1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  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!

Creemore Springs UrBock - Creemore Springs Brewery Limited

Not Rated.
Creemore Springs UrBockCreemore Springs UrBock

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

133 Ratings
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 133
Reviews: 84
rAvg: 3.63
pDev: 10.47%
Wants: 3
Gots: 6 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Creemore Springs Brewery Limited visit their website
Ontario, Canada

Style | ABV
Bock |  6.00% ABV

Availability: Fall

Notes/Commercial Description:
Bock beers gained notoriety in Munich back in 1612. All the Bavarian nobles were drinking fashionable northern ales known as Einbeck Bier. So Duke Maximillian I of Munich hired his own northern brewmaster, who created a lager similar in character but superior in taste. It won back the local aristocrats. Inspired by his entrepreneurial spirit we started brewing our own urBock – rich, ruby-hued beer with subtle, dark roasted flavours. It’s an aristocratic beer but rest assured, you needn’t be a Duke to enjoy it.

28 IBU

(Beer added by: brewdlyhooked13 on 12-10-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 76-100 | 101-125 | 126-150  | next › last »
Ratings: 133 | Reviews: 84 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of IronDjinn
3.53/5  rDev -2.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Oh my, my first Creemore Springs in almost a decade. I think I had last sampled their Urbock in 1996, before I even knew what a Bock beer actually was. Chances are I probably drank it straight from the bottle as well (dumbass....).

This time around is a bottle of their 2003 Seasonal Specialty courtesy of the ever-generous and insightful northyorksammy. I think this is the first time I've ever seen a Creemore Springs product in a 341 ml bottle. The typeface on the label distinctly reminds me of the font that Big Rock uses for their own labels, but I like the design and lay-out nonetheless, simple but it works.

This is a looker of a beer, a seductive clear chestnut hue with a quick splash of beige head. Spiced fruit on the nose, burnt malt that comes across sweet as well, with a trace of alcohol. The flavour occurs in layers: dried fruit and spice at first with a full-bodied mouthfeel, which then drops to a bold roasted malt presence in the middle, and then melds into a grassy hop finish which is more oily on the palate, blended with a sweet caramel accent. The flavours and textures take you around the block a few times, and it's a pleasant trip each time. Complex enough to keep me interested, but not something I could drink on a regular basis. Good thing it's a seasonal.

IronDjinn, Jun 11, 2004
Photo of Sammy
3.3/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

(2003 version) Brown colour. Like their premium lager but instead of cream, the unique bock taste and some sweetness and slight fruit. Unpasteurized is a problem. I can see why Creemore doesn't expand their lineup. Ok session brew and with Chinese food as light complexion.

(2004 version) More German-like quality with less carbonation noticeable. Sweet, nicer brown colour. Same overall rating.
(2005 version on tap) smooth, creamy, dry. A variation of the creemore cream.

Sammy, Apr 22, 2004
Photo of Phyl21ca
3.23/5  rDev -11%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Tap - Copper brew with a small head. Malty aroma with a medium body. Taste is very creamy which I approved with small traced of burnt malt. Not the best of bock but still a great beer that should be made available all year long. The Creemore brewery is starting to impress me with two great german inspired brew (lager and bock).

Phyl21ca, Jan 04, 2004
Photo of TerryW
3.53/5  rDev -2.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Dark red-brown pour with only a small bit of a head. Sparse, spotty lace only.

Quite sweet smell of malt and fruit. Solid hit of malt on the tongue. Sweet up front, but settles into gently bitter hops with dry, lingering bitter finish. Carbonation is about right, so overall this feels quite good to drink. Taste is real simple, nothing particularly complex.

Solid, unsensational beer, good with a meal. Suitable for introducing neophytes to something a little different.

TerryW, Dec 29, 2003
Photo of OldFrothingSlosh
3.33/5  rDev -8.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Presentation: Squat amber 11.5 oz bottle. Freshness date of 07/03. Received as part of a beer trade with AKSmokedPoter (who has done a great job of getting new beer styles to me as part of his membership in something like 183 different "beer of the month" clubs).

Appearance: Deep clear copper with a tan-colored head that settles nicely to a thin layer. Nice lacing of the glass.

Smell: Malty sweet on the nose. A pleasant mixture of sweet caramel and fruity aromas.

Taste: A little too sweet for me. I was hoping for a little more balanced beer, but it's certainly not bad. Easy to drink with a fruity aftertaste.

Mouthfeel: Thinly smooth and creamy. Not much body, perhaps dur to low carbonation?

Drinkability: Above average. Nothing in this beer to remember it by, but not a burden on the palate. Having read the description of the style, I guess I expected more of a hop influence (being the hop-head that I am).

OldFrothingSlosh, Jan 31, 2003
Photo of Shiloh
3/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Not my style of choice in beer, but is certainly acceptable in all the BA categories......taste is a little to sweet for me, yet this brew has qualities that you know must be appreciated by those who care for this particular style....
I guess what I am trying to say here is that this brew has all the qualities of a fine product, but needs to be critiqued by a more knowledgeable person than I......

Shiloh, Jan 07, 2003
Photo of Popsinc
3.4/5  rDev -6.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

I just assumed that this would be a darker, more bold & flavouful beer than it's sister Creemore Springs lager. Well, it was darker but.......that's as far as it goes.

The look, smell and taste of this beer left me looking for something more. It lacked a distinct flavour. A signature of its own. Maybe my opinion is skewed in part because of my love for Creemore Springs Lager. One sip of the lager, whether you're in Canada or half way across the world, and YOU KNOW it's Creemore Lager. That is the distinct impression left by that beer. But the urBock......i don't know. i was underwhelmed. This is NOT a bad beer. It is however quite ordinary.

Popsinc, Dec 02, 2002
Photo of Gusler
3.45/5  rDev -5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

The beer pours a somewhat murky brown; the head is modest in size, the lace fair and clings in sheets to the glass. Nose is malt, caramel, somewhat sweet as in ripe fruit. Start is lightly malt sweet, the top is middling, the finish is piddlingly acidic, and puny in the hops arena, dry aftertaste. Not a bad drinking beer, just a little "Wimpy" on the hops, but then I'm a "Hop Head".

Gusler, Nov 03, 2002
« first ‹ prev | 76-100 | 101-125 | 126-150  | next › last »
Creemore Springs UrBock from Creemore Springs Brewery Limited
82 out of 100 based on 133 ratings.