2006 Creemore UrBock

pootz · Post by **pootz** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:05 pm

Creemore's UrBock has a history of changing slightly year to year so I thought I'd share some tasting notes on this year's release:

This year's batch seems to have been thinned out a bit in body and there is less sweetness and more hops and black malt husk "char" in the finish. This finish combined with the thinner body is reminiscent of a schwarzbier

The look is similar in color to previous years...clear reddish cola color... but the cap is less prominent and reduces more quickly to a ring which leaves some weak lacing.

The main body is thinner to the palate than one expects in a dark bock (or previous releases) and more like a Munich dunkel...taste is well balanced, non cloying, grainy with some cocoa tones....gone are the dried fruit notes the earlier richer sweeter versions had ...there is a "sharpness" to this year's release that may be the result of the increased hopping and "char" astringency combining with what seems like more carbonation than in previous years.

This is still drinkable and clean but this year has a character that seems to lack a defined Bock identity...thinner than one expects in a dark bock....more like a dunkel-schwarzbier hybrid...I still bought a case

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:18 pm

Look forward to it. Nothing wrong with some variation if the quality's there!

JK

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:04 pm

I had this on Draught, and it really was a light, refreshing beer. Not bad beer. Just, "where's the lightly honeyed malt notes?"

Worth a try though.

pootz · Post by **pootz** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 5:54 pm

Belgian wrote:I had this on Draught, and it really was a light, refreshing beer. Not bad beer. Just, "where's the lightly honeyed malt notes?"

Worth a try though.

But certainly lighter in body and more bitter than last year right?

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:24 pm

I wouldn't say more bitter, no.

It's only a single Bock yet I thought the malt profile was a bit more up there past years. It can change a little I guess?

pootz · Post by **pootz** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:42 am

Belgian wrote:I wouldn't say more bitter, no.

It's only a single Bock yet I thought the malt profile was a bit more up there past years. It can change a little I guess?

I guess the point is that even as a "single bock" it has a lighter body that makes it come off more like a dunkel.....with a light bittering in the finish.

shintriad · Post by **shintriad** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 2:27 pm

I've been holding onto a few bottles of this stuff from 2003. Had one recently, and it was great! It really holds up and improves with a bit of aging.

Surprisingly, I found the same thing with Sleeman's Porter. I haven't seen it at LCBOs lately, but I'd be willing to try this experiment again.

liammckenna · Post by **liammckenna** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:47 am

Found the 2006 UrBock quite pleasant but indeed different than previous vintages.

It is indeed thinner with diminished malt character vs. previous encounters and I definitely picked up some faint acetic notes. Thought it may just be one bottle but so far all three I've tried have presented similarly. Not unpleasant, merely unexpected. I do miss the maltiness. Sort of expected in a bock.

Pax.

Liam