Tap Room No. 21 Amber Ale - World Brews

Not Rated.
Tap Room No. 21 Amber AleTap Room No. 21 Amber Ale

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
65
poor

180 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 180
Reviews: 82
rAvg: 2.73
pDev: 26.01%
Wants: 2
Gots: 18 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
World Brews visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Ale |  4.80% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: brewdlyhooked13 on 05-17-2007

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (80) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
to view more.
Ratings: 180 | Reviews: 82
Photo of Mrose78
2/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Slightly strange after taste. Probably would not do again.

Photo of Mark88
3.42/5  rDev +25.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

this was a little better then the Tap Room no. 21 Pale ale

Photo of Dabrochu
3.37/5  rDev +23.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Similar to Yuengling. Easy to drink and good flavor!

Photo of KYGunner
2.91/5  rDev +6.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3

The nose is very metallic with stale grain and roasted barley tone. The flavor is a bit boring but I do get a barley graininess and an obvious honey sweetness. There's some really good elements in this but it never really exerts itself.

Photo of crob3888
2.5/5  rDev -8.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Cereal adjuncts, honey, and light toastiness in the flavor. Pretty one note. Avoid or save for friends or family who don't like craft beer but will dabble outside of BMC without complaining.

Photo of car2052
2.5/5  rDev -8.4%

Dundee Honey Brown with a fancy label. Overpriced.

Photo of DavoleBomb
2.2/5  rDev -19.4%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.75

Poured into a perfect pint. Says "ale with honey added" on label, so this might be a different listing.

3.25 A: Clear dark orange color. Two fingers of frothy off-white head. Retention is a touch below average and a short ring of lacing is left.

2.5 S: Light toastiness. Bland overall with a noticeable adjunct aroma hinting at rice. A touch of honey comes through, but only because the rest of the nose is so anemic.

2.0 T: Man this is bad. It's has that sickening adjunct sweetness that I will never get used to. The residual honey only bolsters this flavor. Again light toastiness and maybe a touch of graininesss.

2.5 M: Lighter body. Too much carbonation. Could be creaminess. Finish leaves a horrible sweet aftertaste.

1.75 D: This beer is ass. Don't buy it. Avoid it at all costs.

Photo of tdm168
2.95/5  rDev +8.1%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3

A - light, see-through amber with a thin, soapy, loose head that fades quickly

S - caramel malt, sweet; very faint

T - caramel malt, light peat, apples, somewhat sugary, marshmallows

M - medium bodied, crisp, a tad overcarbonated

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. The flavor isn't bad, but it's certainly not as expressive as I'd like for the style. The marshmallow flavor through me, but I actually liked it because I thought it gave this beer some dimensions. Overall, this is an average at best amber, but inexpensive and very easy to drink.

Photo of hackmann
1.92/5  rDev -29.7%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.75 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Appearance: clear amber colored body with ¼ inch white head that leaves no lacing behind.

Aroma: dusty grains and muted spice mingled with some sweet bread

Flavors: a strange sweet note (if that is the honey – I don’t like it) – I think that sweet note is coming from the corn, stale caramel malt, flat dusty grains – old corn, dainty non-descript spice on the back

Mouthfeel: light in body and just a bad taste on the palate, strange, strange and strange, good thing it has a weak nasty aftertaste.

To the Point: a first time home brewer can do better making it out of their bath tub. Yes, this is terrible, save your money, save your taste buds, save the future of mankind -

Photo of fischerking
2.65/5  rDev -2.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Tap Room No. 21 Amber Ale from Novato, CA.

This beer had a sweet honey taste (overly sweet) - it says "honey added" on the bottle. A little too sugary for my liking. Even smells sweet.

I drank it out of a bottle from Kroger in Knoxville, TN on 12/22/2012 from a create your own 6-pack.

No.

Photo of B-Rad
2.42/5  rDev -11.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A- Light amber color.
S- Sweet flowery aroma.
T- Sweet malt.
M- Average. Rather dull.
O- Nothing to really describe. Very average ale. Too sweet for my taste. I guess that's the best way to describe it- sweet malty flavor.

