Half-Assed Reviews - 3/29/10

So I think I might do something from time to time called "Half Assed Reviews" wherein I put quick notes on a handful of beers I've recently tried. While I enjoy some of the in depth reviews, it's a bit of a pain to do with every single beer I drink, as I have many during the course of a 24 hour period. However: there are still a handful of beers that I have enjoyed or disliked, that I simply didn't have time to give full review, was not in the right location to give a full review, or I just flat out didn't feel like getting off my ass and giving them a full review. I figured if I found some gems out there or even some stinkers or underwhelming brews, I should at least give you a heads up. I obviously won't be as detailed in my review, but seeing as how I'm uncomfortably intimate with what I drink, I can assure you that many of the beers I try are fresh on my mind for sometime. (Also I will put some beers on here that I've already had, but I just recently gave a go around to, again. But, there shouldn't be anything on here that I haven't had within the week) So.....here goes:

Flying Dog Brewery - Snake Dog IPA.

7.1% abv. Poured from a 12oz bottle into a pint glass. A good balance of malt and hops so you don't get killed with bitterness, but the taste just simply isn't all that good. The 7.1% is hidden pretty well and it's actually quite easy to drink. A decent pale ale, or I guess this is an IPA....but nothing to write home about. If it's on sale or special at a bar go for it, but if you have other choices, there a is a bunch better.
Half-Assed Verdict: 6.5/10










Southern Tier - Oak Aged Unearthly IPA (Imperial IPA).

11% abv. Had it on tap at the International Tap House, it was served in a chalice. The regular Unearthly is just an IPA on steroids (so a super hopped pale ale), and this is that same beer, just aged in oak barrels. I found an article listing the original Unearthly at 153 IBUs(!), which is insane and might actually scare me away if I saw it on the label. Regardless, this is an absolutely fabulous beer. Sure, it's HUGE, and it's not something you want more than one or two of, but it is extremely well crafted and extremely tasty. I don't know how to describe it, but the intense hop flavor is present in that there is a TON of hops, but it's not intense in the sense that it is knocking you on your ass and making your lips pucker with the bitterness. There is a good malt backbone (which I think helps keep the hops from killing you) but it doesn't turn into a syrupy mess that some imperial IPAs often become. It's fabulously balanced, and what makes it even better is that the oak gives you a nice, dry woody sort of finish as opposed to a big, bitter, hop bite. It never really feels like it's too much and when you're done drinking it you'd swear that both the 11% is a lie, along with the huge IBU level. I believe this one is only found in 22oz bottles, and I can't imagine it'd be available anywhere without a top notch beer selection, nor will it be cheap. But.....if you happen to see it at a bar or you want a nice treat, it's worth it. Even beer lovers that aren't huge hop-heads (like me) can appreciate this. But, buyer beware, the 11% will hit you, and hit you hard.
Half-Assed Verdict: 9/10

Guinness "Imported" Extra Stout.

6% abv. 12oz bottle poured into a simple pint glass. Now, for all the folks that have the wrong idea about Guinness, this is a beer that does not have the same "thick" consistency that you would find with Guinness Draught. The Draught is that way because it's tapped and served with nitrogen as opposed to CO2 like most beers. The Guinness Draught you get in cans has a little nitro-widget in there as well that tries to replicate getting one off the tap. This beer here, the Extra Stout, is an example of a Guinness product that has a consistency more like what you are used to, because of the presence of CO2, and not nitrogen. Moving on, this is a solid beer that pours the same dark brown/almost black with a really nice chewy tan head. You're going to get the same flavors you get in the "normal" Guinness, but there is obviously the more airy consistency on your tongue because of the lack of nitrogen, and there is also a much more noticeable sweetness, as well as a stronger roast. While not as smooth on the tongue as the draught Guinness, this is still on the "smooth" side, but somewhat heavier, as well. The finish stays with the roasty-coffee sweetness and there isn't the lingering roasted bitterness that comes with the draught Guinness. This is a nice beer, and while different, very much drinkable, like its popular draught cousin. A quintessential stout, and something that would be good to try if you want to move from nitrogen-draught stouts, and onto something slightly different.
Half-Assed Verdict: 7.5/10

New Belgium - Ranger IPA

Well, I'll be honest, I've never "disliked" New Belgium, per se..... I have just thought a number of their beers (of all styles) have been a bit dull and watered down. None of them are bad-tasting or anything of that nature, but just a bit dumbed-down and made "easy to drink". I went into this one thinking the same thing, and while I've had it on tap before and was underwhelmed, I figured I'd sit down and give it a good taste, and ultimately a second chance. While still not amazing, it was a touch better than I remember.

I picked this up at Friar Tucks in a build your own six pack. As it is a New Belgium product, I imagine this is available at most liquor stores and probably a ton of super markets in the St. Louis area, as well as all over Missouri for that matter. You'll probably see it for around 8 bucks for a sixer.

12oz bottle in this case, poured into a basic pint glass. Bottle says it's 6.5% abv. The bottle also says it's 70 IBUs (that's a measure of the hop-bitterness) and that it's brewed with a combination of simcoe, cascade, and chinook hops. I'm a beer nerd, but I'm still not down with the specifics of what hops have what characteristics.

Pours a fairly clear rosey/amber/brown. A good amount of carbonation gives a pretty significant 2 finger head after a somewhat aggressive pour. A good amount of foam remains after a minute or so, and I will have to say that there was some pretty solid lacing during the entire drinking session. Looks a *touch* light for an IPA, but we'll see. Remember what I said in my previous post about tasting your beer, and how lighter colored beers might be lacking malt? Well, that will come into play here.

