Brux Domesticated Wild Ale - Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Brux Domesticated Wild AleBrux Domesticated Wild Ale

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
86
very good

1,302 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 1,302
Reviews: 322
rAvg: 3.8
pDev: 11.84%
Wants: 49
Gots: 367 | FT: 21
Brewed by:
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American Wild Ale |  8.30% ABV

Availability: Limited (brewed once)

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: JohnGalt1 on 06-24-2012

This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 1,302 | Reviews: 322
Photo of donkeyrunner
2.23/5  rDev -41.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Gold, solid gold color with big bubble dome head erupting from my initial pour. Wave tube shaped skim of retention.

Coppery wheat, mint aroma with a initial twang of sweet/sour brett. Brett smell fades after a few minutes in the glass.

Tastes very minty. Almost menthol. Dry, mint seltzer is pretty comparable. Not very bretty.

No sir, I don't like it. I dumped it, my wife dumped it: the dreaded double drainpour.

Photo of smchenry75
2.28/5  rDev -40%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

This beer is really not very good at all. I am a huge fan of sours. This is just bad. Not very sour or flavorful. Rather boring and unbalanced... Hops are way out of place here. I wish I had more to say to get to 250 characters. This was a quick drain pour. Going to go crack a Westy 12 as an apology to my palate.

Photo of OldPenguinHunter
2.51/5  rDev -33.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Popped the bottle a few days ago, was pretty disappointed... Poured into a tulip.

A. Fizzy and golden, maybe a bit too over-carbonated, sustaining head.
S. Band-aids and tart fruit
T. Sour dough bread, a bit of nutmeggy-ish spice, very dry and sort of anti-septic.
M. Very dry, the carbonation explodes into a pillow-y foam on the tongue.
O. I can see some Orval-esque notes in the beer, that may just be the Brett. Brux. but I can't get over the flaws, the beer tastes antiseptic and smells like Band-Aids.

Photo of jethrodium
2.57/5  rDev -32.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

750 ml bottle. Pours a slightly hazy golden amber with a small white head that disappears quickly and leaves no lacing. The aroma is green apple, apricot, and a light peppery note. There is a light funky brett earthiness, but not much. The initial taste is sweet with green apple, a bit of brett earthiness, and some apricot. The finish has a hint of brett and some lingering apple. Medium body. Low carbonation. This was quite disappointing. It's too sweet for the style and there is not much brett funkiness. It will probably improve with time, but I'm not going to buy more bottles to find out given the price.

Photo of Flashy
2.64/5  rDev -30.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

From a bottle purchased at a reliable, high turnover store. This beer smells like a skunked bottle (and at $15 I hope to g*d it was fresh)- but I think that this is the way it is supposed to taste.
Sour tasting, but clean, if you want to say anything nice- at $15 a bottle- never again. I am used to pretty much anything. I had high hopes for these brewers and made the purchase based on their rep, but will look before leaping next time.

Photo of UnderPressure
2.67/5  rDev -29.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Slightly hazy, golden orange. Very fizzy head, which quickly melts to a ring. Highly carbonated. I don't see much lacing, if any.

Tangy and sour aroma. A slightly sweet backbone, and some hops.

Unusual flavor. Not what I was expecting. Aside from the sourness, there is an emptiness to the flavor. Some might describe it as "watery."

The emptiness carries over to the mouthfeel. The carbonation is very high, and explodes as it enters your mouth. The finish is dry and lingering.

I'm sorry to say, I didn't like this beer very much. Normally, I love wild ales and sour beers. But, this one didn't have much going on in the flavor department. Generally speaking, I would prefer a bolder flavor and mouthfeel.

Photo of boredalready
2.78/5  rDev -26.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

I didn't much care for this when it was fresh and it is definitely less appealing to me now that it has time on it.

Photo of ZippyThePinhead
2.87/5  rDev -24.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

For $14 per bottle, I was really expecting to be wowed by this. Did I miss something here?

In the cigar world, new cigars that sell for small money are commonly regarded as dog rockets. The mentality is, if the cigar is good, the price should reflect that, and if it is not, well, the price is a tacit admission of quality, etc.

Is the same happening in the beer world?

This is definitely drinkable, as it should be for $14 per 750 ml, but it does not seem extraordinary in any way. In fairness, my palate is a little compromised today, after drinking some IPA, but still... this comes across like a home-brew that got some Brett contamination, not like a bottle of $14 store beer.

