Rogue Farms Single Malt Ale - Rogue Ales

Not Rated.
Rogue Farms Single Malt AleRogue Farms Single Malt Ale

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
83
good

156 Reviews
THE BROS
-
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 156
Hads: 332
rAvg: 3.65
pDev: 8.49%
Wants: 14
Gots: 15 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Rogue Ales visit their website
Oregon, United States

Style | ABV
American Blonde Ale |  5.30% ABV

Availability: Rotating

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: jsh420 on 03-13-2010

No notes at this time.
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 156 | Hads: 332
Photo of brewdlyhooked13
1.69/5  rDev -53.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Appearance - uncaps with a major rush of air. Pouring into a DinkelAcker half-litre, I am greeted with eight to nine fingers of rocky off-white foam. With some patience I am getting the beer into the glass, but I can't help thinking that this may be a waste of time. As the beer goes, it has a coppery honeyed color, some haze to it. Nice-enough looking but these foamers usually are a bad sign.

Aroma - a bit funky but rather non-descript.

Taste - somne of the lower rated reviews state this as very bitter and astringent. That with the runaway head, I have a feeling the bottle is infected. It has that classic acrid, dry and bitter taste. Against my better judgment I take a healthy pull from the glass anyway (hey there's no pathogens in beer, right?), and I am rewarded with the faintest hint of fruitiness/hoppiness in the back but this is very dry, sharp, and unpleasant to me otherwise, and way gassy. I can taste parts of the beer that I think I'd like, but this bomber is a goner.

Mouthfeel - uber-crisp of course, the body has a medium feel and a layer of smoothness that I like.

Drinkability - probably pretty good with an intact bottle. I can't totally bottom out the score, I'm still nipping at the beer as I type, maybe got a third of it down, but I am always disappointed with infected bottles as I can't always find another sample easily. I'll keep my eyes open for this one though and give it another shot. (1,428 characters)

Photo of FickleBeast
1.97/5  rDev -46%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

22 oz bottle poured into a nonic.

Opening this beer lets out a violent hiss of CO2. As I pour, the glass quickly fills with foam, leaving maybe 25% beer and 75% foam in the glass. Volcanoes of bubble rush to the surface... First impression is that this is likely infected.

Aroma is harsh, mediciny, aspirin, fusel alcohol. First sip very astringent, bitter, and extremely dry and watery. There is something seriously off with this beer. There is absolutely no residual sweetness or mouthfeel, just a fizzy bitter taste, and then nothing.

Yuck. I'm not drinking this one. I gave it several healthy swallows, and I'm throwing in the towel. Down the drain it goes. A huge disappointment. (688 characters)

Photo of HugePlume
2.41/5  rDev -34%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

22oz bomber poured into a pint

A- Pours a bright golden yellow topped with a thick bright white head. Head dissipates rather quickly, but great lacing sticks around for the duration of the event.

S- Good things end with the appearance. Smell is an indistinct grainy mash and bready malt.

T- Very astringent taste. When cold its quite unpleasant. As it warms, the astringency wanes, but its still there.

M- Mouthfeel is middle of the road, well carbonated and a nice weight to the liquid. Like a low-carbonation soda.

O- Lack of interesting nose and the poor taste make this a loser, no reason to try again, (611 characters)

Photo of Gobzilla
2.41/5  rDev -34%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

A: poured into a tulip which was golden yellow in color with one finger head and good lacing that stuck to the glass.

S: absolutely no hop character to this one, lost ao malt for sure with some bready notes coming through.

T: like the smell it has lots of malts and a bready taste to it.

M: this is light to medium body with very little carbonation. seems like it has sat around for awhile.

D: not impressed with this one, very basic flavors not complex at all. Dissapointed cause rogue makes some decent beers. (515 characters)

Photo of curasowa
2.56/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Pours a slightly hazy amber color with two finger of head that fade slowly with thick lacing. Grainy malt and piney hops combine in the aroma. The body is much thinner than I was expecting, and along with a strong, slightly harsh bitterness is the dominate characteristics of this beer. The bitterness is sharp and earthy, with just the slightest hint of malt sweetness. The finish is lingering with an unpleasant bitterness. Not a great beer - the single malt bill doesn't have what it takes to balance the hop profile and really holds this beer back. (552 characters)

Photo of russpowell
2.66/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Picked this up at Goebbels in Wichita, ks

Starts out gushing, WTF?? Lost at least 6-8 oz. Thia pours a turbid amber with a finger of cream colored head. Never clears, but has good head retention & lacing

S: Faint maltyness

T: Plenty of malt sweetness, hints of honey, plus floral hops up front & dryness. Watered down apple juice, slight apricot as well as this warms, & more grainyness. Finishes watery, with apricot, grassyness & apple

MF: Light/medium bodied with firm carbonation. Becomes somewhat grainy when warm & thins out too

Drinks okay, but nothing too interesting going on here. I applaud the effort, but the results fall far short. Money is starting to get tight for beer, might be a long time before I pick up any of these Rouge experiments any time soon..

