Reviews for House Lannister & Lagavulin 9 Year Old - Game of Thrones Single Malts Collection
Fantastic
Absolutely delicious for those that don't want a whisky with an overpowering taste. A fantastic after taste as well. A huge thank you to my partner for buying this for me.
chris hinchliff May 30, 2021
Sweet, smokey, floral, fruity, easy to drink
Typical Lagavulin smoke, but a tad less of it and much sweeter. Lots of vanilla, marshmallow, Ylang yang perfume. Some honey crisp apple and tart pears developed next. It matures into a salted butter toffee- sweet and perfumey; not especially rich. or carmelized The flavors all diminish pretty quickly, finishing with mostly malt. Just malt. Overall, this is definitely not the trademark Lagavulin 16 we all know. It's much lighter & thinner, but not disappointing by any means. Think more like Oban. Delicate, light, sweet, and unabashedly straight forward in its lack of nuance.... It's very easy to drink. It Stands on its own feet just fine, as long as you don't go in with any expectations that it will taste like something more familiar. And it's easy to find at low prices. As a drinker of mostly budget Scotch, I have a pretty capable set of taste buds ( I think). A few bottles of this will probably land in my cabinet.
Master of Malt Customer Jan 28, 2021
Good but not that good
Bought this at the offer price of £38. I am glad I did not pay the full price of £65 as it simply is not worth it, I'd say £45 at best compared to others out there. I was sceptical of the GoT thing and the hype and I have also tried the standard 8 year old and that is nothing special. The 16 year old (when on song, as it can be inconsistent) reigns supreme and is as far as I know, still widely available and not likely to be retired any time soon as too many people like it but it could be so much better if the abv was pushed up to at least 46%, was unchillfiltered and the colouring left out. This 9 year old is good, tasty and it is peaty but not worth the full asking price.
Stephen Beckett May 26, 2020
Where's The Peat?
I hate to be contrary, but...
I confess I tried this expression pretty much because I had to: My usual vendor - one of the few that does deliveries during this misguided "lockdown" lunacy - announced that their inventory of Lagavulin 16 year old, which is far and away my favorite whisky and which I submit is perhaps the greatest liquid creation in all of human history, was zero. On contact with this vendor they informed me that the Lagavulin distillery's new management had decided to discontinue production of the 16 year expression in favor of the 8 year and this 9 year "Game of Thrones" brew. I am really, really hoping someone will tell me this information is wrong, because the 16 year old is...
Similarly, I did not buy this because of its "Game of Thrones" collector's designation. I was an enthusiastic fan of Martin's "Game of Thrones" television show early on, until... I started noticing something. Namely, that anyone with the slightest bit to admire got arbitrarily slaughtered, while Mr. Martin made most of those who were evil not only survive but thrive. And so I bailed, out of annoyance at the intentional amorality of it. As a brilliant mind once put it, "There is nothing as boring as depravity." So to mitigate the further expansion of a bewildering textwall: 'No longer a fan, and the GoT connection was actually a "hold my nose and plunk down the cash" experience.
Anyhow, I poured out a small tasting quantity of all three of these malts, and did some side-by-side back-and forth, and... Perhaps it's unfair to compare two malts to one that's had double the time to mature, but the 9 year was a vast disappointment while the 8 year was... intriguing. Neither is an expression I would likely seek again if given a choice of the 16 year, however.
My first impression of the 9 year, right from the nose, was an immediate "Where's the peat?" In both nosing and (especially) in tasting, it's faint to nonexistent. My second impression was "This is a regular, non-Islay whisky, in the general mold of a Macallan or Bowmore." Its youth is as evident as it is expected and it has a certain appealing oakiness to it, but like the 8 year it lacks most of the depth and mind-boggling complexity of flavor that makes Lagavulin's 16 year so magnificent. Again, I have to cut it slack for its youth, but if I want a conventional, peatless Bowmore or Macallan, I'll buy a Bowmore or Macallan.
Maybe I'm too much of a peat fanatic for my own good, but a caveat emptor to fellow peat-lovers out there: You will find little of your flavor of choice in this particular malt. The 8 year is much better and sits at virtually the same price, so go for that. If you're not particularly enamored of peat, YMMV.
'Looks like I'm going to have to go on a foraging expedition through local (and not-so-local) liquor stores for still-extant bottles of Lagavulin 16. Experimentation is nice, but it makes no sense for a distillery to ditch a certifiable masterpiece. (Again, I am really hoping that rumor is not true.)
Zymoticus Apr 28, 2020
Fantastic
Managed to pick up this for £34, what a steal.
Lagavulin don't make bad whiskies, this was particularly good.
Fraser Shirley Apr 17, 2020
Trade
