Laphroaig Cask Strength

Smell: Gauze bandages, tar and phenolic peat smoke, behind which is subtle iodized salt, smoked bacon, but is nevertheless pleasantly sweet on the nose, lime, shortbread, marzipan, cinnamon and some fresh mint Taste: Strong and peppery attack, peat smoke spreads, oily, tar and the gauze bandages are back, a pleasant sweetness comes through, caramel, forest honey, orange peel, ginger, herbs and oak spice. Finish: Long and slightly dry, leaving anise, some tobacco and ash. Conclusion: I still like the CS very much. Compared to the other batches I was allowed to try, this bottling seems a bit sweeter to me.

So far, all the Cask Strength drinks I've had have been good. I still have a bottle of #17. I'm looking forward to sharing it with my friends, and it's okay if they don't like it; I can drink it myself slowly. I think I can buy a bottle of Cask Strength every year from now on.

Still have to figure out this one. More civilized and tamed than its predecessor the first time I tried it. Maybe it was the previous drams in the particular blind tasting line-up but I expected batch 13 to make a statement who's king after all. Mind you albeit the other drams were cs they were mostly non- /ightly-peated. Not bad at all but we'll see how this thing goes, LP 10 cs hat surprised me before and is rather versatile after all. Nonetheless recommended for a sub 100 price tag. Btw. regarding my question, whether Batch 013 was colored, I received the following answer: "Hi XXXXXX, It's great to hear you tried the latest 10 year old, cask strength. Adding colouring is not a requirement, however if it is added mentioning this on the packaging can be a requirement. The colour of the whisky comes from the oak casks during maturation so it can vary from cask to cask. Colouring is added to some of our more available expressions to keep consistency and make sure every bottling released is the same shade. This does not change the flavour of the whisky. I understand you would like your whisky to be as natural as possible. I hope you enjoyed Batch 13. Regards, Debbie."

Very peaty, smoky and herbal - quite rough

10/14/2021: Beautiful Luff. Slowly harnesses in aroma and simply explodes with colors and saturation to taste. Degree is practically not felt.

There's not necessarily an added value compared to the drinking strength version, except maybe the punch and it kind of sucks. Ten years were not enough for smoke and barrel to come together. For the full review, go here: https://keinehalbendrinks.de/2022/02/14/evolution-of-laphroaig/

Nose: Starts off quite medicinal and inky, and there's some rubber in there as well. Lots of vegetative peat, quite rich overall, and the smoke this time has some ash in it. We're finding mildly damp wood as well as dry driftwood, plenty of salinity or brine, and now quite a lot of barbecue notes - it's a bit saucy. Savory campfire cooking, a hint of oily sausage, somewhat on the dry side, but there a bit of sweetness arrives in the form of red or meaty orange fruit; once, even a touch of stone fruit. As this develops, the barbecue notes become sweeter, and the ashy peat feels thinner. Palate: Mouthfeel is medium-thick, and its packing tons of flavor. Lots of peat as usual, also a bit of heat, and plenty oily; tons of salinity and brine, just a hint of funk in that peat smoke. Just slightly earthy, lots of black ash, or the remains of a day-old campfire, with a hint of dampness. Fruit comes via lemon citrus and oranges, but those burning driftwood and rubber notes begin to overpower the more subtle flavors, and the medicinal character is never far away. Later, there are hints of balsamic and rosemary, and once, a bit of burning propane. Finish: This finish goes on for a long time, full of saucy barbecue on the grill, waves of peat, and more of that ashy smoke. Seriously, peat forever. It's oily, and there are some dry oak notes that prickle the tongue and cheeks. A little bit earthy, some wood smoke added in as well, and a hint of char and vanilla later on. This is still going several minutes after the last sip. Final Note: What a way to wrap these up - for us, this is the best of the bunch. We love the addition of the more savory notes, especially in the nose and finish, and it still retains plenty of the Laphroaig character that we're looking for. Finish goes on for ages, one of the longest we can remember. $100 isn't cheap for a bottle, but to us, this punches well above its weight - hard to compare it to many other 10 year bottles, or cask strength bottles. We would give this a big stamp of approval, especially on this batch. That said, you can't really go wrong with any of them, as far as we've tried.

