Macallan ‘Gold’ Double Cask

Bought: The Whisky World, 28^th August 2020

Ratings:

79.76/100 – Whiskybase (average from 68 member votes)

The last time I bought the entry-level Macallan it was simply called ‘Gold’ and it was part of the 1824 colour series along with Amber, Sienna and Ruby. This series was discontinued in 2018 but Macallan were clearly too attached to the word ‘Gold’ to let it go (the other three colours weren’t posh enough). With the introduction of the Double Cask series in 2018 the name ‘Gold’ lives on as the non-age statement (NAS) before the 12yo, 15yo, etc., in the range. I’ve heard it said that the Gold Double Cask sits between the former 10-year-old versions of the Sherry Cask and Fine Oak. The Gold will be younger than 10 years though.

The pre-2018 Gold was exclusively matured in Spanish sherry casks but the new Double Cask version is a combination of sherry-seasoned American and European oak casks. They’re clearly different whiskies but blended to share that same gold colour (or very, very similar). They also both share the same price (< £40) and are aimed at the same market.

The Gold Double Cask scores nearly 80/100 on Whiskybase, which isn’t bad especially when compared to its predecessor, which only scores 78/100. But it’s worth remembering that the previous 1824 ‘Gold’ was considered a replacement for the much loved 10-year-old sherry cask, so a lot of drinkers voted down the Gold without really giving it a chance (or tasting it!).

Over on Amazon this Macallan scores a very high 4.8/5 stars from 482 ratings. Clearly this is a mass-market malt that’s hitting a lot of the right notes. Comments online for the Gold Double Cask include, “smooth, full enough, not very sweet”, “great to drink on everyday occasions”, “acceptable and easy drinkable dram” and “I think I may have just found my new favourite malt. Wish I’d tried it sooner.”.

Tasting notes from Master of Malt:

Nose: This burnished gold spirit presents a lemon citrus nose, the orange peel and an interlacing sweetness that softens but doesn’t eliminate the zest. A quiet note of vanilla is followed by dark chocolate – more assertive, yet not overly so – with a lingering floral and light oak notes.

Palate: Citrus and boiled sweets rule the palate, along with hints of ginger and cinnamon, while soft oak tones reveal toasted apples.

Finish: The finish is medium sweet, malty and slightly dry.

Here’s Great Drams with their thoughts about this Macallan on YouTube, June 2019:

Macallan ‘Concept Number 1’

Bought: World of Whisky, 16^th March 2019

Ratings:
85.65/100 – Whiskybase (average from 85 member votes)
85/100 – Mark Dermul (his YouTube review below)

As someone said on a whisky Facebook page, because this Macallan has a “1” in the title it has “investment” written all over it. When the Macallan Edition 1 came out 4 years ago it sold for €90 and according to Whiskybase there were at least 120,000 bottles. It now sells at auction for around 4 times that price and over £1,000 retail in the UK. The new Macallan Concept No.1, released in 2018, comprised 84,000 bottles and retailed at £100. It’s not inconceivable that bottles will reach £400 at auction by 2022/3. Why didn’t I buy more than one bottle? Because there are never any guarantees with investments, and there are always other whiskies to try.

If you own the Concept 1 and you’d prefer to drink it rather than sit on it like a goose with a golden liquid egg, the majority of tasters have enjoyed it although they’re quite quiet about it online. Scoring 85.65/100 on Whiskybase is a very good score but the majority of reviewers leaving comments are rather negative. Even Mark Dermul, who rates the Concept a very good 85/100, remarks that the NAS (no age statement) releases at the lowest possible ABV (40%) are getting tiring.

Although the Concept 1 may get some thumbs down from seasoned whisky drinkers, the sturdy presentation box and modern design make it an ideal gift for a Macallan enthusiast. If you don’t tell them the price they’re not going to grumble. Even at 40% it packs enough flavour and Macallan finesse to go down well.

