Discussion in 'Site' started by TastyAdventure, Jan 26, 2013.
Your review was helpful -
You're making it less complicated than it has to be. We're not talking about salt v. sugar and who can tell them apart. We're talking (now) about a subject who tasted almost exclusively coffee in a beer which was brewed with coffee, chocolate, and oats, in addition to the usual suspects. We would not present this subject with the binary of: "you either have a physiological abnormality or your processing of the taste is flawed." If you demand that the subject taste chocolate, why? Because it contains chocolate? Because it says it contains chocolate? Because it contains chocolate malt? Because x% of tasters taste chocolate? Because there is a physiological process which, across all subjects, relates the presence of chocolate in beer to the memory of chocolate previously tasted?
We can also talk about someone who tasted cigar ashes in a beer that presumably contained no cigar ashes. (I tasted/smelled washed rind cheese notes in my Fantome Dalmatienne. I hypothesize the presence of B. linens. The existence of B. linens is testable. The result would be something objective to work with. I don't have that yet. Even if I were to confirm its objective existence, my experience of tasting the beer is subjective.)
Oh and I don't think anyone gives two shits about Pierre Bourdieu or Dr. Charles Zuker...I'll stop if you will.
I am a big fan of Sierra Nevada - I always have a six of SN Pale Ale or Torpedo in my fridge at any given time. But this Ovila really disappointed. I may have been too harsh but I felt that it should have been much better for Sierra Nevada to market a Belgian collaboration beer.
Sierra Nevada - Ovila Abbey Dubbel
2.2/5 rDev -42.3%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
A= carbonation was so active that the bubbles made the glass murky.
S= a little subdued for a belgian
T= even though only 7.5% alcohol that is all I tasted. bubbly carbonated alcohol not much else. A little dry on the back side but not the depth of a dubbel.
M= can't get past the feeling this has seltzer water in it.
O= Overpriced, overcarbonated, nothing special to the palate.
It is nice that some of the proceeds from sales go to the restoration of the Abbey. Consider this when you pay $10 for a 22 oz. bottle. It's a donation.
Serving type: bottle
I don't dare mention it. Far too controversial.
A beer with 2,745 reviews doesn't need another generic review stating what is already set in stone, and since I'm not an ego maniac, I don't care about my reviews:hads ratio. You know my views. 2700+ users spoke them for me.
I was addressing the comments made by IamMe90, not RobertColianni's issue with the OP. I took the OT rant even further OT.
And I said the Hiver tasted like cigar. Which is a direct result of something in the beer, presumably a smoked malt. It was a colloquial description of flavors that existed within the beer. I didn't simply create an imaginary flavor that couldn't exist physiologically. You are making a counter-point out of nothing, and you have done nothing to refute my claims. Congratulations.
And my reference to Zuker was strictly to state that my claims weren't simply pulled from a Google search, like most arguments that populate these forums. I have absolutely no idea why you brought up Pierre Bordieu - his "work" has very little bearing in this conversation. Zuker's work, on the other hand, is relevant (and quite interesting.)
But you are missing the point here. The ability to taste is not always subjective unless you're talking about physiological abnormalities. The chemical reactions are not subjective unless you're talking about physiological abnormalities. The interpretation of those chemical reactions is subjective. The OP's inability to taste chocolate in the beer is not an issue with me. Not being able to discern specific flavors in beer is not the same as discerning flavors that couldn't possibly exist. Make the distinction and you will understand my posts, and why broad claims like "taste is subjective" are not always true.
That's about all I am willing to discuss at this point in this thread. I'm more than happy to continue this discussion in PMs.
Bells hopslam. I keep drinking it thinking that i'm missing something.. It rates so high and I find it so mediocre.
also thought nugget nectar was another overly appreciated beer. not that its terrible....
according to rDev it'd be Wild Blue (-52.2%) and Short's The Gambler (-51.6%)
1.75/5 rDev -56.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1
one of the most vile, disgusting vinegary messes I've ever had the displeasure of putting to my lips.
don't know if it was storage conditions at bottle shop I grabbed it from or what but what I drank was so far removed from what others describe in their reviews.
I wouldn't say it was controversial but I had to add notes from my tasting that shocked me. It was King Henry which I loved, it was a magical experience drinking that beer AFTER said notes.
So the story goes, my buddy was in Chicago and I asked if he happened by a liquor store and they had King Henry or BCBS grab me a bottle or two. On his way back from Chicago to Minnesota he decided to try one last liquor store and found a single bottle of KH, called me "Its $30!!!"...I told him to pass but wasn't very confident in this decision. Well he got it anyway and said it was a Chirstmas Gift but I had to share with him so he could see WTF made a beer cost $30 (I didn't want to go into detail with him the store was marking up the beer heavily but whatever it was gladly received and I'd gladly share). So another buddy came over and I pointed out what we'd be drinking while board gaming it up, we were all excited (ok my buddy who got it was confused but whatever).
I open, and pour 4ish ounces into my nicest beer glasses (Darkness glasses) oh boy my one buddy and I sniffed it forever and finally took a small taste and were in love. Then we look at the guy who picked it up who was trying to sniff it then he unhinged his jaw, tipped his head back and the beer was gone... ... my jaw hit the floor "It was good I suppose" ... ... Basically I just sat there stunned and asked if he'd enjoy something else maybe some of the metric ton of homebrew I had specifically my Rhubarb Wheat that I knew was nearing the end of its lifecycle, he gladly accepted and went through a few bottles.
