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!

San Miguel Premium Lager - San Miguel Brewery Inc.

Not Rated.
San Miguel Premium LagerSan Miguel Premium Lager

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
66
poor

306 Ratings
THE BROS
71
okay

(view ratings)
Ratings: 306
Reviews: 159
rAvg: 2.78
pDev: 21.22%
Wants: 4
Gots: 12 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
San Miguel Brewery Inc. visit their website
Philippines

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 07-12-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of San Miguel Premium Lager Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 306 | Reviews: 159 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of metter98
2.88/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A: The beer is clear yellow in color and has a moderate amount of carbonation. It poured with a finger high white head that gradually died down but never completely faded away and left lots of lacing down the sides of the glass.
S: The smell isn’t that strong and has some fruity notes of apple juice in the aroma.
T: Similar to the smell, the taste has light flavors of apple juice along with some hints of adjunct malts such as rice.
M: It feels light-bodied and a bit watery on the palate with a moderate amount of carbonation.
O: There’s nothing overly special about this beer, but it is easy to drink and might be a refreshing choice if you are in a hot tropical climate.

metter98, Jun 05, 2012
Photo of BuckeyeNation
2.88/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I had no idea that this beer is brewed in the Philippines. When I picked it up, I thought that it was from Mexico. Bright, light yellow with a snow white head that's decently firm and sticks. The head lasts longer and leaves more lace than expected. The nose is straight from a macro lager, maybe a half-step better. Sharply pungeant noble hops with a somewhat sour, grain-like smell.

The flavor follows suit, but isn't overly bad. The beer is drinkable only because the taste doesn't hang around very long. Each mouthful gives up some so-so flavor and then dissipates quickly, leaving the tongue virtually untouched. There are no real off-flavors because there isn't that much flavor to begin with. The body is on the light side, which helps drinkability; assuming that one wanted to drink more than a single bottle. I sure don't.

BuckeyeNation, Jun 07, 2004
Photo of Phyl21ca
1.88/5  rDev -32.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

Bottle: Poured a golden color lager with a medium size bubbly head with average retention for the style. Aroma of light adjunct with sweet notes is more or less pleasant. Taste is very similar to most cheap lager out there with loads of corn and other adjunct which provide a sweet malt backbone. Not worth drinking on a regular basis.

Phyl21ca, May 21, 2010
Photo of BEERchitect
3.3/5  rDev +18.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Pretty typical beer for the style. Though not a big fan of the style, I enjoy the break from all of the heavy gravity stuff. This offers a welcome change. The beer is safe--not much wrong with it. But there is little to comment on either. A mild bready flavor / texture is dulled by a mild grainy-ness. Mild, ripe fruits take the shape mostly of green apples. Maltiness is low and hidden by an abundance of carbonation. Medium in the body, and mildly creamy to the feel. Could use better hopping to cover up the grainy flavors and feel.

BEERchitect, Jul 20, 2006
Photo of kjkinsey
2.5/5  rDev -10.1%

kjkinsey, Aug 29, 2014
Photo of ygtbsm94
2/5  rDev -28.1%

ygtbsm94, Feb 16, 2012
Photo of spycow
2.5/5  rDev -10.1%

spycow, Aug 24, 2014
Photo of jaydoc
2.75/5  rDev -1.1%

jaydoc, Jan 05, 2014
Photo of ChainGangGuy
2.83/5  rDev +1.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12 oz. single - $1.49 at Total Wine & More in Kennesaw, Georgia.

San Miguel well well, what have we here?

Appearance: Pours a crystal clear, yellow body with a smallish, snow white head. It looks nice, for a lager. Perhaps we should just stop there.

Smell: Sweetish, faintly grainy cereal aroma with a tiny, simple note of green apple peelings.

Taste: Light, cereal sweet, grainy maltiness. Incredibly minor taste of green apples. Hint of rice. Only enough basic, spicy Noble hop bitterness for balance. Finishes dry and very abrupt.

Mouthfeel: Light-bodied. Medium carbonation.

