1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Michelob AmberBock - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Michelob AmberBockMichelob AmberBock

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

1,442 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,442
Reviews: 638
rAvg: 2.87
pDev: 21.6%
Wants: 8
Gots: 45 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
Bock |  5.20% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Michelob AmberBock is brewed using 100% malt including dark-roasted black and caramel malts and all-imported hops.

(Beer added by: unclejimbay on 08-16-2001)
View: Beers (79) |  Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Michelob AmberBock Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,442 | Reviews: 638 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of KoG


2.65/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Dark nearly black body with little head and some decent lacing.

Smell is weak for a Bock. Slight rice in the mix, but not dominate like other AB brews.

Taste is weak as well. Malty flavor is not strong enough and a bit light on the hops as well. no offensive, just not very flavorful.

Too thin for a bock. Beef up the malt a bit and add a small amount of body and it might not be too bad.

Serving type: on-tap

07-19-2005 04:47:42 | More by KoG
Photo of RBorsato


2.85/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Copper-brown with a nice light beige head and nice active carbonation. Light breadyand dark grain (crystal?) aroma with a touch of adjuncts. American Dark Lager style flavors ala Becks Dark and Henie Dark; not really a bock. Light-medium bodied with a dry malty finish.

Not really a bock but much better than Shiner Bock and a decent drinkable dark lager.

Label States: "Dark Lager" & "Dark Roasted malt" & "Hallertau, Select, and Tettnang hop cones"

Born On: 10/21/04
Tasted: 06/18/05

Serving type: bottle

06-23-2005 16:24:53 | More by RBorsato
Photo of 67cuda


2.58/5  rDev -10.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

This beer pours with the right color for a Bock; a very lovely dark amber color. However, unlike the norm for Bocks, the head is very small and disappears about as fast as the foam on a cola. It smells kind of caramel and grainy, nothing too special. As for taste, its quite watery, at least if you're going to call it a Bock. It is, however, better than pretty much any other macro beer, but thats really not saying a whole lot. As for the mouthfeel.. well, it tastes much like water, and really feels a lot like water too... It is pretty drinkable, but thats in comparison to other macros, and noting the fact that it really doesn't taste like too much of anything.

Serving type: bottle

06-23-2005 02:04:47 | More by 67cuda
Photo of fizzyfred


2.85/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

The color is a nice amber brown. Looking at in a glass, I'm thinking that the color was engineered not to scare the AB faithful, yet interest a BA. The head has little retention and looks fizzy, kind of like a coke. No real aroma to speak of, very clean caramel smell from the grain. The taste is very dry and clean. There is a faint noble hop flavor, but just enough to make it drinkable. Very thin body with very little aftertaste. I've been in numerous situations where this is best choice on the menu. Not horrible, but sufficiently washes down a pizza.

Also, this is not a bock. There should be some designation for an American Bock with Shiner being the classic example. I'm not sure if its true, but I read somewhere that Shiner bock is called a bock because of an old liquor law in Texas requiring beers of certain alcholic strength to be labeled "bock", similar to Malt Liquor is other states.

Serving type: bottle

06-01-2005 15:26:55 | More by fizzyfred
Photo of arguemaniac


2.2/5  rDev -23.3%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

The head has almost no retention. As a huge bock fan, I admit that, in general, bocks are not known for having tremendously thick and sustaining heads (though that isn't always the case with many sub-styles, such as weizen-bocks). But NO beer should have the head retention of SODA (like this one)!!! However, they did get the color right: a deep, dark amber color with a mahogany hue. Not too much to the aroma, a faint grain and slight caramel. This taste is very thin and watery, especially for a bock. There is some caramel maltiness, but that's about it. The finish is really weak. Mouthfeel is flat.

While it is without a doubt richer than many macros, it is still very mediocre (if that, even). As a craft beer lover, I'm unimpressed, as a bock lover, I'm very dissapointed. Not recommended.

Serving type: bottle

05-24-2005 07:39:38 | More by arguemaniac
Photo of BrewMaven

New York

3.25/5  rDev +13.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

This was a beer I tried before the concept of using a glass occured to me. Anyway, I found this to be a highly drinkable, enjoyable and readily available dark(er) than usual, beer. After being weaned on the usual "drink to get buzzed" beers, I found this one to be several levels above those in terms of drinkablility and taste. Although not (quite) in the same league as, say, Guinness, this is very much worth trying before you just pick up the same grocery store type beer you usually settle for.

