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!

Saint Arnold Amber Ale - Saint Arnold Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Saint Arnold Amber AleSaint Arnold Amber Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

394 Ratings
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 394
Reviews: 170
rAvg: 3.55
pDev: 13.52%
Wants: 8
Gots: 28 | FT: 1
Brewed by:
Saint Arnold Brewing Company visit their website
Texas, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Ale |  5.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 12-11-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 394 | Reviews: 170 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of phishbone23

New York

1.5/5  rDev -57.7%

02-03-2013 16:12:47 | More by phishbone23
Photo of Joe1019


1.75/5  rDev -50.7%

06-13-2013 18:02:52 | More by Joe1019
Photo of garyford


2/5  rDev -43.7%

02-15-2012 22:33:45 | More by garyford
Photo of aracauna


2.1/5  rDev -40.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I have respect for Venom's ratings, but I think Saint Arnold may have changed the recipe between when he tasted it and I did. The color was extremely pale -- it looked like a pale golden ale with a reddish tint. The head was really small and it had the same big bubble carbonation that the brown ale did. The taste fit the appearance in that it was really light and watery. Not much maltiness or hoppiness.

Serving type: bottle

04-26-2002 06:51:41 | More by aracauna
Photo of walleye


2.23/5  rDev -37.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

got this in a trade.from the bottle.poured a light honey with a small white head that did not last very long. aroma, yeast, hops,as it warmed sweet grapefruit, white bread, musty. flavor, sour, grassy hints of hops and , malts not impressed with this one. dry mouthfeel

Serving type: bottle

03-10-2005 04:32:43 | More by walleye
Photo of Sazz9


2.25/5  rDev -36.6%

03-22-2014 22:48:56 | More by Sazz9
Photo of branham1989


2.25/5  rDev -36.6%

09-26-2013 19:41:18 | More by branham1989
Photo of JudgeRoughneck


2.3/5  rDev -35.2%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

This beer is confusingly called an amber, so I rated it as such. It seems much more like a pale ale to me and would have fared better if I was thinking of it in that way, so I kind of tried to rate it somewhere in between. Anyway, as either style it leaves something to be desired.

It is a light yellow beer with large rocky head and sticky lacing that offers up softly resinous, perfumey hop aroma. The taste is basically watered down red hook ipa with a strange juicy-fruit gum character. Mouthfeel would be nice for a pale. Its light, soft, and kind of fuzzy, but is all wrong for an amber. There is really nothing "amber" about this beer at all. WTF.

Serving type: bottle

11-19-2006 03:19:48 | More by JudgeRoughneck
Photo of mgdeth


2.48/5  rDev -30.1%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - Poured and little head appeared. Color is light amber, and actually should probably be a "pale" beer.

Smell - Pleasant hop aroma. Others appear to describe it as floral. Some malt aroma is also present.

Taste - Not great. Actually, quite poor. The picture of stale or rancid hops comes to mind. The flavor really does not match the aroma. Hops tend to dominate the taste of this beer, but some malt is in there somewhere. Maybe the beer is old. I cannot tell because there is not a date stamp on it.

Mouthfeel - This beer has a pretty thick mouthfeel. Not watery. Too bad the other features of the beer tend to detract from this one.

Drinkability - The unbalanced bitterness in this beer tends to make it less drinkable.

Comments - This beer has some redeeming qualities, like the wonderful hop aroma. For the most part, this beer falls flat. This is the third or fourth time I have had a bad experience with SAint Arnold's beers. I keep trying them, and they continue to be sub-mediocre. It's a shame that such a cool name got wasted on such rotten beer.

Serving type: bottle

11-26-2004 23:40:58 | More by mgdeth
Photo of StevieW


2.5/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

12 oz bottle. A recent find at a beer store, I had not yet visited. No freshness date that I could find. Pale to hazy burnt golden color. Thin and faint white head. No lacing to speak of. Smell was somewhat sour, grainy, and off. Lots of sour undertones. Taste was slighty sweet, some very positive hints of carmel malt. Slick, sweet, and syrupy feel takes over. Taste is faded. Sweetness dominates. Thin and watery, carbonation is on the way out. Hard to finish. I think I got it past it's prime. The first time I have seen these beers in Florida. I will give it another chance, when I am sure of it's freshness. A real disappointment, I was looking forward to this one.

Serving type: bottle

02-04-2003 18:09:31 | More by StevieW
Photo of winomark


2.5/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Not as dark as I was expecting. Medium copper with no head whatsoever. Lots of malty sweetness on the nose. Some mild hop spice also noticable. An interesting combination fo sweetness and a tannic dryness on the palate. Nothing too exciting. Mouthfeel is thin, but has a lasting finish. I wouldn't worry about looking too hard for this one. Disappointing, IMO.

Serving type: bottle

11-07-2004 14:51:07 | More by winomark
Photo of corekneelius


2.5/5  rDev -29.6%

08-16-2012 20:33:52 | More by corekneelius
Photo of maximum12


2.63/5  rDev -25.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Thanks to mhewes for sending a box with a bunch of St. Arnold goodness north during the reluctant Minnesota spring of '09.

Beer is very pretty in my New Belgium snifter, a coppery, golden amber. Very nice. Smell is slight but sweet.

