Glenfarclas 21 Year

It is the first time I have been able to try a whisky from the Glenfarclas distillery. A whisky tasting is always the perfect opportunity to discover new gems. I compared it to a whisky with a similar profile, i.e. the Glenfiddich 18. Nose - The Glenfarclas 21 is less full-bodied than the Glenfiddich 18, which would fool me in thinking this whisky was younger. Grassy and sherry notes dominate the nose, with added notes from (over)ripe fruit, oranges and citrus. Palate - Tasty and warming. The arrival is sour and slowly becomes more bitter and sweet. For an age statement of 21 years, I find the palate not particularly complex. Finish - The finish is dry, medium long and has a lingering taste of malt. The finish makes up for a lack in taste with predominantly sweet and earthy flavours. To be honest, I was a little disappointed by this whisky. Because of the reviews I read beforehand, I was hoping for a better and more consistent experience for the age statement. Tasty, but not a great success. "Tasty" : 3 stars | A cut above.

Rating: 19/23 I've previously tried several other Glenfarclas bottlings, including the 17, 25, and Lismore 21 (likely Glenfarclas). The 17 and Lismore are excellent, but the 25 is mind-blowing. I'm hoping that this 21 is close enough to the 25 in quality to be an undiscovered even better bargain. N: Spicy, fruity (dried dark fruits with maybe a bit of orange) sherry with clear Glenfarclas funk coming through, bringing in complexity and a hint of meaty savoriness, though not so meaty that the alcohol starts to seem raw. Side by side, the 25 has a substantially richer nose with more dried fruit and chocolate (and somewhat reduced funk), but this is by no means weak. There's some maltiness bordering on nuttiness at times and also a bit of tartness. The oloroso scent is balanced so perfectly in there that although I can tell there is an oloroso influence, fairly clearly, but I can't detect any lemon or other scent that would be a dead give away, revealing the nose directly. I get the impression that this is fairly well aged, though not super old. With the complexity and lightness in comparison with Glenfarclas 25, I would guess that it's substantially younger side by side. Compared with something like Dalwhinnie 15, this seems much older. So the nose seems in the right ballpark for the age. P: Spice, fruit, and malt. The spice gives it a bigger burn than I'd expect for this proof. Some tannins come in as well, helping to fill it out. The fruit is a bit tart at times and the profile is kind of balanced between tart and sweet. The fruit largely leans toward the raisin and sultana side and it blends nicely into a bit of chocolate. Some lemon does come out fairly routinely, along with a touch of mineral. It gets a little waxy, but not to Clynelish levels. There's that rich, funky savoriness throughout that's filled out by a bit of a toasty, nutty character. The funk has a little bit of charred, tar flavor mixed with some dark (80%?) chocolate. Spicy is the main descriptor I would use here though. And a bit too tart, perhaps. I get a big cinnamon, pepper, lemon character routinely that's a bit stronger than I'd like. With all of the spice, the 43% ABV is certainly sufficient. F: Spice with some waxy lemon bite are first on the finish. Some of the maltiness remains alongside a little bit of grass and a more faint layer of that usual funk. What lingers long into the finish though is a nuttiness that reminds me a bit of buckwheat. - Conclusion - The nose really blew me away. It seems. seriously competitive with Glenfarclas 25. The palate is still great, but it isn't on the same level, unfortunately. There's a lot going on here, but it tastes to me like there's perhaps a touch too much oloroso and a touch too little age. As for complexity though, this is Glenfarclas and it nails that dimension. Lismore 21 is smoother and fuller with more of a grassy malty flavor. The flavor here stand out more and there's more of that sherried fruit sweetness for sure, but there's also a tarter bite. I'd call these two competitive, but my gut reaction is that the Lismore is a hair better because it is more balanced and smooth. Glenfarclas 25 is tremendously smooth and decadent in comparison. It's so rich and full with sweet fruit and chocolate backed by that Glenfarclas funk. It's clearly substantially better than this is, though it does still have some tannins and bite to it. I'm shocked by how much of a difference those last 4 years make. The price jump from this up to Glenfarclas 25 is not so substantial that I would skimp and get the clearly inferior product. Neither is the gap in quality between this and Lismore 21 - even if I decided that this is the better spirit - so great that I would pay up for this over the Lismore. So I'd be happy to sip this if offered (and I'd be delighted to sniff the glass), but I won't be buying any myself. Based on the nose, I was sure that there was no way this could be lower than an 18. Well, I'm not looking at going lower than an 18, but I kind of thought that after I tried the palate I wouldn't be looking at an 18 at all either. The palate just isn't as rich and full as the nose led me to believe and there's more of a bite. This is far far from a bad expression, but the palate just doesn't live up to the nose. Most likely, I'll be going with an 18 or 19, but I can imagine a 20 if I decided that I'd underrated the Lismore 21 or that this was a bit better. If I come back and find the bite to be too much, I might drop this to a 17 as well. I did give the Glenfarclas 17 a 20, so I thought that this was likely to be at least that, but I think I must have overrated that one. Either that or this is a weird middle child. I eventually had a sip of this that I thought beat a side by side sip of the Lismore 21. Considering that, I think I'll call the two about even and give this a 19.