Month: June 2013

Profiled by Ken Carman for professorgoodales.com

Aroma: caramel, light… should have more. Not much else and not much of that.

Appearance: nice brown: probably in the mid=20s, srm-wise, with head fading fast… not unexpected. Pillow head with some clarity but a slight haze: probably chill since I had to put in freezer.

Mouthfeel: nice carmelized sense with a full body sense due to that, a little sweet and clings to the roof of the mouth. The mouthfeel is pretty much spot on, though maybe a hint more of abv might help.

Taste: here is where it falls. Everything is right except someone added too much hops for the style. As it warms it bounces between the hops and a more appropriate Scottish ale sense. Back and forth. Could also use a higher abv sense for the style: as I mentioned. The hops seem Centennial-ish. Malt sweet, as expected, but when the hops popthey distract from that all important Scottish Ale characteristic.

A close try at a 4. maybe a 3.8? But I can only give it a 3. That may seem unfair, but the Professor has explained to me that 1-5 rating is meant to make the reviewer come firmly down as possible when rating a beer. We can mention increments of, say .5, but it needs to be 1-5. Now, if they cut back on the hops, raised the avb a hint, and they might get close a 5.

Welcome to the PGA beer rating system: one beer “Don’t bother.” Two: Eh, if someone gives it to you, drink. Three: very good, go ahead and seek it out, but be aware there is at least one problem. Four: seek it out. Five: pretty much “prefecto.”

Profiled by Ken Carman for professorgoodales.net

I finally did it. I found a Straight to Ale I’m not fond of.

Gorillanaut is a deep golden yellow. Clarity is good: no head in small glass, except what clings to the side of the glass… white pillow. In a glass with a bigger mouth, nice white head… still pillow. A hint of shimmer to the gold as light passes through the glass.

Strong hop nose with a fruity orange, lemon, grapefruit sense. Some caramelized malt in the background the lingers beneath the hop like a ghost.

All good for far, right?

Mouthfeel: harsh hop as if additions boiled too long, some astringency. Tis not pleasant. This has a nice full body but the hopping just distracts from all that should be good.

Taste: harsh and more harsh. This is as if all the hops were added at the start of an incredibly long boil. Astringent is the best description as it attempts to rip the roof of your mouth off. Malt is there but simply defeated by the overwhelming harsh hop sense.

I love highly hopped beer, well above 100 IBU. But there’s a a way to do this right, and a lot of ways to do it wrong. This is wrong.

Did I get a bad bottle? It happens.

You know, recently I judged in Starksville, Mississippi, and I will be writing about this soon… criticism was leveled that I didn’t wax eloquent on the interplay of ingredients when the specialty add pretty much blew everything else out of the taste bud ball park. But that was nothing in comparison. This is almost undrinkable. I think if the malt had been a bit more upfront, and complex, maybe this would have rated at least a 3. Also do more sophisticated, timed, hop additions and with the more complex, upfront, malt this might have been incredible.

Welcome to the PGA beer rating system: one beer “Don’t bother.” Two: Eh, if someone gives it to you, drink. Three: very good, go ahead and seek it out, but be aware there is at least one problem. Four: seek it out. Five: pretty much “prefecto.”

A 2 is the best I can do.

Profiled by Ken Carman for professorgoodales.net

Image courtesy ratebeer.com

Right from the start, opening the bottle, I get a nice: not too strong, whiff of smoke… like of like a smoker in a bottle. Pilsner malt in the background with some roast. The maltiness could be stronger: smoke seems to overcome. No diacetyl or DMS. No defects noted in aroma, not even the normal phenol sense one often gets with smoke.

Good clarity with nice brown highlights. No head in small glass. In glass with wider top: still small, small head: about a 1/10th of an inch. Off white.

Mouthfeel close to full, light carbonation that lightly tingles the tongue… very light. Sweet, but not cloying, as if sugars from prune sense hung in there long after fermentation. It is well attenuated, however.

Taste: a bit prune-ish with esters… not unexpected. Smoke lighter in the taste than in the aroma. Nice hop bitter that does not overwhelm other, more prune-like, taste. Alcohol firm in taste, but not harsh, or solvent. This is very rich with the prune esters and smoke. It would make a great desert beer. Malt dominates. Some raisin sense too, good carmelization of malt that adds to prune and raisin-like sense. Some Munich malt sense, but not as some Doppels seem: as if they relied too much on Munich malt.

I have to give this a 4. Could be a 4.5. Another Straight to Ale winner.

Welcome to the PGA beer rating system: one beer “Don’t bother.” Two: Eh, if someone gives it to you, drink. Three: very good, go ahead and seek it out, but be aware there is at least one problem. Four: seek it out. Five: pretty much “prefecto.”