Sam Adams Summer Ale

I went out to eat with my husband and a friend last night.  The draft choices were sadly limited, so I got a Sam Adams Summer Ale.  Also sadly, my phone didn't want to charge, so I was unable to take a picture.  You're not missing much.

Vittles:
5.3% abv
7 IBUs
6 SRM
166 Cal.

Appearance: 7/10
It's a golden straw color, mildly hazy, with no head whatsoever.  I don't know if they didn't have their kegs under enough pressure there or what, but I was served a pretty unappetizing beer.

Aroma: 17/25
Barely detectable, but what I could smell was a very faint light maltiness.  I couldn't smell any hop characteristics, nor could I pick up on the citrus aroma that I know I've found in this beer before.

Taste: 25/40
I'm seriously not trying to pan this beer, but it tasted like faintly flavored water with just a vague hint of spiciness.  I've had this beer before, both on tap and from a bottle, and I remember it being more flavorful in the past, but this particular beer was very uninspiring.  The same light maltiness from the nose carried onto the tongue, and there was a slight lemon flavor in the aftertaste, but it really tasted very thin.  I was quite disappointed.

Mouthfeel: 8/10
It had a light-medium body, with low levels of carbonation.  It may have tasted like water, but at least it kind of sort of didn't quite feel like water.  Again, very disappointed, and I'm almost certain they didn't have the keg set to the proper psi.

Style: 4/5
American wheat ales are supposed to have a decent head with good retention, and the flavor should be more present than what I tasted in this Summer Ale.

Drinkability: 7/10
Not worth it for the price.  I'm hoping it was just a one-off, and not a change in the beer altogether.  I have had this beer before, and I did enjoy it in the past, but I feel like I paid twice as much for something that had less flavor and character than a macro lager.  It'd be fine for a sweaty day of yard work in the summertime, but I was less than thrilled having it with dinner.

Overall: 68/100
Maybe my tastes are changing.  Or maybe it was just an atypical pour.  That does happen from time to time. Either way, I feel like I should try another one, maybe from a different bar or out of a bottle, because it just didn't seem like I was drinking a Summer Ale.

Hoping the next one's better...  Cheers!

Tommyknocker Pick Axe IPA

The final bottle in my sampler was the Pick Axe IPA:

Vittles:

6.2% abv

55 IBU

Dry-hopped

Appearance: 8/10

This IPA poured a hazy burnt-amber/orange color with a very thin off-white head that fell very quickly and left little to no lacing.  So far, I'm not overly impressed.

Aroma: 19/25

Floral and citrus aromas hit me first, followed up by a mellow, sweet, malty scent that I wasn't really expecting to pick up on as clearly in an American IPA.  There are also very faint hints of grass, spice, and pine, and I think I might smell something herbal, too, but it's extremely faint.  The hops aromas aren't very strong, nor is the malt aroma.  I was expecting a more solid hop nose, but then again, Tommyknocker's black IPA at 78 IBUs didn't exactly pack a wallop, either, so I don't know why I was expecting their 55 IBU IPA to be any stronger.

Taste: 28/40

Again, floral and citrus notes are apparent up front, and the taste of the sweet malt hits the tongue next.  All three of these flavors are on the weak side.  The other hop flavors are somewhat present, but you have to roll the beer around to taste any of them.  I'm not impressed by the bitterness level, either.  This is a pansy IPA, despite the 55 IBUs, especially when considering that is was dry-hopped, because I really don't taste any of the characteristics that dry-hopping should add.  The aftertaste reflected mostly the same flavors, but the malt was a little more apparent.

This is a beer that should clearly be on the hoppy end of the scale, but it's more middling, since the hop flavors are somewhat subdued, the bitterness is very subdued, and the malt profile is more apparent.  This beer might have 55 IBUs (and the Hop Strike might have 78) on paper, but in reality, there could be several factors decreasing hop utilization, from the levels of SO4 in the brew liquor, to the mash pH, to the length of boil, and so on.  

Mouthfeel: 6/10

It's pretty thin and has fairly low levels of carbonation.  At times, it even felt a little watery, which detracted from the beer even more.

Style: 3/5

The head did not persist like it should for this style, and the mouthfeel was more watery instead of medium-light bodied.  It is certainly not "decidedly hoppy and bitter," so it loses points on that count, too.

Drinkability: 7/10

Because it isn't as hoppy or bitter of a beer as most IPAs, it's easier to enjoy with a wider range of foods.  It's a decent beer to sip while enjoying a sunny day in the backyard, but don't expect it to wow you, especially if you're looking for an actual IPA.

Overall: 71/100

If you want an IPA, look elsewhere.  If you want a beer that won't sit so heavy on your palate or coat your tongue in resiny numbness, but still lets you sample some American hops flavors, you might enjoy this one.  I really didn't find much in this beer that would make me want to buy it again, but I'm glad I tried it once.

Time to find another sampler, I suppose.  Cheers!

Tommyknocker Hop Strike Black IPA

It's been a long time since I've had a black IPA, so I snagged the Hop Strike out of the sampler next:

Vittles:

6.5% abv

78 IBUs

Appearance: 9/10

This beer looks black until you shine some light through it.  Then you can see the pretty ruby gleam.  It's very dark but crystal clear.  The light tan head starts with a decent showing but falls pretty fast, leaving heavy lacing.