88.5

Nose: wet smoke in the foreground, medicinal, honey sweetness, smoked cheese, smoked meat, citrus, sweet orange, herbs - 88 Taste: thick - oily, creamy, pleasantly sweet, smoke, ash, sour fruits with a bit of tartness, iodine, herbal bitterness, oak - 89 Finish: medium long, pleasantly warming, dominantly smoky, a pinch of salt, maritime, slightly dry, a bit tart, citrus, herbal bitterness and oak - 89

Tasted on 09-09-21.

The first nose is wonderful. Beautiful, tasty and full of expectations. After I found batches 11 and 12 very good, this one is unfortunately disappointing, but for the aromas offered and 75 euros it is still a great standard whisky for the bar. Unfortunately, it lacks complexity and subtlety for a better rating.

Consistent quality as always Very standard Laphroaig style I have to recommend it to all peated style whisky lovers

great bottling

Smoky Session: 2023.07.10. Old Ballantruan 15yo https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/113419/old-ballantruan-15-year-old 84+ Lagavulin 16yo (2021) https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/182617/lagavulin-16-year-old 84+ Ben Bracken 19yo Cd 2003 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/221745/ben-bracken-2003-cd 85+ Ardbeg BizarreBQ https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/228999/ardbeg-bizarrebq 84+ Ardbeg Heavy Vapours https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/229937/ardbeg-heavy-vapours 86- Laphroaig 10yo CS#13 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/189372/laphroaig-cask-strength 88-

Nose: slightly peaty, but very smoky, medical, bandages, not very salty compared to other 10 CS, fruity sweet, peaches, apricots, dried light fruits, pears, smoked meat, smoked ham, citrus fruits, pomelo, grapefruit peel, cheese pecorino, herbs. Taste: Thick, creamy, oily, pleasantly sweet, honey, sweet fruit, ripe peach, butter cookies, ash, dying fire, burning cigar, herbs, spices. Finish: medium long, peaty, smoky, salty, sea, dry, a bit tart, citrus, pomelo and grapefruit, a bit herbal, pleasantly warming.

Golden color. Oily structure.

For many years I loved the standard ten, which suited me. And I was able to forgive it a lot (often a lighter body, or excessive sweetness from dried fruit at the expense of the freshness of citrus, etc.). I was even more excited about the barrel-strength filling – batch 013. However, it is still a slightly different whisky than the standard ten. I was also convinced by the realization that any addition of water does not benefit this whisky. Or maybe I just can't dilute it that well. Or maybe I'm not using the right water. Who knows. Anything is possible.

N: 14/20 M: 39/50 F: 10/15 Bang for buck: 8/15

Laphroaig Cask Strength Batch 13. From a 70cl bottle purchased online and rated Dec 2021. A dull orange. Aroma is initially biscuity, becoming papery and medicinal. Lots of clove and calpol, boozed up eggnog, aniseed mouth wash, cherry cough sweets, nutmeg. Clove and nutmeg predominate. Taste is medicinal, seriously punchy up front. Takes no prisoners. No smoke comes through to start - it’s all oily and mechanical, soft sweetness and char. It’s a very tasty whisky, showing off the oily medicinal side of Laphroaig. A good buy at the £70 price tag, objectively, although for me it’s the least good of the Laphroaig cask strength bottlings of the last 3 years. Still, much better than the majority of whiskies you will find on any shelf, which shows the inherent quality of this spirit. 3.675/87.5

Laphroaig Rocket Fuel: 2023.04.02. Laphroaig 10yo Cask Strength - Batch 15 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/211936/laphroaig-cask-strength 88+ Laphroaig 10yo Cask Strength - Batch 14 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/195979/laphroaig-cask-strength 88- Laphroaig 10yo Cask Strength - Batch 13 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/189372/laphroaig-cask-strength 89- Laphroaig 10yo Cask Strength - Batch 12 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/159190/laphroaig-cask-strength 89+ Laphroaig 10yo Cask Strength - Batch 8 https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/82295/laphroaig-cask-strength 91+

A bit closed when first opened, a lot opened a day later. Good Laphroaig, makes my tongue spin.

