1. Rating beers by attributes (look, smell, taste, feel, overall) is back! Read the latest update ...
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Grozet - Williams Brothers Brewing Company

Not Rated.
GrozetGrozet

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
80
good

425 Ratings
THE BROS
88
very good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 425
Reviews: 323
rAvg: 3.53
pDev: 13.88%
Wants: 10
Gots: 5 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Williams Brothers Brewing Company visit their website
United Kingdom (Scotland)

Style | ABV
Scottish Gruit / Ancient Herbed Ale |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
From the Gaelic "Groseid", Since at least the 16th century Scots monks and alewives brewed indigenous drinks from cereals, wild herbs and ripe fruits. Tibbie Shiels green Grozet was immortalised by such Scots literati as Sir Walter Scott, Jas Hogg. (The Ettrick shepherd) and Robert Burns whoconsidered it a most convivial drink. Brewed with lager malt, wheat, bog myrtle, hops and meadowsweet then secondary fermented with ripe Scottish gooseberries.

(Beer added by: canadianbarman on 09-12-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Grozet Alström Bros
Ratings: 425 | Reviews: 323 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of charlatan
3.4/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12oz bottle has freshness date April 2007. The beer pours a light gold colour with a small rim around the glass for a head.

Gooseberries are definitely apparent in the nose, but heather is rather more so. This is well carbonated with a rather dry feel. The start and finish exhibit a delightful heathery, halfway between flowery and piney flavour with more than a hint of gooseberry involved inbetween. It certainly isn't as sharp as I would expect a beer involving gooseberry to be.

This is not as rich as the same brewer's Fraoch heather ale but certainly a pleasant and interesting diversion from the normal ales I quaff.

charlatan, Aug 12, 2006
Photo of rebel1771
4.08/5  rDev +15.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Pours a hazey light golden color with a slight head.

Aoma of sweet goosberry is the first scent you notice with a little maltiness as well.

The goosberry flavors take center stage in this brew along with the typical citrus flavors from a wheat ale.

All in all a very good ale with a unique flavor that is pretty smooth.

rebel1771, Aug 04, 2006
Photo of MaltyGoodness
3.5/5  rDev -0.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

12oz. bottle

Pours a slightly hazed straw color with a hint of orange. Has a thing white head that maintains. Mild lacing on the glass.

Smells lightly of berries and herbs. No malt or hops detected.

Taste of berries upfront with a slightly malty and herbal taste the follows. Finishes slightly sweet.

Light body, nice carbonation.

An interesting brew, and quite enjoyable. Nice for a change of gears once and a while.

MaltyGoodness, Jul 15, 2006
Photo of Blakaeris
3.1/5  rDev -12.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours cloudy golden yellow with a thin soapy ring for a head.

Smell is balanced honey sweet apricot fruitiness and a strong sour aroma. Virtually no malt or hop qualities.

Taste is similiar to the nose, but much sweeter. Definite honey mead quality. Finish has a bit of resinous piney flavor for a bit of peppery spice bitterness. Lingering sweetness

Mouthfeel is light bodied.

Overall this beer is unusual and interesting. Worth the experience but a little too sweet for my pallet.

Blakaeris, Jul 09, 2006
Photo of bashiba
3.65/5  rDev +3.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured a cloudy light orange with a small white head.

Smelled like slightly sour dark berries, and grapes.

Taste is very herbal and spicy with a slight bit of light malts and a subtle hint of dark berries. Finishes with a spicy nutmeg and cinnamon taste with a slight pine like hop bitterness. Very different, but not to bad.

Mouthfeel is light with a very dry finish.

Not to bad overall, would enjoy drinking this again. Very different.

bashiba, Jul 09, 2006
Photo of therica
1.43/5  rDev -59.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

First impression-- appearance like lemon water; smell like a lovely bouquet of grape and flowers; taste like watered-down turpentine.

My wife's interested first (and final) reaction to her "sure I'll try the Gooseberry" - "BLEHHH" as she permanently sat it aside. Oh-- she corrects me and notes that she also said, "It sure doesn't taste like gooseberry!" She's absolutely correct-- this has no excitement or fruity flavor as might a flavored Kriek. There's gooseberry in the nose, but you won't find much hint of it in the taste.

I'm glad to see that some epicurian affectionados seem to rate this highly. It's nice to read the interesting historical notes given for this beer. My first, middle and final impression echoes my wife's-- BLEHHH. Even for a wheat-beer, it's not very good, in my opinion. The only exotic beer that I've had which this might resemble (and was even worse), was the Rodenbach, whose slogan is "you either love it or you hate it." I was in the latter group. I was sick for 6 hours, after having it on-tap.

