Category Archives: Reviews

Here is where the beer reviews will be listed.

Brew in a Bag and Traditional Mash Hybrid (Mash in a bag)

Posted on by
2

There has been a lot of buzz over the past couple of years about Brew in a Bag. I had 1 semi-failed attempt at it, and the only reason for the failure was that I didn’t have the correct sized bag. I made a decent beer, but not exactly what I was shooting for. We have several members of our brew club who do brew in a bag and have great results. I have been on the fence about doing brew in a bag myself more often, because I enjoy doing a traditional mash, and sparging. I also like that the grain bed acts as a filter clarifying your beer, which is an admitted downside of brew in a bag. You run the risk of having either more particulate in your boil and/or can end up with haze. I am attracted to how simple the equipment is. So I thought, what if I remove the manifold from my mash tun, and use a bag as my manifold. Then I can still mash traditionally, still sparge, and when the brew day is done, just remove my bag (maybe give it gentle squeeze to get just a bit more sugar out, rinse it, and be done. So that is exactly what I did. I purchased 2 bags on ebay and put my thought to the test. The bags I got were exactly like these (http://www.austinhomebrew.com/product_info.php?cPath=178_33_403&products_id=1058), but you got 2 for $19 and free shipping.

For more on brew in a bag, check out These 2 podcasts, these are direct links to the brew in a bag topics. (Basic Brewing Radio – The Brewing Network)

So before my mash I washed the bags in hot water to remove any residue from manufacture and removed my manifold in the mash tun (You really don’t have to remove your manifold if you do not want to, but I did for the sake of the experiment). Below is what my 5 gallon setup looked like.

Mash in a bag

Mash in a bag 2

With all that in place I got my mash underway.

Mashing in the bag setup

As you can see below, the 1st running went through very well.

1st runnings

Drained Grain bed

Now, I would love to say this whole process went through without a hitch, but I did get a bit of a stuck sparge during my 2nd batch sparge. I think it was from grain and proteins that may have collected around the bottom of the bag hole. This was OK in a way, because I was a bit concerned with channeling and planned on doing this next step during my 3rd round of sparging, but I ended up doing it sooner. I simply lifted the bag up and slowly dunked it over and over in the hot sparge water, and that took care of the issue. The reason i wanted to do the dunk was to rework the grain bed in case of channeling and give everything a good chance at mixing.

So now comes the important part. What was my brewhouse efficiency. Well, normally I hover in the 72%-75% range fairly consistently with my setup. I will have to do a few more beers like this to be sure, but my efficiency for this experiment was 82%. So I gained 10%. This is more than likely from the rinse and dunk during the 2 stages of sparging and also because I was able to gently squeeze the bag getting just a bit more sugar out in the end. I still don’t want to aggressively squeeze it, still fearing some tannins even though others say that’s been debunked.

All in all I think this was a success and probably will brew this entire summer with this method. If I keep getting great results and decent efficiency, I will probably make this my default method for brewing. Oh, and for those who care, below is a picture of the beer mid-fermentation. I know some of us beer guys like looking at this sort of thing.

Skywalker's Legacy IPA (This beer took a 1st place as an IPA in the 2012 Titletown Open and a 3rd place as a pale in the same competition)

 

Get a little bit more from your propane burner (Turkey Fryer)

Posted on by
3

This will be short and simple post. I use a turkey fryer to do my boils outside. We have noticed that you get a lot of heat loss to the sides of the burner and one of our homebrew club members (Brian Lesperance) came up with an idea on how to get just a little bit extra from your propane burner. I have finally gotten around to making the brewing ring that he made and I can say I have gone from a decent boil, to a vigorous boil. Not only is the boil more intense, but it comes a lot faster as well. All you need is either some aluminum flashing or in my case, 2 pieces of 18″ X 24″ sheet metal. The sheet metal I got was in the heating duct section of my local Lowes and one edge had folded over grooves which I used to place the other end into. I folded the straight edge over onto itself and inserted it into the grooves on the prefabricated side and hammered them in together. Below is the result of my half hours worth of labor. You do have to cut a slot into the ring for your propane hose.

The Brewing Ring, it's a simple concept but does wonders for the boil!

 

Brewing Ring with Keggle on it.

Review of Rhinelander Thumper American IPA from Minhas

Posted on by
2

Today I picked up an inexpensive bomber of what appears to be a local (Wisconsin) beer. Thumper American IPA, is obviously supposed to be an American IPA. We should expect this beer to be a medium body, high in hop flavor, aroma, and bitterness. It should still have a decent malt presence to stand up to hops, but the hops should be star of the show in this beer on all accounts. In most cases the hops should be piney or citrusy, but with the new American varieties citrusy is not always the case with American hops these days. You need to use your best judgement that the hops in the beer are not continental or noble hops.

Aroma: The first thing I am hunting for is the typical American hop aroma, and not finding it. As a matter of fact, I’m not getting much in the way of intense hop aroma at all. I get some floral hops which is noticeable, but far from prominent to intense. There is a bit of bitter orange, and touch of peppery spice. The malt actually comes through easily and is a sweet caramel. The malt is a bit more forward than I would expect in an American IPA, if anything, the hops and malt are even and not hop forward. One other thing to notice is that the beer I have has an obvious hot alcohol presence, which is odd for 6.8% ABV beer. Usually, you can start to detect alcohol fairly easy at the 7% range, but this seems a bit too much for a beer this strength. Not really enjoying the aroma in here and sadly is not enticing me take that drink. (4 points)

Appearance: The beer pours a great stiff foamy head, and the head is extremely persistent. The color is simply beautiful. It is a glowing copper color and fairly hazy. Normally I would assume the haze is from dry hopping in an IPA but the lack of hop aroma leads me to believe otherwise. Still, the beer is pretty, it should be more clear. (2 points)

Flavor: The initial flavor of this IPA is OK, it is very mediocre. It’s a bit sweet up front, and has a nice caramel presence…..but this is an IPA. There is a lack of hop flavor in the beer, that is really no surprise based on the aroma. Generally, if you don’t get much hop aroma, the flavor will be lower as well. Then there is something very odd that happens. You get a great grapefruit bitterness in the finish that rolls on quickly into a bit of an intense and oddly flavorless bitterness. Sort of like that bitter flavor when you inhale hairspray. That bitterness is just simply bitter and does not have much flavor. Then as it fades I get some lingering malt sweetness. The alcohol is a bit noticeable in the middle as well. It’s not really an enjoyable IPA, which is sad for a commercial brewery. I expected a lot more. It’s redeeming quality is the malt profile is actually pretty nice. Caramel and the flavor of bread crust. But again, this is an IPA, the Hops are out of balance and not really enjoyable. (9 points)

Mouthfeel:The beer is medium body, and borderline Medium-high. The carbonation is a bit on the low side, which could be part of the reason there is not a lot of hop aroma. You want that carbonation to push the aromas out. (3 points)

Overall: Overall, this beer is a sad example of an American IPA. It is lacking hop flavor and aroma. It is not lacking the bitterness, but you need more than intense bitterness to make a good IPA. You need to have that flavor and aroma to balance out the malt. This beer is just bitter. I am surprised that a commercial brewery would actually put this product out to market. It seems like a first pass at a recipe that did not turn out. This beer would be good if you kept the same grain bill, but dialed back the bitterness and amped up the late addition hops…..a lot. This is one of the few beers that I would recommend not wasting your time on. Sorry , I’m going to finish this beer, but I’m not going to enjoy it. (4 points)

Total Score: 22 points which would be a D+ in my book.

