1. Rating beers by attributes (look, smell, taste, feel, overall) is back! Read the latest update ...
  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!

New Holland Black Tulip Trippel Ale - New Holland Brewing Company

Not Rated.
New Holland Black Tulip Trippel AleNew Holland Black Tulip Trippel Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
87
very good

477 Ratings
THE BROS
100
world-class

(view ratings)
Ratings: 477
Reviews: 261
rAvg: 3.89
pDev: 14.14%
Wants: 27
Gots: 30 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
New Holland Brewing Company visit their website
Michigan, United States

Style | ABV
Tripel |  9.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 11-09-2002)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of New Holland Black Tulip Trippel Ale Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 477 | Reviews: 261 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of TectonicFun
1/5  rDev -74.3%

TectonicFun, Sep 19, 2012
Photo of kraticus41
1.25/5  rDev -67.9%

kraticus41, Aug 22, 2013
Photo of cosmicevan
1.43/5  rDev -63.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Think I got this bottle from cam in a goandpickitupforyabro box back in the day. 2007 vintage that I have probably been holding for a few years as well. I guess tonight is the night...enjoyed from a la fin du monde tulip (despite most reviews saying that this isn't very triple like, we'll see about that).

a - brew poured a ruby chestnut with a finger plus of big frothy cream colored head, nice staying power. Slippery lacing.

s - nose is massively sweet. Knock you over sweet. Really rich and syrupy. Gooey. Caramelish. Musty.

t/m/o - whoa. Too much. Just too sweet. Cannot handle...sorry, not my bag. Although I never had this fresh, I can tell you that 7 yrs is too much. I can only handle small sips of this beer. I will have to try this fresh to give it a fair shake, but please don't age this for 7 yrs unless you want to play a joke on someone.

cosmicevan, Apr 19, 2014
Photo of Pillowburn
1.5/5  rDev -61.4%

Pillowburn, Jul 05, 2013
Photo of Arbitrator
1.88/5  rDev -51.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Chilled bottle into a glass. A generous gift from boatshoes. Thanks!

The side of the bottle had 2008 written in silver marker. I generally don't think tripels age well, so if I find this to be less than stellar, I'll chalk it up to deterioration and will make a mental note to retry a fresh one.

A: A careful, sediment-avoiding pour produces a mostly clear golden-copper body with an inch of poorly retaining off-white head. It leaves a few bubbles on the sides of the glass, and it has a small film on top of the beer.

S: Overripe apples, yeast, candi sugar. It's not an unpleasant aroma, but it's fairly one-dimensional, and I really don't care for the prominence and over-ripeness of the apple note.

T: It's a little more complex than the nose suggests, though I still wouldn't claim the beer is as complex as (say) La Fin du Monde or other greats of the style. Again, overripe apples lead the way, and a surprising amount of candi sugar is present. I would expect the yeast to dry out the beer, especially with age (this is bottle-conditioned, right?) but that hasn't happened here. I enjoy the lighter fruit notes that emerge in the finish: pears, mangos, apricot. It's mildly bitter. I can't determine if that's from hops or if I'm mixing that up with orange rind.

M: On the low-carbed end (again, likely from age). I see some other reviews mentioned that the beer is hot, but with age that has clearly been tempered, as there is no trace of the ABV. Still, the flavors are weak and muddled, and the beer lacks fullness of body or crispness of carbonation.

O: I didn't care for this, but as I mentioned above, that could just be due to the age. I hope to retry a fresh one down the line.

Arbitrator, Apr 13, 2011
Photo of jasonpeckins32
1.88/5  rDev -51.7%
look: 2 | smell: 4 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Pours a transparent copper color with little to no head retention at all. The aroma is of very rich, sweet malts with a little bit of fruits, maybe oranges and peaches lingering in the background. The initial taste is of nice sweet malts. This is followed by hints of oranges, and a strange and sour "are you sure its supposed to taste like that?" flavor. I'm not too familiar with this style of brew, so hopefully my rating is not too biased. The mouthfeel was VERY slick and oily and was quite shy on the carbonation. The oily mouthfeel really made it difficult to convince myself to take the next sip. I was not impressed and will probably not be trying this one again. Maybe its more of the style that I dont care for instead of the beer.

jasonpeckins32, Jun 06, 2005
Photo of nogoodreason
2.2/5  rDev -43.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

I do not like this beer, no sirree, not at all.

