1. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $14.99 (US/print only). Offer ends April 30. Subscribe now! (Because great beer deserves great stories AND readers.)

Baltika #2 Svetloye - Baltika Breweries

Not Rated.
Baltika #2 SvetloyeBaltika #2 Svetloye

Educational use only; do not reuse.

60 Ratings
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 60
Reviews: 38
rAvg: 2.74
pDev: 19.71%
Wants: 3
Gots: 2 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Baltika Breweries visit their website
Russian Federation

Style | ABV
Euro Pale Lager |  4.70% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: Todd on 09-03-2005

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (52) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
to view more.
Ratings: 60 | Reviews: 38
Photo of tone77
3.34/5  rDev +21.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a green 16.9 oz. bottle. Has a light golden color with a 1/2 inch head. Smell is of grains, a bit skunky. Taste is crisp, malts, grains, a slight bit of sweetness, very easy drinking. Feels medium bodied in the mouth and overall is a decent session beer, but nothing to get excited about.

Photo of metter98
2.77/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 2.75

A: The beer is crystal clear yellow in color and has a moderate amount of visible carbonation. It poured with a finger high bright white head that gradually died down, leaving a thin layer of bubbles covering the surface, a collar around the edge and some lacing down the sides of the glass.
S: Light aromas of sweet adjunct malts are present in the nose—rice seems to stand out in particular—along with some hints of grassy hops.
T: Despite coming from a green bottle, the overall taste isn't skunked and has some initial sweetness followed by notes of bready and grainy malts. Only faint hints of bitterness from the hops are detectable.
M: It feels light-bodied, rather smooth and a little clean on the palate with a moderate amount of carbonation.
O: Although there's nothing special about the taste of this beer, it's easy to drink and doesn’t' have any offensive flavors.

Photo of johnnnniee
2.39/5  rDev -12.8%
look: 4 | smell: 1.25 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

From the green bottle pours a crystal clear golden elixir with a huge bone white head that slowly dissipates. Huge notes of skunk coming from the bottle and glass that second I pop the top open. Airing it out a bit that does somewhat subside revealing a somewhat lackluster lightly bready lightly spicy aroma. The flavor is a bit sweet up front with sugary biscuits and a hint of earthy spicy hops and a touch of wet cardboard. Medium to thin body with a moderate level of carbonation and a sweet watery mouthfeel. Feels like a macro lager, and aside from the fact that its from Russia, I see no reason to ever pick this up again.

Photo of puboflyons
3.21/5  rDev +17.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

From the 25 fl. oz. green bottle stamped: 1901.13-13:09/1901.14-5W. Sampled on March 31, 2013 while listening to a song by Russian pop singer Anya Muzafarova. Need to get into the spirit here!

The pour is pale yellow with a quick eruption of fizzy white head that settles after a short time

The aroma has a little sweetness throughout but it is still mainly grain, rice, and biscuit. Any hops are played down on the nose.

Light body overall.

Even though the hops are difficult to find on the nose they play up a bit more in the taste which starts sweet and grainy but has a slightly lingering finish. This is better than Baltika 5 but in the grand scheme of things it is basically just another straightforward pale lager.

Photo of NeroFiddled
3.3/5  rDev +20.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Baltika #2
22 oz. bottle, green glass
Bottled 2.12.11 Best by 2.2.12
$2.49 @ HyVee in Omaha, NE

Baltika #2 is really not much different than Baltika #3 (please see my review for reference). It's a basic Russian "Euro" lager with a combination of sweetish adjunct-malt, herbal hops, and some fruitiness (mainly apple) backed by a soft bitterness. It seems to me that they've cleaned up production as of late, and there are less esters to it than usual. It's sweetish upfront, but finishes mostly dry with a lingering herbal constituent. Not bad.

Photo of UCLABrewN84
3.05/5  rDev +11.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Bottled 10/9/11. Best before 10/9/12.

Pours a slightly murky yellow with a foamy white head that settles to a film on top of the beer. Tiny dots of lace form around the glass on the drink down. Smell is of malt, grain, and a mild skunky aroma. Taste is much the same with a slightly sweet finish. There is a very mild bitterness on the palate with each sip. This beer has a lower level of carbonation with a slightly crisp mouthfeel. Overall, this is an average beer that is definitely drinkable but nothing special.

Photo of chinchill
2.45/5  rDev -10.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 16.9 oz green bottle into a snifter.

A: rather ordinary looking lager: slightly hazy, golden with a modest and short-lived head.

Aroma: light malt and hops with a slight skunkiness and a hint of honey.

T: slightly sweet and floral, with low but well balanced levels of hops and malt.

M: rather light and watery body; carbonation is too low; smooth.

Overall: this beer is drinkable but not good enough to recommend or buy again.

2.56/5  rDev -6.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

500ml bottle. Pokal glass. Enjoyed on may´12. Pale straw in color, crystal clear appearance. White, small bubbled, slowly dissipated crown. Some rings on sides. Slightly metallic to the nose, wet grass odor. Moderate maltiness, grainy, low hoppiness. Rough flavors. Slightly fizzy sensation, fat mouthfeel. Light body, medium carbonation. Industrial Lager, no doubt!

