Bud Light Platinum - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Bud Light PlatinumBud Light Platinum

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
54
awful

1,679 Ratings
THE BROS
60
poor

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,679
Reviews: 345
rAvg: 2.21
pDev: 34.39%
Wants: 16
Gots: 384 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
Light Lager |  6.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: DarthKostrizer on 12-31-2011

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (87) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Bud Light Platinum Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 1,679 | Reviews: 345
Photo of UCLABrewN84
1.94/5  rDev -12.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 1.5

Pours a clear gold with a foamy bone head that settles to tiny wisps of film on top of the beer. No lacing on the drink down. Smell is of malt, grain, and some fruity but vegetal aromas. Taste is much the same with fruity, grassy, and corn-like flavors on the finish. There is a very mild amount of hop bitterness on the palate with each sip. This beer has a lower level of carbonation with a slightly crisp mouthfeel. Overall, this is a very poor beer that is slightly better than regular Bud Light but that isn't really hard to do.

Photo of kylehay2004
1.75/5  rDev -20.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

A half finger head forms. The smell is of barely. Taste is sweeter than bud light with a less bitter aftertaste.The beer tastes and looks watered down but really its just lack of hop flavoring. Far more watered down than its non-light version just like bud light.

Photo of metter98
2.23/5  rDev +0.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

A: The beer is crystal clear light yellow in color and has a moderate amount of visible carbonation. It poured with a thin head that quickly died down, leaving lacing on the surface and a thin ring of bubbles around the edge of the glass.
S: There are light aromas of Concord grapes in the nose along with some hints of grainy malts.
T: The taste is not very flavorful and has some hints of corn and rice malts.
M: It feels light-bodied and a bit thin on the palate with a moderate to high amount of carbonation.
O: This beer is easy to drink but doesn’t taste much more that slightly flavored water.

Photo of BEERchitect
2/5  rDev -9.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Maybe considered to be a high-gravity light beer, Bud Light Platinum breaks all the rules and traditions of beer to accomodate those who don't like beer but wants the buzz to come in a couple drinks rather than multiple.

Extremely light in straw with hardly and color at all- even ginger ales have a more beer-like appearance than this. Efforvescent streams of carbonation fuel an absolute fizzy head for a moment or two before falling flat. A rather dull looking beer overall.

Aromas of mineral water and grain carry a sweetish cereal component that dominates the nose. Vegital and with an apple-like sulfur note, the beer offers very little aromatic value.

Flavors do much the same. When the taste of water gives just as much intensity as the rice, corn, and aspirtame sweetness, then that might become a complement rather than a criticism. Minerally, like hard water and raw grains struggle to offer any bready malt notes or floral hop profiles.

Very light throughout and with an evaporative cooling from the alcohol dryness that starts almost immediately, even while the grainy-sweet taste is still present early on. Thin, watery, and dry- this is the closest thing I've taste to alcoholic water.

Surprisingly, I'm not too terribly off put with this beer. It's probably because there actually has to be a taste present in order to critique negativley. There's just no 'there' there.

Photo of StonedTrippin
1.37/5  rDev -38%
look: 2 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.25 | overall: 1

take the watery extract flavors of a bud light and add the burning stomach churning effect of grain alcohol, and you have a bud light platinum. as much as I hate the politics, marketing, and desired demographic (see my black crown review), I also hate the beer. it just tastes awful, metallic and boozy, yet somehow still diluted. its a mess from top to bottom. if it had no taste it would have a passable mouthfeel, that's about it. upbeat carbonation and a lighter body, but it cant save a beer that tastes more like a caustic chemical reaction than an honest brew for human consumption. I have no interest in ever consuming one of these again. it had the profound effect of bringing me from craving a beer badly to instantly not wanting to drink anymore, they should treat alcoholics with this wash, might turn them off too. id honestly rather drink any dirty 40 from the gas station than have another one of these. steer clear.

Photo of Phyl21ca
2/5  rDev -9.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Bottle: Poured a clear pale yellow color lager with a small bubbly head with minimal retention. Aroma consists of light sweet malt with well hidden adjunct. Taste is also dominated by sweet malt with no clearly identifiable adjunct but also very limited characteristics. Body is light with average carbonation. I actually drank this side-by-side with a regular bud light and I must say that the platinum is actually better though still quite bland in the grand scheme of things.

