Today I’m reviewing something a bit mysterious. When dealing with independent bottlers, some distilleries are keen not to have their names on the label. This can be for various reasons. For example, some distilleries, such as Glenfarclas, prefer to have absolute control over their brand and don’t wish to see that identity diluted by putting their name on another company’s label. Other brands sell off casks that don’t adhere to a flavour profile in their official bottlings. They may not wish to be explicitly associated with that particular cask.
The reasoning behind keeping the whisky in this bottle a secret as to it’s origins remains…well…a secret. Roger Tan, the person behind Roger’s whisky happens to have a bit of an interest in ancient civilizations, such as the Mayans, whose temples he has visited while on vacation. Melding this with the secrecy behind this whisky’s origins led him to create the Hidden Treasures series, of which this one is the first.
With the help his friend, Andrew (aka @whiskyhobo), they developed the label that you see here. Intricate, shiny and fiendishly difficult to photograph, it incorporates elements of whisky, distilling and the lost Mayan culture. Also note the Roger’s Whisky logo. A circular dragon with a Glencairn in the center. Apparently, there is a clue in the label as to it’s origins. I’m not the most observant or knowledgeable person in these matters so I’ll just leave that to others. Maybe you can find the clue that will unlock the secret!
This Roger’s Whisky Hidden Treasures bottle comes from a secret Speyside distillery and has been aged for eight years in a single ex-Bourbon cask. It was limited to 285 bottles and is 56.1% abv. This whisky was imported by PWS Imports and was made available to their exclusive Single Cask Clan members only. To join the club, DM @singlecaskclan on Instagram.
Nose: Ever since I opened this bottle, it’s had quite a bit of alcohol on the nose so it’s difficult to get right into the glass. Even having to hold my nose up higher, this has turned into a classic ex-bourbon cask matured scotch. It’s a lovely fruit bomb. Orchard fruits such as ripe Royal Gala apples and Barlett pears are at the forefront. Pineapple, mango and papaya linger in the back. With more time in the glass, the ex-Bourbon cask starts to come into play with vanilla wafers and light caramel. Some milk chocolate is in there as well. There aren’t a huge array of spices here except for some cinnamon and ginger. I’m not getting a lot of oak on the nose, but I think it will turn up in the development.
Palate: The entry has a bit of heat to it almost straight away. There’s a good dose of ginger in there for sure, but some sweetness in the form of vanilla cream and tart apples helps to cut through the spice. As I smack my lips during the development, I get fresh pineapple and mandarin oranges. The ginger is joined by a tiny bit of cracked black pepper and some cinnamon to ramp up the spice, but the heat doesn’t get out of hand. The caramel turns to sponge toffee and the milk chocolate darkens a little toward the end of the development. I’m really not getting much oak until the very end of the. This is just fruity, tart and spicy.
Finish: For a cask strength whisky, the finish isn’t really all that long. The spice fades away fairly quickly. The oak, toffee and chocolate linger a little longer. At the end, I’m left with a little bit of tang from the fruit that makes my mouth water for more.
With water added…
That vanilla wafer note I got without water added has moved to the front now and the fruit has taken a back seat. The extra cinnamon that get’s introduced, along with the apple, almost gives it a homemade apple sauce kind of note. I’m not really getting a lot of tropical fruit now. The entry is much more measured. That spice I got right off the bat has been tamped down significantly. The apple note isn’t as strong here, but some orange has taken its place along with a little bit of milk chocolate. The oak is much more detectable during the development now, but it doesn’t overwhelm the experience. The development is more chocolate than fruit forward, particularly towards the end. The finish is a little more bitter and oak-driven, but the citrus tang prevents it from being too drying.
Conclusion
To be honest, I was not a fan of this whisky initially. The nose was shy and a bit vegetal, there wasn’t much fruit and the development and finish were not very satisfying. What a difference a bit of time has made to this bottle. Now it’s the fruity, ex-Bourbon Speysider I was initially expecting it to be.
Along with a couple of other bottles in my collection, along with some samples and shares, I’m developing a bit of a liking for ex-Bourbon scotch lately. I think my heart will always be rooted in ex-sherry, but I think I can carve out some space in my heart for ex-Bourbon as well.
Instgram: @paul.bovis