Drinkability: It's pretty acceptable considering it is just a simple lager. You could certainly do far, far worse when it comes to this style.

ChainGangGuy, Feb 20, 2009
Photo of zeff80
3.3/5  rDev +18.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A - 12 oz bottle pours out a clear, golden yellow with a two finger head. It left some okay lacing.

S - It smelled of corn and yeast. Also, a little alcohol aroma was detected.

T - It tastes very much of corn and grains. It also has a slightly bitter kick to it.

M - It is light-bodied and quite crisp.

D - It is drinkable. Not the best lager on the planet but it exceeded my expectations. Pretty good.

zeff80, Jul 18, 2006
Photo of biboergosum
2.55/5  rDev -8.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

355ml squat bottle.

This beer pours a clear pale golden hue, with one finger of soapy white head, which leaves a patchy wall of lace around the glass as it settles. It smells of bready pale malt, and nail polish remover. The taste is sweeter pale malt, a bit of generic fruitiness, and more acetone. The carbonation is fairly low, the body a skinny medium weight, and clingy. It finishes off-dry, a bit of medicinal alcohol sweetness standing out.

Not enough core ingredients to hide the booze. I wouldn't recommend this, at least when consumed half a world away from its origin.

biboergosum, Jul 23, 2011
Photo of NeroFiddled
3.45/5  rDev +24.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

A crystal-clear yellow-gold body is topped by a creamy head of bright white foam that settles into a decent collar and leaves some nice but transient lace. The nose is clean and welcoming with a pleasant combination of grainy malt and grassy hops. It's gently crisp and refreshing with a medium/light body and delicate, somewhat restrained carbonation. The flavor expresses everything that the aroma suggests with a bit more depth; nicely balanced by a distinct but mild-mannered bitterness that leads into a short and dry finish. Well brewed!

NeroFiddled, Aug 12, 2003
Photo of Jason
3.18/5  rDev +14.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

12 oz stubby brown bottle with no freshness date. Bright filtered clarity with a lean wispy white lace. Very pale in colour.

Grainy aroma with sweet corn and a very faint hop in the back.

Lacks in crispness with a moderate carbonation, a sufficient hop bitterness is spicy in a bland way and the same goes for the malt. Faded twang of grain and hop in the finish. Not much to taste but a one sided hop and malt mix.

Weird, this brew taste like Mexican beer. Not horrible but not good either, to be generous I’d say average. If you want average give this beer a try.

Jason, Aug 05, 2002
Photo of feloniousmonk
2.17/5  rDev -21.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Perfectly yellow appearnace, clear and gloden, lush, creamy white head turns to a sliver in no time.
Aroma: typical spoiled, skunk, with overtones of maize, sickly and unappealing.
Taste: things get worse here, but only if you pay attention. Drink quickly, and you never notice. Unpleasant greeting on the palate, sad, unworthy of almost any palate. Drink it fast, though, gulp it down, and this disappointing mouthfeel and utter lack of flavor just doesn't register.
Overall: eh, it's a "beer"...best avoid...halfway though, after gulping it down, it feels rather average, and not as aggressively bad as before, when I tried to meet this beverage with a contemplative palate. Still, stay away and save your sheckels on something with better taste.

feloniousmonk, May 05, 2005
Photo of Slatetank
3/5  rDev +7.9%

Slatetank, May 23, 2013
Photo of WesWes
3.65/5  rDev +31.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

The beer pours a pale gold color with a thick frothy white head that quickly fades to lacing. The aroma is decent. It has a clean and crisp pale malt scent along with adjuncts that refreshes and finishes dry. The taste is decent as well. It has a refreshing pale malt flavor with an adjunct lightness and a dry lager yeast finish. It has that Mexican style aftertaste and a grainy malt quality. The mouthfeel is fine. It is a low bodied beer with good carbonation. This is a good drinking lager. It has decent flavor and good mouthfeel.