The smell is on the sweet side, but not a heavy sweet. This is a citrusy-grapefruit kind of sweet. Very floral, leafy, piney as well. There is definitely a bitterness there (with the pine) and you can get a bit of the alcohol in the nose, also. I'm not getting any sort of malt notes here, just a light, leafy-floral thing. It's a good smell, no doubt, but I'm not sure how it will translate to taste.

The first drink brings a big bitter bite right up front with a somewhat astringent finish. A little warmth and a few more sips allows the grapefruit notes to shine through. As it gets warm the grapefruit notes are extremely present, and the bitterness is toned down just a touch. The finish is still bitter and dry with the pine and leafy-ness that I picked up with the first smell. All this is somewhat mellowed out and dulled with a bit of warmth, but it never turns to a heavier sweetness that would make me assume any sort of malt significance. It's fairly light on the tongue. I guess I harped on the grapefruit in it enough, but it's a pleasant presence.

It's not a bad taste, it's bitter like you'd expect out of an IPA. The grapefruit and pine aren't extremely overpowering, and are typical of this style, but it needs a touch of malt to bring everything together and not have the bitterness sit on your tongue as long as it does. I kept waiting for something else that just never came. And while this is a touch better than most New Belgium offerings this is the ultimate issue with their beers, in my opinion. Let's say there are 4 characteristics that make a certain beer a great version of a certain style, but NB always seems to be missing one or two of those characteristics. They'll take 2-3 characteristics and do a good job with them, and make it taste good, but it will be like they left out something else completely. I understand that an IPA is about the hop-presence, but a top notch brew still achieves that balance. The grapefruit and the pine in this brew are good, so is a not too overpowering bitterness. But without the sweetness of some malt to give it some balance, and a bit more weight on the tongue, the bitterness lingers until it turns into an unattractive astringent, chemically quality. Now, it's not, like crazy harsh, just a bit more than it should be.

Overall this is still a good beer, and something I wouldn't mind drinking again. I just get disappointed that NB never seems to be able to take that extra step that makes their beer well rounded and complete to the point where it is a "very good" beer. As usual, this is a "good beer" that is just missing something.

Verdict: 6.5/10

How you should drink good beer - Tasting.

I know not every person takes a new beer and sees it as a possible religious experience as I often do. I also understand that not every time you have a beer it's you by yourself on your couch with a laptop or notepad to figure out every detail of what you're drinking. I'm not retarded. It's obvious that this is a hobby of mine and I enjoy it so much that I often pay very close attention to what it is I'm drinking. There are times, of course where I'm in a situation where I can't nerd it up to the point where I can do everything I want when trying something new, and that's fine. Not everyone is as lame as I am, and they don't feel like hanging around me while I go off into the corner to sniff my beer for 4-5 minutes. So while there are things I do when trying something new, I'm not saying it's some sort of guide that you or I should follow, but it's nice to do if you have the time and you're in a place where looking like a tool won't matter.

What I'm saying is, is that I figure if you're reading this you have at least a modicum of interest into getting to know your beer better, so why not give you a few tips? These will not only help you figure out what your drinking, but it will allow you to compare brews with one another, and better yet, figure out what it is that you really like about a certain beer, and what separates what you think is a "good" beer from what is a "great" beer. This will allow you to get past the first impressions of what you're drinking and maybe give you a more specific idea of you're looking for when you spend a few extra bucks for something good.

(caveat: once again, don't do this shit when you're with your boys at the bar watching the game, or knocking back a dozen or so brews at a tailgate or a bbq.....you'll look like a douche. Do this if you're at a place that focuses on good beers, or you're having a night staying in where you're just going to have a few top notch bottles. Also, I'm far from a beer expert, so I'm sure there are pros out there who may take an issue with how I do my "thing". Oh well.)

Assuming you try to follow some of the basic ideas I had in serving your beer:

THE LOOK: Take a minute to see what's atually happening right after the pour. Is there head, how much? Does it last for more than a few seconds....during the entire drinking session? Is there "lacing" as the head reduces or as you drink? Lacing is the white crap that remains on the glass as you drink. The glass pictured is an extreme version of it, but with a good, clean glass, a lot of the top notch beers will give you some pretty good lacing. Take a look at the color of the beer.....is it opaque, translucent, clear as a bell? Color is often based on the malt that's being used, as in both the amount of malt in the beer, and how much roast is put on the malt before adding it to the water when starting the brewing process. While there are certainly beers with a high level

of hop-bitterness that are "dark", a closer to opaque brew generally has a higher level of malt than usual, sometimes it may be to just balance out a high level of hops.

THE SMELL: Yes, you may look like a gigantic tool when doing this to your beer, but that's too bad. At a good beer bar nobody will really care, or if you're alone it shouldn't matter if you shove your nose into the top of your glass and take a few big whiffs. I do, though, recommend a good sniff. A good couple of sniffs right after the pour will give you a pretty good indication of what you are about to drink. A lot of high end beers have all sorts of hidden flavors and complexities that you might not notice if you take a swig right away when the beer is colder. There are tons of times where I find stuff in the nose of a beer that I may not pick up in the taste until I'm about halfway done and the beer is a bit warmer. Some beers give you weird notes in the smell like bubblegum, banana, cloves, raisins, cherries, blueberries, wheat, hay, fresh cut grass, pine, and many more. Don't freak out, if that's what you smell....then that's what you smell. You may not taste all that shit at first....maybe never, but you'll be surprised what you'll find as the beer warms up, and that your nose didn't fail you.

