Not a member? - Register and login now.
All registered users can read our entire magazine archive.

What do you think of Macallan ?

Take part in our whisky polls and votes. You can also post your own polls in this forum.

Overall your feeling on the Macallan ?

Great whisky that deserves its special status.
21
31%
Just another distillery. Good but not great.
40
60%
Below average malt hidden by good sherry.
5
7%
Poor whisky not worth trying.
1
1%
 
Total votes : 67

Postby Lawrence » Sat Mar 18, 2006 7:58 pm

Sorry, I should been more clear, I meant new expression from other distilleries and I was speaking of the last few years not recently. Some examples are Glenfarclas 105, this is more sherried than in the past and has a better mouth feel and more sherry. Aberlour A'bunadh is very sherried, as is the Aberlour 12 and 15 although they both have a lightly different mouth feel to the Macallan but the quality is still there.
Lawrence
Matured cask
 
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

What do you think of Macallan.

Postby Danny » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:20 pm

Lawrence/Peter, thanks for the info. It is a bit of a downer, but as Lawrence states there are other sherried malts available.

So, life will go on, but me thinks I will buy an extra bottle or two before thay are totally gone.
Danny
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Postby Lawrence » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:45 pm

It's not all bad news (for us) since were one of the selected Macallan markets!

Lawrence
Lawrence
Matured cask
 
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

Thank you Bacchus

Postby Muskrat Portage » Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:16 pm

Lawrence wrote:It's not all bad news (for us) since were one of the selected Macallan markets!Lawrence

:D :D :D :D :D (Sorry Frodo, I got here first) Musky P.
User avatar
Muskrat Portage
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:47 am
Location: Jan says the North Pole, Ontario, Canada

Postby Sherried Malt » Sun Mar 19, 2006 12:55 pm

Lawrence wrote:Some examples are Glenfarclas 105, this is more sherried than in the past and has a better mouth feel and more sherry. Aberlour A'bunadh is very sherried, as is the Aberlour 12 and 15 although they both have a lightly different mouth feel to the Macallan but the quality is still there.


Lawrence, thanks for all the tips here. As you say, the Abunadh is VERY sherried and quite enjoyable. I'll try to track some of these others down.

Thanks again.

Now if we can only get Macallan to produce another sherry expression... :wink:
User avatar
Sherried Malt
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:32 pm
Location: New York, United States

Postby MacLover » Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:31 am

As my tag indicates I have a fondness for Macallan and probably always will. My first single malt was a Macallan 18YO and that was all it took.

But to be honest I have to admit that the more recent bottlings I have tried have been lacking, especially the 18YOs. The older distillations/bottlings (distilled in the 60's and 70's) were great while the more recent bottlings have been merely average (in my humble opinion).

I do always have a bottle of a recently bottled Mac 18YO and/or CS on hand but if I have a Laphroaig CS or Talisker 18YO sitting near by I find my hand reaching for the Laphroaig or Talisker instead of the Mac.

I agree with many of the previous statements that the status is probably not deserved as perception is skewed (and also sales) since it is trendy to drink Macallan. I know of quite a few Macallan devotees that have not even heard of, much less tried, Ardbeg, Laphroaig, Talisker, or any other single malt that is as good as or better than the current bottlings of Macallan.

I contemplated voting for it deserving its perceived status but I in good conscience I voted for good, but not great as I feel I should vote on what it is producing today.
MacLover
New member
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Shanghai

Postby Deactivated Member » Thu Mar 23, 2006 8:15 am

Another very good (in my opinion) Sherried Malt is the 1986 Dark Sherry from Bruichladdich.
There are various bottlings, or should that read label pictures?, from 2005 and the one I tasted most recently was bottled 2006.

A fine dram indeed.
WH
Deactivated Member
 

Postby Lord_Pfaffin » Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:20 am

Frodo wrote:
Sherried Malt wrote:I will also say that the prices for the current releases are a bit steep for what they deliver. I've had people say that it was just a few years ago that the 18 went for half of what it does now; if I bought it back in the "good ol' days" I would be going through major sticker shock right now.



This echos my view. I like Mac as a nice dram, but the price is out of wack!


