Moe's Backroom Pale Ale | City Brewing Company, LLC

Your Rating: None
Want it   Got it 
Moe's Backroom Pale AleMoe's Backroom Pale Ale
104 Ratings
Moe's Backroom Pale AleMoe's Backroom Pale Ale

Brewed by:
City Brewing Company, LLC
Wisconsin, United States

Style: American Pale Ale (APA)

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.70%

Availability: Limited (brewed once)

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by AndIWantYou on 05-09-2007

This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

Bros Score:
View: Beers
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Ratings: 104 |  Reviews: 80
Reviews by atpben:
Photo of atpben
3/5  rDev -1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured the bottle into a pint glass. Pours a golden amber color with a medium white head. Aroma of very light citurs and some caramel. Fairly light on the taste. Starts weet (honey) and ends with a lightly hoppy finsih that doesn't linger for too long. Very easy to drink but could use a little stronger taste profile. Not bad - a good simple session pale ale.

 360 characters

More User Reviews:
Photo of boston2bburg
3.06/5  rDev +1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours with a rather large foamy beige head and translucent amber body. The head retains itself pretty well, covering the body comfortably, and forming a modest patch or two of lacing.

There isn't much in the way of an aroma for a pale ale. Ever so subtle citrus notes and not much else.

The flavor is actually decent for a pale ale at this price. There's a nice thick, slightly resinous citrus flavor and a touch of grapefruit bitterness - seems like a Cascade-heavy beer to me. The one drawback is the obvious use of sugar adjuncts, which impart a slightly cidery, ultimately ersatz flavor and aroma to the beer.

There's not much wrong with the mouthfeel - it's maybe a little thin on body and a bit overcarbonated but finishes dry and refreshing as a pale ale should.

Drinkability suffers a bit from the sugary flavor, which gets old pretty quick and doesn't sit very well in the stomach. For $5.49 a six-pack, this beer definitely serves it's purpose well, and may top the list of beers you can buy for under a dollar a piece. I'm sure I'll return to it next time I'm low on cash.

 1,088 characters

Photo of jonphilipp
3.5/5  rDev +15.5%

Photo of Mora2000
2.58/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Thanks to Travita for sharing this bottle.

The beer pours a clear yellow with a white head. The aroma is corn with some wheat. I don't get many hops in the aroma. The flavor is corn with some light grassy hops. Medium mouthfeel and medium carbonation. Not good in any way.

 273 characters

Photo of WVbeergeek
1.78/5  rDev -41.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Pours a pale bright copper hue with a large off white head. Speckled lacing left behind this beer label looks so ghetto and forgettable. Aroma has some spicy and citric floral hop notes in the nose. Flavor has a hars bitterness with some watery soapy character going on this stuff is terrible. The worst pale ale I've had let's pour this stuff. Watery texture I can't stand the high carbonation going on in this atrocity. Drinkability terrible never again I've officially retired the Tap Room No. 21 Moe's Backroom lineup.

 522 characters

Photo of chinchill
3/5  rDev -1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12 oz bottle served in a pint glass. Undated. While label appears the same as BA photo, print indicates "Brewed and bottled by Tap Room Brewing ... Rochester, NY"

Crystal clear golden, with a small off-white head that is surprisingly durable.

Subtle aromas of faint hops, malt, and grains/cereal.

The taste is mostly of hops; flaws of omission (intensity and complexity) rather than commission. Slightly bitter balance, appropriate for style. Mild hoppy finish.

M: light-medium body, a bit thin for an APA; ample carbonation; clean, crisp and rather dry finish.

A rather ordinary pale ale, but good drinkability and well priced at about $6/6.

 650 characters

Photo of Adkins1203
2.75/5  rDev -9.2%

Photo of LXIXME
3.75/5  rDev +23.8%

Photo of RickS95
2.24/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Light copper in color, very filtered, thin white head.

Doesn't smell too bad, mostly floral hops.

Has a watered-down, hoppy taste.

Lacks character, very flat in the mouth.

Not a very good beer, it's even hard to comment on; if I never have another it'll be just fine.

 272 characters

Photo of avisong
2.25/5  rDev -25.7%

Photo of tempest
3.6/5  rDev +18.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Picked up a bottle at Chip's Wine and Beer in Kill Devil Hills, NC. The clear amber beer has a mix of earthy grapefruit and toasted caramel malt. It's on the sweeter, fruitier side of pale ales, but I think it's deserves better than it's C+ rating. It finishes with a simple, herbal hop bite and overall is fairly sessionable. It's just a touch on the thick side of a pale ale.

