1. BeerAdvocate on your phone?! True story. Try the beta now.

Northern Hemisphere Harvest Wet Hop Ale - Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.

Northern Hemisphere Harvest Wet Hop AleNorthern Hemisphere Harvest Wet Hop Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
94
outstanding

2,847 Ratings
THE BROS
100
world-class

(view ratings)
Ratings: 2847
Reviews: 1435
rAvg: 4.2
pDev: 9.29%


Brewed by:
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American IPA |  6.70% ABV

Availability: Fall

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: jmatthew on 10-15-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Reviewers | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Northern Hemisphere Harvest Wet Hop Ale Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 2,847 | Reviews: 1,435 | Show All Ratings:
Photo of Mitchster
Mitchster

Michigan

2.63/5  rDev -37.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

$5.99 for a 24oz bottle @ Jacks. 6.7% ABV. Pours out to a sparkingly clear deep ruby, forming a poofy light tan head with very good retention and adequate lacing. Carbonation is mild to moderate. The aroma isn't your typical hop-bomb along the likes of Lagunitas or Stone...it opens with caramel, malts, floral, piney and resinous hops, but without the big tropical fruits one might find in an IPA. When swirled, there is a nice sour milk and toast thing going on. The mouthfeel is stinging with hop pungency and moderate bitterness. Medium bodied. Some higher alcohols are present with touches of damp cardboard...something that I frequently find in Sierra Nevada products. I think it has to do with the yeast strain they use. The finish is fleeting of taste and the harsh aftertaste is robust with bitterness.

Not really something I care for. Not balanced at all. It's pretty harsh in it's bitterness and metallic sting. I'm gonna have a hard time finishing this bottle.

Serving type: bottle

11-29-2008 22:52:10 | More by Mitchster
Photo of jujubeast6000
jujubeast6000

Texas

2.68/5  rDev -36.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Reviewed 10/23/2007 (bottle):

Pours an amber brown color, big yellow-white head, foamy. Consistent color in the body. Hoppy aroma, acidic, some grapefruit, but mostly acidic, piney. Piney, somewhat hoppy taste. A little bitter aftertaste, but mostly balanced. Not too bad, IPAish, but balanced.

Serving type: bottle

02-19-2009 04:03:33 | More by jujubeast6000
Photo of zeledonia
zeledonia

Minnesota

2.68/5  rDev -36.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

I love fresh hop beers. Excited to try one of the early ones. Tasted 12 October 2012, reviewed from notes.

Pours a medium light-brown amber. Nice cream-colored, slightly orange head. Good retention, really good lacing.

Smell is faint and lightly floral. Mostly hoppy but twingy hoppy. A little bit of citrus and a little pine.

Taste is under-malted and super bitter. Chalky bitter, oniony, really unpleasant. A little caramel malt, but not enough. Something about it really doesn't agree with me. Chalky, dry, and bitter. A perfect example of how I don't like IPAs to be.

Medium-bodied, good carbonation. Lasting... but I wish it weren't.

I really don't like this beer all that much. I find it to be unbalanced, overly bitter, and without a whole lot of depth of flavor. Don't plan on drinking it again. Chalky and dry. Blech.

Serving type: bottle

11-17-2012 04:06:24 | More by zeledonia
Photo of tr4nc3d
tr4nc3d

Kansas

2.7/5  rDev -35.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

24fl oz bottle poured into my tulip(had no pint glass)

Pours a dirty looking copper mixed with some orange and light brown color(interesting).Dense frothy two and a half inch white head. Great head retention that when subsides leaves rings of lacing sticking to the sides of my glass.

Smell consist of some citrus fruit with tangerine coming out most, some lemon and slight grapefruit. Pine hops are also noticeable and a fresh perfume like scent(my guess is the wet hops).

Slightly sweet upfront but no noticeable citrus flavors show up except a medium pine hop bitterness that last throughout the taste. Caramel malts come through during the end.