Honestly. I did not like this ale. It was very sweet, almost juice like. It didn't taste like any amber ale I have ever had or would really want to have again.

Photo of Bookseeb
2.22/5  rDev -18.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Appearance is a mid amber color supporting a thin dissipating head leaving no lace. Smell having a honey sweetness with a bit of malt in the background. Taste has that honey sweetness that kind of overpowers everything else and not truly enjoying the malt or hops. Mouthfeel is light with some body with a spike of carbonation. This amber is to sweet for me and takes away from the actual style.

Photo of lwillitz
2.68/5  rDev -1.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

12-oz bottle into Samuel Smith "Tulip" pint glass

A - 4 fingers of off-white head atop a crystal-clear body of pale amber; a few carbonation bubbles

S - appple, grass, caramel

T - honey sweetness, diacetyl, grassy hops, fruit (primarily apple); not a very good balance of tastes

M - sticky light body, medium/high carbonation, astringent bite

O - The label looks crafty, but the beer just isn't very good.

Photo of travolta
2.82/5  rDev +3.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

App: Clear, amber, puffed white head that disappeared quickly.

Nose: Malts and fruity, but slightly and cheaply.

Taste: Sweet and syrupy. Corn syrupy sweet.

Notes: Smells and tastes like a Macro's sneaky interpretation of craft and quality. Nothing memorable.

Photo of Brenden
2.5/5  rDev -8.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The color is a completely clear amber. A very slight white head sticks around for a minute or two before being reduced to a thinnish foam. Just a bit of thin, spotty lacing is left around.
The aroma is certainly thin and weak. Malts are in here but not the highest quality. Are there adjuncts in here? There's almost a corny sweetness before leaning more toward fruits. A bit of toast is here as well and a dusting of something herbal makes me believe that there's at least something by way opf hops contributed.
The flavor follows suit. Grains carry the day and a bit of something diacetylic lingers as well. It's not terrible, but it's below average.
Thin and dull, at least this light-bodied brew has enough crispness to not be flat.

If this is representative of these Tap Room 21 beers, I'm not sure I want to try the rest. Seeing them pop up at grocery stores everywhere, I hasd a feeling it might be a macro effort. Whatever else, it's certainly lackluster.

Photo of zeff80
2.63/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

A - Poured out a clear, amber color with a one-finger, egg shell white head of foam. Short retention and little to no lacing.

S - It smelled malty and fruity, but not very good.

T - It tasted of sweet malt, very, very sweet. Odd fruitiness with a very mild spice.

M - It was crisp and sharp. A light bodied ale with a smooth finish.

O - This is an okay brew. Too sweet. Needs some balance.

Photo of ginemesis
3.16/5  rDev +15.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A - Surprisingly clear, like apple juice or morning piss. Virtually no head.
S - Slightly sour in smell.. a little bit of acetone smell.
T - Green apple aftertaste. Light on flavor. Quite sweet.
M - Thick and sticky, especially in the finish.
O - 3 ounces was enough for me. Might be good on a hot day, or paired with cow.

Photo of DaveBlack
2.96/5  rDev +8.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Given to me by a friend, who apparently has fond memories of it from a bygone time.

A: Light amber with a finger's width of fluffy white head that is fed by a seemingly never-ending stream of bubbles from the bottom of the glass. Leaves a fair amount of lacing on the edges

S: A malty sweetness and cereal grains. Not a whole lot going on for this beer in the nose department.

T: Tastes rather like it smells: malts and grains. Better than a BMC lager, but flavor profiles are the same. Lacking in complexity.

M: Mouthfeel is relatively light with moderate carbonation. Again, thoroughly average.

O: Meh. Not a terrible beer, but not one that I'm anxious to drink again. I've had any number of beers that taste more or less the same, and I don't generally drink those either.

Photo of Veillantif
2.68/5  rDev -1.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

On special at the supermarket; bottle poured into tall 14-oz juice beaker.

A: a fetching amber, with a reddish tint; diaphonous but doesn't look weak; the head is too sudsy; the repeal of prohibition, much celebrated by the beer's makers, was before my time, and the lawful right to drink isn't something that's ever been on my mind; 1933, a year lauded on the neck label, doesn't have such good connotations in my mind.

S: I had to look at the label again to know that I had bought an amber ale; this smells more like apple juice, and

T: tastes like it, too.

M: I don't see much really wrong with it; maybe the carbonation, which is a little too smooth. An old friend of mine would say this is the kind of beer that drunks like to drink for breakfast.

D: I would drink this again if I had to, but I wouldn't be expecting an amber ale, at all: amber ales have touches of earthiness and bitterness that keep notes of fruit juice at bay. This has notes of fruit juice and not much else. It is mildly likeable, as long as you disabuse yourself of any expectation that it will be...good. To be tolerated at best, not relished.

Photo of katan
3.56/5  rDev +30.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12oz into a pint

A - Pours a light brown color. Very clear, lightly bubbly. Head formation is about none.

S - Very light nose. Just a little bit of graininess. Nothing much there.

T - Starts off lightly malty, some caramel malts. Pilsner graininess seems present. Mid-stream gets more bitter, a little bit of hops. Finishes mostly clean, perhaps a little oxidation.

M - Light mouthfeel, light carbonation. A little bit of a sugary cling left on the palette.

O/D - Easy drinking beer - albeit a little bit pedestrian. For this style, thats probably appropriate.

Photo of Jadjunk
2.25/5  rDev -17.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

#91. This is another of those beers that are found at most Kroger grocers lately at a crazy expensive retail price but a much more affordable (and appropriate) sale price of under $6 for a six pack. It was this price range that coerced me into picking up a variety. The last one wasn't too great, but again I'm leaving an open mind for this one.

Poured from a 12 oz. bottle to a pint glass at room temp.

(Appearance) Yikes. There's that alarmingly fizzy head again (Just like the lager) that dissipates alarmingly quickly. It's almost like soda water in its consistency. Starts out at a 2 finger depth but is down to a thin froth like sea foam within about a minute. The color is a slightly pinkish tone amber and crystal clear. Carbonation is busy and scattered. The head was a major disappointment and overshadows the other average-at-best qualities of this beer. Ultimate sadness. 2

(Smell) Very fishy smelling to me. There's a great deal of macro presence in this beer; sweet corn, grassy malts and a faint unpleasant, unidentifiable foul tone wafting over the entire thing, like something died or went bad. It's very bizarre; not in a good way. Besides the cheap malty flavors, which render the aroma on the subtly sweet side, the potency of this beer is on a very low setting. It's about as impressive as the appearance, which means this isn't getting off on a good start. 2

(Taste) Hardly passes for much. Beginning impression is a tidal wave of super clean sweet corn malt, carrying over the entire brew. Fact of the matter is, I can hardly pick out anything else in this beer, save for possibly a slight hint of caramel, but not enough to balance out flavor. It's not repulsive but I could only imagine enjoying this if I were in a mood to enjoy cheap sweet corn lagers (and I never am). Rebranded as one, I would be hard pressed to note a difference in taste. That sweetness is borderline cloying; it's a good deal tougher to drink than I expected. One point down for originality or lack thereof. There's not much exciting about this beer. It's fairly easy to drink but that's all it's got going for it. It would likely be a winner in a crowd of underage drinkers with no enthusiasm for variety or complexity (or good beer). Not good. 2

(Mouthfeel) Slightly tart beginning which turns sweet later on. Extra carbonation is nearly dead or indiscernible in this thin, textureless beer. While the entire beer could certainly use a kick in any department, this one would be a great place to start. The beer doesn't quite hit flat in any places, the body is quite light and the alcohol is packed away quite well. The whole thing is super clean and the finish is ever-slightly dry. There's work to be done everywhere, but this is just as likely a worthy candidate for improvement as the remaining categories. 2.5

