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!

Stone Mill Organic Pale Ale - Green Valley Brewing Company (Crooked Creek)

Not Rated.
Stone Mill Organic Pale AleStone Mill Organic Pale Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
72
okay

212 Ratings
THE BROS
81
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 212
Reviews: 189
rAvg: 3.11
pDev: 18.01%
Wants: 2
Gots: 0 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Green Valley Brewing Company (Crooked Creek) visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
English Pale Ale |  5.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: Todd on 09-04-2006)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Stone Mill Organic Pale Ale Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 212 | Reviews: 189 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of circus_cat
1/5  rDev -67.8%

circus_cat, Feb 15, 2013
Photo of FriedGold2112
1.25/5  rDev -59.8%

FriedGold2112, May 03, 2012
Photo of bort11
1.63/5  rDev -47.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

12 oz bottle poured into an imperial pint glass. Color is a clear copper/orange. Fluffy white head that leaves some lacing on the glass.
Smell is kind of pungent. Kind of like cloves and hops, but sour. My wife said it smelled like an armpit. The taste is also off. It's hard to pinpoint one particular flavor in the mix, but whatever it is it's not mixing well.
Mouthfeel is light to medium bodied and finishes dry.
I was unable to finish this, drain pour.

bort11, Jan 25, 2007
Photo of aristeros
1.7/5  rDev -45.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

Noticed the "michelob" after I bought it. Their Pale Ale from the "craft collection" was drinkable, though, so we'll see how it goes.

Poured into my Bodum pint glass. Pours a ginger-ale amber with a lot of visible carbonation. A finger of head, but it's gone in about ten seconds. Clarity is good.

Smells of mixed red and yellow fruit, strong sweet malt presence. No bittering hops detected. I expected different and stronger fruit aromas. Slight iron or copper smell that I hope is my imagination; let's find out.

Very light and malty up front, and the metal--copper?--is strong throughout. Some fruit. Watery mouthfeel. A bit of hops at the end, masked by metallic flavors.

I'd be better able to tell what was going on without the metal in there. I won't be finishing this one, although it's a shame, as I don't have anything else in the fridge.

aristeros, Aug 01, 2009
Photo of EagleTalon
1.73/5  rDev -44.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Pours to a thin white head and clear medium amber color. Aroma is mostly old hops, CO2 and stale malt. Flavor is malt dominant with hop bitterness to balance, however, it deteriorates in the finish with metallic and astringent overtones. The metallic taste just builds up to intolerable levels.

EagleTalon, Nov 18, 2006
Photo of theozag
1.8/5  rDev -42.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Crystal clear in the glass with deep amber (red-brown) color. Beige head fades fast. Smell is sugary sweet with perhaps some ginger character. Stats extremely strong and sour. Full-bodied but painfully strong with an over-bitter taste. Drinking this beer was similar to downing a too-old porter; nothing stands out. Finish is thankfully wet with relatively little aftertaste.

judging, however, by the reviews of my colleagues, i suspect that the particular bottle i tried had been sold past its shelf life. i hhoto have another opportunity to review a fresh bottle later.

theozag, Dec 31, 2007
Photo of ralree
1.88/5  rDev -39.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 1

A: Clear copper with a very short-lived large bubbled head. Not too impressed - it looks like soda.

S: Sweet malt with nice grain backing, some fruit. Hops present but light.

T: Metallic and awful. This is a pour-out. Tastes like blood. Ugh. Tastes gets better after swallowing. Extreme yeast. Fruit is the right level, but it's only detectable after swallowing. The metal flavor kills all fun.

M: Slimy on the tongue, slightly astringent. Carbonation OK.

D: Not drinkable. Had to pour out. If the taste wasn't so bad, it would be a refreshing beer.

ralree, Jun 17, 2009
Photo of Vendetta
1.98/5  rDev -36.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Original Rating Date:
October 10, 2008

Pours nicely, fluffy head and a lightly colored pale ale. Smell is alright, some maltiness, but a strange metallic note. Taste is much the same, no real hop presence and faint maltiness followed by a metallic aftertaste that the nose hinted at. Another average Anheuser-Busch effort, not sure I'll ever be impressed with one of their beers at this point.

Vendetta, Dec 14, 2008
Photo of AaronMcDonald
2.1/5  rDev -32.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Served on-tap in a 12 ounce glass.

A: Clear bronze amber color. Head dissipated by the time I was able to take a drink. No lacing.

S: Very faint with a slight aroma of hops.

T: It tasted like a watered down pale ale. Very faint hop flavor. Not much taste to even write about. Basically it was bland.

M: Very thin.

D: Because of how water like this beer tasted you could physically drink a quite a few, but I would not reccomend it.