Photo of Charlemagne7
2.93/5  rDev -22.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.25 | overall: 2.75

Bought this as I'm a RR fan. Little did I know the letdown I was about to drink

Appearance was typical, golden with a whole lotta carbonation. What I would expect from a saison.

Smell is where this beer took it home. The smell on this beer gave me multiple orgasms. It smells like sexy hook ups and no regrets.

Taste.... I found the regrets... I found them hard. This beer literally tastes like a malty pile of my puppy's leftover. No funk, no sour, no anything other than a depressing taste of why the fuck did I buy this 15 dollar bottle of BS.

MF: over carbed. done.

Overall, this beer is pathetic. It's over priced and tastes like garbage for that price point. Pretty shocked that SN and RR couldn't come up with something more than a drain pour. Whatever, enjoy my review, Im so disgustingly over this beer

Photo of riotontheroad
3.07/5  rDev -19.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 3

This did absolutely not hold up.

Photo of yamar68
3.08/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Pours a still honey gold with an extremely lively white head that eventually settles to a thin collar that laces minimally.

Lots of clove, wheat, some honeycomb notes, green apple, fresh yeast flavors, nothing too funky as of yet.

BRUX? What brux? It's like a faintly tart, heavy weissebier with hooves. That said, there are elements of cereal malt, fresh spices, wheat, not too complex in my opinion. I hope the other bottle does a LOT of evolving before I open it. Very average on the tongue.

I think it's a shame that one of the first beers to see widespread distribution with the Russian River name is so ho-hum. I hope a year in the cellar will prove me wrong.

Photo of teromous
3.14/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A: It has a hazy golden body with a fizzy bubbly white head that seems to be going nuts. Popping all over the place in a myriad of bubbles. Despite the persistent bubbles, the head fades quickly leaving absolutely no head or lacing.

S: I pick up what smells like cherry Starburst, followed by what smells like soap, then a funky musty aroma. Lots of sour fruit smell.

T: There's more of that funky mustiness. It's that old house quality, but in a flavor. There's a bit of sourness, but it's an initial burst of sour and doesn't have any follow-through. It literally seems to depend on the size of the drink. A sip doesn't seem to deliver enough flavor for me to enjoy this beer. When I take a big gulp, there's much more presence to the beer. There's a cottony flavor and a bit of wood in there too. Kind of like sucking on a tooth pick. I didn't think it was especially great tasting. There really wasn't much aftertaste.

M: The mouthfeel leaves much to be desired. It feels empty, plain, and insipid. It isn't completely dry, leaving this light flavorless coating on the palate.

O: Overall I thought the beer was just "okay." It has just enough flavor to feel interesting, but could use more. It just doesn't feel dry enough either. That's probably the biggest detractor to a beer like this. The bottle recommends aging, but I have no idea how old this bottle is to begin with. It's worth drinking, but I can't say that I would be all that excited about aging this.

Photo of zander4dawin
3.14/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

Murky golden ale with soapy head. Funky, sour tart nose. Grassy, saw dust, bret funk, tart notes but overall under whelming flavors and taste a little watered down. Overall disappointing offering from two great breweries.

Photo of hardy008
3.15/5  rDev -17.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a hazy light orange marmalade color with a large foamy white head which fades pretty quickly down to less than one fingers width and then vanishes. Leaves no lacing. I can smell the Brett pretty clearly, as well as horse blanket, green apples, and funk.

The taste is less acidic than I thought it would be, and less acidic than I hoped for. There is some apple, grapes, light Brett, and mild tartness from the Brett. Actually tastes somewhat sweet. This doesn't taste bad, but it does taste like it didn't come together the way it was intended to.

Light bodied with above average carbonation, and a slightly sweet aftertaste, and a slightly sticky mouthfeel. Like I said, this doesn't taste bad, but it does taste like it didn't come together properly. Overall, not a successful collaboration.

Photo of Jimmys
3.16/5  rDev -16.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.25

750mL bottle into snifter. cant make out this bottle coding.

A: hazy. orangey blond body. head is bright white and has some big bubbles. head has good retention, lacing is super minimal though. pours pretty vivacious initially.