Mouthfeel is medium bodied(although lacking hop flavor)with very high carbonation.

Well the bottle says 2009, but I do not know exactly how old the bottle is. If you buy it now though, it's going to lack the hop flavors I'm sure were there if it were fresh. High price plus lack of flavor equals disappointment for me.

Serving type: bottle

02-13-2010 22:17:07 | More by tr4nc3d
Photo of beertunes
beertunes

Washington

2.8/5  rDev -33.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Had on 9/5/09, I suspect this beer has not improved with a year on it. Poured into 10oz glass. Poured a clean, clear copper color, typical of IPAs. About 3/4 inch of fluffy , just off-white head had very good retention and decant lacing.

A subdued hop aroma greets the nose, not much malt apparent. A solid hop flavor is backed by, for this brewery, a solid malt foundation. I suspect that the hops have faded with age.
The body and drinkability are typical for the style. It is unfair that I'm reviewing this beer when it's a year old, this beer was almost certainly much better when fresh. I'm on record as thinking that SN is guilty of making a series of similar IPAs. This one seems like it may have been better than the usual SN IPA. I hope that I can try this years version and give this brew a higher score.

Serving type: bottle

09-06-2009 00:12:21 | More by beertunes
Photo of IntriqKen
IntriqKen

California

2.85/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Ok, I'm the odd man out on this brew.
Pours a medium golden yellow/orange with a nice two finger head that melts to very sticky lacing.

Aromas are full of hops...lots of both citrus peel and pine oil fresh hops. A little of the sweet amber malt comes through but gets beaten down by the hop aromas.

Taste comes across as very unbalanced to me. Too much fresh hop for my palette. I lose all of the malt presence and my palette is merely assaulted by the fresh citrus peel hop. The hops aren't so much intense as in overly high IBUs as they are just "in your face".
Some people have compared this one to SN's Celebration Ale and I just can't see it. I love Celebration and could (occassionally do) drink it all night. I've yet to finish a bottle of Harvest Ale by contrast.

Mouthfeel is good and comfortable for the style and the aftertaste is no where near as offensive as the actual fresh taste, but still I am left with little more than 'just hops'.

Serving type: bottle

11-01-2007 07:20:11 | More by IntriqKen
Photo of mdwalsh
mdwalsh

Iowa

3/5  rDev -28.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Quite a bit of head, and a little haze to the amber body.

S: A strong hoppy aroma with hints of bitter grapefruit and orange with a slightly malty background, but just enough to notice, not much more. That strength fades fast though. This is not the resiny beast I expected.

T: Man, what a disappointment. If the malt is here at all it is grainy and astringent. There is no briteness to the hops at all. They taste stale, somehow. It does linger though.

M: Apparently all the carbonation went out with the head, because this beer has the thick flatness of a much hoppier double IPA with none of the flavor.

O: Not something I wanted to spend $6 on, especially not 2....

Serving type: bottle

10-23-2012 21:30:07 | More by mdwalsh
Photo of Hop-Droppen-Roll
Hop-Droppen-Roll

Minnesota

3.05/5  rDev -27.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I'm enjoying this, my first SN Harvest, a little late. I don't know when these puppies hit shelves but I know it was at least a couple of months ago. I saw it in my little small town bottle shop and had to pick it up. It looks great. The appearance doesn't tell me much but it's that nice golden amber that great IPAs tend to be. I predict a solid malty backbone.

The aroma here is lacking. I suspect that's a freshness issue but I could be totally wrong. Oh well, I trust the flavor will make up for it....

... maybe, maybe not. This is really different. Have I had a wet-hopped ale before? I'm not getting the citrusy punch I've come to expect. In fact, the flavor of this beer is almost that of a plain APA. This beer must be way past its prime. The only factor of any real interest is the surprisingly bitterness. It's got a definite 'crushed-aspirin-on-the-back-of-my-tongue' thing going on. If this sensation were coupled with a booming floral aroma and a piney, citrus taste, I'd really dig it. On its own, though, it's a little off-putting.

