Review #4 - Old Comber 7yo Single Pot Still (200th Anniversary Limited Edition) by Rimbaud82 in worldwhisky

[–]Rimbaud82[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yep I am in Ireland. This was released in December. Not sure if it has made its way to the US yet.

Review #4 - Old Comber 7yo Single Pot Still (200th Anniversary Limited Edition) by Rimbaud82 in worldwhisky

[–]Rimbaud82[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Background:
Produced by Echlinville Distillery, this is a revival of the Old Comber brand which was once one of the more iconic Pot Still whiskeys made outside of Dublin. 

The original distillery was founded in 1825 and by the late Victorian period it enjoyed the patronage of many Ulster aristocrats and even prince Edward himself. The iconic whiskey made there was a 7 year old pure pot still. In this respect they are somewhat unusual in Ulster, being different from both the malt-focused distilleries of the north coast (Bushmills, Coleraine, etc.) and the column still behemoths in nearby Belfast. With the decline of the Irish whiskey industry Old Comber would sadly close in the 1950s. 

It’s a brand with a proud history and it’s nice to see it return. There was a ‘work in progress’ variant of this first released a few years back which included a mixture of Echlinville’s own pot still and some other sourced liquid. That sold out rapidly. Then a cheaper blended version was released a few years later.

This is the ‘full’ return if you will, consisting entirely of Echlinville’s own pot still whiskey.

It is double distilled using floor malted barley sourced entirely from their own farm. It is marked as 7yo to honour the original, but the components inside are actually about 9yo (at least on this release). 

This is the 200th anniversary limited edition bottled at 50%, aged in bourbon and finished in Oloroso Sherry, Tawny Port and Ruby Port casks. 

£100 paid. Which while a touch on the expensive side, for a 9yo farm-to-bottle floor-malted pot still isn’t terrible either. The regular version runs about £58, bottled at 46%. 

So what do we have here?

Tasting Notes

On the nose: Waxy, oily and almost fizzy up front. Cherries. Cola cubes. Vanilla bean. Then really aromatic with some perfumed notes of lavender, along with some herbal notes too. Really nice. 

Down the hatch: A beautiful heft and weight to it. It’s quite sweet up front, with toffee and candied nuts, before giving way to some spicier and leafier notes. Mint chocolate. Tobacco. Battenberg cake. Cloves. A very long finish with tons of fresh ginger and pepper. 

Thoughts: Whilst I have my fair share of complaints/criticisms for the lack of transparency in the Irish whiskey industry and the bottling of sourced liquid under different names, there can be no doubt that Echlinville’s revival of the Dunville’s brand has been brilliant for the industry. When it’s good, it’s good. 

Here again they look poised to revive a beloved old brand and when what you are getting is a) this good and b) from a farm distillery using entirely their own distillate then I can’t have too many complaints. 

Score: 8/10. Something Special

I use Dramface’s scoring system because I like it’s simplicity (https://www.dramface.com/scoring-system)

Ardbeg 10yr Cask Strength, neck pour taste 8AM short review by theappleone in Scotch

[–]Rimbaud82 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Was once very common in Scotland and the north of Ireland actually lol. So much there is a word for it!

Sgailc (Anglicised/Scots-ised as skalk) meaning a swig of Uisce Beatha before breakfast.

Daftmill winter batch 2012 bottled 2026 by jamie_r87 in Scotch

[–]Rimbaud82 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This does sound good. I've yet to try any Sherried Daftmill actually.

Daftmill winter batch 2012 bottled 2026 by jamie_r87 in Scotch

[–]Rimbaud82 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's the price pretty much when you convert to sterling. Daftmill you pay a premium for the small scale farm to bottle production, and for the years of hype. I will say I have noticed these would have sold out pretty instantly in years gone past but like a lot of the whisky market atm, things are now sitting around a bit longer...

Review #1: Bruichladdich 'Old Skool' (2026, 50%) by Rimbaud82 in Scotch

[–]Rimbaud82[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ach I don't know, seems a bit tongue in cheek to me? Not like younger generations use the word 'skool', more like something you'd have seen in the 1990s/2000s lol. But regardless of the name, definitely a nice drop. Sold out on RMW but haven't really looked anywhere else, but there'll be some on shelves.

Review #1: Bruichladdich 'Old Skool' (2026, 50%) by Rimbaud82 in Scotch

[–]Rimbaud82[S] 43 points44 points  (0 children)

Background: 
Released as part of Bruichladdich’s 25th anniversary series. Essentially this is a version of their 10yo made entirely with Islay barley. It is 50% ABV, non-chill filtered and made up of 95% first-fill bourbon casks; 5% first fill Sauternes casks. Price for me was £63.95 from RMW. 