This one just sings with 5ml of water. Sweet and smoky bournon cask just nails it for me.

Pretty tasty and somehow well balanced. But something is missing. I just can't pinpoint what. Full review, alongside five other Laphroaig CS10: https://keinehalbendrinks.de/2022/02/24/laphroaig-cask-strength-10-year-old/

Very similar to the previous batch but not quite up to par for my taste, this is yet another wonderful cask strength malt from ''Laphroaig''. A pleasure!

Compared to Batch012, this whisky is completely different. This is a fantastic, real laphy with no distracting overly sweet notes. It is exactly as a real Laphy should be, iodine, bandage, pleasantly smoky, a little pungent, slightly bitter with lemon freshness and pleasant caramel sweetness.

Aroma：Pronounced；Palate：88/100; Aftertaste：Med-Long.

On the back label of my bottle that I bought in Germany, at the end of the lowercase text, it actually says: "With dye". That was it, dear Laphroaig team!

Caramel, vanilla biscuits, little medicinal, smoke, ash, butterscotch, dried fruits, honey, oak, pear, farm. Strong body, good intensity, warming, piquant, little depth.

For the friends of the big stinkers. Always my pleasure

Mixed Bag of Peat: 2022.10.12. https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/163132/ledaig-2008-ca 88- https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/180128/tobermory-2007-smws-4259 86+ https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/111682/ledaig-2008-brd 86+ https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/118582/ballechin-2008-vintage 87+ https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/118334/ledaig-2005-sv 88- https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/179124/ballechin-2010 85- https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/200101/craigellachie-2007-ca 87- https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/189372/laphroaig-cask-strength 88+

Decent CS, top in the nose, in the mouth it decreases slightly, but still impeccable!

At cask strength, as always, a solid, but not quite as diluted! Only bourbon barrels were used for this? I could swear there was a sherry cask in there!? Absolutely unbeatable, Ardbeg should take a leaf out of their book...

88.5

classic laphie peaty fruit combo, particularly the nose is lovely

I wanted to know exactly and accordingly I tasted seven editions, 3 Lagas (12yo) and 4 Laphis (10yo) side by side. My order looks like this: 1. Laphroaig 2017, 10yo, B009: 91.6P (filigree, depth) 2. Laphroaig 2020, 10yo, B012: 91.0P (intensive) 3. Lagavulin 2019, 12yo, DSR: 90.8P (filigree) 4. Lagavulin 2021, 12yo, DSR: 90.4P (intensive) 5. Laphroaig 2019, 10yo, B011: 90.0P (balanced) 6. Laphroaig 2021, 10yo, B013: 89.0P (mainstream) 7. Lagavulin 2020, 12yo, DSR: 87.4P

very good, bourbon cask peat monster, moderate burn, but lacks a bit more medicinal iodiney notes and/or fruit notes for complexity for a bigger score, lot of vanilla

N 88 Buzz is a bit. Bright flower 4 honey 4 lemon 4 peat 4. Iodine 3. Salt 2. Carbonated ash 2 vanilla 3 herbs 3 tropical fruit 2. Rich. Pineapple hint P 88 Honey 5 Cream Custard 4 Flower 4 Honey 4 Pepper 4. Clove 3 Peat 4. Iodine 3. Salt 2. Ash 3. Medicinal 3 // There is a point where the spices come on strongly. Around 3.5. F 85 Medium-long. Honey 4 Peat 4. Medicinal 4. Ash 3. Iodine 2 Flower 3 Lemon peel 3 Malt 3 Slight metallic hint Tannin 3 Pepper 5. Clove 4 The strong, bright honey scent is attractive. The peat provides good balance. There is a sudden, sharp spicy point at the finish, and a slightly subtle, long-lasting bitterness.

