Dismiss Notice
Extreme Beer Fest:Los Angeles

Join us December 9th in Los Angeles for the ultimate throwdown of craft beer creativity!

Learn more...
Dismiss Notice
Introducing: Project Extreme Brewing (a Dogfish Head + BeerAdvocate project)

Saint Arnold Amber Ale | Saint Arnold Brewing Company

Your Rating: None

Want it   Got it 
Saint Arnold Amber AleSaint Arnold Amber Ale
BA SCORE
3.55/5
Good
510 Ratings
Saint Arnold Amber AleSaint Arnold Amber Ale
BEER INFO

Brewed by:
Saint Arnold Brewing Company
Texas, United States
saintarnold.com

Style: American Amber / Red Ale

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.50%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
Saint Arnold Amber Ale is the brewery's flagship product and first official brew. A well balanced, full flavored, amber ale, it has a rich, malty body with a pleasant caramel character derived from a specialty Caravienne malt. A complex hop aroma, with a hint of floral and citrus comes from a combination of Cascades and Liberty hops. It has a rich, creamy head with a fine lace. The light fruitiness, characteristic of ales, is derived from a proprietary yeast strain.


Added by kbub6f on 12-11-2001

BEER STATS
Ranking:
#39,582
Reviews:
187
Ratings:
510
pDev:
13.52%
Bros Score:
0
 
 
Wants:
13
Gots:
112
Trade:
1
HISTOGRAM
 
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Ratings: 510 |  Reviews: 187
Photo of phishbone23
1.5/5  rDev -57.7%

Photo of Joe1019
1.75/5  rDev -50.7%

Photo of garyford
2/5  rDev -43.7%

Photo of Dreynolds1808
2/5  rDev -43.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Photo of vapordragon77
2/5  rDev -43.7%

Photo of aracauna
2.12/5  rDev -40.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I have respect for Venom's ratings, but I think Saint Arnold may have changed the recipe between when he tasted it and I did. The color was extremely pale -- it looked like a pale golden ale with a reddish tint. The head was really small and it had the same big bubble carbonation that the brown ale did. The taste fit the appearance in that it was really light and watery. Not much maltiness or hoppiness.

 406 characters

Photo of Waddellm
2.16/5  rDev -39.2%

Photo of Sazz9
2.25/5  rDev -36.6%

Photo of walleye
2.25/5  rDev -36.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

got this in a trade.from the bottle.poured a light honey with a small white head that did not last very long. aroma, yeast, hops,as it warmed sweet grapefruit, white bread, musty. flavor, sour, grassy hints of hops and , malts not impressed with this one. dry mouthfeel

 269 characters

Photo of branham1989
2.25/5  rDev -36.6%

Photo of JudgeRoughneck
2.34/5  rDev -34.1%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

This beer is confusingly called an amber, so I rated it as such. It seems much more like a pale ale to me and would have fared better if I was thinking of it in that way, so I kind of tried to rate it somewhere in between. Anyway, as either style it leaves something to be desired.

It is a light yellow beer with large rocky head and sticky lacing that offers up softly resinous, perfumey hop aroma. The taste is basically watered down red hook ipa with a strange juicy-fruit gum character. Mouthfeel would be nice for a pale. Its light, soft, and kind of fuzzy, but is all wrong for an amber. There is really nothing "amber" about this beer at all. WTF.

 658 characters

Photo of kojevergas
2.5/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

02.02.15: Brief impressions below. Full review to follow.

Screw-top, eh? Interesting...

I bought this 6 pack for $8.00 USD at a Target. In hindsight, I find that vaguely depressing.

Healthy white head. Foamy and frothy and that.

Body is clear as hell. Pale copper.

Aroma is shockingly buttery to the point it evokes diacetyl. Equally shocking is the absence of any amber malt whatsoever, let alone toastiness or caramel. How is this an amber? It reeks of ESB-meets-pale lager. Ugh. Weird notes of peanut butter and starch do it no favours.

