By
Andrew Derbidge
Devotees
of single malts will be no stranger to The Macallan. One of the more famed Speyside distilleries, The Macallan earned
its reputation by making consistently brilliant sherried whiskies.
Malt whisky today
is matured in oak casks that have previously held either bourbon or
sherry. The selection of one or the
other is no accident, and each distillery usually has a dedicated wood policy
or regime designed such that the selected wood is the one that best suits their
spirit. Many distilleries will mature
their spirit in both types of wood, and then vat them in appropriate
proportions at bottling stage to achieve the desired flavour profile.
For
The Macallan, the decision was made in the late 1960’s to mature their single
malt chiefly in sherry butts, which had previously held dry oloroso. These casks imparted a rich, nutty sweetness
to the whisky, and Macallan came to epitomise the sherried style of malt whisky
sought after by so many today.
However,
sourcing sherry butts is an expensive exercise. The figures are now a little out of date, but about five years
ago, a distillery could purchase an ex-bourbon cask for around US$90, whereas
an ex-sherry butt cost closer to US$600
(bearing in mind that a Sherry butt has a holding capacity roughly
double that of a bourbon barrel). Whilst Macallan’s single malt bottlings were
matured exclusively in ex-oloroso butts, they also matured some of their spirit
in ex-fino casks and ex-bourbon casks, which they sold off to blenders.
Unfortunately
– for us as consumers – it seems the practice of using only ex-sherry casks for
their single malt expressions has became prohibitively expensive for
Macallan. The Macallan has recently
launched a new range of single malts under the name “Fine Oak”. Available in a range of aged expressions,
(e.g. 12, 18, 21 years, etc), the Fine Oak range is a vatting (combination) of
both sherry-matured and bourbon-matured Macallan.
The
product matured exclusively in sherry casks has been withdrawn from several
markets (including Australia), and many countries will now have to adjust to
this new style of Macallan. Not
surprisingly, the move has attracted its fair share of controversy. Given that a 30 y/o Fine Oak expression is
available, one wonders how long ago this new launch was planned, as it is
unlikely that stocks destined for blenders would be kept for this amount of
time!
So
with all this as background, how does the Fine Oak compare against the Macallan
we all knew and loved? I pitted the
Fine Oak 12 y/o against the “normal” Macallan 12 y/o, both sampled without the
addition of any water. Let’s compare
the two at each stage of analysis, starting with the nose:
NOSE: It’s difficult to describe the 100% sherry version
without resorting to the signature Macallan characteristics, but they are all
there in spades - rich toffee, some sweet dried fruits, (dates, apricots,
figs), and healthy malty, cereal aromas.
Other concealed spices flit around the nose, making for a tantalising
mix of aromas that are complex and not immediately or obviously
identifiable. A delicious nuttiness
also revealed itself after 10 minutes or so.
The regular Macallan 12 y/o seemingly suffered a dip in quality in
recent years, but the nose on this bottling suggests a return to fine
form.
The
Fine Oak version certainly demonstrated some of these features, if a little
weakly in places, although the signature Macallan fruitcake-type scents still
shone through. I went looking for some
caramel or vanilla notes, usually a good indication of bourbon wood, but none
were immediately obvious. Nevertheless,
it was still a pleasant nose and as attractive as most going around Speyside.
PALATE: The 100% sherry version was silky in its
texture. The sweetness present on the
nose follows through into the palate, integrating well with the rich &
spicy flavours. The nuttiness is again
evident, but well balanced against the fruity, malty background. The sherry is very abundant and at the
forefront of everything, but strangely not in a negative way. “Smooth” is a somewhat crude and simplistic
term for describing a whisky, and I usually try to avoid it, but I’m stuck for
a more apt description in this instance.
The
Fine Oak version was surprisingly sweet.
Almost candied – I likened it to fairy floss. It was still spicy, and a very interesting pineapple note
floated around, adding further to the sweetness. However, the spirit was a little hot, and I suspect this could
have overpowered some of the more subtle aspects of the malt. A perfectly good palate in its own right,
but still somewhat inferior to its predecessor.
FINISH: Both whiskies had a good length on the
finish; they were warming, and also maintained their sweetness. This is a plus for both whiskies, as many
malts trail away leaving a bitterness behind.
Neither malt seemed to add anything new to the finish, but both held
their ground and confirmed all that was evident on the palate.
SCORES
& COMMENTS: The 100% sherry version
scored 7.85 and the Fine Oak version came in at 7.3. It took considerable effort at all times throughout the tasting
to judge the Fine Oak on its own merits, rather than compare it against what a
Macallan “should” be. However, without
the legacy that comes with the Macallan name, it must be said that the Fine Oak
was still a pleasant whisky, and was reasonably well crafted. It did exhibit less complexity, (ironic,
given that not one, but two woods were used to mature the spirit), and this is
chiefly where it lost ground against its stable-mate. The flavours in the Fine Oak were also less integrated, and the
whisky as a whole did not strike as good a balance.
The
Fine Oak Macallans will have their detractors, and fans of the Macallan brand
and style will have to work hard to overcome their bias and shed the
baggage. This comparison of the
12-year-old expressions suggests we have been short-changed in the affair,
although I have it on good authority that the Fine Oak 21 y/o is a particularly
stellar dram.
As
a consumer though, I still have one question… if bourbon casks are so much
cheaper than sherry casks, why does the Macallan Fine Oak range retail for the
same price as the 100% sherry range?
Editor’s
notes: Talking to Shane
Kaloglian, Australia’s foremost Macallan collector he had the following to say
about the Fine Oak range:
“I
have tried the 12 y/o, 15 y/o and 18 y/o only at this stage. I find the 15 y/o
the most palatable of the three. (Score 8.2/10) The 18 y/o is thin and watery
and lacking intensity, with a short finish (Score 7/10). The 12 y/o is a lot
fuller in flavour and has a much better finish, but it also displays a raw and
unappealing spirity character (Score 7.6/10). The 15 y/o is in between the two,
with a bit more sherry and spice, although still quite dry, showing the
maturity of the 18 y/o with the zest of the 12 y/o (Score 8.2/10). There
is no doubt in my mind that the traditional, sherried range is far superior!”