THE TASTE: This is more than taste, it's the feel on your mouth as well. Take a reasonable swig, and don't just swallow it down. I don't know about all that wine-swirling-swishing BS, but letting it sit on each part of your tongue is something I like to do. You probably know that different parts of the tongue pick up different tastes, so that of course applies to a good brew. If that's weird, then with your first few sips, just let the beer sit on different parts of your tongue, and you'll usually notice different characteristics of the beer come through as you move it around. Sometimes things like a lingering bitterness or alcohol presence don't come through when you down it right away........which is probably why it's easy to get girls drunk on Delirium Tremens as they tend to go through it like water. Try and notice all the little stuff going on. See if it matches with what you had an idea of with both the look of the beer, and more importantly, the smell. Did you get all that weird crap that you were smelling, or does it fall flat once it's in your mouth? (ok.....that's a pretty funny sentence after I re-read it) Also, while you don't have to go through this whole process with every sip, try to pay attention to what's going on when the beer gets warmer. A lot of sweetness and boozy-alcohol goodness is hidden when the beer is on the cold side, and before the air gets to it. So don't just think "bitter" or "sweet". Bitter how? Sweet how........fruit, syrup, brown-sugar, candy,...what is it? And lastly, try to think of the taste in three different moments. What's going on when it first hits your tongue, then what goes on after you let it sit for a bit, then what's going on in the finish? Sometimes there's a fourth sensation that happens 2-3 seconds after the finish. There's a lot of beers that are aged in oak-barrels now and often time that really comes through well after the beer is swallowed. Here's another quick-tasting guide from Beer Advocate.

WRAPPING IT UP: (another pun!!) You don't have to do this all the time as it's not always fun to sit and agonize over all these details. But the benefits of this is that you'll really get to know what kind of beer you like and you'll figure out that just because something is a specific style, that you don't like it. You may not like certain IPAs, or certain Stouts, but that doesn't mean you hate all of them. While I'm not going to be lame and say all beer is like a snowflake (yes, I know I just said it), not all Pale Ales are the same, and not all Porters are the same. Nobody uses the exact same ingredients, and yes, things like where the hops are grown, where the malt is grown, and what kind of water is used can make a huge difference. There's more to a beer than just "it's sweet" or "it's bitter" and you'll be surprised at how many times you can find enjoyable characteristics in a style that you previously might not have enjoyed as much.

Cheers, fools.

How you should drink good beer - Serving Basics

The following are just some basic tips and things that I follow when drinking good beer. I say "when I'm drinking good beer" as there's little you can do to drastically effect the taste of a Bud Light or a Bud Select. Hell, something that inhibits the flavor of those beers might actually be a good thing. Also, I understand that not every situation allows you to do this stuff, so I'm not advocating you turn into a gigantic douche at a BBQ or a friend's Super Bowl party because you want a specific type of glass or whatnot. If you're in the right atmosphere and you actually want your more expensive beer to taste the way it is supposed to taste, here's a few easy things that I recommend to get the best out of your purchase. After all, why spend the money on something and not drink it correctly?

(I understand I didn't get to everything here, this was just stuff that I was thinking about last night while I was....yes...... drinking beer)


SERVING BASICS:

If possible, always, and I mean ALWAYS pour your beer into a glass. Your beer will absolutely not taste the way the brewer intended it to taste if you suck it out of the bottle. Find a freaking glass, and pour it into that glass.....not a plastic cup, but a glass. There's not one reputable brewer out there that would recommend their beer out of a bottle/can when a glass is available, which of course makes perfect sense. Why would a brewer not want their product to taste as good as it possibly can?

Secondly: By no means does your beer belong in a frosted glass/mug of any sort. I don't give a shit how many crappy beer commercials you see that get all boner-rific over the coldness of their beer, you are severely hurting the flavor of your beer by putting it into a frosted mug. Not only does your beer being that cold hurt the flavor, but it doesn't take Bill Nye the Science guy to understand that frost = ice = water = diluted beer = compromised taste. If you're looking to just go out and just get hammered on miller lites, then this is fine, but if you're dropping 10+ bucks on a six pack, or 5-6 bucks a bottle at a nicer beer bar then you are just wasting your time. For you St. Charles/St. Louis folks, this is why Trailhead "Brewery" sucks. (notice the quotes around the word "Brewery") Any place that claims they brew their own beer then proceed to serve it in a glass so that has ice floating on the top of their brown ale pretty much lets you know they suck and suck hard. A good brewer spent a hell of a lot of time figuring out a recipe and making that recipe just right, if they wanted more water to be in the beer they would have made it that way.

Thirdly: Be reasonable with your temperature. Not drinking your beer at sub-zero temperatures is just something you're going to have to get over. Put on your big kid pants, and realize that the reason you remember your beer tasting like shit when it was "warm" is because you were most likely drinking shitty beer to begin with. Similar to pouring your beer in a glass, no good brewer will recommend serving your beer as cold as humanly possible. Also, regardless of what people say, good beer in Europe is not, anywhere, served "warm". It's not served ice cold, but it's not served warm. There are a TON of good beers that recommend a serving temperature on their bottles, and the "warmest" I've seen is 55 degrees F, which is still below room temperature. A good rule of thumb that I follow is to get your beer as cold as your fridge will allow it. Pull it out, and let it sit 10-15 minutes before opening it. Pour it and drink it slowly, letting it warm up closer to room temperature as you drink it, and try to see how it changes as it 'warms'. Often times you'll find flavors that weren't there at first, or a bit of sweetness that didn't come through at all when you took your first sip of it at 40 or so degrees. With high ABV brews you will honestly miss a lot of the great aspects of the beer when you try to drink it too cold.

