Glenfarclas 26-year-old

You should give this malt time, 30 minutes in the glass opens up a greater depth. In any case, I like it better than the 25yo standard bottling. Resemblance to one or the other bottling within the Scottish Personalities series is definitely there. And that is definitely a sign of quality.

It is similar to the 25s from 2018 (WB115728 & WB121038) with less orange, but with darker and fuller aromas without any off-notes. But above all, due to the 4% increase in alcohol, it is noticeably more present in taste and also in the finish. The alcohol is very well integrated. "The better is the enemy of the good."

Really nice whisky, that has a little too much oak for me pushing towards the finish. Usually I love these more balanced whiskies but this one misses a few nuances for me to be in the 90+ category. I can understand every high rating though :)

I haven't had such an inexpensive single malt for a long time. Just under 200 EUR for a 26-year-old of this quality, you just have to grab it. The 47.3% is a good mix between CS and a diluted entry-level whisky. I like the nose and the first taste in the mouth the best, very similar to a perfect 4th fill keg..

EYE/NOSE Strong, dark gold tone. Numerous streaks form pronounced church windows on the glass wall. The first thing I notice on the nose are orange aromas. Orange chocolate and especially orange liqueur. In addition ripe yellow pear, mango, some cocoa and a hint of apricot. The nose is rather light fruity. You can already feel the advanced age of the malt if you know a little bit about Glenfarclas. The alcohol is perfectly integrated. Everything is immediately reminiscent of the earlier GF40 with 46% ABV. Can the tasting start better? Hardly likely. Roasted aromas that remind me of the traditional direct firing of the Glenfarclas stills. The delicate sweetness of the bouquet is reminiscent of powdered sugar and warm, savory baked goods. Oloroso Sherry storage as it should be. Subliminally, I even think I can make out the heavy, downright earthy character of the new make from Ballindalloch. A tailor-made start! PALATE The Glenfarclas 26 has a pleasant, quite oily consistency. The alcohol content is also well chosen for the drinking experience. On the one hand, the malt offers a great mouthfeel and, on the other hand, it is extremely harmonious and smooth, never burning. Also on the tongue I immediately have the orange liqueur association again. Then vanilla and freshly baked cookies. With a little time in the mouth, the impressions become more dark fruity. The apricot becomes a ripe plum, so to speak. The sweetness and the spice make you think of plum jam. Vanilla is also recognizable again. I briefly see a steaming yeast dumpling in my mind's eye. The only thing missing is the poppy seed sugar. A very fine oak note completes the picture. It often characterizes Glenfarclas malts and distinguishes them when it is not overly concise, which it sometimes is. Not here. The oak gives the malt the impression of depth, maturity and seniority. No annoying acidity, as found in some batches of the 25-year-old. Not the oaky dryness of the 30-year-old. Instead, a beautiful, harmonious interplay of different notes that give the whisky a complexity that has become rare. For me, the woody-spicy aromas in combination with the fruity flavor components are as typical as they are desirable for Oloroso storage. In a word: delicious! FINISH/CONCLUSION Long and less dry than expected. Just really pleasant. Not as artificially charged as so many current whiskys, mostly dark finished, unfortunately seem. No real weaknesses, absolutely clean, no misses. Very classic profile of a sherry malt that has been matured for a long time. This is how I imagine a modern sherry malt that perfectly bridges the gap to a great past. Wow! Right up my alley, as they say in Scotland. More notes and reviews on Facebook: #Maltkanzlei

Complex and balanced, good fruitiness with right level of sweetness, spices – very drinkable – very good!

Back to back 26 years with the 185th birthday.

Everything was better in the old days. old white man thinking

Fruity and somewhat spicy. That is not usual for GF. Super.

A good, pleasant, drinkable whisky! Of course, it's better not to look at the label, I didn't find 26 years, but otherwise everything is good! 22 22 22 22 88

Back-to-back comparison of the 25th, 26th, and 185th bottlings. In terms of mouthfeel, the 25th is the fullest. The 185th feels the thinnest of the three. 26 years: Complexity: 87 Intensity: 88 Mouthfeel: 88

When on vacation to Austria, my dear friend gave my girlfriend and I a Glenfarclas tasting box with 15 drams of this distillery. This is the 12th one.

These are decent but not the best well aged casks in Glenfarclas' warehouse and that would have been okay had they at least added one of the very good ones in the vatting to take this a notch higher. As it is this is a fine but unremarkable dram where the sherry is a little too sharp and complexity is too low given the age statement.

Fine old-school sherry profile! Great, sherry fruity nose! In the beginning almost something like Chilicatch on the edges of the tongue... and then it gets rounder and softer and more complex... take your time! No water! The nutty and fruity impressions in the finish whet your appetite...

