1. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $14.99 (US/print only). Offer ends April 30. Subscribe now! (Because great beer deserves great stories AND readers.)

Girardin Gueuze 1882 (White Label) - Brouwerij Girardin

Not Rated.
Girardin Gueuze 1882 (White Label)Girardin Gueuze 1882 (White Label)

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
85
very good

71 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 71
Reviews: 41
rAvg: 3.76
pDev: 12.23%
Wants: 20
Gots: 6 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Brouwerij Girardin
Belgium

Style | ABV
Gueuze |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: TheLongBeachBum on 02-24-2003

Filtered version.
View: Beers (13) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
to view more.
Ratings: 71 | Reviews: 41
Reviews by the Alström Bros:

  None found.

More User Reviews:
Photo of DaPeculierDane
4.1/5  rDev +9%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Giradin's operation is everything one could hope for in a lambic brewery - a small family farm that grows and mills their own wheat, ages their own hops, and grows barley, which up until not too long ago was malted and went into their own brews. The lambic is made in a traditional turbid mash and housed in a koelschip before being poured into oak and chestnut barrels that are sometimes up to 100 years old. The lambic is aged and blended at 12, 18, and 24 months old and allowed to referment in the bottle. The result is a highly traditional lambic with a somewhat pronounced bitterness. Then, for the White Label, at least some of that tradition is cast out for this is a filtered Geuze.

Pours into a basic bar tumble a crystal clear gold that leans toward yellow with a white, airy head. Retention is decent but it eventually settles to a pretty lacing. Aroma is quite bready with plenty of green apple, touches of gym socks, and a lemony finish. Quite crisp and refreshing with moderate tartness and sourness that doesn't nearly reach that of the Black Label. Flavor follows the aroma closely with small amounts of barnyard, apple cider vinegar, and a bit of grapefruit at the end. Quite pleasant and drinkable, though I prefer the intensity of the Black Label.

Photo of ricke
3.97/5  rDev +5.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

A: Brassy color, clear liquid. A 3 cm white head settles quickly and leaves minimal lacings.

S: A bigger smell than I had anticipated. Lots of somewhat puckering notes of vinegar, grass, hay and tart apples. Some yeast and funky notes of mold. This is better than expected.

T: A nice mix of semi-sweet and sour flavors. Tart apples, lemon, grass and hay. Light maltiness, wheat crackers. Some vinegar, but not as much as in the smell. A gentle funkiness and notes of barrel in the middle. A dry finish with a decent sourness and grassy bitterness to it with notes of wet hay.

M: Sparkling mouthfeel with a rather light body.

D: Not a bad gueuze. Clean and refreshing, easy to drink. Not as demanding or assertive as some gueuzes, not as sweet as others.

Photo of rastaman
4.38/5  rDev +16.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

Well, after having this, i thought it really couldn't get much better in terms of gueuze lambic. That was until i had the Black Label unfiltered version. This is still world class lambic. All the lambic stinkyness is there, and the acidity, but it falls short in terms of complexity in comparison to the black label. Still bloody good, and i'd take this ale any day of the week. Juicy, earthy, grassy, simply wonderful!!!!

Photo of Sammy
3.81/5  rDev +1.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4

A fine geuze, long lasting head, easy mouthfeel. Went well with dinner. Light colour. Barnyard aroma. Apple juice, grassiness, eno salt carbonation. Some sour bitterness in finish, but overall balanced with the fruit sugar in a drying aftertaste. Thanks Madsberg, the last of a fine trade.

Photo of CanuckRover
3.8/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Pours a nice gold. Thin fizzy head. Slight haze.

Lemon is the stand out aroma. Faint barnyard funk.

Again lemon in the taste, nice zest flavours. Funk and barnyard flavours are pretty subdued in this example. Cider like tartness, doesn't really come close to sour.

Nice lively carbonation.

This is a very approachable gueuze that I wouldn't be afraid to give to a lambic virgin.

Photo of SpeedwayJim
3.36/5  rDev -10.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

2014 vintage. First time I've seen this in the states. 375ml corked and caged bottle into 3F stemware. Shared with schen9303.

Pours a foamy 2 finger white head with low retention. Beer is a clear copper. Lacing is sparse and stringy with little cling. Average.

Nose is anise, green raisin, brown sugar and a mellow, light cheesiness. Sweet and more fruity than your average gueuze. Decent.

Opens raisin, tart and sweet soy sauce. Notes of grass, oak, foam, wheat and a citrus and lemon tartness. End is dank tart funk juxtaposed against a bright citrus tart and dry finish. Clean aftertaste. This one's a bit too sweet for my taste.

