Dismiss Notice
Sneak peek! BeerAdvocate magazine #104 (September 2015) featuring Leah & Oscar from Highland Brewing in Asheville, North Carolina. Learn more ...

Panil Barriquée (Sour Version) - Panil

Not Rated.
Panil Barriquée (Sour Version)Panil Barriquée (Sour Version)

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
87
very good

188 Reviews
THE BROS
-
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 188
Hads: 382
rAvg: 3.9
pDev: 8.46%
Wants: 25
Gots: 59 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
Panil visit their website
Italy

Style | ABV
Flanders Red Ale |  8.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: Phyl21ca on 10-23-2006

This is the version imported to the US.
View: Beers (11) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 188 | Hads: 382
Photo of bowersdm
2.02/5  rDev -48.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 3

'05 vintage picked up today. this is not my first Flanders Red, but I do believe that since my first was Duchesse de Bourgogne, I'm going to be let down by many FRAs. 750mL bottle, 10 or so ounces of which was poured into a snifter. The remaining 15 ounces went down the drain after not enjoying this beer. Served at cellar temperature

A - ruby, almost red-brown color. no head, but given that it's 3 years old, I didn't expect much.

S - lactic acid, oak, a touch (less than a touch, a micro-touch? a nano-touch?) of cherries. nothing else.

T - lactic acid, musty attic, hint of cherry in the end. very dry overall and definitely not good. If FRAs are supposed to get more sour with age, then this beer must have been bottled in '05 as water, because it's weak for the style.

M - worst. mouthfeel. ever. it was like water.

D - I'm not going to entirely rule out drinking this beer again, but I'd only consider a fresh one. (927 characters)

Photo of Zonian1
2.29/5  rDev -41.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 1 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Batch #14 2011. I love sours and was looking forward to trying this one. It poured with a lively fizz. Unfortunately this one had a sour (in a bad way) taste of something gone wrong. Soy sauce maybe. I couldn't drink it. (225 characters)

Photo of doubleipa
2.43/5  rDev -37.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

'06 Vintage. I was so loking forward to drinking this beer, however I was underimpressed. I was ready for a big sour aroma. It didn't happen. Not much sour and not much oak. Virtually zero head. Really kind of a bland beer. I don't think I even finished the bottle. I have a feeling that I didn't get a representative bottle. I bought this at Green's on Buford this past spring. I'd like to try a fresh bottle as I love this style of beer. (439 characters)

Photo of shleepy
2.53/5  rDev -35.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Served from 750 bottle into snifters. Batch #14, 2011. Writing from ~3-week-old notes.

A: Dark amber, small head.

S: Roasted caramels. Meh.

T: Some sourness, but lots of roastiness, and not much else.

M: Medium body (on the lighter side of medium). Not much carbonation.

O: Not a fan... Too much roastiness. Not completely awful, but far too expensive to be on the low side of mediocre. (391 characters)

Photo of Richardberg
2.57/5  rDev -34.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

2006 vintage. Fair warning: I may have gotten a bad batch, or bad seal on the bottle.

A - hazy burnt orange / brown, admits a little light but quite opaque. Bit of sediment. Attractive enough, except...absolutely NO carbonation apparent in the pour. I've had 20% ABV stouts show more signs of life.

S - mild funk, red wine vinegar, caramel malt, brandy, sour cherries

T - watery vinegar with a touch of woody age on it. That's about it. I happen to really like sour beers; if not, this could've easily been a 1/5. Even so, there's little resemblance to a high quality Flemish Red or lambic.

M - roughly equivalent to drinking a glass of tap water with a splash of vodka in it

D - the smells are headed in the right general ballpark, and even the flavor isn't terrible per se. Also quite drinkable in a literal sense; the 8% booze is well hidden. But still a big disappointment. (882 characters)

Photo of Meg
2.75/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

It smelled like it would have a bit of sweetness. Lemon, Vinegar, Red berries
The taste was (of course) sour but lacked any real body or depth of flavor. I didn't detect any of the berry that I thought I smelled, and the taste ended up being pretty metallic.
The aftertaste lingered in an unpleasant way.
I absolutely love sours, so I drank this anyway, and if it were any cheaper I'd drink it again.
However, I think the body is too weak and watery, and the taste lacking complexity, the aftertaste of metal got me wondering about the brewing process.
It is pretty expensive, but I don't think it is worth it. The Duchesse is way better, so is La Folie. (655 characters)

Photo of Vaultdweller
2.79/5  rDev -28.5%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Bottle says brewed in 2006.