Maybe I got one out of date, how the hell would I know? No freshness dating,,, (856 characters)

Photo of Doppelbockulus
2.81/5  rDev -23%
look: 3 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

WTF!? I figured by the name "Single Malt" that this would be a malty brew, but I was surprised again.

This is a hazy gold color. Definatley unfiltered.

This is one of the best smelling beers I have come across. It is super cleansing. It's like a palate cleanser for your nose. I smell a garden full of flowers, pizza dough, and environmentally friendly cleaning fluid (because it is a friendly cleaner smell). The hop aroma is tremendously on the floral side, I have smelled candles that smell like this.

Oh no, then the taste is like, Hops Hops Hops, Hops hops. I get no malt, damn it. The name is misleading. I get pine and water with bunches of hop oils in it. America needs to calm down with the hop obsession. Really dry taste, and a hint of grapefruit juice. I have a hard time identifying flavors in overly hopped beers.

It feels like Sprite with all sugar and syrupy sensations removed and replaced with grass.

Sorry Rogue, this one isn't doin' it for me. (970 characters)

Photo of bucklemyshoe
2.98/5  rDev -18.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

22 oz bottle at 48 degrees into a Sam Adams Perfect Pint glass.

A: It opens with a very loud hiss. It pours a hazy golden-orange with an enormous 3 and a half finger head that lasts forever and becomes quite rocky, leaving huge clumps of lace on the sides (and this was with a gentle pour).

S: Very floral and medicinal, grass, and some light citrus notes.

T: Flowers up front, grass, sweet citrus, and aspirin.

M: It has a medium-light body with lots of effervescence and palate-sticking flavors.

D: This is strange. The carbonation is way too high, the floral aromas are over-bearing, and it tastes like I'm licking a Bayer aspirin. (640 characters)

Photo of flagmantho
2.98/5  rDev -18.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured from 22oz bomber into a pint glass.

Appearance: light golden-orange color with 2+ fingers of ivory foam. Not bad; it looks a bit orange for a blonde ale, in my opinion.

Smell: sweet, grainy malt with a light dose of citrusy hops. There's also a kind of bizarre off-odor in my beer which I can only describe as rubbery. Could it be funky hops? It's hard for me to tell; a nice, mild aroma, but for the rubber. Call it OK.

Taste: grainy, dry malt flavor with some citrusy hops. Bitterness is somewhat strong for the style. I'm getting a little bit of the rubber, but not as much as in the aroma. Truth be told, I'm not crazy about this beer, but it's not objectively a "bad" beer.

Mouthfeel: medium body with a nice level of carbonation for the style.

Drinkability: I'm just not into Rogue's first foray into the chateau-beer world. This beer is awfully rough around the edges, and my guess would be that this is due to the hops. I just don't think this variety is well-suited to a single-variety beer. (1,012 characters)

Photo of thesarahfuller
2.99/5  rDev -18.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from a 22 ounce bottle into a pint glass.

Bright cloudy yellow with a very white head and nice lacing.

Smell is almost nonexistent - pretty disappointing.

Taste falls a bit short. There's a bit of bitterness from the hops (it was dry hopped maybe?), but I'm not really tasting any malt to balance it. Very crisp and clean, but not particularly exciting. I'd like to try another beer with these hops.

Mouthfeel is too light for my taste.

I love the concept behind this beer, and imagine this could be nice and refreshing on a hot summer day, but it's not really hitting the spot on the October evening. (616 characters)

Photo of lacqueredmouse
3.01/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

On-tap at the brewery in Newport, OR.

Pours a very pale yellow hue: very mild and light. Head is very frothy and egg white; it leaves firm rings of lace down the glass. Carbonation is streaming, but quite mild. Not bad all up.

Nose is very, very light and very, very dull. Some maltiness comes through along with a very faint hint of lemon, but it's not exciting or bold, and doesn't really give me anything insight into the malt itself.

Pale light entry on the palate, with a clean but empty mid-palate. There's a touch of bitterness on the finish, along with some husky grain. It's not unpleasant, it's just, well, not there. Feel is extremely weak. Almost watery.

I don't have a lot to say about this beer, because this beer doesn't have a lot to say about itself. Single malt? Is that interesting? Certainly not this one. (829 characters)

Photo of RyanTeeter
3.03/5  rDev -17%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.25

a: A slight haze to a straw colored beer. Very unique and cool to look at. Held up to the light you get faint tints of copper. Thin white head that is gone in moments.

s: Watery smell, with hints of lemons. Decently pleasant.

t: The bitterness was very fresh however seemed to slightly over power the rest of the flavors. In the background there is some bitter lemons and earth.

m: It is a strong medium mouthfeel Very enjoyable.

o: I enjoyed this beer very much. I wish the flavors balanced themselves out a little more however overall, it was not a bad finish to the flavors. I would drink this beer again. Would not be the first thing I purchase however should I be in the specific mood for a beer with a solid bite - this it is. (736 characters)

Photo of cnally
3.05/5  rDev -16.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

The excitement of producing your own. The thrill of eliminating the horizontally positioned vendors. Hats off to Rogue for doing the damn thing.

