Springbank 21 Year

Rating: 20/23 Nose: Intriguing. It's herbal and earthy with a strong menthol note. Swirling reveals farmyard and wood. The wood is robust but not excessively harsh. Then, toasty grain appears with vanilla and a touch of cinnamon. A subtle layer of smoke, like old soot on a brick, is present. An occasional faint trace of orange concentrate or something tart yet full-bodied. A whisper of buckwheat joins the wood, adding a light, toasty, nutty character. This nose is much bolder than the 2018 Springbank 18, though not as balanced or enjoyable. I'd choose the Springbank 18 between the two. Palate: A richness emerges. It has a virgin oak sweetness and vanilla notes without the usual monotony of young virgin oak. It complements the existing Springbank maturity. A bit of menthol with fruit that's tart yet rich, like lemons evolving into plums, then prunes over time. The nuttiness that follows confirms the oloroso influence. The Springbank character persists with occasional farmyard funk from behind the sherry. The robust wood from the nose returns with cinnamon, clove, and occasional white pepper. It's a bit tannic, not just from the clove, but not overpowering. Finish: This is where the Springbank character is most evident, reminding of its origin. Grain, a hint of malt, and funkiness combining earthy and vegetal notes. Oloroso flavors and syrupy prunes with plums merge with tart lemon and bold wood, creating an almost manuka honey taste. - Conclusion - Hot take: an excellent dram, but Springbank 18 is superior. This attempts to be a rich, sherried, hedonistic whisky while retaining its Springbank funk. I've enjoyed whiskies that combine a bold sherry profile with a funky distillate, like Talisker Distiller's Edition, Ardbeg Uigeadail, or Springbank 12 Cask Strength. They often feature a potent distillate and shorter sherry aging. This tastes as if oloroso was added to Springbank, deemed too lemony, and then intensified to sweetness. To be clear, the result is delightful. However, it seems like the wrong aging strategy for a long-matured Springbank. Sherry and long aging can be great, as seen in Springbank 12 CS and 18. Here, the genre blend isn't as successful as it could be. It's poetic how the palate shows a bold new Springbank, but the original profile lingers on the finish. I appreciate the imagery it creates. Yet, it doesn't convince me this was the right approach for 21-year-old Springbank. The Springbank 18's more bourbon-forward approach with greater cinnamon and sweetness had significant potential. Comparisons: Cadenhead's Tullibardine 25 (1993) lacks complexity and has rough edges, but possesses a refreshing confidence I enjoy. This feels less coherent with aggressive cask influence, but is more complex, interesting, and enjoyable. It has rough edges from obvious fresh cask flavors, possibly amplified by my home blending experiments. I had a similar issue with Garrison Brothers, which always tastes like sawdust from rapid wood aging to me, and which I never tried before home blending. These two are closer than expected, but this Springbank wins. Lismore 21 (19) is more complex and balanced, though a bit muddled and less intense with a touch of sulfur. I'm strangely drawn to the Lismore; it seems more self-assured. This is difficult, but I'm leaning towards the Lismore. That places this between two 19s, suggesting a 19, but I'll do more comparisons. Springbank 15 is brasher with more out-of-place sherry (I'm detecting Pedro Ximenez sweetness alongside oloroso now). The cask is more prominent here, but this one seems to have committed entirely to the cask. Speaking of cask commitment: Glenfarclas 25 (rated 23, though this bottle is slightly past its prime, perhaps a 22). The Glenfarclas is a decadent sherry bomb, like Christmas. It has tannins that might deter some. This has more aggressive flavors and increasingly reminds me of my own home blending and rapid aging attempts. Glenfarclas is the clear winner, though not by a huge margin, which is also a defense of my home blending skills. Revisiting the next day, it still tastes over-finished, with the barrel overwhelming the flavors, but it's less jarring. Side-by-side with Lismore, I'm now leaning toward this. Springbank 18 remains substantially better. Conversely, Tullibardine is more cohesive and tighter but less intricate. I'm now considering a 19 to 21. Hmm, the over-finished character is becoming more apparent again. One last comparison, an unusual one: El Dorado 21 (rated 21). The two are close, but El Dorado is more complex and coherent. I might give this a low 21 if El Dorado were a high 21 or 22, but as it stands, it solidly feels like a 20. This refines the sherry cask combined with maturity that Springbank 15 began. It expertly balances multiple cask types for a decadent, complex dram. It lacks the obvious oloroso dump of the 15. The cask combination here is very well executed. I'm sometimes tempted to rate it a 21, but I'm sticking with a 20. An excellent whisky, but it's disheartening to imagine Springbank overwhelming a beautifully crafted 18 with intense finishing. The 10, 12, and 18 are the Springbanks worth acquiring. Thanks so much to a friend for sharing this rare delicacy! I wish it could be a regular offering.