OVERALL - (READ THIS IF YOU'RE WONDERING WHAT THE DEAL IS WITH THE LOW SCORE) - go ahead and consider this a review of a past-its-prime SN Harvest. I considered scrapping this review but I don't think it's useless, as it can serve those who possess old bottles of this beer, so I'm letting it ride. I'll try to pick some up fresh this fall and re-review.

Serving type: bottle

01-30-2014 01:25:17 | More by Hop-Droppen-Roll
Photo of Amalak
Amalak

New York

3.08/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I grabbed a growler of this at Pawling Beer Distributer in Dutchess County, NY.
A- Muddy brown color, opaque with a decent head and some lace.
S- Fruity, sweet scent.
T- It should be noted that this came of a keg that was kicked after serving. It had an intense taste, very bitter with a banana kind of taste. Slight balance of wheat to it.

Serving type: growler

08-06-2009 15:38:07 | More by Amalak
Photo of Phyl21ca
Phyl21ca

Quebec (Canada)

3.13/5  rDev -25.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Bottle courtesy of Hogtownharry: Poured a clear medium amber color ale with a large foamy head with good retention but no lacing. Aroma consists of bitter hops with some traces of caramel malt. Taste is a mix between some bitter green hops with some notes of caramel malt. Medium body with some average carbonation. This beer is really average on so many levels and it definitely isn't one of the best harvest hops beers that I have had the chance to try.

Serving type: bottle

02-25-2008 19:27:16 | More by Phyl21ca
Photo of ktrillionaire
ktrillionaire

Florida

3.15/5  rDev -25%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

On-tap at Ale&Witch

A - It pours a radiant amber-bronze and is capped with a textbook example of foam, leaving exemplary lace. SN has most everything beer-related down pat, but especially appearance. I have never seen an ugly Sierra Nevada beer in my life.

S - The nose is equal parts piney, and bitter white grapfruit-y. As it airs out, the biscuity and caramelly malt starts to rear its semi-attractive head. The hop bouquet is not particulary dynamic or pungent, but is still enjoyable in a general sense; it is not special enough for a special release.

T - Using Pale Ale, Celebration or Torpedo as a basis for comparison, the flavor is not doing it for me here. There is a tinny metallic flavor that is apparent from the second the beer touched my lips. Other than that major detractor, the flavor is quite nice. Catty, resinous, dank hops atop crackery malt and perfectly sharp carbonation to enhance the flavor. Seriously, other than the nasty metallic flavor, this is a finely crafted brew.

M - IPA. Good.

O - A mixed bag. Solid craftmanship, but it has a major off-putting character.

Serving type: on-tap

05-11-2011 18:47:35 | More by ktrillionaire
Photo of cokes
cokes

Wisconsin

3.18/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Scarlet-leaning copper with a fat, sticky cloud of eggy suds on top.
The nose is modest and balanced between the toffee and toasted grain of the malts and the grapefruit pith, dried grass, and conifer resin of the hops. It's not bent in the direction I would anticipate, as the hops are basically in check. There's also an unfortunate rubber band-type phenol, which-- while minor-- further distracts the nose from its purpose.
Through the mouth, it starts with a sturdy malt foundation of toasted nuts and grains, sweetened with toffee and even a few glimmers of jammy dark fruits. Almost trailmix-like. The malt does it's job, and should anchor the beer for the hop squall due to arrive. Except it never really comes, or at least not like it seems it should. Hop flavor is minimal, with pulpy plant matter, peppery dried grass hues. Bitterness is magnified with an astringent blast of alum at the close.
It's slightly plumper than medium body and subtle carbonation seems appropriate for the style, and keeps it drinkable in spite of some significant flaws.
The hop flavor here is pretty dry for a wet hopped beer. See Great Divide's Fresh Hop Ale for a study in wet hopping. This doesn't get it done.

