1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Michelob (Original Lager) - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Michelob (Original Lager)Michelob (Original Lager)

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

922 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 922
Reviews: 347
rAvg: 2.64
pDev: 26.52%
Wants: 8
Gots: 47 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
American Pale Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Michelob Original Lager is brewed with pale, kilned two-row barley malt and noble European hops.

(Beer added by: Shiloh on 11-28-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Michelob (Original Lager) Alström Bros
Ratings: 922 | Reviews: 347 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of LordChesterfield
3.05/5  rDev +15.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

I've been drinking this beer since I was 2 so the smell is deeply ingrained in my mind. It pours with an okay head, but this stuff is completely clear and shiny. I would prefer the chill hase be left in myself, without it the beer looks very strange. Dark yellow. Smells like your typical AB lager, full of grain of some kind probably rice and corn. God I've never seen a more translucent beer than this! Strange mouthfeel, once it gets beyond the front of my mouth it doesn't even have a mouthfeel. No real aftertaste to speak of. It's a little strange to spend so much time on a macro american lager, but for some reason the image of Bud with better ingredients seemed interesting, plus it was free. Michelob... As with Budweis, AB steals the name of another Czech town. This stuff is so boring and mediocre I had a hard time even finishing the bottle. I think budweiser might even be better.

LordChesterfield, Jan 08, 2006
Photo of RJLarse
2.5/5  rDev -5.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The beer has a pale yellow color and is clear. Well carbonated and fizzy.

Smell and is generally unremarkable. Perfect for drinking from a can or bottle.

The taste is light, watery, unremarkable. Perfect for drinking from a can or bottle, especially if you are thirsty.

The paper wrapper about the throat of the bottle makes one feel this is an above average beer. It's not.

RJLarse, Jan 08, 2006
Photo of danielharper
3.05/5  rDev +15.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Received as a Christmas gift as part of the Michelob Mix-Pack.

This is my father's favorite beer, about the only thing he'll drink. If all beer tasted like this, well... I probably wouldn't be a beer drinker today. But I remember getting a taste of it when I was a kid and thinking "blech" even then... although it was for far different reasons than I might think so today.

Poured cold into a pint glass -- it creates a thick white smooth head and a dark yellow/orange body. Transparent and clean -- pretty much perfect appearance to-style.

Nose is strong on the malt presence, a touch of hops deep in the background. Very neutral, not much here to absorb through the aroma at all.

Sweet, bready up-front with slight corn aftertaste. No hop bitterness to be detected here; really just a very simple macro lager. A bit more "kick" to the malt than many macro lagers, but nothing too special.

Overall mouthfeel is slightly thicker than a Bud, but again nothing to get excited about. Average.

This is reasonably drinkable. If not reviewing, I'd probably have just consumed it straight from the bottle. Better than many macros, but nothing a beer geek should actively seek out.

danielharper, Jan 02, 2006
Photo of Jason
2.88/5  rDev +9.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

12 oz brown bottle with a "Born On Date" freshness date on the label.

A- Sizable head off of a hard pouring, the head seems to stay around for a while. Bright straw hue shimmers in the light.

S- Not much off of the aroma, a little grain ... that is about it.

T&M- Thin maltiness, light body with a feigned dextrin mouth feel. Semi-crisp with an odd bitty slickness on the mouth. A trained hop bitterness barks out only a small yet balancing bite. Odd finish as it wanted to be sweet but it really ended up very dry.

D- Not a horrible premium American lager it missed its mark totally for any kind of substantial flavor. But that is what a macro-lager is right? It does not live up to its manly advertisements in Playboy back in the 1970's.

Jason, Dec 29, 2005
Photo of willgro
3.43/5  rDev +29.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

You can't mess w/ Michelob. Its my dad's drink for god's sake. If you haven't had one, get one immediately. It is what it is, but please try it. Gotta love the Michelob. No need for a real review. It has a slight bitterness to it and can have a little bit of an aftertaste. Not the best beer in the world, but better than budweiser, for god's sake.

willgro, Dec 25, 2005
Photo of arguemaniac
2.33/5  rDev -11.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Pours a dull, but crystal clear golden amber with a poorly retained white head tha leaves no lace whatsoever. Mostly a moderate grain aroma in the nose, with very subtle hints of honey and alcohol. The taste includes dissapointingly mild traces of caramel, grain, very slight alcohol, and a barely detectable hop flavor. A nearly non-existent finish with a thin mouthfeel and very little carbonation. Not recommended.

arguemaniac, Dec 02, 2005
Photo of allengarvin
2.8/5  rDev +6.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Picked this up in a 12-pack of 6 Michelob varieties... unusual that there's only one other review. I assumed this was the standard Michelob.