Tasting notes from Macallan:

Nose: Sweet butterscotch toffee, with almond, ginger spice and cinnamon. Hints of dried fruit, citrus and green banana

Palate: Sweet orange and lemon citrus with soft oak spices, fresh fruit and ginger

Finish: Medium sweet, dry with a lingering oak, citrus fruit and ginger finish

Here’s Mark Dermul on YouTube with his thoughts on the Macallan Concept Number 1 (March 2019):

Macallan Whisky Maker’s Edition (1930s Propeller Plane)

Bought: Amazon, 6^th June 2018

Ratings:
87.6/100 – Whiskybase (average from 7 member votes)
5/5 – The Whisky Exchange (average from 6 member votes)

My third Macallan post in a row. Anyone would think I was a fan! Well I am. You can’t really go wrong with a Macallan. I wouldn’t necessarily savour a glass of the ‘Gold’ for any length of time but it still has its moments and it’s undeniably Macallan. My one quibble with the illustrious Speyside giant is the amount of NAS (no age statement) releases they have done in recent years. My blogs about the Terra, Classic Cut and now the Whisky Maker’s Edition (WME) haven’t got a declared age digit between them. Call me picky but the age of a single malt used to be a significant piece of information when deciding what to buy and if a whisky was worth its price tag.

My WME first appeared in 2016 and was part of a series of 4 different presentations of the WME to feature work by the British x-ray photographer Nick Veasey. My bottle and box show an x-ray photo of a 1930s propeller plane. The others in the series depict a 1920s locomotive, 1930s ocean liner and a 1940s roadster. Nick Veasey is no stranger to Macallan who had already used his work in c.2012 for six versions of the WME entitled the Six Pillars. These pictures also appeared on six versions of the 12yo ‘Fine Oak’. I believe the WME has been on the go since 2009 and in airports as ‘Travel Retail Exclusive’, which means it was soon available everywhere else.

Well that’s all very interesting but what about the whisky itself? Scoring 87.6/100 on Whiskybase is a very good score and all the reviewers on The Whisky Exchange absolutely love this dram. Comments include, “amazing experience, indulging”, “compared to a Macallan Gold for tasting purposes at a gathering and clearly a couple of levels of smoothly and strength higher”, “excellent round flavour with spicy fruit” and “well worth the money”.

What Macallan have to say about the Whisky Maker’s Edition:

Nose: Fresh fruit and ginger rounded off with toffee sweetness.
Palate: Delicate fruits, rich sweetness and spice.
Finish: Lingering with a slightly smoky finish.

Here’s Whisky Whistle with his thoughts on YouTube about the Macallan Whisky Maker’s Edition (December 2015):

Macallan ‘Classic Cut’ 2017

Bought: Macallan Distillery Shop, 9^th February 2018

Ratings:
88.84/100 – Whiskybase (average from 88 member votes)

I’ve always wanted a cask strength Macallan. Back in August 2016 I discovered 12 different bottlings of Macallan produced by Single Malts Direct. They ranged from 47.2% for a 1989 vintage to 55.4% for the youngest offering distilled in 1997. The cost ranged from £69 to £92 but at 50cl I felt the price was quite steep. Those were the days! 2 years later and independent bottlers charge a fortune for an outrun of Macallan. Back in 2016 I hesitated and when I returned to make a purchase all 12 bottlings had sold out.

Early in 2018 I got an email from Macallan distillery about the new ‘Classic Cut’. There was no mention of “cask strength” but at 58.4% it sounded like it ought to be. I ordered a bottle. In late 2017 Macallan released 7 new bottles in the ‘Exceptional Cask’ series, all of which had “Cask Strength” written on them. The youngest bottles were two 12yos at 63.8% and 65.2%, which suggests that Macallan’s casks and warehousing keeps the raw spirit high, even after 12 years. By the time we get to a 15yo ‘Exceptional Cask’ it’s 58.5%, 0.1% stronger than the Classic Cut. Wow, does that mean the Classic Cut is a 15yo? Sadly not. At £86 the Classic Cut is going to be young and unless it was badly stored or mixed with old, weak spirit, it’s been watered down to 58.4%. So it’s highly unlikely to be cask strength – damn!

Macallan are no fools. ‘Cask strength’ is one of the buzz phrases in the whisky world at the moment so if the Classic Cut were truly cask strength it would be emblazoned on the bottle and box for all to see as it was with the ‘Exceptional Cask’ range. But it’s close enough for me! And scoring nearly 89/100 on Whiskybase the Classic Cut is hitting Macallan 18yo territory. The Classic Cut is clearly an excellent whisky but, dare I say, it’s also proving to be a very good investment. 7 months after purchase and auction prices have hit £150. But if you want a bottle and £150 seems rather pricy for a non-cask strength NAS, Macallan say on their website “the first in a new series of annual releases”. The Classic Cut 2018 has already been announced but at a much weaker 51.2% (even less likely to be cask strength). I wonder how much Macallan will charge given the success of the 2017 version?

