White Lightning
Speakeasy Ales & Lagers
- From:
- Speakeasy Ales & Lagers
- California, United States
- Style:
- American Pale Wheat Beer
- ABV:
- 5.2%
- Score:
- 78
- Avg:
- 3.33 | pDev: 15.92%
- Ratings:
- | reviews: 43
- Status:
- Inactive
- Rated:
- Mar 23, 2020
- Added:
- May 25, 2008
- Wants:
- 1
- Gots:
- 4
SCORE
78
Okay
78
Okay
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews. | Log in to view more ratings + sorting options.
Reviewed by rodbeermunch from Nevada
2.96/5 rDev -11.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
2.96/5 rDev -11.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Man you get those disappointed feels when a beer name lets you down. This is anything but white lightning, similar to how that girl says a regular night at the bar was "EPIC". Pours a cloudy dull yellow with 2/3" white head and average retention.
Aroma lacks what I was looking for, instead it drops some misplaced spice rack. Is that wheat? Just a generic grain note.
Taste thankfully has less spice rack. Not much going on, I can see people drinking this who want to have a drink but not a lot of overpowering flavor. Definitely has a wet, doughy kind of feel to it, even though the carbonation is fine, it still brings a soggy kind of vibe, like you'd describe it as juicy if there was hops or fruit, but it barely is hopped and is devoid of fruit. This beer would substantially improve if it removed all the spice rack, and upped the hop bill. I would think if someone wanted the spice rack, they would just get a traditional hefeweizen.
Mar 23, 2020Aroma lacks what I was looking for, instead it drops some misplaced spice rack. Is that wheat? Just a generic grain note.
Taste thankfully has less spice rack. Not much going on, I can see people drinking this who want to have a drink but not a lot of overpowering flavor. Definitely has a wet, doughy kind of feel to it, even though the carbonation is fine, it still brings a soggy kind of vibe, like you'd describe it as juicy if there was hops or fruit, but it barely is hopped and is devoid of fruit. This beer would substantially improve if it removed all the spice rack, and upped the hop bill. I would think if someone wanted the spice rack, they would just get a traditional hefeweizen.
Reviewed by UCLABrewN84 from California
3.13/5 rDev -6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3
3.13/5 rDev -6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3
Pours a slightly murky light yellow with a 1 inch foamy off-white head that settles to a film on top of the beer. Foamy swaths of lace form around the glass on the drink down. Smell is of grain, slight yeast, spice, and some fruity perfume aromas. Taste is much the same but the overall flavor is pretty light. There is a mild spice-like bitterness after each sip that quickly fades. This beer has a good level of carbonation with a crisp mouthfeel. Overall, this is a pretty average beer all around and not something I would go for again.
Jul 02, 2012
Reviewed by DoubleJ from Wisconsin
3.5/5 rDev +5.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
3.5/5 rDev +5.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
What should I do? Do nothing, or drink a beer? Ok, drink a beer. And on to the beer:
The color is more resemblant to an American wheat than to a witbier. It's a darker shade of blonde, with little cloudiness from the yeast, and a head that's ½ inch thick. The retention is fine, and it leaves a few strokes of lace. Its nose consits of sweet malted wheat, a creamy orange aroma, and a vague spice.
Pale wheat, witbier, or a combination of the two? The flavor is fine. It has some good orange peel notes and some spice, but it lacks the fruitiness from the yeast. And it definately has a little more flavor than the usual American Wheat. It also helps that the base malt provides sufficent flavor. The body is light, and the carbonation sizzles.
Some spiced-up AmWheats take the spice too far. White Lightning respects the balance, and ends up as a servicable option.
May 11, 2012The color is more resemblant to an American wheat than to a witbier. It's a darker shade of blonde, with little cloudiness from the yeast, and a head that's ½ inch thick. The retention is fine, and it leaves a few strokes of lace. Its nose consits of sweet malted wheat, a creamy orange aroma, and a vague spice.
Pale wheat, witbier, or a combination of the two? The flavor is fine. It has some good orange peel notes and some spice, but it lacks the fruitiness from the yeast. And it definately has a little more flavor than the usual American Wheat. It also helps that the base malt provides sufficent flavor. The body is light, and the carbonation sizzles.
Some spiced-up AmWheats take the spice too far. White Lightning respects the balance, and ends up as a servicable option.