 377 characters

Photo of cauchonpa
2.67/5  rDev -11.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I picked up six of these at the local grocer on sale. After the first three, it became obvious why they hadn't moved at the original price. Not a terrible beer, but nothing to call up the old man about. This might be a good American Pale Ale to introduce someone who typically sticks to light beers and sweet liquors.

Appearance -- Pours (into a pint glass) a coppery orange with a thick head; 2 fingers unless poured with the utmost delicacy. Several ascending trails of bubbles highlight this APA's effervescent quality. The head laces well and is left clinging to the side of the glass. From appearance alone, you'd expect this beer to be better than it is. (4.5 out of 5)

Smell-- Not much to note here. Nearly all malt, punctuated by brief notes of spice. The wife says it smells like her (overly malted) gluten free beer. The nose becomes acutely aware of the high ABV. If you are expecting a hoppy aroma, look elsewhere. (2.5 out of 5)

Taste-- Similar to the aroma, nearly absent of any hop characteristics. High on malt and alcohol, which may make this a good beginner's pale ale. Overall, it lacks body and comes off one dimensional.The alcoholic pungency reminds me of watered down corn whiskey. Finally, the spice that briefly appeared in the smell appears even more briefly about mid-palette. (2 out of 5)

Mouthfeel-- The carbonation that impressed me so much in the appearance has disappeared. I'm left with a feeling reminiscent of water. Smooth and drinkable; this APA reinforces its place in the territory of the novice. I'm not disappointed, but I'm not impressed. (3 out of 5)

Drinkability-- Very smooth and not offensive, this ale would sit well in the latter half of a night of drinking as the high ABV stands out and excuses the lack of taste. Overall, this would be a good beer to introduce someone used to liquor or lagers to the world of pale ales. (3.5 out of 5)

 1,891 characters

Photo of wspscott
3.25/5  rDev +7.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: gold/copper color with a thin off-white head, no lace
S: A hint of fruitiness (makes me think of a british pale ale) and a hint of hop bitterness.
T: Tastes like an amber ale, not an APA, needs more hops to be an APA. Almost no aroma hops, just bittering hops.
M: Very crisp, drying on the tongue, lots of carbonation.
D: A very easy drinking beer, but not overly memorable. Given that it was $5.99 for a 6-pack, not a bad beer. I would not be upset to find this in a cooler at a party (lots better than BMC), but I probably won't buy again.

 545 characters

Photo of Jasoncolliver
4/5  rDev +32%

Photo of Bigfatbino
3.62/5  rDev +19.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

A = Nice dark amber in the glass, surprisingly so for a pale ale in my experience. decent head, yet quick-fading, with some lacing in the glass

S = a nice blend of sweet, grainy, and and hoppy aroma. Not too pungent, not too bland

T = Sweet on the palate, mild bitter aftertaste, light roasted chocolate/coffee undertones.

M = light on the palate as expected, but not in a "watered down" kind of way. nice medium body in the bubbles.

D = A good beer for someone who is looking to get into the ale variety of beers, especially the pale ales. Not what I would normally drink as I like it stronger, but I wouldn't pass one up either.

 634 characters

Photo of bluejacket74
3.13/5  rDev +3.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12 ounce bottle. Served in a pint glass, the beer pours a clear amber color with a half-inch off-white head. Head retention is average, lacing is good. The aroma is sweet, I can smell bready and caramel malt, but no hops at all. Luckily there are some hops in the taste, I can taste some light citrusy hops along with sweet and bready malt. There's also a slight bitter finish. Mouthfeel/body is light/medium, and a bit thin. Drinkability is OK, it's not hard to drink at all. It's a drinkable beer, but there certainly isn't anything about it that would make me want to buy it again. As far as pale ales go, there's plenty I would drink before this one.

 654 characters

Photo of wingman14
3.45/5  rDev +13.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a dark copper color with a large off white head that fades somewhat quickly, but leaves lacing. The smell is hoppy up front with not much else going on. A few sweet and citrus notes. The taste is a moderately hoppy flavor, a one-sided beer, but done well. It works if you like the taste. A very small bitter aftertaste finish with the hops. A light mouthfeel, frothy and somewhat smooth. Not a very complex beer, but enjoyable, good carbonation. Easy drinker, especially during a hot summer day. A good beer, but nothing amazing.

 535 characters

Photo of GroovyDeus
2.21/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This is a strange one as the first bottle I had, I really enjoyed - however, the second and third (which I am currently on) seem markedly different.

