Navigation

The Archives

Sort By Catagory

Subscribe

Important Links


A Walk in The Woods

Join us for a relaxing walk in the woods with two wood finish single malts from The Glenmorangie, the 12 year Sherrywood and the 12 year Portwood. In Scotch 101 we'll learn about the geography of scotch, we'll read some listener feedback, and let you know about a new way that you can help support The Scotchcast.

Be sure not to miss the first show of 2008! We'll be having a special treat by tasting the 21 year Balvenie Portwood and the 21 year Glenlivet Archive!

Promos: MOREVI: RemasteredPlaying For Keeps

Distilleries

The Glenmorangie

Tasting Notes

The Glenmorangie Sherrywood 12 year:

Whisky Magazine #8

The Glenmorangie Portwood 12 year:

Whisky Magazine #8


Print pagePDF pageEmail page
Play
Be Sociable, Share!

3 Responses to “A Walk in The Woods”

  1. dc Says:

    Just finished listening to show #7 and tasted along with you guys for the first time (port wood finish). It really made the show more enjoyable (for once I wasn’t jealous you guys were drinking scotch and I wasn’t) and hearing your comments while having the first glass of a scotch I’d never tried really enhanced the experience. Thanks a lot, this is fast becoming my favorite podcast!
    ——–
    btw, the Balvenie Doublewood’s second finish is sherry, not port (I’m sure you guys realized this after the show, but thought I’d mention it in case someone reads this comment).

  2. Chip Says:

    Hey, thanks for the awesome comment, dc!!

    We are thrilled to be your new favorite podcast. All of us have a blast doing the show, so knowing that listeners are enjoying it just makes it more fun. It is also nice to know that someone is tasting along with us!

    I think we knew that the second finish was sherry, but our brains failed us. I had the container next to me, so I really should have looked at it and verified the second finish. Thanks for keeping us honest!

  3. Chris Gray Says:

    I feel like the scoring system is getting stale. The scotch is supposed to be judged on a scale of 1-10, but the actual range of the averaged scores of you 16 graded scotches is only 3.5. The lowest score given by one of the main judges is a 6. The elaborated scoring system itself is faulty: the system lumps scores of 1-5 (half the points possible for any scotch) under a group description (i.e. “significant problems”). If separate criteria are not set forth for a 3 vs. a 4, how are different judges expected to grade a lower-scoring scotch similarly and consistently? Also, if supermarket scotches are scoring 6 or more, why even have scores of 1 through 5? What could a 1 possibly be? Why is a score of 5 not an “average” scotch? I think using the full 10 point scale would open up conversation for more disagreement between judges as well as allowing listeners listeners a more appreciable sense of what was really liked or disliked. Another option would be to admit you are using a three point scale (bad, ok, and very good), which would at least be honest. Siskel & Ebert got famous on less! Thanks for the show.