Not the best malt, but still a pleasant surprise. On the nose it is very fruity with apple (saus) dominating. A fague reminder of fire somewhere and a cheap bitter and harshness. this whisky should be given some time in the glass and some water to loose some of it´s agressiveness. The taste is fruity again, but also a bit harsh. The finish however is nicely balanced, and again, apart from the harshness, pretty nice.
Arthur Spoor Mar 21, 2017
Nice for this price!
Not the best malt, but still a pleasant surprise. On the nose it is very fruity with apple (saus) dominating. A fague reminder of fire somewhere and a cheap bitter and harshness. this whisky should be given some time in the glass and some water to loose some of it´s agressiveness. The taste is fruity again, but also a bit harsh. The finish however is nicely balanced, and again, apart from the harshness, pretty nice.
Arthur Spoor Mar 21, 2017
Stick with the good stuff for the real experience
The first drink was nice, I thought it would be OK, however subsequent drinks left me wanting that deep rich finish. The moral of the story is, if you can tell the difference, buy the good stuff, otherwise buy a comparably priced blend, but don't be reeled in by the "single malt scotch whisky" label, because this will not satisfy your hunger.
Master of Malt Customer Feb 24, 2017
My favourite for 50 years
It may be unsophisticated to enjoy such a solera-style whisky, but I continue to enjoy it, ever since meeting it over 50 years ago, my first taste of single malt whisky.
Mr H O Faulkner Jan 29, 2017
This is a Scotch??
Glen Grant is ruining its brand equity with stuff like this...without much nose, thin and sour on the palate and devoid of any finish this tastes mostly like cheap booze. You could be forgiven for mistaking it for a low-end Bourbon. It's cheap for a Single Malt, but there are somewhat decent Single Malts for only 4-6 Euros more, and there are blends for less money that at least are not worse. It's a pity.