Aroma: 18/25

I was hit first by the roasted/burnt grain smell, which I was expecting to dominate the malty side of the profile.  I also picked up floral, chocolate, coffee, mild vegetal, and faint pine and slightly spicy aromas.  The malt smells were a little bit more dominant than the hops aroma, which I wasn't expecting, since American IPAs are usually hopped fairly aggressively.

Taste: 30/40

It's really a very average tasting beer for an IPA, especially for an American IPA.  The hops profile could barely be called assertive, certainly not aggressive in flavor or aroma.  It just doesn't pack that hop punch that I was expecting, especially since it's listed at a whopping 78 IBUs.  I've had more bitter-tasting beers down in the 30s range, to be honest.  As far as the actual flavors go, again, the malt side of the scale wins out by a hair.  Roasted grains and that earthy rye taste dominated the flavor profile, rounded out by floral, pine, bitter chocolate, and coffee.  The aftertaste was thick, bitter, and lingering.

Mouthfeel: 8/10

Moderately low levels of carbonation lend this beer more of a medium-bodied mouthfeel.  It feels a little velvety on the tongue, with just a very slight sting -- enjoyable.

Style: 5/5

As a black rye IPA, this beer would be entered in category 23, Specialty Beer, according to the BJCP, and the guidelines allow quite a bit of leeway.  I was very much tempted to give it a 4/5 here, since the bitterness aspect makes a pretty poor showing.  Maybe I'm just feeling a little lenient today.

Drinkability: 7/10

It's average for a craft beer, which means it's good compared to, say, a macro lager.  I would like to try it on tap, or, even better, from a cask.  Even so, I'd probably only have one, and I wouldn't really go out of my way to buy this again or recommend it to anyone.  I've had better black IPAs and better rye IPAs, but isn't a bad example of either type.  It's just average.

Overall: 77/100

The label works against the beer.  You see that it's got 78 IBUs, and you think, "Great!  It should really knock my socks off!" and you look forward to that bitter bitch slap, only to get a mild love tap instead.  It's a little disappointing, and it took away from my enjoyment of the beer, since every time I took a sip, I thought, "Damn, I wish this was just a little more bitter."

One left to try, and it's another IPA.  Cheers!

Tommyknocker Alpine Glacier Pilsner

The fourth beer I grabbed out of my Tommyknocker sampler was the Alpine Glacier Pilsner:

Vittles:

5.1% abv

31 IBUs

Appearance: 9/10

It pours a straw/pale golden color with a large, off-white head.  The head retains nicely, and when it falls, it leaves significant lacing.  The beer itself is crystal clear, and you can see a decent amount of effervescence.

Aroma: 19/25

A faint malt background is noticeable, as is an earthy straw/hay/grass kind of aroma.  I also picked up on mild spiciness and a slight floral character.  It smells fairly delicate.  After the head fell, I could also smell that cooked vegetable/creamed corn odor of DMS.  DMS does rear its ugly head more readily in pale lagers, but a good brewer will use methods like the roiling boil, an uncovered brew kettle, and/or a strong fermentation to help reduce the DMS.  I'm not saying Tommyknocker didn't use those methods (or that they're not good brewers).  I'm just saying there's still some DMS left over, which is allowable for this style.

Taste: 30/40

Not what I was expecting after the aroma.  The malt taste was fairly mild and consisted of straw/hay notes, a very subdued breadiness, and a barely there biscuit flavor.  The more noticeable flavors were piney/resiny, floral, and a nice spiciness that makes your tongue feel alive.  The aftertaste is heavy, thick, and lingering, and it also tastes of pine and resin, with fainter floral and spicy notes.

Mouthfeel: 7/10

This beer has a light to medium body with moderate carbonation.  It finishes fairly dry, which is accentuated by the thick aftertaste.

Style: 5/5

There are three kinds of pilsners: German, Bohemian, and Classic American.  This beer fits the German Pils category very nicely.  The only unexpected for me was the pine/resin taste.

Drinkability: 7/10

I wouldn't go out of my way to have another of these beers.  One was enough.  It's not a bad beer, but it really isn't better than average in any sense of the word.  It was a little unexpected where taste and flavor are concerned, but again, not necessarily in a bad way.

Overall: 77/100

It was a bit heavier of a taste than I was expecting out of a pilsner, and I attribute that mainly to the pine, resin, and spice flavors.  This probably would have been better to have with a meal instead of sipping after yard work.  Honestly, if someone handed me a glass of this beer and didn't tell me what it was, I probably would have taken it for an APA or even a mild AIPA.  It just didn't have the balance of maltiness and hoppiness that I thought it should have had.

Two left to try, and both are IPAs.  Cheers!

Tommyknocker Vienna Amber Lager

My third Tommyknocker beer wound up being the Vienna Amber Lager:

Appearance: 9/10

It's a crystal-clear amber with an inch and a half off-white head.  The head persists nicely, and when it falls, it leaves moderate lacing behind.  The carbonation is visible and inviting.

Aroma: 21/25

Starts off malty, finishes slightly fruity, maybe like cherries?  There's also hints of barley, biscuit, mild earthy tones, and a light peppery-spiciness.  Interesting nose overall.

