Page 1 of 2

Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:35 pm
by joey_capps
And the worst . . .

Cool & Lakeport

(Let's leave the macros out of this thread)

Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2002 8:25 pm
by GregClow
I feel kinda bad saying it, since it was discovering the beers of this brewery during my time at the University of Waterloo in the late 80s that initally turned me on to "good" beer - but except for their Bock, I'd be inclined to consider Brick one of the worst micro-breweries around today.

It's a real shame, too, as they once had some great beers in thier portfolio, like Celis and some of the Conners and Algonquin beers. But now, all the good stuff (except for the Bock) is gone. Like I said, it's a shame.


Greg

Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2002 9:12 pm
by Andicus
Without a doubt, my vote goes to Sleeman. Blecch!

Oops. Just saw about leaving the macros out.

Is Sleeman now considered a macro?

I guess my point is made either way.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: andicus on 2002-10-31 23:17 ]</font>

Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:20 pm
by Kent
Not that I like to slag any brewery, but Vessels & Barrels in Pointe Claire, Qc has got to be the worst brewpub I have ever visited.There is something seriously wrong with their system.

Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2002 5:52 pm
by DukeofYork = Richard
I suppose technically speaking, the Dave's line of beer is brewed by a macro (Molson, right?) but they deserve to be slagged for trying to fool people into thinking they're some sort of micro. Plus their beer is bad - with some exceptions (e.g. Massive Irish, which is kinda passable).

Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2002 11:02 pm
by howardt
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: howardt on 2003-01-06 13:31 ]</font>

Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2002 11:36 pm
by Mississauga Matt
Howard, I am quite stunned by your statements.
  • Rauchbier worthy as a "worst beer" ???!!!" Seriously? Do you really mean that?
  • "Quick, name one good French/Italian beer." Again, are you serious? Is there no biere de garde that you like?
  • cellaring beer "doesn't work." Do you really mean that?
BTW, I'm the "chap" with the Triple Bock, and now I'm even more intrigued.

I'll be popping one open around Christmas - wish me luck! :lol:

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 7:15 am
by Manul
I think I just lost my Creemore appetite. Come on Howard, Aecht Smoked Marzen is a world class beer and I think I've had at least 3 cases of that during the last two years - never came over a stale one. In my opinion it's the best companion for smoked foods and charcoal barbecue, nothing comes even close. As to the quality and purity of the brew I'd rather trust our dear brewers from Bavaria and for that matter anywhere in Germany than the ones here in North America. For foreigners or not I don't think those guys ever brewed crap. Sorry if I'm too harsh ...

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 9:45 am
by howardt
Whoa, I was celebrating a rare Leaf win with some friends last night and perhaps I was a bit punchy. Matt and Manul, of course you are both right, there may be good smoked beers and I can no more write off the whole category than Dan did English Ales. The ones I have tried to date are not to my taste and that's what I thought this was all about.

Ditto the above of French or Italian beers. However, if I was going to Europe for the best Food, Wine and Beer, I would be visiting different countries for each.

On cellaring beer, I checked with our Brewmaster. To begin, any beer not packaged with yeast in the bottle is unlikely to last at all. So Sierra and Unibroue and others have some natural cushion (not so for urBock, Eisbock or other bright lagered products). His opinion was that certain beers might last ok and in rare cases oxidation might improve a mediocre beer. He couldn't think of a great beer being made better by time in a bottle. We tested this theory with our own urBock after somebody wrote about it being better after it was 'laid down' for a year. It wasn't. But for fun, send me your list of favorite cellared beers. I will try to source them directly from the brewers and get their f/g specs. We'll store them in a controlled environemnt over time and re-test the flavour, abv, balance, color and BU's. I'd love to be proven wrong.

