Style tweaks are getting ridiculous. This is like two cousins having a baby. Is it a rye ale crossed with a black IPA or is it a rye IPA crossed with a black IPA? It's a pretty hoppy black IPA, regardless. Smells malty, tastes malty, feels malty. And the hops are muddy in a rich way. A little too much residue for my liking though and not terribly spicy.
This is probably one of the few beers to which I've looked forward in recent memory. I picked up two bottles, one for the fridge and one for sitting, even though I know it won't keep well probably. For being an anniversary brew, it was pretty reasonably priced.
DAAAAAAAAAAMN. Watching the pour, thick resiny bubbles cropped up in the fine, dense head. A rich floral, hoppy aroma. And I mean floral. Usually when someone says floral, it means a slightly fragrant, maybe grassy, delicate non-bitter aroma. This is not that kind of floral. It is a bouquet.
This actually tastes somewhat more refined than Stone IPA and, presumably, Ruination. The up-front is relatively gently, but the IBUs kick in hard and fast, super punchy, really aggressive and persistent. The body is nice and light for the wallop, but leaves a bit of residue.
Really, I should have tried this next to a regular Ruination, but, alas, I did not. But this is a kickass, dangerously sippable/drinkable beer. I( will definitely have to pick up some more, if I see it around.
Finally getting into some new beer for another summer abroad. I haven't heard of Knee Deep so I picked up a bomber. This was actually a purchase from a few weeks ago, but I've been so busy lately that I haven't had much time to sit with a thoughtful beer. To be honest, I've mostly been drinking Copper Bell, $5 for a 12-pack at WF these days. Pretty hard to beat that.
First impression is a bit hop pellet-y, a typically bit unbalanced DIPA. Not going to be impressed, especially since I just finished a Stone IPA. But it's a funny bottle.
On a related note, WF was having a 20% off 375mL+-sized bottles today so I picked up a half dozen or so new ones, so hopefully I'll have some solid beers coming down the line soon. I should also probably pick up some more Copper Bell. I must say, I'm enjoying my boozing a bit more this summer without the self-imposed pressure of taking myself so seriously. Expect a lot more casual impressions rather than 5-point reviews. Got a hankering to head up to Lagunitas and Russian River soon.
I never got around to trying any Black Diamond last summer so here we are. It's only ok. It's nice for an IPA but there's something a bit watery behind it. Meh. I wouldn't be interested in buying this again. 'Nuff said.
A new Sam Adams I found the other day. I don't much much experience with Baltic porters so I didn't know what to expect. If I had to compare this to a black IPA, it fits the bill better than most. There is a sweetness and creaminess like a milk stout. It's not strongly bitter from the dark malts, and there is a nice, mild grassy hop taste on the back end. The mouthfeel is exceptionally smooth. Overall
I've been seeing these special brews from Sam Adams lately. They look pretty adventurous. I've been sitting on this one and another one lately and since I found a couple new ones the other day, I figured I should start working on one. Third Voyage is brewed with Cascades from UK, NZ and US so that's kind of cool. It's not as hooppy as I'd like for a double but maybe that's because it's mostly malty up front with the bitter showing up late. Not going to lie, there's some serious booziness going on.
Maybe it's because I'm sick, but I'm not really feeling this one. All somewhat unbalanced
Still working through the haul from the west. I brought back a lot of bombers from Port Brewing, which I think is a great all-around brewery. Even better, they make some pretty damn good pizza and their sister brewery, Lost Abbey isn't too shabby either. I picked up a couple bottles of the 5th Anniversary Ale since anniversary ales are usually pretty good and/or interesting. I was surprised to find that this is "yet another hop monster of a beer". Is it a hop monster? Not really. But it is a pretty hoppy, yet well-balanced IPA. Definite sweet malt up front with a jack-in-the-box hop backbone. A swish releases a lot of carbonation before releasing a healthy dose of hop bitter, slightly pilsener-y. Everyone on BA keeps mentioning pine, but I get more of resin-y taste.