Glassware: This is great if you or the bar you are at have the proper glass for the style, but it's not the most important thing ever. In my opinion, a non-frosted glass, and a very CLEAN glass are just as important to get the proper flavor(s). Here's a good primer on glassware from: beeradvocate.com. If you don't have a bevy of different style glasses, a good alternative (which is also in the link) for a lot of the higher ABV beers is to just get a big/oversized wine glass. Air is a good thing for a lot of the "bigger" beers and it will only help open up all the intricate flavors and smells that the brewer intended. I guess you can be afraid of looking like a douche, but if you're just with a few folks hanging out at someone's place, they're probably aware of the fact that you're just trying to optimize the good chunk of change you just spent on whatever you're drinking.

The pour: Head, in any form, is not a bad thing (pun INTENDED). You are supposed to get a good layer of foam on your beer, and some brewers even make their own glassware to support a large amount of foam in their product. (Duvel being a great example) The reason some of you don't like foam in your shitty light beers is because you're more worried about getting more beer in your glass than you are the taste. If you ever start getting the glassware made for specific beers you'll even find that some of them have lines on them where they suggest the head of the beer to start. Most beers will give you the desired head without a super aggressive pour, but I like to do the typical 45 degree angle slow pour, then slowly get the glass upright and finish the last 1/3 or so of the pour a little more aggressively to see if I can get some foam. Don't worry if you don't get any, as there are some beers that simply won't give you a big fluffy head, or if they do, it will dissipate quickly. Also, a dirty glass will inhibit both the initial amount of head, and head retention while you're drinking.

Fruit?: No thanks. I don't go absolutely bonkers over someone trying to put a lemon, lime or orange in their beer, but I really don't want that. If the brewer wanted that stuff in their beer, they would have put it in there. The reason you put a lime in your Corona or other Mexican beers, is because those beers kind of suck. Putting a lemon or an orange in your draft beer just adds acid to it which is going to compromise the head you got with your pour, as well as the overall taste of the beer. Once again, I don't go completely apeshit over someone putting a lemon in their beer (although it makes less and less sense to me), but for god sakes, don't assume I want the same......ask me first.

I'll get to what I do to taste beer in the future (as you can be surprised at what you can find when you really pay attention to what you're drinking) , but these are just some small things I was thinking about that can have somewhat of an effect on the quality of your brew.

Schneider and Sohn: Aventinus Weizen-Eisbock

This is a bit of unique style, an "Eisbock". Read HERE for a bit of an explanation. In not so technical terms, it's basically a ramped up doppelbock, but not because they add a ton of extra ingredients to it, but the extraction of the water through freezing essentially just makes it more concentrated. This gives it high malt levels, high levels of sweetness and booziness, and some of the highest ABVs of any style (this one is 12%). I'm not 100% sure if all eisbocks are made with wheat malt like this one, but this one is a wheat doppelbock that's made in the traditional "eisbock" style. I don't know what the experts say, but I'd say that some of these styles could be considered extreme beers just because of the tedious brewing process and the higher than normal abv levels.

Moving on......

This was an 11.2 oz. bottle poured into a little half chalice/half snifter looking thing. Like I said, this is 12% abv and it was 4.99 for the bottle which I got at Friar Tucks in O'Fallon, MO. There's a good little story on the back about how they started making the beer as if it was some sort of accident....who knows.

Pours an extremely dark, opaque, brown. A touch of head, maybe a finger of tan foam that dissipates quickly to just a few bubbles. I guess that's typical for something this thick and syrupy. Smells very sweet, very syrupy. You get the typical malt-sweetness that gives you hints of banana, along with a weird touch of smokiness. That I may be wrong about, but it's there. There is also some of that "christmasy" spice type of sweetness as well, ...figs raisins, and definitely the cloves that you would expect in a lot of wheat beers. I don't get much booze on the nose, maybe because it's still a bit cold, but it's not too clear, even though it's obviously a super high alcohol beer.

Taste is very sweet, dark-syrupy sweet, although not as heavy on the tongue as you'd think. There's a bit of booze in the middle, but not too overpowering right now like I was afraid of. Dark fruits, figs, candy-sugar, with the cloves and a bit of bubble come are what comes at the end. Definitely a full, and heavy beer, but not as heavy on the tongue as you'd think. Even though the alcohol becomes more present with the warmth, it's not killing you, which is kind of cool considering this is 12% abv. Overall I'd call it a "good" not great taste. It's really sweet, and really syrupy. But I guess that's the point of this style. Hop bitterness is really nowhere to be had.

This is a pretty good beer, and it's fun to try every once in a while as a sipper on a cold night. But if I had my choice, I'd stick with the Aventinus Weizen-bock, which is what I believe this beer starts as before they take it through the freezing process. I couldn't see myself drinking more than 1 or 2 small bottles of this. The alcohol isn't too overpowering in the taste but you can still certainly feel it after only half a bottle.

Verdict: 7/10

Cathedral Square - Belgian Style White Ale

For the unitiated, a Belgian Style White Ale is basically the Belgian's version of a wheat beer (aka: "witbier"). Also, this beer comes from a new St. Louis brewery, Cathedral Square. I could only find two different styles that they make right now, both Belgian. As it was only $3.99 for a 22oz bottle, I figured I'd give it a shot. And yes, I'm very aware there is a picture of Toby Flenderson, HR-rep for Dunder-Mifflin Paper Company on my TV. He did not enjoy the beer, and I may let him write a guest tasting sometime in the future.