Taste: 30/40

On the malty side of the spectrum, this beer also has toasty, caramel, floral, fruity (again, picking up some cherry?), and spicy flavors.  I like the rich, grainy taste, but I was expecting less hop bitterness from a Vienna-style lager.  I like the other hop characteristics, and I think they combine to make a very drinkable beer, but it's a little different from what the name led me to believe I would be drinking.  I'm not really sure where the "Vienna" part comes in with this beer, since it tastes more like a regular amber lager or even a brown ale.

Mouthfeel: 8/10
Medium-bodied with a crisp finish.  Very, very faint alcohol-warmth lingers on the back of my tongue, as does a fuzzy, tingly feeling.  What little aftertaste remains is on the malty side, and it's very faint.

Style: 3/5
Vienna lagers shouldn't have any fruity esters, but I'm picking up on cherries.  The finish and aftertaste also diverge from the style guidelines, as do the IBUs -- this beer has 33 IBUs, while the style calls for 18-30.  The abv just squeaks by on the top end at 5.5%.

Drinkability: 8/10
Slightly above average for drinkability.  If my local bars offered this on tap, I'd like to try it that way, but chances are slim.  It has a good flavor but lacks the overpowering aftertaste that I'm not so fond of in other beers.

Overall: 79/100
So far, Tommyknocker Brewery seems to produce decent beers -- nothing spectacular so far, but enjoyable nonetheless.  I would probably get this beer again.  I think it would be a good beer to give a friend as an introduction to craft beers.

Cheers!

Tommyknocker Jack Whacker Wheat

Jack Whacker Wheat Ale was the second Tommyknocker beer I tried:

Appearance: 9/10

Damn that's a good lookin' beer!  With the unfiltered golden-orange body and the nearly-white foamy head, it really does make me want to take a nice long pull.  It's actually a little bit lighter in color than the picture makes look.  I should find a better spot for pics.

Aroma: 20/25

Before the head fell, I had trouble picking up on any kind of aroma whatsoever.  But, once the foam settled, the aroma was a very pleasing combination of light wheat, loads of lemon, and more subdued floral and grassy notes.  I would have scored it higher, but I didn't like that I couldn't smell it before the head fell.

Taste: 33/40

The solid wheat base accentuates the strong lemon flavors.  It almost tastes like they dissolved Lemonheads in the brew, but without that sickly sweetness.  Their website says they added lemon grass, and I like the flavors it imparts.  Just like with the nose, the floral and grassy flavors are present but very subdued.  There is also a faint but very pleasing biscuit/cracker/dough-like yeasty flavor, which I think nicely complements the rest of the flavor profile.

Mouthfeel: 9/10

It's a bit thin at first, but rolling it around your mouth releases the carbonation to bring out a mild sting and a more full-bodied mouthfeel.  I could feel the bubbles forming on my tongue, which was an interesting sensation.  This beer finished moderately dry, followed by a very slight warmth from the 4.7% abv.  The aftertaste is very light, not bitter at all, and it leaves a faint dough/lemon/wheat flavor on the tongue.

Style: 5/5

This isn't a German-style hefeweizen; it's an American wheat beer.  This beer does not have the banana esters or the clove phenols common to German hefeweizens, and that's a good thing.  American wheat beers should have citrusy, floral, or spicy esters, and the banana and clove flavors that many people expect from wheat beers would be out of place in this style.  This beer hits the nail on the head for the American Wheat Beer category.

Drinkability: 8/10

It's a decent and enjoyable beer, but I wouldn't spend extra money for one.  I'd prefer something like this to have with a meal, and I'd love to try it on tap, but chances of that happening in the foreseeable future aren't that great.  I would recommend it to anyone who likes lighter flavors in their beer.  It would probably go exceptionally well with grilled chicken or fish.

Overall: 84/100

So far, I'm fairly impressed with Tommyknocker Brewery.  Both of the beers I've tried so far have been enjoyable, flavorful, and somewhat on the malty side of the scale.  I still have four of their beers to try, and I'm looking forward to them all.  I haven't yet decided where I'll rank these guys in my mega-list of brewers, but they'll be going in the database later today, and I can sort the rest out after I've tried a few more of their brews.

Cheers!

Tommyknocker Maple Nut Brown Ale

It's been a few days since I've tried a new beer (hence the lack of new posts...).  So, I swung by the bottle shop on my way home today to see what kind of selection they had to offer.  Lately, they've been getting some different craft beers, though the bulk of what they offer still seems pretty bland.  Anyway, I saw a sampler from Tommyknocker Brewery, and I've never tried any of their beers before, so I thought, what the hell, why not?  What I like about it right off the bat, before even opening up the box, is that there are 6 varieties (2 of each) instead of the usual 3-4 that most samplers offer.  (The only other brewer that I've seen do this so far is Sam Adams, so sidebar kudos to them!)

So, I grabbed a bottle out of the box without looking.  I wound up with their Maple Nut Brown Ale:

Appearance: 10/10

It's a rich, dark amber with ruby highlights.  The off-white head retains nicely, and when it does fall, it leaves very pretty lacing on the mug.  This beer screams, "Drink me!"

Aroma: 20/25
The nose is mainly roasted malt with nutty and caramel hints.  I can't really make out any maple, but that isn't really surprising, since the aromatics in maple syrup can be carried off by the heat if the syrup boils too long in the brew.  It's still an appealing aroma, despite the lack of maple scent.

