Cheers mike! Great reply, I'm very thankful for the info.
I might exercise some self control and wait until the weekend before I start acting all mad scientist, but will surely post my findings, it's also Inspired me to finally use the hand made leather journal the missus bought me for my recipes and tasting notes, she will be pleased
Interesting about the WT12, a few years back in my early American whiskey days (reformed scotch drinker) I had a bottle and didn't really like it, it was too rich and too sweet at the time, then it dissapeard of the shelves, since then I believe my palette changed somewhat and i began to appreciate the older stuff, what was once overpowering became accesible through hardworking and persistence (read: drinking a load of booze) ive started seeking out the less punchy in your face rye flavors (wont ever knock back a Ritt 100 though, ever) and started seeking deeper,'richer Flavours, so, long story short, when i stumbled across a random bottle of WT12 a few weeks ago I snatched it, thinking, I love WT 101 And I love the old stuff, how could I loose?
Well sipping at a glass and typing this I can see why you hold it in such high regard, to me the nose is undoubtedly full of WT, but with a secondary layer of full on barrel richness, deeper the breath the better as the most pleasant notes come in right at the end, then taking a sip it's nothing like the 101, wood, wood and cloves, nice dry finish, some spice then a clean creamy light oak finish that hangs around for a good amount of time
Comparing it to the EC12 now, too be honest I like the EC lot more than I used to, but the finish still leaves something to be desired, slightly too astringent, i don't know,'I get the feeling that it doesnt use it's age to advantage, maybe slightly less aging would suit my pallete more?