Proper | Furthermore Beer

Your Rating: None
Want it   Got it 
101 Ratings

Brewed by:
Furthermore Beer
Wisconsin, United States

Style: English Pale Ale

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 4.50%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by Skidz on 07-13-2006

Bros Score:
View: Beers
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Ratings: 101 |  Reviews: 70
Photo of dsuedbeck
1.5/5  rDev -56.6%

Photo of FightingEntropy
2.11/5  rDev -39%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Presentation: bottle from France 44 in Minneapolis served in a pint glass

A: hazy off amber to burnt orange color with a thick white head that lingers for a bit

S: slight hop aroma, mineral or metallic smell, with a small amount of bready malt underneath. Not pleasant but not overly bad either.

T: buttery, probably diactyl, and slick. Some maltiness and no real hop character at all, taste or bitterness. Lingering astringentcy.

M: slick, watery, and a lingering sweetness.

D: negative tastes build and overshadow the beer.

Overall: not a great beer. Seems to have a couple of clear flaws, and none of the crisp, light hop on malt of the style. A clear miss. I've done two bottles of Furthermore tonight, and unimpressed, though I seem to be below other raters. The defects aren't skunk or light struck, so seems to be from brewing rather than handling.

 865 characters

Photo of ATLbeerDog
2.12/5  rDev -38.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a light orange reddish yellow color with a small very thin head, almost no lacing. Below average carbonation with a slight smell of bittersweet hops. Tastes extremely weak with a very light body at all. Somewhat bitter not enough flavor to be had again. Avoid this one!

 275 characters

Photo of bashiba
2.33/5  rDev -32.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Pored a very hazy orange with lots of sediment, a nice inch of creamy off white head, light retention and lacing.

The smell had a very oxidized metallic copper quality to it.

The flavor was very light with a touch of bready malts and a bit of coppery oxidization comes through here as well.

The mouthfeel is light and thin, a bit watery.

Pretty poor, with no date that I can find on the bottle and no previous experience I can't tell if this is just a bad bottle, or just a bad beer.

 487 characters

Photo of botham
2.53/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12 oz bottle poured into a pub glass. Pours an amber color with sediment throughout, and a half finger of off white head that has poor retention and leaves light lacings.

Aroma is of floral hops up front, with a bit of pale malt thrown in. not much else. Lightly stale in the nose.

Taste is lightly floral, with a bit of bready malt and stale grain on the finish. Devoid of any real character and somewhat flabby on the palate. Not impressive.

Mouthfeel is light bodied and mildly crisp with an aftertaste of only a bit of stale grain.

Drinkability is decent. For a non-descript light amber ale, this gets the job done, but it just fades away without any distinct character.

 678 characters

Photo of surlyseth
2.68/5  rDev -22.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Part of a pick six from France 44.

A: Nice enough. little to no lacing, but a gold-orange copper hue.

S: Sweet, but malty and kind of Breakfasty (biscuit?).

T&M: Weak and a little odd. Not bad, but nothing to write home about. Light and, sorry to say, cheap tasting.

D: I'll drink this again if I ever find myself in SpringGreen, WI (never).

 345 characters

Photo of TheNakedStiletto
2.75/5  rDev -20.5%

Photo of Rihup
2.75/5  rDev -20.5%

Photo of wedgie9
2.88/5  rDev -16.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Tasted on draft at Sugar Maple. Pours cloudy orange with an average white head that leaves heavy lace. Nose is simple with very light malt, hops, and yeast. The flavors have a little more depth with good citrus, bread malt, and good wheat flavors as well. Body us light with heavy carbonation and a mfuum bitter and wheat finish.

 329 characters

Photo of steve8robin
2.95/5  rDev -14.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Got this in a trade with Jdiddy. Good guy. 12oz bottle...

A: Medium honey color with a small white head that quickly fades to nothing. Ok.

S: Smells of hints of rye and corn. Some bready malt in the middle with a watery base on the backend. Ok.

T: Tastes of hints of rye with a slight metallic taste. Some faint cherry and hints of caramel and chocolate. Eh.

M: Medium body with not much carbonation. Decent.

D: Goes down easy, but almost in a watery sense. Decent.

All in all, don;t bother trying or hunting. The brew is ok and that's about it. An ok brew, but not a good or great brew. Comments to the brewer, try harder and expect better from your brewery. This is not at all good or great, try harder.

 711 characters

Photo of sgttibbs
3/5  rDev -13.3%

Photo of dhannes
3/5  rDev -13.3%

A=Nice golden yellow with generous white foam head.
S= Fair--slightly sweet aroma, most similar to lemondade.
T=Caramel and bread surfaces when warmer.
M=Very light body, and almost no carbonation.
O=Despite the overly light body, the flavor comes through in the finish...I won't go out of my way to find this beer again, but may revisit it if I find it on tap.

 361 characters

Photo of mtnbikerpa
3/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from bottle with no freshness date, into my pint glass. Orange in appearance with very weak head. Very little scent coming from this brew. Bland almost flavorless. This brew is very underwhelming, nothing real outstanding. I did note some sediment floating in my glass.

