1. Don't miss our 7th annual American Craft Beer Fest featuring 640+ beers from 140+ brewers this May 30 & 31 in Boston, MA! Buy your tickets now!
  2. BeerAdvocate on your phone?! True story. Try the beta now.

Samuel Smith's Old Brewery Pale Ale - Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster)

Samuel Smith's Old Brewery Pale AleSamuel Smith's Old Brewery Pale Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
87
very good

917 Ratings
THE BROS
92
outstanding

(view ratings)
Ratings: 917
Reviews: 656
rAvg: 3.87
pDev: 11.89%


Brewed by:
Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) visit their website
United Kingdom (England)

Style | ABV
English Pale Ale |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 07-11-2001)
View: Beers (28) |  Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Reviewers | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Samuel Smith's Old Brewery Pale Ale Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 917 | Reviews: 656 | Show All Ratings:
Photo of Trentonator
Trentonator

Kansas

2.13/5  rDev -45%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

When I took my first drink of this beer, I felt like I was sucking the smelt off of a copper mine. This beer has a bitter, unforgiving and relentless afterbite. More bitter than my ex girlfriend, and an aftertaste that haunts you like her memory, and will not go away. I needed crackers to remove the aftertaste. I needed therapy to remove her memory. I did not like this beer, not one bit.

Serving type: bottle

04-13-2004 02:46:04 | More by Trentonator
Photo of Higravity
Higravity

Michigan

2.15/5  rDev -44.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Well as with the other SS this is metallic and this is probably the worst. I must have been chewing my bronze gum while drinking this, note to self no more light SS. Anyway from this years gift set this beer was a nice copper taste, I mean color and a unforgiving metal taste that was only tolerable being chugged. It had a decent body and it smelled like a beer in a rusty can.

Serving type: bottle

11-16-2004 20:48:55 | More by Higravity
Photo of bubseymour
bubseymour

Maryland

2.38/5  rDev -38.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

I have always been a big fan of Samuel Smith beers. Unfortunately the Old Brewery Pale Ale did not work for me. There was an undescribable flavor/taste to this particular S.S. that I just did not care for. I plan to stick with many of the other beers from their line.

Serving type: bottle

11-25-2010 22:36:44 | More by bubseymour
Photo of rastaman
rastaman

United Kingdom (England)

2.5/5  rDev -35.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Not my favourite, but i got a feeling that the place that served it hadn't cleaned there equipment for a while, coz it tasted off, so thats what my ratings based on.

Serving type: bottle

05-14-2002 17:45:32 | More by rastaman
Photo of zacharius
zacharius

Washington

2.6/5  rDev -32.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours an orange color with a thick off white head, little carbonatoin noted. As I opened the beer I was taken back by the skunky odor, damn clear bottles. Skunkyness dissapated as the beer settled in the glass but then was replaced by fruitty esters with a sulfury winey characteristic. I don't care too much for the yeast strain Samuel Smith uses. Taste is earthy and aftertaste of grain builds up, some fruitty esters in there, again with a vinous characteristic. Body is thin and watery and beer is lightly carbonated. Once you get past the taste the drinkablity isn't bad. Definatly not worth the price.

Serving type: bottle

10-31-2004 22:32:58 | More by zacharius
Photo of mothman
mothman

United Kingdom (Wales)

2.6/5  rDev -32.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Poured into my Sam Smith Pint Glass

Pours a 1/2 finger slightly off white head. Fades down quickly. Carbonation bubbles stick to the bottom and a few float to the top. Color is a clear bright golden orange. Not the best retention. No lace observed.

Aroma: The main thing I smell is caramel. Not very hoppy. I haven't had a pale ale in a while, but I am definitely not liking this one.

Taste: Caramel and a lot of malts here. Some grassy hops. There just isn't a lot going on here and I am really not liking any of it. Has a nut taste to it as it warms.

Mouthfeel: A little bitter, nothing compared to an IPA though. Medium bodied. Lower-level of carbonation. Leaves a musky hoppy aftertaste. I am not liking this either.

