- Double Gold Member
- Posts: 1119
- Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:47 pm
- Location: Heddesheim, Germany
Whisky Mag does treat them as different malts.
http://www.whiskymag.com/whisky/brand/c ... ky889.html
http://www.whiskymag.com/whisky/brand/c ... sky29.html
At least they have different tasting notes. The pictures of the bottles seem to be identical, though.
I have not seen a bottle labled "Aged 12 Years" yet. As one malt was reviewed in issue 22 and the other in 28, let us hope it is not just a case of new labels! Mean to say is there really a difference or did marketing strike again? Now that would be interesting, if the malt in the bottle did not change at all.
But I´m raving.
The difference in wording is insignificant--just two ways of saying the same thing. Unless someone has information indicating otherwise, I'd assume we're talking about one expression, tasted on two occasions about a year apart.
Nothing wrong with new labels, kk--such are updated periodically for any given expression, nothing nefarious about it. But I don't think that's even the case here.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests