Mississippi Mud Black & Tan - Mississippi Brewing Co.
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 852 | Reviews: 396 | Display Reviews Only:
2.6/5 rDev -16.1%
I was given this beer at an x-mas party. Needless the say, while I drank it I was not that impressed but had to put up a good face and drink it so as not to embarass the giver. There is a dark colour, I tasted some roastiness. Sourish finish. The packaging is unique and attracted curiousity. Despite that, with the name mud, noone wanted to share it out.
07-09-2006 04:32:49 | More by Sammy
2.83/5 rDev -8.7%
Pours a clear cola brown color with a 1 inch beige head that fades to a film on the top of the beer. Random streaks of lace form down the glass on the drink down. Smells of sweet malt, mild fruitiness, and slight smoke. Taste is a subdued and watery version of the smell with a roasty flavor coming through on the finish. This beer has a good level of carbonation with a bubbly but smooth mouthfeel. Overall, this is a pretty average beer but it's super cheap at $2.49 for the mini-jug at Trader Joe's. Nothing horrible but nothing great here.
06-19-2011 05:22:25 | More by UCLABrewN84
2.25/5 rDev -27.4%
Bottle picked up a Total Wine in Alexandria. Served in a tulip.
Pour yields a dense black brew with a short off-white head and a bit of lacing. The nose begins all the problems. First of all, mixing a porter and a pilsner does not yield a black and tan. Second, even judging this beer on its own, it tastes like a watered-down porter that wasn't any good to begin with. Nose brings forward a bit of roasted malt plus some slight notes of chocolate. Anything resembling hops--Noble or American--is completely lacking. The flavor is similarly plain and one dimensional, containing nothing other than a bit of roasted malt. Feel is thin and a bit watery. This is a bad beer.
03-08-2011 11:57:02 | More by Thorpe429
3/5 rDev -3.2%
A: The beer is very dark red in color but clear and has a slight amount of visible carbonation. It poured with a quarter finger high off white head that consistently left a thin layer of bubbles covering the surface.
S: There are light to moderate amounts of roasted malt aromas in the nose along with some hints of maple syrup.
T: The taste is similar to the smell and has flavors of nutty malts along with notes of roasted malts and hints of maple syrup and smoke.
M: It feels a bit more than light-bodied on the palate and has a moderate amount of carbonation.
O: This beer does not have much complexity in the flavors but its light body makes it very easy to drink.
08-06-2012 02:09:58 | More by metter98
2.23/5 rDev -28.1%
When the sun goes down, the tide goes out,
The people gather 'round and they all begin to shout,
"Hey! Hey! Uncle Dud,
It's a treat to beat your feet on the Mississippi Mud,
It's a treat to beat your feet on the Mississippi Mud"
--James Cavanaugh and Harry Barris
I've seen these 'crocks' of Mississippi Mud in stores for years, but was never intrigued enough to buy one. When I spotted this smaller, less expensive version I figured I'd give it a shot. I'm a little disappointed that it's a black & tan though. Shouldn't a beer called Mississippi Mud be a thick, black, high-ABV American double stout?
Flawless dark orange-darkest bronze when backlit with morning sun. Unfortunately, it looks nothing at all like Mississippi mud. The toasted ecru head was large initially, but fell without fanfare to a simple, covering film and left the glass completely devoid of lace.
MM is a bit of an oddity in the sense that it isn't a combination of a stout and a pale ale, but a combination of a porter and a pilsener. It smells like neither, but rather like a weakly aromatic dark lager. There isn't much to go on, though I do pick up some faint cocoa notes. So far... not impressed.
After drinking, I'm still not impressed. Could this beer be any more wimpy, both in terms of flavor and mouthfeel? It tastes like a poor-quality dark lager that has been cut with water. What flavor is present tastes artificial, like dark caramel extract was added. A lousy porter (I'm guessing) and a lousy pilsener (I'm guessing), when mixed, can only result in a lousy (I know for a fact) black & tan.
There's nothing at all here that resembles good beer. I can't get over the fact that it tastes artificially-flavored. It doesn't help that there's a metallic, almost chemical aspect to the finish (maybe the brewers add a splash of Mississippi River water for authenticity). It's a little sour as well, which doesn't help. Even this small 'crock' will be a chore to get through. I have no idea about the ABV, but it doesn't drink very high at all. About 5.0%, I'd say.
The mouthfeel is as un-mud-like as possible. This is the lightest, thinnest version of the style that I've had (all three of them) and has no mouthfillingness whatsoever. The carbonation is finely bubbled and hangs on until the end, but it can't possibly save the mouthfeel from its pathetic self.
I had a feeling that I wasn't missing much each time I thought about grabbing a Mississippi Mud and didn't. It's a forgettable beer that continues to be brewed and sold only because of the novelty and distinctiveness of its packaging. I wish now that I'd been content to remain curious.
05-14-2006 12:59:11 | More by BuckeyeNation
2.28/5 rDev -26.5%
Bottle: Poured a dark amber color ale with a huge slightly of-white foamy head with good retention. Aroma of weak sweet malt with a very subtle touch of bitter hops. Taste is sweet with a weak malt presence and not much hops. Watery body and overall a very uninteresting beer.
04-19-2006 18:43:45 | More by Phyl21ca
3.3/5 rDev +6.5%
I really don't consider 'Black and Tan's' to be a legitimate style of beer, but I'll judge it accordingly anyway. After trying this one a few years ago, I was unimpressed. Now, after knowing a bit more about beer flavor profiling, I kinda enjoyed this brew. Basically a weak, malty sweet American Stout in character. The 'tan' portion seemed to water the stout characters quite a bit, but substituted a moderately fruity sweet caramel malt character. I could also describe this as a big amber beer with cocoa, roasted grain (Porter--sh) and more moderately hopped. Schizophrentic of course, but I don't mind the experiment. Oh yea, the bottle is sorta neat too.
03-11-2006 16:07:37 | More by BEERchitect
2.53/5 rDev -18.4%
What am I doing with this one after all these years. I actually stumbled upon this the other day and had to grab it just for old times. Big jug was served cold and poured into a pint glass.
The pour was decent, light thin brown in color with a minimal off white head emerging. Small retention left behinf little in the way of side lacing and a small amount of carbonation coming up.
The aroma was light, roasted malt maybe hidden way underneath the light grain and basic dull macro smell. Not much complexity here and just way too light overall. Same for the flavor, Nothing overwhelming me with a light cereal grain and a small caramel sweetness, way too carbonated with a thin feel, it was drinkable, but forgettable.
Overall I think my memories are fonder then what this really was, Not at all as good as I remember, but ehh, was worth it for the memories.
12-09-2008 02:26:18 | More by mikesgroove
2.03/5 rDev -34.5%
I bought this because the bottle was awesome looking. I thought I'd enjoy this beer much more than I did. The beer is on the light side, not by color but by mouthfeel. I know it's a blend I just think ofnmud as being thick and I was expecting this to be like that too. The color is a dark yet transparent brown. Flavor had too much grass in it and not enough porter/stout.
03-24-2011 04:16:07 | More by Knapp85
2.58/5 rDev -16.8%
My wife picked me up the big jusg of this brew cuzz she liked the jug-like bottle a few weeks agoe and I never reviewed it because it was quite forgettable.Pour is decent a reddish brown color with not much head to it,aroma is very grainy and malty but not much there.I also got a metallic taste but not much just a slight metallic tinge in the finish,some slight caramel malt taste but pretty bland.A beer in a gimmick bottle quite a concept,that how you can sell really bad beer.
11-08-2003 13:16:35 | More by oberon
3.53/5 rDev +13.9%
Served in a Walter Payton shaker pint glass.
Possibly the best bottle presentation available on the market, hands down. From within, this stuff pours a clear light-ruby-brown topped by over a finger of light tan foam. The nose comprises toffee, very light roasted malts, white bread, light wheat, and a touch of watered-down coffee. The taste re-examines these elements and adds in a touch of vague fruitiness (mostly akin to honeydew and mandarin orange, I think) in a streak, much like the white bit of Rogue's hair (yeah, I just went all comic book nerd on ya...). It's unexpected, but not really all that off-putting somehow. The body is a light medium, with a light moderate carbonation and a sorta watery feel. Overall, a nice brew, nothing extremely special, but very drinkable. Probably one of the best pre-mixed black and tans on the market (in, as I've said before, the best packaging), however much that really says...