A - Opaque dark reddish brown with light creamy head dissolving in the center.

S - Funky horse blanket, phenol alcohols, tart fruits, and candi sugar.

T - Light malt sweetness with slight tart up front gives way to moderate sourness, reminiscent of a wine with out a lot of fruitiness or acidity.

M - Medium carbonation with smooth creamy mouthfeel, leaves mouth and taste buds somewhat dried out from the sourness.

D - Good presentation of balance, if that can be said of Flanders Red. (523 characters)

Photo of LilBeerDoctor
3/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

2006 bottle sampled on 09/26/08 at Night of the Funk. Pours a clear brown with no head. Aroma of bourbon. Flavor of light tartness and lots of hard alcohol. Hmm, this one just wasn't that good and the alcohol was too strong.
Aroma: 6/10
Appearance: 3/5
Flavor: 6/10
Palate: 3/5
Overall: 14/20
(3.2/5) (300 characters)

Photo of Proteus93
3.1/5  rDev -20.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This is the 2007 vintage, Batch #9, Bottle #825, picked up at Beer Run in Charlottesville, VA

A: Rather hazy deep reddish brown. Head forms a little bit soapy, but it does retain quite nicely, and when it slips back to a collar, the appearance is a little more creamy.

S: Wet wood, a little musty, some funkiness that I wasn't quite expecting. A little malty, but I don't pick up on a whole lot of the aromas that might suggest this is going to be a sour. Nonetheless, I do find it to be a rather pleasant scent.

T: Unfortunately, as far as the style goes, I feel it suffers a little in flavour. The tartness is very mild, and the overall flavour of the beer seems rather muted. With the typical 'sour cherry' taking a back burner, the woodiness of the oak aging stands out as one of the predominant flavours, and it doesn't really seem to have much to complement. I don't really detect any off-flavours, aside from a touch of papery oxidation, it's just a little lacking.

M: Medium bodied, actually even a little weighty. Carbonation is a bit low, which doesn't help the flavour profile a great deal. The dryness associated with the style is there, but it can't carry the beer attributes alone.

D: A bit disappointed... I had hoped for a nice, complex brew - tart, crisp, dry, with the added oak notes to kick it up a notch. Price was a little high considering the product (~$17). Perhaps a newer vintage would be more to my liking, and if I see one, I'd be willing to give it another shot. Until then, though, I'm not too convinced. (1,543 characters)

Photo of Goblinmunkey7
3.11/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 3

Appearance: Deep purplish red with a small creamy off-white head. Drops to a small wispy cap with a slightly thicker collar. No lacing.

Smell: Oak. Sour cherry in abundance. A touch of raspberry and a jammy fruit quality. Slightly lactic with some citric notes. Powdery yeast as well. Some grassy and earthy elements thrown in the back. Screamingly tart on the back of the nose. Mild caramelized malt sweetness with a ton of tannic oak. Heavy barrel influence. Cherry skin and lots of cherry juice and flesh. Vinous in good measure. Deep red wine. Slightly musty. Some sharp cheese and gym sock and sweat.

Taste: Oaked sweaty gym socks. Deep tannic oak with a vaguely salty and slightly sour flavor. Some cherry skin and juice as well. Slightly citric with some lactic elements in the back. A ton of oak and something that tastes like rotten fruit. Slightly bready malt presence with some backing sweetness. Almost like vomit on the back of the swallow. A touch of red wine and some grape must. Earthy with some woody and mild floral elements. Yeast adds a dry, almost powdery, flavor to the finish.

Mouthfeel: Mediumish body with no carbonation. Slightly slick on the inital sip. Finishes clean.

Overall: So much barrel.