Serving type: bottle

12-20-2007 04:44:14 | More by cokes
Photo of KenOnBass
KenOnBass

New York

3.18/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Beer distributor in Patterson, NY. Poured from a growler.

A: Amber dark color, decent head and okay lacing

S: Very citrusy sweet smell, smells like oranges.

T: Very sweet and intense bitter taste. Weird and smooth like juice. I also had this at the end of the keg so not sure if this can be a fair assessment or not.

M: Really smooth, almost like juice. Too smooth.

D: I will have to try this again in from a bottle or on tap somewhere.

Serving type: growler

08-10-2009 23:23:02 | More by KenOnBass
Photo of kojevergas
kojevergas

Texas

3.19/5  rDev -24%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

1 pint 8 fl oz brown glass bottle with standard pressure cap served into a generic hefeweissbier glass in low altitude Los Angeles, California. This is the 2011 vintage. Acquired at Wally's Wine. Reviewed live.

A: Pours a four finger head of very appealing cream lacing, great thickness, and good retention. Maybe four minutes. Colour is a dark copper; semitransparent.

Sm: Pleasantly hoppy and light, with some lovely floral notes. Moderate in strength and quite appealing.

T: Pleasantly hoppy with some lovely toasted malt as a foundation. Some nice floral notes are present alongside cream but only in the open. No alcohol comes through. The hops are really nicely treated and fit right in. It's well balanced and built, though it's a touch too bitter on the finish and in the aftertaste. It's simple, but forgivable. Complexity wouldn't suit the style (I'm judging it as an Autumn Ale, not the forced categories of Beeradvocate).

Mf: Smooth and wet, with some nice cream. It's nice and pleasant. It suits the flavour in a general sense.

Dr: Very drinkable if not for the ruinous bitterness on the finish. I'd try it on draught if I found it, but otherwise it's not interesting enough to make me pay its price again.

---
2013 batch reviewed 10/20/13. Reviewed live. Notes below are truncated since I've already reviewed this. 1 pint 8 fl oz brown glass bottle with branded pry-off cap served into a pilsner glass in me gaff in Austin, Texas. Purchased earlier today.

Served cold. Side-poured.

A: No bubble show forms as I pour.

Pours a two finger wide head of off-white/light khaki colour. Nice thickness and creaminess. Decent frothiness. Head retenton is good - about 5-6+ minutes.

Body colour is a clear copper of above average vibrance. Appears adequately carbonated. No yeast particles are visible.

Standard fare for style. Not unique/special. No obvious flaws.

Sm: Floral hops. Grassy. Bready malts, caramalt, pale malts. Faint fruity hops; quite vague. Light restrained pine. Some toasted grains. Some oily hop character. Grassiness is dominant. A pleasant aroma of mild strength.

No yeast character or alcohol is detectable.

T: Piney hop character, floral hops, vaguely fruity hops. Some grassiness. Caramalt, pale malts, toasted grains, clean barley. Hints of lemon citrus/zest. Okay tradeoffs between malty sweetness and hoppy bitterness; the balance is never ideal. Not a gestalt beer. Has general cohesion. Has interesting elements, but overall it's a fairly simple brew without much subtlety or nuance. I like it generally, but it's not great.

Above average depth of flavour. Average duration and intensity of flavour.

No yeast character or alcohol comes through.

Mf: Smooth and wet, with enough coarseness to coax out some depth of flavour. Unrefreshing. Overcarbonated. Too thick and full-bodied for the flavour profile. Slightly oily. Decent presence on the palate.

Not harsh, astringent, gushed, or boozy.

Dr: A drinkable IPA that exhibits none of the best aspects of a wet hop ale. It's decently priced, but I wouldn't bother with it again. Better balance and more complexity/subtlety is needed. Certainly not world class, but worth trying once.

