1. Extreme Beer Fest tickets go on sale Sat, Sep 27 @ Noon EDT.
  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!

Celis Pale Bock - Michigan Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Celis Pale BockCelis Pale Bock

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
78
okay

93 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 93
Reviews: 84
rAvg: 3.38
pDev: 16.27%
Wants: 0
Gots: 0 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Michigan Brewing Company visit their website
Michigan, United States

Style | ABV
Belgian Pale Ale |  3.90% ABV

Availability: Winter

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

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 01-26-2003)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Ratings: 93 | Reviews: 84 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of CharlieMopps
2.08/5  rDev -38.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

A: Pours a deep auburn hue, a bit of transparency, topped by about a centimeter of head that recedes quickly. Somewhat of a lackluster appearance.

S: A breadiness that is drowned out by sweet malt aromas, don't seem to gel together very well. Not very appealing in the nose.

T: Everything seems off about this beer. Malt tastes very underrepresented, hops add a strange bitterness, and is a little to sharp toward the middle.

M: Carbonation seems a bit too bubbly and crisp, too sharp, and does not complement the beer very well.

D: Not a very good bock-style beer at all. The palate characteristics, when blended together, seem too off-base to be enjoyable, and the flavors that are present aren't very tasty. Not recommended.

CharlieMopps, Aug 05, 2007
Photo of PittBeerGirl
2.93/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A- Pours a transparent amber colored body with thick foamy off-white head. Head subsides quickly and becomes very thin. Decent retention. Lots of lacing left behind in the glass. Pale bock. Doesn't look like a bock or a blonde maibock...has a color similar to dead guy but this one is one dimensional and completely transparent.

S- not to much to pick up. Some grainy malt and hints of hops. Rather boring.

T- not too much here either. The big taste is the malt. Tastes similar to a bland cereal. Hints of hops pop up but not too much. Finish is clean and dry.

M- Medium carbonation and very watery.

D- This beats a macro anyday but is rather bland. Its quite drinkable but not enjoyable. Very unoffensive and there's nothing to hate about it.

Not sure what style this would fall under. Not belgian-not bock either.

PittBeerGirl, Jul 05, 2007
Photo of feloniousmonk
3.63/5  rDev +7.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Clear, amber-reddish coloration, large, creamy, rocky head. Lookin' good.

Fragrant nose, herbal and malty, but not too sweet, rather dry. Smells of cereal.

Dry on the tongue, too, then wet....and smooth. Clean. Some malty flavors, hints of spice. Does feel like a Belgian pale ale done as a lager, maybe, but not much like a bock. Strange name.

Grainy grit in the texture lays on the tongue at first sip, then fades slowly. Minimal hops in this, and a bit too light in body for me. Extremely drinkable, and subtle. Enjoyable in it's way, but a little disappointing for me.
Just a little, though...

feloniousmonk, May 28, 2007
Photo of NeroFiddled
3.9/5  rDev +15.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

I can only assume that Pale Bock was intitially intended to compete with Shiner Bock, as Michelob's ZiegenBock now does. But I'm not sure of that. What I am sure of is that Michigan's version is slightly different, and more harsher than Pierre's was. It has more bitterness (Pierre's was in the 22 IBU range, but this seems more like 28-30). Of course, that could just be perception due to the hardness of the water, or something else (spicing level, residual malt, etc). It does have it's good points though. It pours a deep copper color, and the creamy ivory head holds fairly well. The nose is delicately sweet with a touch of caramel malts, candyish with a hint of clove, and generically herbal and spicy. The flavor is fuller, and adds a spark of citrus that helps to enliven it; and the spicing is fuller. It's dry and herbal and spicy with yeasty phenolic undertones. Not a bad tipple. Makes a good apertif or after dinner drink.

NeroFiddled, May 27, 2007
Photo of brdc
3.63/5  rDev +7.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

This is a strange beer.
It is not pale, it does not look or taste like a bock, but has some qualities nonetheless.
Golden with a reddish hue, it has a plentiful white head with a very good retention.
Nose is not very prominent, but it contains malts, yeast-like fruitiness, bread, some alcohol.
Light to medium, it has a palate that is mostly well balanced, with bread, malts, some hops and fruitiness; however, despite pleasant, it is still a very "light" and quickly fading taste.
It is very easy to drink, but not exactly something I would pursue on a frequent basis.

brdc, Apr 09, 2007
Photo of TastyTaste
3.68/5  rDev +8.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Appearance: LIght haze in an orange-rust body, big head, slow fade, symmetrical and admirable lacing.

