Page 1 of 2

Burton Porter

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:08 pm
by Bytowner
Anyone else find this unpleasantly sour? Is that the sulphur in the Burton water or something else? Certainly not my favourite seasonal release of the year.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:33 pm
by JesseM
I didn't even bother with this one this time. It sucked last year and I was frankly surprised and disappointed that it was included this year. If I recall correctly, it costs more than the Harvey's, right? Ridiculous.

Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:43 pm
by Bobsy
I'm with Jesse on this one after last year's experience. I think President Bush said it best:

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:57 am
by matt7215
i didnt buy this one either. i was dissapointed in it last year so i figured i wouldnt waste my money this year. im glad to see that i made the right choice.

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:05 pm
by Bytowner
Huh, I guess I was the only one that missed it last year. Well, I know better for next year!

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:07 pm
by boney
Yeah, the Burton Porter is odd with a little sourness and the metalic notes, but I didn't think it was offensive by any means. Not the best of the fall releases, but cetainly not the worst. I actually thought the slight sourness (not the same kind of sourness as a skunky beer) complimented the slightly bitter finish. If anything, the unique flavour made me remember this from last year. I'd only really buy 1 per year, but I'd recommend it to someone who hadn't tried it just for something a little different.

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 7:14 pm
by sprague11
I found the Burton very underwhelming. Of course, I'm used to Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald, which is outstanding.

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:51 pm
by Torontoblue
sprague11 wrote:I found the Burton very underwhelming. Of course, I'm used to Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald, which is outstanding.
I agree that the Burton isn't a great beer but the Great Lakes is a totally different style, so it's really Apples & Oranges to compare them. Wouldn't you say? :evil: Let's keep this on topic eh :P

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:39 pm
by sprague11
Torontoblue wrote:
sprague11 wrote:I found the Burton very underwhelming. Of course, I'm used to Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald, which is outstanding.
I agree that the Burton isn't a great beer but the Great Lakes is a totally different style, so it's really Apples & Oranges to compare them. Wouldn't you say? :evil: Let's keep this on topic eh :P
Hey, they both say "porter" on the bottle ;)

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:50 pm
by Torontoblue
sprague11 wrote:
Torontoblue wrote:
sprague11 wrote:I found the Burton very underwhelming. Of course, I'm used to Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald, which is outstanding.
I agree that the Burton isn't a great beer but the Great Lakes is a totally different style, so it's really Apples & Oranges to compare them. Wouldn't you say? :evil: Let's keep this on topic eh :P
Hey, they both say "porter" on the bottle ;)
And........................................? :P Alexander Keith's says IPA.

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:34 pm
by sprague11
Torontoblue wrote:
And........................................? :P Alexander Keith's says IPA.
Hey, Mr Keith was scared to death of hops! We can't help that!;)

Lets just agree that the Burton was not worth the money!

Re: Burton Porter

Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:01 pm
by pootz
Bytowner wrote:Anyone else find this unpleasantly sour? Is that the sulphur in the Burton water or something else? Certainly not my favourite seasonal release of the year.
It was a bottle conditioned ale that did not turn out well. Mine was slightly off and the other was a volcano when I opened it...took a pass this time.

Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:43 pm
by Belgian
TorontoBlue is calling the BS correctly- a so called 'style' of beer can have a drastic range, almost making the comparisons irrelevant..

I found the Burton this year (my particular bottle anyway!) quite unlike the green-apple-skin flavor I got last year - today's Burton is mushroom-y and earthy as if those green apples had been forgotten in a damp cellar.

Interesting but not quite likable.

Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 10:11 pm
by Illuminatus
Bobsy wrote:I think President Bush said it best
Huh. I didn't think those words would ever fit in that order.

Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 9:24 am
by Steve Beaumont
The Burton Porter is old school, the way porters used to be when tanks large enough to host a good-sized dinner party in were used to age them. (Really. The brewer Meux once had a tank that would hold 20,000 barrels of beer, and a vat at the Horse Show Brewery which ruptured in 1814 resulted in the reported deaths of 8 people!) The aging was necessary to impart to the beers a sourness reminiscent of the old ales, sometimes known as sour ales, which were an important part of the original blended porter known as three threads.

(I don't know how much of this Ron Pattinson has now debunked, probably a considerable amount, but the sourness is certainly true.)

The Burton unquestionably has had gushing issues in the past -- I haven't yet tried any of the new release -- but in terms of flavour alone, it's a bit of a taste of history. Which is not to say that you should like it, just that the sour flavour is less infection than intent.