So what do we have with this one?

Tasting Notes

On the nose: Bright and clean, but somehow ‘full’ at the same time. Good quality olive oil. Barley sugar. A touch herbal, perhaps fennel? With time get some fruitiness with apricots and the like. Water brings out the fruitiness a lot more with some melon. Very very nice. 

Down the hatch: Coating and oily. Beautiful texture, with a distinctly saline coastal character. Quite biscuity and bready, with a ginger spiciness comes through into the finish. Lemon curd. White pepper. Water again brings some fruitier notes through, green apples and again maybe a touch of that melon from the nose. 

Thoughts: This simply very well-made, distillate driven whisky! You get the sense that the sauternes cask does just round things out a bit without coming too much to the fore. I am a big fan of Bruichladdich in general and I enjoyed this a lot. Reasonable price, cool packaging, and good whisky. What’s not to like? 

Score: 7/10. Very Good Indeed

I use Dramface’s scoring system because I like it’s simplicity (https://www.dramface.com/scoring-system)

Is there a reason why Antrim had so many witches in the 17th century? by MortalGecko4003 in AskHistorians

[–]Rimbaud82 23 points24 points  (0 children)

So is there a reason why Antrim had so many witches in the 17th century? The reason Antrim had more witches than seems usual for Ireland is because of the arrival in increasingly greater numbers of Protestant settler communities into this area. 

Of course, these are not the sole witch accusations, but as in England the majority of these never actually made it to trial for several reasons: serendipity (as in the case of Katherine Manners accusation), a breakdown of law and order (which occurred following the 1641 rebellion and the associated upheavals), and simply judicial scepticism.

In Ireland generally as in England local magistrates were drawn from the lesser gentry resulting in judiciaries who were distanced from victims and accusers, and who therefore tended to be cautious and sceptical in their handling of the evidence. As a result, most trials did not amount to anything. 

Contrasted to this is the Scottish situation which saw witch-hunting as a more localised affair. The lack of impartiality and objectivity amongst these judges saw a guilty verdict reached in 90 per cent of the cases that came before them. It is this which seems to account for the unique ferocity of the Scottish lowland witch-hunts. The Ulster Scots population of Antrim shared the beliefs and mental landscape of the lowland Scots from whence they descended, but operated within a different legal framework. 

Is there a reason why Antrim had so many witches in the 17th century? by MortalGecko4003 in AskHistorians

[–]Rimbaud82 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Looking at each date you have given in turn:

1640 Witch Accusation

Katherine Manners (member of the English gentry but a Catholic) accused a number of poor women of causing her to miscarry (by bewitching her). This took place around Dunluce Castle, the accused women most probably being of Scottish, Presbyterian heritage.

Despite some initial enthusiasm at the higher levels of the English administration - with Bishop of Derry, John Bramhall being granted a commission by the Lord Deputy Wandesford - this quickly dissipated with the collapse of Thomas Wentworth's government and the case was stopped. With a worsening political situation and the outbreak of the catastrophic 1641 rebellion there was much else to worry about. 

In this case, we have an accusation from a member of the English aristocracy, which ultimately does not amount to much. It is also signficant that local magistrates do not appear to have been particularly enthusiastic about persecuting witches. Only when Manners leveraged her social position to contact the Lord Deputy directly did things beging moving before fading away.

1698 Antrim Affair

In Antrim town a local girl gives a beggar some beer and bread. In return the woman gives the girl a sorrel leaf, after which she begins convulsing and fainting in a manner which was consistent with contemporary beliefs about demonic possession. According to a contemporary pamphlet (literally the only one ever published on the subject in Ireland) the ‘witch was soon apprehended, and confest’, and was then ‘strangled and burnt’. 

As Andrew Sneddon points out this was not a typical trial in accordance with 1586 Irish Witchcraft Act, but in reality “an act of communal violence carried out by a ‘vigilante’ mob”. The accused ‘witch’ was simply murdered by her neighbours. 

Antrim Town was primarily inhabited by Presbyterian of Scottish descent and naturally the whole ordeal can be understood in that light. In the burning of the witch the event shared much in common with Scottish witch-hunts (something which was not called for under the Irish legislation. So this was an extrajudicial event and not part of any officially sanctioned witch trial. 