The whisky does not live up to its reputation. Definately not at its price anyhow. There are just so many better whiskys with much smaller price tags.
Lord_Pfaffin
Silver Member
 
Posts: 498
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby Scotchio » Fri Mar 24, 2006 9:55 am

Don't know if anyone can answer this but why is it that Aberlour seem to be able to access high quality sherry butts and put out a whisky at incredibly competitive prices selling in large quantities worldwide whilst Macallan seem to struggle to access suitable butts and are going down the path of separate expressions to reduce costs at the same time as hiking their trad style prices and churning out overpriced "collectables." The Fine Oak series is hardly bargain basement either.
Are they trying to create a niche product with snob and history appeal to sell at an excessive premium?Surely it's not beyond the wit of their blenders to produce something sherry accented and less heavy than the trad at a competitive price, could even be an improvement on their current ranges. Their behaviour strikes me as more DeLorean than Rolls Royce.
Methinks they are guilty of believing their own publicity and treating their followers with disdain.
Scotchio
Gold Member
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: devon uk

Postby lbacha » Fri Mar 24, 2006 12:50 pm

I hade to go with good but not great because I have tried too many Macallans that arn't that great. I also think with the addition of the fine oak line that they have two distinct types of whisky that are to some extent hard to compare.

As a side note I got the chance to try the 30's and 50's traveler series bottlings and they were excellent, and well worth trying if you like a good sherried Macallan, and the 30's has some smoke as well.

Len
lbacha
Gold Member
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio USA

Postby lbacha » Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:08 pm

I've been reading some of the posts after I made my first post and I just wanted to add that if you are looking for a good Macallan at a great price the two bottles I mentioned the 30's and 50's travelers series only cost me 25 euros each for a 700ml bottle. To me that is a bargain price especially considering I spend 40 euros for a bottle of Macallan 12 yr old "elegancia 1992" and it doesn't come close to either of them.

Len
lbacha
Gold Member
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio USA

Re: What do you think of Macallan.

Postby Deactivated Member » Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:48 pm

Danny wrote:
Tried it again tonight along with the 1987 18 year and found it lacking in comparision.


Hi Danny,
my understanding is that after the 1986 18 y/o, Macallan only supplies 'generic' 18 year olds - undated.
Are you telling me that dated versions still exist for collectors?

It has been my opinion that Macallan has been the most collected malt and indeed, was once upon a time the most collectible one. But they upset many collectors by stopping their dated bottlings of 18 y/o.
Especially here in Germany collectors have turned away from Macallan in droves.

It was also evident at the Munich Whisky Festival in February that the Macallan stand (bar) was very poorly frequented compared to the others.

I also believe that the Macallan reputation for collectibles has been severely tarnished by the recent flood of fakes appearing on the Market, which I know has been discussed at length elsewhere on this forum.

However, to make a final comment on an earlier post about the price of the 18 year olds, these have proven to be excellent investments for the collectors and have completely out-performed other traditional methods of longer-term financial investment.

WH
Deactivated Member
 

Postby kallaskander » Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:03 pm

Hi there,

Ibacha I was not aware that there were bottlings of the Traveler Collection in 0,7 ltr. bottles. Is that for the US market only?

Greetings
kallaskander
kallaskander
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: Heddesheim, Germany

Postby lbacha » Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:43 pm

I actually got them in Eindhoven Netherlands, and I'll check again but I'm pretty sure they are 700ml. May be wrong though.

Len
lbacha
Gold Member
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Cleveland, Ohio USA

Postby Scotchio » Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:28 pm

Plenty of well priced 50cl bottles and sets from ebay Euro traders
Scotchio
Gold Member
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:06 pm
Location: devon uk

Postby Deactivated Member » Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:03 pm

The current price for the 50cl series of four bottles tends to be around €99 in Germany.

UK prices tend to be nearer this amount but in GBP, making them a little more expensive.

WH
Deactivated Member
 

macallan

Postby wylam mag » Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:32 pm

i personally like macallan but have been limited so far to 10 yo sherry and fine oak,15 yo sherry and 18 yo sherry all of which i think are great but thats the beauty of whisky we dont all have to agree. macallan is just my personal preference based on taste couldnt afford the older ones anyway.

steve
wylam mag
New member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:25 pm
Location: wylam, northumberland

Re: What do you think of Macallan.

Postby Danny » Sat Mar 25, 2006 3:07 am

WhiskyHammer wrote:
Danny wrote:
Tried it again tonight along with the 1987 18 year and found it lacking in comparision.


