Dismiss Notice
Subscribe to BeerAdvocate magazine?

Learn more about beer and save over 53% with a 3-year subscription.

Subscribe now →

Silk Porter - Hoppin' Frog Brewery

Not Rated.
Silk PorterSilk Porter

Educational use only; do not reuse.
very good

157 Reviews
very good

(Read More)
Reviews: 157
Hads: 306
Avg: 3.82
pDev: 10.47%
Wants: 15
Gots: 35 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Hoppin' Frog Brewery visit their website
Ohio, United States

Style | ABV
American Porter |  6.20% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: klewis on 12-20-2007

No notes at this time.
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Silk Porter Alström Bros
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 157 | Hads: 306
Photo of Jeffo
2.32/5  rDev -39.3%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Got this at De Bierkoning in Amsterdam.

From a bomber into a snifter.

APPEARANCE: Pours a thinner looking one finger tan/brown head that makes tones of crackling noises. Poor retention, head dissipates very quickly and disappears totally. Dark brown and some carbonation in the form of little bubbles. Resembles flat cola.

SMELL: Some smoky barley malt and mound so tobacco, perhaps even cigarette smoke. Hints of sweet caramel malt in the back and a faint touch of milk chocolate as well. Too weak to make a statement, and perhaps that's a good thing. I don't mind some tobacco aromas and flavors, but this is a little over the top.

TASTE: Smoky and roasted barley malt and bitter coffee flavors compete with caramel sweetness up front, which was quite a pleasant surprise. The tobacco makes an appearance, which borders on the unpleasant. Aftertaste is strong and long lasting, consisting of bitter-sweet milk chocolate, bitter coffee and smoky tobacco. A decent taste profile actually; much better than the nose advertised.

PALATE: Disappointing here again. Thinner body and, surprisingly, higher levels of carbonation. Mildly creamy going down, but carries too much air on the way. Finishes quite dry on the palate, almost too astringent. Not full or creamy enough for the style. A bit of a mess here.

OVERALL: I could certainly finish this one, but wasn't necessarily looking forward to the next sip. A big disappointment. I had higher hopes for this offering, from a brewery I otherwise enjoy very much. Am also a big fan of porters as well, but this one just didn't work out. Reminded me more of a weaker Baltic porter that missed the mark. Too heavy on the tobacco, too boring a look, and too light and astringent a palate, this is one I won't be picking up again.

 1,784 characters

Photo of JerseyDevil980
2.4/5  rDev -37.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

It pours with a nice caramel color but very little head and lies a bit flat. It had very little aroma, basically nothing which was disappointing. It has a decent caramel, malty flavor with a satisfying finish but not the best by far. Its drinkable but not something I would recommend or purchase again.

 302 characters

Photo of CaraAndMike
2.69/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A/ this bottle poured a scant head that disappeared after a second, otherwise had a dark, chocolate-like body

S/ the smell was its best characteristic with a sweet, roasted malt earthiness

T/ disappointing due to being overly carbonated and having a sweetness that lingered too long

M/ flat

D/ discarded the majority of this bomber down the drain

Given some of the positive reviews, I wonder if this bomber was severely out of date. As it was, I would not purchase it again.

 480 characters

Photo of bruachan
2.81/5  rDev -26.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

frothed well but the head lasted only so long. lacing looks like it might be good. very dark, of course...with a hint of red blazing through the darkness

sweet smelling to start with a touch of smoke. enough char to keep it firmly in porter territory. nondescript hop aroma. not complex, really

it's smooth, as (ostensibly) advertised...and disappears from my tongue in a jiffy. some early sweetness, followed by kilned bitterness (which fades into hop bitterness)(but not enough), but everything vanishes without enough of a fight

aftertaste is strange. frankly, (like i said) it vanishes rather serrepticiously. i guess "silk" translates to "sly"...but is that good? mild and session beers are meant to be drinkable, but i don't think that means innocuous

 760 characters

Photo of elgiacomo
2.84/5  rDev -25.7%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

22oz bottled early/mid May 2010.

Pours medium bodied dark brown with a one finger head, even with a vigorous pour, no real lacing, quickly reduces to a small ring, eventually to almost nothing.

There is some sweet chocolate, dark fruit, roasted malt, day-old coffee on the nose, although it is all quite subdued.

Flavor features good caramel, some dark fruit, chocolate, a tiny bit of citrus hops.

Finishes sweet, a little sticky, thin bodied, low carbonation, dull.