Buttery and pale-centric, with no amber malts at all and frankly no amber ale characteristics whatsoever. Oddly grainy and light-bodied, with strange English leanings. If I tried this blind, I'd swear English yeast was used. A faint hint of Nutter Butter throws me. Not sure what they're after with this one, but frankly it's rather crappy for an ostensible amber.

Not undrinkable. Certainly below average. An across-the-board failure at its intended style.

High D+ (2.5)

***
02.24.15:

Colour is anything but amber. A clear yellow-copper at best, with an above average head.

Aroma is flat, with helles malts and diacetyl. Below average strength.

Taste is simple and generic. Helles malts, starch, diacetyl, cream, flaked barley. There's nothing going on here. Shallow as a beer can be. Below average duration and intensity of flavour. Has no amber malts or hop character. Lacks balance. Not a gestalt build, nor an intricate one. Why brew this?

Texture is smooth, wet, unrefreshing, and light-bodied. Okay overall presence on the palate. Adequately carbonated. This mouthfeel fails to elevate the beer, and doesn't accentuate any notes in the flavour profile at all.

It's a downable brew, I guess. I won't be buying it again. Even for Saint Arnold, this is shockingly forgettable. And if they're actually going for an amber, this is flat-out pathetic. Is the whole "amber ale" label just a marketing gimmick? A new low in terms of market presence from one of Texas' most whorishly business-focused breweries.

D+

***
.3.16.15: Upon reconsideration, this beer doesn't warrant a full review. Brief notes from a third bottle listed below:

A: 4 inches wide. White colour. Average thickness, fullness, etc.

Body is a clear copper of average vibrance. No yeast or hop sediment is visible.

Sm: Not an amber at all. Light starchy malts provide the only note, insipid as they are.

T: Shallow and insipid, with a subtle starchy Belgian edge.

Pathetic.

D+ (2.5)

 2,511 characters

Photo of winomark
2.5/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Not as dark as I was expecting. Medium copper with no head whatsoever. Lots of malty sweetness on the nose. Some mild hop spice also noticable. An interesting combination fo sweetness and a tannic dryness on the palate. Nothing too exciting. Mouthfeel is thin, but has a lasting finish. I wouldn't worry about looking too hard for this one. Disappointing, IMO.

 360 characters

Photo of corekneelius
2.5/5  rDev -29.6%

Photo of StevieW
2.53/5  rDev -28.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

12 oz bottle. A recent find at a beer store, I had not yet visited. No freshness date that I could find. Pale to hazy burnt golden color. Thin and faint white head. No lacing to speak of. Smell was somewhat sour, grainy, and off. Lots of sour undertones. Taste was slighty sweet, some very positive hints of carmel malt. Slick, sweet, and syrupy feel takes over. Taste is faded. Sweetness dominates. Thin and watery, carbonation is on the way out. Hard to finish. I think I got it past it's prime. The first time I have seen these beers in Florida. I will give it another chance, when I am sure of it's freshness. A real disappointment, I was looking forward to this one.

 671 characters

Photo of mgdeth
2.59/5  rDev -27%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - Poured and little head appeared. Color is light amber, and actually should probably be a "pale" beer.

Smell - Pleasant hop aroma. Others appear to describe it as floral. Some malt aroma is also present.

Taste - Not great. Actually, quite poor. The picture of stale or rancid hops comes to mind. The flavor really does not match the aroma. Hops tend to dominate the taste of this beer, but some malt is in there somewhere. Maybe the beer is old. I cannot tell because there is not a date stamp on it.

Mouthfeel - This beer has a pretty thick mouthfeel. Not watery. Too bad the other features of the beer tend to detract from this one.

Drinkability - The unbalanced bitterness in this beer tends to make it less drinkable.

Comments - This beer has some redeeming qualities, like the wonderful hop aroma. For the most part, this beer falls flat. This is the third or fourth time I have had a bad experience with SAint Arnold's beers. I keep trying them, and they continue to be sub-mediocre. It's a shame that such a cool name got wasted on such rotten beer.

 1,083 characters

Photo of pwoods
2.64/5  rDev -25.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Thanks to jasonjlewis for this extra.

