Let's first praise the Scotch Whisky Association for its dedication to purity and honesty in labeling, once exceeded only by Bourbon (who mandated aging ONLY in new charred oak, and who refused even simple coloring with E150a). Thus the world of whisky was a relatively safe haven and example of truly noble spirits.
But cracks are appearing...
Some years ago the incomparable John Glaser released his Spice Tree Whisky (lovely dram). Now mind you Glaser's creations appear first in his mind, whereupon he takes literally years of searching, testing, aging and blending to achieve the vision. For the most part he succeeds, and brilliantly so. He is an absolute madman when it comes to the art of wood aging. He seeks the best woods, the best casks and in many cases constructs his own barrels. Example: for his "Oak Cross", he replaced the heads of a good ex-bourbon barrel with French oak so that the spirit would be exposed to both American and French Oak simultaneously.
For "Spice Tree" - in similar fashion, he attached expensive inner staves to the interior of the barrels, once a very common historical practice used to refresh or extend tired barrels, as noted by Ralfy in his 2015 New Year's video. Quoting Glaser...
These "inner staves" became part of the barrel (almost like a barrel with a double layer of wood, like a wooden boat hull). Still the SWA said "Non!", so Glaser withdrew the product, and figured out a new way to achieve his aging goal."First launched in 2005, we were forced to discontinue production under a legal threat by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) for our pioneering use of the highest quality French oak inner staves. This, despite rave reviews from consumers, trade and press."
In sum, he replaced the inner staves with different heads that achieved the same thing. The SWA accepted this."What is different is the secondary maturation. Rather than using inner stave inserts, as we did for the original Spice Tree, we rack the whisky into barrels with heavily toasted new French oak heads. We have created a method for getting a super heavy toast on the cask heads which imparts a flavour profile similar to the flat staves used for the original Spice Tree.
We use oak with three different levels of toasting on the barrel heads, thus allowing us to blend the resultant whiskies to create additional layers of complexity. This secondary maturation lasts as long as two years".
Meanwhile the strict rules of "Bourbon" - which insist on aging ONLY in charred new oak - were being bypassed by a couple of mega's who started "finishing" the spirit in used sherry and other used ex-wine barrels to greatly alter the product. Never you mind that the reg's do NOT define or refer to either "aging" or "finishing", but consider only "storage" and that storage MUST be - ONLY - in charred new oak.
The Arse Crack Widens
Back to the SWA and our good Mr. John Glaser. And as the Godz are my witness, you simply won't believe this one! I'm fackin serious. This time it didn't have to do with what was or wasn't a barrel, but had to do with - are you sitting down? - it had to do with, well, simple honesty. You read that right. Glaser simply told the absolute, completely transparent, and honest truth about two of his new releases ("Flaming Heart" and "This is not a luxury Whisky").
(Obtained via the Way Back machine from old archives)Flaming Heart:
"The fifteenth-anniversary bottling of Flaming Heart is comprised of 38.5% 14-year-old Caol Ila, 27.1% 30-year-old Caol Ila, 24.1% 20-year old Clynelish and 10.3% seven-year-old blended malt from Clynelish, Teaninich and Dailuaine. Another excellent release from Compass Box, this is sweet and spicy with light smoke."
Honest facts, completely transparent and a good thing, in fact a wonderful thing, yes? Not according to the SWA
So WTF happened?
Simple. One of Glaser's much larger competitors complained privatedly to the SWA, claiming that the only legal claim Glaser could make would be to list ONLY the age of the youngest whisky, thus forcing Glaser to either release Flaming Heart as an NAS, or at best as "7 years old".
Now do you think for a microsecond that this unnamed competitor really cared that much about the law and such an overly strict interpretation? No fackin way! No!! What the industry was actually afraid of was that this might force them to admit their own contents, no doubt largely dominated by very young whisky.
Compare to Glaser whose blend contained only 10% of a 7 year, with with rest being VERY well aged and VERY expensive.
Flat Ass Bottom Line
Neither Glaser, Dave Broom (and a host of other reviewers) or Ralfy agree with the SWA. Glaser did not try the old ploy of naming or insinuating just the oldest component; to the contrary, he pulled down his shorts and exposed the whole magilla - every distillery, every age, every percentage and TONS of detail insofar as wood and aging.
Total honesty and transparency. And the competition just couldn't have that. Worse yet, the fackin SWA is backing up that unnamed but frightened competitor. It was this event to cause Ralfy to beseech the SWA to reconsider just what quality and labelling is all about.
I couldn't agree more. Stay tuned...