The Bar Towel

Belgian wrote:imagine how different things might have been in pre-industrial times - perhaps in centuries past your 'favorite' beer was made a little different each time!

Or everything tasted basically the same... with that classic and Brett-in-the-barrel Guiness tang! (as well as the smokey malt from the open fires).

We've got it pretty good.

Responsible Drinker wrote:

Belgian wrote:imagine how different things might have been in pre-industrial times - perhaps in centuries past your 'favorite' beer was made a little different each time!

Or everything tasted basically the same... with that classic and Brett-in-the-barrel Guiness tang! (as well as the smokey malt from the open fires).

We've got it pretty good.

True enough, I understand what you're saying, and Scotch Irish has been bottling the most consistently good beer I've had.

Sometimes I like to compare beer with bread. Each time I've made it I see differences in how the yeast is working, etc. etc. and the end product is always 'unique' (read varying levels of disaster).

What I was trying to get at initially was the change in ingredients I seemed to detect. What I'm thinking now is that perhaps I should regard beers more like wine, and accept that from batch to batch, just as from year to year, there will be differences, good or bad.

Lubaka wrote:perhaps I should regard beers more like wine, and accept that from batch to batch, just as from year to year, there will be differences, good or bad.

Yes but it is frightening how good the year-to-year control is when brewers do settle in on a method & recipe. At least they are brewing with fairly reliable malt and hops, not making wine with grapes... grapes are subject to so many variables and influences - how it rains and shines that year, unusual swings in temperature, the particular micro-climate and soil, crop parasites... I almost feel bad for vine growers breaking their back against all of nature's tricks. Wine has more of an 'excuse' to be variable in a sense; technology is even less in control with wine grapes than it is with beer making, even though smarter vintification has helped many wines improve in recent decades.

But I wander off track here a little! There has never been so much good wine and beer, let's enjoy having it so good.

I bought some at Summerhill and like it. I don't find it that different from the previous version except it is darker and more malty, but the basic profile is the same. Good product. I bought it with some Griffon Rousse(the latter newly arrived at Beer Store, I got it at the one on Dupont past Bathurst). The Griffon was fairly good but maybe a little bland for me. I note it is 4.5% abv, not far off the norm of 5% (even for Griffon I believe), but not sure why that is. The label refers to cold-filtering too and I wonder if all this is contributing to the mild palate. Anyway it's a good quaffer but I thought the Sarge was a rank above: in fact for this purpose I'd commission the Sarge.

Gary

"Cold Filtered" is an industry catch phrase. Virtually every beer is cold filtered these days so its meaningless except in the hands of marketers.

I have often wondered what a 'warm filtered beer' would taste like but since it has never existed in any context, I guess we'll never know.

It would taste like air because none of the beer would make it into the conditioning tank.

PRMason wrote:It would taste like air because none of the beer would make it into the conditioning tank.

Perry-Air?

I'll get me coat.

old faithful wrote:I bought it with some Boreale Red (the latter obtained at a Beer Store, the one on Dupont past Bathurst).

Do you mean the Griffon Red, Gary? I didn't think that any Boreale beers were available in Ontario.

Maybe you are right, Greg, I'll check tonight if I erred. If that is so the beer I had in Montreal was different because it was certainly a Boreale. I'll post a follow-up tonight on this, thanks for mentioning it.

Gary

Greg, I just checked, you are absolutely right, it was Griffon Rousse, not Boreale's red ale. Thanks again for pointing this out. I was writing from memory and mixed them up. (I've fixed the original post to reflect the true facts). I just had one and can say the Griffon is nice, light but a good summer ale.

Tonight at Smokeless I checked out its Durham Hop Addict and was wowed by this beer. It is made in a style I don't usually go for (i.e., big emphasis on U.S. West Coast hops) but it is a stunner, the absolute quality has to be mentioned. Big clean malty palate, big complementary hop flavour. It was served very cold and I always felt well-chilled is the way to go with such big flavours. Great job, Durham, this is as good as the best the West Coast can do in American Pale Ale/IPA and is better than most Stateside types I've had.

Gary

I would like to see some Boréale Rousse here though... good stuff.

I agree and that is the red ale I had in Montreal on draught not long ago. When Boreale first came out 10 years ago or more I found their beers somewhat awkward but they've hit their stride in recent years and make excellent products.

Gary

At the Mondial de la Bière in Montreal, the surprise of the festival for me was that Boréale Noire won the Platinum medal at the M'Beer Conference.

This was a beer that I routinely passed on earlier because of it's lack of taste, doubtful quality, and had usually aged a bit on the shelf.

The sample I had at the festival blew me away.

Wonder what caused the turn-aroudn in quality.

Back on the subject of post-Heritage Scotch-Irish beers, I was also extremely dismayed with the Dogsbody 2006. It seems to lack flavour completely. Whereas previously it has been a quite delicious session ale, it is now extremely disappointing.

At least the Sgt Major's is still a reasonable beer, just a different one. The Dogsbody does not even have that going for it. I consider this a great shame, as for me the Dogsbody was a vastly more interesting and impressive beer than the Sgt Major's ever has been (which is not to say that I don't enjoy a pint of the IPA).