Home Roasting (or toasting) Your Malts Part 3

Posted on by
9

Since my last installments on home roasting ( Part 1 which is an introduction and Part 2 which gets into experimentation and I make Special B ), I have been doing some more experimentation as well as research on the reactions of home roasting. The experimentation I focused on was working on comparing oven roasting to roasting the grain in a nut roaster (A drum roaster or something similar will give you the same results as my nut roaster). Each has a trade off, the nut roaster has more control and is a bit faster. The tradeoff for this is that things can quickly and very easily go beyond the point you intend. The second, is that at a specific point, the grain will start to smoke. The smoke can get very heavy very fast. I do find that the color in the nut roaster seems to be a bit more even. The oven is a much slower, but offers much better temperature control. There is also a bit less smoking. However, the roast appears to be a bit more uneven, and to keep the roast even you have to take the grain out and stir it, which will increase your roast time. You are also limited to being able to do the much deeper roasts because you need the control and high heat of a nut roaster, or other roasting vessel. Below you will see examples of several grain types for comparison in color and even texture. I must note that I did some experimentation with wheat malt and pearled (dehusked) barley and found the nut roaster to be a much better option for those types of grain.

Roasting Grain-The Reaction.
I covered this briefly in part 1 of my home roasting segment, but I will cover it a bit more in-depth here. Don’t worry, I will not be going into formulas and chemistry, I found that very boring. But understanding the reaction a bit more will help you come up with your own roasting varieties and experiments. The only process you really need to concern yourself with in home roasting malt is the Maillard reaction, which is not a single reaction but rather a grouping of complex chemical reactions between acids and carbohydrates. In short is a non-enzymatic browning by heat. During the Maillard reactions there are many different flavor compounds created, the number and type of compounds created depend on the food type being heated. For example when grilling a steak, you have the Maillard reactions taking place and while some of the aroma and flavor compounds may me the same as with grain, you are going to have some that are quite different and unique. This why you can make the connection between certain foods in flavor and aroma between beer. A classic is biscuits. A lot of beers have a biscuit flavor and aroma. That is the result of a Maillard reaction correlation between compounds in what makes the biscuit and your grains. It’s no surprise that since beer is mostly grain, we get a lot of similar flavor and aroma compounds between foods like breads, pastas, crackers, and so on in the malt profile of a beer. We even get caramelization, even though to get the caramelization in the truest sense, you have to bring the temperature of the sugar components up to 248-302 degrees F. In most cases what we get when we roast/toast grain is actually the formation of Melanoidins, which often bring a degree of caramelization-like flavors and aromas to the grain, even though it is not true caramelization of the sugars.  In short, the varying degree of pH (acidity), types of amino acids and sugars, temperature, time, presence or lack of oxygen, water, and other food components all are important in this Maillard Reactions in the grain. Changing one part of the whole process will give you a new degree of flavor and aroma, which is something I have been playing around with a lot lately. Generally the only part of the reaction process we can change when roasting/toasting grain is time, temperature, food component (type of grain used), water, and sugars (if you mash the grain first, and to what degree you mash). Does that makes sense? I hope so because that’s about as simple as I can make it.

To Mist or not to mist, that is a big question.
OK so now the big question that seems to be getting asked. Do you mist the grains with water or not? The answer is not so simple. You need to consider what you are trying to do. Misting the grain will introduce a water component to your process. I generally do not mist my grains and I get good results. Others claim that misting the grains prevents burning in some cases, reduces smoking, and prevents the grain from drying out too much. Since I mostly use roasted/toasted grain for specialty malts, I don’t have an issue with drying out the grain too much. I made a beer once with all home roasted malt as the base and had some issues with conversation, so I don’t recommend making a beer with all roasted malt anyway. For specialty grains, the moisture level of the grain is meaningless, unless  you are going to store it for a very long time. So I say misting the grain is up to you. When I do the grain in the oven I do not get a lot of smoke anyway. In the nut roaster, I get some smoke but by that time I’m usually at the end of the roast anyway. For chocolate or black malt, misting may be appropriate, but that would be a two-man job.

Nut Roaster or Oven?
So Below you will fin a bunch of pictures of what I am talking about in this segment, so if you want to skip this part, feel free. In a side by side comparison, I found that I was easily able to reproduce any grain in the nut roaster that I was in the oven. The key is to keep the grains moving and keep a close eye on the changes in color of the grain. Because the roasting goes so fast in a nut roaster (less than 5 minutes in most cases) it is very easy to get beyond the point you wish to get to, for example while making chocolate malt I easily went past my point and charred a few grains. I lost focus for only about 30 seconds as I stirred and watched what my son was doing for just a second. You also get a considerable about of smoke past a certain point, so if you don’t have a fan above your stove, you may be better off doing this outside. I found the best temperature to roast my grains in the nut roaster to get a decent even browning and not to over burn the grain or take forever to get to the browning point was at medium heat on my stove. I cannot stress enough that you really need to keep the grain moving. I did notice that you have 5 easily definable stages. The point you notice the grain starts to brown slightly, a slight crackled of the grain every now and again, a heavier crackle of the grain as it roasts, a light smoke, and a heavier smoking stage. The problem with using these stages though is that there is a lot of color change between each one, so you really need to mainly gauge the stage of the grain by your eye, unlike the oven where you can rely on time and temperature. I also found that the darker grains were much more even and had better flavor in the roaster than in the oven, even though it is much easier for the grain to get away from you once you hit that higher roasting stage. Below is a quick Pros and Cons of each roasting method.

Oven.
Pros: Easy Temperature control, time is easy to control, Roast/Toast is consistent with your system, easy to provide instruction to others (toast grain at 350 degrees for 30 minutes is easy instruction to pass on).
Cons: Roast can be uneven at times if you don’t stir often, stirring often can increase roast/toast time, takes a long time to achieve roast, darker roasts are near impossible.
Roaster
Pros:Faster Roast Time, Roast/Toast is more even, easy to get darker roasts not achievable in oven, visual gauging of the grain can give you a wider variety of roasts, handles dehusked or husk free grains a bit better.
Cons: Easy for the grain to get away from you (too dark or burned), grain can start to smoke, consistent roasts are hard when based solely on visual gauging, if roaster is too hot you will only brown the husk and not the starches inside.

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to email me. Below are pictures of a few recent roasts as well as Marris Otter and White Wheat experiments. Note that in each picture I included a small amount of the unroasted grain for change comparison.

Now on to the photos

This is just a picture of the nut roaster. You could probably use a drum roaster, clean wok, or even a clean pat if you can keep the grain moving.

Golden Malt, in the oven (300 Degrees for 25-30 Min)

Deep Amber in the Oven (375 Degrees for 40-45 Min)

Brown Malt (400 degrees for 45-50 Min depending on you oven)

White Wheat in the oven (400 degrees for 15 Minutes) You need to remember that grains without husks will brown the starches faster and more direct.

White Wheat in the Nut Roaster till the grain starts to crackle.

Marris Otter in the Oven, amber Roast (350 degrees for 25-30 Minutes)

Marris Otter in the Nut Roaster till the grain crackles heavy.

Here is a pale chocolate roast of dehusked barley. I did this in the nut roaster until the grain got this dark color. Be careful because it will smoke.