Pours out pale pale crystal clear gold, with a thin layering of foam across the top and some, though not much, lacing. Aroma is faintly grainy, barely detectable. Very clean taste, with neutral, slightly sweet grain and barely perceptable hops, though just enough bitterness to keep the sweetness at bay. Finishes dry. Light bodied with average carbonation.

Better than most mass-produced American lagers, in that there are no off-flavors. There's not much good either.

allengarvin, Nov 29, 2005
Photo of nekronos
4/5  rDev +51.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Well, by the time I drank that beer, I was too far from the Beer fan I am now. It was very nice, in th emiddle of being a dark lager, but it was not annoying, after all. That is what counts from a macro lager for me. NOt refreshing at all, but you can have a good time with it, no aditives being bad in it.

nekronos, Oct 20, 2005
Photo of tesguino
2.78/5  rDev +5.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

The best of michelob family, i try this beer in its new extruded aluminum bottle; superior over its sisters; appearance like a real lager, smell hops, rice, bit of malt, taste acceptable; mouthfeel not impressed; drinkability over the average; try with american food; 80% recommended

tesguino, Oct 18, 2005
Photo of BeerBeing
1.27/5  rDev -51.9%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Presentation: 12oz brown glass custom bottle, black/red on gold label

Appearance: yellow color, medium head, no lacing

Smell: minor mix of malt and hops

Taste: thin body, very watery mouth feel, some generic sweetness and nothing else

Notes: awful brew,it is better to drink spring water

BeerBeing, Oct 09, 2005
Photo of ski271
2.93/5  rDev +11%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: Clear pale yellow with a small, white, very quickly diminishing head.

Smell: Sweet grain and VERY lightly floral

Taste: Malt sweetness balanced by a very light bitterness. Finishes crisp.

Mouthfeel: Light-medium body, ever so slightly creamy texture, moderate carbonation.

Drinkability: In the world of lagers, this beer is quite weak. But compared to other American macros, this isn’t too shabby (and probably one of the best A-B brews), so it has to get some points for that.

ski271, Sep 09, 2005
Photo of BEERchitect
2.75/5  rDev +4.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Does 'all-malt' beers deserve better praise that their adjunct ladden counterparts? Anheuser Busch thinks so with their Michelob brand. The beer begins with a malt profile that hits on light bread / toast / caramel character, and does a better job of balancing out the sulfer compounds and tart astringencies that hinder the Busch and Bud brands. However the weak malts come across a bit raw with a touch of cola and bread dough character. Hops may balance the sweetness, but don't offer much in the way of bitterness, flavor or aroma. Though all malt, an over sparged-type astringency comes through as the sweetness fades in the finish. Perhaps a better beer than the more pale Light Lagers, but only marginally.

BEERchitect, Sep 07, 2005
Photo of jettjon
2.88/5  rDev +9.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Sometimes I like to have a good old traditional American macro lager just for perspective. Michelob is supposedly one of the best, so….

Pours golden clear with a thick white head that quickly vanishes before your eyes. Rather bland nose, quite unremarkable. Very unremarkable appearance; it looks flat. Very slightly bitter with the faintest hint of hops and malt. Drinkability is average (typical lawn mowing beer). Overall, quite unimpressive though unfortunately I have had much worse (Bud Light in the can springs to mind). So essentially: it’s got no head, no nose, looks flat, tastes flat, and basically has all the worst qualities of a macro lager. I would avoid this beer.

jettjon, Sep 07, 2005
Photo of BuckeyeNation
1.8/5  rDev -31.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Today is a fine day for Macro Smackdown VI. This will be yet another slugfest between Anheuser-Busch (Michelob) and Miller (Red Dog). This beer comes in the fancy new bottle-shaped can, while its competitor will be disgorged from the standard aluminum can; and a great looking, boldly colored can it is. Points right off the bat to Red Dog for the superior container, although it won't be reflected in the final score. And there's the opening bell...

