and I think only one Maniac really likes Brora of ancient age. I also think that in total number of books published that JM has written more than MJ on whisky but Jm is certainly being noticed for the Bible since there really is nothing comparable these days in print and is reasonably up to date.
If I were a rich man dabadabadab.............,.
i have various books by both writers and with out a doubt jim murray has a passion for whisky as well as bourbons i would never have got into bourbons if it wasnt for jim murray as well as blended whiskies i would never have tried
michael jackson just doesnt have that passion
we all have are views i think jim murray isnt afraid to say what he thinks i dont allways agree with jim murray but i do like his style
Anyone had a distillery version of Royal Brackla or Glenburgie? Does anyone still have a copy of Dave Daiches book on scotch whiskey? I think he may have been a less biased authority than todays so called know it alls!
- Silver Member
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:28 am
- Location: United States
His critism isn't constructive and his description of a malt is a journey through pointless rants surrounding his younger girlfriend and Millwall FC. Michael, on the other hand is straight to the point, no messing around by trying to find something that is not there.
Also, on the sleeve it states that he famously refuses to write for magazines, yet there is an instance in one review where he states he was writing for an American magazine. Say's a lot really
Also, on the sleeve it states that he famously refuses to write for magazines
What is actually written is ".....but he famously refuses to write for magazines where he believes his honest and fearlessly independant style is compromised."
I think you too would be really annoyed if you submitted tasting notes and those notes had been alterend by the magazine before publishing. Must not annoy the advertisers with unflatering tasting notes!
"I think you too would be really annoyed if you submitted tasting notes and those had been alterend by the magazine to be less flatering to one of your advertisers."
Admiral, I don't get that bit. It suggests the notes were altered by WM to be less flattering to one of JM's advertisers I think there might be a slip of the virtual pen in there
Can you explain why the tasting notes were altered, by whom, and what whisky company was involved?
JM does indeed write for magazines, including Malt Advocate last time I saw a copy.
I never refered to any magazine by name nor will I do so, you'll have to ask Jim Murray yourself!
(I editied my first comment for clarity, on review I realized it was not saying what I was trying to say-apologies).
- Cask Strength Gold Member
- Posts: 3644
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:27 pm
- Location: Galway, Ireland
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest