1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Brother David's Triple Abbey Style Ale - Anderson Valley Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Brother David's Triple Abbey Style AleBrother David's Triple Abbey Style Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
79
okay

597 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 597
Reviews: 352
rAvg: 3.47
pDev: 16.43%
Wants: 8
Gots: 40 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anderson Valley Brewing Company visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
Tripel |  10.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 05-15-2004)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 597 | Reviews: 352 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of BGsWo22
1/5  rDev -71.2%

BGsWo22, Mar 21, 2013
Photo of JasErwin
1/5  rDev -71.2%

JasErwin, Aug 10, 2012
Photo of sneekee22
1/5  rDev -71.2%

sneekee22, Dec 21, 2011
Photo of tmars13
1/5  rDev -71.2%

tmars13, Aug 21, 2012
Photo of Hellpop65
1.75/5  rDev -49.6%

Hellpop65, Aug 30, 2014
Photo of DeadGuyRyan
1.75/5  rDev -49.6%

DeadGuyRyan, Oct 23, 2012
Photo of mrasskicktastic
1.75/5  rDev -49.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

A - A large frothy head rests atop a viscous looking clear golden brew. A bit of patchy lacing adorns the sides.

S - Aroma is... strange. On some level it smells of sweet banana - maybe a little malty - then I start to sense some spi... then I'm shut out by this boozy aroma. It isn't even that strong, but the moment I try to probe to this hints of pleasantness, I get a rum soaked banana shoved in my nostrils. Maybe it is tossed on a mound of pumpkin pie spices, but I get nothing but booze and sweet bananas.

T - Spicy. Very malty. Very, very boozy - even at low temperatures. Sure - this is ten percent, but it kicks like a rail whiskey long after the rocks have given out. Reminds me of NyQuil because it is thick, sweet, boozy and has a bit of a medicinal finish - well maybe NyQuil with a spoonful of vodka to help the medicine go down. The alcohol actually works its way way back up my nose as I try to discern the flavors. After the booze vapors finally subside, the aftertaste is of bananas, some allspice, hay and a bit of bland malt.

M - Numbing, and a bit warming, from the alcohol, carbonation is astonishingly harsh for a still brew, thick, syrupy, a bit sticky and not refreshing.

D - Ummm... maybe great for alcoholics who love the way alcohol burns, but want to cut back on their overall intake? The alcohol presence on this one is just unacceptable. I give beers some room to be a bit boozy, but this detracts from the flavor, the aroma, the mouthfeel and the drinkability. Even if it wasn't so boozy, it seems like it would be a mediocre tripel at best. This is the worst beer I've had in quite a while. Still above a drain pour though...

mrasskicktastic, Nov 07, 2007
Photo of francisweizen
1.98/5  rDev -42.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

I love anderson valley and i've rated there beers at 4 or higher (some I have not rated here on BA), but this beer was a big mess.

The 22oz bomber bottle that is sealed in gold rubber is nice, and very easy to open (as compared to the real candle-like wax that breweries like alesmith use)

The appearance was a dark golden colour with a head that fizzed and died quickly. Unfortunately this mediocre appearance was the best part of this beer. The aroma was sweet and funky with WAY too much banana in the mix. The aroma was very one dimensional and consisted of the previously mentioned banana overload as well as some funky yeast notes, some slight spicing, and some other odd flavors. The taste was WAY too cloyingly sweet and banana-like as well. What were they thinking with this one. The after-taste was spicy and metallic and the mouthfeel was thin, but average. The drinkability was lame as well, as this took like 3 hours to finish ( and Erica and I split the 22oz bottle into 2 glasses!)