The appearance is a deep orange, mildly cloudy. The carbonation is unruly and produces a huge, thick white head.

The aroma is sterile, sour and floral. You get a sense of the freshness.

The flavor continues with the sterile bitterness. It is a little puckering. The hops really jump out at you and maintain a lingering bitterness in the finish. The malts have produced a significant sweetness but not enough to tackle the off bitterness.

Mouthfeel is good enough considering the amount of carbonation and foam. Even keeled and thick.

I love the theory and I cannot say I even understand how difficult it would be to produce a consistent product with self grown materials. Let alone a first run with first growth products. I love the idea. I don't love the beer. (911 characters)

Photo of WYVYRN527
3.08/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a 22 oz. bottle into a pint glass.

A: Single malt pours a hazy golden to orange color with a thick white head that slowly settles to a few millimeters thick. Lacing is decent, and carbonation is lively.

S: Honey and biscuity malt notes are prominent, with a hop aroma of grass and floral character. Overall not very strong on the nose.

T: Grainy cereal malt flavors, with some hints of toffee. Hops give the beer a slightly dry finish, with herbal, grassy characters.

M: Typical smooth Rogue mouthfeel, however still lacks something.

D: Not a bad beer, but it just doesn't have alot to it. It's just boring, so to speak. Of all of the beers Rogue had produced over the years, I've liked most of them. I have to say I'm a bit dissappointed. (757 characters)

Photo of mrfrancis
3.08/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A: Pours a hazy gold with an enormous white head. Subtle orange highlights are on display once the beer settles. Overall, this is a moderately attractive ale.

S: Sweet, soothing aromas of spicy malt and ripe orange are present on the nose. As the beer settles and warms, these two aromas blend until they are indistinguishable. I would have liked to see greater depth and a longer separation of scents here.

T: Opens smooth and velvety with notes of roasted nuts, heavy cream, herbs, vanilla, lemon, and navel orange accompanied all the way by a restrained malt spiciness. Finishes in a delicate fashion while displaying spicy malt, orange, and herbal hop notes. Pleasant, but lacks any standout flavor component to make it more memorable.

M: Off-dry medium body that gets slightly stickier before the finish.

O: This is not a terrible effort, but it is not one of Rogue's finest offerings either. In the end, this is a pleasant enough beer, but nothing about it is all that remarkable. (990 characters)

Photo of errantnight
3.11/5  rDev -14.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Well, I was expecting more after enjoying Sierra Nevada's Estate Ale, but this is another beast entirely.

Comes out of the bottle looking quite nice, and orange hued straw. Nice retention and moderate lacing in my Spiegelau tulip.

Downhill from there. A musty graininess with some light esters predominates, only a hint of citrusy, earthy hop.

On the palate this is pale malt up front, light toast. Flinty and firmly, strongly bitter that settles in on the tongue and predominates. Dryness sweeps up a bit of lemon on the fringe.

Body and carbonation are spot on, right in the medium-light range, although I wonder if it is slightly overcarbonated given the bitterness.

It's not hard to drink, but the mineral, metallic bitterness is the strongest flavor, and the aroma speaks to a flaw either in process or some weakness in the ingredients that I'm not quite putting my finger on.

Certainly not worth the price, and really doesn't work as a pale or a blonde. Love the idea of the series, but this needs some adjustments in next year's batch. (1,049 characters)

Photo of Zorro
3.12/5  rDev -14.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Clear yellow beer with a full sized snow white head. This looks like a lager.

Smells strongly of toasted grain. Lesser scent of caramel and scorched sugar. Mild noble hop aroma that is mostly lemon scent.

Starts out neutral with a little bit of bitterness and a stronger grass flavor. Mildly sweet and a little astringent. That is about it tastes like they steeped the grain too hot.

Mouthfeel is OK.

Overall a average beer. (433 characters)

Photo of EgadBananas
3.14/5  rDev -14%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pale straw yellow, with a soapy white head. Nice lace.

Not much aroma, but mostly biscuity malts.

Tastes much better. Nice floral, bitter hop bite with a light malt base .

Light body, crisp and clean finishing.

Nice hop bite, but that's about it. (250 characters)

Photo of crossovert
3.15/5  rDev -13.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

650ml bottle.

It pours a light gold with a frothy white head that leaves a few spots of lacing.