The 2018 edition, with 70% rum and 30% first-fill bourbon, yielded 3,700 bottles at 46% ABV. Appearance: As is typical for a 21-year-old Springbank with annual cask changes and no added color, it presents a rich gold/straw hue. It appears significantly influenced by first-fill casks, suggesting a substantial portion of 'fresh rum' as Springbank terms it. However, compared to a 19-year single cask of fresh rum at cask strength, this is lighter, indicating the bourbon is the primary color contributor. Regardless, the casks seem fresher and younger than many whiskies available, and certainly more so than recent 12-year batches, which have become less enjoyable. Nose: Salty vanilla, fresh oak, cooked vegetables, and citrus fruits dominate, with the oak and vanilla/salt being the key elements. It's a very good nose for these casks, though not my personal preference. Palate: The distillate is very forward, showcasing the Springbank malt with the casks adding sweetness. It's salty, with peat being quite prominent (unexpected after the nose), a vegetal note, a touch of sourness and bitterness, and some vanilla, though it's not dominant. The whisky then moves into a fruity, slightly bitter finish that seems to last indefinitely, with oak, fruit, and a light spice. One of the absolute best finishes I've ever experienced in a scotch, especially one without wine or bourbon cask influence. I do wish it had more sweetness to balance the bitter notes. I believe sherry casks excel here with Springbank, or perhaps port. Pure bourbon and/or rum seem too simplistic for the overpowering Springbank malt. Nevertheless, I'm being quite critical, and at over $400 a bottle, I feel I'm entitled to be. This remains one of the finest 21-year-old scotches I've tasted. It's not my ideal profile, as I generally prefer heavy sherry or other wine influences, or significant peat, even at this age – I'm a peat enthusiast. Still, this is already a very special bottle in my collection, and I suspect the 2019 bottling would align more with my preferences. Four stars, but for the price, one must be either a devoted Springbank fan (like myself) or a major admirer of spirit-forward aged whiskies.

It's 2022 and I'm diving into a collection of samples, starting with this Springbank. This 21-year-old from the 2019 release offers a rich, deep aroma with notes of aged oak, intense berries, citrus, and a hint of farmyard funk. Candied pineapple and white chocolate macadamia nut cookies emerge, followed by a subtle smokiness like a distant seaside campfire. Hints of sautéed apples, candied orange peel, and cherries jubilee transition to vintage leather and polished mahogany, with a moderate alcohol sting. The palate is rich, echoing the nose with aged oak, bold berries, citrus, and light farm funk, then introducing dark chocolate, moderate ash, and a mild drying spice that fades into vanilla crème brûlée. Flavors of caramelized mango, candied pineapple, and cherries jubilee reappear, leading to vintage leather and old polished mahogany, with a medium alcohol burn. The finish is lengthy, featuring white chocolate macadamia nut cookies, charred orange, strawberry jam on toast, dark chocolate, mild ash, vintage leather, and polished mahogany. This is a substantial, powerful Springbank highlighting mature wood with a balanced blend of tropical, berry, and citrus notes that complement its characteristic funk, smoke, and minerality. A moderately drying spice slightly disrupts the balance but yields to rum and port cask fruitiness, culminating in a long finish with baked sweets, dark chocolate, citrus, berries, and aged oak. This Springbank bottling is exceptional. A huge thanks to a generous friend for sharing this rare sample.

Aroma - brown sugar, dark chocolate, oily peat, black cherry, grape jam, molasses, rich oak, charred orange, toffee, vanilla cream, banana, walnut, allspice, lemon, grass, moderate ethanol burn. Taste - oily peat, grapefruit, pomegranate, orange zest, lemon, grass, pineapple, allspice, green apple, chocolate, hazelnut, brown sugar, white pepper, ginger, moderate alcohol bite, finishing medium long with sour fruit, oily peat, and chocolate flavors. This is the 2019 release of the 21 Year expression, aged in 55% rum and 45% port casks. At the time, it was the most expensive bottle I had ever bought, costing over $400. I have high expectations, but is it worth the effort? The aroma needs some time to develop in the glass, but once it does, you're met with tart, jammy grapes, cherry pie, rich brown sugar, the characteristic, oily Springbank funk, and a sweet tropical quality. The palate is rich and deeply citrusy. There are dark, rich fruits, chocolate, rum-infused banana, and more tropical notes. In short, this is excellent but definitely not worth the price, at least for me. I prefer all three of the 12 Year Cask Strength versions I've reviewed, and I'd happily purchase three or four of those for the same cost as this one. Since the 21 Year is a batch product, I might enjoy a different iteration much more. Given my history with rum and port finished whiskies, I might prefer a more traditional sherry and bourbon cask release.

As a fan of port and peat, and a devotee of Springbank, I found this to be the most captivating scotch in my collection. It might be the sole bottle I've awarded a perfect score to. It exhibits all the hallmark Springbank traits, elevated with greater refinement. Flavors of dark fruit mingle with a hint of tropical character, though less pronounced than in other rum-finished whiskies for me, complemented by a subtly integrated smoke. It's truly remarkable. Considering the abundance of excellent whiskies under $100, it's a challenge to justify pricier options, and even more so when they disappoint. I have absolutely no regrets about this purchase. I'd acquire more if I could, as the availability of a port and rum combination batch is uncertain given the yearly variations in releases. However, some pleasures are fleeting, I suppose. 2019 Release - Matured in casks with a 45% port and 55% rum composition (46% ABV)

Okay, in a rare moment of laziness, can anyone tell me where I can find the bottling dates on the Springbanks? I've inquired with retailers and bar staff without success. I suspect it might be like the Longrow 18 (we certainly searched for that date), so I may have to borrow the bottle for a while as the whiskey bar staff couldn't locate it. Regardless of the year (I suspect 2018 as it tastes of rum and bourbon), it's a lovely dram. Is it worth the money? Absolutely NOT at $250 USD. Buy two Dingles, perhaps three. It's a perfect, classic Springbank, but perhaps too refined. I prefer a bit of a 15-year-old sherry-matured, sulphur-tinged character, and this lacks that. Still very, very pleasant. Viscous, lovely, well-integrated bourbon and rum influence.