Rolling Rock Extra Pale - Latrobe Brewing Co.
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 2,105 | Reviews: 717 | Display Reviews Only:
3.7/5 rDev +42.9%
The interesting thing that some people forget about beer is that there are multiple communities of those drinking it. Those who go for complex flavor, aroma, appearance, etc, who typically frown on American Macro brews. Then there are those who drink to get drunk, who look for lighter beers so that more can be drank in a single sitting, and though this isn't a cheap beer, at $9.99/12 it isn't overly expensive, and while the flavor isn't really complex at all, the extreme drinkability of the beer truly makes it a standout in the crowd who drink to get drunk. Interestingly enough, I'm the type of person who enjoys both facets of beer, so I can see the positive attributes on either side.
06-03-2006 17:16:01 | More by BamaWorKs
2.1/5 rDev -18.9%
A friend left a few in my fridge after a party the other day, so I figured I'd try one. Pours a pale, almost translucent straw color, topped by a flourish of fizzy white head that subsides almost immediately, leaving just a touch of lacing. Aroma of adjunct malt and diacetyl, with a touch of skunkiness thrown in for good measure. Palate is bereft of any significant flavors - very light adjunct malt, some corn, the slightest hint of fruity hops. Body is thin and fizzy. It is refreshing, I'll give it that. Maybe I'll save the others for a heat wave, although I'm not sure aging this beer even a few weeks is a good idea.
06-01-2006 07:10:03 | More by ElGordo
2.6/5 rDev +0.4%
From the 12 oz. bottle, pours golden clear pushing transparency. Yes, this is an extra pale brew. Head is puffy white spit that quickly fades to a ring with no real lacing. Nose is oddly similar to salty peas, a touch of malt, and almost citrus. Unfortunately, the pea flavor carries over to the taste, making me wonder if this is a skunked beer. At any rate, the flavor is pretty rough, grassy, malty, and coupled with a flat, watery mouthfeel. Finish is more flat, grassy malt. On the up side, it goes down easily, though I dont think Id even classify this as lawn mowing beer.
Overall: A pretty bad Euro lager. Avoid.
05-31-2006 23:45:33 | More by jettjon
1.75/5 rDev -32.4%
Pale straw, with a wispy white head. Pure, unadulterated skunkiness in the aroma. The taste....well, the folks at Old Latrobe are obviously not afraid to put corn in the forefront of their brew. Indeed they flaunt it...corn sweetness on parade. There is a bit of redeeming bitter hops in the taste but not enough to rescue this trainwreck of a beer. I wouldn't turn down a free one, but that's the nicest thing I can say.
05-23-2006 08:19:45 | More by johnrobe
2.9/5 rDev +12%
Appearance is just as is should be: pale. Head begins nicely and leaves a nice coat above the beer with a satisfactory amount of bubbling. Smell is different. I'm not sure how to describe the smell, somewhat sweet and malty. This beer tastes much like it smells, somewhat sweet. I have heard people complain that this beer is too sweet. This beer does begin sweet but ends bitter with a short aftertaste that is far from unpleasant. This was my first "beer love" from years ago, but drinking it now I wonder what I liked so much about it: it's drinkable. Have 6. Hell, have 18. These things go down easy and taste decent at the same time.
05-15-2006 03:14:42 | More by uabigdaz
2.05/5 rDev -20.8%
Poured pale yellow with a small white head that melted to a surprising marshmellow lacing that stayed the entire drink.
Aroma was faintly of malt and corn...no hops at all.
Taste much like the aroma...very slightly sweet malt with corn or rice adunct flavor on the back end. Again, absolutely no hops.
Overall both taste and aroma very bland.
Mouthfeel just slightly above water due to the carbonation.
Not enough primary taste to leave much of an aftertaste.
05-14-2006 06:24:02 | More by IntriqKen
2.75/5 rDev +6.2%
12 oz green bottle.
Very light golden color with ok head.
Not much aroma. Mild with a bit of typical malt.
Taste is very light, clean finish, refreshing but rather bland and plain. Not awful, but not really good either.
Mouthfeel is light and thin.
This beer is not great, but is not too offensive either so that combined with it's refreshing lightness makes it somewhat drinkable.
05-03-2006 22:47:02 | More by AaronHomoya
3.08/5 rDev +18.9%
Poured a pale, straw yellow color from a green twelve ounce painted label bottle into a pint glass. Thin foamy white head fell quickly to light thin lacing. Aroma is dominated by a sweet corny maltiness, light on the nose. Taste is very much so like the smell, sweet aftertaste. Mouthfeel is light bodied with moderate to heavy carbonation. Every characteristic of this beer is light, nothing over the top in any way. For a macro, this is a solid, refreshing beer that is cheap and easy to find most anywhere. I was afraid that drinking as much Rolling Rock as I have over the years might leave me with a negative bias towards this brew, but I can still appreciate this beer from time to time. Drinkability is exceptional for it's type, great summer day beer, thirst quenching quality appreciable.
