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 Nectar - Humboldt Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Red NectarRed Nectar

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

488 Ratings
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 488
Reviews: 250
rAvg: 3.64
pDev: 13.46%
Wants: 9
Gots: 13 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Humboldt Brewing Co. visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Ale |  5.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 10-25-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 488 | Reviews: 250 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of KristaHall
1/5  rDev -72.5%

KristaHall, Mar 23, 2012
Photo of rah1734bones
1/5  rDev -72.5%

rah1734bones, Mar 23, 2012
Photo of ninaturner
2/5  rDev -45.1%

ninaturner, May 30, 2013
Photo of mhaugo
2/5  rDev -45.1%

mhaugo, Dec 22, 2011
Photo of Darles_Chickens
2/5  rDev -45.1%

Darles_Chickens, May 18, 2012
Photo of rudy0908
2/5  rDev -45.1%

rudy0908, Dec 16, 2012
Photo of westcoastbeerlvr
2/5  rDev -45.1%

westcoastbeerlvr, Apr 06, 2013
Photo of Punkyg0608
2/5  rDev -45.1%

Punkyg0608, Jan 17, 2012
Photo of Bsod27
2/5  rDev -45.1%

Bsod27, Jan 15, 2013
Photo of largadeer
2.15/5  rDev -40.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

"Bottled on" date reads 8/27/08.

Appearance: Perfectly clear amber with two fingers of off-white foam. Nice and frothy with good retention and stickage.

Smell: Soap. That's pretty much it. What the hell? This is one of the least aromatic beers I've ever smelled.

Taste & mouthfeel: Biscuit-like malts, minerals, husky grain, a bit estery in the background. Slight astringency from the malt. Mild floral hop flavor with a dry bitterness in the finish. Light bodied, fairly crisp on the palate but not especially clean. Not the worst beer around, but not exactly good either. Meh.

largadeer, Nov 25, 2008
Photo of ouser31
2.25/5  rDev -38.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

From what i remember about this beer is the taste... It wasnt the best or a fav of mine but it was drinkable! think i had it during a sit down while trying new beers and it was just ok... little different been a red ale or hemp ale but thats how it was different in its own way! try it out see what you think!!

ouser31, Mar 15, 2012
Photo of jdhilt
2.3/5  rDev -36.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a three finger cream head that fades to a shallow layer and leaves some lace. Cloudy dark amber color. Light carbonation and medium bodied. Hoppy nose. Starts mildly hoppy, looking for sweetness and not finding it, hoppy, resiny finish, with bitter aftertaste. $1.69 for a 12oz bottle from John's Market Tigard, Or.

jdhilt, Oct 14, 2006
Photo of Fiore757
2.5/5  rDev -31.3%

Fiore757, Jun 05, 2013
Photo of Raziel313
2.5/5  rDev -31.3%

Raziel313, Feb 20, 2014
Photo of khargro2
2.5/5  rDev -31.3%

khargro2, Jun 30, 2013
Photo of anon
2.5/5  rDev -31.3%

anon, Feb 08, 2014
Photo of pants678
2.55/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured into a pint from a normal 12oz bottle. Color is deep brown with a white head that's frothy but does not retain.

The smell is more complex than the palate with strong hops mixed with fruit and bread.

Boring. Complexity is minimal, the complementing flavors are all hardly subtleties. There are tinges of cinnamon behind the bitter hops with a backend that is almost non existent.

The carbonation is light that still leaves this drinkable but without a distinct feel. It's something I'd go to on a hot day, but doesn't seem a choice red.

pants678, Nov 02, 2009
Photo of IntriqKen
2.63/5  rDev -27.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a light orangish amber with a nice single finger full tan head that melts to a nice lacing.
Aroma is only faintly sweet malt and honey.
Taste is stronger than the aroma but still very light...malt, followed by a honey cloying, then a mild hop bitterness.
Aftertaste of honey and hops.
Just a very average beer of this style in my opinion. I don't know if they actually used honey in this beer, but to me it was distinct and distracting for the style.

IntriqKen, Apr 30, 2006
Photo of JuicesFlowing
2.65/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 2.75

Poured into a shaker pint glass.

Look: Ruby copper body. Cream colored head, little retention. Little or no lacing.

Aroma: Sweet caramel, wet cardboard, sweet corn.

Taste: Sweet malts and a caramel candy presence at first. A tangy, woody finish, faint hop bitterness.

