Got this on ebay last nite for the low, low price of $9.99. At that cost, no biggie if it's mediocre or a little worse. But I am curious about a few things and I hope someone can help set me straight. I apologize if any of these are asinine...my scotch background is pretty weak.
1) The label uses the term "liqueur". My understanding of that is an alcohol which contains some non-alcoholic additive and with a proof of less than 80. Is that accurate? If so, this bottle does not seem to meet those criteria.
2) It's also called a "blended scotch whisky", which I thought to mean a mix of scotch and grain neutral spirits. But this is also billed as "100% scotch whiskies". Is this basically what would be called today a vatted, or pure, malt? Or does it mean that the only whisky in here is scotch and other, non-whisky alcohol could be used?
3) In general, does scotch follow the bourbon trend of older bottlings being better? Can I expect this to be significantly superior to a current Ballentine's bottle?
I'm also interested in any other info or opinions anyone may have on this bottling. The seller indicates it's a circa-1950's release. I guess the "in use for over 125 years, established 1827" would peg it at no older than 1952 but who knows how often they updated their labels? Any reason to believe otherwise?
Anyone tried Ballantine's from this era? Any thoughts?