S: not nearly as tart as I would like it. a little sweet sugar as well. virtually no hop component.

T: similar to the nose, some horsehair and barn, but limited. a little bit of grain on the back end. no bitterness. not lingering or starting. hop flavor is nonexistent.

M: pretty vivacious bottle carb. medium body.

D: two suggestions for this brew: a) let it warm before drinking. b) age. age this bottle for a couple of years. well maybe that is a stretch, but give it time for the Brett to take hold in the bottle and develop its flavor and aroma.

Photo of cosmicevan
3.2/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 4.25 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

picked this one up around the time of the release, but never got around to opening it...until now. enjoyed from a russian river flute/tulip.

a - brew pours a murky orange brown...same as the color scheme on the label. finger of fizzy head half vanishes after the pour and the champagne like carbonation keeps replenishing the fizz that zaps away.

s - nose is nice, leading with crisp brett and some soft lemon notes. tart tingly alcohol phenols tickles the nose. sweet and grassy.

t/m/o - fairly complex leading with some plasticy brett that is quickly washed over by a bright clean vibrant fruity burst and then a dryness sweeps over. the first thing i noticed was the feel which has a prickly carbonation, but a creaminess to it at the same time...similar to authentic belgian stytles. the dryness on the finish is a bit off putting. there is a really nice sweetness in there, but too much other noise that comes with it for this to be a good drinking beer. i'm definitely let down since this is 2 great breweries taking on a style that one would expect to be a slam dunk but sadly doesn't really work. i had heard mixed things about it when it was fresh so i held off and although can't compare to fresh to say if it has improved or not, what i can say is that it is pretty meh for the price point and the players at the table. might not finish the

Photo of feloniousmonk
3.2/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Brux Domesticated Wild Ale, A Russian River & Sierra Nevada Collaboration. A dry and complex Belgian-style ale refermented in the bottle with Brettanomyces bruxellensis. Brewed and bottled by Sierra Nevada Brewing Company, Chico, CA, in collaboration with with Russian River Brewing Company.

Caged and cork, 750 ml bottle. Clear, bright amber color, under a slim white head that dissipates quickly.

Aroma: this one will take some time, as it's not throwing out any ordinary flavors or associations. There's some fruit, but no sweetness, no hops, very dry, and none of the typical descriptors for a sour brew come out of this nose. There's some of that horse blanket rearing it's head, now, some of the cat pee shows up, some of the funk.

Taste: lean bodied, short finish, light on flavor. Mild malt character, negligible hop contribution, but the yeast is felt, and tasted. The cat pee returns to the flavor, hints of lemon, dry, yes, again, but , alas, there's very little of anything else going on.

I'll take a minute to read the label. "What began as a mutual admiration between Sierra Nevada's Grossman family and Russian River's Cilurzos has grown and progressed into genuine friendship. Brux began as an idea and has grown into something altogether different. …The liquid manifestation of change over time….Refermented in the bottle with Brettanomyces bruxellensis, Brux will change and develop over time. Copper-colored, dry and complex, with slightly tart notes of green grass, pear, spice and lemon---this ale will progress in the bottle for many years."

Well. damnit, why didn't I read this first? Why did I make the dunder-headed move of actually drinking this bottle fresh and expecting something good, when I should have sat on it for years, to see what happens when it develops? Will it gain flavor, where now it has virtually none?

I'm sorry, but beers should be judged based on how they taste when they're placed on the shelves. This one as it is should be filed under: "meh." No, wait, make that "Blah."

Photo of Alieniloquium
3.23/5  rDev -15%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

750 mL bottle poured into a pint glass.

Appearance - Golden orange. Big head that settles quickly to a continuous layer of foam. No lacing.

Smell - Extremely bretty. A little bit acidic. Earthy brett aroma. Slight apple aroma too.

Taste - Overpowered by brett. Sharp acidic flavor, but not sour. Slight fruity malt flavor comes through before an earthy brett takes over. Dry with a slight bitterness in the finish.

Mouthfeel - Very dry. Brett has made it feel light. High carbonation.

Overall - The second brett bomb of the evening. This one hasn't fared as well as Saison du Swamp. Many similarities, but this is too bretty.

