Dismiss Notice
Get 12 monthly issues of BeerAdvocate magazine and save $5 when you select "auto-renew."

Subscribe now →
Dismiss Notice
Join our email list →

And we'll send you the latest updates and offers from BeerAdvocate, because knowing is half the battle.

Dark Lord Imperial Stout - 3 Floyds Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Dark Lord Imperial StoutDark Lord Imperial Stout

Educational use only; do not reuse.

1,230 Reviews
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 1,230
Hads: 4,024
Avg: 4.28
pDev: 26.17%
Wants: 3,136
Gots: 1,928 | FT: 158
Brewed by:
3 Floyds Brewing Co.
Indiana, United States | website

Style | ABV
Russian Imperial Stout | 15.00% ABV

Availability: Spring

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: cretemixer on 12-13-2002

A demonic Russian-Style Imperial Stout brewed with coffee, Mexican vanilla, and Indian sugar, this beer defies description. Available one day a year, in April at the brewery: Dark Lord Day.

Vintage guide:
Red wax = 2004
Orange wax = 2005
Gold wax = 2006
Silver wax = 2007
Black wax = 2008
White wax = 2009
Green wax = 2010 - 15% ABV
Yellow wax = 2011 - 15% ABV
Red wax = 2012 - 15% ABV
Orange wax = 2013 - New Label 15% ABV
Blue wax = 2014 - 15% ABV
Maroon wax = 2015 15% ABV
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Reviews: 1,230 | Hads: 4,024
Photo of aracauna
3.48/5  rDev -18.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

This is thick. It pours thick, it feels thick and it sticks to your ribs like a stack of pancakes. Pitch black with a thin brown head. The aroma is chocolate, a little vanilla and soy sauce. The flavor continues with the chocolate and soy sauce with a little bit of molasses. I’m really surprised to not notice much if any roast malt in the mix. I’ll have to try to make it up north when it’s on tap and try this again, but this definitely did not live up to expectations.

 475 characters

Photo of jeffthecheff
3.48/5  rDev -18.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

08 and 09 bottle shared at "Black Friday" stout tasting. I'm reviewing both bottles but using the 08 bottle for quantitative scores. I would usually use the fresh bottle for this purpose, but there was just something wrong with the 09 bottle.

Appearance is black, thick, and with no light coming through. The head on both was brown but it turned to just a lace.

The aroma on the 2009 bottle was pretty bad. There was some serious metallic off flavors here. It smelled like a sweaty handfull of change. The dark aromas come through as boozy and soy sauce like. 2

The aroma of the 2008 bottle was much better, and was actually worth smelling. Not terribly impressive, but still good. Almost fudgy chocolate in the nose. Not terribly complex, just thick, sweet, and strong, as you would expect from an imperial stout of this size. 3.5

2009- The flavor of this beer was a bit off. Sweet, with some soy sauce notes and a hot finish. Sweet and syrupy are characters that are acceptable in an imperial stout but here it just doesn't work. It has a strange bitterness with that metallic off flavor coming back. 2

2008- This bottle was a bit more integrated in its flavors. The hotness died down quite a bit, but there was still some boozy character. Dark fruit flavors, reminding me of chocolate covered cranberry. This has the typical stout flavors but they seem to be dominated by the fermentation character of a beer this big. Slight soy sauce flavor, but not nearly as much as the 2009 bottle. 3.5

The mouthfeel for both was very thick, as you would expect. It reminded me of tar in both the heavy stout flavors and the thick feel. It impressed me but it didn't have the life changing thickness that I read in some of the reviews. Carbonation is high enough to lift a beer of this size and make it drinkable.

My overall impression was that a year of age didn't make these two beers very different, but it was the batch to batch variation. 2008 was a nice, big stout but not the greatest. 2009 was just simply bad, with soy sauce and metallic off flavors dominating.

 2,070 characters

Photo of zhanson88
3.47/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.25

2010 vintage.

Appearance: Pours out a very dark brown that appears pitch black in the glass. A viscous pour, but not astoundingly so. About 1/4" of dark tan head forms, which quickly reduces to a ring around the edges of the glass.

