It's been almost a year since I first tried Springbank. I was new to whisky, so rather than spend $99 on the 15-year, I opted to try the 10 year first. It was $55 bucks, and being a whisky noob, it was a bit of a gamble for me at the time.

It's been a year, and I've had more than my share of whisky. I figured it was time to revisit Springbank and see if the 15 year is any good.

At $99 bucks, this is some pretty expensive stuff. For that kind of money, I'd go with a Highland Park 15, but I really wanted to try the Springbank.





Just like the 10-year, this is non-chill filtered with no artificial coloring added. Whisky as whisky is meant to be.





At 46% alcohol, it packs a bit of a punch, but not like I had described a year ago. In my last writing for the 10-year, I basically said it was a turn off; that it was like rubbing alcohol. I guess it just goes to show you that you get used to things, because I don't feel the need to add water to this whisky. It's very clean. Very pure, and just some fine hand-crafted whisky.



The nose has a hint of toffee and caramel, but grassy after it opens up. The taste is very spicy, almost peppery. Again, very herbal and grassy after it opens up. A bit of caramel and fudge on the finish, along with some gentle smoke. Overall, it's very clean and pure and just tastes like something very unique. It's like no other whisky I've had. It's definitely something different.

It's a great bottle of whisky, but I have to say I'd rather go with a Highland Park 15. Highland Park just has that long smokey finish that no one else comes close to. Don't get me wrong, this was still $99 well spent. I just won't be spending it again on Springbank. Like I said a year ago, I'd be willing to give them another try. I did. Springbank is good. It has a nice balance of sweet and spice with a touch of smoke, but it's just not amazing. And it's just a little too expensive considering the alternatives.