04-30-2006 22:16:17 | More by danielocean03
3.53/5 rDev +36.3%
Nice smell is the first thing I noticed about this beer. It has a nice taste kind of sweet and a littl bitter., however i think a lot of the taste might be from the smell as the sesnes work together. The beer cost 3.75 at the bar. Not worth it for the rpice.
04-30-2006 04:26:38 | More by jasonjlewis
2.33/5 rDev -10%
Pours a color like apple juice, good head retention and lacing. Unfortunately, this was the high point - never a good sign.
Almost no aroma at all, smells like a squeaky clean AML.
The smell is an indication of the taste. Watery, no real flavor to comment on... Not very pleasant aftertaste.
Any bite in this beer comes more from carbonation than hops, I think. Mouthfeel is watery, again.
About the only thing this would be good for would be playing some drinking game where you have to drink beer like water - hey, that's pretty much what you'd be doing.
04-19-2006 20:40:30 | More by hunteraw
1.5/5 rDev -42.1%
This is one of the worst. I used to drink these WAY too much back in college. Looks, smells, tastes, feels bland. It may be the very reason I developed a distaste for lagers. I certainly haven't recovered since. As I said, I did drink quite a few of these, thus the 2.0 for drinkability. But if I recall, it was one of the cheapest beers available everywhere I ended up, so that's probably the main reason I had so many.
04-11-2006 02:59:10 | More by JayTheFinn
Nova Scotia (Canada)
1.9/5 rDev -26.6%
Picked up a 6 pack on a recent trip to Boston. I wanted to pick up an infamous American brand you can't get here in Nova Scotia. It's pretty well exactly what I expected, maybe a little smoother than I would have thought.
Appearance: The color was standard golden-yellow. It poured a typical white head, which dimished to a thin lacey ring.
Aroma: Typical of a poorly made macro brew. Aromas of pine with notable skunkiness.
Taste: Lack luster. Keeping in mind that I expected it to be terrible, I actually thought it wasn't THAT bad. It had little flavour and reminded me of Corona to some extent. I drank it slowly to observe the change in flavour as the temperature changes and goes more flat. After about 10 mins, I changed my opinon. As it got a little warmer it was increasingly difficult to drink. The taste of the corn and alcohol was sticking around much longer. The last drop was putred.
Mouthfeel: Lots of carbonation, thin. Very standard to style.
Final Statement: Lived up to my expectations, just a bad American macro lager. God bless microbrews. I still have one in the fridge. I'm saving it for a chug.
04-10-2006 03:46:59 | More by MMansfield
2.8/5 rDev +8.1%
My friends despise this beer. I really don't feel the same way. This beer needs to be cold to drink, but it goes down pretty smoothly. This beer is really easy to drink, not to expensive, and i've had worse beers for more money. Not much flavor, a little bit in the way of hops, but mainly grainy.
04-04-2006 02:39:36 | More by seanmhogan
2.35/5 rDev -9.3%
The beerf that I tried wasa UK brewed version.
It was extremely carbonated with a white head adorning the mid gold beer that , despite its name tended only ever so slightly to the pasle side of things.
The smell , well, oh my dear> The smell is typical of the as yet recognised Australian macro Lager style of beer. That is metallic tank water.
The tatse fortunately has just a LITTLE bit of character, the emphasis on the little.
Sweetly sour malt predominates the fore,mid and after palates.
Did they forget to use hops ?There was virtually no bitternessand no dryness to the finish.
The mouthfeel and overall appeal is watery weak and not particularly enjoyable
This would not even appeal on a blistering hot afternoon, and for me that makes it pretty well not worth drinking,
04-02-2006 05:47:33 | More by jarmby1711
2.89/5 rDev +11.6%
Green 355 ml can (another one for the collection), almost a water stained look to it, 4.5%.
"Rolling Rock Extra Pale, Premium Beer, 1939. To honor the tradition of this great brand, we quote from the original pledge of quality: 'From the glass lined tanks of Old Latrobe we tender this premium beer for your enjoyment, as a tribute to your good taste.' '33' " (text is repeated in French). Latrobe Brewing Co., St. Louis. Anheuser-Busch, Labatt Brewing.
Light golden color, with a steady stream of carbonation bubbles. Short, white head, sticky lace. Smell of light malt grains, mild floral hop aroma. Not alot of flavor, slightly sweet malt and sourish, lemony hops. As it warms, the corn/vegetable flavor comes out.