86-90 – Wow, really good one, need a bottle

Banana, cinnamon, toffee, varnish, orange, cloves, dark fruits, tobacco, really balanced with just the right sherry influence, very good

It is very delicious, full of juice, very special feeling of O barrel, not too wooden barrel at all, the juice looks unrestrained and pleasant under the rough wine of direct fire. Coordination and balance.

This is a real Glenfarclas, like the ones we had regularly for years, now finally with the right alcohol strength. I'm excited. A price-performance hit for today's times. Fruity and exciting on the nose. In the taste great oak, coffee, dark chocolate. Perfect.

Fruity and so Glenfarclas

I must admit beforehand that I rarely have older bottlings in my glass, therefore this rating is subject to reservation. The bottling is superb, complex, and balanced, with a primary focus on mature (and therefore elegant, not aggressive) oak spice. Fruit, sweetness, maturity, and a great drinking strength—sure, it's not a bargain (at the time of writing, €220.00), but considering what it offers, it's definitely good value for money. In the euphoria of the moment, two bottles on the shelf almost seem insufficient; truly exquisite stuff!

(Update Dec 22: Having drunk half a bottle of the whisky in the last two weeks, I can only confirm the 92 points. I really recommend sitting down with the whisky and enjoying several drams without notes. This is a perfect drinking pleasure and a wonderful whisky to die for, if you drink it casually, pour it up once or twice and don't analyze it head-heavy.) One thing you should keep in mind when it comes to whisky: several decades ago, whisky was still being produced and sold because connoisseurs spent a few nice evenings with a good bottle. Not so that 35 x 2cl samples are poured out of a bottle and nerds like us then analyze and evaluate a whisky from a fleeting 2cl sample. This is almost impossible with a 2-cl sample. This is a perfect indulgence bottle and by today's standards it's almost cheap if you pour yourself several drams a night over several nights to sip for hours. This whisky received great advance praise from well-known members and the bottles from the Dutchman were sold out within a few days. Anyone who likes these subtle and soft sherry malts in the direction of long maturation in good refill casks will be able to give this whisky 89 to 93 points. If you are looking for intense and powerful aromas, you will end up below this score. I can understand why someone would give the whisky an 87, but I'm also more on the soft side of power and celebrate this subtle, mature and liquid copper-gold. I gave the Glenfarclas 185th (WB183951) 91 points and this one is one or two points better for me, but of course also older and costs almost twice as much. Today almost 92 points for enjoyment and quality. Not spectacle. But what do other renowned bottlings cost at 26 years and over 47 percent these days? (Balvenie, Glendronach - I don't even want to start with Macallan, Glenallachie and the value for money..)

Quite reserved on the nose, probably needs a good breath. The taste is quite decent, but I find the real hammer in the finish. Long and neat oooomphh.

Good, but comparatively irrelevant to me

Beautiful Glenfarclas with a dense nose that is very pleasing and a spectacular finish that makes it very interesting for me. For me significantly better than the 25 standard.

Beautiful old Glenfarclas nose. Ripe, sweet blood oranges. Nut cake. Wonderfully spicy aromas of roasted coffee beans. The Oloroso comes through clearly. Shown in a beautiful interplay with the wooden arms. Some orange peel studded with cloves. In the mouth it is initially a bit underpowered and weak in the start. The oak is far too dominant for me. It tastes a bit overpowering. The beautiful fruit note from the nose is completely gone. Same with the sweetness. A very tart, bitter oak aroma dominates the tongue. Way too bitter for my taste. Unfortunately this continues in the finish. It was really promising on the nose. But then it continued to decline. A nice example of being in the barrel for too long if you ask me. A pity.

I expected significantly more from a 26-year-old Glenfarclas, especially at that price. It's not bad, but there's definitely room for improvement. I wouldn't buy it again.

Tried 3 times now... Unfortunately, one of those malts that promises a lot in the nosing and then doesn't deliver in the taste.

A whisky that improves a lot in the bottle with some oxidation. The nose is great, palate pretty good but the finish lags behind a little. Overall very enjoyable though. However, I would not consider €250+ or even discounts as low as 200 real value for money. It's quite steeply priced for the presented level of complexity.

A classic Glenfarclas refill sherry profile. I tasted a sample besides two Famliy Casks of similar age: the 1994 S20 and the 1994 S21. For the 26 years old the used casks most likely stem from 1995 or 1996 vintages. The 26 is a bit lighter in colour, and lacks the depth of the 1994 Family Casks (especially the S20). While I was quite impressed at first, it didn't really improve from there. Therefore, it just misses the 89 point mark for me. Still, this is certainly a better dram than the somewhat lacklustre regular 25 years old. Since that dram approaches a retail price of 200 euro in todays outrageously expensive whisky market, 200 euro for this 26 years is reasonable. I was really considering a purchase, but after tasting a sample I nevertheless refrain from buying a full bottle. It just misses that little extra to justify the price tag.

