Shieldaig 12 Year Speyside Single Malt

I'm having some fun with 50ml samplers i purchased at Total Wine. This is sampled neat from a glencairn. The aroma is very faint and nearly indistinct. If I give the whisky a good swirl I'll get notes of pears, apple and green apple, fruity plums, some briny air, & ethanol. It's certainly a speyside signature, and one that is offering some faint promise of a delicate sipper. The first sip shows this to be delicate for certain. It's quite toned back on arrival and offers just the slightest kiss of fruit. The barrel note is dry with a bitter mid palate that is just a bit softened by a lemon zest blush. All taken, this isn't half bad but it is a bit watery. There's nearly no finish, but what does feebly show up is a glow of powdered ginger that leaves a slight tingle on the back of the tongue. This drinks the 80 proof it is and not a bit more. This is a very soft and innocuous dram. I'm struggling with this one a bit. This is almost good enough to be a mixer, but I believe its just too spineless to handle anything more than a clear and bubbly soda. Certainly Dewar's 12yo is a full head and shoulders bigger in profile and depth of flavor, so that makes this an easily sippable "near" scotch for the times when the palate wants a simpler watercolor interpretation of a speyside malt. A fine choice for the whisky shy and the bite averse, but not a bottle that would entertain a spirited whisky adventurer for more than a moment.

The aroma is quite dull, though significantly better than "The Classic" Shieldaig. It has a somewhat generic foot-like smell. The palate is watery and flat, but possesses a pleasant, slightly bitter richness with a moderately balanced sweetness. The flavor is generally Scotch-like without much complexity or variation, but it's acceptable. The palate is far superior to "The Classic" Shieldaig. Compared to Bushmill's Black Bush, the flavor is marginally richer but considerably less complex and a bit milder. The distinction between this and Bushmill's Black Bush is akin to the difference between this and "The Classic" Shieldaig, albeit slightly less pronounced. It's certainly several levels below Glenfiddich 14, but it is drinkable. Considering the price difference, it's difficult to justify choosing this over the Glenfiddich. The aroma is uninspiring but not unpleasant, with a hint of sweetness. The palate has a decent viscosity and is inoffensive. It tastes young, yet exhibits mild characteristics of various Scotches, including some malt and coastal notes along with faint hints of orange. It's not outstanding, but it is drinkable and could serve as a starting point for home blending of Scotch. It's less engaging than Glenfarclas 12, but also less flawed, giving it a minor edge. However, the sherry richness of the Glenfarclas is definitely superior.

This was a small, humorous gift from some friends who inquired about bringing an appetizer or dessert for dinner. I jokingly suggested scotch. To our amusing surprise, they complied and brought this 12-year-old. The aroma is consistently light, offering simple, fundamental notes: sweetness, fruitiness, and cereals. Butterscotch and honey represent the sweetness. Orchard fruits like apples and pears embody the fruitiness. Barley and oatmeal with a hint of leather capture the earthiness. The body is disappointingly thin, carrying only a few flavors, as if the body couldn't support a greater variety. It leans towards the sweeter side with notes of vanilla and honey. The sweetness quickly dissipates, giving way to a mild spiciness with ginger and cinnamon. A mineral, earthy, woody quality emerges as it fades. The finish is uncomplicated: dry oak tannins and orange zest with a slight nuttiness that persists for a medium duration. It's a simple, direct dram that fulfills its purpose: easy to drink and enjoyable at a bargain price. It can stand up to comparisons with Glenlivet or Glenfiddich while saving you $10 to $20. [84/100][$32][Tasted: 11/22/19]

Nose: Pear, apple, honey, oats, wilting grass, cereal grain, coconut, aged wood, white wine, with a mild to moderate ethanol burn. Taste: Pear, coconut, apple juice, damp grass, honey, melon, cereal grain, grape, cinnamon, bitter herbal notes, barrel spice, orange blossom, yeast, with a moderate alcohol bite. The finish is medium-short, featuring honeyed fruit, dry herbal, and grain flavors. This is certainly an improvement over the Shieldaig Classic, but it still comes across as young and cheap. Fortunately, off-putting flavors like spoiled meat and plastic are absent, though there's an unidentifiable odd note. Perhaps it's the decaying grass, bitter herbs, or a hint of sulfur. Whatever it is, it's not terrible. The youthful graininess persists throughout, but much less intensely. At approximately $35, it's not a complete rip-off, but better options exist in this price range. I won't seek out a higher age statement of this particular product, but I suspect the expressions aged 18+ years might be quite good.

A 12-year-old single malt scotch for $35. It's not bad, but many other single malts or blends are superior. It presents with dank, overripe fruits like golden raisins and fallen apples. There's some spice, a touch of malt (insufficient), and barrel influence that borders on bitterness. The flavors lack depth, and the overall impression is unremarkable. I easily finished the bottle due to my love for scotch but would never buy it again. Numerous others, including Monkey, Naked, JWB, Chivas 12, Deanston Virgin, and Speyburn, are better. Rated 74/100. It's a drinkable, inexpensive single malt, nothing more.

Nose: Oranges, limes, caramel, freshly cut grass, and a sugary scent reminiscent of the inside of a sweet candy wrapper. Palate: Slightly peaty, less sweet than the nose, leaning towards somewhat bitter with intermittent waves of sweetness. Some spice is present. Finish: Medium length, warm, fruity, and dry, with rich berries rather than citrus. Overall Impressions: Neither special nor objectionable. It possesses a certain complexity that invites contemplation. It's a thoroughly average whisky. I'd suggest trying it if you're in the mood for a Speyside, but otherwise, it's not something I would actively recommend.