Peatreek Whisky Mince Pies

Ready to go in the oven.

Despite being snowed under at work, like a Glenfiddich Cask in 2010, I have found time to embark on a little experiment. My theory was that whisky is an ideal accompaniment to any Christmas cuisine, then I hypothesised that mince pies may be an excellent example of this. Mincemeat has brandy or rum stirred through it so why not whisky?

The base of my mincemeat was Bramley apples, medium cider and soft dark brown sugar. Then enhanced with some lemon zest and juice, almonds, raisins, currents, and a spice combination. Once this had stewed and cooled I stirred through a generous dose of whisky. The choice of whisky was a no-brainer, only the Compass Box Spice Tree would do. Its cardamon, clove, nutmeg and cinnamon flavour profile would perfectly harmonise with the mincemeat.

The first lesson I learnt was that although the mincemeat tasted fantastic (I apologise for the vanity, but it really did), it didn't taste overly whiskyfied. Maybe the Spice Tree complimented the mincemeat too well? So my next move was to make whisky butter. Now I make rum butter (one part butter, one part light brown sugar, a little Nutmeg and complete saturation with rum) to go with Frei Kirk. Frei Kirk is a Scottish Christmas pudding from a recipe passed down through my Dad's side of the family. The recipe is a secret so I am forbidden to divulge it here, although please feel free to drop by my flat on Christmas day for a taste. So my plan was to substitute the rum for the Spice Tree and by jingo did it work. I separated the lids from the (cooked) mince pies and spread the whisky butter over the mincemeat before replacing the lid. What I was left with was a mince pie with a distinct whisky flavour that didn't overpower the mincemeat but added more depth and warmth to a Christmas staple.

I am now thinking of stirring whisky through the pastry instead of water, maybe some Bowmore Tempest (Batch 3), who knows?

Peatreek Whisky Mince Pies & Butter
ABV Unknown - No Age Statement - Baked at Peatreek HQ
Nose: Pastry
Palate: Stewed apple, spice, sweet butter and Scotch Blended Malt Whisky.
Finish: Moreish!
Overall: The start of further whisky-food-combinations.

The Subjectivity of Tasting… Glendronach Revival

Do you see faces or a glass?

Subjectivity is something that makes the world a more vivid and vibrant place. It is a force that drives discussion and debate and forms the context of the world we live in. A concept both flawed and personal, we wouldn't be human if we didn't form our own opinion of the world around us. For me, the most interesting facet of subjectivity is our perception of what we sense. Green Blob Theory is something that sums this up quite nicely: How do we know what you see as a dog and we both call a dog, doesn't look like a green blob if you looked through my eyes. Or put more simply, is what we both call orange the same colour?

I think this is very interesting and after some thought I came to the realisation that I could test this. Writing tasting notes for alcohol demonstrates it quite nicely. The reason for this is because what we taste in whisky and wine are esters and acids that form the flavour profile. For example, if you taste lemon in a dram then it is probably the citric acid content of the drink that is giving you that flavour. Of course tasting high alcohol beverages isn't as clean cut as that. There are so many chemicals knocking around in a glass of whisky that it is quite difficult to differentiate between them. This is the reason why tasting notes can differ so much. Some flavours are obvious; an Ardbeg tastes smoky to everyone, except those with the most warped palates, because of its high phenol content. So in essence, tasting notes become buzzwords that remind us of a particular flavour. Some aren't particularly pleasant, cat's piss is a common one for some sauvignon blancs, and it isn't even a critical tasting note. Conventions do occur, this is why you'll see similarities across tasting notes until you get occasions such as a conversation I had recently when one person got a complex leathery quality and the other (me) got car tyre.

So back to my test…

On hearing that the irrepressible Robert Manning who judged my tasting competition a few blogs back (see here), had tried the Glendronach 15 year old a couple of nights back, I went out to get a sample for myself. We then both wrote our tasting notes down ready for comparison. The idea being to see what similarities and differences there would be. Clearly there isn't much experimental control going on here but for the sake of whimsy we persevered. Here are our notes, starting with my own:

Glendronach Revival
46% - 15 Years Old - Sherry Cask 
Nose: A fruit driven nose of raisins and sultanas with raspberry and blackcurrants. Cabernet sauvignon is also present giving this woody whisky a stern backdrop.
Palate: The sherry wood is very apparent with dark fruits, dry leaves and a hint of ash adding to the Revival's rich intensity.
Finish: Port is the flavour that jumps to mind with that cabernet sauvignon appearing again with a dose of red currants.
Overall: Richer and more overpowering than the 'Dronach 12 year old. Maybe a touch too much wood for my liking although I'd say that is personal preference only. A masterclass in whisky making.