It's a soured version of the barrel it lived in. Could stand to dry out a little and pick up a bit more of a tart edge, but the base flavors are in there. Pick up a bottle and sit on it for a few years and it might be worth the sticker price. (1,470 characters)

Photo of dnichols
3.13/5  rDev -19.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I shared a 750 ml capped bottle with a wax cover with a couple of beer buddies during a pre-holiday home sampling event. We poured the brew into chilled tulips.

A: It poured a reddish brown body that when back lit looked more of a semi-clear ruddy red. There was hardly any head despite a somewhat aggressive pour. The lack of a head limited the lacing to an occasional spot of thin legs that quickly disappeared.

S: It had the aroma of over-ripe sour fruits (e.g., white grapes, green apples). There was a herbal earthy accent that came in and out.

T: It bit the tongue with a bitter sour taste that reminded me of a dry white wine. The taste followed the nose resulting in an abundance of ripe sour fruits with green apples dominating. There were also hints of earthy spices but they were quickly overcome by the sour dry flavors.

M: It was thin bodied with no carbonation. It started and finished dry and sour.

D: This is not my style so I found it hard to enjoy and doubt I will indulge again. It was too reminicent of dry white wine for my taste. (1,060 characters)

Photo of kingcrowing
3.15/5  rDev -19.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

750ml bottle poured intonanDuvel tulip, Batch #13, 2011, bottle 1552.

Pours a dark reddish brown with a big yellow/brown head with generous lacing. Nose is malty, a bit tart, earthy and oaky.

Taste is a bit odd, sour and a bit vinegary, but also earthy. Mouthfeel is big and very carbonated. Finish is sour and tart. Overall it's decent but not too special. (359 characters)

Photo of Treebs
3.16/5  rDev -19%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Bottled in 2005, carbon copy of the beer's picture on this site. Served in Founders snifter.

A: Pours a hazy brown with a nice off-white head. Sticks around for a little while.

S: Tart smelling with a definite must. Some grape skins and some oakiness.

T: Woody and a little pucker from the sour. Some tartness too. Some fruit skins and unripe berries are present as well. Has a slight wine taste with a little acetone/nail polish finish.

M: Dry finish, some fruity berries left on the palate and a nice prickly carbonation.

O: I can appreciate the style, but flanders red ales are definitely not my favorite. (613 characters)

Photo of techdiver
3.19/5  rDev -18.2%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a hazy chestnut with no visible carbonation and a few bubbles for a head.

Sour fruit to the nose.

Taste is fairly unexciting. Sourness is present, but after any Rodenbach this is lacking.

Mouthfeel is thin and could benefit from more carbonation.

Drinkable, but this will be my last Barriquee unless I can find the other version. (348 characters)

Photo of Ek0nomik
3.25/5  rDev -16.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Poured In: Wine Glass
Purchased At: Steve's (Madison, WI)

Batch 11, 2009.
Bottle #2323

Appearance: The pour was a red bistre color just reaching a fingers worth of head, though it disappears within seconds. It's very murky; I was expecting it to be a bit more clear than this. The bottle was well rested too, so it wasn't at the fault of yeast. Nonetheless, I'm fine with a beer not being clear. No lace on the side of the glass.

Smell: I've sampled this beer before at a Belgian style tasting, and I have to say it was quite different then. This bottle has a whole lot of funk going on. It's like I'm sticking my nose into a bacteria cesspool. I was hoping it would grow on me, but unfortunately the funk was a bit too much. It wasn't a barnyard funk like a Brettanomyces would contribute, it was hard to point it to something specific. There was a nice subtle tart cherry and plum aroma, but it was pretty well overpowered.

Taste: The tasting started out with a nice sour cherry, vanilla and oak flavor resting on top of some brown malt, but, again, it quickly turned into an overwhelming amount of funky and musty flavors. I still can't be certain that this bottle was completely okay, as I don't remember it tasting like this at the Belgian tasting I was at.

Mouthfeel: The mouthfeel of the beer was spot on. Lightly carbonated and a thin body.