Anderson Valley is a great brewery, and Hop Ottin is awesome, but this one need some major work, or perhaps a very, very long nap!

francisweizen, Jun 28, 2004
Photo of largadeer
2/5  rDev -42.4%

largadeer, May 08, 2013
Photo of Rollzroyce21
2/5  rDev -42.4%

Rollzroyce21, Nov 25, 2011
Photo of Boilermaker88
2.03/5  rDev -41.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Presented in a 22oz bottle sporting a flat gold rubber seal over the cap. No best before date but, at 10%ABV, I'm willing to bet it could stand up in a cool, dark place for a long, long time. Split between me and the missus, into a Chimay chalice (for her) and Duvel glass (for me).
Dark gold coloring, almost brassy, with decent carbonation and a modest off-white head that fizzled down to nothing all too quickly, leaving no hint of it's presence.
Woof, big slap of alcohol fumes and raw cane sugars heaped over tropical fruits such as banana and mango, both in the nose and the taste. Real sugary yet has a decent spicy hops bite further back on the tongue, consisting of clove, coriander and pepper. Then things start falling apart as this tripel takes on an almost Beast-like roughness from all the alcohol. Develops a real "hot" streak to it that, for me, is completely off-putting. The feel was medium-bodied, rough and raw.
Well, my wife ended up dumping half of the 10oz pour I gave her. I struggled through my glass until, battle-scarred and battered, my palate hoisted the white flag and I dumped the last remaining couple of ounces. Letting this AV offering warm up is a mistake as it only adds more fuel to the alcohol fire already raging in this bottle. Ten percent ABV?? I'd have guessed substantially more. Yet another Anderson Valley offering I'll not return to anytime soon. I'm dangerously close to skipping their entire line-up now as I'm not impressed with this one or many others in their arsenal. Danger-close to a total drain-pour.

Boilermaker88, Jul 12, 2005
Photo of cokes
2.05/5  rDev -40.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Clear bronze with a retreating grey lacework that recedes into nothingness with haste.
Reduced apricot nose, heaped with cane sugar, with a wavering rum-soaked banana essence.

Ever had a Captain Morgans and Mountain Dew? Me either....until now. And on all accounts too, flavor, texture, consistency, carbonation, alcohol burn. I guess there is a bready, banana-ish yeastiness that can't be explained in those terms, but aside from that it's all lemon-lime soda and tracers of dark sugar-laden heat.

It lacks any sort of nuance or depth. Stark and naked, this fails on all accounts.

cokes, Jan 09, 2005
Photo of TheLongBeachBum
2.1/5  rDev -39.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Presentation: Funky 22 ounce Bomber. Not the usual Anderson Valley presentation, the colorful label is gone to be replaced with a two-tone cream and sepia affair. Labeled as ‘Brother David’s Triple Abbey Style Ale’ and listed at 10.0% Alc./Vol. Described as brewed from ‘malted barley, hops, water, demerara sugar and special Trappist yeast’. The label also states that this is ‘Never Heat Pasteurized nor Sterile Filtered’, recommended to be served at between 40°F to 45°F, that’s 4.44°C - 7.22°C in real money.

Appearance: Lucid body, dark amber with some polished copper hints. The head builds up quickly but soon dissipates to leave a thin broken covering and a small ringed halo head. Light carbonation, enough to reinstate the head when swirled but that’s about it.

Nose: Some raw alcohol, a clove-like banana hint with a smidgeon of un-dissolved brown sugar, no doubt from the demerara. Not much else really. Funny; that’s funny weird, not funny Ha-Ha.

Taste: Urgh!-WTF!?! My initial thoughts, quite literally. The alcohol is high, raw, unrefined and rough, you can taste it everywhere. Sickly malt feel, cloying brown sugar feel, some mashed banana’s – the sort you see in Monkey Sick, sweet candy tastes in the backend….muddled, befuddled and a bloody mess.

Mouthfeel: Initial carbonation was enough to spare me from the raw alcohol but it soon rescinds to leave the full onslaught of this rough and ready brew. Sugary middle and a cheap brandy finish. Unbalanced, uncultured and seemingly under-matured, way, way too raw – drink this down the fields with a few of your underage mates, they’ll love the big alcohol and not mind the awful taste and feel.