What Macallan say about the Classic Cut:

Nose: Creamy vanilla custard, sweet ginger, fresh sweet oak.
Palate: Caramel, orange zest, nutmeg spice.
Finish: Warming oak with a sweet mouth coating.

Here’s Liquor Hound with his thoughts on YouTube about the Macallan ‘Classic Cut’ 2017 and how it compares to older cask strength Macallans, even though he doesn’t believe that the Classic Cut is cask strength (November 2017):

Macallan ‘Terra’

Bought: World of Whisky, 22^nd March 2018

Ratings:
85.35/100 – Whiskybase (average from 19 member votes)

Firstly, thank you to everyone for getting my blog over £200k hits. Who knew that whisky was so popular that an obscure blog like mine could get so may views!

The ‘Terra’ is part of the new Travel Retail range that the Macallan distillery introduced into airports at the end of 2017. Like the colour range before it (Gold, Amber, Sienna and Ruby) there are four bottles in the new set consisting of the Quest, Lumina, Terra and Enigma. I’ve listed both ranges from low to high according to price. The main reason I went for the Terra as my first example of the new range is because it equates to the Sienna (3rd in terms of price), which was the best of the colour range. But wow, what a price difference! The Sienna was c.£65 and the Terra cost £128, almost double. If there’s one distillery that knows how to squeeze blood out of a stone it’s Macallan.

Scoring over 85/100 on Whiskybase is a very good score and more than a point ahead of the Sienna. The Terra is matured exclusively in first-fill European and American sherry seasoned oak casks so the spirit gets first dibs on all the flavour in the wood. At 43.8% the Terra is 0.8% higher than the Sienna but it’s a shame it’s not 46%, especially considering the price. At least it’s not 40% like the Gold and Quest. In fairness to the Terra its packaging is better than the Sienna. The Ruby was slightly more expensive than the Terra, similar presentation and an almost identical score on Whiskybase. It’s almost as if the Terra equates to the Ruby rather than the Sienna and the Enigma is in a bracket of its own.

Comments online about the Terra include, “much better then the Quest and the Lumina”, “it’s special. Lovely complex texture. I’ve never tried anything so well balanced and in my personal opinion, perfect”, “lovely sherried layers compared to the Ruby”.

Tasting notes from Master of Malt:

Nose: Fresh orange, brioche, coffee, sultana and walnut loaf.
Palate: Melted chocolate, dried apricot, toffee pennies and a touch of strawberry jam.
Finish: Baking spices and dried oak notes take shape on the finish.

Macallan 10-year-old ‘old style’ (1990s)

Source: Family Gift, late 1990s

Ratings:
88/100 – Whiskybase (average from 13 member votes)

This highly acclaimed Macallan 10yo was a gift from my uncle Hamish and added to the family collection in the late 1990s. I believe the style of bottling was first introduced in the mid 1990s and carried on until the launch of the ‘Fine Oak’ range in 2004. Before 2004 the standard Macallan was all ‘sherry oak’ so there wasn’t a need to make a distinction on the label. After 2004 bottles were clearly labelled either ‘Sherry Oak’ or ‘Fine Oak’.

It’s hard to believe that back in the 1990s supermarkets would sometimes discount this Macallan 10yo to less than £20. Today it typically sells at auction for about £200 and retails closer to £300. It’s good but it’s not that good. Exclusively matured in selected sherry oak casks from Jarez the box features an autumnal scene of Easter Elchies house, Craigellachie, Speyside, which is the ‘Home of the Macallan’.

Scoring 88/100 on Whiskybase is an excellent score and only about a point less than what you’d expect the Macallan 18yo to get. I’ve tasted this Macallan 10yo many times and I wouldn’t say it was that good but it’s definitely a fine dram. It’s more of an 85/100 from me.

Tasting notes from ‘Ormiston Whisky’:

Nose: Matured, sherry notes, raisins, rich, vanilla, caramel, fudge, slightly pungy.
Taste: Sweet with lovely fruity layers, clear wood spices (nutmeg, cinnamon etc.) some black pepper as well.
Finish: Soothing with some tutti frutti sherry notes.