12oz. stubby brown bottle poured into an imperial pint. No dating.

A: Pours a orangish - light amber, good visibility. 2 fingers worth of lightly tinted head forms a bit rocky but holds for a few minutes. A bit of lacing.

S: Pretty dull. A bit of grainy malts and some subtle sweetness.

T/M: Sweet malts with a touch of caramel, but mostly grainy. A dab of hops and bitterness up front, mostly floral with a bit of light citrus. A metallic taste pops out a bit at the end, just before a lightly dry finish. Body is medium light with decent carbonation.

D: Easy to drink and low ABV, but it's just not interesting enough and has some off flavors.

 689 characters

Photo of Illini5596
2.65/5  rDev -25.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Tried this at the brewery in Houston, TX. Not impressed. The owner of the brewery stands up and gives a huge speech before serving about how he wants a beer with flavor and life is too short for bad beer

Unfortunately his beers fall flat on their back. Don't get me wrong, not a *bad* beer per se, but not a good one either. It's C+, B- variety. The taste is thin and a bit on the sour side (not bitter mind you or good and hoppy, just kind of a sour bad beer after taste) at the same time being weak for an ale. The head is non-existant but the color is rich enough.

Overall not something I'd ever pay for, but might drink if it is all that was available.

 662 characters

Photo of maximum12
2.66/5  rDev -25.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Thanks to mhewes for sending a box with a bunch of St. Arnold goodness north during the reluctant Minnesota spring of '09.

Beer is very pretty in my New Belgium snifter, a coppery, golden amber. Very nice. Smell is slight but sweet.

Taste is a bit disjointed. The oily hops upfront are at active war with the malty sweetness that comes rushing behind it, leading to something that doesn't really taste...right. Malt is good. Hops are good. Combo is good. But there's something about these that isn't working for me. I dunno.

Straightforward enough, but the oddness lowers the drinkability for me significantly. Decent beer, but not one of the better ambers I've had.

 672 characters

Photo of goochpunch
2.67/5  rDev -24.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours out a honey color with a nice looking head that fizzles out to near nothing, leaving no lacing, OBTW. Has a typical pale ale smell of light, toasty malt along with a punch of some citrus hops. Alcohol is all too present and kind of stings the nose. Taste starts off big on hops, citrus fruit and grass. Turns into something fruity, with a lot of Juicy Fruit gum. Finishes sweet and sticky. Mouthfeel manages to be flat, syrupy, and slick all at the same time. I have little interest in drinking this again, but I guess it'd be better than most of their other offerings.

How is this an amber? More like a half-assed pale ale.

 634 characters

Photo of DuqTroops
2.7/5  rDev -23.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Drank on January 18th. Travelled to Houston on business and had this at our hotel - no real glass.

It tasted like a pale ale with a hint of honey in it. Not what I originally expected an amber ale to be. It was delicious, however, I probably won't go out of my way to get it again. It boasted being the oldest micro-brewery in Texas; good for them, but they need to work on the flavor more here. Not the best in Texas.

 421 characters

Photo of porter0209
2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

Photo of Richardbeerlover
2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

Typical beer with not much body

31 characters

Photo of Wayne17
2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

Photo of Dogleg
2.75/5  rDev -22.5%

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Saint Arnold Amber Ale from Saint Arnold Brewing Company
Beer rating: 3.55 out of 5 with 510 ratings
  • About Us

    Founded in Boston in 1996, BeerAdvocate (BA) is your go-to resource for beer powered by an independent community of enthusiasts and professionals dedicated to supporting and promoting better beer.

    Learn More
  • Our Community

    Comprised of consumers and industry professionals, many of whom started as members of this site, our community is one of the oldest, largest, and most respected beer communities online.
  • Our Events

    Since 2003 we've hosted over 60 world-class beer festivals to bring awareness to independent brewers and educate attendees.
  • Our Magazine

    Support uncompromising beer advocacy and award-winning, independent journalism with a print subscription to BeerAdvocate magazine.