WaPo on Why Americans "Have Such Bad Taste in Beer"

Discussion in 'Beer News' started by breadwinner, Jun 12, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Myotus

    Myotus Initiate (0) Nov 11, 2014 Texas

    Show me a well-developed experimental design and valid results supporting your claims. We'll talk then.
     
  2. bergbrew

    bergbrew Initiate (0) Jan 12, 2004 Minnesota

    And oddly enough, the breweries in the US that demanded on making all malt beer all those years ago...went out of business. And when CORN was rationed during the war, brewers had a very tough time making the beer that the American people wanted.

    It's way too convenient to believe those evil brewers used adjuncts to cut costs, when in fact that's probably the least believable of all possible scenarios. Perhaps when Greg Casey's book on American Lagers comes out, we can finally put to rest the revisionist history of beer in the United States.
     
  3. DrStiffington

    DrStiffington Grand Pooh-Bah (3,586) Oct 27, 2010 New Jersey
    Pooh-Bah Society

    I know a few, and they are my friends who drink Coors Light, Bud Light, Miller Lite, etc.
     
  4. DPRickli

    DPRickli Initiate (0) Jan 11, 2014 Massachusetts

    Ha! This dude was my professor in college. Wish I would have known he liked beer enough to write an article on it; I could have just told him I skipped his class all those mornings because I was hungover.

    Really nice dude and a great teacher. Good article!
     
  5. TongoRad

    TongoRad Grand Pooh-Bah (3,848) Jun 3, 2004 New Jersey
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    I've had quite a few very well made and enjoyable 'adjunct lagers', so won't be dismissing the style (or even the adjuncts) out of hand, but those tend to be few and far between these days. I bet further back the beers were much more characterful.

    I think corn gets a bad rap because it's the easy target, and also because with the most popular (and least characterful) versions use a fairly high percentage in the grist. But the main culprit, imo, is the sparsity of the hops. As it has been said, hops are the seasoning of beer, and so many of the modern versions are akin to underseasoned food. The Classic American Pilsners, and even many of the post-prohibition beers did use a respectable amount of hops, and those are the types that I have found to be quite enjoyable. Plus whatever the heck Yuengling's Lord Chesterfield Ale is.
     
  6. bungletrpg

    bungletrpg Zealot (588) Sep 3, 2014 California
    Trader

    fuck that article
     
    yemenmocha likes this.
  7. hophugger

    hophugger Grand Pooh-Bah (3,410) Mar 5, 2014 Virginia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    I personally think that a lot of beer drinkers (especially those between 40-60 yrs of age) drank nothing but Bud, Miller, etc. before craft beer took off. They got so used to it, that they just are happy with it, have settled with it and believe that that is what beer is supposed to be. Their ignorance of what is out there is not there fault, they just have become happy with what they are used to...IMO
     
  8. bergbrew

    bergbrew Initiate (0) Jan 12, 2004 Minnesota

    Maybe they were, and then again, maybe not.:grinning: I mean, we really don't know, we just like to project what we like on how we hope things are/were. What we do know, however, was brewers were reacting to what the consumer wanted. To think anything else is quite frankly absurd. The brewers of that age (like those of any age) were trying to make the beer they liked. And the consumer wanted something else.

    Ever notice how often pro brewers talk about going somewhere and the beer they gravitate towards is a Pilsner? And yet they make IPAs. And now there are Black/Red/White etc IPAs. History repeats. You just need to understand it's history, not some fantasy repeated with no basis on what was actually happening culturally.
     
    BrettHead, herrburgess and TongoRad like this.
  9. drtth

    drtth Initiate (0) Nov 25, 2007 Pennsylvania
    In Memoriam

    As Harry Truman said more than once, "The only thing that's new is the history you haven't read yet."
     
    TongoRad and bergbrew like this.
  10. bergbrew

    bergbrew Initiate (0) Jan 12, 2004 Minnesota

    Yep. And that's why I referenced Greg's book. Hopefully it can revise some of the revisionist history that is all too rampant is this industry. Of course, I'm expecting people to actually care about facts, which may be a bit of a stretch.:grinning:
     
    BrettHead likes this.
  11. drtth

    drtth Initiate (0) Nov 25, 2007 Pennsylvania
    In Memoriam

    Some don't want to be confused by facts as their minds are already made up. :slight_smile:

    Do you have any idea of a target date for release of the book? We have more than one person in the Philly area with strong interest in the history of Lagers.
     