Rob's:
Nose: Dry sherry, and the bitter sweet aroma of cherries and summer fruits complimented by a biscuit-like maltiness.
Palate: Fruit cake, dried fruits with fresh citrus undertones and sweet toffee abide alongside a small hint of oak.
Finish: Fresh summer fruits and chewy toffee accompanied by a crescendo of malty liveliness.
Overall: Unlike any other whiskey in my tasting arsenal to date. Probably the smoothest dram I've had in a long while. Very fruity and sweet with a nice malty flavour. Christmas cake is the analogy of choice when describing this particularly morish dram.

Us camping above Dalwhinnie
with a cigar (midgie repellent!)

So in conclusion you can see some obvious differences: I got dry fruits whereas Rob got summer fruits on the nose; and on the palate I got that very dry woody quality whereas Rob was gathering citrus undertones and lots of toffee. Despite this there are some clear similarities; the dried fruits I got on the nose appear on Rob’s palate. Also, those summer fruits that keep recurring for Rob do pop up in mine in the form of raspberries and red currants. The unambiguous sherry presence was identified by the pair of us. What is most interesting is that Rob got a much sweeter flavour profile than mine. For me there are a few interesting factors that can be deduced from this. Firstly, the similarities didn’t necessarily occur to us at the same time, where one of us got a note on the nose the other would get it on the palate. Secondly, the sweet to dry ratio of the tasting notes clearly is subject to individual perception. Although I would say I was comparing quite to the 12 year old, which is sweeter still, so maybe this explains part of the difference. Finally, what is most interesting for me is the different language we both use to describe the whisky. Rob and I discovered whisky together so I assumed we would have picked up the same buzzwords for the same flavours, this clearly wasn’t the case. Then again perhaps all that is important is that we both enjoyed it. The Glendronach 15 year old is a fantastic whisky as indeed all the Glendronachs are. So, where to go from here? Clearly one whisky isn’t enough to draw absolute conclusions from so in the interests of science I have posted Rob a Glendronach 18 year old, so watch this space for the next chapter of this experiment! I would also be interested if anyone has any conflicting tasting notes and welcome them to comment below.

Blogger to Blender...

A little while back I let my arrogance get the better of me. I foolishly thought that blending whisky must be easy and could be done in an afternoon. Buoyed up with thoughts of being the next Richard Paterson I set about my vain work. The concept was simple, make a blend combining the flavour profiles of three of my favourite (apologies for the f-word) distilleries: Talisker, Highland Park and Springbank. I set up my tools; an array of pipettes, Glencairns and some tongue stretches to get my palate loosened up. Having never attempted blending whisky before and caught up in the excitement of the moment I didn’t really think through the intricacies of making a blend, my foresight went as far as to record quantities used (that I later lost) and to include a grain whisky, as a blend would of course be a combination of both single malts and grain whisky. What I hadn’t considered was firstly that most bottles of whiskies are already an optimum blend of different casks, secondly that alcohol is a volatile substance and therefore some whiskies would not combine and thirdly that blends are usually allowed time to vat to become a whole. Okay, technically there was a fourth element I had completely forgotten in my fervour to become the next blending giant and that is that I don’t know what I’m doing. Having forgotten all of this I set about my task.

For all of my glaringly obvious mistakes I did have myself a very fun afternoon. I used Cameron Brig and another single grain whisky for the grain element of my blend then I went in heavy on the Talisker 10 year old. After tasting it later it became apparent that I should have held back on the Talisker as it clashed the most with the other flavours. I waded on adding equal quantities of the Springbank 15 year old and the Highland Park 12 year old. This is when it started to go wrong. In an effort to combat the increasingly bitter flavour the blend was taking on I began adding a variety of different malts to balance out the flavour, including Glenfarclas 30 year old and MacAllan 12 year old. The idea behind the Glenfarclas was to add some age and depth to the blend, whereas the MacAllan was supposed to soften out the bitterness; instead it overpowered the constituent parts. In a moment of inspiration I added Longrow C.V. that actually married quite nicely giving the blend a touch of smoke and I reckon complimented the Springbank quite well. After adding a few more bits and bobs and tinkering with the quantities I was forced to admit defeat. Dr. Jekyll had morphed into Mr. Hyde. So below I provide the tasting notes for my humbling blending attempt.

Peatreek Blend 1.0
Blend – No Age Statement
Nose: The nose was surprisingly wholesome and was the only part of the blend that actually worked. A lovely maltiness arrives first with waves of sea breeze and light fruits, with apple wood smoke drifting behind. Underneath is a touch of caramel and vanilla that plays quite nicely with the malty foreground. This blend has a nose of two parts: Coastal malt and sherried Speyside.
Palate: Bitter, Talisker dominated and fought a bloody battle with a squabbling opposing army. Truly horrid.
Finish: The bitterness now comes in waves, reminding me of my own idiocy. On the other hand a slight toffee-ness allows for a brief respite.
Overall: A sharp learning curve and a lot of fun. This is by no means my last attempt and next time I will bear in mind what I forgot this time. I will probably use single cask whiskies so that I am working with purer ingredients. I won’t be quite so selfish as to include all of my top whiskies and next time I will let it marry for a time to give the flavours a chance to settle in. Watch this space for future updates…