1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Red Marker Ale - AleWerks Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Red Marker AleRed Marker Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
75
okay

112 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 112
Reviews: 52
rAvg: 3.24
pDev: 15.74%
Wants: 0
Gots: 5 | 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:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: Riverwarrior on 05-12-2008)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 112 | Reviews: 52 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of Thorpe429
Thorpe429

Illinois

3.5/5  rDev +8%

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.

10-21-2010 10:52:25 | More by Thorpe429
Photo of ygtbsm94
ygtbsm94

Virginia

2.5/5  rDev -22.8%

09-15-2013 02:49:35 | More by ygtbsm94
Photo of jwc215
jwc215

Wisconsin

3.6/5  rDev +11.1%

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".

08-18-2008 15:52:50 | More by jwc215
Photo of yourefragile
yourefragile

District of Columbia

2.58/5  rDev -20.4%

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.

12-29-2009 03:03:40 | More by yourefragile
Photo of smakawhat
smakawhat

Maryland

3.61/5  rDev +11.4%

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.

08-06-2013 01:09:23 | More by smakawhat
Photo of chinchill
chinchill

South Carolina

2.6/5  rDev -19.8%

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.

02-02-2014 19:13:52 | More by chinchill
Photo of THECPJ
THECPJ

Delaware

3.25/5  rDev +0.3%

12-05-2012 03:35:11 | More by THECPJ
Photo of avalon07
avalon07

South Carolina

2.65/5  rDev -18.2%

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.

09-24-2011 12:11:33 | More by avalon07
Photo of Boone757
Boone757

Maryland

3.5/5  rDev +8%

06-29-2014 21:58:45 | More by Boone757
Photo of AngusOg
AngusOg

North Carolina

3/5  rDev -7.4%

09-04-2013 10:13:13 | More by AngusOg
Photo of Suds
Suds

Pennsylvania

3.08/5  rDev -4.9%

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'.

06-26-2011 01:57:00 | More by Suds
Photo of BMart
BMart

Pennsylvania

3/5  rDev -7.4%

09-16-2013 13:59:29 | More by BMart
Photo of msubulldog25
msubulldog25

Oregon

2.83/5  rDev -12.7%

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.

02-21-2011 00:37:26 | More by msubulldog25
Photo of Metalmonk
Metalmonk

North Carolina

3.45/5  rDev +6.5%

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.

02-07-2011 23:33:45 | More by Metalmonk
Photo of Bung
Bung

Michigan

3.88/5  rDev +19.8%

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.

08-06-2011 03:15:20 | More by Bung
Photo of Chaney
Chaney

District of Columbia

2.6/5  rDev -19.8%

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...

04-24-2011 20:03:38 | More by Chaney
Photo of ncaudle
ncaudle

Virginia

3.5/5  rDev +8%

10-13-2012 14:53:31 | More by ncaudle
Photo of Molson2000
Molson2000

Ontario (Canada)

3.5/5  rDev +8%

06-17-2013 21:22:26 | More by Molson2000
Photo of Davepoolesque
Davepoolesque

Massachusetts

2/5  rDev -38.3%

06-05-2013 00:15:30 | More by Davepoolesque
Photo of VeganUndead
VeganUndead

Virginia

3.5/5  rDev +8%

05-26-2014 17:28:28 | More by VeganUndead
Photo of JayQue
JayQue

Virginia

3.53/5  rDev +9%

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.

08-10-2008 17:52:59 | More by JayQue
Photo of JamesS
JamesS

Indiana

2.83/5  rDev -12.7%

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.

05-05-2010 17:20:10 | More by JamesS
Photo of Kmlund
Kmlund

Massachusetts

2.5/5  rDev -22.8%

10-02-2013 15:46:08 | More by Kmlund
Photo of micromaniac129
micromaniac129

Pennsylvania

3.5/5  rDev +8%

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.

07-23-2011 17:41:07 | More by micromaniac129
Photo of AndrewMichael
AndrewMichael

Virginia

2/5  rDev -38.3%

01-26-2012 01:27:12 | More by AndrewMichael
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Red Marker Ale from AleWerks Brewing Company
75 out of 100 based on 112 ratings.