C+

Serving type: bottle

11-01-2011 22:20:30 | More by kojevergas
Photo of JG-90
JG-90

New Jersey

3.2/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

N Hemisphere is a clear, red/amber color. Pours a small, dense and creamy tan head that has okay retention and leaves heavy lacing.Has a overall faint smell consisting of bread and dank/resinous hops.

Taste starts with prickly resinous hops, then a lot of dankness, with a bitter orange/bread/lemon finish, bready/resinous aftertaste. Mouthfeel is very light, feels thin and watery, with high carbonation.

Actually kinda dissapointed with this one, to mouthfeel is just SOOOO thin it really takes away from the beer in my opinion, theres also not too much overall aroma which I think SN usually does a good job with both.

Serving type: bottle

10-27-2013 00:38:42 | More by JG-90
Photo of Bighuge
Bighuge

Minnesota

3.23/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

2007.

Deep copper hue. Slightly hazed. Rocky eggshell colored head sits on top. The retenion is better than average and lace patterns are quite full and intricate. Nice hop aroma, but not as heavy as I was expecting from this wet hopped beer. It contains all the usual suspects on the nose. Grapefruit, canabis, pine resin and citrus. Just not that strong for the style. This beer is pretty thick. Full bodied and heavy. Carbonation is pretty light. The malt base of this beer is caramel and toffee based. The bitterness does linger, but it's more of an astringent kind of bitterness. The hoppiness is pretty subdued for a wet hopped beer. Not sure what happened here, but it's really not what I was expecting. Celebration has a lot more juicy hop flavors than this. Maybe the Town Hall's Fresh Hop beer has me spoiled now, but this really is pretty average.

Serving type: bottle

10-25-2007 03:30:42 | More by Bighuge
Photo of AustinBeerLvr
AustinBeerLvr

Texas

3.23/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3

Poured a 24 ounce bottle into a English pint style glass.

As with most all of Sierra Nevada's offerings, this is a beautiful beer in a glass, as it has a deep red, copper body, with an excellent amount of head and lacing. Being a veteran SN drinker, I expected a lot of hops in the aroma. Surprisingly, I picked up on a significant amount of caramel and toffee like sweetness along with the spicy citrus hop notes.

First sip was even more of a surprise, as last year's harvest offering was much hoppier. This year's version is actually almost dominated by a somewhat coarse, caramel and toffee malt sweetness. As the beer warms, the trademark fruity ester flavors become more present and blend nicely with the hops at the end. Even more surprising, for an IPA, the hops seem to struggle to balance out the toffee malt flavors. Mouthfeel is very solid, a bit creamy, but just the right weight for an IPA.

Overall, this is somewhat of a letdown, in my opinion. It almost tastes more like an ESB rather than an IPA. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't looking for just another hoppy beer, but the malt character seems to be just too strong and somewhat rough in this brew and seems to clash rather than blend with the hops. Noting horrible, but it appears SN wanted to try something new this year, and this one just didn't quite do it.

As a side note, their Celebration Ale this season seems to also be maltier than last years, and in my opinion, this years is probably the best one they have ever done.

Serving type: bottle

11-09-2008 01:49:14 | More by AustinBeerLvr
Photo of Seanibus
Seanibus

California

3.23/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

I'm not sure what I was expecting, but it wasn't this. It's not bad, but, well, it's not all that good either. Maybe it was too young. Maybe I'll let my second bottle age a year or two.

Pours clear amber with a fluffy decent head and a little bit of carbonation from the glass. The aroma is sharp and hoppy, but strangely soapy. The flavor is sharp and bitter, but not pleasant - I find it spicy, astringent, with a strange soapy character that I have only encountered a few times in my life with hops. It reminds me of chewing on a piece of Orange zest. And it's strangely thin - there is plenty of hop flavor here, to be sure, but it is strange and unpleasant and lacking in solid malt balance. The mouthfeel is at once thin and clingy, leaving a lingering spicy bitterness on the tongue and the top of the mouth. Overall, the effect is just not what I'd want from a special Sierra Nevada product.

