ralfy review 750 - Balvenie 21yo Portwood @ 40%vol:
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 жов 2018
- If you like my content you can buy me a 'wee dram' at / ralfy , thanks !
For more whisky info & stuff, SUBSCRIBE to ralfydotcom !
This video represents a personal opinion and perspective only.
To comply with Google Adsense policy this video is an independent non-profit review and is not selling or linking to a site that sells the product being reviewed.
Just had a bottle of Balvenie 21 with my friends, and although i truly respect what this man is doing for us "ordinary" people this would be the first time that i disagree with Ralfy.
The mark of 82 in my opinon is a little bit harsh, for me it goes more around 87-88.
I agree that the bottle of 21 year old whisky should have a higher abv but this is a still good dram for me.
Instablaster
Ralfy.. I learn more from your reviews than any others on UA-cam. Thank you.
Hello there Ralfy! This is Da70Dude & thank you for that malt mention! 2 years later & here I am following my malty mentors every little step! Yes I actually have the Balvenie 21yo Portwood tucked away in my closet. Here is one occasion to pop it wide open while I go through your video. Keep those good malt times rollin & much love from Beirut, Lebanon!
My god, Ralfy, you really kicked their ass and you meant it! Hope someone at the distillery takes note of your arguments.
Just yesterday I had a blind tasting of the 15 yo single barrel Sherry cask (at 47.8%) and this 21 yo.
Myself and a mate of mine both thought the 15 yo was a far more complex and enjoyable whisky.
The length of flavour in the 15 yo was superb compared to the disappointing cutoff in the 21.
Nice to see our opinions align!
Great review Ralfy! We get the 43% in North America, it's a good pour at that ABV, but I think the travel retail bottling is the way to go. I was disappointed to find out most Balvenie is chill filtered and coloured. Single barrel stuff is good, and the TUNs are top class. Cheers!
You are so right with the Malt Marks Ralfy!
Fantastic review Ralfy, you are right in that they really dropped the ball with this whisky, especially when you consider cost. In Canada we do not have that particular bottle but there 15 YO here is over $225.00 CDN so I feel that we are really being ripped off by these companies. I love you Idea for reviews next year of indicating if it's an integrity or standard bottling, someone has to start calling these companies out, and your the man!!!
So is it easier for a basic malt to get a higher mark now because you're not holding it to the same standard of a natural color, non-chill filtered 46% malt?
Thanks Ralfy this was on my shortlist for Christmas not now.
A nice arran 18 I think can't go wrong there reviews ar a1 as usual.
Their single cask series is presented in a craft way but its very expensive and also very rare. I have heard they are very good but Never wanted to pony up the money. Great reveiw Ralfy.
My concern with the extra differentiation of integrity vs. basic is that, to me at least, it seems rather arbitrary. I feel as those a malt ought to just be scored based on what it brings to the table. What you've been doing makes sense to me; score it and if it's chill filtered/colored etc... Mention how it would be better without. I'm not necessarily opposed to the extra distinction, but I guess I just simply fail to see the point? Either way, I'm always for more Ralfy content so if it helps to keep things more interesting for you, then go for it! If I could vote for anything, it would be for MORE Ralfy videos each week!!!
Here in the U.S we get the 43% version yet I still believe it’s under strength. This could be a really good malt at 48% but unfortunately it’s not. For me it is the first and last bottle of Balvenie 21
Integrity MM seems like a good idea. Brings the point into focus and if the industry is listening maybe it will sway them away from bulk volume presentations to high quality and honest presentations.
I had a dram of this a little over a year ago at a friends house. Was excited to try and was then considering buying -- I was very underwhelmed and of course didn't buy. Here where I live in the US it's $225. I'll stick with their 12yo Single Barrel offering.
Hi Ralfy, I have this bottle, and the Glenmorangie Quinta Ruban as well. A year ago I poured two glasses to make a side by side comparison. I remember I though the Quinta Ruban was not perceived as a lesser quality spirit. Thanks for your videos. Regards.
I think the idea of standard and integrity, go for it!
Hi ralfy spot on review my brother had this as a Christmas present to himself last year. It’s not a terrible whisky but I found it a bit light and a bit contrived and I’m sure it’s between £135 to £165 in uk, a better 21 yr old option would be glengoyne, glenfarclas or glendronach and all are cheaper.