As for the other specs, there was no ABV listed on it, which I figured was probably hovering around 5%, give or take a touch. It was poured into my Ommegang Hennepin glass.

Pours a pretty muddy orangy-brownish color. Not as yellow/golden as I'm used to, and overall, somewhat darker than you'd see with say, a Hoegaarden. Decent fluffy white head, 1-2 fingers, doesn't last all that long. Decent bit of foam remaining, but nothing really to write about. This one though, is definitely unfiltered, and looks about as thick and chewy as a beer can be.

Smell is pretty typical, but maybe with a heavier dose of wheat malt than I'm used to in a Belgian Wit. Noticeable amount of citrus fruit and citrus peel, specifically orange. I didn't see on the bottle if it specifically talked about orange peels in the brewing process, but I wouldn't be surprised. I'm also getting a touch of bitterness, but I can't tell if it's hop bitterness or malt bitterness. Good smelling beer, but nothing really stands out, in the sense that makes this overly unique.

Initial impressions when drinking is that it's really smooth on the tongue, not all that much carbonation. First taste is a light, sweet wheat that combines with some of the citrusy-orange that you smell. Pretty delicate sweetness there, nothing overpowering (overly-sweet beers suck my ass). A nice touch of spiciness and bitterness in the finish that you'd see in a good witbier, once again, not overly spicy or bitter. Nothing really blows you away in the taste of this beer, but it's solid and pretty balanced throughout. To quote a line from those d-bags in the Bud-Light marketing department, it's very "drinkable". One last thing I would say is that as it warms up, there is certainly a higher level of wheat and the grassy/hay notes that come with the presence of the wheat. Nothing too crazy, though.

I can't write a ton about this brew as nothing stands out, but for their first go around, it's a solid take on a classic, slightly complex style. It's local, and it's cheaper, so I may use this as a go-to from time to time if I want a decent Belgian White. For any of my friends in St. Louis that may be reading this, it's worth a try for only $3.99.

Verdict: 6.5/10

Duvel

750ml poured into a over sized Duvel-branded tulip. 8.5% abv. Got it at the local grocery store (Dierbergs) at only 6.50 for a big bottle. That's pretty much better than you can find at most liquor stores.

Pours a nice, clear-golden that you'd see in a typical pilsner. As is suggested on the bottle and with the proper glassware, you get a massive, fluffy-white 4ish finger head with this. Even after a fair amount of drinking there's a minimum of a half-finger head remaining until your finished, and you'll often get big cottony-globs of foam that last well after the first sip, as well. You can tell there is a large amount of carbonation in this beer, and the clarity of the beer will show the rising bubbles for nearly the whole time you are drinking it.

It smells at first of a pilsner, and you get a a bit of the typical pilsner malts. What you also get is a hint of spicy and floral hops, some notes of fresh cut grass....maybe some hay as well, and a touch of banana which probably comes from the belgian yeast. What's also evident, is a fair amount of phenol-alcohol. While not massive at 8.5% abv, that's still enough to be present with a good whiff. With all this, what's pretty cool about this is that you can tell this is a very crisp, clean beer. Even the nose has a nice bite to it.

The first sensation you get with the first sip is a very sharp, crisp, beer with a fair amount of carbonation that's really evident on your tongue. After getting over that with a few more sips, you get an initial malty, not quite tart sweetness not uncommon to a typical pilsner. There's also a small hint of that banana that you may have smelled. Unless you let the beer sit for a while on your tongue, a quick drink will only allow that sweetness to last for a short while, until a quick bitter hop-bite cleans up. This is followed by the alcohol which offers an extremely dry and clean, crisp finish. Not quite "refreshing", but certainly feels, more light on the tongue then most complex belgian beers. 2 other things should be said; one: as the beer warms up, the malt sweetness that is very short lasting at first tends to linger longer and longer; two: the whole time you are drinking this, you keep thinking that at some point you are going to get this citrus zest/lemony thing at some point or another, but it never happens.

I've had this beer numerous times and it's honestly one of my favorites. I'm not saying it's a favorite as in I'd give it a 10/10 or it's the best tasting beer ever, just that it's seemingly very simple, yet there is still a fun complexity to it, even among its high level of drinkability. It's a top notch brew but it's not absurdly overpriced nor does it come off as some extremely exclusive beer that you need to be experienced to enjoy. It's an extremely straight forward, well polished beer. I'm also not sure I've seen too many versions of this style which is essentially a pilsner with a belgian tweak to it. Boulevard made their collaboration pilsner with the brewmaster from Orval and I was told by the beer guys at a few liquor stores that it was a unique belgian interpretation of a pilsner. Well it was somewhat unique in that the style isn't totally common, but it was their take on a Duvel, essentially. While pretty good, it did not reach the standard that Duvel has set.


Verdict: 8/10

Bud Light Golden Wheat

Objective review of an A.B. product with the world "light" in it!!! ZOMG!!!!!11!!!!!11!oneone!!!!

2-12oz bottles (1.5 actually) poured into a weizen-glass. Bottle says 4.1% alcohol. Also says that it is a "light beer brewed with coriander and citrus peels."

I know I said I'd probably do some more common beers, but you probably didn't think I'd go this low. Well, there was some in the fridge, and I also said I'd give everything a fair chance. So here we go. I'll try to be objective.