Scent: peat, citrus, medical, marine, seaweed, chocolate, Taste: asphalt, burnt tires, fire potatoes, peat, vanilla, citrus, pharmacy Finish: peaty-medicinal Rating: 4

It is less complex than its predecessors, but a full bourbon cask maturation allows the Laphroaig spirit character to dominate. Still a great bottling and probably the best value for money OB of Laphroaig that is currently available.

Matured in charred ex-bourbon casks. Non-chill filtered. Thick slowly forming straight primary legs. Midsize slow secondary legs. Droplets. Holds water very well. Advanced level scotch.

Nose has large amounts of peat with rubber, bacon, and butter. Big peaty palette reminiscent of cigarette ash, but in a sweet way. Finish changes over time. Ashy peat at first but then it transitions to bacon, and then adds butter to that. Tail end is ashy peaty buttery bacon.

No comments simple island whisky Nose - 21 Taste - 22 Finish - 21 Balance - 21 Rating - 85

I've just finished a bottle of my favorite whisky, so I'll have to post a review. As always happens to me in these cases, I don't know what to say. I am perfectly aware that the reasons why I love this whisky completely escape my cognition. Who can say why they love whom they love? Can one answer the question "Why do you love him/her?" by giving a list of that person's characteristics? Is a reality exhausted by listing its observable characteristics? Does a mere list of relatively excellent properties justify our sincere appreciation of something that displays those properties? If that were the case, determining the beauty of something should be a mere scientific endeavor, just measuring stuff, and humanity would have reached a total consensus long ago about what things are the most beautiful, but it seems that hasn't happened. If it is not the properties of the thing that make it beautiful, perhaps our appreciation is due exclusively to the way we perceive the thing. What makes a person’s smile, a painting, or a song beautiful would be the psychological, anatomical, cultural, and biographical peculiarities of the person perceiving them. But if aesthetical taste were purely subjective, there would never be any kind of consensus about the quality of art (and making whisky is an art, remember), which is also not true. You might not personally like the Iliad, The Godfather, or the Sistine Chapel, but any expert will disdain your opinion, probably with good reason, if you also claim that you prefer Dan Brown, Marvel movies, or your front porch. If the beauty of something does not depend on its objective characteristics or subjective taste, what does it depend on? Once, an old, stuffy German tried to propose the idea that beauty is both objective and subjective. There are certain realities that objectively possess the characteristics that make it possible to enjoy them aesthetically. However, possessing these characteristics is not enough, as it is the way we perceive them, the effect they have on us, that makes them beautiful. According to the almost forgotten old German, aesthetic objects are not beautiful in themselves but because of the effect they elicit in us, the free interaction they provoke between our faculties of imagination, understanding, reason, volition and pleasure. Therefore, although saying that something is beautiful is not the same as saying something about its weight or color (since this is indisputably objective), it is also not the same as saying that I personally like it (since this is indisputably subjective). The aesthetic judgment (“this is beautiful”) has a certain pretension of universality; it asserts that any rational and free being should find beauty ("purposiveness without purpose") in the same object as I do, as long as their faculties that make them a rational and free being are intact and enjoys leisure. Beautiful things have the purpose of having no purpose, of liberating us from the subjugation of survival, cognitive and moral purposes, or in other words, of "letting us be" ourselves; pausing, for a moment, our identification with the knowing subject and with the moral subject with which we usually identify in everyday life. Beautiful things are, therefore, those that do not force us to know them better, nor to support our moral development thanks to them, but simply to stop to contemplate them and