It poured a hazy straw, with a fizzy head. It looks pretty nice.

The nose was of Juicy Fruit gum, banana and clove. Is this a tripel or a hefe? Whatever it is, it's all esters.

It's thin and fizzy in the mouth, none of that roundness that IMO, a tripel should have. The malt base was undectable, under all the fruit, bublegum and cloves. There's a fair amount of booze burn, even though there's not much alcohol in the taste. It's like a really high alcohol hefe, except that sounds yummy and this is not.

New Holland makes some nice brews, they really do, but this is not one of them. This just misses the softness, roundness and sophistication that a good tripel has. There's no trace of malt and really not much more than crazy esters.

I drank half of a twelve ounce bottle before giving up and feeding it to my sink.

nogoodreason, Aug 15, 2005
Photo of rrski198
2.21/5  rDev -43.2%
look: 2.25 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This beer is a sugary mess! Not sure why it's classified as a Belgian trippel. Little head that dissipated quickly. The Belgian phenolic funk is subdued on the nose. Sweet... Didn't the yeast convert the sugar??? No attenuation. Will not buy again.

rrski198, Dec 29, 2013
Photo of TheDM
2.45/5  rDev -37%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This brew poured a medium sized head of medium sized bubbles and a transparent light orange body. It had a strong initial IPA type bite that I did not care for. Not one of my favorite flavors. This beer was sampled at the Festival in Frankenmuth Michigan.

TheDM, Jul 19, 2003
Photo of KarlHungus
2.48/5  rDev -36.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

This brew pours a semi cloudy pale orange color with a small white head that recedes quickly into sparce lacing. The aroma has some nice yeasty tones and a lot of oranges (perhaps too much orange). The taste is metallic, and the aftertaste is more so. The mouthfeel seems about right for a tripel, but nothing special. Overall, this beer was a hard one to finish, and at $6.99 a bottle I certainly will not but it again.

KarlHungus, Sep 04, 2006
Photo of benmiliron
2.5/5  rDev -35.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Paid $7.99 for a 4-pack. Made a road trip to Jungle Jim's in Cincinnati and they had New Holland stuff available, a first for me.

Hazy tan-orange. No head but some lacing. Not much of a smell at all. Taste belgian-ish, but with way too much of a crisp "tang" to it. The 9% ABV is warming, hidden and unnecessary. Not a very complex brew here. Kind of a waste of a great name.

benmiliron, Jul 13, 2004
Photo of Alex5
2.5/5  rDev -35.7%

Alex5, Dec 10, 2013
Photo of BuckeyeNation
2.5/5  rDev -35.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Significantly murky yellow-gold with a fair amount of carbonation speeding up to an ivory hued, tight-bubbled head. I gave this one a gentler pour than usual because I didn't want to add any of the dark chunks from the bottom of the bottle. As a result, the head started out small and isn't lasting as long as it might have. Still, there's a better than average amount of intricate lace.

Black Tulip smells like a tripel should, only it's more subdued than I like and smells faintly sour. Sweet honeyish malt is made a little more complex by a spicy fruitiness. Clove in particular stands out. The flavor profile starts out on solid footing, but changes near the halfway point to something altogether different and more than a little disturbing.

Initially, the taste buds register flavors of candi sugar-laden pale malt and clove spice, the classic (classically pedestrian in this case) tripel lineup. The beer then makes an abrupt turn into overwhelmingly sour, pungent nastiness. This is one of the few beers from a reputable brewer that doesn't pass the 'involuntary grimace test' and is, therefore, a drain pour. The body is a trifle too thin for the style.

This beer is, by far, New Holland's worst offering. I won't recount its failings, but suffice it to say that Black Tulip Trippel Ale isn't worth your time or your money. I can't imagine that I'll drink a worse tripel anytime in the foreseeable future.

BuckeyeNation, Aug 16, 2004
Photo of sloejams
2.63/5  rDev -32.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

22 oz. bomber picked up on my travels in Chitown

I've had this in my fridge for some time and finally cracked it up over the weekend. Poured it into my chalice - it looked good: straw color with a bubbly champagne head. Aromas of banana, cloves and a bit of nutmeg. Tasting it initially was a bit of a surprise - it was very sweet. I didn't see that coming. I expected the yeasty sweet but this was extremely sugary.