Smell: Toasted caramel malts and brown sugar, soy sauce, a bit of booze, perhaps a bit of weak coffee as well as a hint of oxidation. I had heard this vintage was pretty boozy back in the day, and it seems letting it sit for a few years helped out with that, at least from what I'm getting on the nose.

Taste: Brown sugar sweetness, toasted caramel, soy sauce, weak milk chocolate, maybe a hint of bitterness from the malts on the finish. No boozy notes, but one dimensional with the sweetness. Finish is heavy with residual sugars.

Mouthfeel/Overall: Heavy mouthfeel with light carbonation, mouthfeel is a bit slick. Finish is messy with a lot of sweetness, which retracts for me. Overall, not a bad RIS. Really just too sweet in my opinion to be rated any higher. I liked it less as I drank it and it took a while to polish off.

 1,066 characters

Photo of Mora2000
3.46/5  rDev -19.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3.5

Thanks to Exiled for sharing this bottle.

2009 vintage. Pours black with no head. Very dark brown highlights at the edges. the aroma is very nice, with some oak and vanilla. You also get some milk chocolate and the slightest hint of soy sauce. The flavor is not as good as the aroma, but still not bad. The chocolate and vanilla are still there along with some roasted malt. You also get some soy sauce which is not a flavor I really enjoy. The mouthfeel is very thick and there is very low carbonation. The beer leaves an oily residue on the glass similar to a Samuel Adams Triple Bock.

 588 characters

Photo of ms11781
3.46/5  rDev -19.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3.5

2012 vintage. 22oz bottle poured into a snifter.

The thickness (viscosity might be a better word) of the liquid is quite striking right out of the bottle. The actual pour looks to be a translucent brown color but once it settles in the glass it's dark as night. Surprisingly a half finger of airy, dark brown foam develops and sits on top of the beer. There is actually a good deal of lacing left on the glass with each sip.

The nose is extremely sweet and full of dark fruit right from the beginning. There are all sorts of fruits coming through, ripe cherries, plums and raisins are here. Molasses and brown sugar come through as well. The aromas are full and rich and really assert themselves but they can be a bit jumbled at times.

The taste follows closely with the nose. The fruits really come through again. In addition to the dark fruits (cherries, plums, raisins, etc, once again) there is a bit of some light fruit, maybe apple or pear. It's a bit off and doesn't mesh with the rest of the flavors but it isn't all that strong and seems to give way the other characteristics more often than not. The same molasses and brown sugar that were in the nose are here as well. There is no hint of the coffee that the beer was brewed with, perhaps the sweetness overpowers it. It also seems like it wants to be big and roasty but the sweetness never quite allows it turn the corner.

This beer is huge. Big, thick and viscous. Possibly the biggest beer feel-wise I've had. Each sip seems to coat the throat all the way down. There really isn't much more to say about it. Big pretty much sums it up.

This is certainly one big beer. There is a ton going on and they flavors and aromas don't necessarily mesh together. None of it is bad, most quite good actually. It just seems like it might need some more time to come together before hitting its peak. This is definitely a beer that I will revisit down the road but for now it misses the mark just a bit.

 1,960 characters

Photo of Jacobpaul81
3.46/5  rDev -19.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

2010 vintage. Whole bottle poured into a canning jar.

Dark, as expected from an Imperial Stout. Syrupy but not thick. Actually, thin for the style. Nice lacing around top of glass. Dark head maybe 1/4 inch thick.

Sweet malt smell, heavy on the soy with some vanilla.

Beer is very complex. A lot of layering. One of the more obvious layer combinations I've tried. Opens up with dark tart cherries and heavy roasted malts. Grape emerges as you experience a port wine flavor profile with some plum and blackberry flavors. This is followed by a bitter chocolate/coffee flavor as the port flavor lingers. You can really pull the layers apart in this one.

Went down smooth and creamy. Very strong alcohol burn at the end. Did not care for the alcohol at all. If it had finished smooth, this would have been a much improved beer.