Photo of beerme343
3.15/5  rDev +15%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Enjoyed from a bottle, poured into a standard pint glass.

This beer had a nice mix of very fine bubbles and a few large ones in a huge white head. The brew is crystal clear, gold maybe slightly copper in color.

The aroma is pleasing with a light honey note and a hint of malt.

Some slight sweetness comes through in the initial taste and honey flavors are prevalent. This is a light easy drinking beer with hops and malt well balanced. Nothing truly remarkable about it, but nothing offensive either.

The finish is smooth and light, a little watery. Overall this beer is very drinkable.

Photo of Nerudamann
3.08/5  rDev +12.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a bottle into a pilsner glass.

Look - light amber in color, with good carbonation and about a finger and a half's worth of frothy white foam that dissipates slowly.

Smell - typical pale lager type of smell, much like a pilsner, but with a little more body to the smell

Taste - also typical of a pale lager, but there's a lot more bite and bitterness to the taste, especially toward the middle of the tasting. There's also an odd spiciness to it for which I can't quite account.

Mouthfeel - pretty soundly on the watery side of the texture.

Overall - not a bad brew, but not very interesting at all.

Photo of tdm168
2.33/5  rDev -15%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

pours a clear gold with 1/4" of head with nice retention. Smells skunky with grains and some mild hop notes. Taste is grainy with just a hint of hops for bitterness. Mouthfeel is smooth but a little thin and flat.

Mediocre at best. Just another substandard Euro pale lager.

Photo of flagmantho
3/5  rDev +9.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from 500mL bottle into a Pilsner glass. Bottle is best by 12/28/2010.

Appearance: body is a pale straw color with a touch of haze, and the head poured three fingers of pillowy white foam. Head leaves a nice lace as it dissipates. Not bad for a pale lager, but I feel like it could be brighter (that's the name, after all).

Smell: sweet malt with a bit of grain. Pretty boring, but at least the grain doesn't impart too much sourness like some beers of the style.

Taste: sweet malt with a bit of grain; hey, at least the beer's consistent. There's a little bit of hop bitterness in here but it's not enough to really make this a great beer. Still, for its style, you could do worse.

Mouthfeel: light body with a relatively low amount of carbonation; there's simply not much going on here.

Drinkability: this beer is neither good nor bad; it is merely pretty boring. Its basic flavors are not offensive, but I wouldn't go after this beer again. Actually, it might make a decent lawnmower beer.

Photo of speter
2.21/5  rDev -19.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A: Pours a golden yellow with a thick, fluffy head. This was the best part of the whole beer.

S: Sweet malt and rice, and lots of it.

T: Like all Russian beers, this is very sweet up front with a hint of hops in the center. Where things start to go horribly wrong is in the finish and aftertaste. The rice produces a thirst-making aftertaste, but there's also an odd phenol taste that kills the whole thing.

M: Whatever causes the bad taste coats the tongue, and the carbonation can't wash it away.

D: If you're in the mood for a Baltika, go with the other even numbers: 4, 6, or 8.

Photo of RoyalT
2.57/5  rDev -6.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - This is a beautiful light yellow in color with a full, gorgeous, fluffy white head.

Smell - The stank hit me before I even put my nose down to take a whiff. The cheap corn is more like a nasty mash and there's that rotten taffy flavor that smells like you just stepped on something and need to clean the bottom of your shoe.

Taste - The flavor is a tad better as the grain shows some signs of depth but there's a putrid aftertaste to this beer that really turns one off to the drinking experience.

Mouthfeel - This is a shade bigger than light-bodied with some sprightly carbonation.

Sinkability - There are components of this beer that I enjoyed such as the deep grain flavor and the energetic mouthfeel but overall this just didn't cut the mustard.

Photo of gfreed
2.16/5  rDev -21.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Looks nice: clear and shimmery yellow, with a bright head that floats for a long time before fading. In fact, the head appeared to be somewhat pale peach as it exited the bottle. Not sure why, but then it turned white. Maybe it was the room lighting. Anyhow, all that gets pushed aside by the corny, veggie smell and the Edelmeister-style sweetishness that tastes blech. The bubbles are a positive Thing, but there's not much else to say besides... avoid this one.

Photo of DrJay
3.08/5  rDev +12.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Crystal clear, very pale yellow. The fine, white cap stuck around for quite a while and left a little bit of transient spotty lace on the glass between sips. The aroma was big on sulfury hops, light skunkage, mild lemon with a bit of malt in the background. Light bitterness with very mild malt sweetness. Hop flavour was pronounced, sulfury and floral for the most part, but with a hint of lemon. Hops lingered. Very light bodied with moderate carbonation, fairly dry. Not bad, but the hop character doesn't really work for me.

Photo of FleeVT
3.17/5  rDev +15.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

16.9 oz green bottle with production and best before dates poured into a mug.

A: This is my third Baltika in as many days, they all produce a great looking 2 finger head on the initial pour than die down to a pond scum. Light carbonation action, mellow yellow, and clear.

S: Has a faint hint of the Euro skunk lager. Everything is subdued on the nose, grassy hops and mild malts.