I split the bottle with a buddy. I drank all of mine, thought by the time it got to the end it was warm and almost medicinal - that kind off children's cough syrup flavor. My friend only finished a few sips.

sloejams, Sep 19, 2006
Photo of jcalabre
2.63/5  rDev -32.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance: This brew pours an opaque burnt orange color with very little head.
Nose: The aroma is yeasty with some fruity notes.
Flavor: It's a little spicy with a some bite, but all in all, for a trippel, it's a bit thin. There are many far better trippels out there in my opinion.

jcalabre, Aug 07, 2003
Photo of cokes
2.8/5  rDev -28%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Milky, hazed, dried golden under a scattered white lacework.
Nose full of rough grains, bubblegum, potent lemon-grassy Saaz (?), and wet cement.
Taste begins with a that same grain coarseness. Fruitiness lurks below with traces of tropical and berry sweetness. Turns dramatically tart with all sorts of lemon rind traits. This becomes oppressive as it warms. Verily fermented Lemon Pledge. Yeasty backing is non-descript. Ends hoppy and bitter. The Saaz exclamation from the nose is not so readily identified in the taste. But that's probably because of the tacky lemon rind tart bitterness that obscures everthing else.
The introductory airy and well carbonated manner of this beer fades quickly. It soon becomes fat and lazy in the mouth. The flavors are not awful upon arrivial, but soon become annoying, lingering and perseverating, and harrassing the tongue.
This is passable up front, but truly a chore by the 8th ounce. Any more than 12 may have been impossible.

cokes, Jun 30, 2004
Photo of Brent
2.83/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

I'm a bit conflicted over this beer. There was nothing wrong with it, and, actually, it seems quite well made. I should like it, but I don't. It didn't fit the trippel style - too hoppy. I'm okay with hybred Belgian/American experiments, but here it just didn't meld - disjointed somehow with the Belgian yeast and candy sugar flavors battling with the hops.

Brent, Jun 12, 2006
Photo of ppoitras
2.83/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

12oz bottle from NorthernTimber as part of The Easter BIF Bunny exchange. Thanks for the opportunity.

Poured into a Rapscallion glass, formed a 1/2" off-white head above the bright golden brew. Head fades slowly down to layer of bubbles, with average to good lacing. Aroma is sweetness, tinged with some apricot and light spicing. Taste is dominated by almost cloying sweetness, coupled with the same light spicing that in the nose, and also joined by light fruitiness and a gooly amount of unmasked alcohol flavor, all sort of thrown at the taste buds at once. Mouthfeel is low carbonation over the tongue, not mention leaving a slick almost oily feeling. Drinkability is in the "why would I revisit this" category. Move along please, nothing much to see here...

ppoitras, Jul 24, 2005
Photo of Jayli
2.83/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

PIcked this up a Plaza Liquors in O'Fallon IL

A: This beer pours a hazy light burnt orange color with a one finger of sudsy head. Head recedes immediately with no lacing to speak of.

S: Nose is rather boozy, very sugary, decent presence of malt, and hint of spicing.

T: Taste starts with a rich malt sweetness, very sugary. Yeast/bready presence really comes through mingle with an odd spice funkiness. Far less boozy in the taste that it was in the nose, with a hint of apple in the finish.

M: Medium body, medium carbonation, rich and creamy on the tongue.

D: Ok flavoring, goes down ok, ok representation of style. I would definitely reach for others though.

Jayli, Mar 22, 2010
Photo of HarrySTruman
2.83/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours a golden color. Easily transparent. 1 finger head. Plenty of lacing.

Smells of fruits and malt. Oranges and bananas. Good scent of alcohol as well.

Tastes like it smells. Fruity, but not over the top. Finishes with the flavor of banana.

Dry finish. Quite different mouth feel than most of the tripels I have had. The mouth feel was certainly the stand out area of this beer. Smooth going down, finishes dry, pretty light considering the high ABV.

This was an average overall tripel experience for me. Certainly not the best of the style. The price seemed a bit high considering how many good tripels there are on the market. I'd rather have several imports over this and they would cost nearly the same.

HarrySTruman, Jun 13, 2012
Photo of EPseja
2.88/5  rDev -26%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Served from a 22oz bottle at just below cellar temperature in a wine glass... my brother didn't have a goblet to use. I'll have to remedy that sometime soon.

