Alexander Keith's Premium White | Alexander Keith's

54 Reviews
no score
Send samples
Alexander Keith's Premium WhiteAlexander Keith's Premium White

Brewed by:
Alexander Keith's
Nova Scotia, Canada

Style: Witbier

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.00%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by Shadman on 03-25-2009

For Trade:
View: Beers | Events
User Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 54 | Ratings: 110
Photo of Phyl21ca
1.5/5  rDev -46.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Bottle: Poured a golden color ale with a small bubbly head with minimal retention and no lacing. Aroma of light spices with some weird adjunct crap and no real notes of wheat. Taste is also dominated by some crap adjunct with some very faint wheat and subtle spices at the end. Body is a bit thin with some average carbonation. This is a real shame that they have dumbed down a easily accessible style.

 402 characters

Photo of duffman768
1.7/5  rDev -39.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

This was by far one of the worst Witbier I have ever had. The fact they deem this a Witbier is appalling. It had almost no citrus or spice flavour. I'm sure glad I bought a 12 pack of this.

Appearance - pours a brown-orange color with a yellowish-brown head.

Smell - very faint smell of some kind of citrus, old orange peel smell?

Taste - tastes nothing like a Witbier should. Tastes like a cross between a white beer and a honey brown.

Mouthfeel - decent.

Drinkability - if you're looking for a wit beer, look elsewhere.

 526 characters

Photo of dieudehalligan
1.86/5  rDev -33.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

472 ml Bottle. Pours a suprisingly good opaque yellowish orange.

Smell is citrus and cotton. Very similar to a good white but somehow it seems artificial.

Taste. Dull monotonous flavour. Little excitement in terms of fruit. Carbonation is out of touch with a wit or weiss. Dreadful aftertaste.

Feel. Never reaches any levels of expanse. Splenda sweet i guess.

I really wouldn't have this again. Perhaps better on tap but could really care less.

 451 characters

Photo of kevofficiel
1.97/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.75 | overall: 2.25

Alexander Keith's Premium White

The look of it: Nice color like a Witbier, but lots of carbonation about almost 2 fingers of head not like a Witbier.

The smell of it: Nothing. Very disappointing.

The taste of it: A bit of orange and citrus but very light. Goes very fast. The aftertaste is watery, there is not much left.

So overall would I recommend it? No ! Go buy a Hoegaarden, you won t go wrong with it.

 414 characters

Photo of DrJay
1.98/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Cloudy, dull straw yellow with a thin cap of fizzy white bubbles. A bit of lace, moderate head retention. Mild aroma, a bit of citrus and faint spice -- kind of earthy and sort of like nutmeg, slightly peppery. Not digging the flavour. Tastes a lot like the regular Kieth's IPA, but with a bit of breadiness, faint citrus and odd spice added. Very dry with a bit of lingering citrus zest. Light bodied, moderate carbonation. Slightly soapy or slick in texture. Overall, a poor witbier.

 485 characters

Photo of Sammy
1.99/5  rDev -29.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

A poor beer and extremely weak representation of the style. Pours light bodied with lots of carbonation, and a bit of retained head. Cheesy aroma, weak mouthfeel with carbonation a bit agressive. I cannot drink much of this and it became a drain pour. Decidedly he worst of the Alexander Keith series.

 301 characters

Photo of Viggo
2.02/5  rDev -28.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

500 ml can from the LCBO! Yum!

Pours a hazy amber, some orange highlights, decently thick and solid looking white head forms, quickly bubbles its way down to a thin ring around the glass, few lace spots stick. Smell is fantastic, if you like Keiths. Basically smells like the "IPA" with some orange peel and spices, lightly grainy, sweet and kind of peppery. Taste is more or less the same, very watery and lacking almost any flavour, light graininess and some sweetness, touch of orange peel, very weak. Mouthfeel is light bodied with medium to high carbonation. Wow, they even manage to fuck up a witbier. Seriously this is like Keiths with a bit of spice and different colouring. I'm not even sure how they pull this mess off.

 730 characters

Photo of
2.05/5  rDev -27%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Appearance - It does not look like a white beer. It is yellow and vaguely cloudy with a slightly larger head than you would see on a regular Keith's.

Smell - It doesn't smell like a white beer either. A bit a bread, maybe some citrus in there. Not really much to describe, sort of weak on aroma. Strange for such an aromatic style.

Taste - Surprise! It doesn't taste like a white beer. Goes down like water. Somehwere in there you can catch a hint of the fruity esters of a white beer, but you can also taste the corn-like sweetness of an adjunct lager.