I call this a stout roast. It's beyond brown malt and quite black. It was too bad a some of the grains got charred, You need to be careful to avoid charring too many grains.

This was a fun experiment. I have started mashing in a pot instead of soaking the grains and then mashing in the oven. It is easier to control the mash temps and it seems a bit easier. You don't have to worry about the grains at the top drying out. But this time around I also did a decoction style boil after the mash. This will help develop the melanoidin character in the grain. This was the result. A very caramel-like and sweet grain. The drying and post roasting process remains the same as it has in past posts.

Mashing in a small pot. Easier to control the mash temp of the grain.

Here I am boiling the grains in a thin decoction style mash. This helps develop true caramelization and melanoidin character.

Review: Caylight

Posted on by
Reply

Cay Light

Today I am trying another of the beers I got from a friend who visited the Cayman Islands. This one is Caybrew’s answer to Bud Light, Miller Lite, Coors Light, and so on. This is an American Lite/Light Lager. We can expect this review to be fairly short because this style does not have much to it, but I don’t think I have ever reviewed an American Light Lager on here before.

Aroma: I don’t find anything in the way of hop aroma. There is a dry grainy aroma and that’s just about it.  A good solid swirl in the glass does give way to a bit of DMS (canned corn) aroma. Normally this is a considered a fault, but it is allowed in low levels in this style. The grain becomes more dominant as the beer warmed. (8 points)

Appearance: A very pale yellow and crystal clear. It pours a decent head and there is a layer of foam that sticks around. A nice looking Light Lager. (3 points)

Flavor: This beer is the light lager for the beer lover because it actually has some interesting flavor. The hop bitterness is very low, I suspect it’s just enough to balance the small amount of malt in the beer. However, there is a very interesting cracked grain flavor. Normally when you think Bud Light or Miller Lite you are thinking everything is so in balance you don’t get much malt or any hops, and maybe a bit of corn if you are lucky. This beer is a bit different and actually brings a bit of grain flavor the table. The beer is very dry and nice and crisp. I suspect some people will find the grain flavor off putting for a light lager, but I welcome it. The high carbonation also brings a slight acidic twang as well. If this were to cross a table in homebrew competition, I suspect most judges would be happy with it because while it remains within the style guidelines, it still pushes the boundary of American Lite Lager and has some flavor. Don’t get me wrong, this is not a very flavorful beer, but compared to the hallmark examples of this style, I like it. I must note, that like most light lagers, as it warms it becomes a bit more unpleasant so drink it fairly cold. (15 points)

Mouthfeel: Very light body and has a watery feel, as it should per style. The carbonation is very high and crisp and gives a bit of acidic twang. (4 points)

Overall: The beer, for what it is, is impressive to me. For an American Light Lager it is very good, probably one of the best I have had. In all honesty I have not had as many Light Lagers as I have had IPA’s (Bud Light, Miller Lite, Coors Light, Beer 30 Light, and Sam Adams Light is all I can think of for beers I’ve had from this style off hand), but this is my favorite Light lager so far. It has it all. It is dry, crisp, low hop profile, low malt profile, it actually has some flavor and does not taste as much like water. However, you still need to drink it fairly cold and fairly fast. As it warms it becomes a bit more harder to drink. (8 points)

Score: 38 points which is an excellent example of the style. This would be a solid B if I were to assign a letter grade to it. Remember, this grade is a comparison according to the style guidelines. I’m not saying this is the best craft beer you are going to have, but compared to other Light Lagers, this is top notch.

Review: Shock Top Wheat IPA

Posted on by
3

Shock Top Wheat IPA

Today, instead of a beer I purchased, I have a beer that sent to me. Shock Top Wheat IPA sounds interesting, and I am more than willing to review it. According to the bottle, this is an Unfiltered IPA brewed with wheat, citrus peels, and coriander. It does not sound like a combination I would try, but it does sound interesting. I will be judging this in Category 23, specialty category with a base style of American IPA. I came to this decision because of the description. First it says it’s an unfiltered IPA which is why I chose that as the base. Since it is brewed with wheat, citrus peels, and coriander, it is part Belgian Wit as well. I am thinking since they encourage you to swirl the yeast and pout it into your glass, it is also part Bavarian Hefeweizen as well. First and foremost it needs to be an IPA, with the secondary and background characteristics being the wheat and spiced beers. That is what we are going to be looking at for this particular beer. With that said, let’s get this under way.

Aroma: For an IPA, the aroma is lacking. While I do get some floral and slightly piney hop aroma, there really is not enough to be considered a solid IPA in my opinion. That’s not to say the beer is not without some positive vibes in the aroma. The grains come though to be interesting. The wheat is very evident and dominates the aroma, it almost smells like a fresh wheat field. The hops and slightly sweet citrus notes take a backseat supporting role. It is a good smelling beer, I like it. But it is lacking the IPA portion of the aroma. If you put up front that it is an IPA, it needs to have a “prominent to intense hop aroma”. The hop aroma is moderate at best. The coriander does come through nicely as the beer warms up. It misses the mark big time though for IPA quality aroma. (5 points)

Appearance: For a wheat beer, the color is as you would expect, especially if you swirl and add the yeast. The color is strikingly beautiful. It is a deep hazy gold color and will make you want to drink it. It poured a very nice head that disappeared fairly quickly. It did leave a nice thin layer on top. (3 points)

Flavor: The flavor is interesting and complex. There are several layers (as you could expect from this array of ingredients). For an IPA, again the hop character is lacking.The hops seem to be of the orange and mostly grapefruit variety (your classic American “C” hops). The flavor could be coming from citrus peels as well, and who knows, maybe they called it citrus peels instead of orange peel because maybe they used orange and grapefruit peels to compliment the hops. Either way, the hop flavor is moderate and the bitterness is also in that medium range. The coriander does come through nicely in the middle. For me, the star of this show is the malt. There is a hint of sourdough bread, with a classic grainy wheat flavor you seek in a hefeweizen or other classic German wheat beer. There is a bit of sweetness, so I would bet there is a touch of caramel malt in the mix as well. The flavor is nice, just not near the IPA level. I do admit on a personal level that I like the beer. But calling it an IPA was a huge mistake. It is barely at the pale ale level for hop character, regardless of how well the flavors dance around in your mouth. (10 points)

Mouthfeel: The beer is solidly in the medium mouthfeel range and slightly creamy. It is well carbonated and is brewed very well. No astringency. (4 points)

Overall: First and foremost it is actually a tasty beer. With that said, it is too far out of style to even be called an IPA. It is even at the low end for a Pale Ale. If you compare this beer to Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, which is at the high end of the Pale Ale Spectrum, you will notice the obvious difference in hop intensity. A true IPA should be even more hoppy than Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. The beer is not without some redeeming qualities though. The malt profile is interesting and I enjoy it. The spices are fairly subtle and take on the supporting role quite nicely. It’s easy drinking, and flavorful. But the misrepresentation of the IPA style is a bit annoying. While for the casual drinker, there may not be much to notice when you see IPA, until you decide you like this beer and make the connection with the IPA style. Then you head to the store to buy another IPA and find that beer to be way too intense, or worse yet they go telling people the love IPA and end up getting their hands on a Green Flash IPA and are either embarrassed that it was nothing what they expected, or decided that Green Flash IPA sucks. While this is a very tasty beer, and I enjoyed it. It’s a decent slightly hoppy wheat beer, it is not an IPA. (4 points)

Overall score: I gave this beer a 26, which still makes it a good beer. If you take a look at the lower left corner of a score sheet, you will see that a 26 is still a good beer, but “misses the mark on style and/or has minor flaws” which is the case with this beer missing the mark on calling itself an IPA.