Taste is a bit disjointed. The oily hops upfront are at active war with the malty sweetness that comes rushing behind it, leading to something that doesn't really taste...right. Malt is good. Hops are good. Combo is good. But there's something about these that isn't working for me. I dunno.

Straightforward enough, but the oddness lowers the drinkability for me significantly. Decent beer, but not one of the better ambers I've had.

Serving type: bottle

05-16-2009 01:07:02 | More by maximum12
Photo of Illini5596


2.63/5  rDev -25.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Tried this at the brewery in Houston, TX. Not impressed. The owner of the brewery stands up and gives a huge speech before serving about how he wants a beer with flavor and life is too short for bad beer

Unfortunately his beers fall flat on their back. Don't get me wrong, not a *bad* beer per se, but not a good one either. It's C+, B- variety. The taste is thin and a bit on the sour side (not bitter mind you or good and hoppy, just kind of a sour bad beer after taste) at the same time being weak for an ale. The head is non-existant but the color is rich enough.

Overall not something I'd ever pay for, but might drink if it is all that was available.

Serving type: on-tap

05-22-2005 03:16:30 | More by Illini5596
Photo of pwoods


2.65/5  rDev -25.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Thanks to jasonjlewis for this extra.

12oz. stubby brown bottle poured into an imperial pint. No dating.

A: Pours a orangish - light amber, good visibility. 2 fingers worth of lightly tinted head forms a bit rocky but holds for a few minutes. A bit of lacing.

S: Pretty dull. A bit of grainy malts and some subtle sweetness.

T/M: Sweet malts with a touch of caramel, but mostly grainy. A dab of hops and bitterness up front, mostly floral with a bit of light citrus. A metallic taste pops out a bit at the end, just before a lightly dry finish. Body is medium light with decent carbonation.

D: Easy to drink and low ABV, but it's just not interesting enough and has some off flavors.

Serving type: bottle

07-17-2008 22:36:39 | More by pwoods
Photo of goochpunch


2.68/5  rDev -24.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours out a honey color with a nice looking head that fizzles out to near nothing, leaving no lacing, OBTW. Has a typical pale ale smell of light, toasty malt along with a punch of some citrus hops. Alcohol is all too present and kind of stings the nose. Taste starts off big on hops, citrus fruit and grass. Turns into something fruity, with a lot of Juicy Fruit gum. Finishes sweet and sticky. Mouthfeel manages to be flat, syrupy, and slick all at the same time. I have little interest in drinking this again, but I guess it'd be better than most of their other offerings.

How is this an amber? More like a half-assed pale ale.

Serving type: bottle

11-19-2006 02:43:44 | More by goochpunch
Photo of DuqTroops


2.68/5  rDev -24.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Drank on January 18th. Travelled to Houston on business and had this at our hotel - no real glass.

It tasted like a pale ale with a hint of honey in it. Not what I originally expected an amber ale to be. It was delicious, however, I probably won't go out of my way to get it again. It boasted being the oldest micro-brewery in Texas; good for them, but they need to work on the flavor more here. Not the best in Texas.

Serving type: bottle

01-19-2006 18:18:42 | More by DuqTroops
Photo of Wayne17


2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

06-18-2014 22:03:49 | More by Wayne17
Photo of Trappist_Vince


2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

11-01-2013 22:22:54 | More by Trappist_Vince
Photo of brewdlyhooked13


2.75/5  rDev -22.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Appearance - hazy light orange with a thin, pale orange covering.

Aroma - some good malt and sweet fruitiness up front to start, but loses most of its nose after a few moments. Hangs onto some of it, though, and what is there is appealing.

Taste - an unusual assortment of flavors in this beer. A typical malt start turns into a back and forth shoving match between raw bitterness and some brash alcohol. Sometimes I taste one or the other, when they combine it has a medicinal flavor. The finish is dry and bitter. Some parts I rather like and some I rather don't.

Mouthfeel - average carbonation and body. A good smoothness, well done for the style.

Drinkability - interesting beer, but medicinal flavors turn me away.

Serving type: bottle

02-08-2005 21:13:31 | More by brewdlyhooked13
Photo of acat25


2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

08-31-2012 22:07:01 | More by acat25
Photo of ReyG006


2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

09-17-2012 10:41:16 | More by ReyG006
Photo of Mortarforker


2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

09-08-2012 21:01:12 | More by Mortarforker
Photo of jujubeast6000


2.78/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Reviewed 5/20/2006 (On tap @ Brewery):

Pours an amber brownish-reddish colored body, with a decent sized head, white, a good sized head. It has an aroma of malts, hops, some bitter freshness, but there's not much aroma present. Clean smelling too. Has a clean malty taste, slightly bitter. Not bad.

Serving type: on-tap

01-14-2009 13:48:38 | More by jujubeast6000
Photo of nem2006


2.8/5  rDev -21.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

The smell of the beer was malty. Poured amber with a nice head. Had a hoppy finish to it. The beer has a medium body to it. I did not think the beer had a very smooth finish. Almost a little sour.

The aftertaste left in my mouth was overly bitter and not at all tasteful.

Serving type: bottle

05-07-2008 04:00:06 | More by nem2006
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Saint Arnold Amber Ale from Saint Arnold Brewing Company
81 out of 100 based on 394 ratings.