Bank Note Blended Scotch
January 14, 2013
Arguably, times are bad. The economy is still in the dumps, unemployment is high, and the whisky industry is having a field day with rampant price increases. In the midst of this less-than-favorable market, there are still a few good ways to get a deal. Bank Note blended scotch from the Morrison family (owners of celebrated independent bottler A.D. Rattray) is 1 liter of blended scotch for $20. That’s cheaper than… well, just about everything else. Given the current market conditions, at that price, it -should- taste like garbage. It doesn’t. If you want something to lower your average yearly spend on scotch without having to buy Red Label, stop reading this now and go buy some of this. I have no idea how long the Morrisons can maintain stock at this price, but I can’t imagine they’ve got an unlimited supply; either quality or price will have to give as the market continues to balloon.
Bank Note is a blend of 40% single malts to 60% scotch grain whisky. That’s WAY higher than most blends, even though one must assume the malts aren’t worthy of bottling as single-cask products (or A.D. Rattray most certainly would have done so). At 43% ABV and 5 years of age (minimum), and a bonus 250ml due to the larger bottle, it’s hard to justify buying any other low-end blend as long as this is available. It’s no SIA or Great King Street, but it’s eminently drinkable, mixable, and at this price I swear I can taste the money I’m saving. Seriously, I should include ‘VALUE’ in the tasting notes!
Nose: Peach (indicating mild sherry), some brash young grain. Somewhat lemony, but otherwise standard cereal notes. Light and inoffensive.
Palate: Mid-creamy body. Nougat. Lemon gummy candies. Cocoa nibs. Very mild tongue burn.
Finish: On the short side. Caramel and freshly-baked bread. The lemon notes turn a little bitter – like lemon pith.
With Water: Reveals some vanilla in the nose, thins the body, and washes out some of the more interesting flavors. Perhaps more citrus on the finish, but I wouldn’t bother.
Overall: It’s certainly not bad. Compared to every other $20/liter blended scotch, it stands far above the competition. It lacks a substantial aroma, but presents a pleasantly sweet array of notes on the tongue, and does not reveal any of the off-flavors I usually get with young grain. The finish is, like the nose, unremarkable. I would still prefer Great King Street if I had only one blend, which is altogether more elegant and more balanced, but it’s also more than twice the price. I recommend this over Johnnie Walker Black Label, Chivas, Dewars, or any other sub-$40 blend. If this product remains available for this price, it will become my standard cheap blend. A rare example, these days, of whisky sold for a price below its value. If you need something cheap to get your wallet through the price increases we’re seeing lately, look no further.
Note: The “Must Try” rating reflects the quality-to-value ratio of this bottle. If you’re not looking for an alternative cheap blend, then this is not “must”-anything for you.
This one definitely deserves the great press you’re giving it. It’s become a new favourite since I’ve been trying to save cash this year.
I’m gonna have to give this one a try. Other than Black Bottle, I have had little luck enjoying sub $20 Scotch.
A surprising review! At a duty free, I saw a bottle which I believed was called King of Clubs or King of Spades scotch. If I recall correctly it was 1140 ml and it was $8. Scary. I cannot find it anywhere online but curious to know if anyone reviewed it.
Hello Noob. First time commenter here…woop woop! Anyways, it sounds like a pretty good whisky but am I correct in assuming that you bumped the rating of it up a notch because of it being such a goos value? Cheers.
Hi Peter,
Yes, all of my ratings include a subjective analysis of the “worth” of a whisky, which includes its “bang for the buck”. If Bank Note retailed for $100 a bottle, I would give it an “Avoid” rating. Similarly, if a whisky I wasn’t crazy about, like Yamazaki 12 year retailed for $27, it would warrant a hearty recommendation. It’s not a perfect system, but it actually causes less confusion than a number-point scale… “How can Talisker 10 be rated 95 and Talisker 18 is only 92?!?!”
Only way you can do that fairly, is a 2 rating point system. A rating of how good the whiskey is across the whole range of whiskey. And a rating adjusting for value. could even do a rating of, this whiskey came out with a overall rating of 75 compared across the board of whiskey’s. It gaines 20 points for value, giving it a rounded score of 95. then you can look and see, it’s way lower than glenfiddich 30 year aged. But still a really good buy. The advantage to that is, if my budget is $35 for a bottle of scotch, i can get a clearer idea of what I’m gaining relative quality wise, spending the extra $15. Rather than, the somewhat confusing am I better or worse at the higher rated scotch costing $25 than the lower rated $35 dollar scotch. I mean, yeah, it might not be as good a value, but is it actually better?
I’ve thought about doing that, but it ends up being somewhat hard to explain to new readers. Also, it’s a lot of work keeping everything consistent – especially when prices inevitably change.
How would you compare this to Grant’s Family Reserve?
Alas, I haven’t yet had an opportunity to try Grant’s.
Looking at my first bottle now. Went in asking for Black Bottle and inquiring about deal they had on something else (2 for $30 or something like that). They recommended the 1 liter Bank Note instead b/c of the value. Decided to buy and vette later. Looking forward to a taste.