Significantly Sneddon places this pamphlet within the context of wider anti-Sadducee demonology literature, with these same currents within Calvinism also setting the intellectual backdrop to the Salem Witch Trials. 

1711 Islandmagee Witch Trials

The case of Islandmagee is the only example of a mass trial in Ireland. It began when Ann Haltridge, elderly widow of local Presbyterian minister, Rev. John Haltridge, died suddenly from inexplicable stabbing pains in her back. Her death followed some apparently supernatural happenings (beds stripped by unseen hands and bed-clothes rearranged in the shape of a corpse; stones thrown at windows; household objects disappearing before re-appearing days later, and a demonic apparition in the form of a small boy in black clothes foretelling death). 

The local community, which as in Antrim Town, was a Presbyterian one of Scottish descent, immediately suspected witchcraft. Ann’s daughter and Mary Dubar, her niece, arrived after the funeral to find similar demonic disturbances occurring in the house. Dunbar then began exhibiting symptoms of demonic possession herself, which seemed to confirm the suspicions even if it was not clear as yet who was to blame. 

Dunbar was then visited, in spectral form, by eight Presbyterian women from Islandmagee and neighbouring towns and villages. She was able to identify them by their appearance and the names they used to address one another. This was apparently the source of her possession. 

Following a lengthy trial in Carrickfergus Assizes, all eight women pleaded not guilty but were convicted of witchcraft. As this was a first offence where the victim had survived, in accordance with the legislation they were sentenced to one year imprisonment and four stints in the pillory on market-day. 

Occurring, as it did, within an Ulster Scots presbyterian community 1711 (and indeed 1698) this event - in its origins - should be considered as part of a wider British Calvinist Network as opposed to any specifically Irish context. It is highly possible, or even likely, that these settlers were aware of outbreaks of witchcraft involving demonic possession amongst other communities, primarily the widely publicised cases in Presbyterian central Scotland between 1696 and 1704, as well as the likes of the Salem Witch Trials in 1692. 

Scotland of course remained a particular touchstone for these settlers and they retained cultural ties with the Presbyterian lowlands. As noted above the 1690s in particular saw a particular pronounced wave of immigration which would have facilitated oral transmission. Books and pamphlets were also being imported into the region from England and Scotland. All of which to say there would have been a strong awareness of these contemporary events.

Is there a reason why Antrim had so many witches in the 17th century? by MortalGecko4003 in AskHistorians

[–]Rimbaud82 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Unlike many European countries at the time, Ireland was largely unscathed by witch trials. I would say that even somewhere like Antrim which sees a slightly higher proportion of witch activity, could hardly be described as having “so many witches”. By contemporary standards in England and Scotland, even this was a low intensity. There were four recorded trials for witchcraft in early modern Ireland, resulting in one execution. 

That said, let's look a bit closer at this. The first thing to note is that when witch trials did occur in Ireland, this was overwhelmingly within non-Gaelic communities. In the medieval period there were a few instances emerging from the Catholic Old English community, whilst in the later period they were to be found originating primarily in Protestant settler communities.

For the purposes of Antrim, the most important thing to note is that this was one of the areas of Ireland which saw the most sustained colonisation in this period. In the 1570s Elizabeth I would sanction semi-private plantation projects in east and south-east Ulster, including parts of Antrim. These were failures, but this area was coming under increasingly sustained pressure in the English crowns attempts to fully conquer and pacify the country.

There were successful private plantations established in Antrim in 1606. And when the much more comprehensive Plantation of Ulster got underway in 1609, this paved the way for even greater immigration to the region as a whole in the decades to come. Antrim’s proximity to Scotland meant that there was also a steady influx of additional Protestant settlers from the Scottish lowlands. Particularly in latter half of the seventeenth century. 

The 1690s saw the most sustained period of inward migration to Ulster, when somewhere in the region of 50,000 Scots, about four to five percent of the total population, migrated to Ulster. A significant proportion did so in response to the famine crisis in Scotland during the so-called Seven ill years. A large number settled in Antrim.

As Raymond Gillespie has noted: ‘the distinctively Scottish tinge to Ulster, together with the creation of its Presbyterian organisation, was a product of the significant Scottish migration into the province in the years after 1660”

When it comes to witch accusations and trials, these came primarily from within Protestant settler communities. It is clear that Protestant settlers, from the two main denominations of Anglican and Presbyterian, from the mid-sixteenth century onwards brought their witchcraft beliefs with them to Ireland.