Pours a murky orange. There actually is a bit of sediment floating around, and also some left in the bottle. The weizen-glass is obviously too big for one bottle, so I opened a second to top it off. Aggressive pour only gave me a white finger or so head which did not last long, and quickly settles into a decent soapy ring. One thing you will NOT see in this beer or any other beer I ever drink is a lime, lemon, or orange. If the brewer wanted those flavors in the beer, they can put it in themselves. Citrus = acid = kills the head = adversely affects the taste of the beer that was brewed. I guess you can do what you want, but I get a little pissy when I pay extra for a micro brew or a craft brew and the douchey bartender assumes I want a piece of fruit in it. Ask me first. I will tell you no......then I will mock you and curse you behind your back. Besides, there are citrus peels in this beer, that's not enough citrus taste for you?

Smell isn't too bad. Citrus/lemon really dominates, but I do get a little of that hay/dry grass/earthy smell that you get with a wheat. Smells like a mix between, say a Boulevard Wheat, and a Blue Moon. A little bit fruitier than the former, but not as much as the latter. Are you confused? Good.

Taste? This isn't god-awful. Is it all that good? No, it is not all that good. It tastes like a wheat, just thinner....or "lighter" in this instance. There is a somewhat noticeable citrus bite (lemon and orange) at first, and it's pretty highly carbonated and very clean. Tastes (the citrus that is) somewhat natural too, as opposed to that bullshit lime syrup or whatever it is they use for the Bud Light lime. After that a bit of wheat tries to come in, and it's just a little above "noticeable". It's a dull, earthy taste that says "hey this isn't a normal bud light!", but it comes in almost the same time as that...........I can only describe it as the typical - not all that pleasant sweetness - that you get in Budweiser or Bud Light, for that matter. So the finish is a bit like a bud light, but there's a tiny little hint of a dry woodiness like you get in some wheats.

And thus, the "light" part is actually the main problem with me. When I want a good wheat beer, I know I'm getting something super heavy, super filling, and something very full in it's flavor. But I guess if they're going for a "light wheat" then they actually did a fairly decent job. Unfortunately I rarely if ever want something "light" when I want a beer.

I'm not a big fan of this beer, but I don't hate it with the fire of a thousand suns like I do the standard Bud Light. They (AB) wanted to give you something that's still light with a bit more flavor, and I think they accomplished that. To make it more plain for you, if I saw you or a stranger in a bar, and you got me a beer without asking me what I wanted, and showed up with a Bud Light Golden Wheat, I wouldn't have to "choke it down" just to be nice. Nor would I throw a fit if I showed up to a BBQ and this was all they had.

I'm giving it a 5/10, and I can assure you that I will have some beers in the near future from some more reputable micro-breweries that will be ranked below it. (Sam Adam's Cherry Wheat, anyone?).

Verdict: 5/10

Boulevard Dark Truth Stout

(review comes from notes taken earlier in the evening)

750ml caged and corked bottle. 9.7%abv. Poured it into a thinner chalice. I was thinking tulip, but I wanted this to get a bit more air, maybe mellow out. This is a supposedly typical imperial stout. Boulevard did make a limited edition version of an imperial stout a while back, but I believe that was 11%abv and had a different label (tell me if I'm wrong), and this is by all accounts part of their normal smokestack series.

So this cork was a HUGE bitch to get off. Had to resort to a cork screw. All that fuss with the bottle effed it up a bit and there was a massive head with the pour. Although I didn't think it was all my fault as a good half-finger or so head remained with most of the first glass. It's a dark-brown almost black and opaque color. Head is a typical tan head that you'd see on a stout. Pretty good lacing as well during the first glass, very sticky.

Smell is the roasted malt (duh), a nice bitter sweet chocolate, a bit of soy (yeah, I said soy, so what?), and a touch of coffee and hops.

Taste is the bitter sweetness that was apparent in the nose. Bitter sweet chocolate malt, followed by a nice roasted coffee bean, then a good clean hop-bitterness in the finish. The finish is really like that of a good, pale ale. Not overwhelming like some huge, lame IPA, but just a good bitterness to battle the sweetness. I also must say that the whole time this is a very smooth beer. The initial hit of it on the tongue is extremely smooth, and it goes in and out of tastes very nicely. While there is that noticeable hop-bitter finish, it is at no point harsh. I only say this because there are some impy stouts....even good ones, that can be a bit harsh with the malt, the roast, or even the hops. Some alcohol makes it's presence known as the big bottle warms up, but not consistently enough to really make it part of the flavor profile. For nearly 10%abv, this is pretty easy to drink. It's certainly thick on the tongue, but in a smooth, coating sense, not in an "overly heavy" sense.

As a side note, I had the second half of this with a big steak I cooked myself for my birthday. I've read of pairing big stouts with steak but I usually shied away. In this case I was wrong, and it was a good choice. This big, but not overly bold stout paired quite nicely with a medium rare NY strip with sauteed mushrooms.

Overall, for a stout that gets near 10% abv, this is very very easy to drink. There's not really any harsh aspects to it and it stays very smooth, even while it warms up. I think that's why it went well with a meal, it's extremely good, but not so "big" that's it's dominating what you're eating. Definitely a good compliment to some good, red meat. Not mind-blowing, but a very good version of an imperial stout. Once again, Boulevard understand how to make a "balanced" high-end brew.

Verdict: 8.5/10

Boulevard Rye on Rye

750 ml bottle, caged and corked. 11% abv. Had no idea what to pour this into, so I went with a slightly thinner belgian chalice. Starting to drink it at probably about 45 degrees F or so. I imagine the beer will probably change moreso than most as it warms up. I also plan to not submit this writeup until the bottle is done, meaning I'll be 1/2-way towards "shitfaced". That should make for a more entertaining review, huh?

