Mac Queen's Nessie - Brauerei Schloss Eggenberg

Not Rated.
Mac Queen's NessieMac Queen's Nessie

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
76
okay

151 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 151
Reviews: 111
rAvg: 3.28
pDev: 16.46%
Wants: 0
Gots: 5 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Brauerei Schloss Eggenberg visit their website
Austria

Style | ABV
Vienna Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 08-03-2002

Note: New recipe from 2008, gravity went down from 16° to 12°, alcohol from 7.3% to 5%
View: Beers (19) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Ratings: 151 | Reviews: 111
Photo of hegelec
3.43/5  rDev +4.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a 330 mL bottle into a chalice.

Light red colour with a finger of off-white head. Little lacing.

Somewhat subdued malty nose. Sweet, almost buttery smell. Hop undetectable.

Taste is quite simply malty ... really sweet, but not unpleasant. I'm sure I'm getting some butterscotchy diacetyl. Normally unacceptable for a lager, but this is some sort of weird lager/scotch ale hybrid. Very faint noble hop bite on the woody finish. Fleeting smokey aftertaste.

Very full, dextrinous mouthfeel and moderate carbonation. Too sweet to gulp, but a pleasant sipper.

Interesting, though there's not alot going on. Worthy ... just.

EDIT: The bottle insists this is 5% and someone's crossed out the "strong beer" disclaimer on the label. I didn't get the assertive alcohol presence that other people here are claiming. Is this perhaps a different formula?

Photo of Macca
3.11/5  rDev -5.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

This pours a light amber into my Nessie glass. (Why is it only 210ml?) A centimetre or two of solid head which stays almost perfectly from the high carbonation.

Aroma is malty and a slight peatiness.

Palate is quite grainy but not really a lot else. There is a real whole in the flavour profile and in mouthfeel. Not a lot of length.

The whisky of beers? I think this lot is being a bit ambitious. Not a lot going for it at all.

Photo of magictrokini
2.42/5  rDev -26.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

This was advertised as a Smoked when I had it. Darker yellow pour with no head. Fruity, malty aroma with grains and sugar. Not an ounce of anything smoky in this bottle, even though that it what it was advertised as. Looking at BA's category for this, its not really that good of a Scotch Ale imitation. Butterscotch (not scotch), metallic, and medicinal flavors abound. No caramel, peat, earth, roasty malt, nothing. No cabonation gives it a syrupy feel. Not good.

Photo of Vancer
3.48/5  rDev +6.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

One heckava red ale, I must say - another ass kicking brew weighing in at 7.3%.

Pour - yep, nice amber ale with copper tinged edges, white head give a go at sticking to the glass sides.

Strange woody malt aroma, and a very different tasting boozy bourbon brew with a malty backbone. Finishes a bit on the raspy side, but that could be the booze talking.

All around decent beer.

Photo of JBogan
1.9/5  rDev -42.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Poured not a red, but a light golden color with almost no head or lacing.

Smelled a wee bit metallic and buttery, not very pleasing at all to my nose.

My tastebuds didn't far any better, as the taste follwed the aroma. Nothing about the taste beckoned me for more.

Mouthfeel was mostly flat and uninspiring. Medium to thick and slippery feeling, with almost no carbonation to perk things up.

I did what I could to drink as much of this as possible to get a decent impression of this beer, but it was a chore. Knowing what I know now, I'd pass on this beer in the future, even if it was offered to me for free.

Photo of asabreed
1.83/5  rDev -44.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

11.2 oz. bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance: Gold straw-colored body, little to no head retention, and little carbonation overall.

Smell: Oddly enough this smell is pretty reminiscent of the Layla beer I just reviewed. I don't get any smoke or peat or whiskey, and just sugars from the malt and maybe a hint of hop sourness.

Taste: Way overdone sweetness, metallic flavors, hints of smoke, acrid sourness, medicinal unpleasant funk and earthiness. I can't drink anymore of this. Even small sips for sampling are unpleasant.

Mouthfeel: Medium-bodied with thankfully a burst of carbonation near the end, making it a little less watery than it initially presents itself to be.

Drinkability: Not sure I've had a scotch ale like this before, but this seems overly sweet, unbalanced, and fairly caustic, as I'm starting to get a headache from it. I won't be trying this again. Samichlaus and the Urbock Eisbock I'll be trying again, but this I surely won't be trying again, and I'm pouring the rest down the drain because seriously halfway through it's given me a huge headache. Yikes.