AaronMcDonald, Nov 16, 2006
Photo of cokes
2.17/5  rDev -30.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

It pours to a golden-tinted copper with a modest bleached khaki head that shows a bit of stickiness.
Toasted grain nose with a big bubblegum/fruit punch presence. I'm not sure where the hops are at, as it smell one-sidedly sweet.
Toasty, a little, at its onset into the mouth. Then the sweetness is ushered forth, more concord grapey here, but still with somewhat bizarre notions of Hawaiian Punch and Bubble Yum, and then caramel as it warms. It turns a bit astringency and metallic late, as the only notable hop contributions. They ain't tasty, but at least they sheer off some of the tacky sweetness.
Medium bodied, moderate carbonation. It's a bit sticky with the sugary qualities, but otherwise the build is about right.
The balance is way out of whack, English-styled or not. Bad is bad. And so is this.

cokes, Nov 11, 2009
Photo of jasonjlewis
2.23/5  rDev -28.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 1.5

Great head and retention, decent smell mainly of malts. The mouthfeel is pretty crisp and clings well. However this beer is incredibly dry and has a nasty bitterness too it, not that nice one that we all know and love. This beer is just fucking gross. I detect the malts and hops, but it's hard to appreciate them with this nasty dryness and awful bitterness (not the great hop bitterness as I like bitterness).

EWW

jasonjlewis, Dec 20, 2006
Photo of jnezda
2.23/5  rDev -28.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This Organic pale ale sort of pales for the style. Pours a light copper with little head and very light carbonation. The smells were non-existent on the beers I tried poured or from the bottle. The taste is slightly malty and has a finish with some hop characteristics but could use some more body and flavor. The carbonation is mild at best and lacking punch. Not a beer I will be sampling again.

jnezda, Nov 17, 2009
Photo of slowdaddy
2.25/5  rDev -27.7%

slowdaddy, Aug 21, 2012
Photo of JimmytheSaintPSU
2.25/5  rDev -27.7%

JimmytheSaintPSU, Aug 21, 2012
Photo of Metrobus
2.25/5  rDev -27.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

I saw this beer at Smith's and decided to give it a whirl after a good experience with an organic pale from Stone. The pour from a bottle was an average, creamy foam which dissipated quickly, and very carbonated like a soda. I looked at the bottle after the pour to see "made by michelob brewing" on the front, and understood the reasoning behind the stock presentation.

The texture of the beer is very simple and flat. If you ever drank Bud or a Michelob at a party, it's going to be the same experience on your taste scale. I imagine this is Anheuser-Busch's attempt at cornering a niche in the small brewery big character beers. The attempt is pathetic. If you put a label of michelob or budweiser on the front of this bottle you wont be able to tell the difference. I have more respect for brewing companies that go for a hit or miss flavor to a style of beer than this carbon copy with an organic sticker slapped on it.

This beer has no character, no hops, no complex flavors, and no business being bought by anyone other than people with an undying devotion to Anheuser. I could see this maybe as being bought for a party or get together as an alternative to the keg. Then again if you're drinking Bud, why would you pay more for the same thing?

Metrobus, Mar 15, 2009
Photo of wcudwight
2.28/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours an amber color with some golden hues. 1/4" head that was gone in a matter of seconds. Crystal clear.
Smells fruity and buttery. It's a wierd mixture of aromas. Kind of like I imagine a butterscotch flavored Jolley Rancher smelling.
Taste would be good if not for an very off-putting acidic bitterness at the finish. The acidic bitterness almost makes the beer undrinkable. Thin and watery in the mouth with little body. Overall it's a neat marketing gimmick by AB. But that's all it is....a marketing gimmick. If they cared about the beer as much as they cared about the fake name of the brewery and the marketing behind the beer, this is an idea that could work for AB. But if you can sell a shit load of shitty beer, why make the beer good...?

wcudwight, Mar 04, 2007
Photo of ChainGangGuy
2.3/5  rDev -26%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance: Clear, orange body with a small, diminishing, white head.

Smell: Very basic, extremely light aroma of toasted malts with some vague floral hints to it.

Taste: Toasted malts with a faint sweetness. Drop of apple fruitiness. Floral hops, faintly bitter. Dry finish.

Mouthfeel: Light-bodied. Medium carbonation.

Drinkability: This one really took the "pale" and applied it to all of the beer's aspects. Not recommended.

ChainGangGuy, Jun 10, 2008
Photo of Enola
2.33/5  rDev -25.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

This beer may be listed as a pale ale but I cannot really tell it apart from the brewers WIld Hop Lager. It pours a light golden color with little head. The smell is just slightly hoppy with a little vanilla as well. The taste is more like a mass produced lager. The beer is light in body and thus drinkable but not desirable. This is basically Budweiser in a craft beer bottle sold at craft prices. Not good. AB is capable of so much more.