Hi Danny,
my understanding is that after the 1986 18 y/o, Macallan only supplies 'generic' 18 year olds - undated.
Are you telling me that dated versions still exist for collectors?

.


WH


Hi WhiskyHammer, this is probably not dated in the context that you are referring to. The label states "Eighteen Years Old" and then "whiskies distilled in 1987 and in earlier years".

Hope this helps.
Danny
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 1:32 am
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Postby Deactivated Member » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:02 am

Thanks for the clarification Danny, for a moment you had me worried that I had missed something!

I still wish I could get hold of the 18 y/o "Sherry Oak" in Germany. We only seem to have access to the Fine Oak range. I have just looked at my couple of FO bottles and there is no date on these, ONLY 18 years old.


Oh well, C'est la vie.
WH
Deactivated Member
 

Postby kallaskander » Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:10 am

Hi there,

hello hammer try http://www.thewhiskytrader.de. If you not find what you look for send them an email. They are very helpful.

Greetings
kallaskander
kallaskander
Double Gold Member
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: Heddesheim, Germany

Postby Les Paul » Sun Mar 26, 2006 3:39 pm

hello friends:

granted i am still young and have much still to try.....i have immensely enjoyed the 3 Mac's that I have......standard 12 sherry, fine oak 10, and the cask strength... :D
Les Paul
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:02 am
Location: NW Ohio (Maumee)

Postby Mr Ellen » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:25 pm

I am not sure what I think about this distillery. I have tasted some of their whisky and, as with all distilleries there are both good ones and bad ones. Personally, I think the Cask Strength Macallan is very good but I think the 18y. and the Gran Reserva are too heavily sherried, which do not appeal to me.
I also find most of their whiskies far too expensive compared to similar aged Speyside malts.
So I voted just another distillery...Good but not great. (I still have an unopened Macallan Private Eye in my collection though :wink: )

Cheers
__________________
Anders
Mr Ellen
Silver Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:10 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Postby Admiral » Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:18 am

I'm not sure how to answer this question.

Macallan have decided that people in my country aren't worthy enough to drink their good stuff. (In other words, the Australian market has been cut out of the sherried Macallan exports, and we only get the Fine Oak range now).

I love sherried Macallans. I agree with Lawrence....some of their bottlings did dip in quality there for a few years, but they seem to be back on the upswing.

However, I simply do not like the Fine Oaks. To me, they are just another a whisky, and they do not stand out from the crowd.

(In answering this question, I am doing my best to avoid the politics and history that is so heavily entwined in this issue. For those new or not familiar with any of this, check out the thread started by Oliver called "The decline of Macallan.")

So these days, I have a very Jekyll and Hyde opinion of Macallan. Their sherried stuff is great, and their Fine Oak is ordinary at best. As a fan, I would normally still champion their whisky. However, as mentioned at the start, they apparently don't think people from my country are important enough to enjoy their sherried products, so my allegiance and patience with them is sorely tested.

Cheers,
Admiral
Admiral
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2719
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Australia

Postby smokey » Thu May 11, 2006 7:10 am

I've only tried the Macallan 10cs, (the one with the triangle sticker in the litre bottle). Largely due to what the people in the forum say about it being expensive relative to the quality. That said, I have to say I really like the one i've tried. The value is really good, 3,800 yen for a litre, and I think it's a little less spicy but comparable to the Aberlour A'bunndah which runs about 5,300 yen for a 700ml bottle. I don't think i'll be buying anything except that though, because the price seems low when compared to every other macallan I've seen. Actually, I'm going to order two more next week.
smokey
New member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:16 pm
Location: florida

Postby Lawrence » Thu May 11, 2006 6:23 pm

Good comparison to the Macallan and the Aberlour a'bunadh, spicy and wood notes are present in both. Remember the Aberlour is cask strength.
Lawrence
Matured cask
 
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

Postby Admiral » Sat May 13, 2006 11:53 pm

For a great comparison test try:

Macallan Cask Strength (yes, the sherried one)
Glenfarclas 105
Aberlour A'bunadh

Actually, think I might start a poll on that.

Cheers,
Admiral
Admiral
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2719
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Australia

Postby Lawrence » Sun May 14, 2006 4:15 pm

Actually you did start a poll and I repsonded.

Good question and the only proper answer is Aberlour a'bunadh.