Macallan ‘Amber’

Bought: Waitrose, 13^th May 2017

Ratings:
78/100 – Whisky Bible 2015
78.22/100 – Whiskybase (average from 400 member votes)

I would never have bought the Macallan Amber if I hadn’t thought I’d secured a bottle of Ruby on Amazon. Unfortunately 3 months after I’d placed my order Amazon deleted it but by then I’d bought the Amber to go with the Gold thinking I’d only need the Sienna to complete the ‘colour’ set. Since it now seems impossible to get the discontinued Ruby for less than £200, which puts it out of my reach, will I bother getting the Sienna? Hmmm.

So I’m stuck with the Amber. Just as well I’m a fan of the Macallan profile in whatever form because the Amber has rarely done well in reviews. 78/100 from Jim Murray in his Whisky Bible 2015 classifies the Amber as “average, and usually pleasant though sometimes flawed”. In fairness his review is quite favourable, “the texture alone shows this should be something truly special. The first few moments of delivery likewise, with its astonishing Locket’s honey filling; honey is the unambiguous theme throughout. But the tangy presence of a few sub-standard sherry butts undermine some great work in the lab. I suspect the next bottling might be a corker.” Unfortunately we’ll never know because the review disappeared in 2016 and hasn’t reappeared since. Perhaps Mr Murray hasn’t retried the Amber, or he didn’t consider it worth another sip.

78.22/100 on Whiskybase is a so-so score bordering on ‘below average’ but the Gold scores an almost identical 78.19/100. As an experienced Macallan drinker I like the Gold and Jim Murray scores it 89.5/100. The Sienna, the next colour up in the series from the Amber, scores over 84/100 on Whiskybase so it’s considered a significant step up in quality. I’m still tempted to get the Sienna because several reviews have suggested it’s better than the Ruby and the best colour in the series. Comments on Whiskybase about the Amber include “Not bad this. It had quite a bit more flavour to it than the Gold, and was on the whole quite pleasant. It had quite a bit of bitterness and spiciness to it but in a refreshing kind of way.” And “Barely a step up from the Gold. A little more flavour but largely wood tannins and acetone.”

Tasting notes from Master of Malt (where it scores 3/5 stars from 31 votes):

Nose: Soft aromatic vanilla, lemon and barley with hints of ginger. Milk chocolate buttons and hints of Sun-Maid Raisins.
Palate: Surprisingly thick and fruity compared to the nose. Golden sultanas, dates, apple peelings and a dusting of cinnamon. Cereal notes on the mid-palate, joined by mince pies with crumbly shortbread.
Finish: Fragrant oak finish, with the mince pie notes lingering.

Here’s Jack Oughton with his thoughts on YouTube about the Macallan Amber (January 2015):

Macallan ‘Twenties’

Bought: Heathrow Airport, 2004/05

Ratings:
67/100 – Whisky Bible 2006
83.88/100 – Whiskybase (average from 54 member votes)
78/100 – Malt Maniacs (average from 9 maniac votes)

Status: Long since discontinued

I bought this bottle of Macallan ‘Twenties’ for my father’s 81^st or 82^nd birthday in 2004 or 2005. I can’t remember the exact year mostly because he’s had so many birthdays! He has his 94^th this year but I wont be buying him any more whisky. Not long after I got him this Macallan he confessed that he didn’t really like whisky. Nobody had realised. He got at least 5 bottles for his 80^th birthday. So the good news has been that my brother and I got to try this Macallan, so every cloud has a silver lining!

Macallan began introducing the Macallan ‘Decades’ series in 2001 and in 2004 they added this version of the ‘Twenties’ to represent the flavour of Macallan in the 1920s. Not that my father was drinking Macallan when he was born in 1923. As a Scottish baby they don’t start you on whisky until you’re at least 5. Ultimately there were 4 bottles in the series representing the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.

Although I quite like this Macallan, according to Jim Murray in his Whisky Bible of 2006 the ‘Twenties’ was his least favourite decade. 67/100 classifies it as “very unimpressive indeed” and Mr Murray says “Does absolutely nothing for me at all. Totally off-key, no finish. Nothing roaring about this one.” He scores the 1930s 91/100, the 1940s gets 81/100 and 1950s does best with 92/100.

