4 ms·
You really cannot compare a Yamazaki with an Islay whisky. Sherry or otherwise. Preferring Laphroaig PX over a Yamazaki has nothing to do with the quality of e
by molf 8y ago
You really cannot compare a Yamazaki with an Islay whisky. Sherry or otherwise.
Preferring Laphroaig PX over a Yamazaki has nothing to do with the quality of either, but with personal preference. You just cannot compare a heavily peaty/smoky whisky with one that is neither.
- hobs 8y agoAgreed, for a light Highland single malt it might be easier to compare to white spirit than to an Islay.
- crikli 8y agoThere is _no_ objective measure of quality when it comes to whisky so all we have to go on is personal preference. When Murray benighted the 2013 Yamazaki, that was _his_ personal preference against _all_ whiskies reviewed, peaty, smokey, or otherwise. And you can _absolutely_ compare a peaty/smokey whisky to one that isn't. Why can't you? Peaty/smokey isn't the sharp divisor of preference that is insinuated in yours and other comments. Peat is delivered in very unique ways across distilleries and in my tastings I often have folks strongly dislike Ardbeg Corryvreckan but adore Lagavulin 16 (as an example).
- jkaptur 8y agoYou CAN compare it to a Coca Cola, but it’s appropriate to point out that they’re very different.
- asfarley 8y agoIn fact, I did comare Yamazaki whisky to Islay whisky using this (http://rsearch.ca/static/compare http://rsearch.ca/static/compare) web interface I made specifically for cases when people claimed that any two things were "not comparable". The results for Yamazaki include: smooth mizunara hakushu hibiki While the results for Islay include: peat smoke barley caol Actually, you seem to have provided a comparison yourself: one is heavily peaky and smoky, and one is not. Seems like a pretty good comparison to me.