A little barrow of five Springbank


August 21, 2024

A little barrow of five Springbank

Springbank

Casks of all sizes and origins waiting to be refilled in the distillery's courtyard
(WF Archive, 2005)

It’s been a few months since we’ve officially enjoyed any Springbank, which is, we all agree, an absolute scandal. It was high time we rectified this terrible situation.

Springbank 18 yo ‘2024 Edition’ (46%, OB, bourbon)

A freshly bottled edition, August 2024. A sign of the times, you’ll currently find Springbank 18 priced anywhere between €350 and €750 from online retailers, or from €250 on eBay. Of course, this doesn’t change the quality of the liquid one bit. The last one we tasted was the 2020 edition, very good (WF 86) but a far cry from our favourite, the 10-year-old (WF 91 last time) or the younger Local Barleys (also 91). And it's far superior to the ‘Red’, about which we’ll remain silent. Colour: straw. Nose: surprising, heading in the direction of the 10-year-old, with plenty of wet chalk, raw wool, sourdough, aspirin tablets, even bandages, followed by lemon zest, paraffin, a hint of seawater, and traces of tar. This is riiiight up my alley. Mouth: oilier and saltier on the palate, with peat, ashes, a touch of green apple liqueur, and that persistent wet chalk that’s a bit reminiscent of ‘natural’ champagnes. A lovely green pepper then appears, accompanied by small bits of candied lemon, which I find particularly ‘Springbank’. Finish: long, saline, peppery, with fine bitterness and ash, and then paraffined lemon in the aftertaste. Comments: well, either Springbank 18 is evolving, or it’s me. Or, well, perhaps both.
SGP:562 – 90 points.

We're already too high, but the heart remains valiant (nonsense, S.)

The Springbank 'Cuvée' 1965 & 1993/2004 (46%, Murray McDavid, sherry and bourbon, MM 0406, 1224 bottles)

We first sampled this intriguing expression two decades ago, albeit from a different bottle, and, well, any excuse is a good excuse when it comes to whisky. In any case, what we have here is a ten-year-old, for which a cask of 1965 was sacrificed—likely one that had dipped below the fateful 40% ABV mark. A different time, indeed... Colour: pale gold. Nose: I had thought that the additional time in the bottle might have further harmonised the two vintages, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here. It’s rather disjointed, with that medicinal and metallic edge typical of those early 1993 vintages when they were young, alongside a subtle older Springbank showing hints of coconut and chamomile. Not exactly a Springbank one would 'nose' with enthusiasm. Mouth: a bit closer to the 18-year-old but still retaining that slightly sulphurous and overly waxy character (yes, it’s possible) of the young distillate. Plenty of lemon juice and even a touch of Sprite (apologies). Of course, it’s a very good whisky, but it’s kept a slightly off-kilter, metallic quality. Finish: much the same. Comments: slightly disappointed. I had expected it to improve over twenty years, but quite the opposite seems to have happened. In any case, it’s all rather anecdotal.
SGP: 363 - 81 points.

And 1993, 20 years later...

Springbank 30 yo 1993/2023 (52.2%, Royal Mile Whiskies, cask #159, 178 bottles)

Colour: full gold. Nose: a tale of a chrysalis blossoming into a butterfly, thanks to the grace of a very fine cask. There’s still that powdered sulphur (not burnt), chalk, even a bit of lime, paraffin, but also citrus fruits and their peels, with a touch of beeswax mixed with propolis, much like one finds in a beehive. Rather adore it, I must say. With water: wax paper, a hint of lapsang souchong—not too much—and a stack of old magazines stored in an ancient cellar. Rather like the wedding of Charles and Lady Di, or that scuffle between the Stranglers and the Clash. Mouth (neat): superb, very compact and coherent, with smoked lemons and minty seaweed, plus some wax and that’s all. But that’s already quite a lot. With water: everything falls into place perfectly, one of the most idiosyncratic malt whiskies in the world, showing a particularly emblematic version of this distillate’s style, which isn’t always the case. Wax, carbon, lemon zest, roots, petrol. Finish: long but gentler, a bit buttery, with peanut butter, peat smoke, and... a tiny sardine. The lemons hold their ground in the aftertaste. Comments: these 1993s clearly needed some time to come into their own. Brilliant drop.
SGP:562 - 93 points.

Wait, shouldn't we also set aside a 1965 to be thorough?

Springbank 1965/2004 (46%, Lombard, Jewels of Scotland, USA release, 75cl)

‘Aged in oakwood casks’, as the label proudly proclaims. Quite refreshing to see a time before we started to be endlessly bombarded with improbable stories about casks and wine, wouldn’t you say? But imagine, this baby is nearly 40 years old. Lombard had several different Springbank 1965s, but we’d never had the pleasure of trying this one... Colour: bright gold. Nose: a perfect lineage, more evident in casks that aren’t too active like this one, even though the Distillery filled plenty of active sherry casks in those vintages. Here we find seawater, putty, old paint pots, ashes, wax, chalk, citrus peels, paraffin, old papers, and even sardines and anchovies... Mouth: it’s crazy, you’d swear it was a 1993, I assure you. Has anything ever changed at Springbank? Paint, tar, paraffin, metallic touches (copper), lemon, petrol, seawater, shellfish (our friends, the whelks) ... Then the expected citrus and just plain apples. Plain but very good apples. Finish: of medium length but very consistent, with tar and hints of brine. The putty lingers even into the aftertaste. Comments: I do think 30 years is better, all the same. I also believe that’s what we already noticed when tasting the famous ‘Millennium’ series, albeit informally.
SGP:552 - 90 points.

Springbank 26 yo 1998/2024 (56.8%, Decadent Drinks, WhiskyLand, Chapter One, first fill sherry butt, 550 bottles)

It’s a bit awkward, I already know it’s good since I had a taste at the official launch of WhiskyLand (and the funeral of WhiskySponge) in Glasgow earlier this month. But never mind, we’ll taste this baby again anyway... Colour: amber. Nose: at first, there are those little resinous touches, pine bud liqueur, burnt firwood, and so forth, then a sudden burst of mango accompanied by a few raisins, a pinch of pipe tobacco, followed by a cigar box and a splendid tar laced with liquorice. I could mention some rancio, but I fear that could be the influence of the Cognac-style bottle. With water: those usual touches of natural rubber, artichoke liqueur, tar, Lapsang Souchong... The water seems to add a smoky edge. Tarmac. Mouth (neat): oily texture. Beware, it’s more potent than it seems. A peppery side, leather, amontillado, cigar, another touch of salt, salted butter caramel, and let’s say it straight away, a bit of that Samaroli character, claro que si (but that’s Spanish, S.!). With water: splendid orange liqueurs, caramel, milk chocolate, a hint of coriander adding freshness, Dutch salted liquorice (for instance) ... It’s another dimension, tauter. Finish: very long, saltier. Salted caramel, tobacco, a touch of leather, and blood orange. Frankly smoky aftertaste, almost astringent. Magnificently astringent. Comments: seriously, I even considered going up to 94, then I re-tasted the Westie Sponge Ed3 and found them on par, although they’re very different. If half-points were a thing—God forbid—I’d give it 93.5. Sublime bottle. Oh, and to hell with it, it’s a perfect marriage between a stubborn distillate and an equally stubborn cask…
SGP:563 - 94 points.

(Merci Andy!)

Check the index of all Springbank we've tasted so far