07-17-2011 17:43:26 | More by TMoney2591
3.5/5 rDev +12.9%
So, yes, the bottle, name and artwork is very cheesy. And I think this beer gets a bad rap because of it.
A - Poured out a dark, dark brown color with a small, khaki colored head of foam. It left some sudsy sheets of lace on the glass.
S - It smelled of chocolate and some roasty notes.
T - Mostly chocolate with caramel and a slight bitterness. It started out tasting like a porter, but as it warmed it tasted more like a Munich Dunkel Lager.
M - It was fairly crisp and sharp. A light bodied beer with a somewhat dry finish.
O - This is better than what I expected from the reviews.
08-26-2012 13:48:53 | More by zeff80
3.2/5 rDev +3.2%
A full quart's worth of 'English Porter and Continental Pilsner', on the patio at the Sugar Bowl. This fat-capped jug sure brought the stares from adjacent tables, I'll tell ya.
This beer pours a clear, dark red-brick amber hue, with two chubby fingers of puffy, finely foamy, and latently soapy tan (whoomp, there it is!) head, which leaves some fairly consistent, yet splattered lace around the glass as it slowly and evenly subsides.
It smells of biscuit and caramel malts, dark powdery chocolate, soft milky coffee, musty black fruit, oily nuts, a touch of earthy yeast, and leafy, herbal hops. The taste is lightly roasted, bready caramel and pale malt, mildly bitter coffee, gritty bar-top nuts, a fading mocha, um 'sweetness', stale, and slightly sour dark orchard fruit, and somewhat bitter, leafy, dead grassy hops.
The carbonation is moderate, just a tad frizzy up front, the body a decent medium weight (speaking to a hefty porter input, likely) and basic in its smoothness. It finishes just off-dry, the waning caramel sweetness paired with a strong nutty, crackery, and edgy floral drying character.
As was to be expected, this is a veritable mish-mash of two distinct styles - the heavier, more complex porter, and the lighter, crisper Pils. While nothing really offends, there seems to be a bit of a confusing experience to drinking this hybrid - but maybe if I didn't know that going in, it would just be perceived as a nice, drinkable, mildly complex, sour, and plainly hoppy dark ale. Or not.
05-21-2010 21:47:43 | More by biboergosum
3.68/5 rDev +18.7%
I'm not sure exactly why this beer is so popular in southern New Jersey (I think it's the packaging), but after seeing it time and time again in liquor store coolers I thought I'd give it a try. It pours a clear mahogany body that's topped by a short but creamy tan head. The head retention is only fair, and it drops shortly to a thin collar and whispy surface covering but leaves some lace initially. Fruitiness is prevelent in the nose, backed up by a touch of lightly caramel and cocoa-tinged malt. There's not alot going on, but it's actually quite nice and very welcoming. The body is light and it's crisp on the tongue. In the flavor, assorted fruits (apple, grape, orange, berry) and chocolate/cocoa-tinged malt combine in a mildly sweet cornicopia of drinkability. There's no noticeable hop flavor present, and the bitterness plays only a supporting role. It finishes with a flourish of fruit followed by a soft note of cocoa, and then dries out with a very mild note of alcohol and a touch of hop bitterness. Although it's very simplistic, it is actually quite quaffable. It has more character that most mainstream American lagers and makes a good crossover beer for the uninitiated.
06-10-2003 15:09:30 | More by NeroFiddled
3.35/5 rDev +8.1%
Poured from a 32oz bottle into a mug glass.
A: The beer is a rusty brown color, with a large off-white head that fades quickly and leaves a spotty lace on the glass.
S: The aroma is faint but contains light roasted malts, caramel, coffee and a touch of hops.