Light bodied, fizzy carbonation. Finishes thin and dry.
Got the chance to enjoy a bottle on a recent trip south of the border. One of the macro options available at Legend's in Nashville, so wanted something different than Bud/Bud Lite. Pours a clear, pale, light yellow color from the bottle pictured. Small and instantly disappearing white head. Lots of carbonation, visible bubble streams rising up fromm the bottom of the glass. No lacing. Smells like corn and a bit of malt. The taste is crisp and clean. Highly carbonated and feels light on the tongue. Overall, this is drinkable, beats a Bud every time. Comparable to Blue/Kokanee.
04-01-2006 21:56:53 | More by BigBry
2.78/5 rDev +7.3%
Really maybe I should not rate this bottle seeing that is almost 1 year old on March 31. I really don't think it will make that much difference . I think all this beer lost in that time span is a little of it carbonation. It pours light gold despite the age it still had a white fluffy head. Taste is mostly corn and grainy like. Very light body . Final impression is that this beer is not too exciting. Could be really good on a hot summer day at the beach, but don't appeal to me now on a cold Michigan March day.
03-18-2006 19:36:25 | More by nota
2.15/5 rDev -17%
My parents have always, for some reason, held Rolling Rock Extra Pale in high esteem - in spite of the fact that it's not (and to my knowledge, has never been) available in Canada. So every year when my father goes on a golf trip to South Carolina, he brings back a case of the stuff that never lasts long. I managed to grab a can so I could get my impressions.
The fact that my dad is a big fan of Coors Light should have perhaps dissuaded me, I know, but while curiousity may have killed the cat, satisfaction did indeed bring him back (though whether this brew can bring satisfaction may be highly debatable)
Poured from a 12oz (ooh, American measurement) can into my pint glass a very unhealthy color. Indeed, this is extra pale, for sure - a watered-down ginger ale, almost pure urine colour. An initial inch of head from a rather aggressive pour looks oddly soapy, and dies down almost immediately, leaving only a tiny ring and a very small amount of lacing. This... does not look very appealing.
Smell is exceptionally mild, for better or for worse. It seems to take Sleeman's occasional problem with a cooked veggie (cabbage?) odour to an extreme (and I actually rather like Sleeman's beers, but this is just... unpleasant). Beyond that, all I can get is grain. Maybe some corn, and a tiniest - tiny, tiny, tiny - hint of hops.
Taste is inoffensive, perhaps primarily because on first glance it's as tasteless as water (more expensive though), with an ever-so-barely bitter and slightly-more-than barely detectable metallic feel on the finish. I can see why my father likes this given his penchant for mild brews, and I could literally drink twelve of these in an hour if need be, but that's not the point. There's something else, slightly out of reach on initial taste, and that becomes quickly apparant on a second sip - cooked veggies and corn. No real discernable hops or malts that I can detect.
I actually can't quite fault the mouthfeel so much - thin and watery, but at least it's not as hyper-carbonated as most macros. Thank goodness for small miracles, I suppose. And as for drinkability, I suppose here it does fair quite well. Something literally anyone could drink by the case, though I can't claim they'd enjoy it at all.
Rolling Rock Extra Pale is not particularly appetizing, but at least its miles ahead of Corona/Bud/Coors - appearance and smell is downright awful, but the taste is innocuous, if nothing else. In fact, I could arguably (guilt-ily enough) see myself drinking this if the stars were aligned just right one day and it a) was cheap, b) available in Canada, and c) I was tired after a long hot day or just hanging out with friends. Beyond that, this beer serves no real purpose, besides perhaps making sure its consumers get their 8 reccomended glasses of water a day.
03-15-2006 01:54:35 | More by headlessparrot
1.98/5 rDev -23.6%
Appearance: Very little color; straw yellow. Fluffy, bright white head.
Smell: Faint grains, with a very light touch of hops. There isn't much here for the nostrils to take in.
Taste: Again, not much here. Soft, sweet adjunct flavors are most detectable while it's cold. As it warms, mineral-like bitterness becomes more and more obvious. The mineral taste isn't pleasant.
Mouthfeel: Light as light can be; thin bodied and sharply carbonated. Soda-like.
Verdict: Not to be a snob, but I think I'd rather drink water than have another Rolling Rock. The market is full of better-tasting domestic macros.
03-08-2006 02:09:17 | More by bearrunner44
2.3/5 rDev -11.2%
Had this beer straight from the bottle. Can say much about the appearance since it was from bottle, would imagine a very light colored yellow. The smell was difficult to detect, partly my own fault from drinking it from the bottle, but mostly detectable was tangy hops, with a corny little hint. Taste was the same, really nothing impressive. It states "extra pale" which I suppose was correct, but it still wasn't refreshing, even when very cold. Lots of carbonation, takes away from the taste. Light mouthfeel, watery. Not one of my favorites, especially when there are pleanty of other cheap beers that could take it's place that accompliosh the same task.