enjoy this mere contemplation, with no purpose beyond this pleasure. More clearly put, while in front of any other beings these faculties are exercised mechanically, and we do not possess freedom while confronting them, in front of aesthetic, that is, beautiful objects, we "let our imagination fly" evocatively, understand things for the pleasure of understanding them, reason unreal possibilities, desire mystical chimeras and enjoy this freedom we feel while absorved into them, as they do not drag us towards anything beyond themselves. Undoubtedly, a magnificent and brave theory that only a German romantic living in the midst of a civilization at its peak could have conceived. It is unfortunately forgotten today not just because of the difficulty of its study, but because we have practically lost the ability to find true beauty in the world, so we simply do not need theories about what takes our breath away in front of a virgin landscape or the solemnity of a catedral, as nothing takes our breath away anymore. No need to explain something that is never experienced. Today, the decadent, anhedonic and almost senile Western culture is aesthetically subjectivist, simply identifying beauty with personal taste, and I would even dare to say that the very concept of beauty has practically fallen into disuse, replaced by eminently subjectivist, individualistic, vulgar, and pedestrian concepts (“cool”, “dope”, “rad”, “lit”, “epic”, “sweet”, “neat”…) I myself do it, my whisky rating system is "subjective," it has no claim to universality because, unlike the old German, I am a coward and do not want to offend anyone by suggesting that if they do not find beauty in the whisky in which I find it, then their cognitive and volitional faculties must be aberrant and might not even qualify as rational and free beings… So, anyway… how is this Laphroaig? Well. Simply stunningly beautiful. Aroma: Immediately after pouring, it fills the entire room. Explosive Laphroaig peat, so tons of bonfire at the beach, iodine from sea organic matter, seabreeze, seafood, seaweed, and more words that start with sea-... and a touch of tar. The distillery's character is cradled by two families of notes: autumnal notes (wet leaves, moldy wood, mushrooms, roasted chestnuts, rainy day, wet soil, deciduous forest, damp leather clothes) and sweet fruity/herbal notes (rosemary honey, white chocolate, wildflowers, juniper, tropical fruits like pineapple). Flavor: It hits you with an overdose of ashy, medicinal and maritime peat as if there were no tomorrow, followed by a violent surge of miso soup, seafood, leather, wet soil and seawater. Both aspects rise up imposing like an oak, decorated with Christmas ornaments such as anise, lemon peel, herbal honey, roasted pineapple, almonds, slightly spicy chili, jerky, vinegar, grapefruit, earthy funk... Oily and dense texture. Aftertaste: Maybe it's my imagination, but the finish leaves a sensation similar to accidentally swallowing seawater, an astringency typical of saltwater. The spicy oak becomes a main character, along with iodine, peat, leather, and seafood. The fruit dominates over the nuts, the more floral aspects eclipsed by honey and vanilla, all soaked in seawater. Obviously, it builds up, leaving an intense aftertaste of leather with hints of tobacco, sun-rotted coastal seaweed, brined seafood, and smoked chili. Extremely intense just the way a whisky should be. It’s so solid that it is a flavor in itself, the seams between the various notes are imperceptible, like the parts of an animal. I haven't found a whisky that captures the organoleptic profile of the coast with such accuracy and beauty. Like taking a walk on the boardwalk, eating at a beach bar, and swimming near the sea-bathed rocks. Anyway... what can I say. My favorite whisky from my favorite distillery. I don't know if the ancient belief that the dead should be buried with the objects they might need in the next life is true, but just in case, I want to be buried with a bottle of this strange pirate brew. Adorable stuff.

A decent batch, although I like the successor, Batch 14, much better. I find this Batch 13 a bit one-dimensional in comparison. The youth come through very strongly. Likewise the strong alcohol note. Reminds me a bit of the miserable Batch 15, although that was really much (!) worse.

