Creek Side
New Trail Brewing Company

 

 

Pours a light golden amber with a frothy cream colored head

Fresh whole grain bread lemongrass and floral hops.

Crisp dry delicious hops [lemon and floral] with whole grain malt goodness.

 

Undated can into pint glass. Pours a really pretty gold color, with a nice white head. Decent lacing. Initial impression is grapefruit and biscuit, but with a slight sulfur overtone which really detracts from the taste. Mouthfeel is clean and crisp. Finish leaves a bit of lingering sulfide that doesn't make for fond memories. New Trail generally puts out excellent beer - at least in the IPA sphere - but this isn't one of them.

Slight light khaki colored froth, modest retention, swirling carbonation and a copperish amber color... Nose is light but highlighted by cereal grains, piney hop cones and a subtle fruitiness... Palate is consistent with the nose... Feel is medium bodied and briskly carbonated... Overall a flavorful and enjoyable lager with lots character for 5.5% abv...

 

Ii am returning to New Trail for CANother horizontal from them in support of The CANQuest (tm), but they are beginning to (slightly) p**s me off. The name, as shown in the Notes taken from their site, differs from the verbiage on the CAN in the approved pic! Well, which is it - Creek Side or Creekside? Grr. 8={} This is the fourth beer in this horizontal.

From the CAN: "Creekside Lager"; "Keep Cold. Drink Fresh."

I was quite curious as to what I was going to get from this CAN as I Crack!ed open the vent. Some reviewers had mentioned a sulfurous quality, but I wanted to exbeerience this beer CANyway. I CANtinued with a slow, gentle C-Line Glug into my awaiting Pilsner glass, scored at Ollie's Discount Mart in quantity. It foamed nicely, forming two-plus fingers of foamy, soapy, rocky, eggshell-white head with decent retention. Color beCAN as an oh-so-slightly-hazy Yellow-Gold (SRM = 4- 5), but as it warmed, it clarified, making me wonder if were simply a chill haze CANtesy of my super-cool reefer. Hmm. Nose did not strike me as sulfurous, but then, neither was it as clean as I might expect. Instead, there was a definite grapefruit citrusiness that, while not unpleasant, seemed rather out of place. It was not as inCANgruous as a tarantula on a wedding cake (thanks, pseudo-Great Uncle Raymond), but it was notable when reviewing & rating to style. Mouthfeel was thin-to-medium, about on par for a Lager. The taste remained more grapefruit-citrusy than bready/malty and it had a strange tang that might have been the sulfur mentioned earlier. Hmm. Finish was dry & refreshing, but it would not be cooler-worthy, even on a hot, hazy, humid Summer day, IMHO. YMMV.

Poured into a narrow pint glass: color is straw gold, transparent, head is off white with fine bubbles, nice lacing, solid top remains.

Smell is big sulfide dose at first, pretty heavy and off putting, then minimal backing from malt or hops, maybe just some adjunct notes.

Taste is similarly sulfide dose upfront with lingering presence through the flavor, light malt and adjunct flavor; after acclimating to the sulfide some biscuit presents and grassy hops.

Mouthfeel is low/moderate carbonation, light sweetness, moderate bitterness.

Overall the sulfide component detracted from an easy going brew, otherwise light malt character with moderate adjunct and grassy hops.

 

Wow - unexpected winner for me, bright lager with some interesting taste & depth..will seek this one out in qty.

 

 

I’ve enjoyed many lagers from New Trail over the past year. And this one has potential, but at least the cans I got appear to have come from a batch that was canned entirely too early. This is H2S heavy. It dominates the entire beer, which is a shame because you can tell there is a nice beer hiding in there. Guessing this one took longer to clean up than expected, and rather than adjusting their production schedule, New Trail decided to live with the sulfide in the name of tank space. Either that, or their entire brew staff is not sensitive to sulfur, and at the same time, qa/qc is not running the right analysis on their lagers.

I’ll keep trying NT lagers, but I’m off the bandwagon right now after a basic lager 101 flaw.