Tasted on 12-24-2023. Great dram. Easy to drink.

4*89

My first impression of the sample was also: Not bad, but nothing special. However, with time and with each sip, I like it more...

[November 2022] Oops, a new Glenfarclas age edition with 26 years at (batch) cask strength looks interesting... ...and indeed, it is! The price is not cheap at all (198 Euro) but given the drinking quality of this release it seems to be appropriate (these days). This release is much better than all of the Family Cask editions of the last two years (I tasted) and it is much cheaper. So, if you do not insist on fancy wooden cases and collector's designs go for this one instead - but only if you like the subtle, complex and harmonious old-style sherry maturations. Sherry monster hunters should shy away from this Cinderella dram! By the way, this is another malt where sample tasting does not work. If you just have a small dram at your hand, it tastes rather average only. To get the maximum joy I suggest letting it breath for at least 20 minutes and having two drams in a row, better three (and take rather larger sips). This happens very often with such subtle and complex drams, unfortunately. Just to give you an idea: I score the first dram 87-88 points, the second 90 points and the third (and everyone after that) 92-93 points. Sounds strange? No, that is the way excellent whisky works. If you are not satisfied with this dram, just send me a mail and I will buy your (open) bottle at the release price of 2.85 Euro per cl. After the fifth dram I am tempted to score this 'farclas even north of that, but most probably this is because of the alcohol intake. Nonetheless it feels pretty good, and I could easily empty this bottle tonight. No, I will not do that and stop after half of the bottle is gone, but the idea is tempting...

Short version: Delicious. Long version: may be submitted later.

21+22+20+21

A pleasantly balanced and sweet refill. However, it doesn't really look like a Glenfarclas, or rather, what kind of Oloroso casks could those have been?

Nose-88/100; Taste-89/100; Finish-89/100.

Good Glenfarclas, but I would have expected a little more at the asking price. Especially in the finish it becomes quite dry and woody. Compared to the current 25er Glenfarclas, I don't see a big advantage.

Just arrived today, I wanted to try it out quickly. He already looks gorgeous with thick, old streaks on the glass. A slightly strong nose the additional percentages are noticeable. But the nose is already Glenfarclas. wood and a sweet sherry nose, slightly fruity, apple and pear, a delicate spice in the background. Strong start. Strong, tart... tart than expected. It suits him well, but compared to the 25 year old it is a little less sherry-heavy. the barrels make themselves felt. The wood is a bit bitter, not very, but noticeable. The nose is really great tasty with corners and edges. I'm really glad I got to try it. Do I need a bottle here for around €200? I do not know…

A farclas that is fun for me, who finds the piglets to be a bit thinner than some other soups. Not meant negatively. Relaxed dram. See Notes for details.

A beautifully balanced nose (sweet, sour, spicy, slightly umami). The sherry brings dried fruits and plums. On the palate, perhaps a bit boisterous for a 26-year-old, but overall very enjoyable. The finish is unmistakably Glenfarclas with apricot kernels. Long with pleasant oak spice.

For me personally not a 90+ candidate, but still high quality

The expectations of this bottling were quite high given the previous ratings, the distillery and the old age. As a result, this is a whisky for me, but it can in no way meet my expectations. Here are my impressions in detail: Nose: Fruit (the typical GF Mirabelle), pomace, cardboard, pine honey, vanilla, demerara sugar, herbs. Almost perfect and reminiscent of a great 4th fill cask. Palate: fruit, alcohol (too) clear, some raisins flash, sweetness, no sulphur, no off-notes. Finish: slight bitterness, sweetness, medium to long. Conclusion: for me, the not optimally integrated alcohol, the lack of depth of taste and the somewhat unpleasant bitterness lead to a devaluation. Maybe the whisky was bottled a little too late. The bottling offers a little more than many Glenfarclas standards. However, my hope has not been fulfilled in any way that the whisky is equal to good 4th Fill Family Casks or Refill Casks. There's still a lot missing. Overall no purchase recommendation. Too expensive for what's on offer, even with a current price of just under 200 euros.

I don't understand all these high ratings. Very tannin-heavy, bitter, woody. Little to no fruit, when it is very light (towards pear, apple, tangerine). All very bitter and pretty worn out. The finish is the best thing about whisky. Like a 4th fill FC in pretty bad... (minus the lovely honey and sweet notes of the better ones) Not even worth the offer/introductory price.

I like the nose, but in the mouth, it doesn't fulfill the expectations. Tried a Tomatin 1994 first editions next to it which was cheaper when it entered the market. And the Tomatin clearly wins. Doesn't mean the Glenfarclas is bad, never! But for around 200 Euros, I expected more complexity and a longer and more evolving finish.