 556 characters

Photo of cyrenaica
2.08/5  rDev -26%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

20oz draught
5.0% ABV
I tried this beer on tap on May 1, 2009 at "St. Louis Wings Bar and Grill" in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The beer was a hazy gold colour with a very thin white soapy-like head. There was very little effervescence. The aroma was weak wheat malt, and some citrus (but that may have been the small chunk of orange affixed to the rim of the glass). The mouthfeel was medium bodied, with mild carbonation. The flavour was sweet wheat malt, some peppery spiciness, and finished with a mild bitterness. I tried the beer because it was the only thing in the restauraunt I hadn't tried. I may never try it again.

 624 characters

Photo of kwjd
2.13/5  rDev -24.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

On tap at a bar without anything good. I haven't had Keith's White in a long time, so maybe my memory was wrong of how bad this was. Pours a hazy yellow with almost no head and no lacing. Smell has a tiny bit of orange with a lot of grainy malt. If I was smelling this blind, I would have not guess this was a wheat beer. Flavour is pretty similar to a macro lager. What a useless beer. If you need to drink a macro white beer, go with Rickard's, which is 100 times better.

 473 characters

Photo of biboergosum
2.16/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

20oz pint at the Metro. Let's see if Keith's treats the witbier style with more respect and/or sense than they do the IPA.

This beer arrives on the bar, in fine Keith's glassware (tall and slim, don't let too much of that precious aroma get out), adorned with that slice of orange that the kids seem to be into these days, and looks to be a cloudy, pale apricot-orange hue, with a thin cap of soapy off-white head, which soon leaves some sparse streaky lace around the glass. Not bad, no surprises here.

Getting on with it, it smells of faint buttery white bread, sort of corny, sort of malty, with a hint of bland orange juice, all so timid that I can smell my drinking buddy's (different) beer from a few feet away. The taste is somewhat yeasty, with very mild orange and coriander overtones, although the orange could still be coming from the aforementioned slice of fruit that I instantly removed from the beer, but consumed anyway, waste not want not. Beyond that, there is a weak, kind of astringent pale maltiness, betraying its barely-masked macro heritage.

The carbonation is much too high, kind of burning at first, until my throat just gave in, the body has a medium-light weight that you know just wants to be dense and cloying, but fails miserably on both counts, and is as thin as the "Premium" marketing premise around this whole deal. It finishes off-dry, the anemic fruit and grain limping along, joined by a bit of the house skunk for good measure.

The obvious comparison, in weight-class, at least, is to Rickard's White. While Rickard's is a shell of a white beer, it still has a somewhat respectable ancestry in Blue Moon. On the other hand, Keith's White (I'm not going to call it 'Premium') is a meta-shell of a white beer. It seems jumping on the bandwagon necessitates taking even less risk the farther down the road one goes. I don't see how much more dumbing down this style can take around here - the next iteration may cause a singularity that implodes beer-space-time. Shudder.

 2,013 characters

Photo of MeisterBurger
2.45/5  rDev -12.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours a turbid orangey yellow. Thick head, big bubbles that dissipate quickly.

Smell is citrusy, with some spice, coriander, I guess, with just a hint of aluminum.

As for the taste, it tastes like someone took a mediocre witbier and just added some cold filtered water, and maybe a little carbonated water too. It also tastes tinny. As it warms it starts to taste like orange pith. And no, I don't have a lisp.

It's drinkable and refreshing and inoffensive in its complete lack of character..yeah. I really expected very little from this beer, and yet I'm still disappointed in how watered down this tastes.

 613 characters

Photo of spinrsx
2.53/5  rDev -10%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

341ml Bottle

Appearance - Hazy gold colour with a large size fizzy white coloured head. I can't make out much carbonation due to the haziness and there is a fair amount of lacing. The head lasted for 5 minutes.

Smell – Breads/grains, faint oranges/bananas/all spice, a skunkiness

Taste & Mouth - The beer comes across as slightly thin and watery and there is an average amount of carbonation. I can taste breads/grains and corn. There are also light notes of oranges/bananas/all spice - but not a whole lot. It finishes with a grainy aftertaste with some hints of oranges and spice.

Overall – It tasted like a basic adjunct beer with some spices thrown in. There are so many other beers that I would rather be drinking.. I wouldn't buy this again.

 755 characters

Photo of funkengruven
2.53/5  rDev -10%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I saw this on the beer list at the Whistling Walrus, and figured I'd get a pint, expecting something similar to Canada's other macro Wit. What I got, was something else.

This came to me in a pint glass with an orange, as usual with this style here. Beer was quite cloudy with some nice puffy white cloud head on top, quite nice acutally. Smell was a weak combination of cinnamon and citrus, not terrible. Flavor is where it falls completely flat, I didn't detect any flavor profile until the finish, which was a weak citrus and cinnamon flavor, like water with a hint of orange and cinnamon. Mouthfeel was slightly creamy with ample carbonation.

