For our inaugural tasting we elected to start off with an internationally renowned Taiwanese Whisky from Kavalan. From the Solist series, this single malt, cask strength aged in Oloroso Sherry casks, possesses a completely natural and beautifully aphotic like colour and is a favourite for most from this distillery. Due to Taiwan’s humid and tropical climate, the maturation of their whiskies are accelerated which has afforded Kavalan the capability of producing some fairly high end juice full of rich aromas and flavours wonderfully complex. An essential edge for a young brand still in their infancy compared to the whisky giants around the world.
ABV – 59.1% / Age – 5-6 years / Mash – 100% Malted Barley / Region – Taiwan / Cask – ex-Oloroso Sherry
This bottle was probably the most controversial. Being a full flavoured and cask strength whisky, everyone’s tastes buds and palate maturity clearly varied as I witnessed the differing expressions light up the table while everyone felt this Kavalan out.
NOSE – I always love the nose at cask strength as the scents rush to you quickly and come easier to identify, especially the prominent notes. For me, a dense Sherry and some fennel/anise or black licorice is at the forefront, mixed with a low lying spread of chocolate, tobacco, raisin, assorted berries and vanilla.
PALATE – A lot of the same here on the palate. The Sherry influence is precise with a ton of dark fruity elements like black berries, raisins and prunes. Underlying when the fruitiness fades a bit is some slight baking spices and a bitter nut like taste.
FINISH – Spicy and warm as it finishes. Not a baking type spice but a
fruitier spice like ginger and caraway. this coupled with a subtle note of
tobacco and cocoa or even coffee like hints.
Overall, nice complexity and an array of good flavours and aromas. not crazy about licorice/anise/fennel notes which is a common thread but the mix of those with the other attributes married quite well. I really enjoyed this choice and have always enjoyed the Kavalan whiskies I have tried in the past so I gave it a 8.5/10.
The group was not as generous, averaging out at 6.7/10. Which the high proof may have been the microcosm driving the scores.