Taste: 31/40
After a second or two, I can pick up on the roasted malt flavors, some subdued nuttiness (hazelnut?), and an extremely ephemeral wisp of maple.  That burst of flavor is very brief, though, which was a little disappointing.  I actually taste more flavor in the aftertaste than I do while the beer's in my mouth.  In the aftertaste, I get the maple flavor much clearer.  I also get a very rich, malty background, nuttiness, maple sweetness, a tinge of coffee, and a dab of toffee in the aftertaste.

Mouthfeel: 7/10
This beer seems to have two faces: at times, it's thin and watery in both flavor and mouthfeel.  Then, it switches up on you and you get a burst of flavor along with a full-bodied sensation, but neither one lasts very long.  Moderate carbonation brings a very mild sting to the tongue.  It finishes with a slight alcohol-warmth in the back of the throat and mild dryness on the front of the tongue.

Style: 5/5
While it seems a little thin, like it somewhat lacks that robust flavor I associate with brown ales, this beer actually matches the guidelines for this style pretty well, though it is bottomed out for IBUs -- brown ales usually range from 20-40, and this one squeaks in at 20.  And, like I said, one sip might be thin and bland, but the next sip might be full and robust.  I'm not sure why I'm getting such an inconsistent taste out of it.

Drinkability: 8/10
Very drinkable.  This would pair well with anything but light fish, really.  Heavier-tasting seafood, like maybe shark steaks, would probably go extremely well with this, especially if done on the grill.  This is also a pretty good beer to just sip on a lazy afternoon, like today.

Overall: 81/100
Despite the uneven tasting experience, I like this beer.  It's on the maltier end of the spectrum, which is what I tend to prefer these days.  It's probably not the first brown ale that would come to mind if someone were to ask me for a recommendation, but it is decent.  It's also nice to find a beer with these flavors in a beer with only 4.5 abv.

Cheers!

Boulder Beer Co. Mojo

The fourth of the Boulder Beers that I got to try was their Mojo, a 7.2% abv IPA:

Appearance: 7/10
Mojo poured a golden-straw color with little to no head and low levels of carbonation.  It's not all that appealing.  I'd probably drink this one from the bottle next time, since pouring it out doesn't really add anything to the enjoyment of the beer.

Aroma: 22/25
The aroma is very pleasant and fairly hoppy.  I picked up on pine, citrus (lemon?), and honey, with a faint hint of spiciness (cinnamon?) in the background.  The malt aromas are present but more subdued.  I could smell a mild caramel malt scent and maybe a hint of biscuit.  As the beer warmed, I could smell a little grapefruit, too.

Taste: 35/40
This is a solid IPA.  The pine, resin, citrus, and mild spice flavors come through best for me, and the honey taste is more subdued.  I also tasted some fruitiness as the beer warmed, maybe something like peach, but it was very faint.  The hop characteristics are decently complex, and the malt flavors provide a balancing backdrop, with just a slight amount of malty sweetness to offset the hop bitterness.  This isn't a very bitter beer for an IPA, but it is very tasty.  The aftertaste is also less bitter than many other IPAs.

Mouthfeel: 7/10
It's a little on the thin side, but it doesn't quite feel watery.  There's a low amount of carbonation and little alcohol warmth.  It finishes fairly crisp and dry, and the aftertaste doesn't linger overly long.

Style: 4/5
This is another tricky one.  From what I can tell, it could be either an English IPA or an American IPA.  The brewer's website is unhelpful here.  It says Mojo "was inspired by the English ... but brewed with an attitude of the great American West."  BeerAdvocate calls it an American IPA, but if that's the case, this beer's a little easy on the hops, since it's more of a balanced beer and lacks the "prominent and intense hop aroma," and it's not "decidedly hoppy and bitter" like the BJCP style guidelines specify for American IPAs.  (The BJCP style guidelines can be downloaded here.)  An English IPA, on the other hand, is expected to have less of a punch in the hop aroma department, but the expected hop flavors should be floral, grassy, earthy, etc., where Mojo is more piney, citrusy, and resiny, like you would expect from and American IPA.  In either case, it doesn't quite fit the bill, though both styles do meet nicely in this beer.

Drinkability: 8/10
I enjoyed this beer.  If I were looking for something with a good but not overpowering hop presence, I'd get this again.  It went very well with the marinated and grilled portobello mushrooms I made.  Nice and smooth beverage to enjoy with a meal.

Overall: 83/100

If you enjoy the very powerful IPAs (think Sierra Nevada Hoptimum or Green Flash Palate Wrecker), you might not be impressed with this beer.  I like it for it's balance and for the smoother hop flavors.  I like that it doesn't coat my tongue with an overly bitter, acrid, or lingering aftertaste, but it would be better with a bit more of a full-bodied mouthfeel, I think.  It could also stand to be a wee bit more bitter, since it is an IPA, after all.

I'm always happy when I get to pick up a sampler or when I can fill up a mix & match sixer with beers I've never tried before.  I mentioned in one of my previous posts that I like to try at least one new beer each month, and I think I've already blown that number out of the water this year.  It's a good year for beer.  Cheers!

Boulder Beer Co. Sweaty Betty

The third beer I tried out of my Boulder Beer sampler was the Sweaty Betty, a blonde wheat ale:

Appearance: 9/10

Let's face it: with a foamy, white, one-inch head and that beautiful, hazy straw-colored hefeweizen look, this is a gorgeous beer.  The head fell pretty quickly, though, leaving slight lacing on the glass.