Drinkability: I split the bottle with two other people, though they weren't enormous fans of this beer either. I don't know that I'd pick it up again, though I would love to try this again if someone else was cracking it open. (1,581 characters)

Photo of JDV
3.26/5  rDev -16.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

bottle shared by guezelover
'07 bottle Pours a ruby color with mild offwhite head. Smell is oaky and sour cherry. Taste is mainly the same two flavors as in the nose with no real offensive funkiness at all. Still tart and some vinegar qualities, but one of the more drinkable sours that I've had, for sure. Nice as far as sours go, overall I thought, but still not my cup of tea. (379 characters)

Photo of csmiley
3.26/5  rDev -16.4%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A - Pours kind of sienna with a medium brown around the edges. Head is absent. Even with an aggressive pour. Because of this, no lacing and no retention. Really? The color is nice but that is the only quality here to speak of.

S - Starts out with a sweet fruitiness. Mostly cherry with a malty undertone. Oak quickly comes through as well. Alcohol is present but stays mostly behind the other aromas. Picking up some raspberry but it is very faint.

T - Oak really stands out in the flavor. Tart cherry mixes in well with that. Red apple and grape come through midway. Again, alcohol is there but it doesn't take away from the taste in any way. There is a little bit of mustiness at this point as well. Grape hangs on throughout and gives it an overall feel of wine. Finishes with more oak and a distant hint of candied sugar.

M - Lighter bodied with practically no carbonation. The grape presence that gives a wine like feel helps out the lack of carbonation but only minimally. Finish is tart and first and ends up a little sweet.

D - Drinkability is decent. That is about all that can be said for this one. The flavors seem to work well together even without any suds. The combination of oak, fruit, and earthiness is done pretty well. A 750 ml bottle is no problem in one setting but I'd like to see some changes made before trying my hand at this one again. (1,366 characters)

Photo of flannelman808
3.26/5  rDev -16.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: this pours a dark brown with a dusty purple red hue. Topped with a small bubbled just off white head which has fairly poor retention (only hangs out around the rim) and fairly poor lacing.

S: Balsamic vinegar on the nose and oddly ... peanut shells? A very funky lactic aroma.

T: Once again salad dressing comes to mind. Arugula dressed in balsamic, perhaps its even a blackberry vinaigrette. I'm finding not enough depth of flavor to call this salad harmonious.

M: Acid

O: Disappointing sour ... one dimensional funk, not enough soul. (543 characters)

Photo of HalfFull
3.27/5  rDev -16.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a ruby red with a firm haze and half an inch of whitish cap. Offers decent retention and some artsy lace.

Aroma is well muddled with some hops, a bit of wood and a touch of caramel and a light funk. Lightly acetic in nature but quite subtle in delivery in that regard. Good but lacking as for brightness and clarity on the aroma. Warms to offer a rather solid depth nonetheless.

Flavor too is subdued and muddled; earthy and lightly fruity sweet. Much more along the lines of an Oud Bruin vs. a Flanders Red. Offers just a hint of tartness..

Offers a full feel and a pleasing level of carbonation.

Note: Batch #14, 2011 (629 characters)

Photo of Thorpe429
3.28/5  rDev -15.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Batch #12. 2010. Bottle #1057. Served in a wine glass. Pours a fairly-clear reddish-mahogany color with a good white head that fades relatively quickly before falling to a thin cap. The nose brings a nice acidity and underlying red fruits plus a bit of oak and lactic acidity. Flavor pushes those components a bit further, but also has an underlying tannic graininess that detracts a bit, especially from the mouthfeel. Not a bad beer by any means, though I preferred the nose to the flavor/palate. (498 characters)

Photo of mwilbur
3.32/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Poured from 750 mL bottle into tulip. Bottle is from batch #11 in 2009, bottle #1412.
A: Pours a nice murky reddish-brown with 1/2 tan head that quickly dissipates.
S: Sweet berries, sour, oak, spicy hot cinnamon, and cherry notes. Pleasant aroma.
T: Unfortunately, does not follow aroma. The wood note is off (almost tastes rotten). Minerally. The sour is nearly completely gone here. Overly sweet fruit notes.
M: Soft feel with light body. Missing the sour bite.
D: Not a good example of the style. Would not recommend it. On the plus side, the 8% ABV is nearly imperceptible. (578 characters)

Photo of Jessee
3.35/5  rDev -14.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Very light head, that goes fast. Nice color (dark red, with light red on the edges).
Smell was nothing special at all, but decent.
Taste was good, but flat didn't follow through for the initial taste on the tongue.
Mouthfeel was very thin and flat (biggest downfall)
Easy to drink, but partially for the lack of carbonation and flatness of mouthfeel.