Photo of Knapp85
1.77/5  rDev -19.9%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

This poured out looking a lot like ginger ale... yellowish gold in color with a fizzy white head on top. The head vanishes and leaves nothing behind to look at on the glass or on top of the beer. The beer is clear and slightly bubbly. yellow water is what it honestly looks like. The smell of the beer has some aromas of light grains and corn... nothing really stands out. The taste is bland and gives off what I felt like chemical flavors or chlorine. The mouthfeel is water, thin, carbonated but just boring. Overall it's pretty bad... I can't seem to come up with a really good reason to buy this beer.

Photo of biboergosum
2.09/5  rDev -5.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

12oz, neon blue bottle (it's been done), from some random convenience store on the Big Island; it took up precious luggage space, only because I tried damned near every good beer on the islands whilst there on my honeymoon over the past few weeks.

After the twist and hiss, this beer pours a clear, pale golden straw colour, with one skinny finger of fizzy, loosely foamy white head, which bleeds away at hemophiliac speed, leaving zilch in the manner of lace.

It smells, well it smells of damned near nothing - a void, wherein only the slightest of mineral and fruit ester notes burble to the surface - could be that it's too cold, slave to the marketing that I am. The taste is very sweet breakfast cereal grain, cloying at best, fake-tasting and plastic-like - are there actually aspartame kiddie cereals out there? Very little else comes through, hop or alcohol, or, well, best leave it at that.

The carbonation is zippy, and fairly prickly, but is soon subsumed by the medium-heavy weight (style-wise), palate-coating body, which is smooth, of course, that being the sole successful attribute of this ilk. It finishes like concentrated Bud Light - sweet, quasi-grainy, and soul-reaping.

A weird science experience wrought veritable. Ugh. This is the beer equivalent of that perfect Hollywood, surgically enhanced, personality-deficient starlet. Looks good, has some intangibly attractive trait, and whose attempts at edginess are calculated and cold. Funny, a Nickelback song suddenly came on the cacophony blaring from the bar across the street - ok, no more analogies. Avoid, unless you just want to get trashed, though I can't imagine the hangover possible with this.

Photo of emerge077
2.06/5  rDev -6.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Felt bad to ask for a glass. So I didn't. It was free, thanks Valencio.

Smelled like apple and wet cardboard. Soggy grains, wet cereal.
Tasted similar, more apple and soggy graininess. It has a touch more malt flavor than standard issue Bud Light. Mild taste, flaccid feel, utterly dull and insipid flavor wise. Biting astringent carbonation, watery aftertaste. Pretty much bullshit any way you slice it... whee, liquid garbage.

Photo of womencantsail
2.98/5  rDev +34.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours a pale golden color with a short lived white head. Nose reveals a striking similarity to Bud Light. Corn, sweet cereal, no hops, faint yeast, and minimal esters. Maybe not quite as watery. Flavor does have a touch of hop character, but otherwise your typical light/pale lager. Cereal and grain sweetness, mild yeast, and some water. Very high carbonation and very light body. I actually like it better than Bud Light.

Photo of zeff80
1.03/5  rDev -53.4%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Wow, just wow! Let's take a bad product increase the strength but make it taste worse. I think they've done that. It was fizzy, yellow and clear. Smells like....nothing. Corn, maybe? It tasted like corn and water. Mouthfeel is fizzy and highly carbonated. Overall, this is just as bad if not worse than Bud Light. Simply amazing.

Photo of ChainGangGuy
2.38/5  rDev +7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

Appearance: Pours out a clear, yellow body with a small, fizzly, white head that doesn't stick around for long. A few trails of effervescence fail to support the head.

Smell: Just a small sniff of husky bland barley and booze.

Taste: Faintly grainy with a scant cereal sweetness. A little booze. It's akin to a baby malt liquor. Sweetish, lightly husky, lightly astringent finish.

Mouthfeel: Light-bodied. Medium carbonation.

Overall: It's bad when a beer makes you want a Bud Light.

Photo of TMoney2591
2.71/5  rDev +22.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Served in a tumbler.

Been waiting with baited breath for this randomness to come out. Call it a ticker's curiosity. It pours a clear straw topped by a finger or so of white foam. The nose is faint, with undertones of corn syrup, light grass, light sweet flowers, and mild wheat. The taste is a blast of corn syrup sweetness, with some grains hidden behind. A touch of sweetgrass flares up as well. The body is a light-leaning medium, with a moderate carbonation and a lightly syrupy feel. Overall, this honestly ain't as bad as it initially sounded. Frankly, I'd take this over a normal Bud Light any day...