Review: White Tip Lager

Posted on by
1

White Tip Lager

A friend of mine brought me back 4 beers from the Cayman Islands. This was one of them, White Tip Lager, which is billed as being brewed as a European Premium Lager, which in the BJCP world would still fall under the Premium American Lager category right along with Becks, Stella Artois, Corona, and Heineken. I am confident in the freshness of this beer seeing as the guy who brought it directly from the Caymans just returned 2 days ago.

One thing I don’t enjoy about reviewing light lagers is that you tend to get emails about how much they suck and on. But as a beer judge (especially if you are a beer lover who thinks that way) you need to put that beer snobbery away and judge the beer based upon what it is according to the guidelines, not your personal preference or thoughts on Light Lagers. Like it or not these beers are a part of the craft beer world, although they get little respect. So put those ideas aside, read over the guidelines and accept the beer for what it is, not what you wish it was. So, with that said, let’s review this beer as it would fall if it were in Homebrew Competition.

Aroma: Very low floral aroma, it comes through a lot more if you agitate the beer. There is a slightly sweet clover honey aroma as well. I get the faint aroma of fresh milled grains as well. Other than that, there is not a whole lot going on. Most of the aroma needs to be coaxed out the beer. If you pick it up after sitting a bit, there really is not much to find other than the slight honey aroma. For what it is, it is not bad. If you compare this to the likes of Becks, Stella, or Heineken you will be lacking that classic “skunky” aroma, which is a flaw from being lightstruck. I recall a time when someone would call that the “good stuff” because of that smell. I’m glad that for the most part many people have moved beyond that mindset and recognize that aroma for what it is, a downfall of shipping beer in green bottles across 2 continents.(9 points)

Appearance: This beer is very beautiful. It has a nice gold hue and pours a decent 3/4″ head. The beer is crystal clear. My favorite part comes about half way through the pint, there is a thin 1/8″ layer of foam still present. (3 points)

Flavor: The beer has a nice sweet honey-like flavor that I am digging. The hop flavor is slightly spicy and fairly low. The bitterness lays around the low to medium range and really flows well with the up front sweet flavor of the beer. The beer finishes a only slightly dry. It could be a bit dryer and have a bit more pop to it. It’s not as crisp and refreshing as I would hope. Still the overall flavor is very nice. This is what I find a bit discouraging about beer review sites like Beer Advocate and Rate beer. A majority of the people are rating the beers based on their taste. And many of those people have a taste for the big IPA’s, Barleywines, Belgain Dubbels, and so forth. Granted a beer like this pales in comparison to those extremely flavorful beers, but for what this beer is…..and what the brewery was shooting for, is pretty well done.(13 points)

Mouthfeel: White Tip falls in the medium range for mouthfeel for me. So it could be a touch thinner. That’s strictly by style, on a personal level I like it where it is, but by style it should be dryer so we will have to ding it for that. Carbonation is adequate but I would like to see it a bit higher. More carbonation would give it that pop and help give it a more dry quality as well.(2 points)

Overall: Overall, for an American Premium Lager (which I am comparing more to the other Imported versions we all know) this beer is head and shoulders above it’s competition. While it could thin out a bit, and have a bit more pop, I love the fact that it is not what we are used to for this particular style. I am sure there are plenty of craft brewed versions just as good or better, and it’s possible your local brewpub brews up a version of this style, but I think if you are in Caymans and this is on the beer menu, you will not be disappointed as long as you take it for what it is, a light lager.  (7 points)

Score: 34 points which is a “very good” beer. If I were to assign a letter grade to the beer this would be about a C+. With that, let the email commence about how much the beer sucks because it’s not hoppy enough or big enough.

Sprecher Brewery Tour

Posted on by
Reply

Sprecher Brewery, Milwaukee Wisconsin

As part of my winnings from this summer’s grilling with beer competition, I received a coupon for a case of Sprecher beer and 2 tickets for a brewery tour. So Brian Lesperance and I headed down to Milwaukee this past Monday for a day to geek out on beer. We stopped at Northern Brewer in Milwaukee, then headed over to the Ale House for lunch. The Ale House was great! I enjoyed their Weekend at Louie’s beer which is their Louies Demise brewed with blueberry rooibos and Hibiscus tea. The blueberry tea came though the most for me. I also had one of their cask ales, a vanilla bean stout. Both were outstanding. Brian had the Ale Houses Monkey Paw which is a big 7% beer which we found funny that they had listed in their session beer section. He also asked for Black and Tan of their Solomon Juneau Extra Pale Ale and Sheepshead stout. After the Ale House we headed to Downer’s Wine and Spirits based off a beer advocate review of beer stores in the area, Downer’s got an A+ rating and we could see why. The store is small, but packed with one hell of a selection. But the purpose of this post is to talk about the brewery tour at Sprecher, so with that let’s get started.

Sprecher has tours Monday through Friday at 4pm, and also has tours on the weekend at 1pm, 2pm, and 3pm. The  cost of the tour is $5. You do have to call ahead for reservations. They also have a gift shop that you can hit at the front end or back end of tour. They have all of their beers and soda, as well as shirts and glasses you can purchase. They also have some interesting beer food, like beer flavored chips, BBQ sauce, and candy. I should also note that children are allowed on these tours because they offer soda. So if you are the type who would like to bring your children on a brewery tour, and sample some beers while your kids drink soda, you can do that. Personally, I don’t care for that idea because I know some people that even after 5 sample sized glasses of beer, probably shouldn’t be driving even more so with kids in the car. But that’s just my opinion. You don’t have to drink the beer I guess, but that sort of is the highlight of any tour, sampling the beer after.

Sprecher Brewery Tour

So now at the start of the tour, everything seemed to start as any other tour in general. We started out in the brewing room with a very brief explanation of the brewing process. Now normally, I expect things to go into a bit more depth, than saying we mix different grains with filtered municipal water and heat it up. It makes a syrupy liquid that get’s pumped over there, then cooled and moved to our fermentors, where we mix that with different yeast and the yeast makes CO2 and of course alcohol. The beer will sit for 2 -21 weeks depending on the beer. Then he pointed to where the spent grains go. Honestly, that was the gist of the tour. No mention of hops at all, no talk about lagers or ales or where they get their grains from. No showing  us the equipment or explaining how it works. You can see where the tour guide stood and he just pointed over in the direction of the equipment. Brian and I were very disappointed. All in all it was less than 5 minutes on the entire brewing process and introduction. We then breezed through by the fermentation tanks without stopping or the tour guide even telling the people what they were, what was inside, or how they lager.

Bottling Line

This is where we spent the most time on our tour. The bottling line. Brian and I had a  theory that the guy who gave us our tour worked on the bottling line. We spent a disproportionate amount of time on bottling, labels, dates, and a very odd amount of time discussing neck labels.  We spent more time here listening about the bottling process than we did about the brewing process. Here we heard every detail. I took a picture behind us, of all the ingredients which which we didn’t talk about where they may be used or what beers/soda the go in.

What are these for? Where do they come from? What are they used in? Are they in something going right now?