Serving type: bottle

05-07-2005 19:16:09 | More by BrewMaven
Photo of ski271


2.7/5  rDev -5.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Appearance: Very dark yellowish brown with a small, light tan, fizzy, rapidly diminishing head. No real lasting lacing, as what does cling to the glass slowly sinks down as you drink.

Smell: Can’t really pick up except a little weak malt and some grain, corn and rice. Having no smell is definitely not a good thing, but compared to the adjunct stick of a lot of macros, maybe no smell isn’t all THAT bad. In any case, I’m not impressed.

Taste: Decent caramel sweetness and some rice over a moderately earthy yeast flavor. The finish is short and weak, but then again, it’s weak in general.

Mouthfeel: Thin, watery, lots of carbonation... just slightly heavier than your average macro.

Drinkability: Sure it’s drinkable. It has just a little more character than your average macro, so that’s a plus. I actually had this as one of the beers at my wedding, to satisfy the needs of the macro lovers. I think the color scared them a little, but in the end most people liked it. I think it was a baby-step in the right direction as far as helping their appreciation of beer mature and grow. So I like this beer for that reason. But they call this a bock beer? That’s just wrong.

Serving type: bottle

04-20-2005 19:58:55 | More by ski271
Photo of kbnooshay

New York

2.9/5  rDev +1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

It is better than bud I guess. Something i drink when the monetary situation has seen better days. It pours a nice amber color with a small head. Nothing special but the hint of caramel is nice. Moderately watery mouthfeel but not too bad. Fairly drinkable too.

Serving type: bottle

04-18-2005 01:19:22 | More by kbnooshay
Photo of nota


2.9/5  rDev +1%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Looks great! Taste is a big disappointment. I should say the lack of taste that disappoints me. Its just to watery. It has a faint toasted caramel flavor and just a tinny bit of hops. I guess the best I can say is it goes down crisp and clean. To many other good beers out their to bother with this one again.

I must add this comment a week later. After drinking some other watery macro's then drinking this beer the Taste was more noticeable. I also had this before a pizza at Pizza Hut. The second one tasted better while eating my pizza.

Serving type: bottle

04-15-2005 00:19:41 | More by nota
Photo of soulfly967


2.85/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Let it be known that this is the ONLY beer that AB makes that I will drink. Had this on tap at Sports and Spirits in the bad ass town of Evans City.

Poured a relativly clear dark amber color with a bit of white head that soon vanished. It had a fairly sweet smell, with some hops detected. The taste was clean and showed some dark malt character. The mouthfeel is rather thin, and a bit too carbonated. But, for some reason, I can drink these all night long. Not too bad for such a crappy brewery.

Serving type: on-tap

03-30-2005 20:13:11 | More by soulfly967
Photo of tgbljb


2.35/5  rDev -18.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Poured a deep copper color with large white head that quickly vanished. I sure hope the taste is better than the smell. The first taste is of over sweetness and it doesn't get any better. Did some one forget to put any hops in this. Mouthfeel is poor. Why drink it??

Serving type: bottle

03-23-2005 02:29:23 | More by tgbljb
Photo of DrJay


2.23/5  rDev -22.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Clear, dark amber colour with some reddish highlights. It was topped by a dense, light brown head. Slightly sweet nose with little hops present. Also, an aroma that reminded me of dark malt that's gone stale from sitting on the shelf too long.

The flavour was fairly clean, but was on the weak side. Some refined sugar sweetness and acidic crispness were present, along with a bit of darker malt character. Sweetness was a little strong at the finish, given that there was very little bitterness to provide balance. The body was on the thin side and the carbonation melded fairly well with the smooth, slightly grainy texture.

Overall, not bad for an AB product, but this is certainly not a Bock. It might make a reasonable transition beer for friends that refuse to drink micros.

Serving type: on-tap

02-19-2005 20:09:20 | More by DrJay
Photo of mjc410


2.17/5  rDev -24.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

12oz brown glass twist
Clear amber color, head is thin but does manage to stick around for a while, lacing the sides of the glass in clumps.
Smells of sugar, caramal, weak malts. Hops are negligible.
Carbonation is at a good level, but the taste is grainy and just too sweet. Hops are hard to pick up here as well. Overall, a very light, low taste beer dominated by sweetness. Not too good.