Photo of nickfl
1.86/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

A - Pours from its classy, premium blue bottle with a small head of white foam that disappears very quickly and leaves no lace. The body is a perfectly clear, golden color.

S - A sweet, grainy note with a hint of green apple.

T - Sweet, thick bready notes up front. Some green apple and grainy character in the middle and a fairly clean finish with just a touch of artificial sweetener.

M - Medium body, moderate carbonation, and a slightly dry finish.

D - So, despite the incredibly upscale packaging this pretty much tastes like Bud Light with some nutrasweet in it. In fact, I am pretty sure I just cracked the secret of Bud Light Platinum, time to stake out the local AB brewery and try to get a picture of the truck delivering loads of fake sugar.

Photo of NeroFiddled
3/5  rDev +35.7%

Bud Light Platinum
16. oz. can, coded "14226 SH23"

Poured into a clean glass Bud Light Platinum delivers a nice looking pint with a straw gold body beneath a short head of bright white foam. The head drops readily but maintains a solid surface covering. The lacing is limited but it does leave some nice craggy splashes behind.

The aroma is clean, and expresses only sweetish adjunct malt with a hint of apple-like fruitiness.

The flavor is quite a surprise! My initial impression was that it tasted like a malt liquor... a watered down malt liquor, but one with that sweetish adjunct-laden maltiness that lingers in the mouth because there are very little hops present. It's fruity and sweet, without any noticeable hop flavors at all, and a very low bitterness level to balance it out. Odd.

In the mouth it's medium bodied and smooth with a very moderate carbonation. If I hold the glass to the light I can see tiny bubbles steadily streaming upwards but there are not nearly as many as might be expected, especially for a light beer, which should be crisp.

So what's going on here? If you read the can it states that it's 6.0% ALC./VOL., which is very odd for a light beer, and it's also got 137 calories and 4.4 grams of carbs per 12 oz. serving (thank you A-B for including that, sincerely). I had to get my head around this so I put together a list:

110 calories in Bud Light @ 4.2% abv
137 calories in Bud Light Platinum @ 6.0% abv
145 calories in Budweiser @ 5.0% abv
158 calories in Hurricane @ 5.8% abv

So what we have here is basically a 'light malt liquor'. Is this a new American style of beer?

Unless the cost difference between Hurricane Malt Liquor and Bud Light Platinum is pretty great, I can't imagine anyone going for the Hurricane. The Bud Light Platinum is clean, and actually delivers a slightly bigger punch.

So how to rate this? I generally look at the whole world of beer as a guideline, meaning that there are poorly made beers that suffer from defects, and then there are pristine examples of certain styles that have a certain 'je ne said quoin' of magic to them that exemplify the 'creme de la creme'. An OK beer then scores a "3" as a "3" is average, and on that world-scale a standard Budweiser scores a bit higher at about 3.5. As far as a 'light malt liquor' goes I think this is really the only one. Compared to other malt liquors it's pretty damned good, but if we look at it just as 'a beer' thrown into the world mix it comes out short. I think for what it is it's not bad. I find no defects with it, and I thought it was much more drinkable than a lot of malt liquors.

I'm not sure I have an answer to this one yet, but I'm gonna stick with "okay" until something else pops up.

Photo of TheManiacalOne
1.55/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Poured from a 12oz bottle into a US tumbler pint glass.

A: The beer is a very light straw yellow color, with a short white head that fades very quickly and leaves very little lace on the glass.

S: The aroma contains very light malts along with adjuncts and a very faint bit of hops.

T: The taste starts with a mild breadiness from adjuncts and a thin malt character, Then some malt sweetness quickly follows. The hops presence is almost non-existent but brings a least a little bit of balance. The after-taste is slightly bready.

M: A little crisp and a little smooth, light body, medium-to-heavy carbonation, finish is clean.

D: There isn’t much flavor to it, goes down very easily and not filling at all since there's not much substance to the beer, mild kick, I’m not really picking up much of any difference between this and the regular Bud Light.

Photo of oriolesfan4
2.28/5  rDev +3.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Tried this earlier this afternoon at a crab feast on the eastern shore in MD. Remember seeing the commercials during the Super Bowl, finally get a chance to try it (woohoo). Can't say i was too impressed, I'd actually prefer a Bud Light over this one. Has a musty smell and an odd sweetness to it, awkward finish as well. An odd tasting beer, and definitely not good tasting or refreshing by any means. Comes in a fancy blue bottle and has higher ABV, but I'll pass in the future.