The flavor saves this, but an average Porter overall, and not a good value.

 552 characters

Photo of kojevergas
2.9/5  rDev -24.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Brown glass bottle served into a Beck's flute in Castle Rock, Colorado. Reviewed live.

A: Three finger head of fair cream, great thickness, and good retention. Colour is a solid black.

Sm: Chocolate, toffee, nuts, and cream. A mild strength aroma.

T: Heavy chocolate, decent nuts, light cream, and light caramel. Complex enough, but badly built and balanced.

Mf: Smooth and wet; fairly complementary of the flavour but not the style.

Dr: Fairly high ABV, drinkable enough, and decently priced.

 503 characters

Photo of TexIndy
3.05/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 22oz bomber into a pint glass. No dating info. It was black in color. Slight carb in center and some lacing. It had a large tan head that slowly settled into a film and collar.

The aroma was dark fruit, weak coffee and roasted malt. Wasn't getting the chocolate that others mentioned. Not a big fan of dark fruit aromas. Also missed the chocolate and stronger coffee aromas that I usually find in this style. As is, it didn't really excite me that much. The taste followed the aroma. Tasted more like a baltic porter to me than an American porter - which goes counter to a lot of reviews and the recent switch here from baltic to American in style.

Overall, a disappointment for me. I've had 2 other Hoppin' Frogs that were excellent and AmPorter is one of my favorite styles so expected a lot and got a little. Mild recommendation if you like Baltic porters. For me, one and done.


 905 characters

Photo of mikereaser
3.06/5  rDev -19.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

A - pours a pitch black with 2 fingers of tan foam that slowly faded leaving some good lacing all around the glass
S - nice roasted malts, vanilla, chocolate and coffee with a bit of an age problem.
T - taste follows aroma closely, there is a slightly burnt flavor, almost like a coffee bitterness, but I'm also picking up some chocolate and vanilla as well.
M - smooth and creamy with a medium body, the carbonation is a bit high and I'll detract for that
D - very nice flavor, not really anything special though. Very nicely balanced brew

 541 characters

Photo of drpimento
3.07/5  rDev -19.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

This was from a bomber I got recently at Sam's in Chicago. Poured with a fine bubbled tan head, little lace. Color was opaque brown to black. Aroma was a smokey, dark, ripe fruit. Flavor was the same with a bit of sour. Tad thin. Finish is a slight sour tang on back of tongue. Seems to me average at best.

 306 characters

Photo of Rhettroactive
3.13/5  rDev -18.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

From bomber to Bruges hybrid glass on 2/11/11
*From notes

A: This one is dark and ugly - better then I had expected. It's got a good 1.5 finger head that looks like one of Grandma's chocolate chip cookies.

S: Creamy toffee and black coffee on the nose. I also detect traces of cocoa nibs and smoked malt.

T: Ehh - it's ok. Maybe it's me, maybe I'm just getting older. But I'm really finding that a lot of the low ABV porters and stouts I've had recently taste like processed chocolate sauce in skim milk. More Ovaltine? No thanks.

There's also a trace layer of malt and hops that lay down and take it like a sissy from the Hershey's syrup.

M: No suprise here: it's got that patented Hoppin' Frog forced carb that sticks my tounge like a prsion shank. It makes the overall presentation come off like a carbonated Yoo-Hoo.

O: I mean no offense when I say this, but I'm over Hoppin' Frog. Their beers aren't bad (other then the Frosted Frog, which is an unmitigated disaster), they just don't wow me in any way. Ever.

 1,020 characters

Photo of Vancer
3.17/5  rDev -17%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A "new" one from da frog - pours black with a fast dying tan head, not much in the way of lacing.

Aroma is loaded with cocoa with a sweet malty backbone. Quaff is very woody and burnt chocolate, almost astringent finish.

Not exactly a standout porter in my book (just IMO), I'm a bit surprised as I expected more from this brewery. I think the previous reviews were amped up due to the reputation of this fine brewery - I'd pass on this one in the future.

 458 characters

Photo of SaCkErZ9
3.21/5  rDev -16%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pitch black with chocolate highlights. Small, tan head.

Aroma is fairly sweet with a touch of chocolate. Some vanilla as well.

Kind of bready in the flavor with some of that chocolate flavor gone. More breadiness.

Not bad. I cant say this blew me away or was awful. Average.

 278 characters

Photo of wcintula
3.23/5  rDev -15.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

22 oz bottle, no freshness date visible.

