Collaboration No. 3 - Stingo - Boulevard Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Collaboration No. 3 - StingoCollaboration No. 3 - Stingo

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

420 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 420
Reviews: 106
rAvg: 3.85
pDev: 10.91%
Wants: 12
Gots: 57 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
Boulevard Brewing Co. visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
English Strong Ale |  8.50% ABV

Availability: Limited (brewed once)

Notes/Commercial Description:
This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

Collaboration #3 Stingo was brewed using traditional English ingredients. A variety of ale and specialty malts from Yorkshire are at the forefront; their pronounced roasty aroma and flavor contain hints of toffee, cocoa and bread crust. English hop varieties contribute subtle herbal, peppery qualities. The beer was brewed in batches; some was fermented on oak, some was fermented normally, and some was allowed to sour in the mash tun before being transferred to a fermenter. Boulevard’s brewers, along with Dann and Martha Paquette of Pretty Things Beer & Ale Project, then blended the batches until desired levels of wood and tartness were achieved for the final product.

35 IBU

(Beer added by: sjverla on 08-03-2012)
View: Beers (49) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 420 | Reviews: 106 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of SavvyStudent
1/5  rDev -74%

Photo of GRD13
2/5  rDev -48.1%

Photo of Lare453
2.5/5  rDev -35.1%

Photo of dipso123
2.75/5  rDev -28.6%

Photo of gruss004
2.75/5  rDev -28.6%

Photo of ejimhof
2.75/5  rDev -28.6%

Photo of TMoney2591
2.78/5  rDev -27.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 2.5

Served in a Lagunitas mason jar.

I don't fully remember the Yorkshire Stingo Sam Smith gave me, but I do remember vaguely enjoying it. I think. Hopes raised for this one, especially given the pedigrees of both brewers. It pours a clear sunset bronze topped by a finger or so of khaki foam. The nose comprises dried maple syrup, toffee, light dark fruits, light toast, and a hint of earthy greens. The taste holds notes of dry toffee, light cardboard, dried honey, brown sugar, and a strong vein of plastic, wild rice, Tylenol (in pill form), and vague sourness. The two segments do not cooperate, but rather clash indefinitely on my tongue, creating a rather poor-tasting din. The body is a light-leaning medium, with a light moderate carbonation and a sorta/kinda drying finish. Overall, a huge letdown here from these two brewers. Even if I didn't hold them in such high esteem, this beer just tasted very off and strange to me. The lack of enjoyment here is staggering...

Photo of ShanePB
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of chefduff2
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of 2dogbrew
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of MordorMongo
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of Goblinmunkey7
3/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance: Big fluffy, light khaki head. Massive retention. Creamy. Lively carbonation. Beer is. Nice deep copper. Slight haze. Nice burnt orange hues when held to the light.

Smell: Hyper malty. Big caramel, roasted malts in abundance. Toffee, some phenolic astringency. Aspirin bitterness. Biscuity. Bite of alcohol on the back. Cooked malts. Extremely caramelized. Minerals and rocks. Toasted rocks.

Taste: Burnt sugar, caramel, toffee, and hyper cooked malts. Caramelized into oblivion. Big hit of minerality on the finish. Almost vegetal. Earthy and herbal. Musty. Big sugary, earthy sweetness. Huge toasted edge. As it warms the phenols go in to overdrive. It's not infected, but oxidation is real kids.

Mouthfeel: Carbonation is over high. Nice medium body. Clean.

Overall: I expected more from this beer. It's amazingly British which is nice, but the flavors fall apart in the long run. Big malts.

Photo of AStateJB
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of Whiskeydeez
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of djre4orm
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of cbeer88
3/5  rDev -22.1%

Photo of RuckusDu
3/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A - a larger two fingers of interesting light mocha colored head. Body is cloudy and a deep amber with some purple.

S - Pretty standard. Dark, dried fruits of prunes and raisins. Some lightness to it like an earthy-greeness. Some malts and caramel.

T - Not my style. Weird dried fruits again and some cranberry. A noticeable hop on the finish. Some Indian spices.

M - Nice carbonation and the body holds up well. The downside is a taste/feel on the back of my mouth that just says, yuck.

O - It's a beer. Not something I really enjoy, but maybe others do. I'm a big fan of Boulevard, but this one is too out there.

Photo of kojevergas
3.09/5  rDev -19.7%
look: 2.75 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

Collaboration No. 3; a collaboration brew with Pretty Things. 8.5% ABV confirmed. "English Style Ale." 1 pint 9.4 fl oz brown glass bottle with hood-and-wire cap (aka cage) over a cork acquired at me local bottle shop for $9.99 USD yesterday and served into a Cantillon stemware in me gaff in low altitude Austin, Texas. Reviewed live. Expectations are well above average given the brewery, which makes some wonderful beers. "Batch number 2012-2. Best by: 03-2013." Reviewed as an English Ale; the label's description identifies the style as a "Stingo," which was purportedly an English style in the 17th century.

Served cold, straight from me fridge, and allowed to warm over the course of consumption. Side-poured with standard vigor as no carbonation issues are anticipated.

The cork doesn't pop very easily by hand; it took some effort.

A: No bubble show forms as I pour.

Pours a one finger wide head of light khaki colour. Decent creaminess and thickness. Some decent lacing as the head recedes. Head retention is slightly below average - between 1.5 and 2 minutes.

Body colour is a dull drab brown. Nontransparent and very nontranslucent, but not quite opaque; some light does get through near the bottom of the glass. No yeast particles are visible.

