I don't have a lot of experience with Macallan. My understanding, from what I've read, is that they used to make some of the best scotch out there, but in recent years, opinions are divided. The comparison I've made, based on my limited experience, is that, if Glenlivet is the White Castle of the scotch world, Macallan is the MacDonald's. They'll scratch that itch and really get you there if you've got a craving, but it's not haute cuisine. Not anymore. But like I've said, that's based on reputation. My own experience is with the 12 year olds here: that's the Sherry Cask and the Double Cask. I opened the Sherry Cask on opening day for the NFL of the 2020 season, hoping for a stronger showing. My dad and I both enjoyed it, but it didn't blow us away, and at $75 a bottle, I was expecting to be blown away. That tasting, of course, occurred before I joined the fray here, and I don't have a strong enough memory of it to offer in depth tasting notes, and obviously, if I waited a year and a half to open the double cask, I wasn't in any hurry. Oh, right. I should say that as well. I bought both the Sherry Cask 12 and the Double Cask 12 at the same time. If I'd tasted the Sherry Cask 12 first, I may not have bothered with the Double Cask. Up front, I'm going to put this out there: even if my memory of the Sherry Cask 12 isn't a strong one, the Sherry Cask 12 is the better of the two. I was hoping this wasn't the case. The Double Cask 12 appeared on the Whisky Advocate Top 20, so I was thinking it had to be good. But different strokes and whatnot. I actually had to look at other reviews where they liked this after opening it to see what I might be missing, because to me...well, this isn't bad, but for at 12 year that costs $61.99 on sale it's simply not worth the price of admission. So what's the problem? The nose is strong with the sherry, the fruits, stone fruit mostly, apricot, peach. Vanilla, but you know...vanilla is in most whiskies. It's not bad, it's just not...well, the nose is actually the best part here. My problem really is with the palate, which has this acrid underpinning. I've seen it described as copper in tasting notes, and that's the big turn off for me. About a month before joining this site, I bought a bottle of Tamnavulin Double Cask. It was $35.99 and I figured you can't go wrong at that price. Even if you don't like it, you can use it as a mixer. But it was awful. Likely among the worst scotches I've ever had. I remember thinking that there were notes in there of what I would imagine urine might taste like if, you know, I was ever to have to drink it. And the thing about the Macallan Double Cask 12 is it has a similar profile and it's only slightly better, and I'm even wondering, not being able to taste them side-by-side if I'm only saying this is better because of the branding. I would suppose not because I felt like I had to choke down the Tamnavulin, even in mixed drinks, whereas this is one that I'd pour toward the end of the evening, after a few other drinks, where my taste buds are a little less sensitive, and it's fine in that capacity. Overall, this isn't undrinkable, but at the price they're charging, you can find LITERALLY hundreds of better whiskies out there. It give me the sense that no company has a more overinflated sense of their own worth than Macallan. It's as if they don't realize they're the MacDonald's of the scotch world now. It's a shame, because this is Jame Bond's whisky of choice, and it makes me doubt Mr. Bond's taste. He might have a license to kill, but someone needs to find him a higher-quality dram. Well, there you go...if I'm looking for a sherried scotch, I'm going with Glenmorangie La Santa every time. Much better than this or the Macallan Sherry Cask 12.