Smell: Raw citrus and vegetable funk. Tart, with a little sweet fruitiness in the background. Light grains.

Taste: Smooth yet citrusy and grainy. A little bland, maybe? A quencher to be sure, nothing really wrong with it, just needs more flavor.

Drinkability: Middle of summer beer, no problem, lacks definition of flavor.

TastyTaste, Apr 05, 2007
Photo of kimcgolf
3.05/5  rDev -9.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured to a nice amber color with medium off-white head that lasted through half-glass and left okay lacing. Aroma was faint, and what was there was slightly carmel, with a hint of grassy notes as it warmed. Initial taste tended to almost be spicy, like cinnamon, but again was faint. Body was a bit too thin for my liking, which led to a short, watery, metallic finish. Not really much to this one.

kimcgolf, Mar 11, 2007
Photo of Alkey
3.23/5  rDev -4.4%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

12oz. bottle poured a deep red/amber with a nice white fluffy head that leaves lots of lace around the glass. Smells sweet and malty. Taste seems a little bland with watered down flavors of malt up front and a slight hop bitterness towards the end. The mouth feel is light and seems a bit foamy sort of like a whipped cream feel. This brew is easy to drink but is to pale and flavorless for my taste. I do however really like the way this one looks and feels with all the frothy foam and lace.

Alkey, Jan 24, 2007
Photo of arguemaniac
3.73/5  rDev +10.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Subdued fruit flavors and a touch of sweetness along with some nice toffee malt. Some balancing dryness and a nice hop bitterness in the finish.

A bit confused by the “Bock” label, it’s definitely more along the lines of some sort of Belgian ale. Interesting level of dryness in the finish considering the mellow ABV. Not stellar, but very solid and enjoyably drinkable.

arguemaniac, Dec 30, 2006
Photo of pmcadamis
3.9/5  rDev +15.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

A - Hazy orange brown that is slightly reddish in the light with lots of tiny bubbles rising to a 1/2 finger tan head. Some huge swaths of lacing coat the glass.

S - Biscuits and toast with some sweet honey and caramel undertones. The hop profile is very mild.

T - Musty and dank hop oil with big burnt caramel notes and some very bitter leafy flavors. A bit mouldy and dank. It is pretty unique, I'll give it that. Gets better with warmth as grapey fruit flavors show themselves.

M - Feels thinner than I think it should be. The finish is extremely dry and bitter. Nice.

D - This is a near miss. It's almost good, but somehow falls short.

pmcadamis, Dec 03, 2006
Photo of jcdiflorio
3.55/5  rDev +5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Served into large tulip glass from a 12oz brown bottle with a crimped on cap.

Cloudy,light copper color,creamy off-white head,very lively with lots a tiny bubbles stringing together racing to the top,with a retentative head..
A very fruity aroma,with notes of caramell and chocolate and a candy-like sweet smell.
A nice balanced taste that was nutty,fruitty.with hints of toffee,a bit syrupy a pleasing bittersweet finish thats clean and refreshing.
A medium mouthfeel,thats fizzy,slightly cloying,a bit dry at the end.
Drinkable,enjoyable,couldn't drink all night,but would enjoy more than one. Reminassant of a Cosendonk,but not quite up to par with one.
A beer i would drink again though.

jcdiflorio, Nov 06, 2006
Photo of brentk56
4.13/5  rDev +22.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Appearance: Pours a fairly clear amber color with a huge rocky head that fades quickly that retains well and leaves layers of lace

Smell: Rich fruity caramel aroma with hints of cocoa

Taste: Starts out with a mouthful of toffee character that moves in a herbacious directon by mid-palate, with orange peel elements as well; after the swallow, an earthy fruitiness takes over and overwhelms the sweet malt

Mouthfeel: Medium bodied with moderate carbonation

Drinkability: A whole lot of flavor for a low alcohol beer; I think this beer is mis-understood as many ratings here are looking at this as a Belgian and downgrading it - read the label (it says it is a bock) and go to the website (it has Belgian spice) and then wrap your mind around what this beer is about; it is clearly a hybrid and a pretty interesting one at that

brentk56, Oct 30, 2006
Photo of tgbljb
2.4/5  rDev -29%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured a rich deep color with sparse white head.
Smell is very mild for bananas and a slight yeasty scent.
Taste is nothing like I expected. It is so dry as to almost burn the mouth. This burning sensation overwhelms any other taste.
The burning sensation lingers in the back of the mouth and makes the beer even less tolerable.
Drinkability is poor.
I don't know if this beer went bad. It looked fresh and poured fresh. The glass will be difficult to finish.