You can check my other reviews and see that I do, indeed, enjoy good and interesting and exotic beers. Not this one.

therica, Jul 09, 2006
Photo of tallar
4.25/5  rDev +20.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4

Pours an ever so slightly hashy, orangish-gold, abiet slightly green, straw color. Has a small white head, that quickly dissapates, giving away to very thin lacing. Smells wine-like, more like grapes then gooseberries. After that, herbs of some sort are probably the next most noticable thing, along with a hint of wheat and malt.

Tastes more herbal then anything. Almost tea-like with some grape-ish qualities. Sweet at first, before turning slightly tart, it finishes kind of dry. Malts and wheat seems to be somewhere in there as well, but the herbal tea quality of thism is definitely the most dominate flavor. Fairly drinkable, with a smooth, medium-body.

tallar, Jun 23, 2006
Photo of BeerFink
3.7/5  rDev +4.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pale golden / light straw colored in appearance, head is evanescent. Aroma is notably fruity up front, estery and vinous with hints of green apples, pears, and green grapes. Herbal qualities to the nose, as well as a bit of grass. Some pale malt in the nose, as well as the typical wheat aroma, along with very slight yeastiness. Flavor is smooth up front, but the grainy wheat comes in quickly, coupled with a lingering bready malt flavor that is felt more than tasted. Overall impression of the flavor is its herbal quality. Fruit comes in a flash of sweetness, but quickly moves to a slighly acidic flavor that lasts into the aftertaste, causing a minor drying effect, along with a bit of sourness. Much more tea-like than wine-like. A bit of spiciness balances the acidity, and mixes with the returning wheat flavor. Another interesting & ancient brew from Heather Ale.

BeerFink, Jun 04, 2006
Photo of RedHaze
2.98/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a hazy orange-ish color with a quarter inch head that fades quickly to a thin, spotty cap, leaving behind only a little lacing.

Smell; there's a kind of graininess in the smell, along with a berry aroma that I can only assume is gooseberries. It's also has a very herbal quality to it.

Taste; very herbal with a somewhat weet profile from the gooseberries. The wheat doesn't quite stand out as much as I would have liked, and there's a strange aftertaste, that I can't quite place, that I'm not really enjoying. Mouthfeel is on the thin side, and the aftertaste makes this a bit hard for me to drink. This is something that I won't be seeking out again.

RedHaze, May 28, 2006
Photo of kmpitz2
3.6/5  rDev +2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

11.2 oz bottle. Pours a murkey oranged khaki color with just a minimal head that falls to sparse wisps over top of the brew. This one is pretty hazy, with no apparent carbonation. Nose is definately fruity, what I have to assume is gooseberry, with a light spiceyness playing in there. Flavor is a nice blend between a good fruityness that fades to a moderately creamy and lightly spicey wheat character. I don't think that gooseberry is ever going to be a favorite fruit in my book, as the flavor is just not my bag. It doesn't seem flawed, I just don't enjoy it as much as I could. Feel is moderate with just a hint of carbonation. I'd like a little more bubble in this one, as it would add some sharpness that I think would work well with the flavor. Overall, this one is okay. I don't think I would do gooseberries in a beer, but if I hadn't tried this one, I'd never know that. Good show for giving it a try.

kmpitz2, May 23, 2006
Photo of Brian700
4.03/5  rDev +14.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

This one pours a clear amber with a big billowy white head that sticks around for a while. There is some good lacing.

The aroma is of wheat malt and what I presume to be a gooseberry aroma. It smells sort of like mulberry.

The flavor is of wheat malt with some dry fruitiness. The fruit presence is almost like a mulberry mixed with juniper.

The mouthfeel is medium bodied with medium carbonation.

This is a very drinkable beer. I will go back to this one.

Brian700, May 12, 2006
Photo of erica
2.25/5  rDev -36.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

My label wasn't metal like the one in the picture here, but that's ok. Cool to see that a uni. art class designed it though. Best before June 07. OK, good..

Open, pour... erm.. Poured a golden yellow color, a bit hazy, with a susdy-white head, sort of looked like the bubbles in a sinkful of dishwater. Eh.

Smelled like a big skunk sat on my nose and got scared. I mean SKUNKY. This, from a brown bottle in a decent store. Hmm.. Also got some herbs in there, rosemary I think. I don't like rosemary, so that didn't help to distract me from the skunk.

It did not taste too skunky at all, somehow. It tasted a bit fruity, I suppose those gooseberries (I don't know what gooseberries are), if I thought about it enough there was a generic berry flavor in there though, but very very faint. It was also herbal, again I picked up rosemary, and that didn't make me happy. It also tasted grainy, like corn or something less-than desirable. I do believe I made an icky face upon tasting this.