First review since returning home last week. To be honest, with all the drinking I had done on the drive back, combined with the slew of upkeep, I had been feeling a little burnt out. But here we are. I picked up this bomber at the Sierra Nevada brewery because I had been so impressed with the Best of Beer Camp half-case I had earlier this summer.
The head is pretty creamy and soft though not terribly aromatic. With a name like "Hopsichord", I would expect this to be much hoppier, but it's more on a malty side with apple tones, surrounded with some overdeveloped hop bitter that draws out on the finish. Carbonation is low and smooth. Mostly, I don't think this is as harmonious as its name would imply. I can't figure out if something is actually unbalanced or if nothing really works together. Pretty disappointing.
In contrast, most people on BA noted a good balance and one said the hop bitter was harsh. So I don't know what's up with that. At 9.8%ABV, it's a little beefy.
I didn't necessarily want to pick up a whole six-pack for my last couple of days so I ended up getting two bombers, both happening to be interesting and new. I wouldn't even have seriously considered this one had it not said "wet hop". This is the companion ale to the Southern Hemisphere Harvest which uses fresh hops flown in from New Zealand. The confusing thing about wet hop and fresh hop is that fresh hops are actually whole-cones dried and then used within a few days while wet hops are undried and whole-cone hops used withing 24 hours of picking. The wet hops for this one, naturally, came from Yakima.
Pouring with a pretty full head, it leaves plenty of lacing down the glass. It's also a touch darker than I might see in an American IPA. The aroma is surprisingly subdued, noting the hoppiness but exuded some pine-y, woody, more organic character. The taste is fairly deep with a strong, lasting bitter but not palate-wrecking. Rather than resin-y, it's more oily and flavorful. It's well-smoothed over by the malts making for an exceptionally well balanced beer, both in terms of malts and hop and in terms of mouthfeel. It's full without being too voluminous.
This is really a well-put-together beer for Sierra Nevada. Assertive but not ostentatious, no off-flavors. At 6.7%ABV, it's still easy-going enough to be a relaxing beer or a dinner beer. I like it.
After spending the last few months climbing in the gym, I finally went outdoor climbing. We got pretty destroyed, and I almost fell off a cliff in the worst way. I'm pretty sure I've definitely earned this beer maybe. Also, this is a beer that I got from Cool New Friend Who Buys Beer For WF, so that is pretty cool. For some reason, the label looks very familiar, and i don't know if it's because I just saw it a lot here or if I've actually seen it back home. Beer labels are kind of like beers in that way that there's ones you remember and ones you don't. For some reason, this label makes me think of amateur homebrew guy trying to get some sales and distro. I think it's the font. I guess I am just not that into so much serif.
The pour looks resin-y and produces a decent, lasting head so that's potentially a good start. The aroma is hoppy, more on the weedy side than floral or grassy, perhaps an effect of the dry-hopping, of which they don't specify the format. The undercurrent of malt keeps a fairly potent bitterness in check, and there's a noticeably nice balance there, something that's far too uncommon in IPAs. My only outstanding complaint would have to be the carbonation level and shape which is a little too fizzy, a little too diet soda-like. Otherwise, it's not bad. It's a fairly standard, no-real-complaints, IPA, which is perhaps it's greatest detraction, that there's nothing outstanding about it. At 7.3%ABV, it's unusually strong, but no real complaints there. Because it's so bitter, I'm not sure I would want to pair it against anything other than a very spicy Thai curry with coconut milk.
Also, what is the deal with such aggressively named beers? I don't want a riot in my mouth. People get beat up at riots. Why can't they make an IPA called Hop Symphony or Sock Hop or Hop Pants-off Dance-off? These possibilities are far more intriguing than riots, armageddon, or other such devastation.
With the rash of New Zealand hops being used these days, I thought a New Zealand beer might be an interesting change of pace. Clearly, they are apt on marketing abroad as the top of their label proclaims "ALL THE WAY FROM NEW ZEALAND". I wonder what folks in New Zealand think when they see this. To be contextually appropriate, I am now listening to Flight of the Conchords.