Drinkability: Shite, I had a whole 22 ounce of this. I left it a while, after reading some other Reviews by the time I got to this stage of mine, there are hints that leaving this one “to air” will help improve it – I found no such relief, it was just as bad as ever. The latter half of this was a hard slog; the last quarter went down the drain!

Overall: The left hand side of the label has the phrase “You Are Worthy”. Hmmm, that sounds a little familiar no? Anyways, if I am indeed worthy, what the hell did I do to deserve this? I’m not impressed with this one at all, the best part of the whole experience was playing about trying to remove the gold colored plasticky-wax like blob that covers the crown cap – from thereon in its all downhill I’m afraid. I expected much, much more from a Brewer that I hold in high regard. I think someone broke into Anderson Valley and brewed this whilst the usual brewer was sleeping. Maybe this one needs some time in the Cellar, who knows, yet somehow I don’t think that would improve it that much to be honest as there seemed to be no yeast sediment at all in this one.

If I went back in time knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t waste $5 on this one if I was faced with it in the Cooler again. Don’t be fooled by the appearance of the bottle.

Is it me, or is this just a jumbled up confused high alcohol mess???

TheLongBeachBum, Sep 20, 2004
Photo of RedDiamond
2.15/5  rDev -38%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

How many beers come in a wax-sealed bottle? Could this be the Maker’s Mark of beers? ‘Fraid not. Cutting away the wax reveals an ordinary bomber with an ordinary cap. Inside the bomber is a really bad beer.

Brother David’s Triple produces an abundance of unusually large bubbles that cause the head to crackle and chatter like an ant colony heard through a stethoscope. It is energetically carbonated and has a brilliantly clear bronze color with a head that quickly dissipates to a thin, creamy film. The smell of this beer is its most redeeming, if short-lived, property. I’ve never had a beer with a more profusely banana-like smell. It’s like Belgian banana bubblegum. Strange, though the smell is soon corrupted by an excess of raw alcohol. The taste is also dominated by alcohol and is somewhat wooden and cruel – like corn liquor in a paper cup. What little malt or hop profile does manage to protrude is candy-like and thready.

The bottle I drank of Brother David’s Triple showed no yeast residues at all. It tastes ultimately like a highfalutin malt liquor. Rather than being sealed in wax, this beer should be concealed in brown paper.

RedDiamond, Jun 22, 2004
Photo of Philousa
2.17/5  rDev -37.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Pours a tawny, golden orange. Sits clear with little head in the tulip glass. Banana, spices, nothing but Belgian yeast in the nose. Big banana flavor, tart green apple, lots of candied sugar flavors. I get a little biscuit, but it's overpowered through a bitter, sour sugar aftertaste. This gets to be sickening towards the end of the bottle. The viscous feel of the beer is also off putting, as I associated it with the sugary aftertaste. Finish is very dry.

If you couldn't tell from the description, I didn't like this beer. The aroma started out well, but the taste and mouthfeel just brings this beer down too much for me to give it a good review. I couldn't get over the lack of complexity and the candy flavor just pounded my taste buds beyond recognition. The thickness just made me sick after a while, reminding me of cough syrup. A Tripel should be light and complex, this was anything but.

Philousa, Oct 30, 2011
Photo of semihobo
2.23/5  rDev -35.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Cellared for 15 months, no particular reason I opened it tonight. No idea how much older it is than that.

Looks like a cup of tea or weak coffee, crystal clear brown [edit: must have settled. Second chalice holds particles beautifully in suspension]. No head despite a vigorous pour, just a ring around the edge.

Smells of rum and raisins. Alcohol is definitely present. Sweet, with a distinct candy sugar taste. Nothing too pleasant.

Taste is of sweet raisins, alcohol, and metal. Sugars are interesting, and there are some phenolic banana notes. Alcohol is present but not too pronounced. Pretty industrial taste, however, and not very nuanced.

Highly carbonated but thin, makes drinking this brew slightly more of a chore. Sickening finish.

