Urthel Hop-It - De Leyerth Brouwerijen (Urthel)

Not Rated.
Urthel Hop-ItUrthel Hop-It

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
88
very good

794 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 794
Reviews: 534
rAvg: 3.92
pDev: 11.73%
Wants: 20
Gots: 32 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
De Leyerth Brouwerijen (Urthel) visit their website
Belgium

Style | ABV
Belgian IPA |  9.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: feloniousmonk on 10-04-2005)
View: Beers (6) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 794 | Reviews: 534 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of MaxwellSchaefer
1.8/5  rDev -54.1%
look: 2.75 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 1.75 | feel: 1.75 | overall: 1.75

Appearance: Cloudy amber, some head rings and overall not the prettiest beer.

Smell: apricots with some undertones of hops and I detected a hint of wet cardboard that led me to believe the beer might have been off.

Taste: Strong carbonation, decent hop and malt balance that began bitterly and finished sweet. The aftertaste was a powerful lingering astringency.

Overall: I really believe that my beer was off, or at least I hope it was.

Photo of zweird
2/5  rDev -49%

Photo of AlaskanYoung
2/5  rDev -49%

Photo of joecast
2.1/5  rDev -46.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

pours a hazy light golden color with lots of floating flecks of yeast which would not settle out at all. large white fluffy head with good retention and lacing.

this is one boozy beer. the alcohol presence just domintates everything else making it hard to pick up any hops or malt. i do get some yeast character from the bottle conditioning but that just seems to enhance the booze side of things which makes this tough to drink. as i said, hops were hard to pick out but it was obvious this was a pretty bitter beer. mouthfeel was heavy and slippery.

anyway, to me this style is pretty tough to get right as balancing the belgian and ipa characters is not easy.

Photo of Jwaks
2.15/5  rDev -45.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Pours a dull gold color with little to no head. I must have gotten a bad bottle because this has little to no hop flavor or bitterness and was all flat malt. The drain enjoyed it more than I did. Carbonation is lacking for a belgian. I'll have to try it again and revise my review then. sorry guys!

Photo of bigred89
2.25/5  rDev -42.6%

Photo of Zbeetleman
2.25/5  rDev -42.6%

Photo of Wadsey
2.3/5  rDev -41.3%
look: 5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Urthel Hop-It

Served in New Belgium globe glass

A: Pours clear pale gold with big, meringue-like head that shows great retention and leaves wonderful Brussels lacing. Effervescence competes with champaign. 

S: Initially, somewhat skunky or extremely sulfury. But it opens up a bit, and these off notes ease their grip. Herbal hops and flower blossoms are revealed. 

T: A little malty sweetness and then Belgian spiciness follows up. Some herbal notes before medium-high bitterness presents itself. Finish starts weedy and ends skunky. 

M: Medium-high body and carbonation, but the beer manages to possess a relatively soft mouthfeel. 

O: This particular bottle of Hop-It is not very hoppy and, worse, suffers from skunky and sulfur characteristics. I will revisit in the future to confirm that it is subpar. 

Photo of bellebouche
2.4/5  rDev -38.8%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Hard to explain how frustrating it is to see continental european brewers lagging so far behind what's happening in the USA, UK, Scandinavia.

For a beer that should showcase hops my sample was surprisingly devoid of any.

Poured well, good head, alcohol was too apparent, malts muted no aroma, dry finish and a little fusel/alcohol hotness.

Unrefined if I'm generous but... such a let down.

Photo of jbonapar
2.42/5  rDev -38.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Purchased in Albany, NY...Hated it in the Bottle...Tried on tap.

Poured as expected, nice golden with a thick head. Smelll was sweet with a strong bitter yet medicinal overtone.

Taste. Ok... Ouch. Tastes 100% like Nyquil, green death flavor. I mean, wow. I;ve yet had a beer as pungently medicinal as this. I wouldn't call it hops. To me it tastes like an odd mix of hop and nasty black licorice. To me, VERY unpleasing.

Wow, i'm somewhat shocked how much I hated this beer. I rarely pour beer out, but this one made the cut!

