Dismiss Notice
Sneak peek! BeerAdvocate magazine #104 (September 2015) featuring Leah & Oscar from Highland Brewing in Asheville, North Carolina. Learn more ...
Dismiss Notice
Subscribe to our newsletter and get the latest BeerAdvocate updates delivered to your inbox.

Red Marker Ale - AleWerks Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Red Marker AleRed Marker Ale

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
76
okay

58 Reviews
THE BROS
-
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 58
Hads: 139
rAvg: 3.22
pDev: 13.98%
Wants: 1
Gots: 12 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
AleWerks Brewing Company visit their website
Virginia, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Ale |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: Riverwarrior on 05-12-2008

No notes at this time.
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 58 | Hads: 139
Photo of Thorpe429
3.5/5  rDev +8.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Reviewed from notes.

Pours a moderate amber color with a two-finger off white head. Decent recent but fails to create any lacing. The nose is fairly one dimensional, mostly consisting of some mildly-toasted bread. There are some faint, earthy hops in there as well. The taste adds in a bit of a caramel touch along with fresh dough and toast. Slight bitterness and moderately dry. Medium body and a bit chewy with somewhat high carbonation levels. Drinks fairly well. Not their best, but solid nonetheless. (507 characters)

Photo of chinchill
2.59/5  rDev -19.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

12 oz bottle (no date but purchased 2 days ago) served in a snifter.
An unusual amount of ressure released by uncapping. Pours dark and murky red-brown in color, hazy and with an over-sized, creamy tan head that has excellent retention and leaves the glass well coated with lacing.
Aroma: infected?
Flavor: better than the nose and drinkable, but still poor.
Feel: soft and smooth with high carbonation.

O: possible infected, making 2 out of 3 (all different beers) for me from this brewer. Should re-visit but the lack of quality control discourages that. (561 characters)

Photo of jwc215
3.6/5  rDev +11.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Pours light brown with amber/reddish hues. A thin off-white/tannish head that stays tops it off. A little bit of lacing sticks.

The smell is bready, with toasted notes, and vague fruitiness.

The taste is of lightly toasted breadiness, some caramel, and some leafy, tea-like bitterness. Mild maltiness balanced by mild roast/toast and mild bitterness. It has a soft, dry finish.

Light-to-medium-bodied with medium carbonation, it's pretty smooth.

An easy-drinking, mild amber. Could push it up a notch or two in both malt and hop categories and still be "sessionable". (571 characters)

Photo of smakawhat
3.64/5  rDev +13%
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured from the bottle into a nonic pint glass.

Faint two finger tan head, simple pimple right off the pour. Some good staying power, but she is tiny. Body is a very deep red, crystal clear, but blood and dark with barely a hint of dark mahogany brown to it which makes it hard to see through. Settles to a thin cap and collared ring with even pinhead bubbles.

Nose is filled with lots whipped chocolate sensations. Good sense of sweet powdered spices, dry clove, lots of nutmeg. A very nice aroma almost winter warmer sensing.

Very mellow hop forward but not a booming presence on the palate. Hints of large grapefruit oil on the palate. Clean finish with oil character and coating. Slightly wet, without a chewy or malty depth and presence, some caramel to this would really hit the spot. Interesting the hops seem to star but they are not aggressive, which is fine with me. Slight hints of herbality and tea with the grapefruit also.

An interesting subdued hoppy amber, but with a nice fruit presence. Kind of dig it. (1,024 characters)

Photo of yourefragile
2.52/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

12 oz bottle poured into a nonic.

Maybe I had a bad bottle of this (though I doubt it), but this was bad. Appearance is an average brown copper color, hazed with an un-retentive tan head that leaves no lace a thin crown. Aroma is the worst part of this, very sweet, slightly medicinal, I don't want to think much more about this, but whatever it was, it's not natural. Flavor is average, bready and malty with a mild, dry hop flavor throughout, but my mind might being playing tricks on me on distinguishing how sweet the flavor is compared to the aroma. This was hard to finish the bottle, blindly I never would have called this an amber, I probably would have pegged the style as an American drain pour. (706 characters)

Photo of avalon07
2.65/5  rDev -17.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Poured from a bottle to a pint glass. Had a light amber color and a clear consistency. There was a small amount of foamy head that quickly dissipated. Very little lacing.

S: A weird, slightly off-putting aroma of malt, hops and a soapy quality.

T: Tasted of some malt, piney hops, and that same soapy quality. Not a very appetizing flavor. Unfocused and a bit on the thin side.

M: A good amount of carbonation with a dry finish. Medium-bodied.

