Why age doesn’t always mean quality

This article was published on The Sydney Morning Herald online March 12, 2015.

I’ve been lucky to try some rare old liquor in my time. Some of it’s been ethereal. Some of it … not.

Just last week I tried an old number twice my age that was about as tasty as licking damp logs and leather boots. In fact, some of the most interesting drams I’ve encountered recently have been “young”: an eight-year-old single malt, a seven-year-old single cask armagnac, a five-year-old rum, and other spirits that haven’t even bothered to carry an age statement.

It's worth questioning when age means quality.

Wait – older always means better, right? We’ve been trained to believe this. But now the same industries we learned it from have changed their minds.

In the whisky industry, Macallan has been telling us that age is now a limitation since the release of its no-age-statement 1824 series. And Glenlivet, whose parent company quite recently told us that age matters, has now pulled its 12 year old from the UK and German markets and replaced it with a no-age-statement alternative.

Continue reading the article here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s