Rare Perfection 14 Year Canadian Whisky

Four individuals have altered my perspective on whiskey quality. The first, who will remain anonymous, dislikes a certain distillery. Best of luck to them. I'm still better at video games than they are, despite the scoreboard. The second is a friend, more knowledgeable but less... anatomically blessed. This moniker persists because they are likely reading this and can't object without confirming the description. It's akin to disabling the second controller before a party game; no regrets. The third was a guide at Willett, a true visionary. The fourth was a person whose online presence is uncertain. Is this a known individual or a case of mistaken identity? The mystery endures. In short: Is this 'Rare Perfection'? No. It's rare to me, introducing flavor profiles that were entirely novel, leaving me unsure how to process them. Kudos for innovation. It's assertive, but far from perfect in terms of palatability. Bold choices were made. To grasp my meaning, consider this choose-your-own-adventure. Imagine a desolate, post-apocalyptic factory, akin to a video game setting. Amidst the decay, you find a flask. A sip reveals the taste of this spirit. The aroma is overwhelmingly of rubber, suggesting it's unfit for consumption. It evokes shoe polish or cleaning agents. The palate mirrors the aroma; it's potent and unappealing. The finish offers a subtle peppermint note, the most pleasant aspect. Alternatively, picture a backyard campfire with acquaintances. A stranger is strumming a guitar, playing a tune reminiscent of a popular artist. A friend offers you a s'more. The aroma suggests burnt wood, with faint hints of caramel and sugar, but dominated by char. The palate delivers a taste of toasted marshmallow, an unprecedented whiskey experience, followed by rich chocolate and a touch of coconut. The finish brings cinnamon and gingerbread. This experience is genuinely enjoyable. What accounts for this divergence? The spirit's flavor profile is exceptionally strong. Both tasting scenarios were valid. It's like a dental fluoride treatment tasting better when forewarned. Approaching this without preconceptions, it tastes unusual. My prior bias against Canadian whisky, fueled by mistaking it for a bourbon, further complicated my initial impression. Anticipating a sweet or dessert-like profile shifts the perception dramatically. This highlights the fascinating variability of whiskey. A conversation with another individual provided valuable insight. It's regrettable that the remaining bottle has already been promised to someone else, as there's more to explore. However, sharing a distinctive spirit and potentially guiding its new owner in appreciating its complexity is satisfying. Conclusion: This spirit is bold and experimental. Its appeal will vary. It's distinctive, offering intriguing elements. Purchasing it at the suggested retail price is not recommended due to its cost relative to its offering, even with its unique flavor. This should be a prime example for guided tastings, as its polarizing nature is evident. Appreciation or dislike are both understandable responses. My initial rating of 0.25 stars is being removed for fairness, though the commentary remains. For the sake of objective assessment, trying it without purchasing is advised, if feasible. Gratitude is extended for the encouragement to re-evaluate this spirit.

Rating: 10/23 N: Smells like formaldehyde and orange rind, with a hint of stale hazelnuts and an oily quality akin to single grain scotch. Not an inviting aroma. P: A light caramel sweetness emerges, but then bitterness dominates, presenting that characteristic single grain profile of dull bitterness, oil, and heat. There's also a touch of clean water. The sharp alcohol is certainly present, alongside some sweet undertones and perhaps a whisper of staleness. The oiliness isn't strongly nutty, though a faint suggestion might be there. A bit of ginger and white pepper appear, but it's mainly a spicy burn. F: A burning sensation with unpleasant bitter oil and traces of white pepper. Dull and unappealing. - Conclusion - This is far from perfect and not particularly rare. A similar flavor profile can be found in most mediocre single grain scotches with high teen age statements. That comparison, unfortunately, highlights the poor quality of such scotches, a quality this drink shares. A fleeting impression of funky rum, similar to Smith & Cross, was present but overshadowed by the persistent single grain burn. This is simply not very enjoyable. Obtainium 13 Light Whiskey (13/23) possesses less corn aroma but is less bitter and offers a touch of fruitiness. While Obtainium has a stronger burn, it's very high proof. This tastes older, as if it spent too long in the barrel. Obtainium isn't great either, but its flavors are cleaner, more complex, and sweeter. It burns intensely, but it's clearly superior. I'd be surprised if I rated this higher than a 12; 11 seems like the ceiling. The Sexton (9/23) has a murkier taste with more fruit and sweetness, but also a more intense bitterness that's difficult to overcome. It's like the difference between tasting charred wood versus tasting ash. It's unclear if this is better, but given that these comparisons focus on how actively unpleasant the drams are, this is likely on par with The Sexton. It's a 9 or 10, leaning towards a 9. Disappointing. Considering The Sexton's genuine graininess, I might even assign this an 8. This is genuinely a poor whiskey. However, the amount of vanilla richness here suggests an 8 might be too harsh. Revisiting this, I detect significantly more vanilla. It lacks the bold grain and fruit notes of Signatory's Caledonian 29 (1987) (12/23), but it has less burn and some pleasant vanilla that I initially missed. While I generally prefer the Caledonian for its greater complexity, the difference isn't huge. My earlier rating of 9 seems too severe now. Comparing it to Compass Box Hedonism (12/23), this is definitely less thin, but lacks the hint of apricot, and Hedonism is considerably smoother. This does have more vanilla and coconut, however. Frankly, I'm enjoying this one more side-by-side at the moment, which is unexpected. Perhaps Hedonism was overrated. Hedonism does have a subtle yeasty note that I find appealing, almost like a few drops of Stranahan's Blue Peak were added. The more I compare them, the less impressed I am with this one. Still, it's better than I initially thought. I'm considering a 10 or 11. It's a difficult choice, but I'm settling on a 10. My thanks to a friend for the sample. I was quite curious about this one and am pleased to finally understand its character.

EDIT: Initial rating was 0.25 stars. I've reconsidered my assessment, and the updated review explains my reasoning. This holiday season, I'm committed to sampling a new whiskey daily throughout December. #lifegoals December 8: I feel completely misled. Based on its placement on the shelf and discussions with my liquor store contact, I was under the impression this was bourbon. I've had this on my shelf assuming it was bourbon. Prior to this review, the only other mention of Rare Perfection on this app was identified as bourbon. That might have been a different bottle. This one looks distinct. To echo the elegant words of Lady Galadriel: they were all of them deceived. The back label clearly states, to my dismay: “Canadian Whiskey.” How does this keep happening? My hope is that this disappears as quickly as Crown Royal's supposed-to-be-bourbon offering. The aroma is off-putting. Notes of burnt rubber, sugar, and pencil erasers. The body is intriguing. While the unpleasant aroma is understandable, there are genuinely pleasant elements present as well. Caramel and honey are detectable, but that burnt character is intense. Still not appealing. The finish is peppermint, which I don't dislike. However, every exhale brings back the taste of pencil erasers. My child just commented that my breath smells like flatulence. Not ideal. This might be the biggest disappointment of 2019, even for a Canadian Whisky. This product line should be thoroughly criticized online to prevent others from experiencing its unpleasantness. I wouldn't pay $10 for this, let alone $140. It's virtually undrinkable. I plan to discard this glass and keep the bottle until a friend offers to take it off my hands for free. Happy holidays. I'm not sure if I have 23 more new whiskeys lined up, so if you're reading this and have a readily available spirit you'd like me to try this holiday season, please suggest it in the comments.

Whiskey Consensus gave this a 9.1 rating, and I was eager to try it. I saw it for $150 and debated the purchase heavily. It has a rather unusual background: Kentucky bourbon aged in Canada, classifying it as Canadian whiskey. Aside from Crown Royal Northern Harvest Rye, I don't have much Canadian spirit. I do enjoy Willet 4 year rye, though. But that price and the mixed feedback on distiller left me undecided. Immense gratitude to a friend for providing samples of the 14 and 15. I tasted 14 and 15 consecutively. To confirm my palate's perception, I repeated the tasting a week later with another companion. My rating and assessment of this were consistent. As usual, served in a Glencairn glass after at least a 15-minute rest. N(2): I've never experienced an aroma like this. It was overwhelmingly unpleasant. The proof wasn't the issue. I detected a peculiar burnt plastic scent, similar to incinerating a plastic spork, which was dominant. This was followed by a damp wood musk. Definitely not enjoyable for me. After prolonged sniffing, I managed to perceive underlying notes of vanilla and sweet honeycomb. P(3.25): That blasted plastic spork taste carried over to my palate. However, there's also a rich, sweet creaminess, butter, and vanilla. Hints of rye-like spice are noticeable on the tip and sides of the tongue, along with a touch of citrus – either sweet lemon or tart orange. Without the spork flavor, this would have earned a 4.25. F(3.75): The damp wood funk appeared in the finish. Strong vanilla notes, toasted almonds, sour vanilla custard, and caramel/butterscotch sweetness. The finish is of medium length. Overall: I would not purchase this bottle at $150. I truly wanted to appreciate it, but the plastic undertone was insurmountable. The bottle design is attractive, and the concept is unique, but the liquid didn't meet my expectations. I would consider buying it at the $50 price point.

Sampled the Rare Perfection 14yr Lot 04 at Preservation Distillery, alongside nearly their entire range (including several Very Old St. Nick batches). This particular bottle was clearly the standout. Rich in oak, classic bourbon taste, with a unique touch of funk. Truly distinctive. Absolutely excellent!

This was surprisingly excellent. The aroma offered abundant citrus alongside coconut and chocolate. The initial taste presented butter and cream, transitioning to oak on the mid-palate. The finish was mild and satisfying. While I wouldn't purchase a bottle due to the cost, I thoroughly enjoyed the sample.