Utica Club | Matt Brewing Company / Saranac Brewery
Brewed by:
Matt Brewing Company / Saranac Brewery
New York, United States
saranac.com
Style: American Adjunct Lager
Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.00%
Availability: Year-round
Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.
Added by IrishRedRock on 09-25-2002
HISTOGRAM
View: Beers | Place Reviews
Ratings: 165 | Reviews: 65
Reviews by TheTrevor:
2.65/5 rDev -4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
This can of beer is dented and came out of a 12-pack that was battered and torn, which seems oddly appropriate. This beer poured a light yellow witha big head that didn't last long and lots of visible carbonation after a vigorous pour. The smell is corny and grainy with a hint of metallic. The taste is a run of the mill macro beer. Sweet corn up front and fairly unassuming finish. The mouthfeel is watery but has enough carbonation to be refreshing on a hot day and drinkability is the order of the day for this overly named beer. It's basically a baseline for every boring run of the mill American macrobrew, and is useful in that regard.
642 characters
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
This can of beer is dented and came out of a 12-pack that was battered and torn, which seems oddly appropriate. This beer poured a light yellow witha big head that didn't last long and lots of visible carbonation after a vigorous pour. The smell is corny and grainy with a hint of metallic. The taste is a run of the mill macro beer. Sweet corn up front and fairly unassuming finish. The mouthfeel is watery but has enough carbonation to be refreshing on a hot day and drinkability is the order of the day for this overly named beer. It's basically a baseline for every boring run of the mill American macrobrew, and is useful in that regard.
642 characters
More User Reviews:
1.22/5 rDev -55.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1
Got this sample from a guy that does marketing for breweries. Apparently there's going to be a big push to revitalize the Utica brand. Hmm ... why?
UC comes in a 12oz brown bottle. "Brewed from the best quality malt, grains, and choicest hopes. Absolutely pure." This was also the first beer sold in the US after prohibition. Labeled as "XX Pure" and a "Pilsener Lager Beer" ... can we get a bit more redundant?
Pours a bright and clear pale golden beer. Highly carbonated and capped with a foamy, slightly sticky, pure white head.
Metallic aroma. Cooked veggies. Musty. Sweet corn and grain. Not very inviting, to say the least.
Smooth-bodied, light and creamy on the palate. Consistency is extremely thin, as are all characteristics of this beer. Grainy and oddly sweet with notes of veggies (mostly corn) that stick to the palate with an oily feel. More metallic and musty notes. No real bitterness to talk about. Finish is way too dominate, odd and unpalatable. Flavours seem un-beer-like. Where's the crispness? Where's the refreshment?
In short, this beer is quite hard to stick down your neck. In fact, I'm wincing with each sip, hoping to end this review. If you're looking for an post-Prohibition American Pils, there's much better examples ... like Schlitz, PBR or even a Bud. Skip UC.
1,310 characters
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1
Got this sample from a guy that does marketing for breweries. Apparently there's going to be a big push to revitalize the Utica brand. Hmm ... why?
UC comes in a 12oz brown bottle. "Brewed from the best quality malt, grains, and choicest hopes. Absolutely pure." This was also the first beer sold in the US after prohibition. Labeled as "XX Pure" and a "Pilsener Lager Beer" ... can we get a bit more redundant?
Pours a bright and clear pale golden beer. Highly carbonated and capped with a foamy, slightly sticky, pure white head.
Metallic aroma. Cooked veggies. Musty. Sweet corn and grain. Not very inviting, to say the least.
Smooth-bodied, light and creamy on the palate. Consistency is extremely thin, as are all characteristics of this beer. Grainy and oddly sweet with notes of veggies (mostly corn) that stick to the palate with an oily feel. More metallic and musty notes. No real bitterness to talk about. Finish is way too dominate, odd and unpalatable. Flavours seem un-beer-like. Where's the crispness? Where's the refreshment?
In short, this beer is quite hard to stick down your neck. In fact, I'm wincing with each sip, hoping to end this review. If you're looking for an post-Prohibition American Pils, there's much better examples ... like Schlitz, PBR or even a Bud. Skip UC.
1,310 characters
2.03/5 rDev -26.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
How did I find this here in North Carolina?A staple of my father in law in Buffalo back in the day,pours a clear translusant yellow with a decent head,aroma of sweet cooked corn and wet carpet.Taste is pretty sweet and grainy pretty cloying after a few drinks.Not much of a beer here no better than the big domestic macros but now I can offer my father in law a UC.
