Esquire: Why the "Session" Beer Trend Makes Zero Sense

I'm pretty well acquainted with the experience of drinking lower-ABV, non-light (read: sub-5% craft offerings, though not, admittedly, English cask milds) beer over a period of hours, reaching into the 6+ pint range, and all I can say is that my judgement -- in a lot of areas, palate included -- wasn't at its sharpest. I don't mistake an increased sense of joviality for a steadfast sense of taste.

Of course, I'm kind of a girly drinker, unable to keep pace with my gallon-guzzling counterparts. So, you know, YMMV and all that.

I dig where you're coming from, and I think your subsequent post nailed it. A time and place for everything, each style with particular things to recommend it. I actually feel a bit bad, as I entirely agree with the Euro crowd about the deliciousness of real session beer and about the fundamental difference in perspective between that cultural backdrop for session beer and the one proffered in the article.

I'm ruffling a few feathers on what is essentially a tangent - about the ability of beer to increase in complexity with each successive pint, particularly over a long period of sustained drinking. Agree to disagree and all that is where we end up, I suppose. But, on the main topic of discussion, I'm on board,

I

 

If you don't think I'll session bourbon you don't know me at all.

 

"....the ability of beer to increase in complexity with each successive pint, particularly over a long period of sustained drinking." I have had a number of English Cask Bitter Ales in a row while visiting Britain. I enjoyed drinking the first pint and I enjoyed drinking the last pint. Just like you they all tasted equally 'good' to me.

Cheers!

 

This is the definition listed on this site:

Any beer that contains no higher than 5 percent ABV, featuring a balance between malt and hop characters (ingredients) and, typically, a clean finish - a combination of which creates a beer with high drinkability. The purpose of a session beer is to allow a beer drinker to have multiple beers, within a reasonable time period or session, without overwhelming the senses or reaching inappropriate levels of intoxication. (Yes, you can drink and enjoy beer without getting drunk.)

The purpose is not ONLY taste but also the ability to have multiple. If these are requirements then there is something at least slightly in contest with the express intent of flavor. Now, as I've said and will again, there may be MANY great beers that fall into this category by happenstance while others are willing to compromise flavor to achieve that drinkability. I am saying that I will choose whatever tastes best REGARDLESS OF ABV, HIGH OR LOW. If it is of higher ABV I will exercise self control but I don't choose a beer because it lets me drink multiples of it.

 

I feel like you've not read all my posts as I've not said higher ABV equates to better taste, only that adding variables to achieve a title creates competing interests.

I wrote this to another but it means something to your post as well:

This is the definition listed on this site:

Any beer that contains no higher than 5 percent ABV, featuring a balance between malt and hop characters (ingredients) and, typically, a clean finish - a combination of which creates a beer with high drinkability. The purpose of a session beer is to allow a beer drinker to have multiple beers, within a reasonable time period or session, without overwhelming the senses or reaching inappropriate levels of intoxication. (Yes, you can drink and enjoy beer without getting drunk.)

The purpose is not ONLY taste but also the ability to have multiple. If these are requirements then there is something at least slightly in contest with the express intent of flavor. Now, as I've said and will again, there may be MANY great beers that fall into this category by happenstance while others are willing to compromise flavor to achieve that drinkability. I am saying that I will choose whatever tastes best REGARDLESS OF ABV, HIGH OR LOW. If it is of higher ABV I will exercise self control but I don't choose a beer because it lets me drink multiples of it.

 

So would you also say that the intent of achieving balance is in contest with "the express intent of flavor?"

 

I think that if I were making a beer then I would want to create something with the best flavor possible (while maintaining all legitimate safety concerns - no point in it tasting delicious if you die after drinking it) and I think that if you set out with an additional goal in mind it could greatly impact the other goal.

Like I said in a previous post, if I make a beer that tastes great at 14%, and even better at 9%, then worse at 4%, I would keep it at 9% to keep that ideal taste. I have also said that there are beers whose best possible state may be at the 4% or below range. At that point their belonging to the session category is entirely incidental and not the intent of the creator - taste remains the primary concern.

Now if you mean balance in some other way then I would say that it is a part of flavor, like balancing hop with malt to get a smoother taste profile, but those that are going into this process saying "I need to make something below 4% to get the session beer title." are very likely not as concerned with making the best tasting brew possible. They are probably intent on making the best tasting brew under 4% possible, and for me as a consumer, I just want to drink what tastes best and use my own common sense to decide how many I can drink in a span of time. I don't go out seeking a beer thinking "I need something at X ABV so I can drink more tonight.", I think "I want to find the best tasting beer I can that fits the mood I am in." This could be a high ABV beer or a low one but the ability to drink more of them is not important to me.

 

So, does the goal of achieving balance fit that scenario for you or not? Brewers certainly "sacrifice" certain flavors (which, when taken individually, can be excellent) they could extract from malt, hops, and yeast in order to achieve a greater balance.