Not my reviews, but I opened just now a bottle of Petrus Aged Pale, I had it in the cellar and then in the fridge for quite some time. Anyway, I read in a thread here where someone was asking about sours, that Petrus is a good and affordable one, and decided to try it, I guess is my second sour after the Petrus Oud Bruin. So I go to check the reviews, since sometimes I taste something and can't put exactly my finger on what it is, so reading other people reviews is helping. Two out the three of the first reviews are bashing it with a -70%. Okay I understand that taste is subjective as is mentioned so many times, but don't people take the style in consideration?
I am drinking it now with slow little sips as my first sip was a big gulp and almost chock from the acidity. Maybe it's not my favourite but it's a sour, it's supposed to taste sour, I won't bash it because it taste as it's supposed to taste.
Awesome on draft at the brewery, kinda meh out of the can. Big Swell is the same. Very good chance of old cans, I recently pointed out to a grocery store that their cans were labeled July 2011.
I get so bummed out by those stories. Lots of breweries are possibly catching bad wraps simply because of poor QC at retailers. I look forward to trying it again for sure
I had a guy send me a BM telling me to go fuck myself because I gave the Brandy Barrel Dark Lord like a 3.75.
Could you guys quit cluttering up this thread with pointless shit? I want to hear more about the Breakfast/Rasputin stout kerfuffle.
Sorry it was 3.85 and Brandy Barrel with Vanilla Beans. He was mad I brought the overall rating down. It's still the lowest review and not even that low.
Couldn't be as bad as the "aledged" person from "said brewery" who emailed me and was dissapointed and displeased in a "matter of fact tone" with mine, in a sort of "I am really dissapointed break your thumbs kind of way".
Never mind that said persons email came from a hotmail account...
I was the first guy to give Dark Lord an F. A minor shitshow of a thread ensued when a fanboy noticed. My only regret is I was on vacation/offline and the thread was locked before I had a chance to join the fun.
90 Minute IPA - In hindsight, probably shouldn't have reviewed as it was at least a couple of years old. -29.9
If you're inclined to give the beer another shot, you can always go back and edit your review to reflect your updated thoughts on it.
Mostly of my gaps are due to style preference but I would take a Bud Light Lime that has been sitting on a stove for a year rather than Avery Hog Heaven. -49.5%
Alternatively I gave Avery Samael a rating of +28.9% to the good! Love that stuff!
Yeah, I had a 2008, and it was delicious.
The 2011, however, blows gangrenous donkey appendage.
Will it improve significantly by 2016?
Perhaps, but I'm not holding my breath.
I rarely review. One would think the most "controversial" of mine would be would be fore Fantome Chocolat, my least favorite beer of all times. But, in fact, the distinction goes to Coffee BCS, which earned me a few angry PMs from Chicago BAs at the time.
This thread is full of awesome.
No idea how this thread hasn't been nuked.
I here tons of people on here that say Dark Lord sucks. Can't say I've tried it though.
The beers where my review is at least 33% off the average in the negative direction
R 05-01-2012 Wet Willy Scotch Ale
New England Brewing Co.
Scotch Ale / Wee Heavy 10.00 2.5 -36.7%
R 11-10-2011 Staghorn Octoberfest
New Glarus Brewing Company
Märzen / Oktoberfest 6.25 2.48 -37.4%
R 01-13-2012 Wasatch Polygamy Porter
Utah Brewers Cooperative
American Porter 4.00 1.95 -40.2%
R 01-12-2013 Founders Bolt Cutter
Founders Brewing Company
American Barleywine 15.00 2.28 -43.8%
R 12-24-2011 He'Brew Bittersweet Lenny's R.I.P.A.
Shmaltz Brewing Company
American Double / Imperial IPA 10.00 2.03 -49.9%
R 02-12-2012 Stoudts American Pale Ale
Stoudts Brewing Co.
American Pale Ale (APA) 5.00 1.83 -50.9%
H 01-17-2013 Imperial Stout
Nøgne Ø - Det Kompromissløse Bryggeri A/S
Russian Imperial Stout 9.00 2 -51.5%
R 01-09-2012 Corona Extra
Grupo Modelo S.A. de C.V.
American Adjunct Lager 4.60 1.02 -55.1%
R 12-30-2012 Figgy Pudding
Block 15 Brewery & Restaurant
English Strong Ale 11.00 1.68 -57.9%
R 06-02-2012 Mirror Mirror
English Barleywine 11.00 1.35 -67.9%
Short's Uber Goober
1.6/5 rDev -55.3%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5
Olde Hickory Death My Hops
2.08/5 rDev -46.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5
Lips of Faith Prickly Pear Saison
1.75/5 rDev -49%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2
Smuttynose Big A IPA
2.68/5 rDev -33%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2
Stone Smoked Porter w/Vanilla Beans
2.63/5 rDev -33.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
Assuming internet sarcasm, let me issue a mea culpa: thought it was off to a bad start and would end up with people just saying "your palate sucks" "no, its your palate that sucks" etc etc. I was wrong, it happens.
Separate names with a comma.