I found the 2010 average for an Imperial Stout. It's got some great flavor profiles and the layering is beautifully done. The soy smell bothered me personally. Not a smell I particularly care for from a beer and the alcohol burn was just way too much for me. I'd drink it again, but I wouldn't stand in line to buy bottles.

 1,207 characters

Photo of tut2528
3.46/5  rDev -19.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Big shout out to Woodjjacct for bringing this beast to the tasting!

A: pour is a deep black, very minimal head formation (but it does slightly occur).. Zero lacing. Swirling creating a thin tan-colored film.

S: alcohol soaked raisins and huge molasses dominate the aromas. I also pick up on strong tobacco, dark fruits (plums, raisins, figs), some pepper, a slight sour black berry, ABV hardly detectable. Its massively complex but not all that well balance.

T: wow, this is sooo damn sweet! So massively complex it’s hard to describe each aspect. Huge dark fruits dominate the palate (big raisins, plums, black berry, tart cherry), big sugar notes, brown sugar, strong creamy finish, again quite off balance.

M: taste buds freak out with every sip… leaves a sugary film along the front of the teeth that is quite enjoyable but at the same time overly cloying. Full-bodied, can definitely chew this one. ABV is completely hidden by the massive sweetness.

O: wasn’t so sure on what to expect of this brew. And I was shocked by how sweet this brew was. Drinks more like a Brandy than a beer. The huge amount of dark fruits and sugar make this one hard to comprehend. It rivals Southern Tier Crème Brulee as far as sweetness IMO.

 1,238 characters

Photo of kingcrowing
3.45/5  rDev -19.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Sampled at the 2010 Stout tasting in a Orval Chalice.

2009 Limited Release 22oz bomber.

Pours an oily black mahogany with zero head at all - really bland looking. Nose is full of raisins. It really smells like a quad, full of sweetness and fennel, odd for an RIS.

Taste is very sharp & hot with almost a chili hottness. It's super boozy and pretty meh. Honestly it's interesting and I'm glad I tried it but overall it's way too hard to drink for all the hype it gets. I'd say skip this and get a KtG or an Abyss over this.

 525 characters

Photo of SShelly
3.43/5  rDev -19.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Much hyped, much sought after, really happy to give it a try.

Pours black with a low offwhite head.

Aroma is dark malt, coffee, toffe and maybe some dark fruit.

Flavor is sticky and insipid, really unpleasant overpowering, underattenuated sweetness that really sticks in the mouth. Mouthfeel is super syrupy. The coffee and roast just aren't enough to overcome the sweetness.

Damn what a disappointment, bottle was a 2009, not sure what else to say, sticky sweet mess.

 472 characters

Photo of kasper
3.42/5  rDev -20.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

2008 bottle

A: Pours a dark chocolate brown. Head is pretty small, but creamy; color of hot carmel, fades to just a ring leaving spotted lacing in its path.

S: Aromas of smoke, saddle leather, slimjim, chocolate-covered rainbow cookies, and dark fruits.

T: Whew...This is thick, flavors of smoked meat, bitter dark fruits, burnt coffee, carmel and somewhat salty. Aftertaste is a bit much, honestly, overly burnt and salty.

M: Heavy, thick, creamy, low carbonation... did I mention heavy?

D: Honestly, assuming this wasn't a bad bottle, I'm not sure what the hype is here. It just has a horribly salty. I wont be able to finish this bottle. I'll review again to make sure this wasn't a bad bottle.

 702 characters

Photo of Aimstatus
3.41/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Appearance: very dark motor oil appearance pours with a very dark head that dissipates soon after pour.
Smell: it smells like dark fruits, such as black cherries and burnt or smoked currents. Vaguely reminds of cherry cough syrup.
Mouthfeel: for a beer it has an odd texture to it. The dark liquid clings to your teeth and sides of your mouth leaving a prevalent film.
Taste: the first initial taste was mediciney if that makes sense. The smell and taste co inside it taste a bit like cough syrup, but better because then it turns amazing it is an overwhelming sensation of dark fruits and alcohol.
Drinkability: I don't think I could have one everyday , not that I wouldn't want to but after one glass I was a little buzzed.

