Figuratively, that is. After a little diversion on Springbank and Marketing, it is time to return to the regular whisky review program. Well, sort of. I need a little break from Scottish Whisky to avoid fatigue. So it is time for a short Irish vacation. (Ironically, in real life, I am vacationing in Scotland as I write this). In the next two weeks, I will review four entry-level Irish whiskies. Today I start with a review of Midleton’s Redbreast 12 year old, probably one of the Irish whiskies most suggested to beginners. I am completely new to Redbreast, so it will be intriguing to see if the quality lives up to the whiskyweb endorsement.
TL:DR: Gentle yet rich, comforting but very wood-driven. Like the 90’s California Chardonnay of whisky.
Score: 5, Average in a good way
Before diving into my Review of the Redbreast 12 I am taking a little diversion to understand this whiskey’s history. Also, as a newbie to Irish whiskey, I needed to understand what exactly the “Single Pot Still” term means. Feel free to jump to the review of the Redbreast 12, if you are familiar with both.
Redbreast: The IB years
Redbrest’s story is somewhat unique. It originally was as an Independently Bottled Whiskey sold by wine merchants W&A Gilbey, and it was then sold to the company from whom the spirit was sourced, who in turn transformed it into one of their brands.
Gilbey was founded in the 1850’s in London and by the 1860’s they had established a presence in Dublin. In 1903 Gilbeys started selling a whiskey called JJ Liqueur, a 12 year old whiskey sourced from Dublin’s Jameson distillery. Many believe this to be the precursor of the Redbreast 12 though the name only appears after 1912. According to the legend, the company’s chairman at the time, an avid birdwatcher, chose the name.
The Jameson distillery, like much of the Irish whisky sector, fell on hard times in the mid XX century. To survive, they decided to form the Irish Distillers Group joining their previous rivals, the Cork Distilleries Company and John Power & Son in 1966. By 1971 Irish Distillers had consolidated production in the new Midleton distillery, shutting down Dublin’s Jameson distillery along with others.
Redbreast: The rebirth
In 1985 Gilbey stopped production of the Redbreast and sold the brand to Irish Distillers in 1986. Irish Distillers was sold to Pernod Ricard in 1988, following an attempted hostile takeover by, among others, Guinness. Pernod Ricard restarted production of the Redbreast in 1991, originally with the 12 year old Single Pot Still.
The Redbreast brand has since then expanded. The addition of the 12 cask strength, the 15 and the 21, plus a bunch of special releases has won new fans for the brand. The newfound fame also brought some critique due to some dubious decisions. The Redbresat 12 was sold as non-chill filtered until 4 years ago. The removal of that claim did little to please whisky fans. In cases like this, I wonder if the change is one in production or just nomenclature. Did production methods change to please the broader consumer market, or was the product always filtered, carefully threading the needle to keep the non-chill filtered claim, until someone in management decided it was best to get rid of that claim to avoid potential risks?
Single pot still?
If, like me, you are new to Irish whisky, the term Single Pot Still generates confusion. Does it mean that the whisky is distilled once? That seems unlikely. Most Irish whisky is triple distilled after all. Does it mean it is distilled three times in the same pot still? That would make more sense, but it isn’t that either.
The name actually holds two pieces of information. Single refers to a single distillery, just like single malt. The pot still part means fully distilled in pot stills instead of using Coffey or column stills. Once you understand the way the name it is constructed, that makes a lot more sense. It is just not what I would call immediately intuitive.
The other characteristic of a Single Pot Still Irish whiskey is the mash bill makeup. This is one of the key differences to Scottish Single Malt whisky where 100% of the grain must be malted barley. The mash bill must include both malted and non malted barley. Each of the two must be at least 30% of the total grain used, so you could use between 30% non malted barley and 70% malted to 70% non malted and 30% malted. The mix of the two must make up at least 95% of the total grains used, or, to say it in another way, 5% of the mash bill can be grains different from barley.
With the basic concept of Single Pot still clearer in my mind (and I hope yours) it’s time to review the Redbreast 12 year old Single Pot Still.
Redbreast Single Pot Still 12 Years Old
Specs
Price paid: €42.90
Bottled date: 21/12/2022
ABV: 40%
Natural colour: No
Non-chill filtered: No
Casks Used: Bourbon and Sherry
Tasting Notes
Colour: light amber, but how much comes from the Sherry cask and how much is added caramel?
Nose: It opens up on comforting sweet notes, that manage to stay intense without becoming sickly, something I occasionally find with whiskies that are driven by sweet notes. Rich notes of créme brulêe, apples and pears in syrup at first. Then more grain and Sherry-driven porridge, cinnamon and nutmeg and intense orange peel. Then, all of a sudden, I am hit with a wall of oakiness. It is as if someone was planing a wooden board right in front of me. Once I start noticing the oakiness it takes over and dilutes what was a wonderful nose up to that point.
Taste and Finish: As you might expect from a triple distilled 40% ABV whisky the palate is a bit watery. Not in a terrible way, but it certainly lacks a bit of oomph on the body.What it lacks in body it gains in smoothness. All without compromising the intensity of the aromas on the palate. Here the Sherry cask is more apparent than on the nose. There is some nuttiness, raisins, cinnamon and ginger but also some apple, caramel and a noticeable oaky note, present but far from excessive.
The finish is long and reminds me of baked apples with cinnamon. and demerara sugar, créme brulêe, citrus peels and then loads of oak, very persistent and even slightly tannic.
Score*: 5 Average in a good way.
Don’t let the mark on this review of the Redbreast 12 fool you. I am not trying to be harsh for the sake of it. This is a pleasant whisky, with a lot to like and a few less-than-stellar aspects. It just isn’t, for me, the universe’s gift to new whisky drinkers. As I mentioned in my intro, for me this one immediately draws comparisons to California’s Chardonnay in the 90. Rich, buttery and overly oaked. Loads of people loved those wines. Some still do. For me, they always went too far with the oak aromas, which ultimately covered up the natural quality of the liquid.
That’s pretty much how I feel about the Redbreast 12. It’s an elegant whisky with rich pastry, stewed fruit and spice notes that are ultimately overwhelmed by the oak. It is a bit watery, but at 40% and triple distilled it is to be expected. It is a shame because, without that intense planed oak note, this would be close to a 7. It’s fair to say that your mileage may vary depending on how sensitive you may be to oak. I do however get why many love it, there are a lot of positives. Finally, even with all my critiques, it is good to have a positive example of triple-distilled whiskey and to dispel my disappointing experience with Auchentoshan.
* Scores are based on the scoring scale used by Dramface, slightly modified to allow half-points
Coming up: a Single Pot Still from a Dublin based distillery reborn!
After writing my tasting notes, I always find it interesting to look at other opinions. Here are a few other reviews of Redbreast 12 I enjoyed:
If you have enjoyed this content, please share a comment below and consider supporting the cost of this blog via the button below