Pils
Rousal Brygghus
- From:
- Rousal Brygghus
- Finland
- Style:
- German Pilsner
- ABV:
- Not listed
- Score:
- +9 ratings needed
- Avg:
- 2.54 | pDev: 0%
- Ratings:
- | reviews: 1
- Status:
- Inactive
- Rated:
- Sep 16, 2015
- Added:
- Sep 16, 2015
- Wants:
- 0
- Gots:
- 0
NO SCORE
-
-
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews.
Reviewed by Jugs_McGhee from Texas
2.54/5 rDev 0%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.75
2.54/5 rDev 0%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.75
Brief impressions below from a 33cl bottle purchased at Stockmann’s in Helsinki. Reviewed as a pilsner per the label; neither the Czech nor German tradition is indicated, but I’d surmise it’s German given the Finnish market in general, which tends to rely on German and American styles primarily.
Served cold into a pilsner glass.
A: Head fills ~80% of the glass, and is thin, weak, and fizzy, with a bubbly consistency on par with detergent foam. Leaves no lacing. Easily one of the worst heads I’ve ever seen in a beer – let alone a pilsner.
Body is a murky dull yellow-copper with ample haze. This isn’t at all to style.
We’re off to a bad start…
Sm: The yeast is shockingly prominent to the extent that this almost seems like a hefeweizen (if not for the lager yeast). Heavy phenols from the yeast suggest clove, biscuit, and some subtle fruit. The pilsner malt base lends some sweetness, but I’m not finding any grassy hop character (i.e. Saaz or Noble). What happened here? Completely off-style.
Aroma is of average intensity.
T & Mf: Thin and fizzy. The flavor profile is quite poor, suffering from some soapy off-notes and a strange preoccupation with the lager yeast – which lacks the esters to be of much interest, but is heavy on phenols (which come across as off-notes in a pilsner). Nowhere do I find the Saaz or Noble hops typical of a pilsner. At least the pilsner malt base is pleasant. But as light-bodied as it is, its off-notes make it unrefreshing and somewhat difficult to drink. It even hints at starchiness, with some minor accompanying dryness.
Overall an imbalanced beer with a poor build for a pilsner. It’s bad even outside style conventions, but no one will be disgusted by it; it’s still approachable, smooth, and wet.
O: If we’re strict about style, it’s way off the mark. Outside of style considerations, it’s still below average but not undrinkable or unenjoyable. This is pretty weak work from Rousal, and the price point is awful given the quality, but you could do worse. I wouldn’t buy it again. I’m not sure what happened here. Swing and a miss…
C-
Sep 16, 2015Served cold into a pilsner glass.
A: Head fills ~80% of the glass, and is thin, weak, and fizzy, with a bubbly consistency on par with detergent foam. Leaves no lacing. Easily one of the worst heads I’ve ever seen in a beer – let alone a pilsner.
Body is a murky dull yellow-copper with ample haze. This isn’t at all to style.
We’re off to a bad start…
Sm: The yeast is shockingly prominent to the extent that this almost seems like a hefeweizen (if not for the lager yeast). Heavy phenols from the yeast suggest clove, biscuit, and some subtle fruit. The pilsner malt base lends some sweetness, but I’m not finding any grassy hop character (i.e. Saaz or Noble). What happened here? Completely off-style.
Aroma is of average intensity.
T & Mf: Thin and fizzy. The flavor profile is quite poor, suffering from some soapy off-notes and a strange preoccupation with the lager yeast – which lacks the esters to be of much interest, but is heavy on phenols (which come across as off-notes in a pilsner). Nowhere do I find the Saaz or Noble hops typical of a pilsner. At least the pilsner malt base is pleasant. But as light-bodied as it is, its off-notes make it unrefreshing and somewhat difficult to drink. It even hints at starchiness, with some minor accompanying dryness.
Overall an imbalanced beer with a poor build for a pilsner. It’s bad even outside style conventions, but no one will be disgusted by it; it’s still approachable, smooth, and wet.
O: If we’re strict about style, it’s way off the mark. Outside of style considerations, it’s still below average but not undrinkable or unenjoyable. This is pretty weak work from Rousal, and the price point is awful given the quality, but you could do worse. I wouldn’t buy it again. I’m not sure what happened here. Swing and a miss…
C-
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!