Overall, I refuse to drain pour any beer, but if I were to do so, this would be the beer to do it. There was really nothing I enjoyed about this beer and I probably won't have it again. Maybe I got a bad bottle.

Serving type: bottle

07-22-2009 22:38:48 | More by mothman
Photo of mpyle
mpyle

Maryland

2.6/5  rDev -32.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Copper color, brilliant clarity. Pours a nice white head, tight and creamy and with good retention.

Initial aroma was somewhat mineraly (sp?), but ultimately a rich maltiness with a hint of raisin. Slight earthy hop aroma?

Starts with some malty sweetness, but becomes somewhat sour by the finish. Finishes with a stale bitterness. Tastes old and oxidized.

MF - Light to medium body, fairly light carbonation. No astringency, but some drying on the outside of the tongue, indicative of oxidation.

Overall - No freshness date on the bottle, but guessing the single bottle I picked up at Trader Joes isn't exactly brewery fresh. Put an asterisk on this review - given the reputation of the brewery I'm sure a quality sample of the beer is significantly better!

Serving type: bottle

04-16-2011 20:10:51 | More by mpyle
Photo of mtstatebeer
mtstatebeer

West Virginia

2.65/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

355 ml. bottle. Pours an amber with small off-white head. Initial smell was not very good (maybe got a bad bottle). Taste was a little better, bitter, malty, a little hoppy. Medium body and a slight metallic finish.

I wanted to rate this now, even though it maybe be skewed by a bad beer. Will re-rate.

Serving type: bottle

08-27-2008 23:03:57 | More by mtstatebeer
Photo of Vendetta
Vendetta

New Jersey

2.65/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 4 | smell: 1 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Original Rating Date:
September 4, 2008

Nose in the bottle leads to a really odd, funky smell at first- like stinky feet. After the pour it opens up and smells a bit more of sour hops. Still not a great smell... reminds me of sour dog piss, no kidding. Nice bronze color to it, though. As long as I keep my nose away I can easily handle it- some good bitter, a bit sour hops. Sam Smith loves their ESB, and they do them well. This is an enjoyable beer but not a pale ale in the least. A bit tart, very malty. Average mouthfeel- what I expected. Another good brew from Samuel Smiths. I'm becoming an enormous Samuel Smiths fan, these are some high quality brews for no more than $3. Thumbs up.

Serving type: bottle

12-14-2008 17:49:01 | More by Vendetta
Photo of LiquidBreadMan
LiquidBreadMan

Texas

2.68/5  rDev -30.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The clear bottle is attractive, but I have to wonder if it affected the taste in a bad way. No doubt, Samuel Smith Pale Ale looks good -- really good. However, the taste reminded me of the canned Carling Black Label that we used to hide in the woods, as young teenagers.

The poured appearance is richly golden with a light amber hue (hey, I said it looked good), with a thick short-lived head. Aroma wasn't bad, but it was on the malty side -- not citrusy such as I expect with a Pale Ale. The taste was very Budweiser-esque, or warm canned Carling Black Label: overly sweet (corn, no doubt) with a putrid (skunky) finish. Carbonation, which may have helped this brew, was almost nonexistent.

Serving type: bottle

02-16-2003 08:54:28 | More by LiquidBreadMan
Photo of geexploitation
geexploitation

Indiana

2.7/5  rDev -30.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Maybe I was expecting something a lot different in a "Pale Ale", but I was surprised by how weak this is. I mean, the English like their hops (bitter, anyone?), but this Pale Ale is weak weak weak. The color and nose and nice, the color being a rich caramel brown and the nose filled with nice, bakery-type spicy smells. The taste is pretty blah -- not much going on in the malt, aside from the cookie flavors implied in the nose, and no hops to make up for the malt deficiency. This brew starts out weak flavored, weak bodied, and, for me, continued to seem weaker and weaker as my palate adjusted to it.