Batch #11 (2009)

Drinkin from a Satan glass (396 characters)

Photo of alenonbeeradv
3.37/5  rDev -13.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

a - murky brown with a red taint. most flander reds i have are much more colorful, but this one is a lot more cloudy and earthy. very nice. not much to no head but a slight collar. none of that mildewy moldy appearance that some other bottle conditioned sours have even though it was bottled in 09.

s - nice and tart. sweet cherry, oak, that distinct red flanders smell of like a musky vintage leather suitcase from the 50s that had rubbing alcohol spilled on it. mmm so lovely.

t - again, the oak. very tart. much more on the sour side than sweet. unfortunately this one fades quick. no aftertaste. pretty thin after the initial WHAP!

m - pretty nice. settles very nicely and is kinda similar to a lower carbonated feel of a fruit cider or lambic. again, tarttt.

o - damn man, for 20 bucks a bottle i dont think i could do it again. certainly nothing to write home about although i would try it on tap if i ever had the chance. theres always next time.. (958 characters)

Photo of prototypic
3.4/5  rDev -12.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Vintage 2006

Barriquee pours a light reddish brown color. Looks almost copper with backlighting. A soft, off-white head tops it off. It's very modest and doesn't even rise to a finger in depth. Retention was on the short side. Lacing was a little sticky and moderate.

The nose is a little weak and uninspiring. It would benefit from more strength. Oak is fairly prominent. Its presence has a positive overall impact. I'm not sure if it's the effect of the cognac barrel aging or what, but it has a medicinal scent that's not very pleasant. There's a little cherry and other berry scents. It smells a little tart, but not much. Alcohol is a little noticeable. Meh. It's above average, but not by much.

The flavor is just above average. It kicks off with a very medicinal cherry-like flavor. Not a fan. I'm really curious if it's cognac that's having that effect. It has a slight sour cherry twist, but it's not aggressively tart by any stretch. Not even close to mouth puckering. Oak is noted and adds a bit of a nice flavor. Alcohol is there, but isn't warm or hot at all. Finishes a little sweet and dry. Honestly, I'm disappointed. There seems to be lack of overall flavor. Perhaps I aged it a little too long. Who knows?

Barriquee has a light/medium body. Carbonation is very light. Too light. I guess it's somewhat smooth, but more bubbles would be a plus. Drinkability is very average. I'm not excited about the flavor. I guess it goes down somewhat easy, I'm not really enjoying it. Ready to move on.

Panil Barriquee is a rather big disappointment for me. I was excited about this one, and held on to the bottle for quite a while. Maybe it diminished in that period of time. The biggest problems are the lack of flavor, the medicinal taste, and the lack of bubbles. Fix those things and it'd be all the better for it. Can't recommend it at this point. I don't recall exactly what I paid for this, but whatever it was...it was too much. (1,946 characters)

Photo of Huhzubendah
3.4/5  rDev -12.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Batch 11 - bottle 1030. Shared by WorldWideStout at a recent tasting.

A: Light brown, little head, very little lacing.

S: Unusual scents make me a bit cautious and unsure. The funky bandaid monster has visited this beer.

T: Spicy flavors and weirdness. I'm also getting wood (in the taste), funky sourness, basement mustiness, and bandaids.

M: Ok feel, but again, this tasted out of kilter.

D: I'm always thankful to try a beer I haven't had, but now I know I don't need to purchase this one or seek it out. (512 characters)

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Panil Barriquée (Sour Version) from Panil
87 out of 100 based on 188 ratings.