‘90s, label printed on glass: this Bowmore bottle is beautiful, for sure, but we learned to beware of those dark years of the distillery. Issues with the distillation process in the glorious ‘80s, very likely badly managed from the still? Who knows… for sure it’s true that many Bowmore bottled in the ‘90s are very often double-edged swords. Let’s see how this 12yo entry level behaves.
N: delicate, almost shy… The most eloquent side seems to be the marine one, with a nice see breeze, evident but not really captivating. The peat, already quite delicate in the Bowmore distillate, is in this bottling extremely quiet: a hint of smoke and a bit of smog, nothing more. Afterwards a fresh flowers side emerges, some vanilla and yellow apple peel.
P: solid body, but not really majestic; as on the nose it’s quite marine, salty and at the same time shows an indistinct sweetness… The best metaphors are again freshly cut flowers, sweet hard candies, violet! And the peat? It’s very watery, sustained only from a mineral hint. Reading again the review of Serge, we feel almost guilty not mentioning the obviously note of salty liquorice.
F: we took it for dead too soon: here it comes, a bit of peat smoke. Salty lips.
If it wouldn’t be a Bowmore but simply a random beverage we would say “ah well, it’s good!” – but even without evident defects, it has nothing of the characteristics that made Bowmore grand. The marine side is shy, the fruit is almost inconsistent… well… 78/100, not more, not less.
Recommended soundtrack: Jose Gonzalez – Far Away.