A lackluster appearance overall, but I'm optimistic given the brewery. By no means unique or special, but there are no egregious flaws.

Sm: Plenty of toffee. Biscuit malt. Brown malts. Tart fruit - cherries or raspberries perhaps. Caramel. Some acetic character. Light oak maybe. Cocoa dust. Bready malts. No obvious hop presence. No alcohol either. Clean yeast. Some lactobacillus, even. The malts definitely lend it an identifiably English character, but I'm not used to an English style beer with obvious souring yeast. It takes some getting used to, but I'm liking where it's going so far.

A pleasant, perhaps unique aroma of mild to moderate strength.

T: The first thing I notice is the brief touch of sourness on the climax, which plays nicely against the backdrop of light acetic oak and tart fruit. But I do think it clashes somewhat with the English malts; the British brown and biscuit malts do not play well with the lactobacillus yeast. No hop presence is notable. Toffee, caramel. As it warms, I notice more fruity notes emerging - especially stonefruit; likely plums or grapes. Raisin, fig, cherries, dried red apples, berries. A bit vinous. On the sweeter side.

Some might fairly call it medicinal or identify a wet cardboard note. I wouldn't argue with the contention that there're traces of off-flavours here.

The balance just isn't here; it's not gestalt and doesn't come together like it should. It almost achieves a fair cohesion, but then the climax hits and the vinous/dry fruit notes tear it apart. My palate doesn't feel "stung," but maybe a bit more tartness and sourness would effect** that (and help the beer).

Decent complexity. It certainly tries; there's obvious inspiration here. Okay subtlety.

Mf: The third act is considerably more dry and coarse than the two preceding acts, to its detriment; it's a somewhat jarring effect. Smooth and wet otherwise. Decent body and thickness, but neither ever feels quite right. A biteen overcarbonated; was this bottle conditioned? I doubt it. Decent presence on the palate, but far from ideal. Doesn't feel custom-tailored to the taste by any means. Could be softer. Unrefreshing. Has a light astringency, to its detriment. Also somewhat tannic. The vinous character makes it a bit rough on the palate, which is unwelcome.

Not oily, boozy, or hot.

Dr: Downable - especially for the ABV - but wanting. I wouldn't get it again or recommend it to friends, but I'd sure be interested to try it with some age on it - who knows how this would develop? I always applaud efforts to exhume archaic styles, but this beer doesn't quite have the refined execution of something like New Glarus' Brown Porter. I don't know that I'd even call it unique. I'll finish the bottle alone without trouble, but this isn't Boulevard's strongest work - or Pretty Things' for that matter. I don't know that it's worth trying at this price point, per se, but I'm glad I gave it a spin. Worth giving a go if you've got the wherewithal. A swing and a miss from the two breweries involved.

C+

**Yes, this is correct grammar.

Photo of Ilafan
3.1/5  rDev -19.5%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer has a light lattice and head that lasts an okay amount of time. As for smell, it is faint. But I detect an almost cheap brandy kind of smell. That probably says more about me than the actual beer. As for taste, it is sour. There is a distinct lack of bitte beer hops, and it could use some. It is pretty sour in the aftertaste, but it does have a touch of some burnt coffee to it. Overall, it is okay.

Photo of oline73
3.15/5  rDev -18.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

I had this on-tap at Devil's Advocate in Minneapolis. Served in a tulip glass.

Appearance: Pours a dark mahogany color with a layer of off white head that fades to a ring around the pour.

Smell: Lots of caramel malt with a slight red berry like tartness. There is a ton of dark fruit going on along with the malt.

Taste: More tartness here than there was in the smell. Brown sugar and dark fruit with a slight red berry tartness. Fairly similar to the smell. The finish is rather bitter, along with the sweetness from the malt.

Mouthfeel: Medium body with foamy carbonation and a dry finish.

Overall: I thought the tartness in this one was a bit weird. The sweet and tart didn't really get along in my opinion. I don't need any more.

Photo of chugalug06
3.15/5  rDev -18.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3

Five-finger, off white, soapy head rises and falls fast. Brew is hazy redish copper with lots of brown. Not overly impressive.

No hop profile. Very malty and lots of caramel. Nothing complex or intriguing.

Very papery and wet feeling. Smooth and not sugary. No roughness or feel of heat. Bitterness brings along some dryness too. Hops are nonexistent.. Pretty bland.

Very underwhelming. Not impressive. Not recommended.

I expected A LOT more from this collaboration..

Photo of hardy008
3.23/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Opened the bottle and had a gusher to clean up. Luckily I didn't lose too much.

Pours dark brown with ruby highlights, and a tan 2 finger head, which quickly fades to a small collar, and leaves nice lacing. the aroma has cherries, figs, plums, raisins, brown sugar, and toffee.

The taste is both sweet and bitter with roasted malt, bread crust, alcohol, cherries, figs, plums, raisins, brown sugar, and toffe. The roasted malt, which I could not smell, took over the majority of the taste. I don't think it should have been added, and am of the opinion that the dark roasted malt negatively affects the taste of the beer.

Medium bodied with average carbonation. Finishes dry, and has a roasted malt aftertaste. This beer has too much going on and is a bit of a mess, in my opinion.

Photo of wmobley
3.25/5  rDev -15.6%

Photo of jaydoc
3.25/5  rDev -15.6%

Photo of Goldfishman
3.25/5  rDev -15.6%

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Collaboration No. 3 - Stingo from Boulevard Brewing Co.
87 out of 100 based on 420 ratings.