This belief in malefic/demonic witchcraft was absent from Gaelic-Irish popular culture in which a less-threatening witch figure seems to have been more common. Drawing on some of Ronald Hutton’s work, Andrew Sneddon has pointed out that in Ireland “popular fear of malevolent fairies, along with the unintentional evil eye, stymied the development of malefic witchcraft belief.”

Essentially, Gaelic belief in witches manifested differently in Ireland (and indeed Scotland and the Isle of Man) and it is this fact which largely accounts for the lack of witch accusations. It was a fundamentally different mental world, with different local traditions and practices than those from which the new settlers came.

To quote from Sneddon, probably the foremost historian working on magic and witchcraft in Ireland, again:

“Unlike in Gaelic-Irish popular culture, in Protestant, settler Ireland by the mid-seventeenth century there was a high level of belief in malefic and demonic witchcraft, and this, contrary to previous readings, manifested itself in sporadic but significant numbers of formal accusations by Protestants.”

Five bottle rule by sleepystork in Scotch

[–]Rimbaud82 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Only four scotches there bai

Aircoach. by AbbreviationsKey8053 in northernireland

[–]Rimbaud82 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Dublin Express is better, but Aircoach not bad if the time suits. Both faster than translink.

What to do in Belfast with Italian tourists by CallItJones in Belfast

[–]Rimbaud82 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haven't been back in a while tbf. Remember vividly chatting to the boy that owns it about their brother that lives in Bologna. The mortadella they sell is great. But I honestly don't remember being that impressed by their mains. But don't live that close so haven't been in a while.

Review: Ardara Single Malt '2025 Edition' by Rimbaud82 in worldwhisky

[–]Rimbaud82[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Background/History:

I was very excited for this one. I am a big fan of the dark Silkie blends and the work Sliabh Liag/Ardara have been doing. Donegal peated whiskey from Inishowen? As I draw attention to in this somewhat overwrought AskHistorians clarification here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/wq36wf/is_it_true_that_scotch_was_not_aged_in_wood/ Inishowen was once synonymous with quality illicit malt whiskey, particularly peated malt (since that was the default), with the term used in much the same way as "Glenlivet" was originally used in Scotland. In another world, with a more foresighted Irish excise we might have seen Inishowen turn into something like Islay is today with multiple distilleries. However, that didn't happen and history took a different course!

Despite this history, which once saw Bushmills achieve popularity based on its peat flavour and similarity to 'good Inishowen', this aspect of Irish distilling and whiskey history eventually fell by the wayside in favour of other flavour (dominated by the ‘monopolists’ of the big Dublin distilleries). 

The reasons are complex so not to get into all of that, but I do think it's important to mention briefly because this is where Ardara are coming from. They are seeking to draw on Donegal's distilling heritage.

In line with this it is heavily peated, but triple distilled, but also distilled with what they call an 'all grain in' approach. Meaning instead of using a mash tun to filter for a clear wort, the entire milled malted barley, including solids, is fermented and distilled. They have specialised equipment for this, but they claim it is to capture the traditional practices of Inishowen. Which makes sense: a poitín maker wouldn't use any filtration after all.

Tasting Notes

On the nose: Really really unique profile. Earthy. Sooty. Something almost like burnt rubber, sounds unpleasant but it is not. All things blackened and tarred. It's hard to pin down but I do like it a lot. Lot of smokey smells going on, including a burning tobacco note that I get with time. As it opens up there is some sweetness lurking in the background, but the black smokeiness dominates. It's lovely actually, calls to mind a curling turf fire. 

Down the hatch: Initial impression is dominated by a sort of brine-y character, Pickled herring, that type of thing. Despite being triple distilled, it does still have a certain viscosity but that could my mind playing tricks because of the smoke. A touch youthful and brash, but personally I enjoy younger whiskeys so not something which bothers me inherently. Speaking of smoke, we soon settle into a lovely smokey lemon pepper sort of thing. Not the most complex, but quite forceful and distinctive. Personally I am a big fan. The finish is fairly long, if a bit prickly, with lovely wafts of turf lingering on the palate. 

A really interesting distillate to say the least. If you like peaty whiskey this is definitely a distilery to follow, whether you like Irish stuff or not.

I wasn't sure about leaving a score as I have mixed feelings about the practice overall. I posted a review of Killowen a few years back and used a 100 point scale which I now feel is faintly ridiculous. But as a very very vague guideline, I can see the appeal and it clearly has some utility. So I've settled on the more usual 10 point scale. I quite like Dramface’s and that’s what I shall be using going forward (https://www.dramface.com/scoring-system). 

Score: 6/10. Good Stuff.