Goudenband - Brouwerij Liefmans
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 1,055 | Reviews: 543 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by emerge077:
4.5/5 rDev +7.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 5 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4
Fresh bottle review 2006: Vintage reviews follow below.
Served in a Liefmans .3L wide fluted glass. Pours a ruddy brown with garnet highlights. Ample foam and lacing around the rim.
Smells of oak, cherry, and dark malt. Sort of cidery.
Taste is pretty unique, tartness comes out at first, followed by a sweeter balsamic note. Earthy yeast is in there, which makes a brief cameo. Sweet cherry or grape note. Have to take it down .5 here, since this tastes like sugar was added, compared to an older bottle from 2001 (see later review). Slightly dry, tart finish persuades another sip. One 750, or 2 drafts would probably be equivalent for a session. Get it while you can!
>>>2001 vintage...and the love affair with Goudenband continues.
Pours pretty nasty, deep mahogany brown with suspended yeast chunks. Every vintage bottle of this I try turns out different. 2001 was a good year apparently.The fat, spongy cork may have something to do with its sustained freshness. A brief sizzle of carbonation happens once poured, but settles to nothing soon enough.
Aroma of horse stalls, vinegar, and sweet mustard. The yeast fans out in all manner of funky directions. Sweet and sour like a Gueuze, but walking the line on the dark side. It has a mustiness that feels ancient, like it had been stored since the Middle Ages.
Sour upfront, finally. This is the Goudenband i've heard about. Forget the 2000 batch and some prior, the corks don't seem to age as well to this present date. This is conclusive evidence after sampling several flat '00 vintage bottles and a 750mL from the early '90's. Look for a larger cork and you'll do well.
Residual lemon citrus sourness, and a mellow blanket of oaky woodiness. Balanced and mellow with age. Mild cherry skin here, but more akin to a Gueuze.
Perfect Oud Bruin. Liefmans, what happened to the recipe?
>>>3rd review: early 1990's vintage
Brown Liefmans logo pattern on outer paper wrapper. Served at cellar temperature.
Pours a dark reddish-chestnut brown, with alot of clarity. Large bubbles result from a "higher-altitude" pour, but don't stick around. The ale soon looks like flat cola in the glass.
Smell is strong, a touch phenolic and berry-like. Musty basement notes lurk at the edges, but don't overpower it.
Taste still packs a punch. Almond nuttiness in the malt moves to a dark berry/plum with muted spice and a cola finish. Aftertaste is almost like fruit juice, too sweet to be wine, but not really dry at all. Nearly none of the signature tartness of a fresh bottle.
Mouthfeel is a bit thin without the usual carbonation, and the ABV becomes somewhat more apparent, which hinders the drinkability.
Notes: I was eager to try this vintage bottle, since the recipe reportedly changed post 2002. Age has mellowed it quite a bit, there was minimal to no carbonation, but still a very unique ale. Although the current version is a touch sweeter, I prefer it to an older vintage. The 10 yr. shelf-life is probably a good guideline to follow when cellaring, drink it before it gets too old...
EDIT: Recently tried a 2001 vintage, WOW. Perfectly aged, dusty, fruity, sourness. Still showed good carbonation and funky aroma. Amazing how the variability ranges in a 10+ yr. bottle, and a 6 yr. bottle. Will factor this sample in this score, for an overall vintage rating. See above review.
Serving type: bottle
04-06-2007 04:28:32 | More by emerge077
More User Reviews:
3.7/5 rDev -11.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.5
Purchased at the LCBO 750ml bottle for just under $9.00. Served at 4deg C in a draught glass
A- Opens well pours with little head. Settles to a film and stays. Dark brown and cloudy.
S- Cherry and malt.
T- Sour cherry. Not quite ready yet. Needs time to blend. Raspberries will come through later when this thing calms down. Think that that will be a while though.
M- Tart and dry. Rather carbonated which is good for aging. Looking forward to having this one on a few years.
O- Pretty good. Way too young to drink. Will save the others for a few years down the line
This way too young fruit beer goes well with... Spicy chicken with green vegetables. Keeping it open for you to substitute in what you like as this beer will work well with many combinations.
Serving type: bottle
06-29-2014 16:23:43 | More by DaveBar
4.05/5 rDev -3.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4
Poured into a Funky Buddha Brewery snifter. 2012 vintage.
A- Pours a murky brown color with a 1/8 inch tan head that doesn't retain long before becoming a thin ring around the edge of the glass and a small amount of wispy surface foam. Resilient lacing leaves a thick solid ring behind.
S- Musty aroma of sour cherries. More dark fruit such as raisin, plum and blackberry are detected.
T- Moderately tart flavor with more dark fruit and even red grape skin-like tannins. Very drinkable with hardly any alcohol detected. Juicy, somewhat bright and a hint of oxidation.
M- Dry and mildy tart with medium-low carbonation and a body leaning toward the lighter side.
O- Very good, but a bit tame. I would like to know what a fresher bottle tastes like since this seems to have become a little too toned down while sitting.
Serving type: bottle
06-27-2014 01:31:05 | More by Immortale25
Goudenband from Brouwerij Liefmans
94 out of 100 based on 1,055 ratings.