Mouthfeel was thin, moderately carbonated, and just bland. Not drinkable for me, I had to pass this one off to my mom, who liked it lots. Otherwise it would've been a drain pour.

erica, Apr 27, 2006
Photo of klewis
3.25/5  rDev -7.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A: I would've sworn that this was a Long Island Ice Tea. Pours a murky yellowish-brownish-orange with a small frothy head. Specks of lacing line the glass.

S: Very unusual smell with a potpourri of spices and a unique berry aroma

T: Somewhat sweet with citrusy flavors and unidentifiable herbs and spices. I can't help but wonder exactly what the hell they threw in the brew kettle.

M: Light in body and carbonation with a watery finish

D: This has to be the most unique beverage that I've ever had, and I have no idea as to what to think about it yet. Is it bad? No. Is it good? I'm not sure. Is it worth trying? Absolutely.

klewis, Mar 28, 2006
Photo of mrasskicktastic
2.45/5  rDev -30.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

A - Hazy lemon yellow with almost no head.

S - Light sour floral or fruit smell, not very pleasant, but very weak.

T - A light wheat malt and tart fruit flavor with a touch of sourness. A mild tart/bitter finish.

M - Sort of thin and a bit viscous, refreshing.

D - Well, it isn't hard to drink, but there really isn't much to it. The flavor is weak, but if it were any stronger it wouldn't be pleasant at all. The smell would be nigh unbearable if it were stronger. I would get sick of it after a few. A subpar beverage this is.

mrasskicktastic, Mar 16, 2006
Photo of BigBry
3.73/5  rDev +5.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Tall, thin brown bottle. 50cl with BB date clipped into back label.
Pours a hazy golden yellow, hardly any head or lacing. According to the back label: For maximum drinking pleasure, Grozet should be served cold. You might notice a slight haze once chilled due to natural fruit and cereal proteins. - It's hazy so I must have at the right temp. Smell of gooseberries and some citrus fruit as well. Nice aromas, not overpowering. Taste is quite light and slightly fruity. Again the gooseberries come through - slightl sour and tart. Slight bit of hops and a touch of yeast in the finish. Flavors are all there, nothing overpowers the other, overall well balanced. Well carbonated, but not fizzy, make it crisp and a bit dry. Light tasting, refreshing.
My first beer of this style, and was quite unique, especially with the gooseberry flavor.

BigBry, Feb 24, 2006
Photo of montageman
3.23/5  rDev -8.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a 11.2 oz. bottle into a glass mug. A bit of head that stuck around for a little while then disappears with little to no lacing.

Moderately amber in color, very sweet smelling - gooseberries are immediately noticeable. The berries are also heavily noticeable in the taste and the finish is citrusy. A nice brew, nothing spectacular. This would be nice in the summer as it is quite refreshing.

montageman, Feb 22, 2006
Photo of nouseforotacon
4.15/5  rDev +17.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 5

330ml/11.2 Fl oz. bottle, best before 6/2006.

This one poured out a swirl of carbonated bubbles that formed a creamy white head with good retention. The body was cloudy with visible sediments, dark blood-orange like color that pales as it warms. Interesting appearance.

The smell was STRONG, gooseberries definitely present, dry and doughy malt aroma also heavy. Some wheat/straw presence in the aroma. Very rich.

The taste is, again, strong berries with some light diacetyl notes. Taste of nectarines gives a little tartness. This one was warm and refreshing, light body but not terribly watered down, with slight carbonation in the mouthfeel. Also, aftertaste was a bit doughy from the malts, wheat presence resurfaced.

I had good expectations for this one, and they were surprisingly met. This is a good brew for all seasons - light and refreshing, with enough body and character to keep your palate interested. Recommended.

nouseforotacon, Feb 19, 2006
Photo of IrishRedRock
4.08/5  rDev +15.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 5

Hazy gold, thin frothy lace. Buttery, herbal-tea nose with just a hint of the wily and elusive gooseberry. This particular berry flavor follows through more in the flavor, and balances the bitterness from the herbs oh so very nicely. Dry and grassy at first, but does yield quite a strong malt profile considering the other flavors going on here. Reminds me very much of Heavyweight's Juhlia, and even moreso? A real Snakebite like you'd get in a real Irish pub, complete with the black currant on top, though certainly not that sweet. Carbonation is a bit lacking but I'd barely noticed due to the overall enjoyment factor I'm getting from this. Quite refreshing and an easy drinker for sure. One which I'd certainly quaff innumerable amounts. Cheers to the Scots!