Pours dark black with an espresso cream head, no lacing. Smells of strong roasted coffee, taste profile follows up with a dark sweet fruitiness, but all around the smell and flavor could be stronger. Very prickly carbonation distorts the perceived body of the beer, I'm finding it thinner than I'd like. Very decent, don't know if I'd come back to it.

 393 characters

Photo of Gueuzedude
3.28/5  rDev -14.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A solid pour into my 25cl tulip glass produces a three-finger thick, lightly browned, dark tan colored head. The beer is a dark, concentrated brown almost black color that shows some ruby highlights when held up to the light. The aroma smells of dark chocolate up front but then quickly becomes quite roasted with espresso notes, burnt grain husks, lots of toasted whole grain and even a touch of musty malt character. The aroma is definitely on the charred and burnt side of the spectrum, though it is not so much as to leave the aroma harsh.

Lightly sweet tasting up front, the beer has a medium'ish body to it that lightly coats the palate. The carbonation provides a substantial prickle as well as some sharp carbonic acid; after the carbonation is forcibly removed the beer becomes much more smooth and well integrated. Sweet malted chocolate and some roasted berry notes up front are tempered by a herbal hop flavor, a hop bitterness and a roast grain bitterness in the finish. Hmm, after stepping away from my beer for a bit, I think I know what makes this taste so sweet. There is a definite, though subtle, note of diacetyl here that adds a touch of butterscotch to the flavor. This definitely has a simplistic, at time annoying sugar sweetness to it.

This is a nice beer, I was definitely in the mood for some dark grain on this cold, by Tucson standards, winter evening and this has hit the spot. I could wish for a touch more smooth, chewy dark malt, with a bit less of the simple sweetness (more of a caramelized malt sweetness would have worked a little better here), but this is still a tasty beer. Well here is a bit of a dichotomy, the more I work my way through this bottle, the more cloying and annoying it gets. Not horrible, but I am really not digging the simple, sugary sweetness here; the body is just too light to support this amount of sweetness.

 1,875 characters

Photo of LilBeerDoctor
3.32/5  rDev -13.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Bottle. Pours black with a small ring of light tan head. Aroma of rich roasted malt, roasted nuts and coffee, and bitter chocolate. Flavor is slightly medicinal with roasted malt, not as tasty as the aroma. It's ok, but nothing special, and certainly medicinal.

 261 characters

Photo of mwill7287
3.33/5  rDev -12.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

3/1/11, home

22oz. bottle into a Chimay goblet.

A: Dark brown, with a thin layer of head which dissipated into random assortment of bubbles within a minute. Lacing around the perimeter of beer's surface is retained throughout the drink. Smallest amount of light seeps through when held up to lamp. Very, very carbonated around the surface area of the beer upon pour.

S: Mild smell of chocolate, on the weaker end. Doesn't do much.

T: As expected, the predominant taste is of chocolate, rather sweet with a tad bit of bitterness. Taste, although fairly rich, does not last long on the tongue.

M: Not too heavy for being a porter. Strong at first, fading quickly.

D: I find myself drinking this beer relatively swiftly for a porter. Finishing this bomber will be no problem. Drinkable.

 789 characters

Photo of GatorBeerNerd
3.4/5  rDev -11%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

22 oz bottle purchased at Charleston Beer Exchange and poured into a dimpled mug.

A: Looks really nice at the initial pour. It has a 2 finger thick cocoa colored cap that gradually settles down. The body of the beer shows no highlights around the edges at all. So I would have to call it black. If it had any real lacing to speak of I probably would have given it a 4.5 here.

S: Chocolate and coffee are the main attractions in the aroma. There is also a fruity character as well. Maybe it is from hops?

T: Roasted malt sweetness is balanced by dark chocolate and coffee flavors. There is also a bit of citrus hoppiness as well. It is an interesting beer, but the sum of the parts doesn't turn out quite as well as you would think.

M: It is a bit thin for a porter and the aggressive carbonation doesn't really fit my preference for the style.

D: The aggressive carbonation really made me go a little slowly for this one especially when you look at the ABV.

 962 characters

Photo of biglite351
3.41/5  rDev -10.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A - nicely dark for a porter. Off white foam that leaves slight lace.

S - malts, caramel, something a slight bit bitter. Possibly a sweet fruit as well.

T - sweet malts, caramel with possible chocolate. Slight bitterness like in the scent.