I got a sample of this Balvenie some time ago and the first surprise was that it was just a finishing in Port Cask and then only for such a short time, then the next shock with the 40% abv and the chill filtration. The fact that there is also sugar carrots inside destroyed the first impression completely. I don't know if it's because of these things, but I was a bit disappointed by the smell and taste. It's not bad at all and you can tell the age, but there are more interesting bottles at this price.
This is 43%abv in the US but still feels a little underpowered. The 12yo Single Barrel and 15yo Sherry Cask are both 47.8% which really shines.
I don't really get why they bottle the 21 at 40% with added colouring and chill-filtration - it should be one of their flagships. Luckily there's still the 12 & 15 single barrels - and even the 14 yo - but they're getting increasingly more expensive.
. . . th 12 and 15 are the ones to go for !
@@ralfydotcom The 15 Sherry Cask is one of my favorites, and the 12 is just a "solid" enjoyable dram.
Especially the hard to find first fill sherry 15 and the older discontinued ex-bourbon 15 !
I can still find the 15 yo, but I have to order it out of state.
hardindr Make sure you look for the first fills, many are second fill. Only can tell by color.
I like the idea of "integrity" and "basic" Malt marks, it will also help separate some of the better basics out of the pack...what will you do with malts that only have one or two of the integrity categories (46%, natural color, non-chill)?
Good question... My guess would be that 2 out of 3 would probably suffice?
Indeed, a well deserved critique of this particular batch. Fortunately, I still have the 21yo Portwood bottled at 47.8 ABV! It is, mates, a stunning edition. So, it is truly disgraceful for Balvenie to release such a disappointing malt...
Glad you had a good price on this.
Currently selling for 420CAD (~320USD) right now in my area, whereas the Glendronach Parliament 21yo sells for 205CAD. I get that this particular bottle is a port finish but I don't quite understand the price premium. This is also true for all Balvenie offerings in my region. The Balvenie Single Barrel 25yo is currently priced at 1307CAD...!?
Haven't tried this yet but after trying the quinta ruban glenmorangie I can say that I prefer the port finish to the sherry finish
Good idea to use Basic & Integrity!
The new malt mark system works for me.
Great idea, Ralfy! You may find it even more useful to sidestep a compulsory third mark & only ADD an “integrity” award IF the dram truly deserves special distinction.
If you hold the extra mark as an elective, it brings more value. No need to call out “Same old nonsense” whatsoever. The dram is either distinguished or it isn’t. Give yourself the capacity to extend the honor only when it is earned. Just a thought!
I love the 14 year old rum cask. In the US, they sell the 21 at 43%, but still very overpriced for what it is.
Hey Ralfy, Happy Samhain. About the training. Make sure you do regular ligament/tendon training as you bulk up the muscles. People always leave out the tendon strengthening part as they get bigger and stronger. At some point, the original tendons become too weak to support the muscle that now lifts 50% more than it used to. Then an injury results; quite painful in fact. I recommend that anyone over 40 years old, who wants to build mass, should research tendon training techniques- very important. Just thought I would drop that info to you.
My neighbor gave me a 3/4 bottle of this that had been sitting on the shelf opened for at least 16 years. She didn’t know what she had. It was a beautiful complex whiskey. Goes for $500+tax in Canada. It was volatile due to age; it deteriorated quickly upon pouring. It was a treat that I’d never buy
Hey Ralfy
I‘ve been thinking about your plan to differentiate in Basic Malt Marks and Integrity Malt Marks.
It is my belief a scoring mechanism should be true to its purpose, so first of all I am wondering if your purpose in scoring whisky has changed? If so, I can see logic in two new type of marks. Consequence is of course that new marks are no longer comparable with marks from the ‘old’ system
If i make a decomposition on what - for me - makes out the quality of a whisky it is smell and taste, provenance, customer experience, social and environmental responsibility by the distiller. Mashing those all up into one mark can clog up the reference one is trying to give. So it’s a great idea to differentiate on marks; dividing them up into two types of marks is nevertheless mashing them up.
So might i suggest keeping the old malt mark system as they give us an clear reference on the ‘smell and taste’ aspect of whiskies, and add something like a gold, silver and bronze medal indicating provenance, sustainability and customer experience of the whisky?