IrishRedRock, Feb 17, 2006
Photo of tgbljb
3.55/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

poured a slightly hazy medium amber color with modet white head that rapidly fell to a thin ring. Smell is very difficult to describe. At first I thought it had a wine-like scent, then again maybe it was lime-like. Maybe this is what a goosebeery smells like?? I like it but i'm not sure why. Taste is very ordinary with maybe some medicinal?? notes. Very unique. Finish is very thin and a the flavor quickly dissapears. An OK beer, but not really something to try again.

tgbljb, Feb 09, 2006
Photo of Derek
3.5/5  rDev -0.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Murky golden-yellow, pours with a little white head, which quickly dissipates. Almost looks like it could've been brewed in the middle ages.

S: Gooseberries! (with a little bready malt).

T: Balanced slightly to the sweet side, with an acidic tang in the aftertaste. Like a slice of bread covered in gooseberry jam! (though not THAT sweet).

M: Moderate body with a lower than average carbonation. Could use some more carbonation.

D: Fruit aroma is enticing, easily approachable, not too filling, and not too fruity.

Derek, Feb 08, 2006
Photo of asabreed
3.98/5  rDev +12.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

33 cl. bottle into a pint glass

Appearance: Hazy golden yellow, with hardly any head or lacing to speak of. Color's nice, though.

Smell: Lots of herbs, citrus, and the hint of what I imagine to be gooseberries. Smells like possible articifical sugars also, unless that's some candied malt or something.

Taste: Light, sugary sweet at first, then it dies down into some lemon-like dryness and finishes that way on the palate. I wish the finish was longer, but this is pretty decent stuff, especially for my second stab at the style. Slightest bit of hops maybe, but it's not extremely sugary or malty. That said, it's not extremely complex either, but I dig it. It's such a weird style that I welcome the newness to the taste buds, also. And there's also good balance.

Mouthfeel: Pretty thin-seeming at first, but it turns out to be fairly full with the sugars and malt I think, and the carbonation's fairly light. Almost like a fuller spritzer with less carbonation? Fairly odd, maybe, but I dig it, especially for this style, as it fits well.

Drinkability: I think this is the first time I can say I've had gooseberries before, even though technically it's not physical gooseberries. Still, a beer that I'd suggest to try, as this is not something you encounter every day. But it's good, tasty, and thirst quenching. It's always good to keep your taste buds in check and flexible, too.

asabreed, Jan 27, 2006
Photo of russpowell
3.38/5  rDev -4.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

BBD Jan 07

Poured clear golden with a white flurry head. Light lacing and head retention

Smell: Malted wheat and floral notes

Taste: Dryness upfront and then a honey-like sweetness, floaral notes, and spices: Ginger and brwon sugar

MF: A little to prickly and thin for my palate

This didn't really come together for me. A little to sweet and cloying. Bet you it went like gang busters a few 100 years ago

russpowell, Jan 24, 2006
Photo of crwills
3.53/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured into a standard pint glass. Very hazy and dark yellow/gold, with a small head that dissipates quickly.

Unusual smell, although this is one of the first beers of this style I've tried. Overripe fruits and melon predominated, as well as a bit of skunk. Also present are some root vegetable traces (squash or turnip), and some grass and weedy flowers.

Taste is unusually close to the smell. Usually there's a big shift in perception on the first sip, I find, but in this case the taste is quite matched with the smell. Very flowery up front (clover and other wild, weedy flowers), as well as some damp, very ripe fruit, and a mild fruity aftertaste.

Not something I'd drink on regular basis, but great to try and definitely worth looking up for something different.

crwills, Jan 21, 2006
Photo of scooter231
1.2/5  rDev -66%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

Clear clear clear golden color. Pretty but a bit boring. Smells like... stale cigarettes. With lemon. Yeah... so... um... Taste- better. But better isn't really good. Tastes like dirt. Stinky cigarette-infused dirt. Mouthfeel feels kinda dirty, too. Grainy and not smooth. Not that drinkable. It just... it's dirt. This is beer dirt. Dirt beer. Yech. And it's fresh, it says it's fresh... this must be a big burly man Scot beer.

scooter231, Jan 17, 2006
Photo of allergictomacros
3.38/5  rDev -4.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

A - Slightly hazy orange with a small head and little head retention.

S - Has a bit of a fruity smell. I'm not familiar with gooseberries so I can't say if that's what it is. Sweet and tart, maybe a bit bready.

T - Dryer than I expected. Mild hoppy finish. Not especially flavourful.

M - Medium bodied.

D - Easy to drink, good everyday beer (if it was easier to find/cheaper).This beer isn't going to spur the microbrewed grozet revolution, but it's interesting.

allergictomacros, Jan 07, 2006
Grozet from Williams Brothers Brewing Company
80 out of 100 based on 425 ratings.