This is a limited edition release of Bully's Smokestack Series, this is bottle 7863 out of 12148. It was about 12 bucks for this bottle at The Friar Tuck's in O'fallon, MO. This is pretty much what the name says. It's a rye-malted ale, aged in Templeton Rye whiskey casks. There's plenty of hops in it as well, but obviously this is all about the rye. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't excited about this as I've had a bit of a rye-malt hard on as of late.

Pours a nice, deep red-tinted mahogany. 1 1/2 finger head quickly goes into a soapy foam and stays there with minimal lacing throughout the session. This beer just flat out, looks boozy. Smell is a lot of malt, then the rest is a battle in your nose between the spicy rye and a very very distinct alcohol (not really a surprise at 11%). There are some syrupy hints (like molasses/maple syrup) but it's not mind blowing. Sweet malt like you'd get in big Belgian Quad, mixed with the rye and the booze. Maybe a 750 bottle of this was a bit too much? We'll see.

Taste. Wow. This is very unique. Big and malty up front as expected, but a nice spicy bite to it as well. You think that the maltiness is going to coat your tongue and just kind of linger, but it gets out of the way a lot faster than you'd think. The spiciness of the rye stays throughout each sip, but the sweetness quickly subsides for a strong, but still well placed booziness that is every bit of the whiskey barrel this was aged in. I'm not a huge whiskey guy, but it absolutely works with the spiciness of the rye. The finish is what lingers, and it's a really nice, dry oaky finish that has a touch of the bitterness from the hops. When I say it "lingers" it's not that it overpowers, just that the oak sits on your tongue for awhile. It's pretty cool. This is an extremely interesting beer. And it's every bit as "good" as it is "interesting".


Drunken rant......GO!!!!!!!:


Boulevard gets it. Once again, they take their top-notch brews and absolutely (like the Saison-Brett and the BBQ Quad) just knock it out of the effing park. Sure there are slightly non-traditional ingredients in this, but when you drink it, you can tell that there was actually a thought process to the beer and an idea in mind as to what they wanted to do. Breweries like Avery, Schlafly, and New Belgium should take notes. Exquisitely crafted, and even their freaking lame story of the beer on the back label is spot-on as to what to expect in regards of taste.

You may or may not like Bully's every day beers like their Wheat, Pale, and Porter (although they are all solid), but their super top end stuff, especially their limited edition stuff can compete with absolutely anything this country makes. They take a supposedly "unique" style that everyone is screwing around with (oak/bourbon barrel aged fad we're currently seeing), tweak it just a touch to make it their own, and don't beat you over the head with the new, cool ingredient that everyone's playing with. They let the rye, and the oak aging (for example) work with the style at hand. It just seems like they take their time to make a top quality product, and in the end bend over every other midwest brewery that tries to hang with them. It's truly a shame that they don't get the same nation-wide love of some other operations as I think they, at times, deserve it. I'm not sure if their entire catalog can hang with a company with the diversity of a Rogue or Bells, but they certainly have some beers that should be in the discussion as far as the elite beers that are available in this country. This being one of them.

This beer is every bit of the 11% it says on the bottle, and it's going to take a while to completely finish it. But that's fine. If you have an hour or two where you're not doing anything, pop open a bottle of this guy and just enjoy. An absolutely remarkable brew. The quintessential balance of sweet and bitter, with the spicy rye linking the two.

Verdict:

9.5 out of mother******* 10.

Schlafly Pale Ale

12oz bottle poured into a typical pint glass. 4.4% abv.

Bottle says, "Schlafly Pale Ale is a rich, amber-colored, medium-bodies, British style ale with a smooth, mild hop character." We'll see about all of that.

This was one of the first "real beers" that I enjoyed after I turned 21, and I haven't gone back to it much in the last 6-7 years. Pours a pretty typical light, pale/amber color. Aggressive pour in a clean glass gives you a finger and a half head, dissipates into a pretty decent soapy ring after a minute or two. Smell is biscuity malt, maybe a touch of toffee, and a touch of hops. Although this is a pale, malt dominates the nose.

First taste is a bit thin and a little astringent. Roll it around the tongue a bit and you get a light malt sweetness at first, and the hops come in with a typical bitter finish.....much more so than what you pick up in the smell. There are tiny signs of the stuff like the biscuit and toffee you smell up front, but not enough for me to be one of those douches who lists 45 different flavors just because that's the cool thing to do. There really isn't much going on here, so I'm not going to blow smoke up your ass about what isn't there.

As usual, you can get a little bit more sweetness as it warms up a bit, but the focal point here is a bitter finish, as I said before, almost astringent. Light and bubbly on the tongue. Not "heavy" by any means.

I don't know if it's because I had this on tap nearly all my past experiences with it, or just that I've had a ton more beer in the meantime.....but I'm a but underwhelmed. Honestly, it tastes like it may even be a bit off.....partly skunky perhaps like it's been sitting in the sun. So maybe that's it? But in the meantime, while this isn't awful, I'd opt for Boulevard, Bass, Sam Adams Boston Lager, over this guy if I were to be faced with any of those choices for a basic pale ale.

Verdict: 5.5/10

Annoying hop craze.

Alright. Something's been pissing me off.

To be honest, I have no problem with hops, or hoppy beers. There are some pales, IPAs, and some super hopped barleywines that I really enjoy. I also enjoy styles that are sometimes hybrids of say a belgian golden ale that's hopped up (Gouden Carolous Hopsijnoor), or even a hopped up hefeweizen like the Schneider/Brooklyn collaboration. Those two examples are ok because they exercise a nice word we like to call "balance".