 727 characters

Photo of rowingbrewer
3.4/5  rDev -20.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

2009 vintage(white wax top) opened by John at a recent tasting he hosted.

this beer pours pitch black with nearly no head. as the beer is pouring you can already tell that this one is going to have the mouthfeel of motor oil. this beer is seriously thick. the smell has so much going on, there are roasted malt chaacter, an alcohol presence, some dark fruit and caramel notes, and so much more that i could not even pin point. The taste is sweet, sweeter than i think a stout should be. there are some dark fruit notes and roasted malts there a slight hint of chocolate, and probably more than my palate can discern. the mouth on this is seriously thick, it coats your mouth and throat with every sip. the drinkablility is good but not high, because the beer is just so thick and sweet I could not have had seconds, and the bottle was split 4 ways. its a good beer, definitely worth trying but if you don't have a trading partner who you look out for and he loks out for you I would not buy it form ebay or trade the family farm to get one.

I have heard that 2009 is not the best vintage of dark lord in general, so would like to try other years, maybe an 08 since i have heard better things from that year

 1,208 characters

Photo of RAlmeida77
3.39/5  rDev -20.8%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.25 | overall: 3.25

2015 Bottle Poured into a snifter and shared with 5 others.

A - Looks like an imperial stout should. Pitch black, thick and viscous. Minimal head that dissipates quickly.
S - Some booze for sure and then an overwhelming teriaki/soy smell.
T - Teriaki and soy....no joking. Tastes nothing like what I hoped it would. Very disappointed.
M - Viscous...sticks around for a few but also leaves that teriaki flavor behind.
O - I don't get the hype and as most have said, this beer really has teriaki/soy aroma and flavor to it.

I have 3 bottles left and will NOT be drinking another one! All will be traded!!

 608 characters

Photo of Smurf2055
3.36/5  rDev -21.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

2011 vintage (reviewed 2012) thanks to beersis. Pours a lighter black (if possible) with almost no head.

Smell is sweet raisins and boozy. Dark red fruit. This smells way closer to an English Barley Wine than a RIS. Almost sickeningly sweet.

Taste is also very sweet and boozy. It has some roastiness and faint chocolate, but mostly the deep red fruit from the smell. Lots of alcohol heat for sure. It is very complex, I will admit that much.

Very waxy mouthfeel, full bodied. Heavy, and you can tell the abv is there, but still reasonably drinkable. A sipper.

Not what I was expecting, and not even close to one of my favorite RIS. First FFF I have been genuinely disappointed in. I now understand why this is described as a "sweet boozy mess".

 753 characters

Photo of shundahai
3.36/5  rDev -21.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.25

I'm rating the 2014 Dark Lord. I probably should have waited more than a year to open this but it's far too sweet. They should follow Bourbon County and barrel every ounce of this beer.

 187 characters

Photo of SkunkWorks
3.36/5  rDev -21.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 5 | overall: 3.5

Thanks kmurray8621 for the trade and the opportunity to try this!

22 oz bottle with green wax dripping from the top of the bottle down the label, so this is a 2010 bottle and has about 10 months of age on it. The wax is probably the most difficult wax I've had to deal with so far. As an Imperial Stout lover, I'm excited to try the (Dark) Lord of stout! Poured into my Southampton Imperial Russian Stout Release Party snifter and split with my girlfriend.

Look: despite an aggressive pour, I don't really get any head. There's half a finger of mocha colored foam for a second but it disappears almost immediately. Likewise, there's no lacing left behind. The body itself is pitch black and stains the glass, which is a cool effect. Because of the fact its in a snifter, I can get some dark, brown highlights along the edges but its still black when I hold it to the light. This looks good but I can't award it a better score than "Good" since I didn't get a head and I didn't get lacing.

Smell: oh no. This isn't looking good. The aroma hits the description on the bottle right on the head. There's cherries, dark fruit, currants, sweet maltiness, and hints of port like alcohol. Unfortunately, these are all tastes that I'm not the biggest fan of in my stouts. Where's the chocolate? The coffee? The black patent malt? I can't really get much of any of that. This is personal preference and I am impressed by the pungency of these flavors but I am not a fan.