Serving type: bottle

02-18-2005 18:18:44 | More by mjc410
Photo of Backer2004

North Carolina

3.1/5  rDev +8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Paid $.99 a draft at a steak house tonight and in the past I have never minded Amber Bock. The same was true this time around. No good qualities for its appearance or smell, but nothing horrible. could not rate the drinkability at higher since, even at a dollar, I had no issue only grabbing one at dinner. will still beat BMC any day, but definitely not my choice over Yeungling or Sam Adams for standard restaurant fare.

Serving type: on-tap

02-14-2005 03:16:13 | More by Backer2004
Photo of Frozensoul327


2.68/5  rDev -6.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This beer poured out to a dark red / amber brown colour, with medium carbonation and a short lived white foamy head. Goes down smooth, yet a bit heavy. Flavors of rice and a touch of hops are present, as well as a bitterness that sits on the light side. Finish was a bit on the sweet side, but not over powering. Not a bad attempt by AB to get a grasp on the higher end of macro brews. Most appealing was the colour, and smoothness of this brew. Worth a try, but nothing to write home about.

Serving type: bottle

02-11-2005 00:38:11 | More by Frozensoul327
Photo of theo871


2.53/5  rDev -11.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

When I first poured this one, I thought it looked pretty tasty. Nice dark brown color to the brew, but once it "hits your lips" it loses its luster. How they can get away with calling this a bock beer is beyond me. Nice try AB, but I will not be partaking in this brew again anytime soon.

Serving type: bottle

02-08-2005 21:06:31 | More by theo871
Photo of bceaglejoe


2.88/5  rDev +0.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The local dive bar has dollar drafts of Amber Bock all the time, so I decided to give it a try.

Presentation: Poured a deep, dark brown with about a half-inch off-white head. The retention was very good. The smell was almost slightly metallic, although I didn't really catch much of a scent at all. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either.

Tasting: This beer is slightly heavier on the tongue. There is some carbonation and malt sweetness, but there is virtually no hop bitterness. It's difficult to characterize exactly what this tastes like. I'd say it has hints of an Irish Red Ale, but it is not as smooth or pleasant on the taste buds. While it is far from a bad beer, it is not great either. If I'm in the mood to go cheap, I'll drop a couple bucks on the drafts. It certainly beats some of this bar's other offerings...

Serving type: on-tap

02-06-2005 16:12:36 | More by bceaglejoe
Photo of Vancer


2.98/5  rDev +3.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

The *best* beer on tap at Timber Creek bar in O’Fallon, Mo. Had Ambers before, not a bad mass market frosty – caramel color pour, smidgen of malt aroma, pretty light taste and feel. Somewhat over sweet, not enough hop - but again, for a dumber American mass apeal.

$2 a pint makes them pretty drinkable for the evening session. Overall, nuttin to brag about, but not gonna run it down either.

Serving type: on-tap

02-03-2005 14:21:28 | More by Vancer
Photo of FranklinPCombs


2.33/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

The beer has a nice colour to it, but otherwise the appearance is suspiciously flat. It is crystal clear, with very little head, and no lace to speak of. Smell is a slighly sweet malt and yeasty smell, with hints of dry wheat fields. The smell is very underpowering though. The taste is very little, if any. There is an overpowering metallic taste, which is heightened by the tons of sharp carbonation on the tongue. There are hints of malts and yeast, with almost no hops at all, but overall I had a hard time tasting much of anything. It's a small step up from macro swill, but I would not buy this if it was up to me.

Serving type: bottle

02-02-2005 23:36:27 | More by FranklinPCombs
Photo of BruceBeerman


2.42/5  rDev -15.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

I think the beer is much better on-tap than in bottle. For a macro this is closer to having taste than most american marcos. Therefore I can attempt to write a review on it. It pours with nice head and nice lace (remember I had it on-tap with decent CO2 pressure compared to bottle). It doesn't have a typical Bock smell. It looks like a bock (color), but tastes a little watered down for that style. The hops are really masked. I can't seem to wonder how much adjuncts are included. I guess the general public never had a good Bock before. This is watery compared to the real thing. However, it is cheap in price compared to the real thing. There is a real sweet aftertaste that points to adjuncts. I wish they would have added more hops- German hops. But that would be too much to ask AB....

