Faxe Premium - Royal Unibrew A/S
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 129 | Reviews: 73 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by DoctorStrangiato:
2.73/5 rDev -4.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
Poured a 500-ml can into a pilsner glass.
Appearance - pale yellow colour, with settled-out foam and mild lacing. Not too bad.
Smell - thin barley malt scents with cut apples.
Taste - flavour is minimal, very clean, a little bit of sweetness before a slightly hoppy ending. Not a lot of character.
Mouthfeel - beer-flavoured pop, low on flavour. Inoffensive carbonation.
Drinkability - not bad but nothing special, in my opinion. Not a really memorable brew, but I wouldn't outright refuse it if offered.
Serving type: can
03-02-2009 02:07:21 | More by DoctorStrangiato
More User Reviews:
1.85/5 rDev -35.3%
look: 1.75 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.75 | feel: 1.75 | overall: 2
"Faxe Premium." "Quality Lager Beer." 1 litre aluminum can acquired at a Lidl market in Berlin, Germany. 5% ABV confirmed per the label. Served into a pilsner glass in me friend's gaff in Berlin. Expectations are low given the price and the serving size; in my experience good beers are not packaged in one liter cans. But I'm hopeful...
Served cold. Side-poured with below average vigor as overcarbonation is anticipated.
No bubble show forms as it's poured.
HEAD: 1.5 fingers wide. Off-white colour. Overly fizzy. Terribly thin and weak. It's kind of a pathetic watery head, to be honest, and recedes fully within 1 minute, leaving no lacing. Bad overall, to be sure.
BODY: Dull weak pale copper. I wouldn't call it clean, but there's no visible yeast particulate or hop sediment. Not at all vibrant or fresh looking.
Overall, it's a pretty bad looking lager with no redeeming characteristics. I'm hesitant to try this. Still, I've seen far worse and it could look more watery.
AROMA: Metallic off-notes abound. I guess there're hints of overly sweet grains and some dirty stale barley, but that's about all I'm getting. No overt hop character, yeast, or alcohol here. Really bland and muted, yet what little is present is quite off-putting.
This is seeming more and more terrible.
TEXTURE: Overcarbonated. Rough and scratchy on the palate. Unclean and metallic. Medium-bodied, with far too much weight and heft on the palate for a pale lager. Too thick for the lack of depth of flavour. Unrefreshing. Both the smoothness/coarseness and wetness/dryness are horribly horribly off. This is a terrible overall texture for a beer regardless of style. Poor presence on the palate. This mouthfeel complements the taste only in terms of matching its low quality.
TASTE: Yeah, that metallic twang is rough, and reminds me of Messrs Maguire's beers in Dublin. It lingers throughout the entirety of the flavour profile as an unwelcome guiding tone. The core of the beer is generic cheap barley and feels stale. The generic pilsner malts that fill it out don't help much. And the grains aren't too present, but do lend an adjunct-esque artificial sweetness that I find off-putting. This is not the fresh, crisp, evocative build of a great pale lager.
Don't look for hop character or yeast character here. It's not boozy, but the metallic tone is definitely an off-note.
Horribly shallow in terms of depth of flavour. Fortunately, flavour duration is below average. Flavour intensity is average.
It's cohesive only in its bad taste, and lacks a gestalt build or a good balance. It's a simple, boring, bland beer and yet more blandness would actually be an improvement on the poor flavours featured here. Lacks intricacy, subtlety, complexity, and nuance.
OVERALL: It's really just a poor overall brew, but I can see its market niche; street alcoholics and students will enjoy this cheap treat. In fairness, it would also make a marvelous cooking beer, and intend to simmer my bratwursts in what remains of the litre can shortly. It does hide its ABV decently and I have had worse. It's not undrinkable, but obviously I won't be drinking the entirety of the litre can. At least it isn't watery. It will likely meet your expectations when paying less than a dollar for the litre at the local market, which I guess is a good thing.
Serving type: can
06-02-2014 19:40:51 | More by kojevergas
2.8/5 rDev -2.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75
Served cold into a pint glass. Purchased at LCBO for $2.10 CDN.
Appearance - Clear straw yellow / golden color. Quite a few effervescent bubbles rise to the surface. Small 3/4 finger of white head is poured and dissipates quickly leaving a wispy cap and some good but sparse lacing around the glass.
Smell - Slightly skunked beer with very minimal grassy aromas and a couple grainy notes. Really not much in the way of a nose at all. Nothing off-putting though.
Taste - Fairly bland EPL with slight graininess and a more bitter aftertaste than others in the style. Not a whole lot else other than "beer" flavor. Faint sweetness from corn perhaps after a couple of sips.
Mouthfeel - A touch gritty with a very dry finish and unappealing bitter and slightly metallic aftertaste. Medium high carbonation.
Overall - A passable EPL as it's not undrinkable, but there are many superior options in the style.
Edit February 25 2014- had this the other day and there was a sulphur quality to the smell and the flavour that was very unpleasant. Don't know if this was a bad can or not and will reserve judgement but if this is the case the smell and taste ratings should be dropped by about 0.5 as this seriously detracts from an otherwise average EPL.
Serving type: can
02-16-2014 21:12:47 | More by DenisKolkin
2.85/5 rDev -0.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
A: Golden in appearance. Very typical of any mainstream lager. Nice one finger cap of foam. Retention and lacing were actually very good.
S: Somehow skunky hops come through even though its in a can. Perhaps light exposure before the hops went into the beer? A little bit of sulfur too which somewhat okay for a lager. A lot of off flavors in the smell.
T: Not that bad actually. I get a slight touch of sweet malt and a little bit of some kind of noble hop even though it's very slight. Everything is somewhat muted but what is there is nice.
M: Crisp enough. Fairly medium body with somewhat high carbonation making it pretty easy do drink it in a hurry.
O: Not a bad beer at all. Fairly generic and a pretty bad aroma but its okay and just that.
Serving type: can
12-26-2013 18:49:47 | More by Haydn-Juby
Faxe Premium from Royal Unibrew A/S
68 out of 100 based on 129 ratings.