Is this stuff drinkable? well, it doesn't go down terribly but the flavor is a bit too weak for this to be enjoyable. Not something I'd bother with again.

 803 characters

Photo of steeler
2.63/5  rDev -6.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

This beer is almost an exact replica of Rickards White. But this is worse, much worse.

Looks a like wierd citrusy grapefruity color, it had a nice head, which was not bad.

Smells horrible, smells like malts and cardboard, not good.

Taste is extremely watered down, and the tastes that are there, are hard to decipher, atleast rickards has a nice taste profile. This is bad.

Mouthfeel is thinner than your super cheap macro, horrendous.

Drinkability is average, its easy to get down, and isnt too heavy so its alright, avoid this mess.

 539 characters

Photo of laituegonflable
2.64/5  rDev -6%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Pours a cloudy pale golden colour. Head is whiteish, bubbly when poured, invisible after a while. Not a lot of lacing. Yeah, really very meh.

Smells a bit like smelly feet, but a lot of fruit to it as well. Decent orange peel note, touch of apple juice, some hazelnut character as well, maybe some chestnut. Fruity; not bad but nothing special.

Orange peel from the start, quite rich and fruity upfront that bulges in the middle and sadly goes away largely by the finish. Bit of a spicy, aniseedy note late-mid with a touch of bread yeast, then finish is a bit grainy, slight coriander spice but otherwise nothing, really. Leaves with a slight cola aftertaste. Has some witty elements but falls a bit short.

A bit of body to it, but there needn't be. Bit heavy and gluggy, finishes dry but also a bit thick.

Stylistically OK, but really didn't do much for me.

 863 characters

Photo of Derek
2.65/5  rDev -5.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A: Gold with a slight haze, off-white head, very little retention, but it leaves a little lace.

S: It's got the curaca orange peel and corriander spicing, but there's also an underlying Keith's aroma (floral & catty American hops?).

T: Corriander & curacao, very mild bitterness, slight grainy biscuit (it seems maltier than the IPA).

M: Moderate body has some residual sweetness.

D: It's approachable, but it's not a wit. I had a tough time finishing it, and wouldn't want another.

 486 characters

Photo of jaslesp
2.66/5  rDev -5.3%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

This smells like hoegaarden but tastes awful. There is a bad after taste and it isn't really cloudy. This is labatt product so we can't ask much from it but at least try. It has a yellow color but this beer looks filtrated. It ia way too expensive for what you get though. But this is the style of keith's, we can't trust the kind of beer we buy from them just by looking at their suppose "ipa".

 395 characters

Photo of GodOfBeer
2.69/5  rDev -4.3%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a surprisingly nice cloudy orange-peach colour with a nice fluffy white head, lots of lacing.

Smells like a bad batch of home-made beer, maybe a slight citrus aroma.

Very light tasting, like a macro lager with a slight citrus sweetness, and very subtle spiciness.

Pretty carbonated mouthfeel(because of the can?), slightly drinkable, but there is that slight homebrew taste I don't like, perhaps this is better in the bottle or on tap? This is a lame attempt at a witbier, much like Rickards but not even as good as that.

 530 characters

Photo of Mlkluther
2.76/5  rDev -1.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

At last this version of Alexander Keith's has some flavour. However, compared to almost every other white/wit beer out there this is truly a pathetic attempt. I'm not sure why the macros even try.

 196 characters

Photo of thehyperduck
2.79/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Picked up a Keith's sampler containing three of their brews, including this one which I had never had before.

Pouring it into a standard beer mug produces a one-finger head that wastes no time dissipating into a thin ring. The beer itself looks like cloudy apple juice, except with a constant stream of bubbles percolating to the top, indicating heavy carbonation. The bubbles become far less dense once the beer has had time to settle, though. Looks appetizing enough. Smell is a little disappointing - has some fruity overtones, but other than that it smells pretty much like any macro lager.

The first sip reveals it to be a rather watery concoction, and surprisingly enough the carbonation is kind of subdued. The taste is dominated by (unsurprisingly) wheat, yeast, and some barely-noticeable citrusy notes. The label claims there is spice in here, but I couldn't taste it. This beer is extremely smooth, and I can easily see myself pounding several of these back.

I think I can safely say that this is by far my favourite offering from Keith's so far. That being said, it's still pretty uninteresting for the style, and I have definitely had better witbiers. If I buy Keith's again, it'll probably be this.

 1,216 characters

Photo of DoctorStrangiato
2.8/5  rDev -0.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured a 341-ml bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance - overall a nice appearance with a cloudy light copper colour. Thin head with good lacing. Good carbonation.

Smell - fruity, orange-citrusy aroma over a creamy malt smell. Almost floral with some bready scents as well.