Photo of JavaNoire
2.5/5  rDev -36.2%

Photo of ricke
2.58/5  rDev -34.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

A: Pale orange color with a thick white head that stays along for quite a while and leaves plenty of lacings as it slowly settles.

S: Rather mild with a malty note of wheat crackers, Belgian style yeast, dry earth and pleasant hop notes of grass, orange and lemon. Some phenols.

T: The taste is sweet at first with light flavors of malts and bread crumbs. Some yeast and earthy hop aromas. Upon swallowing, the beer basically becomes a mess: unbalanced herbal bitterness, citric hop notes and medicinal phenols. The finish is basically just some bitterness and spices coupled with lots of sweet and almost burning alcohol. The taste of alcohol lingers on forever in the mouth, and in this case this is not a good ting.

M: Moderate body, quite a lot of carbonation. Somewhat dry finish.

D: This one didn't fare well with me at all. It wasn't very hoppy, at least not in terms of aromas and flavors. It's just unbalanced with a horrible finish of bitterness and poorly integrated alcohol. Can't really figure out what they were thinking when they brewed this one. Not recommended.

Photo of wyatt
2.63/5  rDev -32.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A: Pours medium yellow with a good sized head that settled quickly. Very little lacing.

S: Not at all what I was expecting. For a beer called "Hop-it" I excepted at least a little hops. This is much more Belgium and much less IPA than I was expecting.

T: Once again, I was expecting an IPA. This was very sweet and the alcohol was very up front.

M: Overly carbonated and very strong alcohol presence.

D: Much too sweet and the alcohol was to strong.

I would not buy this again. This was not hoppy at all and extremely disappointing. If you are a fan of Belgium try it, if not stay away.

Photo of rustrose
2.63/5  rDev -32.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Urthel Hop-It

12 oz bottle served in Jever pils glass. Pours gold with a thick, soapy white head of two inches that holds forever and leaves lots of lace. Very sticky foam.

Sweet grainy cheap malt smell hits on the nose first, like a malt liquor. However, this is soon enhanced with a candy-like presence that’s a dead ringer for “smarties.” Floral, almost soapy dimension. Weird. Seems to just keep evolving. Some pear in there, and that weird harsh powdery chalk/drying smell

Kind of a weird beer. Tastes of sweet grainy malts, like PBR supersized, followed by a dose of harsh herbal hops, with a little bit of candy thrown in along the way. Finish is long, confused, and cloying, with herbal hops, Necco wafers, unidentifiable fruit, and some kind of sweet multigrain bread. Just doesn’t clean up very well.

Mouthfeel is medium and highly spritzy with tons of champagne-like prickle.

Low drinkability because of the sweet and cloying aspect, with too much sweet grainy malt. This tastes like a Belgian malt liquor. Blech.

Very disappointing beer. Not sure if this is an old bottle that just isn’t doing this one justice, or if this beer just sucks. But this really lacked balance, cleanness, and digestibility, and was such a chore to drink that I’m dumping the remaining half bottle. I’ve given this one several chances in this 4-pack, and it’s just not doing it for me at all, especially after all the other great, balanced BIPAs that I’ve been trying.

Photo of rekel
2.75/5  rDev -29.8%

Photo of Overlord
2.78/5  rDev -29.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Definitely not my favorite of the Stone 12th anniversary celebration.

Poured pale yellow. No head. Tastes chalky. Smells like it would have some citrus, but almost none in the flavor. Just all-around unplesant. I have no idea what they were going for here. For what it is, more carbonation is definitely required.

Photo of PaigeMoLee
2.8/5  rDev -28.6%

Photo of hustlesworth
2.85/5  rDev -27.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

** edit 2-2-12. Much much better on tap. Not so boozy, better malt and hop flavor. An easy 4.5.

A- this is a beautiful beer. hazy golden amber with some suspended particulates. the big off-white head stands firm for a bit before sluggishly falling away leaving thick trails of slime behind.

