Luminiferous Aether
Theoretically Brewing Company
- From:
- Theoretically Brewing Company
- Alberta, Canada
- Style:
- American Pale Ale
- ABV:
- 5%
- Score:
- +8 ratings needed
- Avg:
- 3.21 | pDev: 0.62%
- Ratings:
- | reviews: 1
- Status:
- Inactive
- Rated:
- Jan 11, 2017
- Added:
- Oct 08, 2016
- Wants:
- 0
- Gots:
- 0
NO SCORE
-
-
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews.
Reviewed by biboergosum from Canada (AB)
3.23/5 rDev +0.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3
3.23/5 rDev +0.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3
650ml bottle - the name refers to the early scientific theory of the medium that propagates light, or so sez the handy label description!
This beer pours a clear, medium copper amber colour, with one finger of puffy, loosely foamy, and well bubbly dirty white head, which leaves some decent defrosting windshield lace around the glass as things slowly seep away.
It smells of grainy and lightly crackery pale malt, a faint musty yeastiness, ephemeral generic citrus rind, wet cardboard, and some very tame leafy, weedy, and floral green hop bitters. The taste is plain cereal malt, very weak orange and white grapefruit essences, still extant yeast, some very understated leafy and grassy hoppiness, and a subtle sense of the packaging material this product once shared with its 11 siblings.
The carbonation is fairly light in its low-key frothiness, the body a so-so middleweight, and generally smooth, with a minor pithiness popping in and out like an annoying neighbour. It finishes off-dry, the wan pale malts limping quietly out the back door.
Overall, there is hardly anything to recommend this offering by - the malt seems sickly, the hops are damned near non-existent, which leaves room for the obvious brewing flaws to ascend. It's not bad, per se, but rather the embodiment of blasé.
Oct 13, 2016This beer pours a clear, medium copper amber colour, with one finger of puffy, loosely foamy, and well bubbly dirty white head, which leaves some decent defrosting windshield lace around the glass as things slowly seep away.
It smells of grainy and lightly crackery pale malt, a faint musty yeastiness, ephemeral generic citrus rind, wet cardboard, and some very tame leafy, weedy, and floral green hop bitters. The taste is plain cereal malt, very weak orange and white grapefruit essences, still extant yeast, some very understated leafy and grassy hoppiness, and a subtle sense of the packaging material this product once shared with its 11 siblings.
The carbonation is fairly light in its low-key frothiness, the body a so-so middleweight, and generally smooth, with a minor pithiness popping in and out like an annoying neighbour. It finishes off-dry, the wan pale malts limping quietly out the back door.
Overall, there is hardly anything to recommend this offering by - the malt seems sickly, the hops are damned near non-existent, which leaves room for the obvious brewing flaws to ascend. It's not bad, per se, but rather the embodiment of blasé.
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!