Which NAS kicks ass, part 3: value for money!

So far in this series, I’ve covered a rather expensive newcomer and the hopelessness of Global Travel Retail. Two examples which, when you come to think about it, aren’t exactly making a strong case for the entire NAS category in terms of getting your money’s worth. This week, I feel I will rectify that.

All the pros and cons regarding the NAS approach have well been covered, but at the end of the day what it comes down to, is whether or not we like what’s in our glass. Strangely, and I know not everyone will agree with me on this one, an element comes into play when we’re appreciating  a whisky which has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the actual  smell and flavour of the thing. The cost to quality ratio, aka the bang for buck factor. At the risk of flogging an already well deceased horse: whisky is pretty darn expensive, and it seems that, as it has in some cases also become an ‘investment opportunity’, pretty much anything goes when slapping a price tag on a bottle of whisky. ‘Scarcity’, ‘rarity’,’ age’, alongside the actual overhead and production costs used to be deciding factors when determining prices. These days these are all obviously still relevant (probably more than ever, even), but by no means the only factors driving the price of whisky. Deliberate premiumisation of prices steering towards exclusivity, not by rarity, but merely by targeting high income customers, more or less put a limited, but not unsignificant number of whiskies well out of reach for most people.  Macallan’s Journey to the centre of their own arseholes, Dalmore Vintage whatever, Mortlach distiller’s own select premium special rare old reserve, or  almost anything Diageo or Islay with an age statement of over 15 years… 

And as such, that’s an entirely valid business model, with the one gripe here that there’s no mistaking the ‘treacle down’ effect, or rather, the cascade effect of them leading by (bad) example towards others. Never underestimate big corporations’ unsatisfiable greed, and indeed, in a lot of cases executive decisions regarding branding, marketing and price setting are made well above the heads of the people on site, those artisans putting their heart and soul into producing this beautiful spirit. Fortunately, there are still examples a plenty contradicting just about everything I ‘ve  written here.

Loch Lomond Steam & Fire. 2023  release, 46% ABV, NC, UCF, Heavily Charred American oak casks, app. €35-€45

If you’re a regular around here (in which case: thank you!!) you ‘ll probably know I have a bit of a soft spot for Loch Lomond – for numerous reasons. If you’re new around here (in which case: welcome!!),  I picked Loch Lomond as my distillery of the year in 2023 – the reasons for me doing so you can find here.

Being one of the most versatile distilleries in Scotland, it’s of no surprise that they’ve got a fairly extended core range – there’s the standard entry level NAS Loch Lomond, the age statement releases from Loch Lomond, Inchmurrin and Inchmoan, there’s the peated and unpeated single grain releases,  their annual releases for ‘The Open’ (the Golf tournament they’ve partnered with) and the always in high demand limited releases of their ‘Distillery Editions’. Likely I’m forgetting a few. So when this Steam & Fire release first came out, I was quite keen to get one. Oddly, it didn’t seem to be catching a lot of attention – this  despite overall quite positive reviews (anything from ‘just decent’ to ‘excellent’), despite it being one of the first Loch Lomond expressions proudly boasting the ‘natural colour’ statement on the label and also despite the attractive price point. This struck me as a bit odd. Surely in times where decent value, good quality whisky is becoming something to be on the lookout for, a whisky ticking plenty of the boxes on any enthusiast’s checklist would be getting more praise and attention. So… why does this seem to fly under the radar a bit? Serendipity has it that Roy just sung its praise on a very recent vPub, but apart from Vin  and a handful of other whiskytubers discussing it, this one seems as it might have  been buried a bit under the truckload of other whiskies that were released in the second half of 2023.

In any case, naming this NAS expression ‘Steam & Fire’ indicates, imo, how Loch Lomond tend to get things right, by and large. Rather than opting for a cliché (see also Mortlach earlier in this review), they picked a well-chosen name if ever there was one. Loch Lomond is the only distillery in Scotland that has  both traditional pot stills, column stills and straight neck stills (a sort of hybrid between the other two with column stills mounted on top of a pot still) at their disposal. More than that, they also have their own cooperage. This unique combination certainly makes them one of the most versatile in Scotland, and arguably even in the entire world. This explains the name. ‘Fire’ hinting at the heavily charred casks, tailored to exact requirements in their own cooperage. ‘Steam’ referring to the distillation process  in the pot stills.

The new make was distilled in both their swan neck and straight neck stills, with about 5%  peated spirit in the make-up (50 ppm) coming from their straight neck stills. The other 95% comes from a narrow cut, high proof  (about 85% ABV!) from the straight neck stills, making for a light, fruity-estery sort of profile, combined with a wider cut (65% ABV) also from their straight neck stills, and new make coming from the more traditional swan neck stills. These were then matured in both first-fill bourbon casks and refill American oak casks for 5 year for the peated spirit and for anywhere between  7 to 10 years for the unpeated spirit, before everything was finally married together in heavily re-charred casks for 10 months and at least  another  month in refill bourbon casks before being bottled at 46% ABV.

Now that’s quite a lot of detailed and specific information. How do I know this? Because  master blender Michael Henry is very open to share this information. Loch Lomond truly is every whisky enthusiast’s dream when it comes to transparency. Let’s dig in to see if the same applies to producing interesting, quality whisky.

Nose

A very interesting combination of both light, fruity notes of pear, apple and citrus (lime and oranges) with more heavy charr- like notes of burnt toast, charred wood and died out fires and embers. I’m getting little to no smoke, though. What I do get, is some of that Loch Lomond distillery character with hints of limestone, wet grass and gentle floral notes.  Overall, there’s quite a lot happening, but all in a quiet, almost subdued way.

Palate

Slightly dry on the arrival. Fruit (lemon, apple) , nuts and hints of  charred wood, slightly peppery and crisp. It has a clinging, medium full mouthfeel. After adding water it changes its shape and colour, as the charr notes become more accentuated alongside a very pleasant sweet dough-like note.

Finish

Quite long, clinging, with echoes of wet wood and dry grass

Final thoughts

Interesting, intriguing and satisfying. This is not a spectacular or loud whisky by any means, but the combination of what seem to be on paper contradicting notes works quite well in this whisky. A few  things that struck me here, though. Firstly, this whisky took well past the shoulders of the bottle  to really open up as on the first drams it seemed to me a bit closed and straightforward. Once it opened up, it did so rather beautifully. Secondly, I feel this whisky needs a clean palate to really shine. I ‘ve come to find I enjoy it the most at the start of a flight. Possibly because it’s quite subtle, almost delicate even, a fresh and clean palate allows me to get the most out of this one. Absolutely decent and absolutely fairly priced – an absolute no brainer in my book: 85/100.