S- very interesting aroma in that it smells like a strong german lager or a kellerbier! noble hops and pilsner malts are of course responsible for this but it's still a surprise. lightly toasted bread, biscuit, and cracker, apple skin, dried grass and lilies. not as hoppy as i would have expected.

T- hoppy, but not over the top. somewhat watery up front with an astringent bitterness in the middle that blends in with pineapple alcohol esters. two sips and i feel lit in my chest, 3 sips and i feel the jingle of a buzz. somewhat metallic. belgian yeast character is understated and it's unclear at this point whether or not it was meant to be pronounced. i'm going with not. some apple skin and white grape fruitiness is in there but it lacks the rounded complexities of a typical strong ale. taste and aroma are more akin to a hoppy boozed up american imperial pilsner than to any belgian IPA that i've ever had, with the malt standing meagerly behind the hops, and the hops standing semi-confident behind the alcohol. especially as it warms, there's nothing to mask the floral alcohol sweetness, which isn't as unpleasant as it has been in past experiences, but i still expected more from this quirky brewery. finishes sweet with a quickly fading bitterness that seats itself near the tonsils.

MF- voluptuous. alcoholic body and tamed fizz feel like a silk covered pillow. drying everywhere.

D- this is a tough call for me. i really want to find a belgian IPA that i like, but perhaps my expectations are too high. alcohol is way too up front and that throws off the whole balance. where is my malt, hildegard? you're still a fox but damn.

Photo of yelterdow
2.85/5  rDev -27.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Served at just over fridge temperature in a tasting tulip. 750ml bottle, corked and caged from 2006 with the lasered I.D. tag 07LE. Incredible amounts of sediment at the bottom of this specimen.

Appearance- Upon releasing the cork, the head rises up the neck of the bottle and begins to creep out... the massive chunks of yeast that were just moments ago resting are now somersaulting inside. In the glass, we have four fingers of monstrous head that implodes over time into a marshmallowy grave, leaving behind a masterful weave of spiderweb lacing. Pale gold, the beer is absolutely *littered* with large yeast particles. An enigma, I'm not sure whether to kill the appearance completely based on this fact alone.

Smell- The weighted use of Magnum hops dominates the nose, showcasing a full and almost stale hoppy aroma. Unfortunately, there are no complexities to enjoy here... definitely an unimpressive showing.

Taste- First, I must say that the chunks of yeast stumbling across my tongue is a big hindrance to this tasting. I have taken good care in not disturbing the bottle and pouring carefully... but still it's a real factor here. Spicy, with a subdued but forceful hop profile. There is a nice Belgian introduction in the first few seconds of entering the mouth, distinctive and enjoyable... but then the hammer falls and America's Northwest sinks all chances of balance and elegance. It simply doesn't work here.

Mouthfeel/Drinkability- At first, this beer was drinking almost to perfection... creamy, slick, and responsive. I'm now halfway through the bottle one hour later and it's lost most of its carbonation and, consequently, its interest. You must be gentler than usual with pouring this one, as not only the yeast plays a role but so does the aggressive head. A challenge to review, and maybe more of a nemesis to just relax and enjoy.

Photo of BattleRoadBrewer
2.88/5  rDev -26.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Served at cellar temp from 12 oz amber stubby.

Pours with a huge whipped cream head, rocky and persistent. Looks very cloudy and golden like a weizenbock.

Aroma is very funky, spicy and sweet. No detectable hop aroma.

Flavor is peppery and yeasty.

Mouthfeel is effervescent from the carbonation, leaves an aspirin-like bitterness on the back of the tongue. Hard to believe it's any more than 50 IBU.

Drinkability is poor, hard to finish this one. There are higher alcohol beers that go down a lot more smoothly in comparison.

Photo of blakesell
2.9/5  rDev -26%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured from an aged one year 750ml bottle into a standard pint glass. Cork was very lodged in there and took some work to come out.

Appearance- Beer pours still with no carbonation whatsoever. Beer itself is clear and golden with no hints of the yeast in the bottle. Lacing is hardly there. What happened to this beer?

Smell- Belgian style yeasts and malts, but nearly no hop. The hops are Saaz and very little else. A light citrus character comes forth, but by and large the smell is much like a pilsner with Belgian yeasty notes.

