Churchwarden Smoked Porter
Refined Fool Brewing Co.
- From:
- Refined Fool Brewing Co.
- Ontario, Canada
- Style:
- Smoked Porter
- ABV:
- 5.1%
- Score:
- +9 ratings needed
- Avg:
- 3.04 | pDev: 0%
- Ratings:
- | reviews: 1
- Status:
- Inactive
- Rated:
- Nov 10, 2014
- Added:
- Nov 09, 2014
- Wants:
- 0
- Gots:
- 0
NO SCORE
-
-
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews.
Reviewed by thehyperduck from Canada (ON)
3.04/5 rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.25
3.04/5 rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.25
750 mL bottle from the brewery, bottled within the last week or so. Served slightly chilled.
Pours a muddy, brownish-black cola colour, topped with one centimetre of loose, foamy, light tan-coloured head. It fades quickly, with only a bubbly collar remaining afterwards. Not the most attractive of beers, and the aroma leaves a bit to be desired, too. I'm getting an odd green olive smell, in addition to notes of smoked malt, apple bacon and some vaguely chocolatey notes. I like olives, but they make for an off-putting presence in beer.
Fortunately, that particular flaw does not carry over into the flavour. Notes of apple and plummy fruit are strangely prominent, with minor hints of coffee and dark malt/molasses sweetness. The smoked malts wait until the latter half of the sip to show up, providing a moderate level of smoky cherrywood to liven things up a bit. It fades quickly, with some dark fruit sweetness lingering briefly into the aftertaste, until only a hint of smoky ash remains on the palate. I don't mind the flavour profile, but the mouthfeel is where things really get rocky. The carbonation is extremely low, which in and of itself is not a crippling problem - but the watery, thin mouthfeel exacerbates the issue. The end result is that this porter simply feels limp and diluted - this aids in its overall drinkability, but not with much else.
Final Grade: 3.04, a C+. Well, you can't win 'em all. Over their brief, six-month existence, Refined Fool has released just shy of 20 different beers, and up until now I have enjoyed all of them - to varying degrees, of course - but always enough to consider a repurchase. But Churchwarden is just not that good, and without some recipe changes I doubt I'd consider trying it again. I had a very good smoked porter earlier today, so it is not that I am unable to appreciate the style - this is just a watery, mediocre example of one in my opinion.
Nov 10, 2014Pours a muddy, brownish-black cola colour, topped with one centimetre of loose, foamy, light tan-coloured head. It fades quickly, with only a bubbly collar remaining afterwards. Not the most attractive of beers, and the aroma leaves a bit to be desired, too. I'm getting an odd green olive smell, in addition to notes of smoked malt, apple bacon and some vaguely chocolatey notes. I like olives, but they make for an off-putting presence in beer.
Fortunately, that particular flaw does not carry over into the flavour. Notes of apple and plummy fruit are strangely prominent, with minor hints of coffee and dark malt/molasses sweetness. The smoked malts wait until the latter half of the sip to show up, providing a moderate level of smoky cherrywood to liven things up a bit. It fades quickly, with some dark fruit sweetness lingering briefly into the aftertaste, until only a hint of smoky ash remains on the palate. I don't mind the flavour profile, but the mouthfeel is where things really get rocky. The carbonation is extremely low, which in and of itself is not a crippling problem - but the watery, thin mouthfeel exacerbates the issue. The end result is that this porter simply feels limp and diluted - this aids in its overall drinkability, but not with much else.
Final Grade: 3.04, a C+. Well, you can't win 'em all. Over their brief, six-month existence, Refined Fool has released just shy of 20 different beers, and up until now I have enjoyed all of them - to varying degrees, of course - but always enough to consider a repurchase. But Churchwarden is just not that good, and without some recipe changes I doubt I'd consider trying it again. I had a very good smoked porter earlier today, so it is not that I am unable to appreciate the style - this is just a watery, mediocre example of one in my opinion.
We love reviews (150 characters or more)! Check out: How to Review a Beer. You don't need to get fancy. Drop some thoughts on the beer's attributes (look, smell, taste, feel) plus your overall impression. Something that backs up your rating and helps others. Thanks!