The whiff is rich and malty with a almost resin-y with hops. Very nice. That's foreplay. Sweet, green, and grassy with lots of lacing. I know this bottle must have been sitting on the shelf forever, but it still smells almost fresh, not dried or pellet-y. But when we get down to business socks, it is not as epic as its namesake. And that's the unfortunate curse of many beers that insist on their epicness, that they will wreck your palate, and otherwise cause catastrophic devastation and calamities. No one wants that in their mouth anyway.
The hop character, while not a cataclysm, is thin and sharp, evident and rather firm. It's not necessarily metallic, but more akin some more organic surfacing material around a full, more-of-a-pale-ale body. It has a session feel despite being the odd 6.66%ABV. It's also a curious format, 1 pint and .9 fl oz. Everything's backwards on that side of the world. That being said, it's a very solid, retro IPA, without some of the more floral or wide-ranging hop complexities that's more commonplace today. Ultimately, I think it's lacking a solid malt backbone, which makes it very drinkable without being filling. The strong-enough hop character is just enough to carry its flimsy compatriot.
At the end of the day, it'll never be a concert flautist, but it's a decent, drinkable beer, depending on the street. I'm not sure if I would want to sit down and drink this on its own, but it might be a good opener for a night.
Speakeasy is a SF-local brewery. I had been putting off picking any up this summer since I figured I would get down there at some point. Since I'm packing up an leaving in a couple weeks, I'm doubtful I'll find myself there. And after having tasted this one, good time not wasted.
The head almost indicated something promising, but I couldn't get anything of the nose, which is really weird for an IPA. As it turns out, there's nothing to get out of the nose because there is nothing there. I have had lagers hoppier than this. This has got to be one of the wateriest IPAs I've ever had. And it's kind of flat to boot. This is my disappointed face: '_'
Hands down, one of the worst IPAs I've had. To be honest, I don't even want to finish this. There are IPAs that are terrible because they just totally fucked up going for something or because it was a bad bottle (I did get to try Denogginizer again; better bottle than the one I had.) but this is the worst because there's no effort. And that's basically as bad as Lex Luthor stealing forty cakes.
Second installation from the Longshot. A viscous, vinous-looking pour into a pint glass. First sip: ugh. What the hell happened here? It is very malty sweet, slightly unripened fruit, and cloying even though it's not a refined sweetness. Supposedly, this guy loves hops and he loves spicy Belgian ales. This has neither. There is some dark ale maltiness in the nose, but the taste is bordering on sour. To be honest, this seems to be either underfermented. or extremely young. Or maybe that sourness is supposed to be a mega-citrus component, but I'm just not feeling it. The more that I think about it, it tastes like some other Belgian-styled beer I had recently, but knows what the name was. Maybe this is just one of those beers.
I wanted to like it, I really did. But there's something not balanced out here. If they said to put some age on it, I would. I'm really missing the hops that were supposed to be in here, too. What gives? I don't even want to finish this bottle. It'd be well enough to piece out for a tasters, but what is it supposed to represent? For sure, this is a higher ABV at 9%, but if that's all you're getting, I'd be happier drinking a bourbon or gin.
After a disastrous Grand Teton experience last night, I felt compelled to go after the other one right away. After all, if it was going to be bad, I might as well find out now, and if it's good, well, that would a timely redemption. So anchors aweigh.
Right off the bat, I could tell this was malty, possibly resiny, from the way it poured into the glass. The head didn't stick around but exposes a glassy surface with visible tension. I was a little nervous about the first taste but the smell was inviting enough. With so much apprehension, actually tasting it left me a little confused. It's sweet and fruity with a tight ball of hop in the center towards the back. And then it just sort of disappears. Very confusing.