Photo of soulgrowl
2.95/5  rDev -10.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Appearance: Surprisingly good retention on this eggy-looking brew, with a sticky white head and a yolky golden-yellow body.

Smell: Not really ale-like at all, more lagery in its simple clarity. There are some sweet Hawaiian bread notes from the malts, a touch of tangy, lightly peppery hops, and something tart and fruity that reminds me of Kalamata olives. Not bad, but nothing at all here says "Scotch ale" to me.

Taste: Not bad, but I still am not quite convinced that this is meant to be brewed in the Scotch ale style; only that it is brewed with whiskey malts. Those malts are somewhat lost on my palate, partly because they don't seem any different from ordinary caramel malts, and partly because of the Saazy hops and rummy alcohol that distract (pleasantly) from the sweet malt base. This tastes like a fairly ordinary blonde Doppelbock, not a Scotch ale.

Mouthfeel: Pleasantly thick and sticky, with very soft, thin carbonation.

Drinkability: Meh. What's the point of this beer? For all its sweetness and its strength, it's got no real character. The whiskey malt gimmick is just that - a gimmick - and it isn't particularly distinguishable from any old European strong lager.

Photo of Traquairlover
3.4/5  rDev +3.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

11.2 fl oz bottle poured into a pint glass.

A = Golden with one finger white head which dissipated quickly. Medium carbonation bubbles.

S = Has a spicy, sour smell that reminds me more of a Belgian yeast strain than a red ale of scottish ale. Big malt backbone, too, though.

T = Malty but with a really smooth quality almost like a lager. The taste and smell are both different than what I expected and not in the same ways. Where the smell was almost Belgian, the taste is like a heavier German lager, but there is a sourness in the finish that reminds me of the smell. This tastes okay, but why it is called a red ale seemingly having few of the characteristics is beyond me. At the time of this review it is listed on BA as a scotch ale, which is equally dumbfounding to me. Its got a good malt backbone, but a certain spiciness on the tongue and sourness in the finish.

M = Light to medium bodied, somewhat stinging on the tongue, decent to light mouthcoating.

D = I'd say this has only average drinkability. I could see drinking it again sometime, but I am not going to be searching this out actively.

Photo of Beertracker
3.48/5  rDev +6.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Schloss Eggenberg Mac Queen's Nessie pours up quickly with a small creamish white head that dissipates rather quickly. The goldenrod color shows a near brilliant clarity that enhances the visual aspect. The aromatics are rather subdued upfront, but a bockish malt driven character emerges as it warms that carries some sweet bread, caramel/toffee candy, & neutral grain alcohol notes that aid the complexity. There's a discernable smokiness in the finish from the Highland whisky malt, but it's very muted by the sweetness. Very clean, hint of fruitiness with no diacetyl. Maybe just an initial hint of DMS in the background which is OK per style. The mild flavor starts off rather grainy with some caramel character emerging towards the end. A slightly off-balanced bitterness carries well into the crisp, semi-dry, slightly bitter finish. This medium bodied specialty is creamy, mild, and surprisingly smooth. This is a finely crafted strong specialty beer from one of the world's great lager breweries, but it's certainly NOT a Scotch Ale (Wee Heavy)! So long as you're not expecting to find the Loch Ness monster then you'll enjoy this one just fine. Try pairing this one with some traditional Kippers or Lox with some Grinzing cheese and cracked peppercorn crackers.

PROST! Beertracker

Photo of tkach
3.68/5  rDev +12.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

This beer is a average amber color, not so much red, it was clear with a tad of sediment floating about within. Head was white and not so big.

Smell was clean and somewhat malty, kind of bland and I didn't find much here.

I really liked the taste it was thick and malty with a nice rich flavor which I didn't expect due to the bland smell.

Mouthfeel was alright and the carbonation was a very good level. Nothing too special.

Drinkability was good because it had a good taste, went down smooth and afterwards was easy going.

Photo of barefootbrewer
3.24/5  rDev -1.2%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This beer poured a clear light golden color with very little head. The aroma is malty and there is a strong note of caramel and maybe even butterscotch. The taste is malty and a bit bitter. The mouthfeel is on the lighter side of medium. There is a slight alcoholic burn as it goes down. Overall, this beer doesn’t seem as balanced as it should be. More body would help the drinkability.