Photo of jmaharaj
3.24/5  rDev -14.7%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A- Golden orange. Fleeting head.
S- Easily its strongest showing. Crisp, clean and fruity-sour. Green apples, pears and a nice spicy backdrop.
T- A little dissapointing. The elements were there but they seemed flat together. Strong belgian yeast flavors dominate and the fruits make a brief appearance that trails of into a spicy dry tartness. Not much funkiness at all.
M- Delicately carbonated. Medium light body, maybe a touch oily.
O- Not bad. An average belgian, but a dissapointing wild ale. Perhaps I built myself up a little too much for this one. Sierra Nevada, Russian River and a Wild Ale? I was expecting a lot.

Photo of chugalug06
3.24/5  rDev -14.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Orange in body color with a fluffy white head. Head rises and falls quickly.

Smells bugged with orange and lemon. Not picking up much tartness.. Bready, funky, and sticky.

Lots of dry sticky pear. Brett stands out. No tartness, unfortunately. High carbonation with nice sweetness.

I couldn't drink much of this, but it's very nice for an Sierra Nevada Collab. I wish RR would have taken the upper hand.. Recommended, just not in large quantities.

Photo of crissy456
3.27/5  rDev -13.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured a nice fluffy head. The look of the beer was cloudy/ hazy / orangey. To me, it smelled yummy, i smelled a lot of fall spices, which i love. Taste is not awful but it is obvious that it needs to age I do wish I would have saved the bottle for a year.

Photo of ThisWangsChung
3.3/5  rDev -13.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Thanks to Jay for the bottle! about 10 oz poured into a Duvel tulip.

A: Pours a amber-copper color with nice clarity. The tulip helps create a stream of strong-looking carbonation in the middle. The head is a one finger white color with okay retention.

S: Some fruit esters, a bit of earthy hops, and *very* faint funk. If you told me this was just a brett-ed saison rather than a wild ale, I would have believed you more.

T: This isn't very impressive, especially for a wild ale. Faintly tart fruit esters help open the body, while the finish is somewhat expressive in grassy hops. I'm having a lot of trouble finding the brett, but concentrating the palate allows me to find slight touches of brett and sourness. It's okay, but it's not impressive.

M: I like that it's fairly light and dry, and the carbonation isn't insanely strong. Not perfect, but the texture is nice.

O: Decent, but not $15 decent. The process of aging this intrigues me - but not if I have to pay $15 for this again. Still, it's worth a try, especially considering it opens up nicely once it warms up.

Photo of Thads324
3.31/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A : pours a clear yellow with a puffy and loose white head. Big froth with no lacing. Head dissipates quickly to next to nothing, similar to a fountain soda.
S: smells a bit sweet like a cider, faint vinegar notes. Maybe a bit of husky grains but they are light. Mostly like a tart hard apple cider smell.
T : starts watery, then both tart and sweet. Tastes mostly like a light cider. A bit of apple juice flavor mixed with pale malt grain. Both are light and easy going. The tart flavor is short. Very light on the flavor.
M : light bodied, slightly over carbonated (which is nice). Bubbly, easy drinking and free of alcohol.

Not bad but not what I really was expecting. Much too much like a cider and not many Belgian beer like characteristics. The best part is how well the alcohol is hidden. It's almost non-existent. Ok, but I would spend the money again.

Photo of Gameover170
3.32/5  rDev -12.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

My second "wild" ale (first being a Stone) I was expecting big things from a Russian River/Sierra Nevada collaboration. I was pretty disappointed.

A-golden straw color, huge white head with no lacing

S- light fruity smell, very decent nose. Definitely smell the Brett

T- this was a let down. Expected a much bigger flavor. The "domesticated" in the title doesn't even do it justice. Too tame IMHO.

Not a terrible beer, I think the expectation of two great breweries (one with a great rep for wilds) working together was too much. That and the $17 price tag.

Photo of cpetrone84
3.33/5  rDev -12.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

pour is a golden copper, light haze, light tan extremely tight tan head with incredible retention. The nose is heavy green vegetal and leathery Brett. There is a light golden fruit note behind but struggling to make its way through. The taste is a complete flip, extremely sweet and almost candied. Pear, golden raisin, candied lemon. The Brett notes are faint, vegetal in back with light leather. Decent carbonation, maybe a touch light, oily slick feel on the tongue and faintly heavy.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Brux Domesticated Wild Ale from Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
86 out of 100 based on 1,302 ratings.