03-04-2006 04:54:53 | More by thebarnesbomb
2.33/5 rDev -10%
Found in my refrigerator from a previous party my roommates had. Never have tried this 'classic' so I decided to sample for review purposes.
Pours a clear, pale, light yellow color with a small and instantly dissolving white head. Much bubble activity is visible in the glass. No lacing whatsoever. Smells like corn and a bit of malt. Little else. The taste is crisp and somewhat clean. It is relatively weak and a bit watery. There is a definite corn presence, with a bit of bitterness at the back of the swallow. R.R. is highly carbonated and light on the tongue. Overall, this isn't the worst you could expect for a macro. Not terrible. Is it drinkable? That depends on other options. It beats BMC, but if this were all that were offered at a gathering, I'd probably volunteer to be the designated driver.
03-01-2006 13:51:16 | More by macpapi
2.42/5 rDev -6.6%
This beer pours a clear yellow straw like color. It has very little malt or hop character. Mostly it is CORN in the taste and smell along with some hard water taste. The Mouthfeel is exactly what you'd expect from an American Macro Lager and the drinkability is fine if you don't care that it taste ... well that way. I admit I had my share of this beer. When I first turned 21 there was a lady who lived around the corner from me and this all she drank so I started buying it on a regular basis. I have never had any other beer that so often I got skunked cases. Truly awful. I liked the beer when it wasn't skunked and when it was it still got us drunk. Anyway, now I wonder, 'what the hell were we thinking!' There are so many good beers out there don't waste your time with this one. IMHO. If you do like the corn adjunct flavor beer try Straub.
Hope this is helpful.
02-23-2006 06:42:56 | More by Phatz
1.02/5 rDev -60.6%
I sampled this as an example of a beer with strong characteristics of DMS or dimethyl sulfide.
The pour is a golden clear color out of a green bottle (sunburn anyone?). The foam was decent and limited lacing.
So I poured this in a sniffer glass and after taking a whiff, wish I didn't. The smell is strongly and pregnantly of stewed, overcooked and roting vegetables. Don't believe me, then let RR set out in the sun for a day then cool it and try it. The smell is horrible. I think I need a band aid for my nostrils. It was so bad I had to take a break before I tasted it.
When I came back to taste, I don't think I took long enough. The taste was all to familiar with the vegi un-delight. I couldn't finish it. Flushed right down the sink with the garbage disposal on. Give me Bud or Coors over this.
02-22-2006 02:34:39 | More by Oxymoron
1.7/5 rDev -34.4%
This beer is obviously super pale. It looks like there's not much there. I mean White Ales probably pull it off but they have the yeast still in there to give it some body and are pretty good usually. The smell was actually kinda unappetizing but you don't drink this one out of a glass ever and that doesn't matter so much to me usually. The taste was slightly bitter and water and just not good. The mouthfeel was completely watery. The drinkability is slightly higher than other scores because it's super thin. I wouldn't give it that much though cause after having one of these I've got beer - blue-balls. It's like ska music: you think it's going to be good then a horn comes in there and screws it all up.
02-21-2006 07:01:58 | More by CaskofFlyingDog
2.98/5 rDev +15.1%
A: Light straw color topped with 1 finger of white head. Head quickly disappears. Tiny bubbles ascend quickly to the top.
S: Sweet and slightly corny malt smell. Tiniest hint of bananas when sought out. No hops or other scents to speak of.
T/M: Sweet, light malt, corn, and cereal flavors. Not much else. Refreshing, light, thin mouthfeel.
D: Easy to drink. No offensive tastes or odors, so it is easy to drink several.
02-20-2006 20:29:50 | More by kdmorse
2.4/5 rDev -7.3%
Appearance: "extra pale" is right...a very faded yellow, this, with a slim, soon-gone splash of foam.
Aroma: soggy cereal and creamed corn, carbonated. a little skunky-like, but not horrible.
Taste: big carbonation grabs the tongue, fades back, but leaves little in the way of flavor. Miniscule hops, some slight sweetness, grainy, but nothing really holds. Lightness of body, faintness of flavor, softness (beyond the high carbonation) in the finish.
An inoffensive alcohol delivery system. Not the type of beer I like to pollute my palate with, however...
rest of y'all, rock it if you must...
02-13-2006 05:49:11 | More by feloniousmonk
Rolling Rock Extra Pale from Latrobe Brewing Co.
62 out of 100 based on 2,105 ratings.