Photo of geexploitation
2.72/5  rDev -17.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours very clear, with a dark gold color and no head. Light aromas which hold some slight clues as to this beer's category: the malt here has a whiskeyish note that reminds of Golden Promise -- a strain that is also sometimes used in Scottish ales. On the palate, sweet with alcohol first off, then some nutty-sweet malt notes that once again remind of a Highland malt. Dusky, half-bitter, half-phenolic finish. Hot mouthfeel. Overall, this is a strange but somewhat interesting beer. The whisky malts used, combined with a relatively neutral yeast strain, provide some evidence of what whisky malts do to a beer. But the "interesting" angle can only take it so far: it's just not that tasty.

Photo of Minkybut
3.12/5  rDev -4.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I poured this beer into my tumbler at 50 degrees. The beer was not red certainly but looked like a regular old beer. No head after a few minutes and very crappy lacing. The beer had a bit of a molaasses smell or like sorghum and tasted a bit like it also. It was a little sweet and a little hoppy. I think I'm going to have to try this one again to be sure what I think about it.

Photo of debaniel
3.8/5  rDev +15.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Poured from a bottle into a sampling glass (straight with no taper)

APPEARANCE: Clear light honey color, minimal head

NOSE: Caramel, honey, sweet malts

TASTE: A great balance of bitterness and sweet maltiness with a very floral finish.

MOUTHFEEL: Medium mouthfeel with appropriate amount of carbonation.

DRINKABILITY: I enjoyed this one quite a bit - balanced enough to warrant having a couple of 'em.

Photo of thierrynantes
3.36/5  rDev +2.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Sorry but this following comment is in french :

Appearance : jaune or, étincelante, mousse nuageuse
Smell : arômes de céréales et d'alcool
Taste : elle dévoile une belle amertume de houblon
Mouthfeel : ensuite l'alcool évolue en bouche, la finale est sèche
Drinkability : bonne bière de style lager forte au malt à whisky 'ce n'est pas une ale !)

Photo of brentk56
3.6/5  rDev +9.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Appearance: Pours a clear honey color with a marginal head that drops to a ringlet but deposits shards of lace

Smell: English toffee with a touch of fusel alcohol; a faint hint of smoke

Taste: Starts out with a toffee base that adds some whisky heat by mid-palate; after the swallow, the toffee flavors dry out to some extent

Mouthfeel: Medium heavy and slightly syrupy; low carbonation

Drinkability: I liked this better than most of the other reviewers but I acknowledge it is a bit to "wee" to be a Wee Heavy

Photo of Padron4KM
3.35/5  rDev +2.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

11.2 oz bottle. No freshness date noted.

Clear amber with a thin almost nonexistent head.<br.
Aroma is rich caramel and slight roasty malt. Very little smoke in the aroma. Definitely no peat.

Flavor again is light on the smoke but heavy on the sweet caramel, touch of fruitiness.

Finish is more burnt sugar than smoke, but it was still tasty.

Highland Whiskies tend to be lighter and much less peaty than other whiskeys, and this beer seemed to follow those guidelines.

Photo of BEERchitect
3.35/5  rDev +2.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Surprised to see this beer listed as a Wee Heavy. Doesn't seem to fit the style, but is a nice brew. The Scottish notes are present in the peat-malt aroma and flavor; lightly toasted, pungent, and campfire-ish. The malt sweetness is very powerful and works well with the alcohols, taking on a thinning, sweet, honey-like flavor. Hopped with traditional, earthy, German hops (saaz) contribuiting to the pungent earthy flavors. Never musty or dirty. The pour is a crystal clear, honey colored brew with mild carbonation that disipated in 5 minutes. Lightly carbonated, which adds to the weight of the brew. Very sweet, but dries up very late in the finish with a lingering hop / malt pungent note. Clean for being so sweet. Well balanced, but no real hop flavors or aromas. A nice beer, but unlikely to go out of my way for again. Probably is best characterized as a Scottish Ale, but not a Wee Heavy. Just does not have the molassas malt character or strong peat flavors / aromas; otherwise, the strength and sweetness makes sense.

Photo of BretSikkink
3.4/5  rDev +3.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Clear golden tangerine color, not a ton of head. What's there is rocky, and recedes to a little island in the center of the brew.

Pale toasted malt and a little sugar in the relatively weak aroma.

Strangely absent flavor, what's there is mostly malted barley with an awkward amount of alcohol. Feels more German than Scottish. Eggenberg's foray into Wee Heavy features a little hop bittering, and it's reasonably well-balanced, but I'm not thrilled.

Mouthfeel and finish are clean, but not crisp at all. Relatively firm, not much carbonation. Ok.