I like the new malt mark idea. God do I wish Glenfarclas would bump their stuff up from 43 to 46.
I used to love this one in the 90s when it at least was at 43%
There is a 47.6% version which is non chill filtered available from the distillery and is a vast improvement over the generic 40%. It's just a shame its for duty free only.
I thought it was a one off bottling from a few years back
I think its still available from the distillery shop but I could be wrong
I agree that this one is a little thin especially for the price. I tasted it head to head with the Glenmoranige 12 Port Wood and liked the Glenmorangie slightly better. The Balvenie 15 Sherry Single cask (bottled at 47.8%) is a much better offering by Balvenie and about 60% the price.
I was so underwhelmed with this one, as was my local Malt Mate who remembered loving it before. So true about new whisky drinkers vs those who have had some experience. Sadly some bloggers/vloggers out there review before their palates are mature enough.
Thanks Ralfy. Watching your extras now.
Cheers from Winnipeg🥃🥃🥃🥃
Mark
+1 for the Integrity malt marks!
LOVE the integrity vs basic malt mark idea! And I agree, 40% for a 21 year old is very disappointing.
Rafaelito...
We’re still waiting for rum reviews...
A few out there right know.
Foursquare Principia and more.
Hampden Kill Devil (whisky barrel)
Monymusk Adelphi
Long Pond Duncan Taylor
Bielle brut the fut
Just to name a few.
There is so much goof quality rum right now!
Hello Ralfy, By all means, it is your channel. If you think it worth it to make that integrity malt mark distinction then go for it. But that brings me to a potential integrity bottle related question I have. Is there a standard industry binding definition for cask strength. I do not mean a standard percentage because that would obviously not make sense, but are producers obliged, if they call something cask strength, to age in cask and bottle straight out of the cask without the addition of water or is there some fudge factor where they may add some water but not enough to make it obvious they are bringing down the alcohol percentage? And that brings me to a related question. Cask strength, while it might seem to imply single cask, I do not think this is strictly the case. I suppose one could have two or more casks at cask strength blended together and maybe that is still cask strength although it is really the average (weighted or otherwise). But what about casks blended where one of them is at cask strength but the other ones have water added? Not that there is anything wrong with adding water, I am just curious if there is a standard or not that all scotch whiskies must adhere to if they present a bottle of whisky as cask strength. Any insight is welcome.
This review is almost exactly my experience. At least we get 43% in US.
Excellent episode Ralfy. Good to see this reviewed again and fine review of it. It's very disappointing that this is bottled at 40%. I can't bring myself to buy it because of that. This expression needs to be 46% if it is to have any credibility. Balvenie really hit the money when they bottle at 46% and above. I think the 2 mark scheme might be confusing. I watch a good channel called Sippers Social Club and he factors in value for money (.5 - 2 points) which I think is fair. I think if you go down the other path you might end up reviewing not very good whisky. We love the show because you review decent stuff that you are prepared to buy. Cheers. WT
Well said Toro, cheers mate!
Nice one Jeremy. I buy good stuff but I factor in value too. You're doing a great job and I'm glad to spread the news.
I like the idea of the two malt marks, I have decided next year I am only buying whisky that is age statement non-shield filter and natural colour and over 40%. I know this will narrow my options but I making a stand a statement. Because I drink other spirits it’s not that bad . Sean
. . . it helps define the better presentations more clearly.
Wonderful review 👌🥃
I'm devastated to hear this. I'm not a veteran whisky drinker but know what I like. I'm a big port cask whisky drinker and honestly think it's the best whisky I've ever had.
What port cask whisky would you recommend?
A Malt Mark is a Malt Mark is a Malt Mark.
I agree, just give it a mark. Integrity/non-integrity marks will end up clouding the issue
I like the new mark system, just shame you didn't mention atleast briefly other (and better) bottlings of balvenie. I plan to go for the 12, 15 single barrels and the 14 to try rum cask fisnihed whisky. Sadly they are pretty expensive in my area, gotta supply them from masterofmalts before brexit :D
I totally agree with Ralfy. This 21 Balvenie with 40% only is a disappointment, especially for the price. Prefer all the other portwood I tried until today, like the Quinta Ruban 14, Benriach 15 or Tomatin 14. Even if the Port wine used with Balvenie is better, older, the final result does not show it.