Bright yellow-gold, accent on yellow. While Michelob is more pale than Red Dog, it isn't a bad hue given the style. The cap is brilliant white, displays pearl-like bubbles on its upper surface and is acceptably persistent. It looks a hell of a lot better than its competitor's head, that's for sure. There's no lace other than a stunted collar that follows the beer down the glass.

The nose, while semi-nasty, is tolerable. It smells like husky grain with a mild whiff of flowery hops. Thankfully, it isn't very powerful. Another win for Michelob.

This isn't good beer. The graininess is rampant and is too harsh and unrefined to score any points with me. I can't detect even a hint of hops, which makes me wonder if I smelled them. Michelob falls on the dry side of the sweet-dry continuum (as do quite a few A-B beers), which hurts it in my eyes.

The mouthfeel is light, lighter, (not quite) lightest. There are no differences between the two beers other than the fact that this one is mildly carbonated and Red Dog is slightly more vigorously carbonated. I prefer more carbonation in this particular case, but not enough for the scores to be different.

Michelob strikes me as lousy beer, even for a macro lager. I remember drinking this stuff in my late teens (okay, mid-teens) when I thought it was a special treat, a step or two above the usual. Well it isn't. In fact, I can't even pick it over a lesser known macro with a big red bulldog on the can. I'm beginning to realize that I prefer Miller products over A-B products. However, it's only in a 'lesser of two evils' kind of way.

BuckeyeNation, Aug 27, 2005
Photo of BigRedN
2.75/5  rDev +4.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I found this beer buried in my fridge tonight. Now how did that get in there? Oh yeah... it's left over from my curiosity purchase (from the article about Chef Todd English "beer slut". I have no review of this? Well, it is within 110 days of the born on date, so why not. Why not? Here's why:

Appearance: Pours into a pilsner glass, yellow/gold, clear, plenty of little bubbles dance through the fluid. Big, fluffy/foamy white head forms, and falls back in on itself. Small ring around the glass, no lacing. Perfectly typical macro, this beer's best feature.

Smell: Virtually none. Some malt/grain/adjunct aroma. Where are the all the imported hops?

Taste: A little sweet, with the malty/grainy taste. Hint of bitterness on the finish as this warms, but then the taste turns foul. Maybe not as adjuncty as Bud, but still not even comparable to good craft beer, even a craft "macro" imitation.

Mouthfeel: Light bodied and crisp, well carbonated.

Drinkability: This is supposed to be the high end AB product. Vastly overpriced IMO. I'll stick to Bud.

BigRedN, Aug 25, 2005
Photo of tgbljb
3.2/5  rDev +21.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

poured a medium yellow color with large white head. Smell is slightly of hops with a background sweetness. Taste is light with a bit of maltiness but little if any hops detected. Refeshing in the mouth but nothing to get excited about. If you want an American Macro lager, go cheap. This costs too much.

tgbljb, Jul 27, 2005
Photo of PBRstreetgang
3/5  rDev +13.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours golden with a quickly fading head. has a slightly malt smell, and thats about all you can taste as well, but not overpowering. Good carbonation and lacing, so it's fairly drinkable, but nothing that sets it apart from any other american macro.

PBRstreetgang, Jul 10, 2005
Photo of mentor
3/5  rDev +13.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Poured a 2 finger white head over a very pale tan crystal clear liquid. Smells faintly of munich malt, but mostly of metalic floral saaz hops. Tastes creamy sweet with some mild metalic hop bitter. Pretty mild in flavor. The malt sweet is crisp and clean, like a lager. A hint of munich malt quality. I'm actually surprised at the amount of floral hop in the late swallow. Much more than I was expecting from a macro beer. Light body and light carbonation. Carbonation is good for the style, as it does not add any acrid foul to the beer that needs to be smooth.

mentor, May 29, 2005
Photo of KoG
2.1/5  rDev -20.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Had both the bottled version and the aluminum bottled version... yeah. Well anyway, Pale yellow with a fizzy head that lasts longer than many macros, still no lacing.

Smells less offensive, but in the sense that less offensive is still more offensive than good. Slighy rotten grain and water, nothing else.

Smoother tasting than BMC main beers, and a bit fuller but still lacking any REAL malt flavor or hop bittereness. Goes down alright though.

If you run low on money and this is the choice between BMC, go with this, but not if you can help it.

