding the fruit, I get tangerine, lemon, and white peaches. That's about it, and it fades quickly. Finish: The smoke becomes slightly ashier. There's a mineral, stony quality. Definitely some dry grass. The fruit is mostly gone, with just a trace at the start of the finish. Faint hints of Springbank funk remain, noticeable only on exhalation. The finish isn't great. - Conclusion - Overall, this isn't very exciting. It's fuller and less harsh than Hazelburn 10 (2019), but it lacks vibrant fruit notes. Between the two, I slightly prefer this one. It's better balanced and smoother, reminding me somewhat of Paul John Christmas Edition 2020 (16/23). Cadenhead's Deanston 19 (1994) (15/23) is similar in quality but not quite as good. It has more burn and a slightly less appealing funkiness. Loch Lomond 12 (16/23) is smoother, funkier, richer, and more complex. It's also more challenging, to be sure. This is close, but not quite as good. Paul John Christmas Edition 2020 offers more bright fruit and smoke with a greater richness that unfolds. I'd likely choose the Paul John over this. This one sits on the border between a 15 and a 16. It's a difficult decision. I believe it's close enough to the Paul John and distinct enough from the Hazelburn 10 to warrant a 16.

It's getting really hard to keep track of which bottles I still need to review. It will be great when I finish reviewing my open bottles so I know they're all documented here. Aroma: Sherry is the immediate impression. There's that signature Springbank characteristic, which some describe as sulfur, but it's something different. It's lively, with a slight vinegar note and oak present. It's almost like being in a rickhouse where wine has spilled on the oak, giving it a sour edge, followed by buttery bread and caramel. Taste: There's a significant oak presence, perhaps the most oak-forward Springbank I've had. The prominent sherry notes from the aroma are much more subdued here. I suspect much of the oak is quite aged and well-used. It starts sweet, then turns bitter and somewhat sour, with a tannic oak bite. The finish introduces an unusual artificial sweetness, almost like aspartame (though not unpleasant as that note often is), and then it warms the mouth, bringing back more oak and sherry notes. I just noticed a faint hint of salt at the end. Although unpeated, I detect some elements of peat, albeit subtly. Hazelburn has been a weaker offering in the Springbank lineup for me (except for the Oloroso Sherry 13 and 14-year-old bottles), and this is one of their less impressive expressions. It doesn't feel like a $100+ bottle of whisky. However, it is very complex, and frankly, outside the context of being a Springbank, it's quite good. Still, I can't rate it higher than 2.0. I'd struggle to recommend this to anyone, unless they're dedicated to trying everything from Campbeltown, which I certainly am.

A robust malt aroma is present, accompanied by a significant salt presence and whispers of caramel and oak. Delicate notes of dry sherry, reminiscent of fino, are also perceived. The taste is notably delicate, featuring prominent biscuity malt at the start. Despite its lightness in flavor, the mouthfeel is oily. A subtle funkiness, which I attribute to this distillery and perhaps the sherry cask maturation, adds complexity. The overall experience carries a pleasing brininess. Sherry is present, but it leans towards dry, more akin to fino than PX. A touch of lemon zest, likely from the sherry influence, appears, and the finish has a characteristic that evokes yellow cake. The finish is quite astringent, with dry wood undertones, though not overpoweringly so. While not my top choice from this distillery's offerings, it stands out as distinct within their range. It's among the most malt-dominant scotches I've sampled lately.

Initially, the aroma reminds me of a favorite granola blend, prepared with honey, orange zest, and coconut; as it rests, more spice emerges. A closer sniff reveals notes of creamy banana and fragrant sweet tobacco. If the smell suggests a sticky-sweet, spicy, sherry-matured malt, the first sip quickly reminds you of the spirit's coastal origin. I detect notes of damp, sea-worn wood alongside crystallized ginger, more candied orange peel, molasses, and toasted Brazil nuts. The palate is tangy and wood-influenced, with sweet and spicy top notes, presenting as fruitier and less savory than its Springbank counterpart. This pour has a hot, drying, and exceptionally long finish. The empty vessel smells like fresh tobacco right after opening the container.

Although this is labeled as un-peated, the aroma carries a subtle wisp of peat that combines with sea spray, new rubber (similar to an inner tube), and a central note of some sherry-influenced fruits like orange and pineapple. I found the fruitiness was pushed aside on the arrival by a tingly pepper and saltiness. It evolves into tart lemon, blood orange, and grapefruit, finishing with a sherry dryness. The grapefruit note continues to round out in the finish, which also has a slightly peaty and spicy character. The lingering scent in the empty glass is of tobacco and sawdust. In conclusion, it was a very interesting 5cl sample and my first experience with this distillery. However, it's not on the same level as other whiskies I've tried from Campbeltown, and not enough for me to consider purchasing a full bottle. I am, though, interested in trying their 10-year-old expression at some point.

This bottle is quite expensive in the states. I paid over $100. Color: gold Nose: citrus, lemon zest, honey, traces of smoke, light and unusual. Palate: sweet malt, light fruitiness, but is quickly overpowered by oak bitterness. It's quite tannic and woody, with a hint of smoke. Combined with the heat from the alcohol, it was very unpleasant. Finish: medium length, with a bitter oak and tannic taste lingering in your mouth. This has far too much wood; the casks were likely refilled many times and were certainly at the end of their useful life. A very disappointing dram from my favorite distillery, Springbank. If they had used quality casks, this could have been a great bottle.