Light bodied with moderate to ample carbonation. Prickly and crisp in the mouth and goes down drown and lightly puckering. Accented finish with a clean aftertaste. Pretty drinkable.

After having waited for this for a while, I'm a bit disappointed in the result. This beer is too sweet and the funky, oaky, woody tartness is almost completely missing. I'd revisit an older vintage just to make sure there's nothing here but otherwise, the black label is strictly better.

Photo of tempest
4.15/5  rDev +10.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

Had a bottle at the Troll Cellar in Ghent. This is very different from the Black label and well worth dirnking side by side. But the black is a more typical ripping gueze. This is totally different and a big change of pace with low tartness and more bready, cheesey flavors instead of sour fruit. Definitely worth a try.

Photo of Filosoof
3.63/5  rDev -3.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

It is only because I like sour beers, that this beer is still getting a B.

L: almost amber; nice top for a geuze.
S: although, is this a geuze? I miss the things that make geuzes attractive. Almost no bretts or oak. Prunes and white raisins.
T: boring sour, finish too hoppy and tart; roadblock stuff.
M: very weak.
O: pity one; weakest geuze I know.

Photo of GRG1313
4.3/5  rDev +14.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Pours clear amber with a short white head. Clearly this "white label" filtered version is a much clearer and brighter appearing beer.

Nose is all gueuze - funk, grass, green spices, lot of complexies. Mouthfeel is big, bright, tart and full - great balance. Tart but not overly so.

Flavor profile is complex and inviting. Lots of funk, mushroom, green spice, grass, hints of white pepper and celery with an underlying "sweet tone" that doesn't quite approach fruit for me, although as the beer warms there are hints of unripe apricots. All around nice flavor profile that balances all aspects of this beer. I may actually prefer the more "consumer friendly" version of this beer over the black label, unfiltered version.

Finish is bright green spice, sour lemon/lemonade and undertones of funky honey. Nice beer over all and a great flavor profile for food.

Photo of emerge077
3.47/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Cork dated 2011, served side by side with Black Label 1882.

Right off the bat, the color is a deeper copper-tinged crystalline amber orange than the paler Black Label. There are also larger bubbles rising persistently from the base of the glass. Head retention is not as good, after 5 minutes the head has completely vanished with no lacing. There was some residue in the bottom of the bottle, oddly enough for a filtered product.

Smells oaky with some citrus and cidery notes, not as funky as its unfiltered counterpart. A dash of malt sweetness and slight oxidation creeping in.

Tastes less complex with slight oxidation, though still quite oaky and cidery sour. Finish is very dry with a lingering moderate tartness on the back of the palate and some moderate tannic bitterness. Refreshing. Overall it's not bad, but its one-dimensional nature is a slight letdown. Not missing much, Black Label is certainly a cut above.

Thanks Eric for the opportunity to try this!

Photo of Phyl21ca
4.53/5  rDev +20.5%
look: 5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

Bottle: Poured a clear orangey/yellow color lambic with a huge pure white foamy head with perfect retention. Aroma of sourness, oak, some funkyness and green apples. Taste has some sweetness to balance the sourness and the oak characteristic. Mix between green apples, light acidity and the funkyness is pretty close to perfection. The fact that this version is supposed to be inferior to the unfiltered version make me crave (the black label) even more.

Photo of Squelch
3.37/5  rDev -10.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Appearance: Hazy. brown. No head. no bubbles. Looks very unappetizing

Smell: smells of vinegar. Some cider notes in here.

Taste: sour dominates. Winey, Slight malt in there.

Mouthfeel: Dry, sour, puckering.

Overall: Not my style but on the better end of it.

Photo of Rastacouere
4.44/5  rDev +18.1%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 5 | overall: 5

Straw yellow, extremely clear, nice pure white cover of sticky foam. and frankly.... hypocrite appearance since the beer is terrific! Aroma reminds me of blue cheese. It’s horsey and barnyardy like any gueuze that respects itself. A good dose of hay and old books alike mustiness claims its seriousness. The addition of fruity undertones (which I couldn’t name besides the cidery apples), old socks and leather makes it a contender against the big boys. Admirable clean dryness. Just enough acidity. Incredibly soft malt base, rediculously soft carbonation. As lovely as a flower that smells the wet horse can be. Give me some of that black label, will you? Thanks Martin.

Photo of liamt07
3.93/5  rDev +4.5%
look: 4.25 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 4 | feel: 4.25 | overall: 3.75

Bottle shared by Pino, 750ml into a tulip. 2012 vintage.

Hazy reddish brown, voluminous white head. Great lace and light retention. Nose of old cheese, woody, earthy, malty vinegar and white wine. Taste of tart apple juice, lemons, dark bread, malty and although still cheesy, is less so than the nose. Denser and maltier than I had anticipated, tartness is medium. Cheesier than I would've liked, but still interesting to try.