The bottom line: if you want to give Mr. Sam Smith your money, exchange it for some Oatmeal Stout or Imperial Stout.

Serving type: bottle

01-22-2006 02:06:46 | More by geexploitation
Photo of Naerhu
Naerhu

Japan

2.73/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Ingredients: malt, hops

Clear bottle gold foil. Where is the beer here? What is up with the clear bottles? Reddish color, thin head, no lace. Barely perceptible malty aroma. Weak bitterness. I imagine a fine beer here out of respect for the brewer’s other products, but it must be the clear bottle that has sapped all the character from this beer. I can’t believe I will bother much more with these brews. Why would I spend big money on them when their character is sapped by the brewer putting them in clear bottles? This is simply a waste of craftsmanship

Serving type: bottle

02-03-2003 06:19:09 | More by Naerhu
Photo of mrasskicktastic
mrasskicktastic

New Jersey

2.75/5  rDev -28.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A - Clear, dark auburn brew with a large foamy tan head. Carbonation is barely noticeable. Some lacing, but not much.

S - A light caramel malty aroma with hints of biscuits and some esters of elderberries and currants as well.

T - The flavor is initially of some light and biscuity malt, then it is joined by some sharp grassy hops that I would generally expect to find in a lager. The aftertaste is a bland, clean bitterness with only a faint lingering hop. A little unpleasant.

M - Eerily silky with a medium body and a harsh carbonation - like sand in the silk. Not very refreshing.

D - Pretty good. A classic English pale ale. I might have again, but I doubt it. It isn't really my style.

Serving type: bottle

07-17-2008 06:12:42 | More by mrasskicktastic
Photo of jjanega08
jjanega08

Minnesota

2.78/5  rDev -28.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3

A= pours a pretty good looking amber color. Nothing too great but really pretty decent looking. More of a golden amber color when you hold it up to the light. The head is a nice two and a half fingers high and is a nice white color with great retention on it and some pretty nice lacing.

S= The first thing I notice is some grainy earthy hops. I notice quite a bit of yeasty odors coming from the nose as well.... smells a lot like a brewery I think. Like fermenting beer. Interesting I've only smelled this at a brewery or in the closet that I keep my homebrew in. The malt in it smells almost like a fresh crush and grainy nothing sweet comes from the nose like a wort or caramelly sweetness. Really nothing too good here.

T= Nothing really special here either. The taste is a lot better than the smell however. Again the malt is a little grainy tasting. The hops are earthy and of the english style all the way. Mellow and smooth. The thing that stands out about the taste however is that it has a mineral sort of quality to it. Sort of irony like well water. I dunno maybe I'm crazy. A little doughy in the finish.

M= Low carbonation and great crisp finish. This is one area in this beer that I can agree with. Feels great.

D= I dunno what is wrong with this beer. Minerally and sort of unrefined tasting. I won't be buying it again but I would have no problem drinking it again. Just a weird beer.

Serving type: bottle

12-15-2009 01:35:17 | More by jjanega08
Photo of midwestbrewers
midwestbrewers

Kansas

2.78/5  rDev -28.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Pours a dark copper color with a 1 finger head that dissipates after a bit. Creamy looking head leaves some lacing.

S: Hints of sweet caramel and malts with a touch of chocolate in the background.

T: Crisp and carbonated. Malty body throughout the drink but lacking in a hops character.

A twist on what I was expecting for a pale. This being my first EPA i was sadly surprised at the lack of a hop character. The flavor profile was excellent but lacked in that citric bite. Glad I tried it but would probably not purchase again. Good brew Samuel Smith Old Brewery.

Serving type: bottle

04-26-2011 18:02:53 | More by midwestbrewers
Photo of cheers2beers
cheers2beers

Texas

2.8/5  rDev -27.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Appearance: This beer pours a pale looking dark amber with a white head that didn't stack up very high at all. No laceing but plenty of beads can be found.

Smell: Has woody aromas with some sour pale malts, a hint of tangerine hops. No alcohol in the nose.