M - slight coating. Very mild tingle on front of tongue and top of back of throat. Very smooth.

D - the smoothness and decent flavor, combined with a great price level ($7 for a bomber) make this an all nighter.

 455 characters

Photo of msquared36
3.42/5  rDev -10.5%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 3.5

Dark chocolate with a reddish tint around the edges. Soft pour yields a fat sand color head.

Aroma of berries, malt and a hint of smoke. Not particularly strong scent.

Dry chocolate up front with a slight fruity sweetness toward the end.

Mouthfeel is a bit of a letdown. On the watery side. Expected more out of a beer with "silk" in the name.

Overall not bad but had higher hopes. Could have been more robust all around.

 427 characters

Photo of JoeyBeerBelly
3.43/5  rDev -10.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

22oz bottle served in a standard pint glass.

L - dark brown/black color with a foamy light brown head that left some good sticky lacing.

S - first wiff I got a hint of alcohol and then some roasted coffee beans.

T - roasted coffee and some chocolate notes, alcohol is apparent.

F - somewhat smooth with low carbonation.

D - it's ok but there are much better Baltic Porters out there.

 388 characters

Photo of WoodBrew
3.47/5  rDev -9.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Tyring the Silk Porter from Hoppin Frog and I am a little dissappointed only in the fact of appearance due to lack of head and no lacing. The color was a silky smooth dark opaque. The smell is roasty but mostly sweet malt and peat. The taste is very smooth and silky with very sweet malts hints of roast, peat, caramel/chocolate. Mouthfeel is ok....smooth medium body with weak, if any, carbonation. Overall this is a decent beer.

 430 characters

Photo of MayorAdamWest
3.49/5  rDev -8.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Okay, first off thanks to my friend in Cleveland for the bottle. Fred from the brewery says I'll be able to pick up Hoppin' Frog in Chicago soon... I can't wait. They are making some amazing stuff. On to the review...

Appearance: Rich "coca-cola" black. Not brown, not quite true black. Nearly no head formed even with a near straight pour into my snifter.

Smell: Sweet...milky... toasty. Pleasant... Pleasing...

Taste: Okay, So my buddy in Cleveland got a suggestion from Fred to add whole coffee beans to the glass to enhance the flavor. I poured half the bottle without and half the bottle with. To be honest... Without the beans it was only mediocre. Sorry HF. Kinda sweet. Kinda malty. Kinda good. Once I added the beans it was an entirely different story. The coffee added a bitterness that excited the flavor and just blew me away. HOLY COW! After a year long love affair with the Frog I was worried. Man was I wrong.

Mouthfeel: Silky smooth. Little carbonation. Nice.

Drinkability: Well... without the beans I don't think I'd come back to this one. With the beans I could drink this one all day long. Seriously, add the beans.

 1,141 characters

Photo of tigg924
3.5/5  rDev -8.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: dark brown in color, 1 inch head, clear, moderate carbonation

Smell: chocolate and roasted malt

Taste: roasted malt and chocolate

Mouthfeel: super smooth, semi-sweet, light bodied, moderate carbonation

Drinkability: The mouthfeel is excellent as this is super smooth and could drink a couple for that. Flavor wise, I have had better. Would not look for this, but once started, several could go down due to the smoothness.

 437 characters

Photo of cjgator3
3.5/5  rDev -8.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

22oz bottle

A- Pours a dark brownish black with a light tan head.

S- The aroma is dark roasted malts, a hint of caramel and sweetened chocolate.

T- The taste like the aroma is roasted malts up front with a good amount of sweetness, bittersweet chocolate and a touch of bitterness in the finish. The taste is a little on the sweet side at times and I feel it could use just a little more hops to balance out the sweetness. Not bad though.

M- The mouthfeel is a little lighter than expected but weighs in at around medium bodied with a good amount of carbonation.

D- Overall, Hoppin' Frog Silk Porter is a pretty decent Porter that is definitely worth a try.

 661 characters

Photo of IdrinkGas
3.5/5  rDev -8.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Bomber into a pint glass.

Pitch black with a finger of head. No lacing.

Picking up some dark fruit in the nose. Along with roastiness and cocoa powder.

Up front its a dark fruity sweetness followed by lightly roasty flavors. Caramel and a dry cocoa in the end.

Lower carbonation and a silky smooth mouthfeel as expected.

Easy drinking but nothing exciting about this one.

 378 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Silk Porter from Hoppin' Frog Brewery
86 out of 100 based on 157 ratings.