A: Light amber/orange. Good head/head retention on all pours.
S: Citrus/pine hops up front and then something a bit off/funky underneath.
T: Not bad...light. No malt character to speak of (perhaps a lot of corn in the grain bill). Late hopping or low alpha hops...pleasant enough here but lacking balance. Metallic on the back end.
M: A bit overly carb'd for the style. Gives the beer a sharp feel.
O: I'll finish the 6...and not a bad summer beer, but probably won't be back for more.

 637 characters

Photo of mikesgroove
4.43/5  rDev +46.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 5

Picked this one up when I was in Knoxville mostly because I had never heard of it before, and I was very glad that I did. Poured a nice medium amber with a frothy white head that was towering over the glass. Great retention as it slid gracefully down the sides. Very clear with apparent carbonation very visible. The aroma was very nicely hopped with a rich mix of pine and grapefruit with a little big of wheat mixed in. The flavor was great for a pale, very full with a really nice mix of sweetness on top of a very bitter hop profile. Nice carbonation and light to medium feel made this one a session ale for sure. Overall I was not expecting much, but was very pleasantly surprised by this one. A real treat and I am glad I picked it up. This is a quality session pale and you could do a lot worse then this one. I would have to say I defiantly recommend you pick this one up.

 880 characters

Photo of HoustonTX
2.98/5  rDev -1.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This beer actually took me a while to find in the database. After some research, it looks like this beer is exclusively brewed for Kroger's grocery stores.

A pale golden-yellow, with a seemingly vibrant orange hue.

Aroma of salt and pepper, and some florals.

Taste is very clean with some peppery notes. Mild hoppiness, and some florals. Small metallic subtleties, and very weak malt balance overall.

Mouthfeel is normal for the style. As is the drinkability.

A forgettable offering, that is not bad, yet nothing exceptional. Better than your average macro, but definitely not a top-class Pale.

 609 characters

Photo of Deconstructionis
3.36/5  rDev +10.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

When I first saw this at Kroger, I assumed "Moe" was an alias for one the big three. It wasn't until I came home and did a search here that I learened Moe is a contract brewed Kroger brand. I must say it's a decent beer offered at a very good price. I'd describe it as most similar to a toned down Burning River Pale Ale which I think is one the best "value" beers around (and just a plain very good beer). This is even cheaper and in "value" terms would rank very high. Ignoring cost it's an above average pale ale that lacks distinction but but is a good quality beer designed to appeal to a broad spectrum if not those who reject low key quality.

Basically, it's an average looking APA with little aroma and the taste is good without any "flaws" but it just doesn't have a lot of it. It's very drinkable-- a good beer perhaps to buy if you are hosting a lot of people who consume a lot of beer and want to keep costs down without serving something you wouldn't drink yourself.

 983 characters

Photo of wcdoyle
2.41/5  rDev -20.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

While I wasn't too fond of Moe's Amber Ale, I thought I'd dip in again and try the Pale Ale. A brewer, after all, shouldn't be judged on just one beer if they have many selections.

Beer was clear a gold trending toward copper. The head was cream-colored, huge and had decent staying power. Smell was mild-sweet and had very faint touch of orangey citrus. I expected th hops to be sharper and more up front. Taste is bland-sweet (trending toward oversweet). Again, there's litter noticeable hops. A expected a crisper, dry sweetness and a higher hop profile. Moutheel was light and a touch creamy, actually pleasant. That alone--and the fact that the beer isn't terrible--keep me from spiking the drinkability score. I might not buy this again, but it was far from an experiment gone wrong.

 792 characters

Photo of plaid75
3.63/5  rDev +19.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Poured a medium copper hue with a two finger foamy white head. There was good retention and lacing.

The smell featured a light herbal hop and a grainy malt.

The taste consisted of a sharp herbal hop and a moderate graininess.

The mouthfeel was toward the thinner side of the style with a good residual spiciness.

Overall a decent APA. Good if you like herbal hops.

 369 characters

Photo of biggred1
3.48/5  rDev +14.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Clear copper penny colored with a fluffy eggshell head that leaves spiderweb lace behind. Mild floral hops and toasted grain in the nose. Tastes well balanced between citrusy hop and caramel malt, could use a higher concentration of flavor to suit my taste but decent anyway. Light bodied with lively carbonation. This beer is good for what it is.. a six dollar sixpack from Kroger, not close to the best examples of the style but you could do far worse.

 454 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Moe's Backroom Pale Ale from City Brewing Company, LLC
Beer rating: 3.03 out of 5 with 104 ratings