Rock Light
Latrobe Brewing Co.

Rock LightRock Light
Write a Review
Beer Geek Stats: | Print Shelf Talker
Style:
American Light Lager
Ranked #221
ABV:
3.59%
Score:
62
Ranked #48,102
Avg:
2.17 | pDev: 23.96%
Reviews:
23
Ratings:
58
From:
Latrobe Brewing Co.
 
Missouri, United States
Avail:
Year-round
Wants
  0
Gots
  0
SCORE
62
Poor
Rock LightRock Light
Notes:
View: Beers
Reviews: 23 | Ratings: 58 | Log in to view all ratings and sort
Reviews by nmann08:
Photo of nmann08
2/5  rDev -7.8%

More User Reviews:
Photo of mpenske
1/5  rDev -53.9%

Photo of sportzfreak1393
3/5  rDev +38.2%

Photo of dradair
2.5/5  rDev +15.2%

Photo of DrMindbender
1/5  rDev -53.9%

Photo of misternebbie
1.88/5  rDev -13.4%

Photo of Beastdog75
1.76/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

Note: I originally reviewed this in February of 2003. My original review seems to have disappeared. This review is pieced together from my notes.

Rock Light pours a pale straw color with active carbonation, with about a finger of foam forming. Smell was similar to regular Rolling Rock and Coors Light, quite adjuncty. Reminds me a little of overripe fruit. Corn and DMS aromas are present with the slightest hint of malt sweetness as well. This brew pretty much felt like fizzy water on the tongue. Initial taste has that overripe fruit sweetness to it. Extremely watery, almost on the level of Coors Light. Tiny amount of malt sweetness. The flavor that is there is very grainy/corny/DMS. The hops that are present add only the slightest amount of dryness to the finish. The aftertaste is quite clean with the dryness a bit more prevalent, but not strong at all. Cooked cabbage taste becomes apparent, and the brew has no alcoholic warmth whatsoever.

Overall, a very watery light beer with some resemblance to regular Rolling Rock.

ORIGINAL REVIEW FROM FEBRUARY 20, 2003

This is another beer where a light version really shouldn't be neccessary. Regular Rolling Rock is a light enough beer, and Rock Light approaches Coors Light on the scale of wateriness.
There isn't too much to say about this other than the wateriness of it.

Rock Light pours a pale straw color with active carbonation. A one-finger foam head forms. The smell is similar to regular RR and Coors Light. Adjuncty would sum it up. The smell somewhat reminds me of overripe fruit in a way. Corn and DMS are the main focal point of the smell, with the slightest hint of malt sweetness. The mouthfeel is very watery and fizzy. The initial flavor has that overripe fruit sweetness to it, but as mentioned, this stuff is barely detectable on the palette. The flavor that makes its way through is, of course, that grainy/corny/DMS taste along with the tiniest amount of malt taste. The hops add a very slight amount of dryness in the finish. The aftertaste is quite clean with the dryness becoming a little more prevalent, but definately not strong. A cooked cabbage taste becomes apparent after a few moments, and the beer ends with no alcoholic warmth.

Rock Light does maintain some resemblence to its higher-calorie cousin in terms of smell and taste. It's quite possible they just added more of that "mountain spring water" to make the light version. Anyway, if you feel the need for a Rolling Rock, stick with the regular one.

 2,500 characters

Photo of BuckeyeNation
1.86/5  rDev -14.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Straw gold with nearly colorless edges and a lively interior thanks to several rapidly rising bubble streams. The foam is cumulus cloud white and is soft and pillowy besides. It looks no better than acceptable as it shrinks and fails to add much lace to the glass.

It's been a while since I've reviewed a light lager, but it seems as if there's even less than usual to go on with respect to the nose. A faint whiff of grain and musky hops is about it. Given the lack of nastiness (or much else besides), the score can only be so low.

Rock Light is beer for people who don't like beer. This is one of the most insipid, weakest tasting so-called light lagers in history. I didn't care enough to search out the calorie and carb counts, but rest assured, they're bargain basement low. Really, when all is said and done, what's the point of this?

