Beez Neez | Matilda Bay Brewing Co.

Your Rating: None
Want it   Got it 
Beez NeezBeez Neez
55 Ratings
Beez NeezBeez Neez

Brewed by:
Matilda Bay Brewing Co.

Style: American Pale Wheat Ale

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 4.70%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
This unique brew has a light malt palate with a distinct honey aroma and flavour plus a hint of bitterness. Clean, crisp and dry on the palate and surprisingly refreshing.

15 IBU

Added by BeerAdvocate on 01-07-2004

Bros Score:
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Ratings: 55 |  Reviews: 34
Reviews by Raebies:
Photo of Raebies
2.05/5  rDev -20.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Perhaps my nostrils are dead. I'm not picking up any aromas, except for a faint generic smell of "beer". Pours a pale, watery golden colour. Crisp light malt flavour. Slight acidity and an off flavour that reminds me of aspirin. Tastes like a watered down lager to me. I don't get any honey in the flavour either.

 313 characters

More User Reviews:
Photo of rastaman
1.3/5  rDev -49.6%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

Crap. Like Melbourne Bitter with honey stirred into it, Cloying, slightly syruppy and fizzy at the same time. Awful. If theres anything to say about it, its probably that, at least its better than The former Masthead version, but im truth, not a whole lot better, i thought it was too sweet and thin, and not very interesting.

 326 characters

Photo of Frog
2.18/5  rDev -15.5%
look: 3.75 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2

This beer is not what I would call a craft beer. Its not a terrible beer and might make a half decent session beer. The price for a 6 pack simply was not a reflection of the quality of this almost fraudulent brew. Theres no disguising the fact that it's a mass produced Aussie blonde lager type beer thats been tinkered with to make something more interesting.
I too did not get any sweetness or honey. Aftertaste wasnt really an issue for me.

 443 characters

Photo of WoodBrew
2.68/5  rDev +3.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2.75

Not sure why this beer is being brutalized by others. There is alot worse beers out there than this.

101 characters

Photo of CrazyDavros
2.58/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Golden amber pour with a small head showing reasonable persistence.
Aroma is quite faint, there's some grainy aussie malt and possible some pride of ringwood hops? A bit of sweet honey in the background.
Flavours are very similar: grainy malt with a little supporting sweet honey and a hint of grassy hops.
Soft, fine carbonation.

 330 characters

Photo of emincems
2.34/5  rDev -9.3%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 2.25 | overall: 2.25

Photo of LathouXaris
3/5  rDev +16.3%

Photo of Kulrak
2.18/5  rDev -15.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Other than not having much flavor, smell or mouthfeel, there isn't really anything bad to say about this beer. There isn't much good to say about it either. I came up with no head at all, something I thought was impossible with a wheat beer. The color is a light straw yellow and the the taste is sorta dry and not bitter or sweet. At least the finish is clean! I probably won't be buying this again, especially for what they want for it.

 438 characters

Photo of foles
2.76/5  rDev +7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A really poor effort by Matilda bay to expand on the success of the Redback Wheat beer. Basically a watery wheat beer which is unsure of its identity, trying to behave like a lager beer.

No real character in it, loosely hinting to the taste of the redback, with a teaspoon of honey.

I'll stay away from this one, given the quality of most of the brewery's other offerings.

Nice bottle.

 388 characters

Photo of Jake321
4/5  rDev +55%

Photo of rec
2.31/5  rDev -10.5%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Initially I was a fan of this beer, but my mind quickly changed...

While brewed with honey, it's not all that sweet and is extremely light bodied - after drinking something heavier it almost feels (and tastes) like a flavoured water.

It's far better on-tap than in-bottle, but remains unimpressive at the best of times.

Due to its light nature and honey flavour, it's easily drinkable and a big winner with the ladies.

I do however remember it being a nicer drink a year or two ago.

 494 characters

Photo of pin
2.5/5  rDev -3.1%

Photo of joecast
1.65/5  rDev -36%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

filtered yellow fizzy beer with barely a lace of head.
really lacking any aroma at all. let it warm a bit and maybe im wrong, but i swear there is a woody smoky character to it. is that intentional?
flavor, basically like they added honey and wheat to a macro lager, and not even a premium one either!! im no expert, but if that is diacetyl in the background it certainly isnt helping things.
mouthfeel is pretty flat.
well this is just bland all around. picked out the last one in the display fridge at the bottleshop. wish they would have run out so i could have grabbed a js amber or ipa.