Reviewed by BigPlay1824 from New York
2.58/5 rDev -22.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
2.58/5 rDev -22.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
Enjoyed in a pint glass
A: pours a very light yellow hay color that is clear and has a nice amount of carbonation bubbles, pours with a two finger head that is frothy and pure white, lingers nicely and leaves a small amount of lacing
S: grasses, lemon and a very slight wheat scent
T: tastes kind of odd, not really what i had been expecting, begins grassy, then slight lemon, then finishes with more grass like notes, no wheat character what so ever, drinks crisp but not all that tasty, just not where it should be
M: pretty intense carbonation, oddly thick, leaves the mouth feeling bright but also oddly dirty
O: eh, not too good, not what i wanted for the style and not all that tastey regardless
Feb 08, 2012A: pours a very light yellow hay color that is clear and has a nice amount of carbonation bubbles, pours with a two finger head that is frothy and pure white, lingers nicely and leaves a small amount of lacing
S: grasses, lemon and a very slight wheat scent
T: tastes kind of odd, not really what i had been expecting, begins grassy, then slight lemon, then finishes with more grass like notes, no wheat character what so ever, drinks crisp but not all that tasty, just not where it should be
M: pretty intense carbonation, oddly thick, leaves the mouth feeling bright but also oddly dirty
O: eh, not too good, not what i wanted for the style and not all that tastey regardless
Reviewed by Jugs_McGhee from Texas
2.87/5 rDev -13.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
2.87/5 rDev -13.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
Served on-draught into a plastic cup at Speakeasy's decrepit warehouse - I mean - brewpub. Reviewed from notes.
Presentation: I couldn't be any more turned off to the beer; why are the brewers allowing it to be served into plastic cups?
A: No head at all. A clear yellow colour.
Sm: Fresh barley and orange esters. A moderate strength aroma.
T: Simple barley, slight pleasant malt, and very light cream hints. Simple and a bit bland, but okay. It's balanced in that there's not many notes there. Built badly.
Mf: Smooth and wet; generic. Not at all tailored to the flavours.
Dr: Drinkable, but simple and a bit boring. I won't have it again. It's okay.
C
---
I reviewed this again at the Yardhouse in Downtown Los Angeles, also on-draught. Reviewed from notes:
A: Pours a one finger head of fair cream, fair thickness, and decent retention. Colour is a quasitransparent somewhat cloudy yellow. No yeast particles are visible.
Sm: Cream, clean malts, hints of subtle nuts, and mild fruit esters. A mild strength aroma.
T: Some cream, full barley - lending it a full body, clean malts, and very slight hints of citrusy notes. Some orange - very tame. Decently balanced and built.
Mf: Smooth, wet, too thick, and adequately carbonated. Mildly complementary of the flavours.
Dr: Drinkable. Boring but pleasant. I wouldn't get it again. Too simple and lacking subtlety. Pleasant I guess.
C+
[The score given reflects the average of both reviews]
Dec 24, 2011Presentation: I couldn't be any more turned off to the beer; why are the brewers allowing it to be served into plastic cups?
A: No head at all. A clear yellow colour.
Sm: Fresh barley and orange esters. A moderate strength aroma.
T: Simple barley, slight pleasant malt, and very light cream hints. Simple and a bit bland, but okay. It's balanced in that there's not many notes there. Built badly.
Mf: Smooth and wet; generic. Not at all tailored to the flavours.
Dr: Drinkable, but simple and a bit boring. I won't have it again. It's okay.
C
---
I reviewed this again at the Yardhouse in Downtown Los Angeles, also on-draught. Reviewed from notes:
A: Pours a one finger head of fair cream, fair thickness, and decent retention. Colour is a quasitransparent somewhat cloudy yellow. No yeast particles are visible.
Sm: Cream, clean malts, hints of subtle nuts, and mild fruit esters. A mild strength aroma.
T: Some cream, full barley - lending it a full body, clean malts, and very slight hints of citrusy notes. Some orange - very tame. Decently balanced and built.
Mf: Smooth, wet, too thick, and adequately carbonated. Mildly complementary of the flavours.
Dr: Drinkable. Boring but pleasant. I wouldn't get it again. Too simple and lacking subtlety. Pleasant I guess.
C+
[The score given reflects the average of both reviews]
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!