Photo of Luk13
3.49/5  rDev -7.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.5

Bottle 375ml. Clear golden pour with decent white head. Aroma is (too) light barnyard and leather, hay but mostly green apples. Light tartness and wood, sweet apples and leaf. Nice carbonation. Lacks authenticity.but still enjoyable. A shadow of the Black label.

Photo of Thorpe429
3.5/5  rDev -6.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

From the bottle at Brasserie Cambrinus during our trip to Belgium last week. Reviewed from notes.

Served in a Girardin tumbler.

Pours a very clear golden color with a thin white head that fizzled out pretty quickly.

The nose brought a very mild amount of funk and faint acidity. Light lemon peel as well. The taste was about the same. Nice and refreshing, but not terribly complex.

Light body with crisp carbonation and mild acidity. Decent enough, but nowhere near what the black label is.

Photo of grub
3.8/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

biegaman brought this back from his trip to belgium and was kind enough to share this rare treat. thanks a bunch jan!

37.5cl bottle, corked and caged.

pours coppery orange colour with a nice fluffy cream coloured head. the head drops fairly fast but leaves some chunky lace behind.

aroma is great. nice earthy funk. leather. tobacco leaves. sour cherries. bit of cracker and bready malt. grain. bit of vanilla. hint of bakers chocolate.

taste is nice. sour cherry. nice earthy funk. bit of grain. hint of grapefruit. low bitterness level. i expected more based on the aroma, but the taste just fell a little flat.

mouthfeel is good. cling feeling that coast your mouth and tongue. medium-high carbonation level. very dry finish. fairly light bodied.

drinkability is good. the aroma is great, and the simple taste just didn't quite live up to it.

Photo of DefenCorps
3.68/5  rDev -2.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

12.7oz bottle poured into my Duvel Green tulip. IMO, the best bottles of the 1882 Black Label are the best gueuzes on the planet bar none, so I'm curious to see what the filtered version is like.

Clear light amber with a dense, off-white head with excellent retention, this is a great looking gueuze. The nose is interesting. Definitely not as sharp as the Black label, but not as sweet as some of the other sweetened gueuzes (from Timmermans, Chapeau or Lindemans). A grassy funk and a mild tartness are present, but there's also some sweetness, some juicy, fruity character. Rather cheesy, there's some mild mustiness, as well as a mild rancidity. Decent.

The palate opens quite sharp, quite unlike anything I was expecting given the nose. Super sharp, very sweet lime-like, almost artificially so with some grass. In this regard, it's unique - I've had grapefruit or lemon forward gueuzes, but this sweet lime flavor is the first that I remember. A little sour cider is present as well. Again, there's quite a strong cheesiness, but the fact that this is filtered takes away from the complexity, making this aspect stand rather alone without really lingering. Light in body, this finish crisp, along with a little aspirin, a little floral character, particularly, some rose. Solid stuff.

Photo of scottfrie
2.87/5  rDev -23.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.75

375ml bottle into Cantillon gueuze tumbler. Cork says REF BX 2013. Who knows.

A: Pours a clear citrus amber with a finger of fuzzy off-white head that faded into a thick soft looking film. Streaks of lace were left down the glass.
S: Fruits and funk, but not that typical earthy barnyard funk. This smells very different than the black label; this funk is more fecal and fruity, like fermented fruit mixed with rotten fruit. I love me some funk, but to be honest this doesn’t smell great. Smells like vomit frankly.
T: More fermented fruits, hints of stomach acid, sweet candied sugar or caramel, musty oxidization, dry oak, earth and earthy spice, pepper faded hops and apple juice. Sour candy finish is pretty tame, and the sweet fruity aftertaste is reminiscent of prunes, plumes, figs, and honey.
M: Airy, fluffy carbonation, medium body, slick and frothy mouthfeel.
O: Definitely not my favorite, and a disappointment compared to black label. Drinkable, but not pleasant.

Photo of TheLongBeachBum
4/5  rDev +6.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Thankfully, Girardin still brews its own lambics, which are some of the most traditional and highly revered in the hall of lambic fame. The label on the Bottle of their Gueuze offerings will actually state "Girardin Gueuze 1882". It should be noted that there are 2 versions of this Gueuze. The first has a White background label, which means it is filtered (flemish - gefiltered), and this is the commercial version. The second is the Black background label, which means unfiltered (flemish - ongefiltered), this is the real traditional version and the one that should be sought out.

The filtered ‘White-Label’ lacks the refinement and traditional pedigree of its ‘Black-Label’ brother. On paper though, the White-Label is only the filtered version of the Black-Label Girardin Gueuze.