Manul, you make my point nicely. I have already said that many of the beers of Bavaria and Franconia are better than anything I have had in NA (including my beloved Creeore). If my biased opinions on beer can suddenly change your appetite for my product, who's being rash now? I think good beers made here will always be better because they are fresh. No import can compete with that. I don't think I implied all beers made here are great. I won't list the bad ones because that would be impolite and wrong given my investment and intimacy in this market.

What can I say? I love rollicking debates about beer. Nobody is ever right, but I don't take it personally. I was delighted to stumble upon this forum group as it seemed similarily inclined. If I have to butter it up for you guys, it's not worth it. It has been fun and I will check in on occasion. I still think you all should come up and see a great little brewery in action, I'll buy the beer.

Howard

Darn, I still can't make that smiley guy work.

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 10:07 am
by A
Howard, you're alright - I think I'll have to open an urBock this evening :smile: (BTW to make a smiley, put a ':' right next to a ')' )

I'm in agreement with you on Smoked beers, I've not met one which I've really liked, and most taste like drinking a bottle of bacon fat!

However, There are many beers that I have seen benefit from aging. Two most recent ones I've had are a MacAuslan Vintage Ale (which is specifically built for aging), and a Sierra Nevada Bigfoot. In both cases I found that the flavors presented themselves in a much more integrated fashion, and the overall texture of the beer was smoother, which I believe benefitted both of these beers tremendously. This was after 3 (or maybe 4) years of aging.

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 12:14 pm
by Mississauga Matt
Howard, I wasn't trying to tell you what you can and cannot say. It's just that I was absolutely astounded by your views, because a) they go against the standard beer geek orthodoxy; and b) coming from the head of a reputable brewery, that's ballsy.

For example, you're the first guy who's ever said that there are few advantages to cellaring. Michael Jackson, Roger Protz, Jamie MacKinnon, your buddy SB, they all say that for some beers there are definite advantages.

Your points are food for thought. I had some trouble getting to sleep last night because I kept mulling them over in my mind for quite some time.

You're a walkin'/talkin' controversy, aren't you? :smile:

Keep 'em coming.

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 1:51 pm
by Rubaiyat
"Quick, name one good French/Italian beer."

JENLAIN !!

Was that quick enough ??

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 4:43 pm
by howardt
'A' thanks for the note about Vintage Ale. I called Peter Mcauslan and asked him about it. He chuckled over the controversy and re-affirmed me as a know-nothing Anglo who only deserves to brew and drink 5%-6% lagers (no matter how great they are). :smile:

He then confirmed that his Vintage ale improves over 6 months to a year. He said this could be true for other old style ales (barley wines) etc. Not a real broad spectrum though, and a year was likely the peak. He also cautioned that imported beers were already 'older' and if they were stored warm on the trip would have already oxidized considerably shortening the window for cellaring.

Good hoppy IPA's he thought benefited from a couple of weeks cold in the bottle to mellow the hops. Otherwise, he agreed that anything without yeast in the bottle (he thought SN products did well over time) and/or that was under 7% alcohol, should be drank fresh.

Chocolate, coffee, chile !? I need to get out more. Make some room on the bus to Buffalo for me.

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 4:51 pm
by A
The MacAuslan Vintage Ales are already 'pre-aged' for at least a year I believe, and even then the 2000 vintage in particular seemed very young when it first came out (The 1999 inaugural vintage was much more drinkable on day 1), but after another year it was simply superb. I still have 1999 bottles and they have not gone downhill yet by any means.

I admit, when I think of cellaring I usually think of Ales and not Lagers. I find you also need to have a certain level of ABV (7-8%) otherwise you do run the risk of it going bad.

And by no means should you ever, *ever* cellar a Rogue beer. Those things go south very fast (except the Imperial Stout and Barleywines)

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2002 8:51 pm
by howardt
The Vintage Ale, according to Peter, matures for 3 months prior to bottling. This is a much different process than aging in a bottle. These are large volumes of beer in stainless steel, happily sleeping with Mother Nature on their own yeast.