Mouthfeel: Medium bodied, really dry.

Overall: I just did not dig this brew that much. The caramel sweetness was good, but what came directly after that was hard to pin down on the palate.

JuicesFlowing, Apr 15, 2014
Photo of samie85
2.73/5  rDev -25%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Reviewed from notes; originally 6/21/11

A-Pours a burnt sienna color with two fingers of rocky, off-white head.

S-Pine resin and grapefruit with some caramel malt on the back end.

T-A little bit of bitter grapefruit upfront with some light caramel malt notes.

M-Very thin and watery with light carbonation and a slightly sticky feel.

D-The flavor profile is a little weak and the mouthfeel doesn't help it at all.

samie85, Jun 24, 2011
Photo of shivtim
2.75/5  rDev -24.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

This is a clear reddish-orange with a nice tan head. There are lots of tiny bubbles and ok lacing. Nose is hoppy and sweet. Taste is metallic with some malts. Not nearly as much hops as the nose. There's an odd grainy aftertaste that's like bitter honey. Complicated taste, but not in a good way. Mouthfeel is ok, drinkability would be better if it weren't for the odd cacophony of the taste.

shivtim, Oct 08, 2006
Photo of kojevergas
2.8/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I had this at Beachwood BBQ, where it was labelled "Humboldt Red Nectar Ale". Humboldt's page suggests it's now brewed at Firestone Walker, but Firestone Walker owns Nectar Ales. It's a confusing contract brew/ownership of brand situation, but I believe I've found the right listing. Served on-draught into a 5 oz taster. Reviewed from notes.

A: Pours a one finger head of nice white cream, good thickness, and great retention. Colour is a dark copper-gold.

Sm: Dry toasted malt and cream. Simple and mild, but appealing.

T: Toasted malt, cream, and some amber hops. Some caramel. Simple, but decently balanced. Hops - mainly bittering - are present but mild, supplementing the balance. Decently built but unremarkable. Not unique or special.

Mf: Smooth and a touch dry - especially on the climax. Complements the flavour profile to a moderate extent. Not tailored to it, but suitable.

Dr: Drinkable but unremarkable. Boring for the style. I wouldn't have it again (knowingly). Pairs decently with barbecue.


kojevergas, May 20, 2012
Photo of JerseyKirk
2.83/5  rDev -22.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

A: almost no head. White no lacing. Carbed. Copperish to amber.

S: citrus, bread, biscut. Very subtle and not really noticeable.

T: sweet caramel malt, bitterness in finish, citrus fruits. Malty backbone.

M: carbed and medium bodied. Sweeter side.

O: doesn't cut it. Too little aroma and flavor. I like bolder beers like troegs hopback. Much better amber.

JerseyKirk, Jan 29, 2012
Photo of PhageLab
2.83/5  rDev -22.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Served in a standard pint glass.

A - Beautiful crystal red with a brownish hue. Nice fingertip of head, fair retention and some really pretty lacing.

S - Mostly hops in the nose, with some cherries and other dark fruits. Not too potent but certainly not bad.

T - Crisp and citrusy, with a mildly bitter finish. Yeah, wasn't too bad, but there was an odd character in the aftertaste that reminded me of medicine. I'm not sure what it was, but it really causes a hit here.

M - Medium bodied, low carbonation level, oily residue left in the mouth.

D - Wouldn't be bad were it not for the odd aftertaste. Can't see a reason to try this one again. Sorry, no reco's here, but if you're eating a burger and you need something to wash it down with, by all means grab one.

PhageLab, Jan 22, 2008
Photo of sacfly
2.98/5  rDev -18.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Code 255D12035 stamped on the bottle, so no freshness date of note.
“All Natural Ale”
Pours a hazy amber/red. Particles noted in suspension. Thin head of tan bubbles. Lightly citrus nose with a hint of herbal character.

Taste is light. Seems “Dusty”? Very light crystal malt blends with a dusty tree bark and grass. Might be annoying, but not enough of any flavor to rank that high. Aftertaste is lightly bitter with a lingering sensation that you ate the white part of a grapefruit peal. Not grapefruit mind you, just the white part.

Uninteresting but not overly terrible. Not one I would seek out, “All Natural” or not.

sacfly, Apr 14, 2006
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Red Nectar from Humboldt Brewing Co.
82 out of 100 based on 488 ratings.