Liefman's Goudenband

[midlife crisis]

I bought a bottle of this to try. Much to my surprise (since the Rodenbach Grand Cru was just too sour for me) I find this to be absolutely outstanding. It is delicious and ultra-complex; no surprise to the Belgo-philes who knew this all along, I'm sure. I'd be interested in your comments on how this compares to the Rodenbach though - different styles? Sour red vs. sour brown? I plan to buy a bunch more of this.

[Belgian]

It IS a sour ale, which means I can generally tolerate one at a time - I slurped back two at a go, and my stomach hurt a little!

But Liefman's Goudenband (even at five dollars) IS as you say ultra-complex, creamy, and a real trip as far as a bottle of beer goes. I like the layers of flavor, the cascading cherry, cellar, cola, spice... seductive magic.

I like Rodenbach GC intense flavor profile, but I ended up returning a case of it because it was just too hard on my body. I don't get quite that harsh effect with Goudenband Vielle Provision, or Petrus Oud Bruin (which is a bit lighter although still wonderfully complex - musty, fruity mysterious tangy nuances - a REAL sleeper bargain at two dollars / 250 ml, grab a case before they DL it.)

First-timers note: take your time with a Goudenband! Chill it only slightly, and as you patiently sip your way through the bottle the nuances become more pronounced and interesting. I guess I mean, don't expect it to hit you over the head right away like Chimay Rouge or something, Goudenband has a very sexy, velvety-smooth texture and flavor that seems to gradually intensify. Enjoy!

[shintriad]

I agree: I loved this beer.

In my opinion, it's light years away from Rodenbach GC, which has an intensely tangy, fruity, vineous flavour profile. Goudenband is much more tame and smooth. Almost a "session sour ale," but as Belgian noted, you probably wouldn't want more than one at a time.

Liefman's also has a significantly higher ABV, though it's hard to detect.

[JWalter]

Agreed, this is a more accessible beer than Grand Cru... Really nice!

[old faithful]

I finally found a bottle of this, at Bayview and Sheppard LCBO.

I like it but the abiding impression is of sourness, not as much as Grand Cru, but it is present all the same. I get the cellar (I think it is from the cork, the bieres de garde that are cork-closed have it too, and ditto cork-closed Chimay), the spice, the malt, the complexity but they are dominated by a light sourness. I assume this is part of the palate and that the beer tastes like this in Belgium.

I could see this accompanying very well a rich dish of meat, or frites and moules.

But to drink it before a meal, I found its best use was 1:2 Liefman's to Wellington County (the bottled one). That is very good, in effect a type of 1800's porter (mixing a stored acidulous beer with a newly made brown ale). I tried it 1:7 Liefman's to the County, following the advice of a 1700's author on brewing, Michael Combrune, who wrote that aged beers should not be added to new beyond that proportion. It is remarkably good, giving depth and additional complexity to the County.

Yesterday at Fionn MacCool's downtown in Toronto I drank a Hoegaarden Forbidden Fruit which I thought trumped the Goudenband. I believe this is the first time I had this beer. I thought it was outstanding. It had a heft and emphatic flavor the Liefman's doesn't offer and yet went down so easily one could hardly notice.

Gary

[Wheatsheaf]

Some might say that Goudenband is one of the has-beens of the Belgian beer world, but I must admit that it's still pretty tasty. Given the choice, though, I'd probably opt for the brewery's Vondel, which is similar in character and just as good, but without the pretence of tissue wrapping, corked bottles, silly best-before dates, and the price that comes with it.

Personally, I wouldn't describe Goudenband as sour, not even tart; lightly tangy, if anything. (Even Rodenbach Grand Cru--puckeringly sour for some--is, for me, only moderately tart, and actually a bit too sweet, which probably makes sense given that it is almost certainly sweetened or blended these days, not 100% aged beer.) But that's just me...

My point is: if two people in the same time and place can't agree on whether a beer is sour or not, is it possible to open a book that was written 300 years earlier and assume that the author is using language in the same way that you would today? When someone like Combrune writes about sour or acidic beer, I have a hard time believing that the sweetened and pasteurized "sour" beers of today would fit the bill. It seems more likely that those beers were quite sour, more so than today, with some that were still palatable and drinkable on their own, and more that were probably well on their way to becoming vinegar.

I like it but the abiding impression is of sourness, not as much as Grand Cru, but it is present all the same. I get the cellar (I think it is from the cork, the bieres de garde that are cork-closed have it too, and ditto cork-closed Chimay), the spice, the malt, the complexity but they are dominated by a light sourness. I assume this is part of the palate and that the beer tastes like this in Belgium.

...

But to drink it before a meal, I found its best use was 1:2 Liefman's to Wellington County (the bottled one). That is very good, in effect a type of 1800's porter (mixing a stored acidulous beer with a newly made brown ale). I tried it 1:7 Liefman's to the County, following the advice of a 1700's author on brewing, Michael Combrune, who wrote that aged beers should not be added to new beyond that proportion. It is remarkably good, giving depth and additional complexity to the County.

[Belgian]

This one is really in the tatebuds of the beholder.

I agree for me it is less sour than Roddy, but Rodenbach GC was incredibly earthy/insect-rotty/funky/acidic-bitey besides being basically 'sour' or 'sweet'. The nuances of Rodenbach, Petrus, and Goudenband make these three completely different beers, almost three different styles in a sense, because when my taste adjusts to the basic sourness of each, the secondary characteristics go much farther in defining each one very uniquely than just quantifying by sourness.

[dhurtubise]

I was personally disapointed with the Goudenband. It might be much better in a year or so, but for the moment it is not sour at all compared with what it was before it was bought by (Riva?). I was planning on buying a few cases but left it at one bottle. There are enough sweet, caramel malt accented, roughly 8% belgians out there that don't cost 10$/750ml.

It sounds and looks to me like Liefman is having some major problems delivering on demand. I'm guessing we are getting very young beers here - rushed beers. If I remember correctly, when Liefman was bought, the new owners tried to move the production of the beer to their more modern main brewery for $ reasons. They weren't able to achieve adequate levels of sourness in the beer that was produced there, so apparently, now they truck the beer to the beer (or wort) to the old brewery so it could age in the old oaken barrels of the antiquated brewery.

My guess is the beer we are getting is by-passing this last step.

No matter how you slice this beer. It's not sour. Bellevue Kriek is more sour then the Goudenband we received as part of the spring release.