The Newcomer.
First, an apology: I had intended to post this review in December, but at the start of the month I was behind with the Glenfarclas, owing perhaps in part to wanting to prolong the bottle. Also, this Macallan has been more of a challenge.
Macallan is a distillery that trades on it's reputation for producing consistently high quality sherried single malt whisky, to the extent that many have termed it the "Rolls Royce of the whisky world". It has legions of fans around the globe, and is one of the most fashionable collecters items in the whisky world. For some time, Macallan has quite rightly been exploring ways to make distillery and dunnage capacity go further as worldwide demand grows. The Fine Oak range was the initial result of this, and whilst I don't pretend to understand the whole ins and outs of the business, it seems that Macallan adapted their cask policy in order to add on the new range (their traditional range being renamed Sherry Oak) without having to cause a shortfall in production of it's traditional malts. Reaction to this was mixed, but the new range is generally accepted to have held its own. In 2013 however, Macallan announced that they would be replacing both of their core ranges with a single range of no age statement bottlings ordered by their colour, which had apparently tested well in the travel retail markets of Asia. The surprise that this caused the whisky talk-o-sphere was, to put it mildly, the equivalent of at least a single blow to the head with a lemon wrapped gold brick.
I must admit, I was initially a little sceptic, because this was a very strange move for a distillery not only seen as a cut above, but whose products are priced a cut above. In this luxury market, tradition is a large part of the image of Scotch whiskey, and to depart from it is a very bold move, particularly for a distillery whose products have been underpinned by dependability for so many years. However, the whisky world benefits highly from changes such as this. One need only look at the success of Compass Box, or the revitalised Benriach, to see how innovation can expand the choices available to the consumer and retain their interest in an area where tradition underpins the appeal of the product. I applaud Macallan for doing this.
Moving on to the actual whisky itself, I confess I have made very few notes for this one, which I will explain in a minute. The Macallan Gold is the lowest priced and lightest coloured of the 1824 series, and I decided to buy it because I knew Macallan's reputation, was intrigued by the new product, and thought it might be an interesting direction to go in for my whisky exploration.
First Impressions.
The nose was floral, with a lot of youthful suggestions in the way it presented itself. Not smooth, cut grass, a little spice, and young spirit, rather reminiscent of Adnams Broadside, a spirit made from their high strength Broadside Ale recipe, matured for a year in Russian oak casks, which can best be described as firewater. Lots of young spirit scents, baked pear, raisin, apple,sweet sherry, corked red wine notes all jumping around. Wisps of more delicate smooth-gone.
The palate escaped me then, the notes as follows: "?? Vibrant but no direction, floral, little raw, honey, sherry somewhere,mint, apple, ink. Where is this going?"
This has continued for a while, and varied every time, although I did pour a glass last night, and I don't know why, but it was borderline undrinkable. I'd sooner do shots of Bulleit (sorry whisky lovers, wanted something that wasn't vodka). It had a metallic feel, in both palate and finish, and the only taste I could put my finger on was sulphur. Before I have a Murray Moment, let me first explain that I have never had that in this bottle before. So I am going to now do the only thing left to me, and type the good, bad, and unknown about the very next glass.
Nose
Aha! There's a pleasant nose! Fresh green apple,like the taste of a perfect Granny Smith, with that sweet zing that permeates the air after the first bite.Behind that on subsequent sniffs is pleasant aroma of...raki! ( I think) Not quite sherry, but Cretan raki, a beautiful after dinner drink similar to grappa, only raw and at times fiery. Then I get the malty, gently sherried whisky character.A sharp note of green oak flashes through the nostrils.Now I detect that spirituous malty Speyside thing, but this one has a sharp edge of alcohol that isn't unpleasant, but a little unexpected for a whisky which is believed to be a minimum of nine years old. I am now going to leave it for a further 30 minutes.
Upon returning, the zesty edge has softened, but so has the sharp raw note.. Curiously I find that the nose has thinned, the previously underpinning malty note which seemed to be the end recedes back into sweet fruit, raki again, and with a little dry white wine character. Puts me in mid of Linkwood if one dumped a tablespoon of icy water in.
Palate
Sweet, a little sharp. Starts as sweet baked apple, then a maltiness, swifty drying. The dryness tingles in metallic fashion and there is a heat which jars. On the finish, a rich dry sherry character is faintly discernable beneath cut grass and clashing, raw flavours which suggest spices but have the attack of chilli.A little nutty, very unripe blackberries.
Upon holding it again, more dryness comes in, but the fruit flavours flash by, twisting into bitterness which makes war on the sherry influence, which fights back to flash by on the finish. It is a strongly spiced, dark sherried whisky note that hints at a real beaut of a malt, but all the time is fighting that bitter and metallic note which I can only describe as unruly young spirit. The metallic edge is not going away, even long after swallowing. Only fifteen minutes laterdoes the aftertaste feel like a sherried whisky.
The metallic, sulpurous taste is receding, hints of almounds, rasins, dry sherry appearing, but the heat is not going away. This is neither smooth nor pleasant to feel in the mouth, initially. The fruit is reasserting itself a little. However, I can see why I dumped this down last night. I was not feeling patient with it after the first mouthful, chased it too agressively. I'm off to get some cheese and crackers to pair with it.