tgbljb, Oct 12, 2006
Photo of BuckeyeNation
3.43/5  rDev +1.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Celis Pale Bock isn't all that pale and it certainly isn't a bock. It's dark coppery orange with a reddish tint and sports an oatmeal colored cap that is firmly creamy and is tacky enough to leave an attractive array of smeary lace on the glass. A good look in spite of the style confusion.

The nose was better at two feet than it is at two inches. It's moderately toasted malty with an indeterminate fruitiness that may be due to ale yeast (if this is truly a BPA, then I assume an ale yeast was used). No hint of Belgian yeastiness makes its way to my nose. What the hell style is this beer again?

Pale Bock tastes like a well-hopped English ESB to me. In fact, it's a dead ringer for an ESB and is more ESB than many ESBs. The malt backbone is bigger than it has a right to be in a 3.9% offering (kudos to the brewers) and is impressively toasted and bready. A mother lode of bitter, tea leaf-like Brit hops swarms over the tongue with each mouthful. The hops are a guess since I have no knowledge of the ingredients.

There's still an overripe apple fruitiness underlying the 'bitter brown bread toast' flavor, but it's overwhelmed by what is turning out to be a smack-me-silly amount of woody, drying bitterness. I applaud the decision to go heavy on the hops, although it effectively puts the kibosh on sessionability. The body/mouthfeel is a fraction ligher than medium with a tongue scrubbing alpha acidity.

Celis Pale Bock is quite the odd little beer and is not at all what I had expected. Both the name and the (BA) style designation need to change though because neither one of them comes close to the mark. I like Celis White and was disappointed with Celis Raspberry. This one gets things back on track to some extent.

BuckeyeNation, Oct 11, 2006
Photo of Blakaeris
3/5  rDev -11.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours cloudy caramel brown with a redish tint. Head dissipates quickly to a thin soapy ring.

Smell is on the sweeter side. Malty and slightly fruity.

Taste caramel malt, and a strong grainy bready presence. Finish is quite minerally, and has mild bitterness with lingering nut flavor.

Mouthfeel is light bodied and watery.

Overall a pretty average offering. Nothing to get excited about.

Blakaeris, Sep 18, 2006
Photo of bashiba
2.93/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured a dark hazy amber with a small ring of bubbly head.

Smell was musty with a touch of oak.

Taste has a grainy malt quality with a slight yeasty funk and a bit of earthy hops.

mouthfeel is light and dry.

Bland and average. Nothing I would be seeking out in the future.

bashiba, Sep 18, 2006
Photo of phisig137
3.03/5  rDev -10.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Pours a crystal clear reddish dark amber color with a one finger head that lasts a decent while. Falls into a nice blanket over top of the glass.

Aroma is very faint, but smells bready and ever so slightly alcoholic. I'd like to smell a little more malt, and have a fuller nose... this smells a little thin. The flavor again is bready and dry, with notes of toasted grain, and a relatively hoppy finish. Very mild and light. Mouthfeel is creamy and full, with large bubbled carbonation. Drinkability is pretty good.

Not fantastic, but not bad either. It's worth a shot, but I don't see myself buying much of this.

phisig137, Aug 20, 2006
Photo of stouty1
3.3/5  rDev -2.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured a rusty brown with a small foamy head. Not impressive, but too cold (I am still trying to cycle in my fridge). Nice lacing around the rim.

Smells sweet with apple the prevailing fruit.

Sweet tasting maltiness. A bit of caramel coming through. Leaves with a slight bitterness. Can definitely taste the hops in the final swallow.

Very light beer but fully carbonated.

Drinkable but probably would get overpowering after a second. Don't think I would order two in a row.

stouty1, Aug 05, 2006
Photo of nicksta
3.5/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: It pours an apple juice orange, with not much of a head. It is slightly cloudy and it reflects the light off of its orange body.

S: I am picking up on spices and some smooth floral hops.

T: It isn't terribly complex but I can taste spices, and maybe even mint? I say mint because of the minty burn that finishes the beer with the bitter hops. It isn't that bitter, it is still drinkable.