365 characters
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
How did I find this here in North Carolina?A staple of my father in law in Buffalo back in the day,pours a clear translusant yellow with a decent head,aroma of sweet cooked corn and wet carpet.Taste is pretty sweet and grainy pretty cloying after a few drinks.Not much of a beer here no better than the big domestic macros but now I can offer my father in law a UC.
365 characters
3.7/5 rDev +34.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Review from BeerAdvocate Magazine Issue #44 (Sep 2010):
Fizzy head, decent amount of lace though. Shiny yellow clarity. Dried grass, cooked veggies and a touch of apple skin in the nose. Dry mouthfeel with a bitty, almost fluffy light body. Clean palate, very clean. Grainy with dried grass, bread crust and cooked cereal flavors throughout. Hop bitterness is there to balance; not much flavor to account for. Cooked veggies and a mild mineral or salty hints in the dry finish. Super clean, with enough flavor to certainly rival many of the other Retro Lagers hyped these days.
579 characters
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Review from BeerAdvocate Magazine Issue #44 (Sep 2010):
Fizzy head, decent amount of lace though. Shiny yellow clarity. Dried grass, cooked veggies and a touch of apple skin in the nose. Dry mouthfeel with a bitty, almost fluffy light body. Clean palate, very clean. Grainy with dried grass, bread crust and cooked cereal flavors throughout. Hop bitterness is there to balance; not much flavor to account for. Cooked veggies and a mild mineral or salty hints in the dry finish. Super clean, with enough flavor to certainly rival many of the other Retro Lagers hyped these days.
579 characters
3.26/5 rDev +18.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3
Having been originally from upstate NY, long before I was of age, I had to try this one when I found it in an obscure venue nearby. Either I got an old/bad batch, or the mediocre ratings are merited. I would try it again if I ever went back that way.
252 characters
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3
Having been originally from upstate NY, long before I was of age, I had to try this one when I found it in an obscure venue nearby. Either I got an old/bad batch, or the mediocre ratings are merited. I would try it again if I ever went back that way.
252 characters
1.36/5 rDev -50.7%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
Poured into a pub glass, this beer was slightly better than a bud light, and worse than just about anything I wouldn't play beer pong with. Look, taste, and feel was very similar to any BMC and the color reminds me of Michelob Light. For taste, literally anything by Great Lakes is far better. This is the 3rd best lager I've had this week; I had four and one was skunked.
372 characters
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
Poured into a pub glass, this beer was slightly better than a bud light, and worse than just about anything I wouldn't play beer pong with. Look, taste, and feel was very similar to any BMC and the color reminds me of Michelob Light. For taste, literally anything by Great Lakes is far better. This is the 3rd best lager I've had this week; I had four and one was skunked.
372 characters
3.99/5 rDev +44.6%
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4
20 oz pint can poured into an imperial pilsner glass
Listen fellow BA's : this is an American adjunct lager, no it's not going to have the crazy complexity or hop blast like your last New England style ipa had...lets keep in mind the style guidlines and take it into consideration within the review. Just sayin'.
Straight clear, but deep golden color. Correct amount of carbonation that forms a crystal white foam top that settles down to a slight, scattered covering.
The nose is spot-on for the style, the classicly buttery and herbal tinted malt, herb and spice, maybe slightly earthy hops, sour(very subtle banana) and sweet, funk from the lager yeast all make it just exactly what you'd hope for in a classic lager. The grainy aroma is impressive...various grains, like wheat, light malt, corn and rice. It all adds up to a pretty perfect nose for this classic American style.
This review for me, is more about how the Utica Club holds up to other versions of the same style. I personally really enjoy the drinkability and historic nature of this style, so I can easily put myself back to 1933, sitting at the club bar and really enjoying this stuff.
Light, crisp and tasty malt hits first, the grains and whatever adjuncts are in this mingle seemlessly. Charred grasses, hay, corn, rice etc...with zero "funky" or "off" flavors you find with bigger, brand pilsners like Bud...Coors etc. No metallic funk here folks! The hops have a slightly bigger effect with this one, dry earthy tones, very herbal and slightly grassy tones are pretty impressive for this style. "Choicest" hops!! Lol.