 276 characters

Photo of ejimhof
3/5  rDev -13.3%

Photo of WastingFreetime
3/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours out golden straw color with about two fingers of white foam head that lasts for about two minutes and no lacing at all. Lighter body and carbonation levels, a touch watery and thin.

Smells and tastes vaguely floral and biscuity with a touch of diacetyl that didn't blend well with the malt profile like some of the better English Bitters do. It's pretty average all around, the hopping seems a bit too murky and the texture isn't as sharp and crisp as it could have been. If these issues were addressed, it could be a really nice beer.

 542 characters

Photo of Grebdioz
3/5  rDev -13.3%

Photo of Kaveman
3/5  rDev -13.3%

Photo of Profchaos20
3/5  rDev -13.3%

Photo of TheKingofWichita
3.01/5  rDev -13%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours a nice yellowish gold color with a thick white head and a fair amount of lacing. Smells of corn and rye with some malty goodness floating up. Tastes mostly of corn and malts, some caramel and maybe toffee. Do not like it much. Mouthfeel is medium and pretty nice. Drinkability is low.

 290 characters

Photo of feloniousmonk
3.01/5  rDev -13%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Clear, coppery, carbonated, with prodigious head.

Clean, floral/herbal aroma, minor hops, aromatic & bittering...largely empty, though...

Smooth on the tongue, lightly malty, toasty caramel malts, slight cereal taste, lacking hops..."moistness" is the major component here, wet and vacant...

"Light-bodied", yes...but "classic",...not so sure. They could have given this some character, but instead chose to go with weak and wanting. Pity.

Not bad, but could have been a lot better.

 494 characters

Photo of Knapp85
3.03/5  rDev -12.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This poured out as a pretty standard colored ale, it had a yellowish golden colors. The head didn't leave much lacing. The smell of the beer has some malts and barley with some hops on the nose. The taste has a decent balance too, give off the flavors that the smell gives off. The mouthfeel is lightly carbonated. It's an average brew to me, I would drink again if it was offered to me.

 387 characters

Photo of ommegoose
3.06/5  rDev -11.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Poured with a dense but small white head on a hazy but translucent pale beer. Thin walls of lacing.

Slightly fruity yeasty aroma. Banana Laffy Taffy, bubblegum. No hops on the aroma.

Certainly a malt forward pale ale. Hops are nearly non-existent. Almost nothing on the palate, and just a touch of bitterness and herbal character in the finish, which is at least long. Malt flavors run a bit buttery and flatly grainy. Although EPA's aren't the pinnacle of flavor, this is still sort of drab.

There's actually a nice amount of body to this one. More to it than I would have expected a 4.5% beer to have.

Hits the style parameters, I suppose, but I can't work up any enthusiasm over it. Sort of gives off an air of cheapness, but I have to wonder if this isn't especially fresh. I'm tending to forget I'm drinking it while going about my internet browsing. However, I doubt it would be a problem drinking a few out of the bottle at a BBQ or something. Just doesn't hold my interest under scrutiny.

 1,000 characters

Photo of Chaz
3.08/5  rDev -11%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Pours a bright brass (dull orange) in color, topped with a wispy off-white head. Lacing is minimal. Nose is fairly tangy, with almost equal parts floral hop and malt (a blend of caramel and pale malts.) Smells fairly light and easy-going. First impression is Wow, this is a far cry from the others in the Furthermore lineup! Lighter in body and a bit less convincing in mouthfeel. Mildly fruity, with a light flavor of caramel and lighter notes of banana and cherry, all backup up by an odd wheat-like presence and texture. This almost tastes like second runnings of the Knot Stock (minus the pepper), except it’s probably just the same malt base here. Very mild hop bitterness and aromatic quality. Some notes of biscuity malt, but those are soon pummeled by a wave of sweeter crystal malts. Doesn’t necessarily get any better as it warms and it’s not very big, so this is no sipper. On the sweeter side of the ‘dry’ equation, lighter bodied, very easy drinking, and with just a bit of citric tang. If this had a darker complexion and a gussied-up hop profile it would remind me a bit of Schell’s Pale Ale, but as it is, it’s so easy going and nonchalant that I can’t draw any other comparisons so readily. Not bad, but far from interesting.

 1,250 characters

Photo of brewcrew76
3.11/5  rDev -10.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A - Hazy peach color with a thin white head.

S - Fruity with an earthy sour graininess.

T - Fruity with a musty earthiness and a dry grainy flavor.

M - Light body with a light carbonation and a dry finish.

D - Pretty bland and boring. This one could use a little more character.

 283 characters

Photo of Dodo2step
3.16/5  rDev -8.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A- a light orange color. A frothy foamy head with a gorgeous spiderweb lacing on the pint.

S- not too much nose but i do gather some earthy hops.

T- more one dimensional in that it is salty malty. Some earthy mild hops comes out at the backend but not much going on here.

M- Salty/malty is overpowering at times a si continue to drink. A bready/yeasty flavor comes back as well.

O- ok not worth the money though. id buy one at a bar with a meal but wouldnt buy a sixer.

 473 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Proper from Furthermore Beer
Beer rating: 3.46 out of 5 with 101 ratings