Taste - thin, almost watery flavour. Wheat flavours up front but break down. Lemony kind of finish. Kind of dull.

Mouthfeel - kind of all over the map. Not smooth, flavours aren't that interesting, basically it creates a little carbonation/bitter effect before the watery taste comes in.

Drinkability - picked up a 12-pack of these several weeks ago, and there's still lots left. Not making my way through this product very quickly. Wouldn't bother with it again.

 740 characters

Photo of biegaman
2.8/5  rDev -0.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Cheddar cheese pancake with dismally feeble head. There's a little too much orange hue to appear as a textbook witbier. No matter, it does lend the beer a nicer complexion. It also helps to bulk up the appearance; judging from the bottom of the bottle and a close inspection up to the light, this appears to be only very lightly sedimented. Clarity is distorted alright, but probably as much so by the tone as by any haze.

I'm willing to overlook the aesthetics if the rest of the beer is better. From what the first few sniffs have indicated things won't be improving much. Sure, there is some light zest and a big shake of white pepper but there is also the unmistakably musty scent of damp cardboard, too. It smells just like a typical macro, albeit flavoured with some questionable additions. It's certainly far more off-putting than tart, zestful, fruity, floral or grainy.

I didn't hope for much in the taste - but I hoped for a little more than this. It turns out I knew nothing about damp cardboard until I tasted the thing. I was hoping that since they put "premium" in the name they'd use a higher concentration of real malt rather than extracts and adjuncts. Turns out, I was expecting too much of them.

The flavour, at least how my palate perceives it, is tinged with an unmistakably corn-like chicken feed taste. I'd be oblivious to the use of orange peel if I otherwise wasn't informed of its inclusion and the coriander, although meager, is drying and overly peppery. I'm not sure if it's possible but I'd be willing to bet Labatts used some sort of adjunct or extract for the orange peel and coriander as well.

If you're going to use corn or rice or any combination of low-grade, synthetic fermentables as adjuncts than surely you can't expect to imitate the endearing mouthfeel of a witbier. A true wit will be tart and spicy, juxtapose grainy and creamy from the unmalted wheat and be effervescent and gratifyingly refreshing due to the high carbonation and light, citric acidity. This is flat, cloying, astringent and painfully compromised.

This is really no more a witbier than it is an adjunct-ridden, marketing driven macro lager. I hope this beer doesn't find its way into the wrong hands, that is of those who are looking to experiment with different styles and are eager to try one of Belgium's most classic beers. This displayed none of the distinguishing features or virtuous traits of the witbier - rather, it showcased all that is wrong with large scale commercial brewing operations.

 2,523 characters

Photo of ThatWineGuy
2.82/5  rDev +0.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Murky orange, honey dew with suspended particles, off white head was fleeting, no lace, no retention. Large bubbles expired after a short time, a bit of fizz on top made me wonder. The nose was of mild yeast, mild citrus; I can't say that I smelled any spice at all really. Taste was mild passion fruit, hint of hop, bitter in mid-mouth, malty swallow with earthy aftertaste. With warming, the overall impression diminished, light body, became quite flat. This beer made me wonder how many macro-attributes it really had. Initially, my scores would have been a half-point higher right across the board but with air and warming, the flatter appearance and lack of a fruity, spicy character weighed against a higher score. While I'm pleased Keith's made an effort to put something new out there, I wish they had put just a bit more effort into it. Worth a try but not necessarily a buy.

 884 characters

Photo of sensorglitch
2.83/5  rDev +0.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I am reviewing the last times I had this beer, which was on tap at a bar in Toronto.

The beer poured with very little head and the color was not very rich.It had that aspect to it, in which you could see through just a little bit too much. The color however, was fairly decent you take into account that this is a Macro-Brewed beer, so I had the mindset where it's not really fair to compare it to something very high end.

The mouth feel as well was good for a macro brewed beer. If it was not a beer which you paid four bucks for, and you were paying more for a premium beer, I would be a lot more harsh on it. However, for what it is, it is good.

In total it is drinkable, and is decent for a MacroBeer. However, Beer snobs should feel free to pass on this one.

 766 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Alexander Keith's Premium White from Alexander Keith's
2.81 out of 5 based on 110 ratings.
  • About Us

    Your go-to website for beer (since 1996), publishers of BeerAdvocate magazine (since 2006) and hosts of world-class beer events (since 2003). Respect Beer.
  • BeerAdvocate Microbrew Invitational

    Join us June 2-3, 2017 in Boston, Mass. for beer, cider, mead, kombucha and sake from over 70 small producers.

    Learn More
  • Subscribe to BeerAdvocate Magazine

    Support uncompromising beer advocacy and award-winning, independent journalism with a print subscription to BeerAdvocate magazine.