Hearty, in a light way overall impression...the flavor's are bold for the style. I can see why this stuff was THE shit back, just shortly after prohibition ended. I'm diggin it. And keeps my rastebuds refreshed for my next big IPA !
1,836 characters
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4
20 oz pint can poured into an imperial pilsner glass
Listen fellow BA's : this is an American adjunct lager, no it's not going to have the crazy complexity or hop blast like your last New England style ipa had...lets keep in mind the style guidlines and take it into consideration within the review. Just sayin'.
Straight clear, but deep golden color. Correct amount of carbonation that forms a crystal white foam top that settles down to a slight, scattered covering.
The nose is spot-on for the style, the classicly buttery and herbal tinted malt, herb and spice, maybe slightly earthy hops, sour(very subtle banana) and sweet, funk from the lager yeast all make it just exactly what you'd hope for in a classic lager. The grainy aroma is impressive...various grains, like wheat, light malt, corn and rice. It all adds up to a pretty perfect nose for this classic American style.
This review for me, is more about how the Utica Club holds up to other versions of the same style. I personally really enjoy the drinkability and historic nature of this style, so I can easily put myself back to 1933, sitting at the club bar and really enjoying this stuff.
Light, crisp and tasty malt hits first, the grains and whatever adjuncts are in this mingle seemlessly. Charred grasses, hay, corn, rice etc...with zero "funky" or "off" flavors you find with bigger, brand pilsners like Bud...Coors etc. No metallic funk here folks! The hops have a slightly bigger effect with this one, dry earthy tones, very herbal and slightly grassy tones are pretty impressive for this style. "Choicest" hops!! Lol.
Hearty, in a light way overall impression...the flavor's are bold for the style. I can see why this stuff was THE shit back, just shortly after prohibition ended. I'm diggin it. And keeps my rastebuds refreshed for my next big IPA !
1,836 characters
1.71/5 rDev -38%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
Pours a clear golden yellow with a 1/4" of head and no retention. Smells of grains, lager yeast, and metal. Taste is pure grains and metal. Mouthfeel is very light with moderate carbonation.
Bought this at Whole Foods for $1 for the 12oz. I'll gamble $1 anytime. This is a one and done for me.
294 characters
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2
Pours a clear golden yellow with a 1/4" of head and no retention. Smells of grains, lager yeast, and metal. Taste is pure grains and metal. Mouthfeel is very light with moderate carbonation.
Bought this at Whole Foods for $1 for the 12oz. I'll gamble $1 anytime. This is a one and done for me.
294 characters
3.59/5 rDev +30.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
look: 4 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
4.25/5 rDev +54%
look: 4.25 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4.25 | overall: 4.25
look: 4.25 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4.25 | overall: 4.25
3.15/5 rDev +14.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4
Thanks to woodychandler for the trade.Poured from a 12 oz. can. Has a rich golden color with a 1/2 inch head. Smell is sweet, some notes of corn. Taste is very mild, light malts, not a whole lot to it. Feels light in the mouth and is very drinkable. Overall this makes for a fairly decent beer.
294 characters
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4
Thanks to woodychandler for the trade.Poured from a 12 oz. can. Has a rich golden color with a 1/2 inch head. Smell is sweet, some notes of corn. Taste is very mild, light malts, not a whole lot to it. Feels light in the mouth and is very drinkable. Overall this makes for a fairly decent beer.
294 characters
3.5/5 rDev +26.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
From the 12 fl. oz. can marked 2329-1346. Sampled on September 29, 2009. The pour is a golden yellow with a thin white head that diminishes in under one minute. The aroma is of sweet caramel and malts with a dash of hops. The mouthfeel is smooth like honey and of adequate quality. The flavor also emphasizes the sweet malty ingredient with some muted hops taking up the rear. This was not all that bad for a cheap beer. Gotta love the classics!
445 characters
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
From the 12 fl. oz. can marked 2329-1346. Sampled on September 29, 2009. The pour is a golden yellow with a thin white head that diminishes in under one minute. The aroma is of sweet caramel and malts with a dash of hops. The mouthfeel is smooth like honey and of adequate quality. The flavor also emphasizes the sweet malty ingredient with some muted hops taking up the rear. This was not all that bad for a cheap beer. Gotta love the classics!
445 characters
1.59/5 rDev -42.4%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5
A: Light, pale golden yellow, bright but not 100% clear. Some rising bubbles. Small short lived white head that leaves basically no lacing.