The tasting was conducted with half a teaspoon of water in a filled nosing glass, followed by a 30-minute waiting period. The spirit coated the glass walls with a thick, oily, syrupy film. The color ranged from golden yellow to light orange. Overall verdict: This is an outstanding whisky, seemingly from another era. It tastes like the past, incredibly nostalgic. Complex and mature, just as Glenfarclas tasted decades ago. The art here lies in the maturation in refill casks, which don't overwhelm the malt, but rather patiently transform it into a dense tapestry of fruity, nutty, floral, and dry aromas. This whisky requires time, patience, and several attempts. Even after three tries, it remains unsolved. You need the whole bottle for that. Or two. It's not for those who like to be captivated and overwhelmed by just one or two aromas. But it's perfect for those who love discovering, unlocking, smelling, and tasting such a bottle. One sample is not enough. Great bottling, an absolutely classic, nostalgic single malt that brings back memories of the good old days.

Glenfarclas 26 years, bottled at 47.3%, was released at the end of November 2022. It didn't take long for this bottling to be registered in the Glenfarclas fan groups, and some questions immediately arose. Is he new to the Standard range? Is it a one-off special bottling? Why so close to 25? Why now? Questions upon questions... One thing is certain: for me, the new 26er Glenfarclas is a very successful single malt whisky, which at 25 years old makes its "little brother" look pretty "old". As much as the 25 in the nosing glass was convincing in terms of aroma (at least older bottlings - those from the last 3-4 years have become continuously weaker), the taste then less and less fulfilled expectations. This may also be due to the "only" 43% that made him look relatively weak on the chest. The 26 can do this much better. Both are quite similar in the nose, but in the mouth the 26er plays its trump cards. The 47.3% is very good for him and carries the whole load of aromas very well. The taste experience is much more intense and is absolutely convincing. A time-honored malt that has aged beautifully and has a lot of quality. Quality that is no longer so common in times of the NAS whisky glut. For me an absolute buy recommendation. The only question that remains is whether the 26 will be available permanently in the range or whether this is a special bottling. In any case, the 26er makes the question of family casks that are comparable in price (which have shown a sometimes catastrophic performance, especially with the last release) almost superfluous. Well done Glenfarclas! 92 points from me. Slainte!

It's reminiscent of 4th Fill Family Casks, but doesn't quite reach their level – although it shares a similar basic character. The aforementioned 4th Fill Family Casks would also cost significantly more today at this age than the €200 offered for this bottling. Therefore, it's a still affordable alternative to most 4th Fill Family Casks. However, the refill character comes through more with less flavor intensity.

A bottling that needs time and attention. For me it was very worthwhile to give her these. At first glance, the aroma portfolio appears to be quite delicate and filigree, but it is also extremely elegant and almost classic. It may be that not every whisky connoisseur wants to get involved with it these days. It is difficult to compare with the 25-year-old bottling. It turns out to be significantly lighter, and the fruit aromas are also lighter. The higher drinking strength is really fun. Here it's a pleasure to follow the known wisdom of giving it *at least* a second in the mouth for every year of aging. Looks beautifully composed, nothing disturbs, everything is in the right place.

I'm not a GF fanboy, but I know very tasty GFs - this one isn't one of them for me - tasty, easy, light - 200++ € nope :) thanks Sebbo for the sample

You need to give him at least 20 minutes. I used three 50ml glasses for the sample. The aroma is best revealed in a Słoń glass. Thin, elegant, honey-fruit notes, flower pollen, milk chocolate with raisins. At first, sour tannins are a little distracting, but later everything gets better and better. Sweet yellow fruits, ripe plums. The taste is a good combination of peach, citrus and spices (light pepper, ginger). The aftertaste is dry, tart and sharp. I wouldn't compare to a regular 25 year old. Here, after all, the aroma and taste are much better. 23-22-22-23 (you can write 90+/-2). Good thing I have a whole bottle.

21.5+22+22.5+22

For me one of the best Glenfarclas outside the family cask range.

An easy sipper Glenfarclas, the refill character comes through. But I'd never pay more than €200 for it. But I've had some better Farclas. The finish is very short and thin.

A winner and recommended at the d12 price of €147,95. Following a rustic Hazelburn 12, this contrasts as a filigree refill cask dram with quite beautiful deep notes of apricot, whiffs of apricot kernels (amaretti morbidi) or marzipan, orchard blossoms, floral perfume, fine oak, emerging saltiness. Alcohol is properly present, white pepper, distant fruit salad, light brown sugar sweetness, aged sherry wood, nice mouth-coating viscosity, Lengthy finish,sweet, floral, fruity, woody, slightly bitter, sugared milk coffee.