Taste- Belgian light fruits and a light earthy hop flavor that does taste a bit citusy. Not very IPA like even for a Belgian IPA. Malts are evenly balanced and very pilsner like. The Belgian yeast is pretty solid in there. Alcoholic phenols linger, but not thickly.

Mouthfeel- Lightly phenolic, bitter, but not like an IPA, more like a Belgian bacteria bitterness, cloying, light bodied, not warming at 9.5%? and nonexistent in carbonation. How did this happen?

Drinkability- I had one of these at new years last year and it was phenomenal. This year it is pretty lame. I don't know what happened, this one has about as much time on it as the last one. This one just didn't have the power the last one did.

Photo of DaveJanssen
2.93/5  rDev -25.3%
look: 5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Reviewed 7/13/2009. 33 cL poured into Urthel Glass at Brugse Beertje in Brugge.

Ar: Floral with mellow tropical fruit, mellow herbal hop and light pine

Ap: Clear brass, pillowy white head, fine with great retention, lumpy lace

F: Rough alcohol, crisp malt, ends with strong herbal hop, resinous bitter, light grassy hop, very solventy alcohol, hints of lemongrass, herbal and fine citrus hop, after alcohol character (which dominates early taste) dies, hop character is nice

M: Burning alc, medium light mouthfeel, medium carbonation

O: ridiculously rough alc, the other characters of the beer are good

Photo of Brent
2.95/5  rDev -24.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Unbalanced and harsh. Big hops up front, as one would expect, but there was a raw, hops oil note that grated. Fusel alchohol character followed close behind, and even at 9.5%, it seemed higher. Some sweetness and a surprisingly muted Belgian yeast flavor trailed weekly in the wake. Quite the let-down.

Photo of Budlum
2.95/5  rDev -24.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This brew starts of with large amounts of foamy, white head. Almost ridiculous amounts, really. A skilled pour is definitely required. The head slowly shrinks leaving a fluffy dome in the center of the glass. Amazing head retention. Pale, golden yellow body displaying tons of carbonation and clarity.

Floral hops are the first noticeable smell followed by a spicy Euro-hop presence. Fresh iris and hyacynthe with a very woody aroma. The yeast presence really tells the story as it dominates the hops with a very strong oak presence.

The first tastes are of very spicy hops. There is almost cayenne pepper quality to the spice level. Some traditional hoppy flavors but more of dry and earthy flavor. This beer is dominated by a very strong yeast presence that provides a very long, woody finish. Far too bitter, spicy and wood-flavored as it warms.

Highly carbonated for the entirety of the 750 mL bottle. Very lively on the tongue with a very spicy feeling. The spice and most likely the alcohol presence almost numb the mouth.

Drinkability was not too good. I couldn't tell exactly what the intentions were for this beer. The closest comparison would be a Saison Dupont dry-hopped in oak for year. The yeast strength of this beer just does not work with the hops.

Photo of Mistofminn
2.98/5  rDev -24%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured into a pint glass. Passed this one up many times and finally gave it a shot.

Color is golden, with a significant amount of floaties suspended in the beer. About two fingers of light tan head sit on top, with decent retention and leave some nice lacing.

The nose is distinctly Belgian, and significantly more malty than hoppy, which disappoints me. This bottle probably has been sitting on the shelf for a while which is a bummer.

The taste is borderline awful. This would pass off better as a Belgian Tripel than a Belgian IPA. Fruity and malty and extremely boozy, what a malt bomb. I don't get any fresh hops what-so-ever, but possibly some stale old dry spicey hops in the finish.

Mouthfeel is medium, with a light carbonation, definitely not enough to make this taste better. Drinkability suffers because of the bad taste.

Overall, I just wasn't feeling this. Definitely not the freshest bottle, but this one didn't hold up well at all. For what it's worth, I can't see a fresh bottle being much better. This just isn't what I'm looking for in the style.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Urthel Hop-It from De Leyerth Brouwerijen (Urthel)
88 out of 100 based on 794 ratings.