Taste: follows the nose with intense dark fruit, sweet malt, molasses, and currants stand out while a bit of alcohol burn dances across my tongue. The label describes it having a Mochachino taste but I really don't detect it. Its just incredibly sweet, almost cloying, and fruity with a good deal of alcohol. Like the aroma, I think its well done but my personal preference prefers roasted malt, coffee and chocolate flavors in my imperial stouts and these tastes are severely lacking. Yes, I'm going to be "that guy" who rates the taste of this incredibly popular and hyped stout a bit low.

Feel: probably the best part about this beer. Full bodied, approaching a motor oil consistency, with a nice alcohol burn on the tip of my tongue. Drinks every bit of its 15% alcohol by volume.

Drink: certainly a sipper but that's good for the style. Its also quite easy drinking for a 15% stout... after having Black Tuesday a week ago, I can say this definitely drinks infinitely easier despite only being 3% lighter.

Overall, this was decent but not what I expected. Hype is truly a double edged sword. I was hoping to get hit in the mouth with an overwhelming roasted malt taste and aroma and didn't. Instead, I got something that was a bit too much like a port wine that happened to be fermented from malt instead of grapes. Maybe it needs more age, maybe I need to drink it fresh, maybe 2010 wasn't as good a year as the others, but I wasn't very much impressed by this beer especially considering how hard it is to get. I'd rather reach for a Black Chocolate Stout or an Old Rasputin or anything from Southern Tier than go for this and I don't have to trade rarities to get them!

That said, I can respect this beer for what it is. My preference for different flavors is really what hurts my ability to enjoy this beer rather than the beer being poorly crafted, so I'm kind of torn on how to rate this. I'd also be lying if I said that disappointment after all the hype behind this beer didn't get to me at all.

I should add, my girlfriend absolutely loved this stout and its probably her favorite imperial stout behind Southern Tier Choklat. That means one day, we're going to Dark Lord Day and I'm excited to try the vanilla bean and the oak aged versions of this.

Its certainly worth a try. Now that I've had it, I feel closer to the beer geek community since I've managed to drink and review it. My advice would just be to try and drink it with an open mind, not let the hype get to you, and try and enjoy it for what it is.


 4,014 characters

Photo of BeerThursdays
3.36/5  rDev -21.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Edit for 2009 Bottle. Previous score was a 4.38 based on the 2006 bottle.

2009 White Waxed Bottle - Opened May 15

Thanks to Malreever for sharing this one.

Poured from bottle into Snifter.

A - Pours pitch black with a thin layer of tan hear. Lacing is good. No light can penetrate this beast.

S - Super sweet smell. Soy Sauce, and syrup. Dark Roasted Malts and some chocolate. Maybe some grapes, and hops? Smell is very interesting, but hard to pin point any one smell. Keeps changing.

T - Not sure about this one.. Very hot, and sweet. Lots going on, but none of it really seems to fit together well. Plum, molasses, and I just can't get off that soy sauce flavor.

M - Very hot and sweet. Somewhat flat too. Good full body, but this leave me wanting a lot more. Just OK..

O - Well, it's Dark Lord, but it's not.. Recently we opened 06-10, and this was by far my least favorite. Tried it again for this tasting, and still wasn't too impressed. Looks nice, but is lacking after that.
Opened both a 2006 and a 2008 bottle in the same night.

These were both amazing beers. Both looked about the same. Completely black with a dark brown head. The 2006 bottle's head was a bit smaller, but both ended up a nice size. Smells of the 06 were more fruity than the 08, but both had coffee smells with dark fruits (plumbs and raisins). Pretty amazing smells.

Alcohol in the 2008 was subtly more apparent than in the 2006. 2006 was super smooth and fruity, with a coffee/chocolate finish. 2008 was not quite as fruity, coffee and roasted malts much more apparent. Both were an amazing experience. Incredible how this beer ages. 2006 had no hint of alcohol at all, just a sweet, chocolaty syrup with a coffee finish. 2008, alcohol more obvious, but if not for the 2006 comparison, it would be hardly noticeable.

This one is a sipper at any age. You're not going to pound 4 in a night and feel ok about yourself.