COLOR: Golden yellow (with dye) - a supermalt from Islay - good combination of smoke, oak and spice - compared to Batch 09 from 2016, not quite as aromatic - tastes better without water than with water - for the actual price of around €70 it's totally fine, now available approx. 150€...a question of taste

https://399s.com/8193.html Color: gold Smell: alcohol, leather, peat, cream, wheat, sour, orange peel Taste: Juice sweetness, good alcohol suppression, milky aroma, maltose, soot, peat, banana, slightly salty, a hint of meat, caramel Finish: long, maltose, slightly tannic, slightly salty, cheese slices I don’t know if I opened the bottle and sobered it up for a long time (half a year +). The taste is round and smooth, followed by salty sea breeze and banana milkshake, with a little salty cheese cream. Overall it’s pretty good.

Love it!

A very good representative of Laphroaig style for fair price!

Eye, copper Nose, peat, wet, sea salt, vanilla, vegetative Mouth, oily, peated, tannin, warm

An excellent, strong Laphroaig, extremely tasty.

Once a year (even twice this year!) The anxious question: is it good again, the 10 CS? For me the answer is clear: yes, absolutely. Initially reminded me of the previous batch 012 in the nose, but then turns in a different direction on the tongue. No herbs like in batch 011, very straight forward. Batch 011 at 58.6% tolerated a few drops of water, Batch 012 came off best on its own, which was quite surprising in view of its 60.1%. Batch 013 imitates its predecessor and is best served pure and undiluted in a glass.

For that price it is the best Whisky you can buy

Nose: Minerality, herbal, fruit cake, smoke and copper. Palate: Fruit cake, herbal, nutty, smoky and coppery. Finish: Long -> Fruity candy smoke.

the previous ones (and following) were a lot better..

88,5

If you like the 10 year old and you like cash strength whisky, then this one is a safe bet!

[August, 2021] A quick word of caution: I tasted this dram with good friends last night and (with all due respect to Laphroaig) it seems as if the quality has degraded substantially compared to earlier batches. Given the aromas and flavours profile they did not add a substantial number of sherry casks to this batch (most probably) as was the standard with previous releases instead they added caramel to create a comparable dark colour (according to German law this has to be stated and they did it for the first time with this batch, the bottle's back label states "Mit Farbstoff" which means "dye added"). As a result this dram tastes rather harsh on aggressive peat and wood only (like many of the NAS editions of the last years) missing out the complexity and balance of earlier CS batches. To be on the safe side I will re-taste this dram on different settings over the course of the next days before doing a detailed review and score, finally... ...and luckily, the various re-tastings improved the rather weak first impressions a lot. This edition is much more simple than earlier ones with dominating wooden and peat notes burying the malt and sherry flavours almost completely in the nose and to a large extend in the taste too. But still this is quaffable dram, no doubt. I did a head-to-head with batch 12 and the earlier batch won this by far because of its higher complexity and better balance. But still the CS is way better than all of the recent NAS Laphroaig releases - so I strongly suggest to go for (still reasonably priced) older batches as I am afraid of the quality of the CS will deteriorate further due to the upcoming Beam management vintages...

It has a relatively oily viscosity and its bouquet is of high intensity. I have aromas of intense peat smoke, smoked bacon, maritime notes, herbs, honey, vanilla and pipe tobacco. Moderately complex. A good balance between sweetness and dryness in terms of taste. The alcohol is relatively well integrated and it has a heavy body.

If we evaluate this release as a separate unit, then in general it came out very good - powerful, energetic, in the classic style of Isla. But everything is learned by comparison! And in my opinion, the previous batches (those that we managed to try) are a little more interesting in terms of their organoleptic characteristics.

This Laphroaig matured for over ten years and was bottled without chill filtration and at cask strength for a particularly rich taste.

Not as good as previous 10CS. It’s still good, but price is up and quality is down. It trends towards what every other young peater is doing. Antiseptic, new plastic, iodine, vanilla. Big dram. 86/87

013 is not as good as 012, but I think it is worse than 011. This series is still pursuing the sense of impact, while the sense of new wine and roughness is still a small regret. Of course, considering the structure, the 10-year barrel series still has its own range positioning.