A - Before the yeast is poured in, this beer is clear and straight gold in color, with very little head to speak of. Swirl the bottle and vigorously pour the yeast and you've got... hmm. Seems that there is not much yeast at all. Only enough to form a slight haze. The head that is formed is diminutive, but well formed -- tightly packed bubbles below, soapy island above. Decent for the style.

S - Mild notes of candy sweetness and an interesting highlight of roses. Some yeastiness, but buried below, along with the usual notes of bubble gum and banana. Subdued and pleasing..

T - Slightly astringent sweetness up front -- almost offputting. In the middle is a metallic candy sugariness, followed by yeasty hoppiness that finally brings this off-balance beer around to the standard tripel mold. There is a strange, alcohol-driven sharpness in the aftertaste.

M - A bit fizzy and tongue-tingling, but develops well in the mouth. Swallow is creamy and nice.

D - In the vast array of tripels available, this one falls among the mediocre, It's drinkable as in, "I'm not going to pour it down the drain," but it's unremarkable for the style. Good, but certainly not great.

EPseja, Jul 05, 2006
Photo of winomark
2.9/5  rDev -25.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Nice, slightly cloudy golden appearance. Almost non-existent, bone white head. Candy sugar, tropical esters and mild malt on the nose. Sweet and sour palate. Sweet and sugary up front, with a sourness on the finish. Somewhat sweet throughout for a trippel. Sour, tart citrus(lemons and limes) on the finish. Flavorful, but not overpowering mouthfeel. Slightly bitter. A nice beer for the style. Lower drinkability, thanks to the bitter and sour finish. Worth a try, at least once. Thanks to Realale for this one.

winomark, Dec 09, 2004
Photo of SupaCelt
2.93/5  rDev -24.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This Black Tulip shows up to the tasting with a pleasant golden honey colour. Carbonation can be seen rising up to the surface through the clear body. Clean stuff. There is no sediment to be visualized. A white, small bubbled head of less than a pinky's width billows and falls without so much as a howdy do. The lace trim slides down into the body as I drink, leaving no residual effect.

The smell is citrus acidity and yeasty malt. Sugar cane tones mingle about in the nose. The scent is stirring up memories of honey mead in a vague sense. I am unable to pick out the alcohol, which is somewhat of a surprise.

The taste is wild and spiced. Perhaps a bit clovey, but there is another spice in there too. Coriander maybe. This spice meets me upfront and is chased off by a drying effect into a peculiar sour. The finish is bittersweet. I cannot say with any shred of truth that I have enjoyed this beer. I had hopes.

Mouthfeel is as expected, but I am overcome by an urge to swallow promptly as the spice and sour start to become too unpleasant for me to relish the mouthfeel. Damn. I am going to throw the rest of this four banger in the basement, and wait to see if a miracle transmogrifies it into something a scosh more palatable over time.

SupaCelt, Mar 19, 2005
Photo of jakester
2.95/5  rDev -24.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I got this as a single at Union Jack's on the Manatawny. No date on the friggin' label. I hate that!

Pours a pretty darn hazy gold with a slight orange tint. A small head of white foam forms, then dropsto a ring. Not much lacing.

Doesn't smell like a tripel at all. Smells like a big witte. Citrusy, oranges, cloves and black pepper. Slight banana aroma, also. Can't smell alcohol.

Flavor is strangely citrusy-tart. Bitter orange. Spices like cloves and pepper are there. Where's the malt? This "tripel" is lemony and refreshing. Not a bad beer at all, but not to style. Can't taste alcohol, it's very well hidden. Aftertaste is crisp and tart.

Mouthfeel is not sweet like a tripel. Instead, it's tart, with a soft to medium level of carbonation. Finish is crisp and refreshing.

It's tough to review a beer that is so far out of style. It's tasty and clean and refreshing, but very different, as tripels go. There are much better tripels out there, but the beer itself isn't bad.

jakester, Aug 17, 2005
Photo of QuentinCall
2.95/5  rDev -24.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

Calling New Holland's Black Tulip a Tripel is approximately as deceiving as the decision to name Marc Forster's recent zombie apocalypse film, "World War Z". Both of them deviate so grandly from their original framework/inspiration that the name carryover seems little more than marketing savvy ("Hey, people who liked this thing! You'll like this thing too!"). I mean, Belgian Strong Pale is a good classification, why not take advantage of it?

QuentinCall, Nov 03, 2013
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
New Holland Black Tulip Trippel Ale from New Holland Brewing Company
87 out of 100 based on 477 ratings.