 1,923 characters

Photo of kojevergas
3.35/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.25

2010 vintage bottle acquired from the very gracious Duff27. Green wax-ed over pressure cap bottle. 650ml brown glass bottle with interesting label art served into a Guinness goblet in me parents' gaff in high altitude Castle Rock, Colorado. Reviewed live. Expectations are sky high given the brewery and its current 96 rating. Reviewed as a Russian Imperial Stout because the label description identifies it as such.

Served cold - straight from the fridge - and allowed to warm over the course of consumption. Side-poured with standard vigor as no carbonation issues are anticipated.

A: No bubble show forms as it's poured.

Pours a half finger khaki-tan head which recedes inside 10 seconds.

Body colour is a solid opaque jet-black. No floating yeast particles are visible; it's quite clean.

Overall, I'm a bit underwhelmed.

Sm: Molasses, chocolate, wisps of dark fruit, dark malts, chocolate malt, and some acidic ash. Depleted cherry. A biteen burnt. Somewhat vinous. Crappucino.

It's pretty reticent for an imperial stout, but I'm intrigued. A pleasant if somewhat muted aroma of mild strength.

No yeast character or alcohol comes through.

T: Sweet, sure, with plenty of fruit - dark and sweet alike. Plum, cherry. Ash. Tobacco. Vague molasses. Nebulous vinous character. Black currants. I do get some char/ash. It's balanced, sure, but nowhere near as complex/subtle/intricate/nuanced as I expected given its rarity and high rating. It's certainly on the sweeter side.

Above average depth of flavour. Average duration and intensity of flavour.

More cynical reviewers might claim there's a soy sauce note.

No yeast character or alcohol comes through.

Mf: Smooth and wet. Nice body and thickness. A biteen overcarbonated. Nice presence on the palate. Lightly syrupy. Sticky. Has weight.

Not oily, astringent, gushed, hot, boozy, or harsh.

Dr: Certainly drinkable for the high ABV. Sure I'd buy it if I saw it in the store, but it isn't worth seeking out to be honest. I expected far better, but it's nice. I don't know that age has made any substantial difference/developments. It has many characteristics which evoke more of a port-wine or liqueur character. I know many claim it's too sweet, and I can see that argument, but I think it's fine as-is. I'm real disappointed. Thanks for the opportunity to try it, Duff27.

Low B-

 2,361 characters

Photo of emmasdad
3.35/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

2009 vintage, poured into a Duvel glass. Inky black color, light does not penetrate. Thick and oily, with no head to speak of. Aromas of dark chocolate, roasted malt, raisins and prunes. Huge roasted malt flavors, along with milk chococate, some vanilla and alcohol. Thick and oily liquid coats the mouth, and finishes heavy and hot. A good experience, but not up to the hype.

 376 characters

Photo of cracker
3.35/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Thanks to warriorsoul for sharing a bottle with me. So I finally get to try this highly sought after beer. It pours thick like molasses. Very little carbonation or head. Smells like dark fruits, raisins, prunes. First impression on taste is way too sweet. However, the hops and roasted malts seems to balance it out quite well. Sort of reminds me of port, a very sweet one. Although I can appreciate this beer for what its worth, I think there is more hype around it than anything else. I'd definitely try it again but it's not a top 10 or even 20 beer for me.

 560 characters

Photo of sleuthdog
3.35/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Epic tasting ending with Dark Lord 2012 vintage
Thanks to woodjjacct for sharing this one!

Appearance: Black as night with no head formation. Swirling does create a one finger head but it does dissapate quickly. Absolutly no light penetration at all even when held up to light. Your typical RIS in appearance.

Smell: Big time molasses notes with the dark fruits taking a center stage. Sweet very sweet with alcohol soaked figs. Some dark maybe blackberries evident and some tobacco notes. Leather is also noted at the tail end.

Taste: This is one enormous beer! Very, very sweet with alcohol soaked dark fruit jumping out at me. Molasses and brown sugar very evident and the sweetness lingers forever. I feel as though the beer has literally stuck to my teeth, gums, and tongue. A trip to the dentist tomorrow may be needed. The sweet sticky feel just does not leave at all. It is very chewy at the same time. No alcohol to speak of.