From the bottling line we went into the tasting room, which was quite nice. You got a tasting glass and 5 samples of any beer you wanted, and unlimited soda samples. Between Brian and I we sampled the Dopplebock, IPA2, Abbey Triple, Pub Brown (which is what I used in Skirt Steak Fajitas), a contract brewed IPA, and Oktoberfest. The part that also bothered us was that Brian asked our guide a few questions and we got an answer of I’ll have to go ask someone and I will get back to you. But as we sat and sampled our beer, we never saw him go ask anyone. It was clear to us that the tour is not so much a tour for the beer fanatic, but more for general public who has a mild interest in beer. Unlike the New Glarus Hard Hat Tour which was a tour that any beer lover would love to take, this brewery tour (at least the one we were on) was just a glorified sample session. We didn’t learn anything about the brewery or it’s processes, which was disappointing to us. A discussion on Facebook came up shortly after and some I did hear from another beer loving friend who lives in Milwaukee that his tours there went down the same way so we were not alone. In the end, I’d say it’s worth the $5 price for the sampling, but the tour itself is nothing to write home about.

Tasting Room

Review of Taras Boulba

Posted on by
Reply

Taras Boulba Belgian Pale Ale from De La Senne

Today I have what I am thinking off the top of my head is the first Belgian Pale Ale I have reviewed to date. Taras Boulba is a Belgian Specialty Ale and call it Session Belgian Blonde, some sites are calling this beer a Belgian Pale Ale, and historically this could be true. The reason it may be getting called a Belgian Pale Ale is because of history. While today, the Belgian Pale Ale has become a malty and earthy copperish colored ale, in the past it was more influenced from a combination of the German Pilsner and British Pale ale hybrid. But while it is helpful to know that, the purpose of this blog is to review beers as you would if these were homebrews in a BJCP competition. This beer, in my opinion is more of a session Belgian Blonde than a Belgian Pale Ale. So before getting started, maybe take a moment to review the Belgian Specialty category as well as the Belgian Blonde Ale category.

Aroma: In the aroma I get honey and lemon peel, as well as a bit of cracker. There is an aroma of fresh cracked pepper and some noticeable Noble Hop aroma. Overall the aroma is is very straight forward and quite appealing for me, but may be a bit assertive for a session Belgian Blonde. (8 points)

Appearance: The beer is a bight gold with just a bit of haze, and the beer should be fairly clear. A large rocky head was formed right after the pour as I drank it, there was always a layer of foam covering the beer. (2 points)

Flavor: Lots of bitterness in the flavor. The beer starts off with a bit of honey and some sweet orange. But that is quickly cut off by a wallop of spicy noble hop flavor and a stiff bitterness on the back end. My guess would be Saaz hops was used for this beer. The flavor is very reminiscent of a a good Bohemian Pils. The front end and the middle of the beer is very nice, and the bitterness makes this beer fairly refreshing. If you are looking for that traditional Belgian yeast flavor found in many Belgian ales, you can find it. It is there, but it is not as pronounced as it is in other beers. Perhaps it’s covered by the hops a bit. For a Belgian Blonde, the hops may be a bit overdone though. (14 points)

Mouthfeel: Medium body beer with a high level of carbonation. The hops provides a prickley sensation to the tongue. No hot alcohol or astringency. (4 points)

Overall: I prefer this beer to a traditional Belgian Blonde for a few reasons. Beers do not have to be big to be very good. This sessionable blong beer is a very good hybrid blend of what could be a Belgian Blonde and Bohemian Pilsner. You can easily drink more than one, and best of all you would want to. The bitterness is not overdone, yet is enough to satisfy the hophead……unless you are strictly an American Hops variety hophead. But this beer is very well done in my opinion. (8 points)

Score: In the end, I ended up giving this beer a 36 which would be about a B- or C+ in my opinion. This scoring was an example of how even though I personally loved the beer, i had to stick to what the guidelines state, and my interpretation of what a “session Belgian Blonde” should be. I know that I am the one who picked it as that style, but I just didn’t scoring this as a Belgian Pale Ale would have done this beer any justice at all. Another avenue could have been a Belgian Pilsner. That would have been an interesting scoring opportunity as well.

Scoring New Glarus Chocolate Abbey

Posted on by
12

New Glarus Chocolate Abbey

Today I went to the store to get some 400 pound monkey from Left Hand Brewing and saw New Glarus’ new thumbprint beer hit our shelves, so of course I had to pick it up. This is billed as a Belgian Dubbel with Chocolate, so technically this would fall under category 21a, Vegetable/Spice/Herb beer. It could also fall under category 23 as well. I will be judging it as category 21a since they did list the base style as a Belgian Dubbel.

Aroma: If there one thing New Glarus does well…..very well actually, it’s aroma’s in beer. Dan Carey really has a knack for adding that little extra. I didn’t even have to bring this beer to my nose, I could smell the chocolate off the pour while the glass was sitting on counter. It was the smell of rich couverture chocolate. But things don’t end there. Digging a bit deeper there is some fig and spiced raisins as well. As the beer releases some of the pent up chocolate energy, the fig and spiced raisins play so nicely with the chocolate, it borders on obscene. The spice notes (I get a touch of nutmeg) are probably derived from the yeast. (10 points)

Appearance: The beer is a deep amber with some great clarity. The tan foamy head is fairly thick and reduces to a thin layer as you drink the beer down. (3 points)

Flavor: The flavor is bit more subdued than the aroma, but the same elements seem to come to the table. There is a graham cracker-like undertone to the malt base that I did not get in the aroma. The chocolate flavor is not as pronounced as the aroma, but plays just as well with the dark fruity fig and spice. They used an interesting variety of hops I have not had, but I really don’t get anI have no real way of knowing, but I am guessing this beer at about 7% alcohol based on the fact I get a bit of alcohol in the flavor, but not a lot. If this beer is bigger than that, it hides if very well. (16 points)

Mouthfeel: For a dubbel, it feels a bit thin on the palette. The carbonation is nice and spikey. I don’t get any astringency. (3 points)

Overall: Overall, this is an outstanding beer. This beer would pair great with wild game or lamb, but would also do justice to a grilled steak. Pair it with some chocolate or fruit (cherry, fig, dates) desserts as well and you can’t go wrong. Rich and bold with not much in the way of being overly sweet. There is some sweetness in the front end, but it finishes dry and fairly spicy. The bitterness from the hops balances things quite well, I just wish I knew how much spice was coming from the yeast and how much (if any) from the hops. I may have to look up Segal Ranch hops. Not sure what they bring to the table. This is probably my favorite Thumbprint beer for the winter months. This beer just screams winter warmer to me. (8 points)

Score: 40 points out of 50, which is an A in my book.

Shipwrecked Captain’s Copper Ale

Posted on by
1

 

Shipwrecked Copper Ale

Today I am going to review a beer from a Door County Wisconsin brewpub called Shipwrecked. Today I have their Captian’s Copper Ale, thanks to my son who picked this out. Generally a copper ale will fit into either the Pale Ale category or the brown ale category, so it’s a toss up depending on the beer itself. Also as a general rule, copper ales tend to be more along the Brittish lineage, such as a English Pale ale or English Browns, but not exclusivly. For fun, I thought I’d run this one against the English Mild category, mostly because if this was my beer this is where I would enter it. Overall I found this beer malty with very little hop aroma. The flavor was quite nice with some hop bitterness in the middle but finished well. So, with that generalization out of the way, lets take a more in depth look at this beer.