Not going to lie, I have kind of mixed feelings about this one. Slightly resiny with a double IPA like body. The carbonation is a little low, leaving the viscosity pretty high. However, the double hops component is not really there. As it warms up, the lack of a strong hop backbone leaves the malt unbalanced. There isn't a strong amber malt component either so for something so mild to be unbalanced says a lot. It's strange for it to be so fruity while still lacking so much hop character. At the end of the day, I think that lack is glaring and unforgivable in an double IPA. So I have to give it an F on the style. As a beer, it's slightly surprising and unique, whether it meant to be or not. Very meandering. Maybe Grand Teton was on the pursuit of hoppiness and got lost and wound up here. Herp derp.
I was told WF got the New Belgium Belgo in so I decided to pick up sixer. I was told it's like what it would be if Ranger and Mothership has a baby. I'm a fan of Ranger, so I thought I ought to check it out as long as I'm in range of NB's distro. Plus, NB always has very clean, aesthetically pleasing labels. It looks like Belgo is being represented by a giant disco ball so that's cool.
A quick taste yields and exceptionally spicy taste, very reminiscent of Hoegaarden. Holding it against the light, I would say it's quite clear but there is something suspended in the liquid. No idea what it is, and it doesn't seem to be circulating at all. Classic Belgian aroma but is somewhat milder on that palate. The spice gradually gives way to the hops which brings a slightly out of place bittering. What's interesting is that the spice seems to share the stage with the hops but eventually upstage it.
I'm a big fan of the Belgo IPA style, and so I want to love this beer. However, I can only say that I like it this time around. The Belgo-IPA balance is rather off. That's not to say it's a bad beer; it's certainly not. But it does favor the Belgo character much more than the IPA influence that is typical for this style. Perhaps that's what sets this one apart though. The Belgo IPA is typically cast as an IPA with a Belgo influence whereas this is more of a Belgian witbier with an IPA influence, though it does have the appearance and body of an IPA. At the end of the day, I think this is an interesting beer and a refreshing addition to the Belgo IPA style. As for pairings, I'm going to go with something mildly spicy with Thai basil and an aromatic rice, probably some kind of chicken curry instead of red meat.
I'm a big fan of rye bread. Rye whiskey has grown on me. While my first encounter with a rye beer was awkward, the grain has grown on me quite a bit. This particular bottle had been staring me in the face every time I went to the grocery. I like IPAs and I like rye, but I kept passing it up in favor of some other more interesting beer. Well, no more; I wanted a solid IPA to break the chain of lackluster beers I've had recently, not that I had any idea whether this was a solid beer or not. I should know well enough by now that if a beer catches my eye, I'm going to get a taste eventually.
The pour is slightly darker than a typical grassy IPA and gives a nice fresh whiff of fruit so we're off to a good start. A modest fine head dissipates to moss. What's the deal with head retention these days? Right off the bat, I get a taste of rye; glorious, spicy rye. The hop bittering is actually somewhat mild and allows the malts to take center stage for the most part. A little sweet freshness up front to some well-rounded malt sweetness in the middle, but the real treat is on the back end when the rye kicks in. The interplay between the hop bitter and rye spice is very pleasant and makes for a drawn-out finish.
Magnum, Amarillo, and Citra hops set Hops on Rye at 75IBU with a healthy 7.5%ABV. This is a nice kick-back-and relax-beer, especially in the bomber format. I can't say what I'd pair it with because I've just ruined my palate with some awesomely hot Casa Sanchez salsa.
I've been knocking off bottles of this this week, and I'm finally getting around to writing this up. Today is 110914, by the way. I remember actually kind of digging this when I first had it. Now that I'm winding down to the end of this 6-pack, my enthusiasm has somewhat tempered. That being said, here I am, nearly at the end of this 6-pack. This is an IPA, albeit, a slightly fizzy, watered-down one. It is nothing spectacular, excels in nothing. It tastes exactly like a watered down IPA. A flimsy hop presence with a whimper of bittering. While this bottle seems a little off compared to the previous ones, the core is still the same. It is a weak IPA, but at least it knows what it's trying to be.