Taste: The flavors are bitter sweet malts with a vague hop character. Nutty/woody palate blended well with a slight alcohol.

Mouthfeel: The mouthfeel is mostly watery with a bitter nut finish. Light to medium body with a medium level of carbonation.

Drinkability: I have come to the conclusion,that I am a fan of American Pale Ales over English. This wasn't a bad beer but it doesn't have that hoppy character that I have come to love from beers such as Sierra Nevada and Sam Adams. It is worth a try but I think most people will agree with my previous statement.


Cheers2Beers

Serving type: bottle

04-21-2006 22:39:09 | More by cheers2beers
Photo of JoeAmerican77
JoeAmerican77

Colorado

2.8/5  rDev -27.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours out into a samuel smith pint glass. Its a tonic dark red fire amber with orange licking the sides when held to light. A formidable off-white head that lasts at its inch and a half til drunk.

Smells a tad bready, some almond and soft leather, slight yeast and floral.

Tastes sweet at first touch with a hint of alcohol at the swallow. There is a little bit of bitter dough and an oh so slight metallic tinge, which is strange considering it goes from stone to glass to get here in the states. Not what you go for if you want an american pale ale. Mmm some citrus/strawberry hits further into the session.

Mouthfeel is lower to medium body with nothing sticking but a tannin feel on the back of the tongue, and again, i know this is taste oriented, but I'm getting iron flavors when focusing on the back of the feel. Light comfortable carbonation.

Semi easy to drink, it is not a beast in any way too powerful, nor is it too weak for any mention, but it really is just not that good. I'd recommend going a different direction when it comes to the purchase of this beer, but hey Sammy Smith has a great Imperial Porter as well as other brews much more lauded than this.

The price was reasonable, but I would not buy this beer again so I guess it is not worth it.

Serving type: bottle

10-19-2010 01:41:39 | More by JoeAmerican77
Photo of Dogbrick
Dogbrick

Ohio

2.83/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

My bottle was slightly skunked (they love those clear bottles at Sam Smith's),but even that aside I was kind of disappointed at the quality, given how much I love their Oatmeal and Imperial Stouts. The aroma was malty and had a stale aspect to it. The flavor was lacking in hops but still managed some bitterness in the finish. All in all I expected better.

Serving type: bottle

09-24-2002 10:56:48 | More by Dogbrick
Photo of biglite351
biglite351

Pennsylvania

2.83/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A - slightly cloudy amber color. Nice tall creamy head that leaves some lacing.

S - Malty like a stout but then a fruity offness counes out.

T - tangy... fruit and malts, some caramel flavor in the mix. mnild bitterness in the after taste.

M - mild coating, a hit on the entire front of the tongue.

D - quite drinkable, but not my overall style.

Serving type: bottle

11-08-2010 03:10:39 | More by biglite351
Photo of FLima
FLima

Brazil

2.83/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Amber color, a bit darker, and with a decent head.
Faint smell of caramels, malt and vanilla.
Taste follows smell, sweet malty taste with caramels and vanilla. Flavor got a bit unpleasant after it warmed up, a bit soapy.
Light to medium body with low carbonation.
Malty beer, traditional English Pale ale, don’t look for complexity. Second time I tried and this one didn’t go well, maybe because I had it too warm, I will need to give it a new try.

Serving type: bottle

12-19-2012 21:32:27 | More by FLima
Photo of ViveLaChouffe
ViveLaChouffe

Georgia

2.9/5  rDev -25.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a rich reddish copper with a very light tan head. Head is thick and a bit lacy. Aroma is lightly bitter and metallic.

Taste is a bit matallic and sweet pale malt. Creamy and smooth with a very mild body. Light hops finish. Very drinkable and pretty light-bodied. Nothing really special here.