Aroma: Toasty and toffee-like malt aroma. Some low caramel notes. Overall the aroma is a bit sweet. I get a very low woodsy hop aroma. I don’t really get any fruitiness. All in all a nice smelling beer. (7 Points)

Appearance: The beer has good clarity. It is a nice rich copper color and has a nice sudsy head. The head disappeared quite quickly. (2 points)

Flavor: First thing I notice is a toffee-like flavor with a little bit of sweetness. That is immediately interrupted by a moderate hop bitterness. There is some herbal hop flavor in the mix as well. I also find that there is a bit of caramel and toasted barley swirling around that I quite like. The only thing that is off-putting is the herbal hop flavor. The bitterness is nice but the flavor just does not seem to mingle well with the other flavors. It’s a good thing this flavor is on the low side, any more and I probably wouldn’t like this beer. All in all it is malty, a bit sweet, but finishes semi-sweet. The lingering malt flavor is very enjoyable. The hop bitterness disappears fairly fast. (12 points)

Mouthfeel: Mouthfeel is medium-light and there is no alcohol sensation or astringency. Carbonation is good for the style, falling right in the lower range. (3 points)

Overall: Overall it is a very good beer. It is lacking  just a touch in aroma, and the flavor is very nice except for the herbal flavor. That flavor would go well in a few other beers, but it just does not seem to fit this one. Would I recommend this beer? Sure. Is it my favorite. No, but it is not a disappointment, that’s for sure. A different hop choice may benefit or perhaps just a bit more malt to cover it up. Still, it’s a nice fall time beer to be sure. (6 points)

Score: I give this beer a 29 out of 50 points. While this beer is good, it is not great or outstanding. I liked it and I would order it again. There was just the herbal flavor I didn’t agree with and thought it was just an average middle of the road beer. Still, it’s not bad.

Firken Follow Up

Posted on by
Reply

Well if you missed it, you probably want to reserve this time of year next year for the next Firken Craft Beer Festival.  The festival may have only been in it’s second year but it is already proving to be a beer event to hit in Wisconsin with a crowd of over 1100 Craft Beer Lovers in attendance. The weather was warm and sunny which didn’t hurt. After all, that’s perfect beer drinking weather….not that there ever is bad beer drinking weather right?  The event took place at Cathedral Square Park in Downtown Milwaukee, on July 23 from 3-8 p.m.

When the gates opened at 3pm,  VIP ticket holders had first crack at their favorite beers. The advantage of VIP is you do not have to contend with lines and you have a lot of open beer options.  The general admissions line wrapped around the block, as they waited for their turn into the fest.  It was not long after opening The Squeezettes made their rounds through the fest, playing everyone’s favorite polka tunes while brandishing their very own tasting glasses.  The Reverend Raven and the Chain Smoking Alter Boys set up on stage and began a set that rumor has it, even the Klements Racing Sausages couldn’t help but dance to.

The Squeezetss playing Wisconsin's favorite Polka Music

Reverend Raven and the Chain Smoking Alter Boys Rockin the fest

In the Firkin Tent,  Fest goers tried one of the eight brews up for the Beer Buffalo Lodge Big Firkin Award (an amazing piece of art which was designed and created by Art Milwaukee).  Attendees were able to vote on their favorite nominated brew. The winner was Big Bay Brewing Company with their Wavehopper Kolsch, a clear fest favorite!

Firken Tent

Fest goers also enjoyed many options for food, including George’s Big Dogs, Miller Bakery Pretzillas (which boasted the longest food vendor line!) and Flannery’s.  The Brewriana Tent was jam packed with displays of antique beer cans, caps, photos and signs.

In the end, it appears that the 2nd Annual Firkin was a huge success.  When you have the best Milwaukee has to offer on the craft beer scene, great music, and sunny blue skies;  you are bound to have a Firkin good time.

Prost!

Review of New Glarus Two Women Classic Country Lager

Posted on by
5

New Glarus Country Lager

I’m not sure what BJCP category a Classic Country Lager would fall into, but I don’t think it is a German Pilsner that many of the beer rating sites have this beer listed as. I feel if you can’t find a category, list is as a specialty lager. For me, I think this beer is much closer to fitting in category 4a, Dark American Lager than German Pils. I think whomever classified this went strictly off the fact that it used German hops and floor malted Bohemian malt. But no part of this beer in the flavor or aroma categories fit a German Pils. Since a big part of my blog is work beers in the way of the BJCP style guidelines, I try to fit the beer into a category that I would enter it in if it were my beer going into a competition. For me, I will judge this beer as I would if I were enter it in category 4a. Once you try this beer you will see it is more  “A somewhat sweeter version of standard/premium lager with a little more body and flavor.” And represents “a  broad range of international lagers that are darker than pale, and not assertive bitter and/or roasted.” Rather than the German Pils which many of these site wrongly put the beer into.  So let’s get reviewing Two Women from New Glarus.

Aroma:Some clean malt with slight hint of sweetness. Some soft bready aroma with a touch of toffee. Hops aroma is low with a slightly floral and herbal character. This beer is not very complex, as it shouldn’t be. But really that’s about all I find going on. (8 points)

Appearance: Dark amber, with a good clarity. Nice white head that persists. Good lacing on the glass. (3 points)

Flavor:Some sweet bready malt with a touch of toffee. The hops are also on the low side, with a bit of subtle spicy flavor. The beer is fairly clean, and finished just slightly sweet. I do get a bit of metallic twang, possibly from the water. While the malt and hops are present, it comes off a bit thin in flavor for me. I taste a bit too much of the water perhaps and not enough of the ingredients. Still, a good lager, it is an easy drinking beer. (13 points)

Mouthfeel:lighter in body than I was thinking when I looked at it and smelled it. Carbonation is medium. (3 points)

Overall:it is a very good easy drinking beer for this summer. It’s well balanced and put together very well, it could just use a touch more of everything. Not much, just a touch. A German Pils it is not, but as a  Dark American Lager this thing is very good. I rather like the malt profile. While I personally would like a touch more bitterness to finish this beer out, the hops does it’s job. I wouldn’t say it is my favorite beer, but I like it. (7 points)

Score: I give this beer a 34 out of 50 points. I give the beer a good solid C to C+. While it is very good, it is not great. There is a metallic twang to the beer I had and it seemed a bit thin to me.  Back to the German Pils thing. Once you have this beer, tell me, do you think this beer is much closer to Sam Adams Boston Lager or a  Victory Prima Pils?

Review of New Glarus IIPA (Imperial India Pale Ale)

Posted on by
2

New Glarus IIPA

I have to give a special thanks to Dave Lichterman from our homebrew club for stopping me while returning a movie to hand me this to try. New Glarus has long been my favorite local brewery by far. They have made some decisions I can respect, but not necessarily agree with in regards to some of their beers, but it’s their business not mine. Still, I really miss Hop Hearty IPA and thought it was different from all the other “West Coast” American Pale Ale and American IPA styles out there. I was a bit disheartened to find that they were rolling with the pack and changing to a west coast inspired beer instead of Hop Hearty IPA. All that aside, I have the Thumbprint Series IIPA, which is an Imperial IPA. According to the BJCP, you should expect this beer to be “ An intensely hoppy, very strong pale ale without the big maltiness and/or deeper malt flavors of an American barleywine. Strongly hopped, but clean, lacking harshness, and a tribute to historical IPAs. Drinkability is an important characteristic; this should not be a heavy, sipping beer. It should also not have much residual sweetness or a heavy character grain profile. Bigger than either an English or American IPA in both alcohol strength and overall hop level (bittering and finish). Less malty, lower body, less rich and a greater overall hop intensity than an American Barleywine. Typically not as high in gravity/alcohol as a barleywine, since high alcohol and malt tend to limit drinkability. A showcase for hops “. So with all that out of the way, let’s dive into this. I’m a hop head and a New Glarus fan so I am excited to try this one.