What's beginning to piss me off, is all these nouveau beer snobs who think they are sophisticated because all they drink is retarded hopped IPAs. And of course micro breweries and craft brewers all over the country saw this and started to pump out ramped up IPAs like it was going out of style. I guess you sell what people want, but what people wanted sucked. It seems like every wannabe beer nerd equated the quality of his new found beer by the amount of hops jammed into the bottle and the IBU count. You ask them "what do you like about this or that beer" and they replied "man this is fucking HOPPY...it's awesome...I'm such a hop-head!1!!1!."

That's fine if you like hops, or malt, or wheat, or whatever. But for christ sakes, your supposed new found love of a single type of beer brought in some really shitty beers (Ranger IPA from New Belgium, Avery IPA to name a few). Beers that boast names that are akin to those d-bags playing beer league softball, who try way too hard to be funny and always have some fat douche playing first base with the name "big sexy" on his jersey and is invariably wearing number 69. Names like: hop slam, hop stoopid, hoptober, hoptacular, hoppopatumus, hop explosion, hop rock and roll extravaganza nuclear bomb face melting awesomeness of hops. (ok, the last few are made up). While you think you are some sort of revolutionary connoisseur, the only thing you know is hops, so brewers make these stupid named beers with a stupid amount of hops to get your stupid attention.

Once again, I'm not anti-hops, or anti-IPA. But good beer is about balance. How do the flavors, particularly the malt and the hops play off of each other? Anybody can throw a million buckets of hops into a brewing tank and charge you 12 bucks a six pack, but it takes an actual brewer to make it still taste good. I made fun of "hop slam" in the last paragraph, but that was just for the name. Bells "gets it". They make Hop Slam with a truckload of hops, but they make it unique, balanced, and fun to drink. Bell's figured that most guys try to load up their double-IPAs with malt so they can strike a balance of sweet and hop-bitter, but you often time get a beer that's extremely malty as well as hoppy, and is just hard to drink. Bell's put some honey in theirs and allowed it to mellow out the hops that were in there but kept it crisp on the tongue without making it a big-syrupy mess. End product: the best "double IPA" on the market.

A beer consists of water, malt, hops, and yeast. All four ingredients can have a drastic effect on the taste of your beer, and all are equally important. There's more to beer than hops, people!!!! There are other styles out there. Try something else. IPA is one of like, a hundred styles you can try. The best beers are the "best" because they offer a multitude of flavors. A good beer is more than just the hops that are in it, and just like an overly malty beer sucks, an overly hoppy beer sucks as well.

I'll still drink, and enjoy a number of beers with a big hop profile, but I will not fellate said beers simply because of the amount of hops that are involved in the brewery process. If it's a good, balanced, well thought out brew, I will enjoy it, regardless of the style or the absolutely inane name on the label.

JW Lees Harvest Ale (2000)

I figure go big with the first post, huh?

Purchased the bottle at Friar Tuck's in O'Fallon, MO. $7.99 for a 9oz. bottle. Served it at around 50 degrees F. 11.5% abv.

First time trying this.

Pours a real deep mahogany, with a good one-finger head after an aggressive pour. Pretty decent head retention, usually something you don't see in an aged beer with this much alcohol. Smell is extremely sweet, definitely boozy and a bit spicy. Also has a bit of musty smell that I can only describe as "old". Makes sense, as this beer was brewed in 2000 (that's 10 years old for the numerically challanged). You know there has to be a load of hops in this one, but it's not really coming through in the smell. Toffee, figs, raisins, all that is coming through in the nose.

First taste is an absolute kick in the ass. It's almost impossible to list all the flavors going on, here. EXTREMELY heavy and velvety on the tongue. Everything I said in the smell is there, the big heavy sweetness, raisins, figs, toffee comes in right away with a nice, distinct port-wine quality. The booze comes next, but it's not an astringent bite, it's still smooth, still sweet. That only lasts for a touch then it comes with a bit of bitter chocolate, then finishes with what only can be described as black licorice. As in the smell, there has to be a ton of hops in this, but the malt and booze dominates this, and you get maybe a touch of hop bitterness in the very end, but that's being generous. This is honestly as complex of a beer as I've ever had. It's extremely fun to drink.

Halfway through, there is still a nice soapy ring as far as the head is concerned, and some moderate lacing on the glass. As it gets warm in my hand, the booziness starts to play a little more of a role. There's also a toasty/biscuity note coming in on the middle of the tongue as well. I've had a lot of "big" beers in my days, but I'm already feeling this halfway through one bottle. Budweiser gives you some bullshit line about "drinkability", but what the hell does that even mean? It's easier to eat a lot more salad or celery than a freaking 16oz new york strip, but I'm not sure I'd take salad in making a decision as to which one I prefer. So while this isn't majorly high in terms of "drinkability", I think it has very little effect on the quality of the beer, at least this one.

I realize this is a bit long of a post for one beer, but I can guarantee you that this beer needs a lot of words to describe it. It's really a different animal. I understand I spend a lot of money on beer and that sometimes I feel guilty as the prices are jacked up....just because. But, this might be worth the $7.99. You could honestly enjoy it for an hour, it tastes fabulous, and is really fun to drink if you're a big beer nerd like I am. Not something you'll have often, but a nice treat.

Final verdict: Phenomenal. Like I said, worth the price if you really want a treat that you can sit down and enjoy. All the crap I read about this was true and it truly is a work of art.

9.5/10