Enola, Feb 11, 2007
Photo of bucko
2.33/5  rDev -25.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I'd seen this beer around a few time and noticed that it was organic. However, I missed the fact that this was an Anheiser Busch product. In any case, this beer pours a copper color with a large, fluffy off-white head that quickly recedes into oblivion. Lacing? Nope. Head retention? Nada. There's a bit of sweet malt aroma as well as some fruitiness as the beer comes to room temperature. Actually the aroma reminds me more of a lager than anything. Delicate malt flavors come through in the taste as well as some graininess and a mild hop bitterness. Very clean, almost too clean... if I didn't read "pale ale" on the label, I'd guess that this was a lager... someone else mentioned Vienna lager, and I tend to agree. Mouthfeel is very light, much lighter than I'm used to for both American and English pale ales. This beer is very drinkable... probably a decent lawnmower beer. Overall not bad, but not at all what I'd expect for a pale ale. This kind of reminds me of the lightest offerings at most brewpubs... the pale beer for people who don't typically like the more expiramental stuff.

bucko, Dec 01, 2006
Photo of donteatpoop
2.33/5  rDev -25.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Murky amber color with a decent white head that quickly fades to a film that clings to the edge and forms a small island in the center of the snifter glass.

Smells of molases, raisens and dates. All sweet and none of the hop-impact that I was anticipating.

Oddly bland taste, the dates and raisens alluded to by scent were present. The sweetness washed down with the brew and left an unpleasant chemical residue behind in the mouth. Much as the nose indicated, this is all sweetness with little to no hop presence.

Very watery going down, all chemicals and cotton in the after burn.

This is not something I'd recommend to anyone.

donteatpoop, Aug 03, 2009
Photo of Overlord
2.35/5  rDev -24.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a bright coppery color. Some head, but strangely enough, not much carbonation.

Some caramel and malt tones, maybe a hint of hoppiness and bitter, but this has a strange skunky aftertaste that is simply not appealing. Mouthfeel is thin and watery. Avoid.

Overlord, Jan 01, 2008
Photo of zeff80
2.38/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A - Poured out a reddish/orange color with a foamy, off-white, one-finger head. It left a little lace.

S - It smelled sweet. It was also very grassy and had an aroma of apples.

T - It had a good sweet malt flavor, but there was an odd spice.

M - It was crisp and sharp. It was light to medium-bodied.

D - This was an okay beer. There was just an odd spicy aftertaste.

zeff80, Jun 13, 2007
Photo of wahhmaster
2.42/5  rDev -22.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 12 oz. bottle into a Guinness-branded tulip pint glass.

Appearance: Pours a translucent golden color with lots of carbonation bubbles. Has a thin, white head that dissipates quickly leaving an initial ring of lacing on the glass.

Smell: Wow, I wasn't expecting this aroma. It has a sweet grainy smell similar to most adjunct lagers. A slight touch of nutty and buttery smells but not much. Disappointing...

Taste: The taste isn't much better. It starts off slightly hoppy and finishes with a buttery, toasty taste. That said, the taste is very light and marred by a lot of adjunct-like flavors. I know this is an AB brewery but I wasn't expecting this level of suck.

Mouthfeel: Thin and watery with a touch too much carbonation.

Drinkability: A sub-par pale ale. It's pretty drinkable but the taste is pretty bad. You could do worse but this beer isn't really worth trying. Don't waste your time or your money...

wahhmaster, Dec 27, 2009
Photo of Nixon
2.45/5  rDev -21.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

They got me too...I went all 'South Park' on 'em in my head and said "you bastard!" after I went to their website to see what I'd bought and saw the Michelob connection. Lately I've been trying beers I haven't tried before and that's why I bought this one. There is nothing on the label or cardboard 6-pack carrier that gives you any clue as to its A-B connection. The distributor's people managed to get this brand stocked in among the local micro brews, away from the Bud/Michelob section. If it had been next to the Michelob I might have tried it anyway...I have tried Bud American Ale and Michelob Pale Ale...but this time I feel cheated so I won't be buying this anymore.

That said...it is a much more malty than hoppy beer. The small hop presence is more bitter than flavorful. Good clarity, decent orangey-amber color, quickly disappearing head, absolutely no lacing, odd chemical-butterscotch malt flavor. I drank one of these then followed it with a Deschutes Mirror Pond and...well, there's no comparison...Mirror Pond kills it.

Dear A-B--you don't have to trick me. I respect you for longevity and hugeness. You must be doing something right and I want to like you. But pulling stunts like this knocks you backwards about 10 notches. Be honest. Hold your head up...I mean you are number one aren't you? You should know better...and I think you do. This is like something a General Motors executive would do.

Nixon, Dec 31, 2008
Photo of goochpunch
2.48/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

Pours a copper color with an off-white head that maintains about 1/4". Leaves scattered lacing. Smell is mostly some crystal (?) malt, overly toasty, with some grassy hops. Taste is malty, pretty straight-forward, with a lot of crystal malt, I'm supposing. Really medicinal hop flavor that kind of makes me gag. Mouthfeel is sturdy in body with a smooth carbonation. I'm not inspired to drink this, and it's actually a little pukey with the medicinal quality.

I really hoped to like it, and I gave it a chance. Too pricey and really not to my liking.

goochpunch, Dec 16, 2006
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Stone Mill Organic Pale Ale from Green Valley Brewing Company (Crooked Creek)
72 out of 100 based on 212 ratings.