Heat, drying sherry tinged with bitter spice, fruited and floral notes standing up a little more. Grapes, heather, and oddly enough, daffodil scent are all discernable. The Mac does not like the double Gloucester, and decides to hide away those more delicate flavours which started out after that dry hurricane of metallic bitterness. Softer, dryer, but still that character persists. The finish is quite short. Now for the Brie... the drying sherry flavour comes out a little further, and again the metal recedes a little. Last mouthful, and back comes the metallic heat, but the bitterness has faded, leaving a pleasant dry sherry character, contrasted with hints of pear, citrus fruit, pepper, but each of these feels young, raw, and a little shouty.
This whisky is split between the young, arrogant, fruity spicy spirit, and the older sherried malts involved here. It's an intriguing conflict if one has the time and patience to persevere with it, but this is not a gentle malt.
Conclusions.
Honestly, as I left the glass for half an hour, I wanted to hate this malt. Yesterday was the second worst whisky experience ever. The nose proved me wrong, and there was the conundrum! This had been pleasant on occasion, but it had also been wayward. On tasting it objectively, I cannot stick to previous prejudices.
The thing about this whisky is that it presents something very different to other entry offerings: it is a clash between young spirit and more mature stuff. The master blender has done a blinding job to get these characters into the same room. However, they are still unresolved over their differences- one wants to be a zesty, spicy, vibrant whisky, but the other wants to be a dark horse, a drying, nutty, rich warm armchair malt. It has a lovely nose, but to taste it is very different. Bluntly,I'm not sure that the tugging in opposite directions works for me. There is no layering of flavours, just combat for the upper hand, which moves between the two. Also, there's an elephant in the room. That bitter, metallic, slightly sulphurous taste is downright unpleasant. I may have got a flawed bottle, but I don't think so, it has not been consistently 'off'. Getting past that feel and taste takes serious time and effort, which is why this could not be a sipping whisky.
It's not a bad whisky to taste and smell. It's different, but one can only know if it is worth the perseverance if one tries it and sticks to it.
To shift from pure objectivity however, there are a number of issues with the above. If indeed, this is an entry level malt, it's not exactly an easy entry to the range. Moreover, I have an idea that this malt was created at least partially in mind to prompt the consumer to reach a little deeper into their pockets for the next one up. There is a lot of young stuff in here, and with Macallan's natural colour policy, I quote from the box "
the interaction of spirit and wood alone delivers the variety of rich natural colours that distinguish the Macallan range", older sherry matured whiskies are usually darker in colour. There is a logic here that suggests consumers used to age statements will gravitate towards to more expensive expressions because they believe them to be in a similar pattern to the flavour progression of age statement whiskies. So, less an entry level bottling than a nudge towards the next one up, as Diageo has done with the Johnnie Walker range.
This irks me. Why put out an entry level malt that doesn't advertise itself on it's own qualities, but trades on preconceived consumer assumptions? In the name of profit, of course. However, Macallan may find that this one comes back to haunt them, because on this box, the sixth "pillar" of Macallan single malt whisky reads as follows: "The Macallan is celebrated far and wide by experts and discerning drinkers as
the world's most precious whisky". Not based on this bottle it ain't. This is not worthy to be mentioned in the same line as a famous British automobile manufacturer. It's not junk, but not stellar either, and certainly adds nothing to Macallan's reputation. If anything, this has damaged it, in my eyes, because it has been built up to be something it is not.
Perhaps this could be much lessened and forgiven, if it was reasonably priced. But it isn't. At £35, it is £7 more than the Glenfarclas, and was not a step up at all. Crucially, it is also priced at the top end of the entry level distillery bottlings, putting it in with some big players. Clynelish 14. Springbank 10. Aberlour 12. Lahroaig 10. Bruichladdich 10. Talisker Storm. I haven't tasted the last two, but it doesn't match up to the others. Not nearly. Here's the killer however- the list of malts that are cheaper: Talisker 10, Highland Park 12, Benriach 12, Cragganmore 12, Balvenie Doublewood 12, Dalwhinnie 15, Edradour 10, and finally Glendronach 12 which I was given as a Christmas present. I've tried it once, liked it, but here is the big, big thing that Macallan have missed. This is a luxury purchase, so buying something that is rewarding is essential. For that it has to hold its own in it's chosen peer group,and this Macallan Gold does not. The gift I received was appreciated because of the thought and research that had gone into making that choice, recommendation had been scrutinized and all manner of considerations taken into account. Edrington Group, which owns the Macallan, do not seem to have appreciated any of this, that even at the entry level, Scotch whisky is a luxury purchase.
At a maximum of £30, called The Young Malt (or something similar), possibly bottled at higher strength, but at very, very least non chill filtered (no scotch mist-I've tested it), I think this might have worked. As it is however, I do not recommend you buy this if the money is any kind of consideration to you. If you had maybe £100 to spend on whisky, then as a tasting experience it's not a bad idea, particularly as you could buy a very good bottle with the remaining cash and still have a little left over to do something else with, perhaps to set up a tasting. However, if like me, you're only buying one bottle to drink slowly over a medium period, avoid this. It is not of high enough quality. For that reason, the Macallan Gold has to be rated as the lowest value for money bottle I've ever had.
Next up is as yet undecided between Balvenie and Cragganmore, though this Macallan will take some finishing. However, I am also considering Benriach, and perhaps something a little different to finish the series off.
Happy dramming in the new year!