O: This is definitely not a very memorable beer. Could have been better than it was. (535 characters)

Photo of Immortale25
3.52/5  rDev +9.3%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured into a Dogfish Spiegelau glass. No freshness date.

A- Pours a reddish light brown color with a 1/2 inch dark tan head that retains well before becoming a thick ring around the edge of the glass and a mostly full sheet of surface foam. Semi-resilient lacing leaves a broken ring behind.

S- Toasty, sweet malt with some mild hop character that's mostly earthy. Also some weird must from the yeast

T- The toastiness continues but it's quite a light toastiness as is the hop bitterness and flavor. Easy to drink, though pretty plain.

M- Also plain with medium carbonation and a body leaning toward the fuller side.

O- I feel like they wanted to make a red that was very red, but not all the way brown, yet they ended up at a halfway point which doesn't really lead to anything interesting. Like they wanted to redefine the style but ended up making something very...plain. But it has enough character to keep it drinkable, hence the generous score. (962 characters)

Photo of Bung
3.85/5  rDev +19.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

12 oz, Found this at the Grapevine in Fort Mill. Hope it's not too old, no idea on dating.
Poured a fairly vibrant red, very thin layer of white head. Doesn't retain and does not lace to well.

Very malty aroma, light leather and treacle. Lighter cocoa. Candied sugar also, pretty sweet. I could see how people would not like that, but for me it's fine.

Taste has much balancing hop presence. Piney and lightly spicey herbal hops equally present with solid caramel malt and peat, leather, some cocoa.

Heavy side of light bodied. Coats very well for a smaller beer. Carbonation more present in the mouth than appearance. Could drink a bunch of this no problem.

I must have got a newer bottler, none of the negative qualities described previously were found for me. (766 characters)

Photo of Suds
3.08/5  rDev -4.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a 12 ounce bottle, this beer is clear, brownish-amber, and presents a very small head. Clarity and color are quite nice. The smell is a mix of lightly roasted, biscuity malt and herbal hops. Modest aroma. The flavor is balanced, with a notable bitter finish. Hop flavor is muted in favor of bitterness. Some slickness in the mouthfeel, but otherwise medium in body. Balanced, semi-dry beer. The beer seems like something of a throwback...to fifteen or twenty years ago when every small brewery seemed to make a similar 'red ale'. (541 characters)

Photo of DavoleBomb
2.75/5  rDev -14.6%

Poured into a pint glass. Bottle.

3.25 A: Clear deep amber brown color. One and a half fingers of frothy off-white head. Retention is below average but a short ring of lacing is left.

3.5 S: Definitely hop forward. Floral with some early citrus notes. A touch of earthy hops underneath. Caramel maltiness with toastiness and a touch of cracker.

2.75 T: The taste is poorly balanced for an amber ale. There's not enough malt character. Moderate bitterness with a touch of tanginess to it. Earthy mountain stream component. There's some caramel and toastiness again, but it's not strong enough and it comes off as slightly watery.

2.5 M: Lighter watery body. It could use a touch more carbonation. Lacking creaminess too. Not a big fan here.

2.75 D: It's not horrible, but it's well below average for the style. (832 characters)

Photo of msubulldog25
2.83/5  rDev -12.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A new red ale (for me) from a new brewery (for me), a 12 oz. bottle sent by Metalmonk - a local for him, but certainly not one I'd find out here in Oregon. Batch code: '087037', for whatever that's worth.

A: Hmmm... well on the 'amber' side, it's almost crimson - a ruddy brown, that's exceedingly muddy-looking. One of the LEAST-filtered beers I've seen. A little carbonation hugs the nfringes, but I have no idea what's going on inside the murky core. Nice head, a light khaki 1/2-finger topping of cream

S: Sweeter and fruitier smell than I expected, quite malty and almost dessert-like. A glazed doughnut or citrus/sugar encrusted scone, maybe some 'breakfast cereal', too. Not sure that this was the point, but not a 'turn-off', truth be told...

T: Definitely on the malty/sweet side, tea-like and seemingly 'aged'... or just pedestrian tasting. A 'fresh' send from Virginia (arrived mere days ago), but who knows just how 'fresh' this really is. Flavors of red apple, baked (slightly dark) wheat, toasted walnuts and a little orange-citrus.

M: Really weak feel: seems to be 3/4 ale, 1/4 water. Carbonation seems scarce, but the feel still holds some 'crispness', thanks to a gentle hop spiciness.