KoG, May 25, 2005
Photo of Frozensoul327
2.75/5  rDev +4.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This may very well be the best brew that AB makes. Pours out to a solid golden color, with a decent head that hangs around for a few moments before bubbling away. Medium carbonation, and scents of hops and barely are noted. Flavor is of your typcial lager, but a bit strong on the flavor of corn. Finished a bit watery, but had a decent aftertaste of malt. Worth a try, but there are far better lagers out there at a fraction of the price.

Frozensoul327, May 15, 2005
Photo of Pegasus
2.53/5  rDev -4.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance: Quite clear medium golden color with a small snow-white head, which retains well, lots of broken lace, and a small amount of carbonation.

Aroma: Slightly sweet, crisp malt light malt aroma and the usual adjuncts, with little hop presence.

Taste: Lightly sweet at the opening, somewhat like sweet corn, this carries throughout. There are minor notes of hop bitterness midway through the taste, finishes with a hint of metallic bitterness.

Mouth feel: Smooth, not unpleasant, but thin overall.

Drinkability/notes: Overall, a lawnmower beer - not offensive, just bland and indifferent.

Presentation: Packaged in a twelve ounce brown glass longneck with a twist off crown, served in a standard tap glass.

Pegasus, May 04, 2005
Photo of whynot44
3/5  rDev +13.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Light bodied, light amber color with a short lived white head. The aroma is mild grain and malt with just a slight touch of hops.

The flavor is along the same lines. mild sweet malt, corn flakes, and just enough hops to balnce.

Decently drinkable and refreshing.

Not particularly "interesting" but it will definitely do the job on a hot day with just about any food.

whynot44, Apr 29, 2005
Photo of Suds
2.28/5  rDev -13.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

This is the first time that I’ve had a Michelob in years. I remember thinking that this was a first-class beer, and drinking it from tall pilsner glasses. It was the late 80’s and I was a high-rolling, sophisticated beer drinker [sic].
Today, I’m trying to approach this brew from an objective point of view. It’s absolutely clear, a brilliant yellow-gold color, and has a fizzy, white head. It sure is one highly carbonated, effervescent beer. The aroma is faintly hoppy, grassy, and grainy. There’s a bit more hops than most macro brews, but their not worth getting excited about. It’s crisp, carbonic, and has a distinct dry taste. Continental hop flavor and finish. The brew is fairly watery, but other then that, there’s nothing offensive. Actually, it’s an uninteresting everyday brew…probably a little better than most, but I’d grab a lot of other brews before settling on this one.

Suds, Apr 24, 2005
Photo of TheDeuce
3.28/5  rDev +24.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

I miss those crazy old bottles...new labels again for this beer.

Appearance-radiant golden color, barely any head, what is there is whispy and fizzy. Clarity is passable, no lace.

Smell-some grains are detectable, corn and rice, barley aroma, no real strong hop or malt influence.

Taste-fuller than I expected, grainy hop lingering on the toungue, crisp and slightly malty, exceptionally smooth.

Mouthfeel-smooth when going down, light grainy aftertaste, smooth and crisp as a lager should be.

Drinkability-as easy to drink as any lager you'll find, you can have as many as you like. More flavorful than many other adjunct lagers.

Overall-while many macro lagers look fine and taste bad this lager is the opposite, it looks bad and tastes fairly good. I'll take the latter anyday. While it is an AB product and a macro, Michelob manages to have much more flavor than most macros and thus, when at a sub-standard bar, it will do in a pinch. Deserves credit for its flavor and while it won't change the world and is by no means a top notch beer (or even lager) its passable.

TheDeuce, Apr 19, 2005
Photo of Redrover
2.63/5  rDev -0.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

12 oz brown bottle with clear born on date.

The beer pours a very light gold with a decent initial head. A bit of lacing.

I can pick-up a bit of hops and some grain in the nose. Not horrible by any means.

Slight initial vegetable taste. There is a little malt/grain sweetness but unfortunately the hops recede far into the background. Taste seems washed out and unfinished.

While the beer has decent carbonation, it is very thin. Drinkablity is just ok.
I had higher hopes for AB’s super premium but the beer’s taste could not live up to even its modest look and smell. Horrible, no, just not something I would search out.

Thanks to whomever left this at my St. Patrick’s Day party, I think….

Redrover, Apr 15, 2005
Michelob (Original Lager) from Anheuser-Busch
63 out of 100 based on 922 ratings.