I know I am in the minority, but this ranks as a major disappointment for me.

Serving type: bottle

11-19-2008 21:12:27 | More by Seanibus
Photo of Damian
Damian

Massachusetts

3.25/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Drank from a 24 fl. oz. bottle purchased at Liquor World, Cambridge, MA
11th Edition

Poured a crystal clear, deep, mahogany-amber with a tight, khaki, one-finger, sea foam head.

The aroma was quite hoppy yet fairly well rounded. Citrusy, cascade hops prevailed over mild caramel malt and candy-like notes. As the beer warmed, some brown sugar came out as well.

The taste was overwhelmingly hoppy and edgy. The beer started slow (almost flavorless) up front before an intense, oily hoppiness kicked in. Crisp, cutting hops attacked and never gave my taste buds a rest. An intense hop spice flavor was apparent as well. The beer became harsh and biting on the back end and finished piney, bitter, tannic and dry. At first, I mistook this beer for having a reasonably high alcohol content but I later discovered that this sharpness was merely a result of the hops. As for being a "fresh hop" beer, I was not able to detect much of a difference between this pale ale and those made with dried hops. The only exception may have been that the hops in this offering displayed more of an herbal/medical quality

Mouthfeel was light, thin and fairly over carbonated.

Overall, I was disappointed with this beer. Hop heads may rejoice with this seasonal offering, but I found its overwhelming hop bitterness rather difficult to stomach.

Serving type: bottle

11-17-2007 16:53:12 | More by Damian
Photo of dancinwillie
dancinwillie

Wisconsin

3.25/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a deep amber, more brown than red, however, garnet highlights when held up to the light, medium brown when sitting on my desk. Sponge-like light tan head that begins at about 2 fingers high, then drops to about a finger, and remains. Beautiful lacing remains, two distinct lines about a centimeter apart surround the insides of my goblet.

Aroma seems to be made up primarily of piney hops.

Taste is more balanced than I was expecting. I thought it the hops would dominate, or at least tip the scale in that direction. But instead, the hops are in there, and they seem to have a deeper flavor. Pine, citrus, and some grassy notes come into play. The malt plays a big role as well, and is a sweet, bready foil to the bitterness of the hops. Picking up a slight herbal flavor also.

Mouthfeel is medium full, slick, and astringent. In other words good to go.

Overall, I would probably drink this more often if it were available on a year round basis. It's not the best IPA out there, definitely worth a try, however, and I will try to check back in from year to year.

Cheers!

Serving type: bottle

11-09-2008 04:56:26 | More by dancinwillie
Photo of Ryan011235
Ryan011235

Ohio

3.25/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Poured into a snifter on 10/24/10

2010 Vintage

Clear copper color with burnt amber highlights. One finger of bubbly foam. 50% retention after a few minutes, though a few minutes more leave just a large swath of bubbles. Initially there were rings of lace, though much has started to resemble eroding sand.

Earthy, juicy & very floral hop aroma. Notions of oily pine & hints of citrus - orange & maybe a touch of grapefruit pith. Solid malt presence; biscuit & a hint of sweet bread. Maybe crystal malts.

The substantial malt profile absolutely carries over to taste as a blend of dry bread & sweeter aspects of caramel. I swear, I just tasted a stray hint of cocoa. Huh? Anyway, the malts have a wide berth & takes up much of the total space available leaving the hops to do more with less. Sure there's some bitterness by way of pine resin & the potency of the hop oils help round it out but it all seems forced away too soon from the burgeoning malts.

The overall feel is strange for this medium bodied brew. On one had the aforementioned oils give it an almost slick feel, while on the other there are prominent undercurrents of grittiness. The grit, in conjunction with the dryness, makes for a slow finish.

