Whisky / Whiskey / Bourbon

I was just thinking of their basic offering, so 10yr, 10yr, 16yr.

I get too much TCP at the first taste with Ardbeg but it apparently evens out with time. But I'm with @umop3pisdn on Lagavulin, the standard 16 is amaze but I also had a distillers edition which was like, life changing. It was '92 or '93 so I don't know how that's changed now that the distiller's editions are no longer attached to a year (ie the different barrels could have been matured and then mixed for the bare minimum of 10 years) http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lagavulin-Distillers-Whisky-70-cl/dp/B007UOLH9W/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1455887577&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=lagavulin+distillers+edition

I find Talisker 10 a bit rough, like the peat and malt and caramel are all good flavours in the glass but sort of hit you independently one after another, I think it's disjointed. For the same price I'd go for the distillers edition not because it's more "prestigious" but because it's says a few of the harsher notes of trad talisker are evened out just a little (unlike Talisker Skye which appears to be them trying to make Talisker taste like a speyside or something or Talisker Storm which is for people who don't know about Laphroigh Quarter Cask apparently) https://www.thewhiskyexchange.com/p/27538/talisker-2003-distillers-edition