Aroma: 19/25

The aroma didn't really draw me in like I was hoping, especially since I didn't pick up on the phenols and esters that I was looking forward to.  I'm a big fan of hefeweizen beers, but I didn't really smell much in the way of banana or clove here.  Instead, I got more of a light wheat nose and a grassy, earthy, straw-like aroma -- not a bad aroma, just not what I was expecting.  There were also some faint citrus notes, but they were more subdued.

Taste: 31/40

The grassy and earthy flavors came through the strongest for me.  I could taste both the malt and the hops, which again gave a nice balance to the beer, but I wasn't overly fond of the main flavor profile.  My husband had a taste of this one, too, and he said it has a bacon-like flavor (we also notice a bacony taste in Troegs' Dream Weaver wheat).  I don't taste the bacon as strongly in this beer as I do in Dream Weaver, but there is still a faint hint of it.

Mouthfeel: 7/10
I didn't really notice the mouthfeel much at all when I tasted this beer.  A moderate level of carbonation didn't bring the sting on the tongue, nor did it make the beer feel more full-bodied.

Style: 3/5
For a Bavarian-style hefeweizen, there are a few points where this differs from the style expectations, especially in the esters/phenols (banana and clove were noticeably lacking in this beer), and the head retention.

Drinkability: 7/10
I'd drink it if someone else bought it for me, but my money would be better spent on other beers.  It's a good beer to have after you mow the lawn and the grassy taste is already in your mouth, I suppose.

Overall: 76/100
If you love the clove and banana scents/flavors common to hefeweizens, you may be disappointed with this beer.  It's the first of the Boulder beers that I'm not overly thrilled with.  I wouldn't stoop so low as to use it for cooking stock, but I also won't be going out of my way to buy it again.

One left to try.  Cheers!

Boulder Beer Co. Hazed & Infused

Today seemed like a good day to try the Hazed & Infused that came in the Boulder Beer Co. sampler that I picked up earlier in the week.  I'm not always thrilled with dry-hopped beers, since they tend to seem very sharp or harsh to me, like the hop flavors would be better if they had more of a chance to mellow.  So, I went in sort of expecting to be disappointed, and I really didn't think I would like this beer:

Appearance: 8/10

The head poured very thin and fell pretty quickly.  The beer itself fits smack dab in the amber range, and the head is off-white.  It's unfiltered and therefore cloudy (hence, "hazed").  Overall, looks fairly appealing.

Aroma: 20/25
The aroma is primarily hoppy, which is exactly what I was expecting to smell.  The hop aroma consists of floral, spicey, citrusy, and piney notes.  A smooth malt background is also detectable.  The hop aroma isn't overpowering; instead, it's subtle and mellow, and it draws you in.

Taste: 34/40
I was truly surprised.  As I mentioned, I went into tasting this beer with a negative expectation, but I actually liked it quite a bit.  It does have that dry-hopped taste, but it isn't overpowering.  None of the hops flavors are overpowering.  They're all nicely in balance, without that sharpness that I often associate with dry-hopped beers.  The pine, floral, and citrus flavors came through the strongest for me, but they were pleasant and enjoyable, and I didn't feel like I got sucker punched by a ton of hop bitterness.  I like the way Boulder was able to emphasize the hop flavors without accentuating the hop bitterness.

Mouthfeel: 8/10
Low to moderate levels of carbonation add to the full-bodied feel without the sting.  The 5% abv leaves no alcohol-warmth, which is good, because I think that warmth would detract from this beer.  The beer itself feels a little silky in the mouth and finishes slightly dry.

Style: 5/5
This is a little tricky, since Boulder Beer's website lists this as an amber ale, while sites like BeerAdvocate say it's an American Pale Ale (APA).  I tend to agree with the brewer here, and the color fits the SRM range of amber ales better.  Boulder's website doesn't list the IBUs for this beer, which also makes this a wee bit tricky.  However, APAs have a slightly higher expected IBU range (30-45) than amber ales (25-40), and as I said before, this isn't an overly bitter beer.  It does have a lot of the hop characteristics, but the bitterness isn't very aggressive, so I'd guess that the IBUs are in a slightly lower range.  When considering this beer as an amber, I think it's spot on.

Drinkability: 8/10
This is a surprisingly drinkable beer, since it doesn't pack that bitter punch or the heavy bitter aftertaste that many dry-hopped beers have.  It's a great beer to drink with a meal, and it would pair well with any foods that aren't very light or very heavy.

Overall: 83/100
I'm not surprised that this beer came out so similar to the last Boulder beer that I had.  I like that the emphasis on these two beers has been balance.  It gives me hope that the rest of their beers will follow suit, and if that's the case, then I would probably place Boulder Beer Co. a little higher on my list of all-time favorite brewers.

Maybe I'll try the Sweaty Betty next.  Cheers!

Boulder Beer Never Summer Ale

I stopped by a local bottle shop yesterday and picked up a sampler from Boulder Beer Co.  The sampler contains Never Summer Ale, Hazed & Infused, Mojo, and Sweaty Betty.  I've heard some pretty good things about their beers before, but haven't actually tried any myself.  Until yesterday, that is.  I started off with the Never Summer Ale:

Appearance: 8/10
This beer pours a cherry-brown with ruby notes and a small, off-white head.  There wasn't much of a head when poured, and the head settled fairly quickly, leaving a neat honeycomb pattern on top of the beer.  The beer itself was very clear; looks crisp, clean, and inviting.