Not a bad beer really; it's just kind of "meh" in terms of an IPA. Now, if the hops were given more wiggle room...

Serving type: bottle

10-30-2010 00:56:43 | More by Ryan011235
Photo of alexhammond
alexhammond

Maine

3.28/5  rDev -21.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

picked this one up on discount, disappointed I couldn't get this one fresh when it was released. I always enjoy IPAs better fresh (especially overly-hopped brews like this one)

pours a nice looking amber, with a decent fluffy head.
smells of citrus and pine, everything I'm looking for in an enticing IPA.
strong, bitter hop taste at first, but it hit me quick and didn't last long. a good balance with the malts, which was surprising considering SNs pale ale products are usually all hops. interesting, but here it didn't really work for me. the flavors came on strong and got me excited, but left me wanting more. a bit of a creamy after taste, with lingering pine and orange peel flavors.
I wasn't overly impressed by this one; maybe it's because I've been so enamored with the Torpedo and Anniversary offerings, maybe I was just expecting a major hop bomb, or maybe this beer was simply past it's prime. worth a try, but I'd wait until the next batch is released to check it out.

Serving type: bottle

01-17-2010 04:49:48 | More by alexhammond
Photo of ShanePB
ShanePB

Pennsylvania

3.28/5  rDev -21.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

24 ounce bottle, 2011 version poured into a tulip glass.

A: Clear bronze/amber body with a slightly off-white head. Very bubbly, creamy and thick looking head that left huge sticky lacing and a great retention cap the entire time. Seriously, this is just a killer looking IPA.

S: Pine, sap, hop resin, slight bitter citrus notes (orange and lemon peel). A nice bitterness comes through along with a faint caramel malt aroma. The focus is certainly the bitter hops.

T: Bitter hop notes all over the palate, through and through. Pine, floral notes, hop resin, orange oils and more caramel malts towards the back end. The finish is sticky with a earthy and dry distinct bitterness.

M: Bubbly and creamy, a bit thicker than I'd personally like for an IPA. Quite dry and sticky in the linger, not bad but there's a few things off about it.

Eh, this was okay for me. I can appreciate the concept of the hop harvesting and such but I think I've become more akin to a citrus IPA profile, as opposed to this brash pine and sap bitterness. It's good but it's tiresome after a while. I didn't even end up finishing the bottle.

Serving type: bottle

10-17-2011 12:50:59 | More by ShanePB
Photo of Doppelbockulus
Doppelbockulus

Florida

3.3/5  rDev -21.4%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This is a copper colored beer that smells like a citrus grove and candy.

Taste is simple, light pine and bitterness at the start fading into an oily bitterness. I am pretty biased against hoppy beers, so I will stop here.

Mouthfeel is airy with bubbles but not a lot of fizz. Swish it around and you will get a cloud of foam in your mouth but not a bunch of tingling.

Serving type: on-tap

01-15-2012 22:15:36 | More by Doppelbockulus
Photo of t0rin0
t0rin0

California

3.33/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Had this on tap at Lucky Baldwins tonight. One bartender poured it for me and it didn't seem right so another bartender poured me another to compare. This is not an IPA, its a hoppier amber ale. I loved the harvest last year, what happened?

Pours a reddish copper color. A bit light for a red but too dark for an IPA. Good clarity, good retention + lacing.

Aroma is sweet and very red ale-like. Very malty, very hoppy too. I could smell what I am sure is Chinook hops. Mild grapefruit moderate pine smell.

Flavor is dry and chalky like an amber. Moderate/high bitterness, medium hop flavor, sweet, sticky, and dry aftertaste. Really malty.

Medium body, good CO2 (from a keg though so this doesn't mean anything). Very drinkable, but this was not at all what I was expecting.

Serving type: on-tap

10-26-2008 06:56:31 | More by t0rin0
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Northern Hemisphere Harvest Wet Hop Ale from Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
94 out of 100 based on 2,847 ratings.