It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“Its exceptional rarity and quality puts it in a league of its own, and the world’s most serious whisky collectors will wait patiently for many years for a bottle to come onto the market.”
When I tasted it, the whisky was quite intense, dry, and tasted of dried fruit with some hint of warming spice,” said David Robertson, a former master distiller at the Macallan”, according to The New York Times. But I had to try a lot of whiskies over the years and in my humble opinion, there were a number that were better than this one.”
originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Fallingdown
I watched this documentary called 'Adam ruins everything' and he pretty much put the kibosh on the whole "connoisseur" crap.
Wine experts were served a cheap wine in an expensive bottle and vice versa-they couldn't tell the difference. Don't trust these so called experts, whiskey is whiskey and a twelve year old single blend is no different from a 400 year old auld lang syne or whatever name sounds fancy.
It doesn't matter about the age, it's the desired effect that matters. Now if you'll excuse me i'm going to drink drunk until i'm wine...
originally posted by: r0xor
In my humble opinion, certain liquors and even certain brands of liquors can have slightly different initial effects on you or buzz. There's some truth to it. I read that different liquors that are distilled different ways starting with different ingredients etc have small but differing levels of all sorts of chemicals similar to alcohol such as methanol and propanolol which causes the subtle differences. Does anyone have info to share on this?