Aroma: 20/25
The aroma was pleasing.  I could pick up both malt and hops, and the hop characteristics came through well on the nose.  Pine was the main hop aroma I picked up on, though there were also hints of resin, leather, bread, and maybe straw.

Taste: 34/40
What struck me the most about the taste was that it was very well-balanced.  Flavors of both maltiness (esp. bready) and hoppiness (spicey, floral, herbal, piney) were both clearly present, and they did not clash with each other, but accentuated each other.  I was fairly well impressed with the flavor profile overall.  It doesn't have the complexity that I find in other beers of this type, but those beers often lack the real balance of this beer.  The 40 IBUs are nicely matched with the sweetness of the malt, and the more you roll this beer around your mouth, the more complementary flavors come out.

Mouthfeel: 8/10
With just the right level of carbonation and full-bodied mouthfeel, this aspect adds to the enjoyment of the beer.  It's the kind of beer that you can roll around in your mouth without getting that unpleasant sting from too much carbonation.  At 6.5% abv, there's just a very slight alcohol-warmth on the back end -- very enjoyable.

Style: 5/5
Though the bottle/packaging doesn't explicitly say what kind of beer this is, I think it's fairly safe bet to call it a winter warmer.  And since the guidelines are pretty lenient in that category, it's kind of hard to lose points there.

Drinkability: 8/10
I did enjoy this beer quite a bit, and it was a good introduction to the Boulder Beer Co. for me.  The flavors were pleasing, I can think of quite a few dishes this beer would go well with (mainly heartier dishes), and I would definitely drink it again.  I'm looking forward to trying the rest of Boulder's beers.

Overall: 83/100
I'll have to try a few of their other beers before I decide for myself where Boulder Beer Co. will rank in my all-time list of brewers, but based on this one beer, I'd say they do merit some applause.  (If that sounds grudging, it's because the people who hyped up Boulder Beer Co. to me also hyped up things like Twilight, so my opinion of their opinion is pretty low.  But they weren't wrong here.  Fluke?  I hope so.)

I can't believe I just referred to Twilight in a beer review.  That makes me feel so... dirty.  Ugh.  This might be a drink-to-forget kind of day.  Cheers!

Why I Started Homebrewing

For Christmas 2007, my mother-in-law got my husband a homebrew kit.  He and I were still just dating back then.  I didn't really know what homebrew was, and I wasn't overly excited about it -- it sounded like a lot of work, and I'll admit I'm pretty damn lazy.  And it sounded a little hectic, what with the strongly worded warnings about messy boil-overs and the need for stringent sanitation methods.

Early in January 2008, we made our first batch.  It was a California Common.  I remember how delicious it made the whole kitchen smell while it was gently bubbling away on the stove.  It was such a lovely golden brown soup in the brew kettle.  It almost looked like very liquidy caramel.  And the wort tasted so very good before the wee yeasties even went to work on it!  When it was done cooking, we pulled it off the heat and dunked it in an ice bath in the kitchen sink.  We made a bit of a mess pouring it from the brew kettle into the primary fermenter, and I remember thinking, "This better be some damn good beer for all this mess I'm going to have to clean!"  We pitched the yeast, closed it up, and tucked it out of the way.

The next afternoon, when I was getting my lunch together, I heard a strange soft clicking noise.  It was a steady, constant sound, and it took me a couple minutes to track it down.  The fermentation had kicked off, and at that moment, when I could see the yeast farts escaping through the airlock, I was hooked.  Before me sat a 6 gallon plastic bucket full of life.  Those bubbles coming through the airlock told me that millions of little yeasties were alive and thriving, busy converting the sugars in the wort into alcohol.  You could smell the breadiness, that yeast smell, when you leaned in closer to the fermenter.  I sat enthralled, watching the airlock tick-tick-tick for some time.  Before I went to bed that night, I checked up on my little friends again, and they were madly at it.  I went to bed with happy thoughts.

In the morning, the bubbling was slower again, and by night, it seemed to have stopped all together.  I was a kind of disappointed and sad.  I knew it couldn't have kept bubbling away forever, and I knew that no more bubbling meant the beer was just about ready to bottle, but my voracious little friends were now starving.  They had destroyed their own environment, filled it up with their delicious waste.

We let the newly produced beer sit for about another week, just to make sure that the fermentation was completely finished, since we would be bottling our brew.  There were several more strong warnings about making sure that the final gravity really had bottomed out, lest one's beer bottles turn into glass grenades.

So, mid-January, we primed and bottled our first batch.  We numbered the caps, too.  We wanted to drink a few immediately and tuck a few away for longer and longer periods of time, so we used the numbers on the caps to determine when we would let ourselves try it.  We wanted to see how the flavors changed as the beer aged more.

The problem was that it was such a damn good beer, especially for our first time out of the gate, that we couldn't help but ignore our numbered cap/aging system.  Before we knew it, we only had a couple bottles left.  Sadly, we didn't get much of a chance to brew again until a couple years later (our second batch was an Irish Stout).

The more batches I brew, the stronger my love for brewing becomes.  My only regret is that I didn't discover my love for brewing beer until well after I had chosen my profession and spent many thousands of dollars getting my degrees.  I think the last decade or so of my life could have played out very differently if I had been allowed to experience the brewing world, and my passion for it, earlier in life.

