Review: Lagavulin Distillers’ Edition 1992

lagavulin-distillers-edition-1992Check out the “Flavour Map” and look in the top right corner. Yep, that’s Lagavulin Distillers Edition, the whisky we’re drinking here, pegged to the limits of “smoky” and “rich.”

There’s nothing subtle in Lagavulin’s 16-year-old special bottling (released in 2008), which is finished in Pedro Ximenez casks to finish off the whisky. This is a huge, peaty and phenolic whisky. There are hints of sweetness that fade in and out, but they can’t stave off that big burst of salty seaweed and peat smoke, that overwhelms you with a ridiculously long finish.

If this style of whisky is your bag, check it out immediately. It’s just a little too much for me.

86 proof.

B / $90 /

Similar Posts:

5 Responses

  1. Edoc February 21, 2009 / 6:22 am

    You should also try the basic 16 yr Lagavulin for the sake of comparison. The distiller’s edition is softer (I have the 1991 Distiller’s edition), with a bit more complexity. While it’s absolutely true that this is a heck of a smoky whiskey, but I like that it has a slight sweetness that adds smoothness and balance. It’s probably my favorite whiskey (Midleton’s being my other fave).

  2. Christopher Null February 21, 2009 / 8:05 am

    Edoc – Have had the basic 16 (not in a few months, though) and actually find this one even bigger, but yes it does have some sweetness from the Pedro X that the basic Lag lacks…

  3. Edoc March 2, 2009 / 7:51 am

    Last night I tried the 1991 Distiller’s Edition against the basic Lag 16. I was a bit surprised by the results: I preferred the basic Lag 16. The things I like about Lagavulin are far more prominent in the basic Lag 16, and more muted in the DE.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.