 

I think there is an explicit difference when you state a target before ever tasting it. If I said I NEED this brew to be over 120 IBUs before considering if it will impact that balance of flavor then I think there is another goal in play than just making the best beer possible.

 

So if I (or, say, Shakespeare) go into writing a poem saying we are going to follow the guidelines of the sonnet form, are we of necessity going to limit our ability to write the best poem possible?

EDIT: many times an artist's (or brewer's) true skills are best showcased precisely when they go into a project with set constraints.

 

I would contend that yes, you are. If you create absolute, unmoving, limitations then you are closing doors prior to ever beginning. You may still write an amazing sonnet but it may have the potential to be better and you will never know due to these restrictions.

 

See my edit, above. The truest showcases of a brewer's skill are often found when they go into a project with specific constraints. Hell, they are necessarily constrained my the basic ingredients of beer anyway. Honestly, I can't see how your set of parameters (for creating something "better") is even possible in anything but the theoretical sense. And if the theoretical is all you are relying on here, there's no point in continuing the discussion.

 

I would disagree, you can have a vision without strict parameters. The difference is that one is completely unmoving regardless of any oppirtunty that may present possible improvement. Shakespeare was a genius because he ignored typical constraints going as far as inventing his own words to suit a purpose. Having a vision is not the same as creating silly rules that you absolutely cannot break or even bend.

 

Brewing beer involves strict, unmoving parameters regardless.

 

SOME aspects of brewing are constrained by scientific reactions, there is no such thing imposed by natural laws about ABV, IBUs, or any other measurement. Many here feel that the old Germanic requirements if limiting beer to strictly three(?) core ingredients are silly and limiting, if that is the case then one must admit that any constraint added that is not necessary is also limiting.

 

Right. Why should one even be required to utilize, say, malted barley if grapes "taste better?" This is ridiculous (and almost as stupid as the Esquire article itself). Going to say goodnight now.

 

Well there is a difference between being a beer and then further restriction within the category of beverage that is beer. I have to assume then that you are opposed to anything other than those core ingredients as even that strays from the strictest criteria. We can continue this over PM too of you'd like, if not then cheers! Time for me to sleep a bit too.

 

You really should do additional research outside of reading the definition on BA. Although the definition "Any beer that contains no higher than 5 percent ABV, featuring a balance between malt and hop characters (ingredients) and, typically, a clean finish - a combination of which creates a beer with high drinkability." is accurate (with the exception of the ABV limit being that arbitrarily chosen by this site), the additional information is mostly opinion.

Additionally, just because a beer is balanced enough to enjoy for multiple pints does not require a person to have multiple pints. I will often choose a session beer simply because I want something that I really enjoy. And I will only have one.

 

Of course I agree with you that one need not have more than one. I am simply referencing the definition on here to show that there is indeed dissenting opinion on what session beer truly means. I have done research outside of BA (but thank you for your condescension) and I know the word varies, however I need some touchstone for conversation sake and since we all belong to this site it seems a fair one to start with. You say that their definition is incorrect but I don't see how you can justify your definition being any better outside of either opinion or a cultural norm you are used to. I've said before that of the definition of session is only a beer that is 5% ABV (which MANY would disagree with you on since they think it is 4%) or below then I take no issue. However the term session, if it is indeed derived from a drinking session, will carry with it some insinuation of drinking many and that appears to be where the confusion is. Many American brewers are even advertising them as "a beer you can drink all day", further revealing that intent.

I feel like I am starting to sound like a broken record but here I will say these points again:

I like and even love many beers below 5% ABV

I do NOT think that higher ABV = more or better flavor

I DO think that many traditional Euro session beers fall into the session category by pure happenstance, they simply are in their best possible form for taste at a lower ABV, while many American brewers are intentionally targeting that ABV and therefore have (at least to a degree) another variable competing with flavor alone.

I PERSONALLY choose whatever beer I think will taste best be it at a high or low ABV, and simply adjust my drinking habits to suit the situation. I don't see a circumstance where I would need to be drinking a beer constantly. I know you may not see the definition of session this way but many do so I feel it is worth addressing.

 

I agree, and this is just really a marketing thing, trying to get the MBC crowd to "cross the line" into craft without all those scary strong flavors and high ABV. This is a way for craft to capture the fringe MBC... and its probably going to be a gateway beer style into the serious craft crowd for many.

Quality ≠ ABV. I enjoy the style/flavor/complexity/mouthfeel of my beers... while most beer that I enjoy has a higher ABV, I would be happy drinking them @4% if they had all the same characteristics otherwise. But I think the alcohol is a direct corollary to some of the characteristics I enjoy about the beers, and they can not be "the same" at a lower ABV.

I would pay more for a beer that I like over a beer with more alcohol that I don't like.