Finding your passion in life is important.  Get out there and figure out what makes you happy, and go after it. Cheers!

Isaac Newton's

When I find myself in Bucks County, PA, there's a place called Isaac Newton's that I love to visit.  Located in Newtown, Isaac Newton's offers an excellent selection of craft beers, both on tap and in bottles.  They carry many of the beers on my wishlist, and I can usually find my stock favorites there, as well.  I'm also glad they list their available and upcoming beers and events like keg tappings on their website, so I can plan ahead if I know I'm going to be in town.

The atmosphere is about what you'd expect from a restaurant that boasts a prodigious beer list.  They have a decent menu and a nice outdoor seating area for warmer weather.  Their prices are a tad higher than I'd like, but I'm not going to gripe too much about it since they do have a spectacular selection, and they regularly rotate in new beers.  If there were a place like that within 30 mins or so of where I live, I'd be simultaneously in heaven and in the poor house.  Sadly, I doubt the local economy would support such an establishment where I am, since most people around here seem to go for the Big 3: Bud Light, Miller Lite, or Coors Light.  At least, those three take up the bulk of the floor/shelf space at the local distributors and bottle shops, so I'd say it's safe to assume that those beers make up the bulk of their purchases.  Otherwise they wouldn't stock so much of them, right?

There I go digressing again.  It is nice to have set places that I can rely on for a good variety, like Zeno's and The Deli (and sometimes Champs) in State College, and Isaac Newton's and The Candlewyck in Bucks County.  I guess I'll keep up the hunt, and fill the craft void with homebrew in the meantime.

Cheers!

Boaks Two Blind Monks

There's a Weis grocery store in Lewisburg, PA that sells beer by the six-pack, so when I went a-visitin' for Easter, I stopped by to see if I could find something I hadn't tried before.  I did see several varieties of craft beers that looked interesting, and there were a few brewers I hadn't heard of before sitting on the shelves.  I wound up getting a Belgian style dubbel called Two Blind Monks, made by Boaks.  I had never heard of Boaks before, so I thought, what the heck, why not?  I was pretty satisfied with my choice:

Appearance: 8/10
It pours a medium amber brown with not much of a head and little head retention.  (I know, it's not the best background to see the color against, but I'm not going to carry around a sheet of white paper every time I think I might have a beer.)  I'm sure it would look more appealing in the "proper" glassware.

Aroma: 20/25
The aroma is very malty, almost bready.  There is a bit of fruitiness to the nose, maybe cherries and/or raisins?  It smells fairly sweet, too, a little like caramel.  My husband said he thought it smelled and tasted like wort, and I can see where he's coming from.

Taste: 33/40
The flavor, like the aroma, is predominantly malty.  There's a good roasted malt flavor on the back end that is very pleasing.  The fruitiness doesn't come through as well in the taste as it does in the nose, but the sweetness is still present.  It has a rich, almost-full flavor, and the combination of the roasted tones and the sweetness remind me a bit of molasses.  There is very little hoppiness, so if you like hop-heavy beers, this might not be your cuppa.

Mouthfeel: 8/10
This is almost a "chewable" beer.  It definitely does not have that watery thinness to it.  It feels silky on the tongue and finishes with a good alcohol-warmth that reflects the 7% abv.  There's a very slight dryness on the back end, as well.

Style: 4/5
The aroma and flavor aren't as complex or estery as I'd expect, and this beer doesn't have the dense and well-retained head expected in the Belgian dubbel style.  Aside from those two points, Two Blind Monks fits the rest of the style expectations nicely.

Drinkability: 8/10
I wouldn't put this beer in my top 10, but it is definitely the kind of beer I would readily recommend to people who enjoy maltier beers.  I found it to be very drinkable, since it's fairly smooth and mellow.  The flavors seem nicely balanced and well-blended.

Overall: 81/100
I was glad I picked up this beer to try.  Two Blind Monks did not disappoint, and it was a good beer to enjoy with Easter dinner.  This beer seems like it would pair well with any hearty kind of meal, but it would be too strong to have with something like fish.  I will certainly be looking for other beers from Boaks to try in the future.

Cheers!

Yuengling Light Lager

So, since a beer in the Lite American Lager category kindly pointed out for me that I had some flaws in my rubric, I'll use a different beer in the same category to test my revisions.  First, the revisions:

Instead of comparing each category to the style, which now seems somewhat redundant and has the added effect of handcuffing me, I pulled the style considerations out into their own category.  It gets a small chunk of points because, let's face it, the experience of the beer is more important for the average consumer than how well it fits into a particular style.  I know I'm usually thinking, "that's pretty decent, maybe I'll pick up a case," not "well, the SRM is a little off, and it's got too much head for it's style, so it's just awful."  You get the idea.

Anyway, my stock is somewhat dwindling from my recent samplings (again, I don't normally drink a beer every single night, and when I do, more often than not it's the same beer night after night, since I usually get a cheap case of something drinkable).  So, the only Lite American Lager I have on hand is Yuengling Light Lager, in cans.  It got a very brief spot and no actual review on my St. Patty's Day post, since I generally don't have good beer after good beer (with only a few exceptions).  It seems like a bit of a waste to me -- after you start to get tipsy, it's hard to pick out and appreciate the complexities and subtleties.  And even if you think that you can pick up on them, you really can't be sure that your palate isn't playing tricks on you, or that you aren't tasting the aftertaste of the first along with the second.  Plus, that's a very expensive way to drink, and I'm not made of money (hence the deal-shopping at distributors).

