I’ll say this and I’ll stand by it: I think I’m a pretty easy guy to please. While I try to aim for a fairly even review distribution on this site, the truth of the matter is that if I try ten different spirits purely at random, I can probably hang with nine out of ten of them.
It doesn’t mean that I love the majority of what I try. I just mean that I can at least find some kind of redeeming quality to focus on. Considering my update frequency with this site, I always try to feature some bottle that has a particular “angle,” or something that allows me to tell a different story than I have already. There are a lot of scotches, for example, where I’ve said, “This is decent for the price,” but it’s hard to summon the time or enthusiasm to write a full piece on something very “mid,” as my students say.
Here’s what I’m building to: if I dislike something – and by that, I mean, really trash it – I’m hoping you guys realize that I’m not doing it for cool points or to inflate my tastes through the Rumpelstiltskin effect. If it rubbed me the wrong way, to the point where I give it a zero, I’m fairly certain it transcends being just a “me” thing.
“Despite its status as an international, ‘luxury’ product, there’s always something in the Macallan 12 that flat-out tastes gross to me.”
Along with the Balvenie 12, Macallan 12 is one of the two age-stated scotches that I flat out dislike. That’s a short list, but nevertheless the Macallan 12 is on it. (More on the Balvenie in a bit.)
For as long as I can remember, Macallan 12 was the prototypical “sherried” whisky. Especially in the last ten years, the distillery has had a number of bizarre expressions and multiple ranges, so there are in fact three different 12-year Macallans. Nevertheless, if you just hear “Macallan 12,” without any context, just about everyone on the planet is talking about this one, the “Sherry Oak Cask,” which remains one of its flagship products. Newcomers wanting to poke their heads down the sherry rabbit hole are often encouraged to start here.
Let’s first be charitable: if you like grapes or raisins—or sultanas, as our British friends (or anglophiles) might say—the Macallan 12 might have something to offer you. I’ve never liked raisins, and the grape comes through as an artificial sort of “froot” to me, especially on the nose.
There’s also some sophistication that hints what the Macallan distillery can do, supposing you had the bottomless pockets necessary to sample its other offerings. With the core “Mac 12”, there’s a nice development of rose water and orange zest on the development, with a little bit of natural honey. Unfortunately, those tastes are subtle—downright watery, even—and the raisin (artificial or otherwise) just absolutely bulldozes everything else I might want to pay attention to.
I’ll also note that Macallan 12 is likely the victim of its own marketing success. Now that it’s on the tip of everyone’s tongue as the preeminent “luxury” scotch, they’re shipping it all around the world. (I know Scotch is an international good as it is, but trust me, Macallan is definitely an international luxury good.) As a result, I don’t think the sherry they’re using is all that great.
In the Macallan 12, there’s something in the mix that just tastes gross to me. It’s a sulphrous, sour note that pops up here and there. In any other whisky, I might attribute this to a bottle being “off” due to spotty QC or a bad batch. Which, incidentally, is more common with sherried whiskies than with any other type. However, I’ve tasted multiple bottles of Macallan 12 over a period of about fifteen years, and I always seem to pick up on this flavor.
I’m not the only one, either. I remember coming across a forum post once on Reddit’s r/scotch where someone said that Macallan 12 smelled and tasted a little like wet dog. In bitching about the Macallan 12, my friend Jason said, “Sometimes, I get it now and again to figure out whether it’s actually a good whiskey and if it’s just me who dislikes it. But I always taste it and say, yep: I really don’t enjoy this stuff.”
So back to the Balvenie 12, the other sherried whisky I don’t enjoy.
Readers with a particularly good memory might recall that I gave the Balvenie 12 the benefit of the doubt and a one star rating, whereas (spoilers!) I’m rating the Macallan 12 a zero. The difference lies in the ethos of the two different distilleries. You see, Macallan gives scotch consumers one of three different choices within their product line, none of which I find palatable:
Something exceptional, but you’ll need to take out a second mortgage to try it.
Something unanimously regarded as good, but horrendously overpriced.
Something bad and significantly overpriced.
While the Balvenie 12 remains gettable for about $55 to $60, a local price check on the Macallan 12 shows that it’s pushing $80+. And knowing Macallan’s track record, along with general trends of whiskey consumers of all varieties generally getting less quality at higher prices with each passing year thanks to escalating demand, I think both the taste and the value of the Macallan 12 are only going to become even worse over time.
I know the Macallan 12 has its fans. I think it sucks. If you’ve never had it before, I don’t think it will impress you in the slightest. (And, if you want a sherried scotch that’s more affordable and better, I recommend the Glendronach 12, Aberlour 12, Auchentoshan 3 Wood, anything Glengoyne, or the Glenfarclas 105.)