Hey Ralfy, is the macallan triple cask 12yo on your to-review list? PS i'm still confused, one moment you're a fitness god, the next moment wearing your old whiskey review outfit ;). Keep on going!
Good idea about splitting the marking.. i think at least..
..but something else I've been wanting to ask you for some time now..
..is that a real Dalek up in the cupboard behind you?
If it was really real, Ralfy would have been exterminated a long time ago. ;-)
@@BINO1986 batteries must be dead. Hmn
I'm all for innovating, but I think you should keep your malt mark system the way it is. It's a part of your brand at this point. I definitely tend to prefer NCF, natural color, and 46%+ but there are plenty of whiskies I enjoy that don't tick those boxes (including some other Balvenie offerings--though I agree with you on this 21 year old, Ralfy.)
Rafly, would you review the Daftmill 2006 which stays on the back? :) I'm curious about the opinion.
. . . waiting for the next more available bottle !
I’ve read the Balvenie PW is only 40% abv in the UK, that’s seems odd to me. In the US it’s 43%. I hope that doesn’t change.
Balvenie is nothing more than whisky flavored water I've tried many and have never found one I would ever go back to, so why do I keep buying it? Love ya Ralfy and I'm all for the new malt marks
Ralfy , can you make a update video of your whisky collection ? 😊
I've got the 43% US version. I suspect Ralfy would like it more.
Sure, but it's still a basic, simply adjusted to the particular market sensibility. A marketing executive decision, not someone's with taste.
I've got a fair bit of respect for Glenfiddich, they still do a lot of things the correct way - just on a larger scale.
What about the 43 ABV version?
I'd say no to the new marking idea, Ralfy. Distilleries like Balvenie make the choice to chill-filter and present at 40% abv; their whiskies should be judged against those that are more naturally presented.
Lets be honest. For a Balvenie. For a 21. It’s just miserable.
I would recommend Grant's 18 over Balvenie Portwood. Grant's seemed to have more to it.
I agree Ralfy, I was very excited to try a pour of this at a bar since I adore the 15 year old single barrel version and the Caribbean cask. SO. MUCH. DISAPPOINTMENT.
Hey, Ralfy. I've just came across a very interesting bottle of single malt scotch whiskey. it was a travel exclusive 1 ltr bottle of Glen Grant 12 48% abv and unchill filtered stated on the bottle. and i reminded me of your review of the Standard Glen Grant 12 YO, and it was as if the Glen Grant people were watching, please review it if you can get your hands on it. It has become my favorite 12 YO.
. . . good stuff, glad it works for you.
I feel the same way..For the money you can do better in my opinion..I like the 14 year old Balvenie Caribbean Cask better. Consequently my dad has an 19 year old barrel of Balvenie that will be cask strength, not chill filtered and no caramel color added coming to the house soon he bought 19 years ago with his business partner. Back then you could buy a barrel. I am really really REALLY interested in getting a few bottles. LIKE REALLY
Hi. I like the idea of putting an 'I' next to the malt mark to emphasise that it is an integrity malt. Or you could call it a GOLD malt mark. There is no need to worry about being able to compare with previous marks - it's just an identifier highlighting integrity. Go for it.
. . . some good suggestions, I'm still thinking about it !
@@ralfydotcom Thanks Ralfy. I constantly will call out artificial colouring where I see videos of (usually industry) people banging on about how great the colour is....regards Mark
Fully agrees with the malt mark
I would love to hear your thoughts on the Millstone whiskies from the Netherlands. Patrick van Zuidam is a God of distilling in my eyes, doing everything right to the point that he's got a lawn full of barrels just waiting for spirit. He found gorgeous casks and had to have them, space be damned. And of course, ncf and natural colouring.
. . . am keeping an eye on these bottlings !
My problem is that I have been drinking a lot of cask strength rum recently (60% ABV+) that any spirit at 40% to me just tastes bland and boring. These days when I reach for scotch I go to the independent bottlers like North Star Spirits. I dunno...for me the bottle needs to be at least 46% ABV, non chill filtered and natural colour otherwise I am not interested. At £136 for this Balvenie I will pass every time.
Tom Rhodes
Nice... feel the same. Whenever i reach for a 40% Scotch I don’t get much.