Photo of Slatetank
2.89/5  rDev +30.8%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 3

I had a bottle of this, it was pretty average for the style, the only thing going for it really is an increased abv threshold. I think for the price it isn't bad, but it really doesn't have much in the way of flavor beyond a corn pop type sweetness. I can't say it is really a flawed beer meaning having noticeable flavor deficiencies unless you consider lack of flavor one, then it is pretty bland which is why I gave it a below average score

Photo of Jason
2.54/5  rDev +14.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

12oz twist-off cobalt blue bottle, no freshness date. Labeling looks sort of cheap looking or at least the design is not so appealing to me.

LOOK: Crystal clear pale yellow, head crackles a bit but does stay.

SMELL: White flour, cooked cereal, carbonic, muted

TASTE: Crisp, warming alcohol, plain porridge, faint hop bitterness, light maltiness, slightly cloying

It's basically a light malt liquor. Lacking any real malt flavor and the cloying character it less resembles a beer and more of a very watered down cheap whiskey. There are clearly better light beers out there if you are into that. Now we all just have to wait for the half dozen fruit varieties that will follow it is does well.

Photo of mactrail
2.52/5  rDev +14%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 2.25

This does seem to have more in common with the cheap malt liquors, and the ABV is actually getting close to that range. It looks nice enough, just very pale. Sudsy with impeccable bubbles and nice lacing. These industrial guys really know their carbonation. I didn't quite get the bottle until I held it in front of the computer screen-- the cobalt blue is quite stunning.

Very light but a touch of wheaty maltiness. The flavor is grainy, even slightly boozy. Maybe that's the hook. It's drinkable enough if you like this kind of stuff. But, as usual with Anheuser, Miller-Coors, SAB, In-Bev ,and all the rest-- it's all about marketing. If they could come up with a Marlborough Man for beer, it would make the advertising so much easier.

Photo of WVbeergeek
3.6/5  rDev +62.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Marketing, marketing, marketing, cool blue bottles Bud Light with a bit more alcohol and flavor not just premium but platinum. Pours a fizzy yellow bright golden color with white head dwindling quickly. Aroma has some green apple notes with a faint slightly metallic note with cooked veggies and cereal grains. This is like putting a tuxedo on a malt liquor. Flavor has the sweetness, like sweet creamed corn notes and a touch of rough alcohol herbal hops. Juicy fruit and sweet malts defines this beer pretty much. Sweet even cloyingly so brings beer to a new level of mass production and acceptable sweetness levels. Overall a beer I will drink with friends who buy this but I won't be spending 11.99 on a 12 pack again, although my wife seems to enjoy the effects of a beer that drinks just as easy as Bud Light but has the full alcohol level of 6% abv.

Photo of feloniousmonk
2.35/5  rDev +6.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Bud Light Platinum. Wow. Platinum. 6% ABV. Triple Fermented, I hear. Anheuser Busch, St. Louis, MO. Lager 12 fl. oz. Born on date: 12007vx78. whatever that means.

"Platinum is a chemical element with the chemical symbol Pt and an atomic number of 78."

Yellow, no head. Active carbonation. Not appealing to look at. Could have just the same being peering at my toilet bowl. But no one is really looking at this, it's being chugged from a bottle.

Even though it has six naturally occurring isotopes, platinum is one of the rarest elements in the Earth's crust and has an average abundance of approximately 5 μg/kg. It is the least reactive metal. It occurs in some nickel and copper ores along with some native deposits, mostly in South Africa, which accounts for 80% of the world production.

Aroma: cereal grains. Probably a lot of rice. Nothing else. Wet water and weak everything else. Moist air.

As a member of the platinum group of elements, as well as of the group 10 of the periodic table of elements, platinum is generally non-reactive. It exhibits a remarkable resistance to corrosion, even at high temperatures, and as such is considered a noble metal. As a result, platinum is often found chemically uncombined as native platinum. Because it occurs naturally in the alluvial sands of various rivers, it was first used by pre-Columbian South American natives to produce artifacts.

Taste: must I? I must. Tons of carbonation. Bristling bubblation on the palate, then gone, then nothing. Nothing from nothing means nothing. Gotta have something. And we got nothing. The tongue sticks in the liquid and pulls out…nothing. The mind races for something and comes back with nothing. Is it a beer? Is it a plane? It's …nothing. It's watered down alcopops. It's a bottle of Smirnoff Ice added to a gallon of ice water.