D: Despite the muddy, unfiltered appearance, not a bad beer to look at, nor to smell. Taste and feel are definitely 'off' though, and so it's with some hesitation I'm even posting a review. If someone knows what the batch code means -and it proves to be well past due -I'm happy to rescind or modify my review. As such, though, not very good. (1,552 characters)

Photo of Metalmonk
3.44/5  rDev +6.8%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Really like the looks of this beer...a deep mahogany red, just glorious, with a tan head that isn't the hugest, but certainly has amazing staying power. Add to that attractive slashes of lace, well, even if it's not the greatest beer in the world, it was almost worth the price (not much) for looks alone.

Smell is very candy-like vibe, big gooey caramel meets cherry taffy. Seriously, if you twisted caramel- and cherry-flavored taffies together, this is what you'd get.

Rich flavor, still candy-like, with hops being rather straightforward even amidst the malt-based, those hops taking on a mild citrus character. The balance of sweet and bitter is quite good. Only caveat is this has tell-tale signs of malt having been burnt in the boil. It's a tricky flavor to grapple with, the tongue having to decide with the brain whether this is char (nah...), toasted grains (too polite) or, yes, okay, something burnt. But then, it could just be my imagination and maybe they're using some severely roasted grain to begin with. The fiery color makes me wonder even more. I like the mystery going on here, and I like the taste.

Smooth carbonation, soft bubbles, the feel is a compromise between bubble attack and a nice velvety caress.

If you can accept the burnt flavor as a "unique personality trait" and not a "character flaw" then you'll like this beer. I'm okay with it. Maybe I'm feeling benevolent tonight, but this is actually a good, unique, quaffable brew with its own personality. (1,490 characters)

Photo of Chaney
2.7/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A: Crystal clear, red color, with a nice tight bubbled (ala. nitro-tap) head that lingered throughout the session.

S: Melted "Astro Pop," with a bit of hoppy fruit in the mix as well.

T: The front part of the beer is great. Candy sugar, hops, and even a bit of vanilla. The aftertaste borders on tragic - bitter, rusted metal and then some.

M: Bitter, bitter, bitter.... on the aftertaste (which ruined the whole experience for me). The carbonation was fine and dandy, but I honestly didn't care.

O: This is one of those rare beers that a small tweak would make all the difference in the world. Here's to hoping... (618 characters)

Photo of micromaniac129
3.5/5  rDev +8.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours an brownish amber color with a little head. Head fades fast due to it's loose structure and not much in way of lacing on the glass.

aroma is mostly of malts.

Taste is lightly malty with some biscuit at end.

Mouthfeel is medium and has a slight bitter finish. Carbonation is light.

An OK beer but I don't think I'd buy it again. Seems to lack flavor and is slightly weak. Some more hops for balancing would be good. (424 characters)

Photo of JayQue
3.51/5  rDev +9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Pours a cloudy brown color with a lot of light coming through when held to a light. Small off white head that fades to a covering of the glass.

Not much aroma.

Strong, slightly sweet malty taste, hint of caramel. Very pleasant.

Mouthfeel is rich enough and crisp. Drinkability is good. This is a nice mild, malty beer. Good with food, or as a session beer. Nothing outstanding but a good solid beer. (403 characters)

Photo of patre_tim
3.89/5  rDev +20.8%
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.75

A: Deep brown cherry red filtered brew with lots of carbonation, 2 fingers of beige head. Fine thin lace like lacing.

S: Citrus, sweet toffee, fruity like cherries, coffee, very candy like.

T: Fruity like fruit punch, citrus, light toasted malts, coffee. Light bitter hops linger on the palate as well as fruity notes.

M: Medium body, medium high foamy carbonation, smooth finish.

O: Got this one in Williamsburg, VA, at the cheese factory, drank in Clyde, NC June 23, 2014. Really well done in spite of mediocre reviews. (525 characters)

Photo of JamesS
2.83/5  rDev -12.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Pours a decent slight copper color with tinges of orange; has a bit of initial head, but no lacing. Decent scent, some malt sweetness, but nothing sticks out. Same with the taste, a very bland, although not bad, flavor; some decent sweet malt grains and notmuch else. Went down fine. I would not turn this beer down, but I would never buy it myself. The lowest of the AleWerks brews I've tried. (394 characters)

Photo of cjgiant
3.58/5  rDev +11.2%
look: 4.25 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

On tap at brewery:
Poured nice dark amber, with large amount of red-tan foamy-to-soapy head. Lacing significant. Nose has more hop profile than I'm used to in an amber, which works for me. Nose is herbal hops with some metallic background.

Taste is cluster to ambers I've had in past, crisp dark bread cracker, light copper, and then an earthy to herbal hop ending. Feel is what I usually think about ambers, thin (not as watery as most, though). Body is medium light, and the beer is actually refreshing.

Better amber in my eyes than most, with maybe a little more hops than normal for the style. Not sure that hops is as obvious from a bottle.