As Dave Chappelle put it, "it'll get you drunk." And that's nice. Otherwise I'd look into other options for the style... this is quite unrefined (not sure the aging helped, but I don't think it hurt). Don't need 22 oz of this, some is going down the drain.

semihobo, May 13, 2007
Photo of kojevergas
2.25/5  rDev -35.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Brown glass bottle with standard pressure cap served into a generic hefeweizen glass in low altitude Los Angeles, California. Reviewed live.

A: Colour is a semitransparent light copper-gold. Head is three fingers of slight cream and decent thickness. Retention is favorable. I wouldn't call it appealing.

Sm: Musty hops reminiscent of many winter warmers I've had. Certainly candy sugar is in there. Some spices are present but me broken nose can't place them - all apologies, lads. Scent is moderate in strength.

T: Splits at the midpoint, which is structurally problematic in this beer. The first half is loaded with candy sugar accompanied by some light caramelized malt. The hops emerge in the second half but aren't distinct, covered (and burdened) by the overdone sugar - some of which I think is unfermented - almost astringent. It's not horribly complex, but balances its problems if that's worth anything. Some spices emerge on the tail end, and I definitely get a winter warmer vibe from them. No alcohol comes through, which is quite an accomplishment given the ABV.

Mf: Smooth and wet, but entirely too thick. Suits the flavours in that it allows them to clear quickly.

Dr: It's difficult to drink on account of its badly handled sugar problem and its overdone thickness. The price isn't particularly great considering the low quality. A trainwreck attempt at the Tripel style.

kojevergas, Sep 13, 2011
Photo of mithrascruor
2.25/5  rDev -35.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

22 oz. bottle poured into a chalice.

Appearance: Pours a golden orange color. Clear, but with lots of medium-sized bubbles. Barely any head, just some bubbly foam at the edges and only for a little while.

Smell: Barely any aroma, a bit of sweetness and perhaps some orange blossom.

Taste: Has a sort of indistinct flavor of some fruit, yeast, and hops. Some sweetness initially, but then turns to a bitter taste in the finish and aftertaste (along with some alcohol).

Mouthfeel: Light- to medium-bodied, though with a bit of density to it. Relatively smooth, with light carbonation.

Drinkability: A bit on the strong side, alcohol-wise. That's masked in a decent way. But the flavor isn't worthwhile after half a glass.

These Brother David beers just don't cut it. Really, not even worth picking up for just a try. The taste is far from good, and I don't even know if I'll finish the bottle.

mithrascruor, May 14, 2010
Photo of crookedhalo
2.3/5  rDev -33.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Pours a light copper/golden orange color with a decent beige head that fades to a collar and thin sheen atop the beer. Aromas are mostly of pale malts with some notes of raw sugar, phenols, light spicing, green apple and pear, some grassy hops and some harsh vegetal aromas (Campbell's tomato soup?). Some sweetness upfront that quickly moves towards a plastic/medicinal mid and then a metallic, alcohol-laden semi-dry finish. A little bit of hops near the end, bitterness in all the wrong places. Too much heat and not enough complexity. Mouthfeel is good with a subtle prickly carbonation presence to cut the sweetness and viscosity. I'll pass on this one.

With this trainwreck in mind, I haven't tried their Double, but I think I'll pass on that one too if this is any kind of indicator on how AV brews an "Abbey".

crookedhalo, Sep 13, 2007
Photo of rudzud
2.35/5  rDev -32.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Picked up a bottle of this at Russell's last year. Poured into a Duvel tulip. Shared with bpk59. Reveiwed from notes.

A - Crystal clear golden amber pour with a fizzy one finger head that fades to leave nice clouding and minimal lacing.

S - Huh? This is a VERY hot triple. So boozy infact that it overpowers almost all of the nice belgian qualities that make a triple a triple.

T - Again, lots and lots of hot alcohol here. Even with over a year on it! No banana persay, light belgian spices. And very sweet.

