Whisky Advocate

Review: Smoking Ember “Pure Malt”

January 30th, 2010

Smoking Ember, 40 %, $40
(A blend of malt whiskies). Big and smoky, but with a rich, balancing, malty underbelly. Tarry rope, leafy bonfire, rooty peat, burnt licorice, smoked seaweed, coal ash, and vanilla-tinged malt, all with emerging brine, subtle Spanish olive and a hint of ginger. A robust, yet well-rounded, Islay-style whisky with a pleasing oily texture. I do wish it had a higher strength for a little more attitude, though.

Advanced Malt Advocate magazine rating: 83

15 Responses to “Review: Smoking Ember “Pure Malt””

  1. Never had anything from Lombard. Are they an independent bottler who is widely available here in the States? Sounds good & seems to have everything I like in a big, rich, smoky whisky (especially for only around $40). Yet something else to search out and try.

    • Red_Arremer says:

      Lombard is an independent bottler, which is sometimes available in the United states. I have a couple from them– Their Pebble Beach 12 yo Speyside Single Malt (no distillery named) and their Jewels of Scotland 22 yo Brora. They’re both very good bottlings imho, and notably excellent values. Whatever else Smoking Ember is I’ll bet your getting something fair for your dollar.

      • Louis says:

        There is also a 12 year old Teanich from Lombard floating around. I have seen it a couple of times in the NYC area.

  2. bgulien says:

    Everybody is jumping on the smoke and peat bandwagon.
    It’s not as quick as in electronics, because of the nature of the beast, but you can see that smoke and peat is the flavor of the 21st century or a least the first couple of decades.
    And if it’s done good, then this is the best decade to be alive and kick..err..tasting

  3. Alex says:

    Is this more Caol Ila like in mouthfeel and taste?

  4. brian mac gregor says:

    is there any neural grain in the blend, or is it a “vatted malt”, what are the sources of the malt?

  5. John Hansell says:

    Brian, it’s a blend of malts (no grain whisky). They don’t reveal the source. Alex, I have to think about that one.

  6. Neil Fusillo says:

    I thought the term ‘Pure Malt’ was now banned…

  7. John Hansell says:

    I think this was bottled before the ban.

  8. Luke says:

    “Blended Malt” is a desperate term!
    “Vatted Malt” is (and always was) perfectedly respectable. (@ 46% ABV NCF!)

    • MrTH says:

      We’ll get used to it. “It’s only words, and words are all I have to take your heart away…”

      (It’s a weird day that finds me quoting the Bee Gees….)

  9. Red_Arremer says:

    This is NAS, I guess. Does the stuff taste a touch too young?

  10. John Hansell says:

    Yes Red, no age statement. But it didn’t taste a touch too young, like many others do. I just wish it were bottled at a higher ABV.

© Copyright 2014. Whisky Advocate. All rights reserved.