46% is good, but also the fullness/heaviness of a speyside in comparison to a cask strength rums from Jamaica, Barbados or Guadeloupe is evidente.
I like my Whiskys, specially heavy sherried and Islay high proof as well.
When it comes to rum: Hampden, foursquare and bielle/Bellevue are beautiful rum distilleries.
Cheers
Love your reviews, Ralfy. How do you know something has caramel coloring added ? And if it doesn't indicate chill-filtration or not, how does one know if it is?
@@alexmil002 I'm guessing in many cases, just the fact that its bottled at 40% is an indication (but no guarantee) that it is likely to have gone through chill filtration. Ralfy will probably correct me on this!
I actually enjoy seeing these practices from produces as it informs my buying practices in overlooking any of their offerings. There is a wealth of great options available to whisky consumers, and frankly, a producer which speaks in flowery language as to the depth and complexity of their 21 year old whisky, only to chill filter it and water it down to 40%, can piss off. I'll stick with my Ledaig, Kilchoman, Benriach, Arran and a host of other produces whose foundation as a company is not to engage in such practices in their offerings, and say as much on the bottle.
I’m only just starting drinking Whisky.... I thought spending £140 per bottle would get me a good one. Is it pot luck or how do I judge reviews as it can be personal likes/ dislikes?? I guess I will learn over the coming years. But nice channel thanks for sharing.
Re: Integrity malt mark.
I think I would find the integrity mark unnecessary as it is easy enough to pick up what you think of the "presentation" of a bottle just by listening to what you say. Just my two cents.
Cannot agree more with upcoming "integrity" designation. Even as an extreme amateur, i am already finding it difficult not to bypass the 40% bottles...
I've enjoyed at lot of whiskies you scored low and can't find or afford the whisky you score high I've gotten to know your scoring system for me meave it as it is also if the distilleries keep putting out watered down whisky s and less and less full flavoured natural whisky soon all the people who have tasted the whisky s you have will die out and those are left wont know the difference apart thanks to you some will all ways know but then I can't afford to join in so I just enjoy the cheap stuff and are quite happy I
Wowzers this one is $493 in Canada! I always assumed Balvenie was a luxury brand like Macallan and Dalmore but I just looked on Masters of Malt and it's only $190 CAD(pre VAT thought). I don't understand why there is such a markup.
. . . Canadian taxes are super-high, it's no wonder so many are hooching now !
Yep, our taxes are sky-high in general but Balvenie is just in the stratosphere. I can still get a bunch of 25 year old malts for less than that.
If I were Canadian and I were in love with Scotch whisky I'd consider emigrating😀
$421 in Quebec; $493 in Ontario
Yeah, markup is a business function, always under a downward pressure from competition. Taxes, not at all.
ralfy - i am im glasgow and tried to get in touch to see if there any any tastings this week. i will try amd catch you next time, i texted glasgow whisky club and they recommended to try good spirits on bath street tomorrow night.
Damn..165,-euro in the Netherlands that is a substantial amount of money for 21years in tired casks in my opinion.
You can get a 25 yrs old glenfarclass for around 100,-
They dont fool around.
I rate the Aberlour 10 quite highly based on taste and price. However, I have not jumped into the rest of their range because they are bottled at 40%. In terms of malt marks I think you should stick to rating them on the same scale. Factor integrity into your rating then naturally the ones with integrity will come out higher I presume - because delivery would be better. Also it may confuse newcomers or the casual viewer. Which would they pick if 2 whiskies have the same score or if a basic whisky scored higher than integrity whisky? It may get complicated. Those are my thoughts anyway. Cheers Ralfy
You should try the Aberlour 12 NCF. Quite nice and with 48% it feels a good bit more powerful than it's lacklustre brothers
@@ironbooze2937 thanks for suggestion . I forgot this existed. Now I just need to track down a bottle. Cheers
I like the new concept...one number is nice and simple, but a new facet to the marks will be helpful. Looking forward to it!
The 40% version is soft, I agree. However the 43% US version is better, and the 47.6% duty free non chill filtered version is much better. Too bad you didn't have samples of each to compare. Cheers.
u got my vote Ralfy.
it mite evn set a fire undr sum distilrys arses 2 get w/th program n start incorporatin integrity n2 their botlings.