S: Pretty clean, but seems like a grainy malt liquor. Faint, but it has an edge in a not appealing way.
T: Husky grain and a bit of grainy sweetness without much in the way of maltiness. Heavy handed adjunct city with plenty of that cooked corn/veggy "goodness." Does have some hop bitterness, but not much defined character. Maybe starts out a little minty and then goes medicinal in an astringent way. It is beer, but is very blah.
M: Rather thin body with active, fizzy CO2. Astringent edge and a tad puckery.
D: Lawnmower beer, but not even in a good way. "Pilsener Lager Beer" It sounds like it is even trying to convice itself. Seems constructed - as if it were made from concentrate - with angular, un-melding flavors and bit astringent. There are significantly better options that are just as cheap.
952 characters
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5
A: Light, pale golden yellow, bright but not 100% clear. Some rising bubbles. Small short lived white head that leaves basically no lacing.
S: Pretty clean, but seems like a grainy malt liquor. Faint, but it has an edge in a not appealing way.
T: Husky grain and a bit of grainy sweetness without much in the way of maltiness. Heavy handed adjunct city with plenty of that cooked corn/veggy "goodness." Does have some hop bitterness, but not much defined character. Maybe starts out a little minty and then goes medicinal in an astringent way. It is beer, but is very blah.
M: Rather thin body with active, fizzy CO2. Astringent edge and a tad puckery.
D: Lawnmower beer, but not even in a good way. "Pilsener Lager Beer" It sounds like it is even trying to convice itself. Seems constructed - as if it were made from concentrate - with angular, un-melding flavors and bit astringent. There are significantly better options that are just as cheap.
952 characters
2.71/5 rDev -1.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
I'm not sure how to review something like this anymore. Nothing going on here. Its easy drinking for a hot day. Nothing special, Taste just like a BMC. very cheap.
163 characters
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
I'm not sure how to review something like this anymore. Nothing going on here. Its easy drinking for a hot day. Nothing special, Taste just like a BMC. very cheap.
163 characters
3.38/5 rDev +22.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Tastes like a number of other cheap macro style beers. Not great but not bad and goes down really well if you're planning on putting a good dent into a case.
158 characters
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Tastes like a number of other cheap macro style beers. Not great but not bad and goes down really well if you're planning on putting a good dent into a case.
158 characters
2.5/5 rDev -9.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5
1.05/5 rDev -62%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1
A nightmare of a beer. I couldn't believe that someone was still brewing this garbage. I hated this beer when I was a poor college student and would drink almost anything cheap. I hate it more now. It is a pale yellow, rank smelling, foul tasting, mess. The only thing that I can think of that would be worse would be UC Light. There oughta be a law.
350 characters
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1
A nightmare of a beer. I couldn't believe that someone was still brewing this garbage. I hated this beer when I was a poor college student and would drink almost anything cheap. I hate it more now. It is a pale yellow, rank smelling, foul tasting, mess. The only thing that I can think of that would be worse would be UC Light. There oughta be a law.
350 characters
2.07/5 rDev -25%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2
Didn't pour it out, but if I were to guess, this is probably fizzy and yellow looking.
Smells like essentially nothing, a bit of metal and sweet corn.
This essentially just tastes like corn and carbonation, and not much else. Cold, it just tastes kind of crisp and boring, as it warms, it becomes a weird melange of creamed corn, cooked veggies, and metal. Meh.
This has a light bodied and crisp mouthfeel, and a higher level of carbonation.
Not horrible, but not very good at all either.
493 characters
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2
Didn't pour it out, but if I were to guess, this is probably fizzy and yellow looking.
Smells like essentially nothing, a bit of metal and sweet corn.
This essentially just tastes like corn and carbonation, and not much else. Cold, it just tastes kind of crisp and boring, as it warms, it becomes a weird melange of creamed corn, cooked veggies, and metal. Meh.
This has a light bodied and crisp mouthfeel, and a higher level of carbonation.
Not horrible, but not very good at all either.
493 characters
Utica Club from Matt Brewing Company / Saranac Brewery
Beer rating:
2.76 out of
5 with
165 ratings
0 characters. We love reviews! Turn your rating into one with ≥ 150 characters.
In English, explain why you're giving this rating. Your review must discuss the beer's attributes (look, smell, taste, feel) and your overall impression in order to indicate that you have legitimately tried the beer. Nonconstructive reviews may be removed without notice and action may be taken on your account.