The Malt Maniacs are a bit more complimentary with a reasonable mark of 78/100 but nearly 84/100 on Whiskybase from 54 votes is a very good score. Nevertheless comments are very up and down ranging from “a perfect recreation from the 1920s” to “not very good”. Expert sipper and reviewer Mark Dermul who scores the ‘Twenties’ 77/100 says “I am not really impressed. Too dry and a tad too sour to my taste.” And leaves the following tasting notes:

Nose: The sherry is immediately present on the nose. Apricots, oranges, pineapple, blackberries. Quite dry, to be honest. A bit of chocolate. Mild smokiness. Soft woodspice.
Taste: The attack is soft and gently spiced. Again all sweet sherry. The fruit is now of the dried variety. Chocolate returns. Does turn a bit sour, now.
Finish: The finish is soft and warm with a hint of nuts.

Macallan 15-year-old ‘Fine Oak’

Bought: Online Whisky Auction, 9^th January 2017

Ratings:
79.5/100 – Whisky Bible 2017
84.12/100 – Whiskybase (average from 173 member votes)

When Macallan discontinued the 10yo, 12yo and 15yo age statements in 2013 it was the 15yo that vanished from the UK shops first (High Street and online). As old stock of the 10yo and 12yo dribbled back onto the market the 15yo has remained elusive, although I believe it’s been easier to obtain in the US and Canada. Thankfully bottles regularly appear in online auctions, which is where I purchased mine. But was it worth it as a drinking dram?

Jim Murray, author of the whisky bible, wasn’t overly impressed with this final version of the 15yo ‘Fine Oak’. In 2009 he scored the previous version 94/100 but in 2012 he added my new bottling with a score of 79.5/100, which classifies it as “average and usually pleasant though sometimes flawed”. He says, “As the stock of the Fine Oak 12 rises, so its 15yo brother, once one of my Favourite drams, falls. Plenty to enjoy, but a few sulphur stains remove the gloss.”

Although 84/100 on Whiskybase is a good score it seems that a lot of Macallan fans are left feeling disappointed with the 15yo Fine Oak. Comments include “appealing, intensely sweet with good infusion of multiple oaks, complex and alluring”, “pretty drinkable and also enjoyable but not really great either”, “I expected much more for this Macallan, so felt disappointed” and “too much wood influence? Not a brilliant whisky for that price.”

As the 15yo Fine Oak drifts into whisky history you feel it will always have its fans, such is the appeal of The Macallan but perhaps this wasn’t their finest hour. It’s worth noting that none of the comments on Whiskybase mention ‘sulphur’ and the previous version of the Fine Oak scores less with 83.25/100 (from 58 votes), which Jim Murray gives 94/100. So make of that what you will.

Here’s ‘Whisky in the 6’ from Canada with their review of the 15yo Fine Oak on YouTube (January 2016):

Macallan 18-year-old ‘Sherry Oak’ 2016

Bought: Amazon, 14^th November 2016

Ratings:
89/100 – Whiskybase (average from 30 member votes)
5/5 – Master of Malt (from 4 reviews)

If you want to get into whisky as an investment you can’t go far wrong with the Macallan 18yo ‘Sherry Oak’ (for now). If anyone criticises you with the tiresome adage “but whisky should be drunk!” slap them hard across the face and remind them that alcohol is a poison. But seriously, it’s none of their business what you spend your money on or how you treat your whisky. Those critics are usually hypocrites because they’ll be only too delighted to buy rare, vintage whisky at auction that would have been drunk long ago were it not for the collectors and investors. I bought my first Macallan 18yo in the summer of 2015 and only 18 months later it was consistently getting £100 more at auction. It’s liquid gold I tell thee!

But what is the Macallan 18yo like to drink? As I mentioned for the 1995 vintage, this is the Rolls Royce of whisky with a deep, smooth texture and heated seats. It’s very rare that you hear a bad word about the Macallan 18yo and year after year the quality is kept high. 89/100 on Whiskybase is a fantastic score and the equal of any previous vintage. Comments on Master of Malt include “perfect”, “the Macallan 18 is still one of my all time favourites”, “fantastic” and “a hefty price tag, but for a special occasion it’s worth it!”

Here are the tasting notes from Master of Malt:
Nose: Classic dried fruit, crème de cacao and crème anglaise with ginger and oak.
Palate: Winter spice, sultanas, toffee apple, rich oak and mixed peels.
Finish: Oak shavings, raisins and caramel.

If you would like to buy the Macallan 18yo and are happy to play a waiting game I’d recommend finding it on Amazon, adding it to your wishlist and waiting until the price drops to sub £150 (if you’re in the UK). I believe it had one mad moment when it hit £125 last year after dropping from the heady heights of its typical RRP of £200.