M - Does have a nice triple feel. Low carbonation, good in the mouth, though very boozy.

O - Overall, this is a very dissappointing beer. I had bought this before I would check reviews, and upon seeing how bad it was I figured I would wait around for it. With room running out in the cellar figured I'd get rid of this. Just bleh.

rudzud, Mar 05, 2012
Photo of drpimento
2.35/5  rDev -32.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Man, this is a pretty sweet ( literally ) beer; like, too sweet. Poured with an ok light tan head and a little lace. Color is a hazy medium amber. Aroma is reminiscent of Bavarian Weiss with that banana spice thing, plus lots of malt. Flavor is pretty good at first and then is totally dominated by sweetness. Body is full and round of course with all those sugars in there. Carbonation is ok. Finish is sweet then sweet and tapering off to sweet and much too long with all that sweetness. Not a session. Can't finish it.

drpimento, May 25, 2010
Photo of jamesmbirchnyc
2.38/5  rDev -31.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

A great start to the beer, unfortunately finishes like a very amauter homebrew which was left to ferment one month too much.

I generally like Belgian during the warm months, but this beer has all the wrong notes. There was very little noticable head for the style, and the after-taste is almost undrinkable.

The one good point is the smell. I absolutely love the fruity notes that come from the minor head of this beer.

Otherwise, it's definitely skippable. Not my favorite, and not a re-buy candidate.

jamesmbirchnyc, Jul 15, 2010
Photo of meathookjones
2.38/5  rDev -31.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Spiffy looking 22oz bottle with a plastic wax covered top. Clear golden orange with a little bitty white head. No lace. Aroma is light fruity notes with some hints of yeast and bread. Along with that was the all too potent alcohol. This is one you could tell from the nose that it was going to have that stinging alcohol taste. Light fruit over a layer of way too sweet malt. Yup this was hot, too much sweetness and too much alcohol don’t make for a pleasant drinking experience. Light burn on the finish. Fairly thick feel to it but the sticky sweetness is not one I would expect for the style. No much in the way of drinkability either. I love some of their beers but this sure isn’t one of them.

meathookjones, Jun 07, 2005
Photo of wrb357
2.42/5  rDev -30.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Have wanted to try this beer for awhile. I live in Nor Cal so Anderson Valley can be found easily. Got this at a liquor store, had to move some of the doubles out of the way to try it. Poured it into a standard pint glass from a 22oz battle.

A - Looked fairly orange, with some light head to it. Reminded me of a hefe in appearance.

S - I got distinct smells of apple and pineapple juice. Honestly it smelled very juice-y right off the nose.

T - This beer, like others have said, is very sweet. I am relatively new to triples but have tried some recently and enjoyed them. I didn't taste the booze as much as others have said, but it did seem almost overpoweringly sweet. This loosened up as time went on, but still was sweet overall.

M - Felt good in the mouth, but just like the taste, reminded me of juice. This made it hard to focus on the feel.

D - It's fairly easy to drink, but again, the sweetness is overpowering. I couldn't imagine drinking more than one of these in a sitting (they're big bottles and it's 10% overall) but I also don't think I'd have this again.

It's a shame it wasn't my favorite because it's easy to get and relatively inexpensive for how much alcohol is in it. Still, you may enjoy this if you are a fan of lambics or ciders and want something that will kick you on your butt.

wrb357, Dec 30, 2010
Photo of impending
2.42/5  rDev -30.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

22oz into a tulip. Pours a crystal clear bright copper penny, minor head was brief, minor lacing.

Aroma lies between a dubbel and a tripel with a phenolic, alcohol ending.

Very sweet, flavor lacks complexity. The notes are simply blunt, no definition. Significant phenols ride the aftertaste, not a strength. Full bodied mouthfeel bordering on cloying.
mediocre
no cheers
jd

impending, May 29, 2011
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Brother David's Triple Abbey Style Ale from Anderson Valley Brewing Company
79 out of 100 based on 597 ratings.