Mouthfeel: This is very creamy and no carbonation and so so palate covering that its hard to believe. It covers all of my mouth and lips to the point that it is cloying.

Overall: This was an enjoyable experience but wow what a sugar bomb! If you don't have a buddy or two to share with you may by in trouble IMO

 1,252 characters

Photo of jwhawkins81
3.33/5  rDev -22.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3

2010 Dark Lord

Aroma - Alcohol with sweet fruits like cherries that accompanies a slight bitter coffee aroma.

Appearance - Very dark and thick with little carbonation but good head retention.

Taste - Sweet with a bitter bite on the back-end. Not a lot of roast or bitterness but a definite touch of alcohol that was immediately warming. Just a cherry sweetness upfront but nothing special flavor wise.

Notes - The mouthfeel was thick and full

 446 characters

Photo of Sarlacc83
3.33/5  rDev -22.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

2009 bottle from long ago. Reviewed from back log. Consumed in early 2012, though, so around 3 years old.

A: Pure, unadulterated blackness with a very thin mocha head.

N: Rubber, dark chocolate, and loads of sea salt. Mmm, soy sauce.

T: Raspberry, chocolate, and soy sauce. Oh, that delightful Chinese topping for beers like this. Blech.

M: Thick and oily. Certainly can't go wrong with this feel.

O: Maybe not as bad as Baller, and it's better than previous vintages I've tried, but this beer never ceases to amaze me. It's not good, but it's proof that DLD has power over its visitors. Overrated and just plain bad.

 623 characters

Photo of mattcrill
3.33/5  rDev -22.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Thanks to cmaruschak for obtaining this rare one. Split this with him and BA mmmmbeeer.

Sampled the '04 version on 1/05 and although I never reviewed it, it blew me away. Would have been nearly close to all 5's if not all 5's for me. I was very excited about the '05 version of this beast and was very much let down. Too many other great local double stouts around here to ever bother with this one again. I hope next year they go back to the '04 recipe.

Appearance: Darkness descends into the glass. An inky black pour with a tan foamy head. Head doesn't retain that well and rings the glass and leaves small patches of carbonation throughout.

Smell: Searing alcohol up front. Rum soaked raisins and a touch of roasted malts. Mostly alcohol.

Taste: Licorice, baker's chocolate, slightly burnt coffee, bittering hops, and alcohol. The presence is all bitterness and alcohol. Towards the middle, the chocolate and coffee profile improves but then gets overtaken by the alcohol near the end.

Mouthfeel: Medium bodied and slick. Very disappointing considering last years recipe was my perfect standard for judging mouthfeel (both with and without sludge...I liked the sludge so get over it!).

Drinkability: A sipper to be sure. No way I would want a whole bottle of this.

Glad to have tried it but I probably won't be bothering with this one in the future unless the recipe changes.

 1,403 characters

Photo of mjtiernan
3.31/5  rDev -22.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Thanks for the trade jmarsh123!

2012 vintage. 22oz bottle poured into a FFF stemmed tulip.

A: One finger tan head. Good retention, tight bubbles. Body is very dark, but I reviewed this outdoors in low-light and couldn’t get a great sense of the color/opacity. Looks inviting though.

S: Molasses, sweet malt, faint chocolate nibs and unappealing dark fruit.

T: Yikes! I was expecting sweet but this surpassed my expectations. Pretty shocking. It’s not really even stout-like. Where’s the roast and/or bitterness? It starts cloyingly sweet and then you get a small hit of coffee flavor but without any coffee bitterness. That is somewhat unique I guess.

M: Creamy texture, yet thin body...especially for such a big stout. Speaking of which, where’s the alcohol? Pretty amazing that this is a 15% beer. That’s the best thing I can say about this.

O: I was expecting to be disappointed, but this was worse than I anticipated. I’m glad I got to have it so now I can get it behind me and not worry about having to trade for it again.

 1,046 characters

Dark Lord Imperial Stout from 3 Floyds Brewing Co.
95 out of 100 based on 1,230 ratings.