T: The taste is malty up front with flavors of caramel, coffee and grain. There's a little bit of smokiness in the background. Then a mild hops presence comes in to provide some balance. The after-taste is slightly bready and slightly sweet.
M: Crisp and a little smooth, medium body, medium carbonation, finish is slightly sticky.
D: Tasty, goes down ok, not too filling, mild kick, decent representation of style, it's not a bad beer overall, but there are others in the style that I would choose first.
11-26-2009 03:46:46 | More by TheManiacalOne
3.53/5 rDev +13.9%
A - One finger of off-white head on a clear, amber-brown body. The head settles slowly and leaves thick lace on the glass.
S - Brown malt with dry caramel. A hint of english hops and a clean yeast profile.
T - Toasted malt with dry, brown caramel flavors. Some light roast towards the finish with mild hops and bitterness.
M - Medium body, moderate carbonation, and a dry finish.
D - Not bad for what it is. The idea of a bottled black and tan is a bit pointless since you just end up with a brown ale, but this is a decent brown ale. Nothing special, but drinkable and better than most beers that come in a 32oz, screw-top bottle. It is interesting to note that the Mississippi Brewing Co is in Utica, NY; kind of like salsa from New York City I guess.
07-29-2009 03:13:07 | More by nickfl
2.83/5 rDev -8.7%
You have to love the novelty bottle, hell I bet these things sell themselves just because of the bottle. Well, I know that couldn't have called it New York Mud, but c'mon who wants to drink Mississippi Mud from Utica, New York, hold on who really wants to drink Mississippi Mud. Well, hey I bought into it, now let's see what this beer is made of. It pours a deep dark ruby tint, and the head is filled with very large bubbles and it is cream and color. Head is sticking around for at least awhile, and the lace is clinging to the sides of my glass. The aroma is very faint, I can barely detect some grainines along with somekind of malt thrown in to give off a sweet aroma. No hops to be sniffed here, oh well let's see how it tastes. Very smooth and on the lighter side, but it brings a fruit tone in the finish that I find very pleasant. This is nothing exceptional, but I find it pretty drinkable. A bitterness along with a semi sour aftertaste is left, but I don't think it's a mistake, somebody tried to make it taste like that. Very light body and thin in the mouth, definitely doesn't have the texture of a real porter mixed anywhere in there. I could drink a couple of these and find myself admiring the bottles, but I probably will never buy this beer again. There are too many outstanding beers in the world, to settle for mediocrity.
02-20-2003 18:05:25 | More by WVbeergeek
2.17/5 rDev -30%
I used to sample this quite a bit in the early days of my beery investigations...the quirky bottle (quart-sized moonshine jug, this time), the cool label and graphics, and perhaps I was new to the various styles available, although I'd gotten my feet wet enough with some stouts...I try it again, now, with much more beer experience behind me...
Appearance: dark violet, nearly black color, with a big, bubbly, creamy, frothy white (?) head.
Aroma: nullish, and nottish, full of nothing but nothing, creamy, maybe, but offering nothing else...soft and sweet
Taste...rather light, and insipid...blah...light, slightly fruity, but far too light..bland and brittle, nothing to it...
I have to admit my resistance and reluctance towards the "black and tan" style. and this particular brew is doing nothing to change that.I like my stouts STOUT, dammit!, and possessing some flavor, and this showed very little...it was a chore to finish this bottle, no joy at all! Far too light in body, texture, flavor, everything!
Will not return to this one again!
07-06-2003 02:07:28 | More by feloniousmonk
2.3/5 rDev -25.8%
Bottle split by Thorpe. Thanks I think.
Beer is dark and clear at the same time, think a dark brown, minimal head. Looks about what I expected.
Smells like a lager with a mild porter mixed in. I guess this is what they were going for.
Taste like nothing mixed with ash. Me no liky. It has a mild sweet character at the lead off like a some lagers might if you were bad at making them and then a super weak bitter ash at the end of the beer, no after taste, this is a tick and nothing more, not a repeat just a random beer I've never had.
03-14-2011 17:44:49 | More by drabmuh
Mississippi Mud Black & Tan from Mississippi Brewing Co.
72 out of 100 based on 852 ratings.