✅
integrity scores Ralfy wud b nicely servd by a 1 thru 4 star system.
$230.00 here in Chicago for the 40%
I like the idea of separating malt marks into 2 categories.
Beside the underwelming experience of smell and taste (luckily I tasted this myself recently before buying a bottle based on the many positive reviews you can find online) the presentation of the bottle gives the impression it was aged for 21 years in port casks. I think this is misleading, more so because the price leads you to believe this is the case.
Amazing how the single barrel 12 is so much better.🙄 That's the one to buy if you can get it.
Balvenie used to be a nice destillery and I kinda liked it, but nowadays it's overestimated and way overpriced for the mediocre quality they fill into the bottle. besides, a 21yo Single malt bottled at poor 40%abv is as bad a joke as a Porsche with only 70Hp would be.
Scotchgod Slaaaaayeeeeeer 🤟🏻🤟🏻🤟🏻🤟🏻
43% here in USA. I bought a bottle a few weeks ago as it was on sale for $160 (normally $220-230). Even at that price I felt it was poor value. Not impressed honestly
Guess what I just brought myself for Christmas LOLOL...
Sorry about the spelling mistake
Great review Ralfy. Ya the 21 port wood is not the best. For that price and flavour profile I would recommend the Glenfiddich 21 winter storm (finished in ice wine casks). Try it out.
where does ralfy get all his malt mentions?
patreon
Damn! Ralfy took Balvenie to the shed! Then proceeded to cudgel them to death with their own bottle. LOL!
and, by the way, a micro rant: Ardbeg, particularly the 10yo, also seems to be getting a bit tired...even the (excellent) entry level Kilchoman Machir Bay, which i think is in the same weight category, is more than capable of kicking Ardbeg10yo ass...
Do you plan to do some rum reviews? It would be nice
Ralfy's done quite a lot of rum reviews over the years.
Yeah search Ralfy Reviews Rum
$225-ish in Ohio, USA.
Review proper 12
Hi Ralfy. It's Ralfy reviews like these that really set you apart from the rest. You are not afraid to tell us what you really think.
Yes, I am very much in favour of an integrity malt mark. Many's the time I have been frustrated by your waxing lyrical about a non chilled filtered, natural colour, complex and demanding whisky, only for you to give it a mediocre mark at the end.
I think however you should mark the whiskies according to their intended audiences. Glenlivets, Glenfiddichs and Macallans for instance, are aimed at the casual malt drinkers who demand an instantly approachable whisky, they want it to look golden whisky colour, don't want to mess about with water, to drink in tumblers and want an alcohol, fruity, malty experience to enjoy straight from the bottle. If the whisky does its job and tastes great at minimum abv, chill filtered and coloured then it deserves a high Beginner's malt mark but low integrity mark.
Then, those like the Balvenie 12 Single Barrel NCF, NC 47 abv, all the Glencadams, the Deanstons, the Benromachs, the BenRiachs, the Bruichladdichs, the Kilchomans, Talisker 57 North NCF, Lagavulin 12 NCF, NC....should be marked according to how well they cater for their intended audience.
Stick to the one mark.... we count on your integrity :-)>>>> 10 years.... how's the book getting along?
Agreed. A seriously disappointing bottle that could be so much better with just slightly more effort.
Ralfy,
I was wondering if you would reconsider your boycott of no age statement single malts? I understand that you are trying to make a statement and completely understand your point. However, they are not going away so I wonder if you could review them and give them a taste review and let them stand as they are with your marks. You have said more than once, and I have found the same, that it the quality of the cask, for the most part, that affects the quality of the finished single malt. I have learned from you that just because a whisky is old does not mean that it is good.
What we are left with now is curiosity about the no age statement whisky but if we see that you are giving it a poor mark than that education would naturally dissuade us from buying the poor value whisky. At the end of the day I want to spend the least but get the most and that is what you have provided for Us. I think that rather than ignoring the problem of non age statement whisky we should openly engage it, properly evaluate it, and tell it as it is.
Another interesting twist for Ralfy would be to do a blind review of a whisky that you have or have not already reviewed?
Thanks for you time,
Curtis
. . . unfortunately too many are inferior versions of old-generation age-stated malts. I see that blended scotch is becoming less desirable these days due to quality issues !