The flavor profile... well, I could start making stuff up. Let's just use the description of the nose and be done with it. The silk-screened label actually uses the word 'flavorful'. It also uses the word 'Premium', which should be your first clue, whenever you see it, that the beer inside the bottle or can is anything but.

Kudos to the brewers for making the mouthfeel distinguishable from water. It's a near thing, though. Proper carbonation is the only thing allowing the score to be where it is.

Several internet articles and brewery press releases said a fair amount about packaging and advertising strategy, but they didn't say one single thing about the beer itself. Big surprise. My mom always said 'if you can't say something nice... ', so I'll shut up now.

 1,615 characters

Photo of woodychandler
2.06/5  rDev -5.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Well, I CAN't really get behind the idea of "Latrobe B. C., St. Louis, MO." but I CAN try yet another beer on the CANQuest (I may have to trademark that name ...).

Stop, uh huh uh huh, stop me. Stop me if you think that you've [read] this one before. Nothing's changed ... - Strangeways, here [I] come!

I am growing REALLY tired of having the same beer over and over in a CAN. I am SOOOO tempted to start cutting & pasting from other reviews, but that would be an indefensible form of cheating and so I soldier on, opening CAN after CAN.

My pour produced a rapidly disappearing finger of bone-white head that morphed into mere wisps as I gasped in amazement. Color was a pale golden-yellow with NE-quality clarity. Nose had it all - cereal, corn, you name it, it was there. This was not even Rolling Rock in a light form - I say that as the result of drinking enough Rock over the years to be able to remember it. This was simply yet one more adjunct lager lightened to the point of worthlessness. Mouthfeel was thin and watery with a slightly metallic cereal sweetness on the tongue. Finish was light, airy, like liquid cotton. If I wanted liquid cotton, I would buy that. When I want beer, I am not looking at the calorie count or any other information like that on the side of the CAN. Gimme some BEER, dammit! OK, I'm over it.

 1,334 characters

Photo of ramrod666
1.75/5  rDev -19.4%

Photo of bluejacket74
2.67/5  rDev +23%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

12 ounce bottle. Found a single bottle (green, of course) of this at a local store, so I figured I might as well try it. Served in a pint glass, the beer pours a clear light gold color with about a half inch white head that went away pretty quickly. Not much lacing, either. Aroma is light grain/adjuncts, sweet malt and not much else. For the style of beer this is, the aroma isn't too bad as there aren't any offensive aromas. Taste is sweet malt, and some adjuncts/grain. Like the aroma, for the type of beer it is it doesn't taste too bad. Mouthfeel is light, with decent carbonation. Drinkability is decent, it's really not hard to drink at all. I wouldn't turn one down if someone gave me a bottle (not that I would look for this again). I've drank worse brews, that's for sure.

 784 characters

Photo of harpus
2.25/5  rDev +3.7%

Photo of graebner3306
2.6/5  rDev +19.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This is a truly average light beer. It does have the slightly distinctive rolling rock pale lager taste (which I do like from time to time) in a watered down package. I would certainly prefer it to bud/miller/coors light, so for the price it is a decent value. I would avoid the cans as they pack the awful tin flavor that most of the other domestics have learned to avoid with plastic liners. In the traditional green bottles they are certainly a smooth and thoroughly decent taste experience. No ground broken, but none expected. A solid C-

 542 characters

Photo of Latarnik
2.25/5  rDev +3.7%

Photo of ROGUE16
2/5  rDev -7.8%

Photo of Cyberkedi
1.32/5  rDev -39.2%
look: 1 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Aroma is - well, it’s weak but at least it’s malty and not watery. Not at all impressive. It pours a wan clear straw yellow with a fairly thick white head that fizzles out quickly. Flavor is actually better than I expected - unlike most light beers I have tried, it really does taste like beer. It’s malty, and that’s about it - although it doesn’t seem watery. Body and fizz both leave something to be desired. Good only when compared to other light beers - otherwise fuhgeddaboudit.

 494 characters

Photo of Bookseeb
2.82/5  rDev +30%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Appearance is a light golden straw with a easily dissapating crisp head. Smell of very light adjunct graininess and hop. taste of again light adjunct grain and hop with not much else going on. Mouthfeel is of course light with some body to it and good carbonation. Overall it's not bad for being a light.