Weak brew, nothing really too good to speak of...disappointing Eggenberg brew.

Photo of Redwood21
3.28/5  rDev 0%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

wee heavy? really?
A: nice look to it a golden color with a thick white head that laces and all the rest.
S: what smell? really ? there is one? could have fooled me?
T: ok let me say i liek this beer but wee heavy? no such. there is some malt flavor and its enjoyable but not for the style at all
M/D: ok this is a good beer. id drink it again but when i look at style and then this beer i scratch my head. very suprisng but not for the style.

Photo of henrysunset
2.78/5  rDev -15.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

not very red for a "red ale". It's a filtered orangish hue beer with some white head of fine bubbles.

Scent is strong, I noticed it simply opening the bottle from afar... Bitter and sweet, with a sour quality as well, citrusy - orange scented.

Taste is not as strong as the scent implies... kinda sweet, bitingly tart, mellower grainy aftertaste but still decidely citrusy. Can't say i'm lovin it.

Photo of seanyfo
3/5  rDev -8.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

330ml bottle poured into my chimay chalice

A- pale orangey hue, with a 1 finger creamy enough head that only lasts a few seconds, reduced to an even crown around the rim, little evidence of lacing

S- some very sweet malts upfront, akin to an eku 28 but as syrupy sweet. No real grain or hops in here. No complexity.

T- Pretty forgettable, a poormans eku 28 comes to mine, starts out very sweet and sugary malts, but just as i expect a nice alcohol kick to warm the back of the throat, it falls flat on its face, and any real flavour disappears. Some hoppy dry bite does come through as the beer warms a bit.

M- Medium to high carbonation, a bit thin of the ground.

D- Cant make my mind up here, like i said its a poormans eku 28 for me. Pretty forgettable, however not a drainpour by any means. Will do the job of warming you up a bit, but thats about it.

Photo of phisig137
3.07/5  rDev -6.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4.5

Pours a very pale gold color, with a one finger head. No retention leaves behind nothing. Looks fizzy and yellow as Stone would say.

Aroma is mildly malty, with some hints of adjunct grain. Slight toasted bread aroma, but nothing to write home about.

Flavor is sweet from front to back, with only mild malt flavors. No hops, no yeast, nothing interesting. Clean fermenation is the only saving grace here. I don't detect any real off flavors. Heavily metallic finish ruins the little taste that is there. Mouthfeel is dominated by carbonation and thin. Drinkability is actually quite good considering the moderately high ABV.

BA lists this as a Wee Heavy, the bottle says original red ale, and the label also says it's brewed with whiskey malts, which would lead me to expect a bit of smokiness. I don't believe any of them. At best this is a euro-lager, and one of only decent quality. A sad offering from Eggenberg, and one that I won't be buying again. It's hard to believe that this came from the same people that make Samichlaus.

Photo of homebrewhawk
2.84/5  rDev -13.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

11.2oz brown bottle, 7.3%abv.
Poured a clear gold with a hint of amber. Low white head that dissapated quickly. Slightly fruity nose with some malt. Some malt sweetness upfront. A little bit of noble hop flavor. Dry malty finish.

For a beer that claims to be brewed with Scotch Whiskey malt, I got no smokey, peaty flavors from it. A decent strong beer, but nothing remarkable. I was a little disappointed with this. I wouldn't call it a Scotch Ale.

Photo of arguemaniac
4.17/5  rDev +27.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 5

Pours a somewhat dull golden amber with a fizzy white head that quickly leaves behind a thin lace. Very mellow malt in the aroma. The smooth, drinkable palate features subdued notes of honey, bright but mild maltiness, a touch of leafy hops and a tiny hint of smoke. Also, this beer masks a relatively high 7.3% ABV better than just about any beer out there.

Every time I drink this beer the same thing happens: with the first sip, I’m not impressed. But, I slowly grow to like the beer more and more as I continue to drink it. After a while, I realize it’s one of my favorites. The subdued yet somewhat unorthodox mixture of flavors is really a treat. I’d imagine that if you crossed a smooth, malty Vienna-style lager with a rich and mildly smokey Scottish ale, this is what you get. Word of warning though: Tasty, yet restrained flavors and an incredibly drinkable smoothness + an extremely well hidden alcohol content = me quickly putting away two bottles of this brew and writing this review with a firm buzz. Highly recommended (the beer, not the buzz).

Mac Queen's Nessie from Brauerei Schloss Eggenberg
76 out of 100 based on 151 ratings.