WesWes, Jul 21, 2004
Photo of Rochefort10nh
3/5  rDev +7.9%

Rochefort10nh, Dec 06, 2011
Photo of kojevergas
2.75/5  rDev -1.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Ah, the beer the Spanish love. Served on-draught in Ibiza, (faux)Spain, into San Miguel stemware. Reviewed from notes.

A: One finger head is frothy, nicely thick, and lacking in cream. Clear transparent gold colour. Meh. I'll drink it, but I don't know I'll like it.

Sm: Nice malt, hints of lime esters, and complex full barley. Very nice.

T: Clean barley with some malt. The lime ester doesn't pull through hardly at all, which is unfortunate. More complex than it maybe has the right to be. Finish is lackluster at best. Fairly built for the style, but well built for the price. Kudos to Spain for having a popular beer that isn't as garbage as Budweiser. Balanced, though the malt feels intrusive. [In retrospect, the Spanish love their unwarranted malt. This was the first beer (of many) I reviewed in Ibiza, and the malt was a consistent feature of Spanish beer.]

Mf: Medium: not too light like many beers in the style (and popular shitebeer category), but not well executed.

Dr: A very good choice for a budget beer, but not worthwhile for the enthusiast.

And ye lads on holiday: I'd better not catch you sneaking a lime into the beer. Don't play coy; I saw you. A beer ought to be released as it's meant to be consumed. None of this adding lime to Spanish/Mexican tropical beers and thinking it's cute. Why don't you order a candied Berliner Kindl Weisse and giggle with your friends while watching Gilmore Girls?

P.S. I kind of like Gilmore Girls. Do I lose manpoints for that?

kojevergas, Jun 11, 2011
Photo of imperialking
3/5  rDev +7.9%

imperialking, Jan 23, 2012
Photo of tempest
3/5  rDev +7.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

I feel like I say this about a lot of the betterr macros, "hey, at least it's inoffensive." It almost has a slight caramel malt flavor, but it fades too quickly to develop past a bland grainy sweetness. If I made a guess, I'd say this was a rice lager from the lack of any discernable character. At least it's smooth and can wash down food. I'd put it on par with Heineken.

tempest, Jan 17, 2007
Photo of dbrauneis
2.83/5  rDev +1.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Pours a medium golden yellow in color. The beer has a finger tall white head that reduces to a thin film covering the entire surface of the beer with some thicker patches and a thicker ring at the edges of the glass. Moderate to heavy amounts of lacing are observed.

S: A pretty mild smelling beer overall, there are hints of apple juice and grassy hops.

T: Not as sweet as the smell might have indicated, there are some sweet apple juice notes as well as the grain and rice adjunct malts. Light amounts of grassy hop bitterness.

M: Light to medium bodied with moderate to heavy amounts of carbonation. Slightly thin/watery.

O: Easy to drink and sessionable - would pair well with spicy foods and it would be refreshing in a hot climate.

dbrauneis, Jun 12, 2012
Photo of Zorro
3.78/5  rDev +36%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a sunny clear yellow beer.

Smell is perfume, grass, and spicy.

Taste is a bit sweet and full of clean bread flavors. Mild perfume shows up in the taste too.

Mouthfeel is average.

Very drinkable. This is my standard "Cheap Beer" Usually $9 a 12 pack of bottles. Why can't Budweiser make something this good for the same price?

Zorro, Feb 21, 2004
Photo of Wasatch
2.85/5  rDev +2.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a pretty nice clean/clear pale yellow color, nice carbonation, nice one-finger slightly creamy white head, which does leave some sticky lacing behind. The nose is malty, with some hop notes thrown in. The taste is malty, slightly sweet, very slight hop notes. Light body. Kinda Drinkable, one of the better macros out there.

Wasatch, Jan 23, 2011
Photo of Mebuzzard
2/5  rDev -28.1%

Mebuzzard, Aug 02, 2014
Photo of BillRoth
3/5  rDev +7.9%

BillRoth, Dec 05, 2013
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
San Miguel Premium Lager from San Miguel Brewery Inc.
66 out of 100 based on 306 ratings.