T/M: Light to medium body with more carbonation than appearance lets on. The front of the palate is smooth, almost watery, with a faint honey sweetness. The middle is where the carbonation perks up the tongue, followed by a brief subtle "peppering" of hops.

Photo of fitzy84
3.07/5  rDev +12%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured with a dark, clear gold look with a decently thick head and some good lacing. Thick, florals and metallic hints with that moderate sweetness from hops and malts. Taste was radically deviant from the aromas. Really dull, chemical-like aftertaste; really earthy in a bitter way. Crisp mouthfeel but a little too watery. Overall, an okay drink.

Photo of armock
3.03/5  rDev +10.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A - Poured a clear golden color with a decent white head that tries to leave some lacing

S - Kinda has that typical euro lager smell with grassy grainy malts

T - Has the standard euro lager taste but it finishes off with some sweetness to it

M - This beer has a medium body with a high level of carbonation to it

D - I don't think this is really a bad beer for the style its fairly average I would definitely grab this to drink if I was at some Russian disco tech listening to techno with some hot Russian chicks.

Photo of yesyouam
2.58/5  rDev -5.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Baltika #2 is a clear and sparkling light golden lager with a dense white head that has good retention and leaves some nice lacing. The aroma is lemony and funky. It has a bit of a sweat sock whiff. It's light, maybe medium-light, bodied and reasonably smooth with a flat, gritty finish. There's not really much flavor at all. What's there is grassy-- maybe lemon grass. I really expected this to be bad, but it wasn't. It's very much along the lines of an American macro, but with a little more oomph and no glaring signs of adjuncts. It was well worth the 96 cents for the 500ml bottle.

Photo of PatrickJR
2.62/5  rDev -4.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 16.9 oz bottle into nonic pint glass.

A - Pale, clear golden. A finger of white head with some moderate retention. Minimal lacing.

S - Touch of sweetness with lots of spicy hops. Pepper, grass, chive, and some noticable skunk come to mind.

T - Blander than I expected. The first half of each sip is largely tasteless. Late palate the hop spiciness tries to come through a little bit and brings a smidge of sweetness with it. Otherwise, this stuff is virtually tasteless.

M - Decent enough, light bodied with carbonation on the high end of moderate. Very crisp.

D - Nothing offensive but I can't imagine having this again. I am shocked at how little flavor is actually in this beer.

Photo of jwc215
2.93/5  rDev +6.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Pours straw yellow with a white, foamy head that descends to a thin cover, leaving some lacing.

The smell is of sulfur, lime, "Euro skunk", a bit chemicalish. Neither better nor worse than the typical EPL.

The taste is of sulfur, lime, light sweetish grainy malt with the slightest bit of hops and a touch of salt, adding some dryness. It "almost" leans towards salty, but, thankfully JUST stops short...whew...close call there. It has a sweetish, abrupt finish.

It is thin and watery, with just some lingering salt in the aftertaste.

It pretty much your typical EPL, at best (in that "mass produced" style, to boot). Not too offensive, but that's about it.

Photo of Halcyondays
2.61/5  rDev -4.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

16.9 oz. bottle,

A: Pours a pale yellow with an average white head, fair retention, very light lacing.

S: Very light, almost nonexistent, but I got some light grain and floral character.

T: Soft cereal grain, with a bit of noble hop character, though it is quite bland compared to others in the Euro lager style.

M: Very light-bodied any crisp, very fizzy and carbonated finish.

D: For a light lager it's not bad, easy to drink if a boring beer, I could have another and it's quite cheap.

Photo of John_M
3.55/5  rDev +29.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Tried this beer the other night.

The beer pours the expected gold color with minimal lacing, but surprisingly good head retention. While the aroma is light, it's still fairly attractive, consisting of light honey and some hoppy bitterness. The beer smells pretty well made. The flavors replicate the nose, though there is a surprising amount of flavor. The mouthfeel is very light, but the beer is also crisp and refreshing. Drinkabilty is very good, and this would make an excellent beer to consume on a warm summer day or after finishing up some work in yard (in other words, this would be a great lawnmower beer).

While nothing spectacular, this was a very nice beer, one I would certainly buy again.

Photo of Dukeofearl
3.08/5  rDev +12.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

$2.49 (I think) for a 500 ml bottle at the local BevMo in February 2008. All of the sudden, this series is showing up everywhere- is it any good? Worthwhile? I have no idea- let's find out together!

Pours a moderately dark golden (for the style) with a fizzy soap-bubble head and a moderate carbonation.

Aroma is the classic sharp, weeds-in-the-garden (not in a good way) hops notes of a Euro lager, quite strong and in your face. Not much else to smell.

Flavor softens the aroma, a more balanced malt sits below, offsetting the nasty hops. Simple, clean, not always a bad thing, but definitely not exciting or interesting. The finish, however, is very astringent and hard to handle.

Overall, a middling start, and decent middle, and a back of the pack finish make this one something I say "glad to have", but immediately thereafter, I say "next!".

to view more.
Baltika #2 Svetloye from Baltika Breweries
67 out of 100 based on 60 ratings.