The smell is candylike with a decent hop overtone that has a bit of citrus and herbs.

The flavor is clean. It is pretty nondescript, a hint of bitterness, perhaps a bit of cattiness. It is okay.

Not too bad of a beer. (317 characters)

Photo of Muhly
3.18/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

500 ml bottle poured into a chalice glass.

A-Pours a golden straw colour with about two fingers of off white head. Head stays up for a decent amount of time and leaves behind a very solid white lace on the glass.

S-moderate hoppy aroma. Probably just the marketing, but I also get a whiff of barnyard or haystack.

T-grassy hops with rustic cereal.

M-nicely carbonated. Bubbles seem to allow the flavour to wash over the tongue.

O-quite liked this one. Simple an refreshing. Would love to kick back on a porch in the summer with a bottle of this and a steak. Probably not the best beer for the winter season, but I knew that going in. (638 characters)

Photo of BuckeyeNation
3.21/5  rDev -12.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pumpkin peel orange with honey bee highlights. In other words, darker than most blonde ales. Three fingers of manila colored foam was created on the first pour, has a firm and pitting texture, and is gracing the glass with small sheets of BB-shot lace. Yet another good looking Rogue beer.

The nose doesn't have much going for it. The malt is contributing nothing more than a very mild toastiness and the hops add a little grassy muskiness. Here's hoping that the ship will be righted on the palate.

It seems that Single Malt Ale was designed to be as simple and as lacking in personality as possible. Beer with only four ingredients is fine, but Rogue Dare malt and Revolution hops don't seem to be able to carry the day all by their lonesome. Pacman yeast lets you know that you're drinking Rogue beer, but can only do so much.

The flavor profile is roughly identical to the aroma. The beer is balanced for these guys, which means there's a pleasant hop nip on the semi-crisp back end. In the end, though, there's nothing for the taste buds to grab onto and make the drinker look forward to the next mouthful.

Even though the mouthfeel is no great shakes, it's slightly above average for the style and ABV (estimated 4.8-5.0% based on degrees Plato). Bigger and more lush is always welcome, of course.

Of the three Chatoe Rogue First Growth brews that I've reviewed so far, Dirtoir Black Lager is clearly the best. Next is Wet Hop Ale. Bringing up the rear is Single Malt Ale, a relatively lackluster offering from a brewery that is capable of much, much better. (1,569 characters)

Photo of Stinkypuss
3.23/5  rDev -11.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Rogue First Growth Single Malt (dare)

Bright amber body, on the lighter side of the spectrum. Caramel and floral hops in the aroma. The flavor is pretty one dimensional, a weak, nutty roasted malt flavor and a bit tart. Hopped to the point of decent balance, but theres not a whole lot there, the typical sour Pacman yeast Rogue insists on using is here at work. Bland, eh, maybe the barley needs a year or two to get firmly rooted before the flavor comes in strong. (467 characters)

Photo of BMoney575
3.28/5  rDev -10.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Sampled on 5-14-10

Pours a hazy golden orange color, with a foamy white head and epic huge bubbles of lacing. Very nice.

Smell is lightly sweet malt with a subtle hoppy kick. A little sweat sock, the malt adds an almost sour quality.

Taste is very tame, not much going on. Very light hops add a little citrus and bitterness, with not much malt to back it up. Slightly fruity, which helps.

Mouthfeel is very slick with tart carbonation, and slightly flat at the same time. A little odd.

Drinkability is good, easy and light.

Overall, not anything special or anything I'd seek out again. (591 characters)

Photo of tchenery
3.3/5  rDev -9.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Bottle to pint glass. Nice head on the beer, very white, and about 1/4 inch. Consistent carbonation makes me thing this will stay throughout. Beer is a nice orange/yellow pale color. I expected this beer to be a darker color and malt character just by looking at the bottle.

Smells slightly fruity/earthy, which is probably from the hops. The taste is pretty tart at first, but smooths out a bit through the drink. The bitterness hits first and doesn't let any of the malt come through. It's carbonation gives the beer an almost thin taste which makes me think they used some sort of priming sugar instead of more malt for bottle conditioning, even though the label says it's made with 4 local ingredients.

I like the idea of this beer and I'm glad I tried it because I've often thought of growing barley and am growing hops right now in my backyard. I don't think I would reach for it again based on flavor, but I might. It is a well disguised high gravity beer. (966 characters)

Photo of kini
3.3/5  rDev -9.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Thought I'd give this a try. I assumed a malt beer would have a strong flavor of malt. I was wrong. A totally unremarkable beer given the price. For a blonde I much prefer the very less expense GB Blonde.

Color was very nice. A nice golden amber, a nice head of off white color. Again taste was nothing more than average. Kind of disappointed. (345 characters)

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Rogue Farms Single Malt Ale from Rogue Ales
83 out of 100 based on 156 ratings.