:wink:
Lawrence
Matured cask
 
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

Macallan CS surprise

Postby Muskrat Portage » Sun May 14, 2006 5:03 pm

Lawrence wrote:Actually you did start a poll and I repsonded.
Good question and the only proper answer is Aberlour a'bunadh. :wink:

Lawrence & Admiral: I too responded, after doing a taste-off. I'd have thought that A'Bunadh would have been my top choice too, but it wasn't. :shock: It was Macallan :!: Musky Portage
User avatar
Muskrat Portage
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:47 am
Location: Jan says the North Pole, Ontario, Canada

Postby Mr Fjeld » Sun May 14, 2006 9:55 pm

What do I think about Macallan? Well, I've only had a Macallan twice but the I recently tried a 10 cl bottle of Fine Oak 12yo - which by all accounts was a nice experience. Not bad but nothing particularly outstanding. But then, are we sometimes too "hard" on the single malts? I wonder if we only go for the "best" and adjust our palate accordingly thus missing out on the decent and good malts in between the "smokey" and the "sherried" malts?

Christian
Mr Fjeld
Cask Strength Gold Member
 
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:08 pm

Postby Admiral » Mon May 15, 2006 4:17 am

I'm not so sure Christian. There are plenty of whiskies we rave on about that aren't in the 'smokey' or 'sherried' styles.

Think Highland Park, Clynelish, Balvenie, Bruichladdich for starters.

Cheers,
Admiral
Admiral
Triple Gold Member
 
Posts: 2719
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Australia

Postby Mr Fjeld » Mon May 15, 2006 4:40 am

....yes, I have to admit you have a point there Admiral :)
I think of Highland Park as a smokey whisky but it sure isn't among the monsters out there. But yes, your examples prove me partly wrong. Maybe I was was under influence of the irish whiskies I've had lately and the Dalwhinnie in particular. They sort of drown in all the attention given to the Abunadhs, the Ardbegs and the like.

Christian
Mr Fjeld
Cask Strength Gold Member
 
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:08 pm

Postby adrian44 » Tue May 23, 2006 1:35 am

MrTattieHeid wrote:A Timex shows the same time as a Rolex. (Whatever that means.... :? )


You are entering my territory here :P

Rolex watches with superlative chronometer certificate will run slow/fast within -4/+6 seconds a day. And these are the most accurate mechanical watches. A Timex quartz watch will probably be fast/slow within 10 seconds in a full YEAR.. :shock:

So in reality Timex shows more accurate time than a Riolex :wink:

Is this what we really look for? I have a James Purdey shotgun that kills birds as dead as my $450 Beretta, but I'd cut my arm before I let the Purdey go :P

8)
adrian44
New member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:29 am

Postby anajulia » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:57 am

Macallan started it all for me some years ago with a mini of the 18 year old sherry oak. From the first sip I thought: "I found my drink".

Finished a bottle of the 18 and then drank the 12 for a long time because of the price. A good compromise, but never as impressive as the 18. Toward the end I found myself adding water to it regularly.

Got a bottle of the Cask Strength as a present - put hair on my girly chest! Then I broke down and bought a bottle of the 25 - not as flavorful as the 18. Two bottles of the Fine Oak 10 and 15, OK but not impressed.

Then moved on to other brands and drank an ejoyed all the popular classics: the Lagavulin, Laphroaig, Arbeg, Highland Park, Talisker and many others.

Recently, after so long without drinking it that I almost forgot what it tasted like, I bought a bottle of the 18 sherry oak at - mind you - $115 - way out of my league!. And from the first sip, it was love all over again!

Macallan 18 is without a doubt my favorite malt.

Too bad the thing is so damn expensive. A bottle of some of the best rum you can find, like the 12 year old "El Dorado" costs $17 at the same place where I bought my Macallan 18 at $115.

I know I'm comparing pears and apples, but well ... I drink a lot of rum.

Which brings me to a question that perhaps I should post to one of these forums some day, if you gentlemen and the few ladies around don't find it too personal ...

What percentage of your take-home income do you regularly spend on your liquor?

AnaJulia
anajulia
New member
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:48 am

Postby Lawrence » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:21 am

150%
Lawrence
Matured cask
 
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

Postby Deactivated Member » Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:12 pm

anajulia wrote:What percentage of your take-home income do you regularly spend on your liquor?

AnaJulia


I don't know and I don't want to know!
Deactivated Member
 

PreviousNext

Return to Whisky Poll

cron

Whisky gift and present finder