 304 characters

Photo of ps42
2.81/5  rDev +29.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

When I spotted these at a Worcester liquor store last week for $10 a case, I figured they were worth a try. I try to shy away from light beers, but after all I am a poor college kid, so threw caution to the wind and bought a case. Even if it sucked, someone would drink it (probably in a game of beer pong) if i didn't.

On to the review.

Appearance - Looks like any other light beer. Its clear Budweiser yellow. When poured into a pint glass it gave a modest bright white head that dissipated almost instantly. It stayed laced a little on top, and there was much carbonation coming up off the bottom of the glass. I wasn't really impressed yet.

Smell - In a word... terrible. It smells stale, like a frat house after a keg party.

Taste - After the smell, I wasn't expecting much here, but it actually doesn't taste that bad (for a macrobrewed light beer). It had the same floral notes as a regular Rolling Rock and it left very little aftertaste. Its really not hoppy at all, but there's not much malt sweetness either. As negative as all that sounds, I somehow didn't find myself hating it. It'll probably go down much easier in the hot summer months, and I'll definitely pick up a few then.

Mouthfeel - Its got a little more body to it than I expected. I actually liked the feel of this beer.

Drinkability - Drinkability is great if your planning on having the whole case in a night. There's nothing to these buggers, they go down like water.

Bottom Line - It's an average light beer. I don't like it, but I don't hate it, and you're not really missing anything by passing it up.

 1,591 characters

Photo of vwbus7
1.5/5  rDev -30.9%

Photo of LXIXME
2.25/5  rDev +3.7%

Photo of sliverX
2.58/5  rDev +18.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured a light gold hue 1 finger worth of white foam for a cap that stood up fairly well for a macro.
Smelled of cereal grains light malt with a hint of banana with a touch of alcohol to boot.
Taste the banana note became much more evident backed with a slight corn/grain taste
Mouthfeel is light yet kind of chewy in a way not too bad actually
Drinkability this is along with all of macro fizzy yellow brews, throw 30 in the cooler and a ton of ice and enjoy all day nothing wrong with it just nothing to blow your mind taste wise.

 532 characters

Photo of dbrauneis
2.15/5  rDev -0.9%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.25

A: Pours a crystal clear medium yellow in color with light amounts of active visible carbonation rising slowly from the bottom of the glass and some faint golden yellow highlights. The beer has a half finger tall fizzy white head that quickly reduces to a couple of small patches of very thin film and a very thin ring at the edges of the glass. Minimal amounts of lacing are observed.

S: Light to moderate aromas of slightly sweet corn adjuncts and grainy malts.

T: Upfront there are very light flavors of grainy malts and corn adjuncts which add just a hint of sweetness. No perceptible hop flavors and only a hint of bitterness.

M: Light bodied with moderate amounts of carbonation. Slightly watery.

O: This is a beer for people that do not really enjoy the flavor/aroma of beer. Very light in flavor and mouthfeel though it is easy to drink.

 849 characters

Photo of rsant
2/5  rDev -7.8%

Photo of beerthulhu
1.65/5  rDev -24%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

A: Poured a bright gold with light orange hues and a flat, weak sudsy white head that quickly dissipated. Visible carbonation was light and sporadic.

S: very corny with a light metallic nature (cold steel).

T: The flavor was corn with a distinct metallic nature and left a sour malting on the fade. pretty much that was all.

M: very fizzy, thin and watery with sour watery corn juice on the fade.

D: Near awful drinkability and couldn't finish. Fizzy, corny and a dumper by all means.

 492 characters

Photo of jsprain1
2.14/5  rDev -1.4%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A- Pours pale golden with no head. Standard light lager.
S- Smells not terrible for a light lager. Corn and grain. Some grass.
T- You remember that commercial with Will Ferrel for Bud Light where he says a pound of sweat in every bottle? Should have been for this.
M- Watery and fizzy.
D- If it didn't taste so bad it would be a decent light lager. Made for the guy who wants to look sophisticated at a BMC party. Not good. Not even a little. Not even for a light lager.

 471 characters

Rock Light from Latrobe Brewing Co.
Beer rating: 62 out of 100 with 58 ratings