Serving type: bottle

03-01-2004 02:46:21 | More by ViveLaChouffe
Photo of pmcadamis
pmcadamis

Illinois

2.9/5  rDev -25.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Had this at Cafe Brio in Springfield IL with a medium-spicy order of chicken tacos (so to be fair, my palate may not have been totally "clean" when reviewing this beer). It was brought to the table with no pint glass, so I had to ask for one! Dude, WTF? For a nice restaurant that had a very decent beer list they sure didn't train thier waitstaff very well....the guy was very young and possibly new, and not everybody is as into beer as we BA's are, so I'll forgive and forget.

Once I did get the glass, I poured this beer somewhat aggressively and got a nice two finger head with several big bubbles in the midst of all the tiny foamy ones.

Not much scent going on here. Smells somewhat hoppy and sweet, but not as sniffable as other pale ales. I smell more earth malt tones than I'm used to in a pale ale.

Tastes good, but rather boring and bland. Again, more malt that I would have expected. Has a nice nutty or seedy aftertaste that is pretty damn smooth. This is decent, but it's just not really grabing my attention. There just isn't enough complexity to this beer.

Mouthfeel is also a bit watery, but really smooth and fairly drinkable...especially for those who are new to the craft beer scene.
or just don't like alot of complexity to thier beer.

I personally like a beer to grab me by the balls and beg for attention, and this one is really just not catching my interest. There is nothing bad about this one, but there isn't enough going on to really burn it into my memory. If you ask me what this beer is like a month from now, It will have passed from all memory and just be remembered as a decent pale ale. A really good thing about it though is that It might be a good ale to recomend to those just starting to make the cross-over from the macro world. It's not too intimidating, but for me that's not a good thing. Intimidate me...please!

Serving type: bottle

08-08-2006 23:20:03 | More by pmcadamis
Photo of DaveGood
DaveGood

Pennsylvania

2.93/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I have enjoyed just about every Samuel Smith's beer that I have tried previously, so I had very high hopes for this one. Unfortunately, I found the Pale Ale to be quite average.

It poured a nice copper color with a nice white head that diminished quickly, leaving a nice lace along the glass. The aroma seemed to be lacking as I could only faintly detect some sweet malts, possibly a butterscotch scent but virtually no hops. The taste was very bland as well as it had a subdued sweet malt taste, almost caramel-like flavor up-front and slightly hoppy on the back end. There was not a lot going on with the way of mouth-feel, possibly a little dryish.

Overall, I would classify this as a very average Pale Ale. As far as drinkability is concerned, it goes down extremely smooth but there doesn't appear to be much going on in the way of complexities here.

Serving type: bottle

04-07-2004 02:51:23 | More by DaveGood
Photo of Hunter
Hunter

Arizona

2.93/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Damn SS and these clear glass bottles...pray I don't get a skunked beer here.

Appearance: Pours the color of a cream ale, with a thick off-white head that billows and sticks to the walls of the glass. No carbonation but then I don't expect any.

Aroma: Unfortunately that skunkiness is there. After that comes the maltiness you expect from an English ale, with a light touch of hops.

Taste: Why, I don't know, but I taste...Heinz 57 sauce. Is that frickin' weird or what? I even washed my mouth out and tried it again...same thing. Curious. There's malt there too, and a VERY faint smack of hops.

Finishes clean enough with a thin mouthfeel. Pretty average by the standards of the style.

Serving type: bottle

02-10-2005 04:20:19 | More by Hunter
Photo of coasterfreak75
coasterfreak75

North Carolina

2.95/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

The pour was a dark copper red with a two finger head that quickly dissapated and left a thin white ring around the top of the beer.

The smell was that of Heiniken, really, it was total skunk with only a hint of hop spice and malt.

The taste followed the smell drink for drink, until it warmed slightly. Once it warmed the mouth was filled with a lingering skunk.

Sorry I wasn't totally impressed with this beer. I could have gotten Heiniken for less money, but I didn't dog it because I like Heiniken.

Serving type: bottle

07-23-2004 04:57:52 | More by coasterfreak75
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Samuel Smith's Old Brewery Pale Ale from Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster)
87 out of 100 based on 917 ratings.