Serving type: on-tap

01-27-2005 23:41:34 | More by BruceBeerman
Photo of BigRedN


2.75/5  rDev -4.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

This was actually the first beer I had in my little "Bock off" tonight. It sucked so I save the reviw for last.

Appearance: The best thing I can say about this beer is it looks good. Dark reddish amber in color. If I remember correctly I think Red Wolf may have looked slightly like this? Thin head with no retention.

Smell: Faint hint of malt, slightly sweet. Aromas not as noticeable as the other bocks I have had.

Taste: This is AB at their best. Taking out any overwhelming flavors, and leaving a bland lifeless beer. Sweet, with a hint of chocolate and slightly malty.

Mouthfeel: Light bodied, thin.

Drinkability: Easy to put them down, but may not leave one wanting more. Typically AB, make something a person will not find offensive and make it as easy to drink as possible.

I remember liking this when I was younger and we thought we were really drinking bad ass beer, cause man this beer was dark. AB sure had us fooled. This is why they will probably never brew top notch beer. They can make it look good, but beyond that it is just plain weak.

Serving type: bottle

01-19-2005 04:47:35 | More by BigRedN
Photo of HardTarget


2.55/5  rDev -11.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Born on 05NOV04, brown twisty in the seasonal collection 12 pk. Mentions Hallatau and Tettnang hops. Really?
Aroma: Nice roasted chocolate malt aroma
Appearance: Very clear, very dark brown glass with a thin off white cover that is struggling to hold itself together. Thin sheets of lace quickly follow the beer down the glass.
Flavor: Balance is toward the sweet with the roasted chocolate malt playing second fiddle. There also is a hint of hops in a mild spice in the finish. Unfortunately, all of this is blended into what tastes like: a Michelob. I don’t know if it’s the yeast or some adjunct.
Mouthfeel: Medium-heavy mouthfeel, a bit fizzy in carbonation level, and a very dry finish.
Overall Impression: I’m starting to get the impression this whole line of 6 different Michelobs is like “What would Michelob look like in a hat? What about a pair of mittens?” It’s what Michelob would taste like if it was a bock, or if it was a pale ale. It’s still Michelob. That’s not a bad thing, but you really shouldn’t try to be what you’re not. This is not a bock.

Serving type: bottle

01-19-2005 01:01:38 | More by HardTarget
Photo of jimdkc


3.28/5  rDev +14.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a dark amber with a small off-white head that fades quickly and leaves no lace. Mild smell of sweet malts. Taste is quite sweet with very little evidence of hops. Slightly sour aftertaste. Thin, watery mouthfeel with medium carbonation. Very easy to drink. Another Michelob specialty beer that is probably a good choice when faced with a sea of macros, but that's probably the only time you'd want to choose it.

Serving type: bottle

01-18-2005 00:26:03 | More by jimdkc
Photo of mynie


2.9/5  rDev +1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours an okay-but-unexceptional amber with a small head.

Smells like an adjunct more than anything. Grain with just a bit of malt. Okay, but not complex.

Tastes like...an adjunct macro! Only a totally decent adjunct macro. A very crisp carbonation makes mixed with light, earthen malts and just a little bit of sweetness at the back make for a decent beer.

Bock? No way. A better choice than regular Michelob? Yes.

Serving type: bottle

01-14-2005 03:00:42 | More by mynie
Photo of swid


2.5/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Michelob Amber Bock pours a medium brown color, with high levels of carbonation. It has an off-white, 1/2" head that dissipates quickly; minimal lacing. The smell is a disappointment when compared to the appearance, though; it has the adjunct-infused aroma common to A-B products, with a weak malt aroma.

Amber Bock is initially quite sweet and fairly malty...unfortunately, the adjuncts flavors rear their ugly head after about a second or so, ruining the flavor. Hop bitterness is nonexistant. The mouthfeel is very light and somewhat insipid; Amber Bock finishes sweeter than most other A-B products. The aftertaste is slightly sour, but not enjoyably so.

For what it's worth, this IS one of the better beers A-B makes; if this is your only non-"straw yellow" option, take it. Also, if you live/travel in sparsely populated areas, Amber Bock may be the best beer available. Otherwise, skip it.

Serving type: bottle

01-09-2005 23:45:54 | More by swid
Michelob AmberBock from Anheuser-Busch
67 out of 100 based on 1,442 ratings.