The Bar Towel

Those two last examples are real valid, Gary, especially since Orval is already such a (beautiful) freak among beers, with its bacteria-induced Brett characteristics. Enough funky complexity already.

The Tripel you mention is no slouch either, extremely bright, complex and flavorful without any murky stuff added, so what's really the point of that?

A case of either is a VERY good investment. See the Esprit listing or search the lcbo.com inventory system.

I'm just happy we could fit a Seinfeld quote in...

Decanting beer, hmph. For two days. To each their own.

How fast did you plan to scare the new folks away Gary?

old faithful wrote:The Orval bottle (Orval - the great Belgian Trappist ale) is designed to trap yeast in the neck, to prevent it from entering the glass. The people that make Orval know exactly what they are doing because they know that an over-yeasty glass will ruin the palate. Even poured clear the beer has plenty of yeast in it and yeast savour (as does real ale in England). You don't "need" all that extra yeast in the glass to lend its accent to the beer.

Interesting... I thought heavily shouldered bottles were meant to catch sediment (a la Gales Prize Old Ale, which mentions it on the bottle). The Orval bottle looks as though it would be conducive to the sediment leaving the bottle. Is it because the bottle bows out in the middle, that it gives the sediment somewhere to sit while you are pouring?

This conversation is getting deep...

Personally, I like to break the neck off on a fire hydrant and dump the foam down my throat. I find the yeast merges nicely with the broken glass shards to make for a piquant little zing about 4-5 hours later.

Mmmmmmmmm .... sharp.

I think someone interested in beer wants to drink it in what many consider is its optimal form. If you dump all the yeast in the glass that palate may scare away a lot of people. My comments, which are no different to what many beer manuals advise, are meant to encourage people, not scare them off.

The bow in the Orval bottle was designed (is my understanding) to help trap excess yeast as the beer is poured from the bottle. I am not saying a high-shouldered bottled won't help too, a number of designs may help. In the end each person learns how to handle a particular bottle. This isn't rocket science.

I know some people like the yeast "all in", and that some Belgian breweries serve or used to serve pots of yeast with the beers so people could add the yeast back in.

This probably developed because 20th century techniques resulted in beer so filtered the process took out too much yeast taste. So I can understand that some consumers wanted to add the yeast back in but the beers being served were not real ale, they were filtered draft beers. For a bottle-conditioned beer such as Westmalle Tripel, as Belgian says the full flavour comes through when the beer is poured bright (or almost so, a little haze won't hurt).

Nowhere however does the expression "de gustibus non est disputandum" ("there is no disputing taste") apply more than in the beer world.

This is my opinion only, offered for what it is worth.


Gary

old faithful wrote:Nowhere however does the expression de gustibus non est disputandum

This thread just jumped the shark. Somebody please cite Hitler so we can officially shut it down!

(and please, for those who aren't aware of it, don't jump on ME - it's common internet shared experience that a discussion has officially gone on too long when the words "nazi" or "hitler" are used - I'm just sayin, is all)

Gary,

Just to be clear, I wasn't doubting your Orval comment. Just genuinely curious how 2 seemingly opposite designs were intended to do the same thing.

Harry-I'm with you...my "too deep" comment was obviously not enough...and it seems neither was yours.

WTH? The subject is about pouring/sediment, etc. If you're both serious, why are you following the thread if you're not interested in it?

Oh, I am (okay "was") interested. It's not the subject that I - and I suspect Beermonger and a few others - are hinting at.

But I've landed myself in hot water too many times - and had too many of my indirect arrows zing unnoticed over heads - to say further.

But the subject *is* interesting.

On a completely unrelated tack, I'm wondering if anyone has anything to add about how they poured ales in the 16th through 18th centuries?

Andicus wrote:WTH? The subject is about pouring/sediment, etc. If you're both serious, why are you following the thread if you're not interested in it?

Because often if a person doesn't stick their oar in with some opinion, they have to stick their oar in dismissing the conversation.

There's little difference, is there. No point acting like anyone's better than anyone else.

Dang, I wish I had a pithy latin riposte to that.

Dang.

I am considering administering 'death by a thousand cuts" to myself as an option...