(Drinkability) I'm not very excited about opening a second of these but I've had worse. The body is very one-dimensional but at least it has some flavor presence. There needs to be improvement everywhere as it seems. The head had pitiful staying power and consistency, the aroma was weak, the flavor bland and one-sided, the mouthfeel was dull. I get a good impression as to why this brand has suddenly "popped up" out of the blue and can sell these beers for dirt cheap prices. They're simply not that good. In a party scene these might do well and the price isn't bad, but as something worth casual drinking, I'd do my looking elsewhere. Average based on it's simplicity to drink, but I wouldn't rate it any higher considering my lack of desire to ever drink it again. 3

Verdict: Believe it or not, this is worse than the last Tap Room Brew (Lager) I tried last week, but by a hair. To summarize: it is mostly cheap corn malt, sickly sweet with very little character or complexity. Practically no bitterness! I was upset by how dull and unexciting this beer really was. I will be sure to steer clear of this forevermore. For you enthusiasts out there: Drink at your own risk! D (2.15)

Photo of aficionado224
4.35/5  rDev +59.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

This is fine beer. Maybe not great, but way better than average. It has a sweet flavor and good balance, not too bitter, but if you're someone who craves bitterness, this might not be for you. I picked up a six-pack at Kroger, not a boutique. This is one of those new mass-produced "craft" beers, an oxymoron if ever there was one. I really like it, though. I'll probably get more of it.

Photo of Mosley1212
2.73/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

I grabbed this at Kroger when I was making a sixer. Have no idea what to expect.

A--Ok. Not that great of a start. It has a nice color--I suppose. A rich amber color that I would expect for the style. It poured with one of the weakest heads I have seen in a while. Reminds me almost of a Bud head...I hope that's not a sign of what's to come.

S--Nothing. Honestly. I don't smell much of anything. I suppose if I really try I can pick up a little hint of caramel, but really it's like smelling water...could this be another Bud like beer??

T--Yes. It's like a Bud. This beer is awful. Overly sweet corn, with a taste of sickening caramel finish. I also got a hint of barley, but it was so hidden that I may be mistaken about whether it's there or not.

M--Carbonated water. Nothing more to say. There's an overly sweet aftertaste, and the feel is of the heavy carbonation, but the lack of a taste is honestly like water.

D--I suppose this drinkability is "semi-high" because of it's low alcohol content you could easily knock back a sixer or so of this and probably still be able to drive. The problem is that it's so overly sweet that I can barely finish one, much less think to drink another.

Avoid this beer guys. One of the worst ever.

Photo of Duff27
2.41/5  rDev -11.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

A- Light amber in color with a quickly receding one-inch white head. Some lacing.

S- Bready. Smells of a macro.

T- Corn, caramel malt. Slightly sweet taste at the back end.

M- Adequate enough carbonation. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

D/O- Got this one from a friend. Had to look it up. Went in with an open mind. Never again. A BMC drinker may like this one, who knows.

Photo of twiggamortis420
2.64/5  rDev -3.3%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12 oz bottle from a 12 pack procured on sale from Kroger for 9.99. No freshness date. Pours a crystal clear amber color with a stark white head. Retention is excellent but does not leave much lacing.

Nose is caramel popcorn, grainy, wet malt and some cooked vegetables. Not really very appealing.

Taste is pretty basic and seems to have a DMS problem. This is NOT craft beer, right? Tastes mass-produced. Sweet and caramely without any real hop presence to speak of. Mouthfeel is fine and carbonation adequate. Its beer, albeit not very good beer, Id take one over a BMC most of the time. Unfortunately for Moe's Taproom, it is a pretty poor example of the style, and compares poorly to its peers for an Amber Ale.

to view more.
Tap Room No. 21 Amber Ale from World Brews
65 out of 100 based on 180 ratings.