Platinum is used in catalytic converters, laboratory equipment, electrical contacts and electrodes, platinum resistance thermometers, dentistry equipment, and jewelry. Because only a few hundred tonnes are produced annually, it is a scarce material, and is highly valuable and is a major precious metal commodity.

Enough carbonation to make you think you're drinking beer. But, that would be a lie and that would be wrong. What could I say to sell this more than "less watery than water"? "Less pungent than pee?"

As a pure metal, platinum is silvery-white, lustrous, ductile, and malleable.[3] Platinum is more ductile than gold, silver and copper, thus being the most ductile of pure metals, but gold is still more malleable than platinum [4][5] It does not oxidize at any temperature, although it is corroded by halogens, cyanides, sulfur, and caustic alkalis. Platinum is insoluble inhydrochloric and nitric acid, but dissolves in hot aqua regia to form chloroplatinic acid, H2PtCl6.[6]

Blah, blah, blah. Wait, I meant, "fullest expression yet known of Bud Light. Bud Light to the Nth Degree. Ne Plus ultra Bud Light. Etcetera."
Higher alcohol, no extra flavor or body, Bud Light Blah. I don't know how else to explain it.

Platinum is an extremely rare metal, occurring at a concentration of only 0.005ppm in the Earth's crust It is sometimes mistaken for silver (Ag). Platinum is often found chemically uncombined as native platinum and alloyed with iridium as platiniridium. Most often the native platinum is found in secondary deposits; platinum is combined with the other platinum group metals in alluvial deposits. The alluvial deposits used by pre-Columbian people in the Chocó Department, Colombiaare still a source for platinum group metals. Another large alluvial deposit is in the Ural Mountains, Russia, and it is still mined.

Who is this meant for, I wonder? Bud Light drinkers who want to step up, but not all the way to Budweiser, or Select, or what-have-you? Drinkers who want watery, but not that watery?

Platinum's rarity as a metal has caused advertisers to associate it with exclusivity and wealth. "Platinum" debit cards have greater privileges than do "gold" ones. "Platinum awards" are the second highest possible, ranking above "gold", "silver" and "bronze", but below diamond. For example, in the United States, a musical album that has sold more than 1 million copies, will be credited as "platinum", whereas an album that sold more than 10 million copies will be certified as "diamond".

Ah, ha! I knew there had to be a reason this is called "Platinum." I knew it wasn't found in alluvial deposits, and it's most certain to oxidize in certain temperatures. How precious and rare is this beer? That is yet to be seen. I haven't found anything in it to convince me it will last.

But, I hope you enjoyed learning about Platinum! Thanks, Wikipedia!

Photo of mdfb79
2.36/5  rDev +6.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

From 05/23/12 notes. Poured from a 12 oz. can into a pint glass.

a - Pours a bright, pale straw yellow color that is very transparent, one finger of fluffy white head that only lastsfor a minute or two, and high carbonation evident. Looks like Bud Light.

s - Smells of corn, grains, wheat, and light sweet pale malts. Not much going on at all, but not skunky light some other light lagers. VERY similiar to Bud Light.

t - Tastes of corn, lightly sweet, grains, bread, and wheat. Again, not offensive but nothing going on. Not skunky at all.

m - Light body and low to moderate carbonation. Light, watery mouthfeel.

o - Overall this is pretty much the same exact beer as Bud Light, with slightly less taste and less calories. Might as well drink this if you're drinking Bud Light as at least you'll save half the calories.

Photo of jwc215
1.88/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Pours golden with a thin head that struggles to be a slight wisp for a little while before disappearing. No real lacing sticks.

The smell is of cheap malt liquor - some grain, some alcohol.

The taste is sweet and slimy. Alcohol shows. Not much in the way of flavor.

It is slick in an oily way with some carbonation and a lingering alcohol taste.

This is ridiculous. A boozy, light beer.

Someone gave me this. I'm glad I didn't buy it.

Photo of chinchill
2.58/5  rDev +16.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

12oz blue bottle served in a snifter.

Th aroma is both faint and not entirely pleasant, having a bit of a metallic note. The flavor is considerably better, with well balanced malt and hops. Still, the flavor is quite mild and lacks complexity or richness.

M: light body is somewhat watery but better than expected. Some crispness from well-chosen level of carbonation

O: Better than expected since this beer had no obvious production flaws. It worked fine as a thirst=quenching beverage after some summer yard work.

P.S. I note this is a rare beer in generating BA ratings all the way from 1 to 5.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Bud Light Platinum from Anheuser-Busch
54 out of 100 based on 1,679 ratings.