Aroma: Wow, this is the single most beautiful IPA aroma I have inhaled in a  long time. The distinct aroma of juicy ripe red grapefruit is the dominant aroma. There is some hints of pine and grass as well, but the forefront is solidly grapefruit. The malt is more than happy to take a back seat supporting role, but is present when you peel back the curtain of hops. Crusty bready malt aroma is what I get, along with a touch of toffee. I wouldn’t have minded a touch more of the malt though. Alcohol become evident only after the beer warms, but early on it blend in very well with the hop character.  Very very well done aroma here. (10 points)

Appearance: A rich golden beer with a well formed 3/4″ head. The head is long lasting and retains a very thin layer throughout the pint. Very nice lacing. The beer is slightly hazy, but it’s expected with highly hopped beers.(3 points)

Flavor: Balance balance balance. If New Glarus is the king of anything, it would be well balanced beers. This why I think they are so successful. They do flavors and aromas right on. Never out of balance or off-putting. This beer follows that to a T. Up front you get some hop tang, In the middle you get some of that juicy grapefruit, in the end you get a mixture of smooth bitterness and finishes with a bit if resinous piney hop flavor. Never once at any point is any part of the hop profile harsh. Something I personally love. The malt is a bit more subdued, there is a bit on honey-like sweetness dead center in the middle, which I found a bit surprising. The finish is bready and a bit toasty. Long into finish a bit of sweetness crops up, but is quickly washed away by the piney hops. If you look for it, there is some alcohol in there that sort of gives you a spicy impression. Sometimes in these big IPA’s, the alcohol can get lost in the bitterness and citrusy hop flavors. Usually if you can taste it as boozy, the beer is out of wack. This beer hides the 9% ABV very well. I have to say this beer reminds me of warm summer nights. Well done. (16 points)

Mouthfeel: Medium body with a fairly high level of carbonation. May be a touch high for carbonation. There is a small amount of astringency from the hops, but nothing to detract from the beer itself. (3 points)

Overall: Try as I might because I don’t want to seem too bias on the New Glarus offerings, I have a hard time really picking them apart. They are all that good and stand up to the hype. Dan Carey is an outstanding brewer who consistently puts out stellar beer in both his special offerings and his regular line-up. I really firmly believe his key to success is balance. Even with beers that supposed to be hop forward, like this one. You need to have the right balance of malt to make a great tasting beer. In malty beers, you need just the right touch of hop flare to offset the malt. Dan has a magic hand when it comes to that knack. This beer may not be as big as some IIPA’s may be, but what it lacks in monstrosity, it makes up for in just being a damn delicious beer. A touch sweet at some points for some maybe, but me…I like it. (8 points)

In the end this beer earns a rare 40 from me. This is a very good style, often overdone and out of balance. This beer is simply good. A solid A- for me, simply because of a few minor things stylistically. Such as it may be a touch sweet and the slight astringency.

Review of Big Flats 1901 American Lager (Sometimes called the Wallgreens Beer)

Posted on by
5

Big Flats 1901 Lager Beer

It’s been a while since I have done a review, but something caught my attention and I wanted to do a review of it. We all knew that with our tanking economy, and booming craft beer market, someone was going to try to fill the niche of cheap none Bud/Miller/Coors lagers. This one, that says it’s brewed by Brewmaster’s Choice in Rochester, NY is the first I have seen attempt to fill that void. You can find this at Wallgreens, for $2.99 a six pack. Yep, that’s right $.49 a can retail. The can states that this is a “Premium Brew” and does not say light, but I will review this as a Standard American Lager simply because they usually like to toss in “Premium” and not really mean the category “Premium American Lager” (again if you need a scoresheet to do this yourself, here is a link since it has been a while).What you are looking at with this style is a refreshing and thirst quenching beer, usually not much in the way of hops or specialty grains. Usually this type of beer will use straight two-row barley and some sort of adjunct like corn or rice. So let’s see what $2.99 has bought us today.

Aroma: Not much going on here. The dominant aroma is by far a sweet corn-like aroma. There is some slight….no very slight husky grain aroma. One thing that does surprise me is that there appears to be a very slight spicy hop aroma. Now granted, all these aromas are very much on low side. At first I was going to say I did not get any fruitiness, but a swirl of my glass and fresh sniff does give way to some green apple-like acetaldehyde. I wouldn’t knock it too much because I had to work it out of the beer for it rear it’s head, but it is there very briefly. All the aromas a bit on the low end of the scale for this beer style but it’s not bad. (8 points)

Color: (See below) Crystal clear and a very pale yellow. It pours a nice head that does not take long to leave the scene. But it’s there. It looks very good for this style (3 points)

Flavor: Here the beer falters a bit. There is a very low sweet grainy malt flavor. The balance between the malt and hops is OK, but it is more a light lager than a standard, and surely not a premium. There is a very slight spicy hop flavor that rears it’s head more in the finish than anything. Although crisp, it doesn’t really finish all that dry. There is a lingering sweetness that is off for the style. There is some noticeable green apple flavor in the middle. All in all it is not a bad beer at all for this style, especially for $2.99. But the flavors a bit too subdued even for such a light style. (13 points)

Mouthfeel: The mouthfeel is very water-like. It should be light bodied, but this is just too light for a standard lager. The carbonation is not effervescent or fizzy at all. It’s not flat by any means but it also is not highly carbonated as it should be. (1 point)

Overall: Overall this is not a bad beer for this style. This beer does fall a bit short for the standard style. But for the price, it is not a bad beer. The only things it has going against it, is the flavor and aroma are too light, and the carbonation leaves the beer feeling a bit flat for the style,  but it is a drinkable beer and a solid alternative to Budweiser or Miller. It does have some malt, and it does have very low levels of hop character. In the end, for this style I would give it a slightly above average score. (6 points)

Total Score is a 30 of 50. Which would equal about a C, which is average. For $2.99 you can’t go wrong there.

It is a Nice looking Lager

New Posts to the Recipe Section

Posted on by
1

I uploaded two new recipes to the Recipe Section. One is for the Oud Bruin I brewed from Northern Brewer and the other is for my Black Rye IPA. Both can be found here, or in the Recipes and homebrewery tab above. If you have never checked out the recipes section, I have recipes for IPA’s (both traditional and Hopbursted, I have a smoked IPA recipe that is quite good, my Chocolate Stout I’ve been brewing for years that uses Cacao nibs, a California common that has done well in competition but is not traditional because it does not contain Northern Brewer hops, an American Barleywine, and my German Porter recipe.

I also have the recipes in three formats. I have a classic brewsheet, which will be useful to anyone. It contains the ingredients, brewing schedule, and other info all on one sheet. I have BeerXML which you can import into any of the big brewing software brands (Beersmith, BeerTools Pro, and Beersmith), and I have it included in bsm or Beersmith format to directly import into beersmith.