 595 characters

Photo of DaveFL1976
2.82/5  rDev +9.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Where's the honey? I can't taste it. Heck, I barely even believe that this is a wheat beer, let alone a honey wheat. A slightly sweet malt smell and sweetish taste. Not very well rounded. Not a lot of flavour. Not much going for it, but it is drinkable. Especially on a hot day. That is until you realize that you could have bought a Little Creatures or a Coopers Sparkling for the same price, if not cheaper. This beer is not worth the money they ask for it.

 459 characters

Photo of bicorrea
4.5/5  rDev +74.4%

Photo of rjimlad
2.88/5  rDev +11.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Generally I like Matilda Bay beers but this one's a bit boring. A nice looking wheaty with no aroma and a barely perceptible honey note. No hops as you'd expect but not much else going on either. It's very drinkable and inoffensive but it's not far removed from a dozen other BBQ macros. Dull.

 293 characters

Photo of Macca
2.61/5  rDev +1.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Looked nice when first poured with a generous white head but it dropped quickly. Clear.

Very grainy nose. If I get any honey it's only fleeting. Disappointing.

Again the graininess on the palate. Blah. Reminds me of a macro.

Crisp mouthfeel.

What a bland brew!

 264 characters

Photo of WHROO
2.4/5  rDev -7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

A: Cloudy golden, 1 finger head, ave head retention, no lacing...ave carbonation.

S: Fruity (pears), little skunky & sulphury, only got honey as it warmed a little...expected more sweet honey but too bland.

T: Really struggled to get any honey - maybe a little as it warmed...just bland, with a little fruit & thats about it...boring finish too.

M: Thin & watery...

D: just another bland beer...was really hoping for more honey. Had this on tap years ago & remembered it to have way more honey.

Boring installment from Matilda Bay.

 536 characters

Photo of JKCooper
2.43/5  rDev -5.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2.5

Photo of nitrofenix
3.5/5  rDev +35.7%

Photo of soju6
2.64/5  rDev +2.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A: Pours a golden color with a good head that fades slowly to some lacing.

S: Aroma of citrus, honey and some grain in the background.

T: Light taste of honey, trace of fruit and some grain. Mild bitterness and a slightly sticky finish.

F: Light body, smooth but the honey sweetness gets to you by the end of the beer.

O: Drinkable but for only one.

 357 characters

Photo of adityashekhar
2.5/5  rDev -3.1%

Photo of magpieken
2.26/5  rDev -12.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

345ml bottle. 02 May 15. Pours a pale gold colour with a decent, creamy, white head which lasted well and left some very nice lace rings. Initially pleasant honey note is matched by an equally unpleasant vegetal one. At times the smell reminds me of a shandy. Light to medium sweetness and some mild unappealing sourness which lingers. Light bodied and with a dry finish. This beer was passable until I put it in my mouth and then that lingering sour taste ruins everything. Please make it stop. Unenjoyable. 4.

 511 characters

Photo of Parrotshake
2.48/5  rDev -3.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

This beer has a bit of a bad rap on this site, it seems. Fair enough, it's not very good, but it's not that bad either... or is it? Maybe I'm just in a good mood at this point. Knocked off a quite a bit of Avec Les Bon Voeux earlier and turned to my girlfriend's supply of this as a nightcap, so to speak, but I'm not not enjoying it....

Pours pale gold without much head. Spotty lacing here and there.

Cheap lager-y smell with a fermented grainy note and a nondescript sweetness. I can't tell if I'm getting a little bit of honey or it's just that I already know the beer contains honey... nothing convincing, at any rate.

A bit of honey on the first sip, which I never really noticed again... strange. Watery, followed with a corn-like flavor. Not much more to it. Metallic hop bitterness leading to an abrupt dry finish. Not as sweet, nor as carbonated as I'd imagined (thank God), but still an obvious shot at the Alcopop market. That said, it goes down easy, even if the taste is a bit lacking.

For anyone interested, I recall it being quite a bit better on tap, though the glassware made me feel a bit self-conscious. But I (and I suspect YOU) are clearly not the target maket. Because we like beer, mostly.

 1,217 characters

Photo of spycow
2.5/5  rDev -3.1%

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Beez Neez from Matilda Bay Brewing Co.
Beer rating: 2.58 out of 5 with 55 ratings