Appearance: 7/10
The appearance doesn't really wow me, but it doesn't turn me off, either, the way most light lagers do.  It looks like a drinkable beer.  It pours with a decent head, but the head falls quickly and leaves no lacing on the glass.  It is a little darker than most other beers in its category, which is a nice deviation.

Aroma: 16/25
The aroma is fairly faint and smells a bit like malt and a bit like adjuncts, so again, not overly impressed.  It's mostly a cereal-grainy kind of scent, with no hop character.

Taste:  21/40
The flavor is very thin and bland.  It's more mouthfeel than flavor.  There is a bit of maltiness, more of the dull adjunct flavor, and a slight nutty finish.  I honestly get more taste out of the grainy aftertaste than when the beer is actually in my mouth.  It's hard to give much of a description of a basically nondescript flavor profile.

Mouthfeel:  6/10
The mouthfeel prevents some of the flavors from reaching the tongue.  The carbonation is so active that there's more of a stinging sensation in the mouth than any real flavor.

Style:  4/5
For a Lite American Lager, it is a little darker than the expected SRM range.  Aside from that, though, it does meet the rest of the style's expectations fairly accurately, as far as I can tell.

Drinkability:  7/10
If I want something cheap and basically drinkable, this is my light lager of choice.  A case of cans runs me less than $20.  It doesn't have the same shitty flavors I find in the other light lagers (it has a different, slightly less shitty taste), so in my book it's a slim step above the competition.

Overall:  61/100
Since I revised the rubric, I don't feel terrible about this scoring lower than the Miller Lite did on the old, clearly flawed rubric.  (I redid the Miller Lite one, just for shits, and it came out around 55 on this scale.)  This category in general, and this beer specifically, define the term "adult soda" best.  You can have it whenever, it goes with any kind of meal (if you're drinking a beer like this, you probably aren't thinking about food pairings), it's a good thirst-quencher while doing yard work, and it won't break the bank.  And, since you don't really get tipsy off of it (at least I can't, anyway), it isn't like drinking real beer.  Just don't be stupid about having some and then using power tools or getting behind the wheel.

On to better beers...  Cheers!

Blue Moon Grand Cru

As I said before, I'm partial to Belgian styles, so when I saw that Blue Moon had put out a grand cru, I was interested in trying it, especially since I like their regular label quite a bit.  Grand cru is more of an umbrella term than a specific style, but the grand crus that I've come across so far have all fallen into the high-abv Belgian wheat category, including the two batches of cru that I brewed myself.

The Blue Moon Grand Cru came in a larger bottle, so my husband and I each got a nice tall glass out of it, and there was a significant amount of yeast sediment in the bottom of the bottle, so my guess is this beer would've been a good one to tuck away in the cellar for a couple years.

If you've ever had the regular Blue Moon Belgian wheat ale before, this is basically the same brew, but more intense.  It's a beautiful golden-orange color with a half-inch, well-retained head.  There's a fairly high level of carbonation that keeps the head going, but such a high level of carbonation seems more fit for a soda than for a beer, so it detracted from my enjoyment a bit.  When it did eventually settle, it left little to no lacing on the glass.  8/10 for appearance

The aroma is very pleasing but subdued.  Most of what you smell is a solid wheat base, with notes of orange and a slight hint of coriander (if I didn't know what coriander smelled like from making cru in the past, I wouldn't have been able to pick it out, since it is a very faint hint).  There's also a very mild hint of banana from the yeast.  23/30 for aroma

The taste is less than I expected it to be, to be honest.  Based on the packaging, appearance, and aroma, I expected this to have a richer, fuller, more complex taste than it actually has.  The upfront taste is more bitter and dry, and there's little aftertaste.  The wheat body of the beer does come through nicely, as does the orange, but it is very difficult to detect the coriander or any of the yeast characteristics, partly due to the high levels of carbonation stinging the tongue.  In my opinion, the beer tasted a little young, like the flavors hadn't had a chance to mellow and blend well.  I think Blue Moon should have sat on it a bit longer before shipping it out for sale, or there should have been some flavor text on the label saying, "For best taste, allow bottle to age 6-12 months before enjoying."  Something like that, anyway, cause it had not had enough maturation time.  30/40 for taste

As I said above, it was over-carbonated from the bottle, giving it a sharp, dry mouthfeel that detracted from the beer and prevented the yeast profile from coming through.  On the plus side, there was a nice alcohol-warmth left behind with the aftertaste, and I'd expect that from an 8.2% abv beer.  6/10 for mouthfeel

If someone were to buy this beer for me, I'd absolutely drink it again, but for the money it cost and the mildly disappointing taste and mouthfeel, it simply isn't worth it.  I'd much rather enjoy the regular Blue Moon, which is just a better beer for the price than the BMGC.  7/10 for drinkability.

At 74/100, I wouldn't say that this is a "must try" beer, not by a long shot.  It's an enjoyable beer, but it doesn't merit the fancier bottle or the heftier price tag.  There are plenty of other grand crus that pack more flavor and more complexity for about the same price.

Cheers!