However, in practice, it may not be that simple. Those in the know will tell you two things when discussing this beer. Why is the Filtered version slightly lighter in color than its unfiltered counterpart? And why do Girardin, a traditional lambic brewery, make a Pils? This Pils is very rare, and why is it almost never seen on sale on draft anywhere?? I agree, for all of my travels in Belgium over 8 years, I have only ever seen the Girardin Ulricher Extra Pils on sale in just one outlet (the Oud Pruim in Beersel). The Gueuze skeptics will tell you that the Pils is only made to be blended with the filtered Gueuze, a common practice amongst the more commercial producers of industrial Gueuzes. Who knows for sure, but the pointers are there.

The White-Label, is sharper in taste than the Black-Label. The sharp, pointy grapefruit tastes are stronger, the lemony citrus flavors are diminished and much harder to find. Sour but not in any offensive manner – which is always a bad sign.

A “watered down” version of the Black-Label, in whatever sense, but that said, this Gueuze is quite an accomplished offering and still makes the Gueuze from Timmermans and Belle-Vue look like a sickly sweet baby-food Apple-Juice.

White-Label is a unique Gueuze in the lambic world, a commercial Gueuze from a traditional producer. If you ever get chance to try the White-Label I would do so. But even better, if you can drink it alongside the Black-Label offering - this is *highly* recommended. For you will surely learn a hell of a lot more about traditional Gueuze by doing this, than reading all the Gueuze Beer Reviews on this Site. After all, experience is everything when drinking lambics.

Photo of Viggo
3.88/5  rDev +3.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Again big thanks to biegaman for providing this bottle fresh from Belgium.

Pours a clear orange, brown highlights, thin white head, tons of lacing, settles to a nice layer. Smell is sour and funky, socks/horseblanket, wheat, some fruits, bit of grass, nice. Taste is sour, sugary touch, fruits, grass, some lemon, bread, nice sweet funky finish. Mouthfeel is medium to light bodied with medium carbonation, very smooth. I really dig these Girardins, not as good as the Black Label but still pretty tasty. Thanks again Jan!

Photo of cypressbob
4.35/5  rDev +15.7%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

Bottled, served in a delirium tremens tulip

Pours with a yellowy, golden body, clear with a fizzy white head, pretty good retention

Smell, nose is instantly full of tart acidic, some barnyard funk, old blankests and a bit of must, some citrus on the nose too

Taste, crisp and dry, grapefruit bitter citrus. Fairly dry on the finish, some crisp carbonation

I didnt try the black, when i went back to bierkoning i forgot to get a bottle which i regret because i'm sure its even better than this filtered white label which is fantastic

Photo of HopHead84
3.41/5  rDev -9.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

6/23/2012

Thanks for sharing! Snifter. Tasted after a really nice bottle of Black Label.

Dark orange and transparent with a big creamy white head that rises above the liquid about two inches. Scattered lacing. The aroma is of lemon, barnyard, and a light mustiness. It's really toned down from the Black Label. There's a little oak. The flavor possesses a simple lactic sourness with a mellow tartness. Lightly oaky and citric with a little leather and barnyard, but the filtering seems to have stripped this beer of positive attributes and turned it into Gueuze light. The beer is lower medium body with high carbonation. An okay beer in its own right, but pales in comparison to the Black Label.

Photo of muttyd
3.57/5  rDev -5.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

A - Golden, amber body with little to head.

S - Horse blanket, citrus, grass/hay barnyard, and some vinegar.

T - Dusty horse blanket, sour green apples, citrus, grainy malts, and slight oak.

M - Body was disappointing, but what I expected for a filtered gueuze.

D - Tried this one in a line up of other sours, and I wasn't too upset when my glass was finished and we moved on to the next. Still a very good beer.

Photo of cpetrone84
3.38/5  rDev -10.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Big thanks to Kevin for sharing this one!

A-pours a darker glowing orange color, mostly clear with just a touch of haze, little white head to it.

S-the nose is sweet, apple cidar with a carmelized malt sweetness, light notes of acetone with some plums and cherries in the back.

T-tons of malt in this, caramel and sugar, dark fruits of plums and cherries, this is quite sweet with more cider notes in it and a hint of sourness towards the back.

M-very syrupy medium body that thins out towards the back and lacks a strong carbonation presence I would have liked to see.

D-very sweet with some issues, one dimensional and a little cidar like. had next to some tasty gueuze and was the least complex of the group and just was too sweet.

to view more.
Girardin Gueuze 1882 (White Label) from Brouwerij Girardin
85 out of 100 based on 71 ratings.