Edit: adjusted based on second tasting on tap at local restaurant later in week. Can't speak to freshness of the place's keg, but the hops definitely were less involved in the glass I had there (note: it didn't taste old or skunked, just definitely a notch less enjoyable than at brewery, unsurprisingly). (961 characters)

Photo of 57md
3.68/5  rDev +14.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.75

Pours reddish-copper with a finger of head that dissipated quickly but left some lacing. Considerable amount of malt in the nose. Malt profile is solid upfront, but it thins out on the finish. The finish is slightly bitter, but it is definitely a diminuendo instead of a crescendo. (281 characters)

Photo of ckollias
3.23/5  rDev +0.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Enjoyed this 12oz bottle out of a large snifter glass.

A: Pours a hazy brown hue with a frothy, white, 2-finger head that quickly dissipates in to a wispy lace leaving a nice trail down the glass.

S: Not a huge nose here. Malty scent with a slight hoppy background.

T: Smooth malty flavor that is a little more sweet than bitter. Finishes slightly hoppy.

M: Medium body and medium carbonation.

O: Decent red ale – nothing special – or anything I would grab again. But it was enjoyable and easy to drink. (512 characters)

Photo of hophugger
3.49/5  rDev +8.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

a nice beer from my hometown. Nice ale flavor but lacking a bit of boldness associated with most ales. Overall, a commendable effort and an enjoyable beer, served well chilled. Flavor tends to lose its appeal as it warms. Bravo for bringing a good beer that is brewed in Williamsburg (283 characters)

Photo of farrago
3.56/5  rDev +10.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

An aggressive pour yields a little around two fingers of off white foam, mostly larger bubbles and it dissolves down to the surface swiftly to leave a spotty covering across the surface, about average stick to the lacing, thin streaks here and there. Reddish brown liquid, more of a metallic orange at the glass bottom and rims, clear and easy to see through, few visible bubbles. The nose offers malt, mocha, hard caramel, scones and pie crust, boozy vanillin notes, mix of red cherry to apricot fruit, turns to mixed unprocessed grains after awhile, lacks some in the length department. Medium-bodied, likewise on the stern side in the mouth not clenched per se but not flowing openly. Dry in texture even without much carbonation and prickle, stunts the flavors a bit. Cocoa, cola, smidge of black licorice to go with the pie crust, challah bread, and pastry dough. Has a mineral water component as well. There’s no real flaws here it is simply hard to warm to, doesn’t offer depth or richness in any one area. Drinkable but you’d likely lose interest halfway through the second bottle. (1,095 characters)

Photo of cvstrickland
3.25/5  rDev +0.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

12-ounce bottle poured into a shaker pint glass yields a clear dark copper body with an ivory cap that recedes quickly to a soapy ring leaving no lacing.

The smell of the drink is lightly toasty with caramel and an undeniable aroma of sugar-sweetened iced tea.

The taste is sweet with a somewhat malt-fruity character and a mostly unsweetened caramel syrup finish. Lightly black tea-style earthy hops provide a bit of dusty dry bitter finish in that comes on stronger as the drink progresses.

On the thin side of medium-bodied and very lightly carbonated. Meh. (563 characters)

Photo of asabreed
3.18/5  rDev -1.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12 oz. bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance: A nice not-surprisingly amber color with good carbonation, a billowing yet lacing-leaving head, in spots more than clumps.

Smell: Roasted malts and hops with some sourness and citrus, along with a mild hint of burnt sugar and funk, which adds a weird element I'm not sure is supposed to be there, though it's interesting.

Taste: Too mild in the roasted malt and hops categories, with a sourness that seems to dominated and mask the other flavors. Finish is too sour and hoppy and masks and semblance of sugar or malt, and brings it down to a subtle hardly-reminiscent version of the style.

Mouthfeel: Too watery and slick, with too little carbonation to bring out the flavors.

Drinkability: Maybe the weakest effort I've had thus far by Williamsburg, as I've enjoyed the rest quite a bit. There's something off here, a weird off-balance weirdness to the brew, and I'm not sure why it exists. I can't say I didn't enjoy it, but I certainly can't say I was craving another after I was done. (1,041 characters)

Photo of Seanibus
3.32/5  rDev +3.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a deep reddish brown with a mediocre head. The aroma is malty and firm, with a little cinnamon behind it. The flavor is malty and mildly spicy, with some cinnamon and nutmeg, and a little broad, woody bitterness on the finish. Not a terribly complex beer, but not terrible either. (286 characters)

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Red Marker Ale from AleWerks Brewing Company
76 out of 100 based on 58 ratings.