  12. bergbrew

    bergbrew Initiate (0) Jan 12, 2004 Minnesota

    I wish I knew. He said he was 400 pages in, and just getting started:grimacing:

    He is truly a fascinating and intelligent brewing scientist (his son says he can't claim to be an actual brewer!). I'm glad he's taking the time in his retirement to research this. It's going to put the puzzle pieces in place, and hopefully we can put this oft repeated Momily about American Lagers to rest. I thought maybe Maureen had done that, but people seem to be adverse to facts. And then Beer Wars happened.
     
    BrettHead, TongoRad and drtth like this.
  13. TongoRad

    TongoRad Grand Pooh-Bah (3,848) Jun 3, 2004 New Jersey
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    I'll look forward to checking out the book you mentioned, but it does seem that with George Fix's work on pre-pro Pilsners, or even reading Ben Jankowski's article on Bushwick Pilsners:
    http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/library/backissues/issue2.1/jankowski.html
    that we can make certain generalizations of where the beers started in comparison to today's AALs; the recreations that I have tried were inarguably much more characterful than what we see today.

    I definitely agree with the principle that brewers are reacting to customers preferences (I've made that argument myself with regards to lite beers), but there is a definite trend line going up as one goes back in time. Perhaps there was a line crossed with the introduction of Miller Lite, where there was a rapid overall decline in not just the most popular beers, but the premium ones as well. Either way, the main thesis of this article, tracing 'blandness' back to the 19th century, is way off, imo.
     
    breadwinner likes this.
  14. drtth

    drtth Initiate (0) Nov 25, 2007 Pennsylvania
    In Memoriam

    I'd suspect that has a lot to do with both the quality of the CSU program and their success in securing recent large gifts.
     
  15. ajchocholousek

    ajchocholousek Initiate (0) Mar 8, 2011 Minnesota

    Hahahahaha...Right now I am at Shorty's in Superior, WI drinking a New Glarus, reading this thread. All of a sudden right behind me, I hear from two dudes: "Nah, man, it's 96 ounces!!" I turn around and he was just slammin' 96 oz of Miller Lite out of a 'Das Boot' glass. His friend goes, "why didn't they just make it 100 ounces, dammit!?"

    HA. What weird timing.
     
  16. bergbrew

    bergbrew Initiate (0) Jan 12, 2004 Minnesota

    I agree. I think that beer changed, due to consumer tastes. My point, however, is those beers (and breweries) died. I mean, it's convenient to think that ALL beers were like that, but it really doesn't make sense. Some beers were like that, some weren't. Then the real beer wars began...what did the consumer prefer? Just because you like Ballantine best, where are they now? It's a game of winners and losers. It's the sad truth of the industry. If I only had a nickel for a beer that ceased being made and someone said "That was my favorite beer"

    And that's exactly why this point in time is so exciting. We have variety. We have different breweries doing different beers. I could be depressed about beer every day reading these forums. Not enough lagers, not enough low abv beers, not enough whatever. We got it good. We have variety, we have options.

    The question is can we keep those options? Does another type of beer (cough IPA) reduce out options and turn beer once again into a commodity, where low price wins? I hope not, and I hope we all hope not.
     
  17. joelwlcx

    joelwlcx Initiate (0) Apr 23, 2007 Minnesota

    100 ounces is three gallons.

    Tell me one scenario where someone drinks three gallons a day of anything and comes out of it having a good time.
     
  18. MNAle

    MNAle Initiate (0) Sep 6, 2011 Minnesota

    Just don't enter "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader"!

    1 gallon is 128 oz., so 100 oz is ~0.8 gallons, or just over 3 quarts, or 6.25 pints.
     
  19. tdizzlegrizzle

    tdizzlegrizzle Initiate (0) Nov 3, 2009 Pennsylvania

    Hit the nail on the head.
     
  20. joelwlcx

    joelwlcx Initiate (0) Apr 23, 2007 Minnesota

    Yep, my bad. I mixed up liters and gallons. I'll drink from the grog.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.