If you are interested in finding out more about brewing software or which one may be right for you, you can check out my review of the big three here. (part 1 and Part 2)

Review of New Glarus Unplugged: Smoked Rye Ale

Posted on by
2

 

New Glarus Unplugged, Smoked Rye Ale

 

I don’t think I have reviewed any official smoked beers on here as of yet. So today while at the store I saw that The next Unplugged beer was out and it is Smoked Rye Ale. Now anyone who knows me, knows that smoked beers are not exactly my favorite style. Many times the smoke is overdone for my taste when it comes to smoked beers. There are a small handful of smoked beers that fit my taste, one is my own homebrew “Hand of Judgment Smoked IPA” which has a light background note. Another is Shiners Smokehouse. I have had plenty of Bamberg style beers, as well as the the classic Rauchbier; Schlenkerla Rauchbier Märzen. But, never one to miss out on an unplugged beer, I had to try New Glarus’s take on a smoked beer. I like the dry, and slightly tangy character of rye, so let’s see how this beer stacks up. Although the Alcohol content is not available at this time, the bottle states it is a big smoked beer, so be wary of that if you have too many. (as always, you can score along with me using the BJCP Scoresheet)

Like fruit beers, vegetable/herb/spice beers, and specialty beer; smoked beers are difficult to judge because they are very open to the judges particular taste. Since this is not a classic rauchbier, we will judge this beer as “other smoked beer” which is a very wide style, again pretty much a “does the judge like it” type of category.

Aroma: The first aroma you get is a classic beachwood smoke aroma. To me this always smells like your clothes the morning after a good campfire. If you have ever had the classic rauchbier, it is the same aroma but not as intense. The smoke is fairly heavy and dominates the aroma. Some rich malt in the background gives it sweet smokey aroma which can remind you of bacon cooking. There is also a touch of molasses in the aroma. Not much in the way of rye is able to poke through the smoke dominated aroma. Although the smoke is dominant is not obnoxiously smokey.  (8 points)

Appearance: Very beautiful beer. A nice clear deep amber color with a solid tan head. A thin layer remains throughout the glass, and forms a nice Belgian lace as you drink it down. (3 points)

Flavor: If I were to ever have a beer that I would swear had bacon in it, this would be it. Up front the beer is very clean, with just a touch of scrubbing carbonation, and very mild bready malt. There is a mild caramel sweetness in the middle, usually sugar contributes to drying the beer out but it’s possible this flavor comes from the Turbinado sugar. The beer finishes nicely with a modest amount of smoke flavor. The smoke flavor is nicely done, and by far not overwhelming. Some mild bitterness cleans the palate, along with a crisp dry finish which is probably biggest contribution from the rye. There is a slight tartness that is also from the rye, it plays around a bit with the hops bitterness in the end. I have to admit, from the aroma I thought the beer was not going to be as drinkable as it was. Leave it to New Glarus to create a very well-balanced smoked beer that will be easily drinkable at any BBQ. I don’t detect any high levels of alcohol so either the beer hides it well, or I suspect it’s in the 7% range. (16 points)

Mouthfeel: The mouthfeel is medium with a good deal of carbonation. That would leave this beer the perfect pairing for a dinner of authentic pulled pork cooked low and slow. The palate cleansing carbonation is what helps make this beer as drinkable as it is.  (4 points)

Overall: I have to say I am impressed. My least favorite part of the beer was the aroma. At first glance it may appear that the smoke may dominate the flavor, leaving you with an overload of smoke, which may be OK for some people. For those who may being seeking a beer to drink quite a few of them, an overly smokey beer can be difficult to drink more than one. This beer delivers as a well-balanced, smokey beer. I don’t detect much contribution from the Turbinado sugar, maybe just a hint of molasses or brown sugar, but that could be coming for the malt as well. Perhaps the sugar helps dry out the finish. One thing I find a bit confusing is why they would release this in the dead of winter. This beer would pair so well with grilled and smoked food it is a crying shame that it comes out in probably the worst season to smoke meat. Still, I highly recommend trying this beer if you either have never had a smoked beer, or are one like myself who don’t like overly smokey beers.  (7 points)

In the end I score this a 38, which is a very respectable B+ in my opinion.

Review of Kona Coffee Macadamia Coconut Porter from Stone/Maui/Ken Schmidt

Posted on by
4

Kona Coffee Macadamia Coconut Porter: A collaboration brew between Ken Schmidt, Stone Brewing, and Maui Brewing Companies

I received this via a trade from Peter at Simply Beer. I am sure the first thing you may notice is the goblet. Yeah, sometimes I like to drink really good beers from glasses that were used as advertisements for crappy beer. Maybe it’s the irony of drinking great craft beer from a glass that some marketing guy thought would be a great way to showcase thier beer. Although I don’t think a goblet is the best glass for Hamms, it is a good glass for a bigger beer like this one. So if you don’t like my glass, too bad. I find it funny. Anyway, today I have Kona Coffee, Macadamia, Coconut porter. This is a collaboration beer between Ken Schmidt, Stone Brewing, and Maui Brewing.

Normally I review a beer according to the BJCP guidelines in my reviews. But for this one,  I don’t really think it will work well for the blog format. I have done several reviews of specialty beers, so you get the idea. However, for the most part it, specialty beers are highly subjective based on the judge who tries them. As long as the base style is stated, and is somewhat present in the specialty beer, the remainder is up to the judge if the beer is balanced or tastes good. For blog setting, a bjcp scoresheet really doesn’t seem to work well in my opinion. So I am thinking perhaps from now on, I will stick to just using the BJCP format for standard styles, and going a bit more informal for specialty (category 23) beers. Ok, so here is my review of Kona Coffee, Macadamia, coconut porter.

Aroma:Coffee, vanilla, and some of what may be perceived as macadamia nuts. If I were to say, it would be the coffee character and roasted grains that dominate. Overall, clean and not as muddled as the name may lead you to believe. Smells like a semi-sweet desert.

Appearance: Almost black and quite opaque. Normally porters are a bit more dark brownish, but black is acceptable to me. It poured a nice rich dark tan head. When held to the light, garnet highlights showed along the edges.

Flavor: The flavor is very interesting. Up front there is a bit of roasted grain and chocolate. In the middle the flavors really start to pop and take shape. The coffee comes through quite solidly here, followed by the unmistakable flavor of the coconut and macadamia. However, if that description was not in the name, I would simply say it was nutty. But knowing what it is, either solidified the flavor, or lead me down that path. There is some solid sourness here as well. Not a lactic or infected sour, but more than likely from the use of roasted grain. It’s a big beer, so it would come to reason that they used a lot of roasted grain, even if it was to proportion. It is also quite sweet, but the bitterness from both the coffee flavor and roasted grain help mellow that sweetness somewhat. The big 8.5% ABV is present, but far from hot. In the end, it tastes like a rich and roasty brownie that you may be washing down with a touch of sweetened coffee.

Mouthfeel: Very full-bodied for a porter. Slightly astringent. Medium to low carbonation.

Overall: Overall Glad I had it. But maybe my expectations were too high. The sourness was a bit over the top for what I would be looking for in a porter, the sourness can be present but should probably be light. The rest of the flavors didn’t so much blend, but they did play well together. It made for a very interesting beer. Although the flavors didn’t meld together, each one retaining its character did make for a complex and enjoyable beer. I would drink this again in a heartbeat.

If I had to give this one a score, I would put it in the mid 30′s range, and give it a letter grade of about a B or B+.