M: It is fairly thick and what I would expect from this beer.

D: Fairly drinkable, a good session if you a fan of this style, or beer.

nicksta, May 14, 2006
Photo of WVbeergeek
3.5/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Appears a copper amber hue with an off white colored head as it dwindles fine scattered lacing clings to my pint glass. Aroma has mildly metallic tone with strong malty layers and a flowery herbal hop mix the malty nose brings a touch of alcohol with apple notes in there. Taste has a vibrant flwoing malty layer matched with herbal grassy hops a touch of caramel and tart apples in the finish very nice. Mouthfeel is medium bodied brew although the carbonation was sorta harsh it didn't hurt overall drinkability too much flavor stays on the palate it's resilient. Drinkability is good and I find this one to be refreshing and flavorful there are flaws here good be a bit smoother but I still enjoyed it definitely worth the experience...now it's time to try the new Celis brewery in Austin, TX where he'll be marketing his wit as Brussels witbier.

WVbeergeek, May 06, 2006
Photo of santoslhalper
4.28/5  rDev +26.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 5

Appearence: Pours a simple copper with a thin bubbly white head. Nice carbonation and clarity.

Smell: The smell is a nice mix of rich malts and bitter, balancing hops. Some sweetness is present, with loads of fruitiness. Very complex and tasty smelling.

Taste and Mouthfeel: Simple malt flavors, balanced by simple hop flavors. Nothing over-the-top or crazy. The malt flavors are grainy, raw, and rich, balanced nicely by a little bit of hop bitterness and citrus flavors Some sweet bubblegum and cotton candy notes as well. The mouthfeel is full bodied.

Drinkability and Overall: Definitly achieved it's goal: an easy drinking, full-flavored, session brew. Nothing special or stand-out in anyways, which makes this one special, and stand-out to me. Simple, subtle, and delicious.

santoslhalper, Apr 21, 2006
Photo of Derek
2.65/5  rDev -21.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I picked this up from the brewery.

A: Copper/amber with an off-white, yellowish head. Very little retention, hints of lace.

S: Malty (caramel & bread).

T: Caramel & bready malt, some earthy spicyness, slightly metallic.

M: Moderate body is slightly syrupy, and doesn't seem to be quite all-together.

D: Easily approached, but the flavour starts to wear...

Derek, Apr 21, 2006
Photo of Frozensoul327
4.05/5  rDev +19.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

This is a really good offering. Poured out to a dark and clear amber color with a short lived medium bodied head. Medium low carbonation. Aromas of dark fruit, malts and yeast. Taste was along the same lines as the smell; fruit, bread and malt blended well with some bitterness toward the finish. The mouthfeel was slightly weaker than I would've liked, as it was on the thin side, but still good enough. High level of drinkability, this could be a great session brew considering the low ABV. Hopefully the bottled version is as good as the tap. Recommended.

Frozensoul327, Nov 01, 2005
Photo of ypsifly
3.93/5  rDev +16.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

Undated 12oz poured into a tulip.

Clear amber with minimal carbonation and an off white head that, despite its small size and short lifespan, leaves a decent broken sheet of lace as it goes down.

Buttered biscuits and some caramel malt in the nose. A pinch of dry hops underneath.

The hops are more pronounced in the taste. They don't dominate as there is just enough carmel malt to give it a backbone. Overall its pretty dry. Nice crisp clean finish. Good flavor plus a low abv equals a really good session beer.

ypsifly, Sep 12, 2005
Photo of MUSHROOMCLOUD
2.95/5  rDev -12.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer is fixing to be gone from our market (San Antonio). I have not had it since it was brewed in Austin. I was lucky enough to drink it at is freshest out of the brewery tap. I figured I better get 6 before it was too late.

The beer poured an amber-orange color and is clear. The head is decent, about 1/2" and retained well with good lacing.

The aroma was hard to pinpoint. The flavor was very good, malty without any cloying aftertaste. Not much of a hop flavor or aroma, but that is not missed on this style of beer. I seem to remember when it was brewed locally this beer tasted a little richer with a more pronounced caramel flavor, almost rich and buttery. This was lacking here, but this beer is no slouch. I could see this being a nice session beer. I am sorry this is not going to be available in SA anymore, but we will have Celis White and Raspberry (review forthcoming!) to fill the void.

MUSHROOMCLOUD, May 16, 2005
Celis Pale Bock from Michigan Brewing Company
78 out of 100 based on 93 ratings.