First Stone Enjoy By Experience (2.14.15)

I posted in another thread my response to this but you were not satisfied with that post.

Cheers!

 

I normally like Stone's hoppy beers...and for that matter, Stone's beers in general, but I'm just not a fan of the Enjoy By series. Any of them, although I do think they vary at least a little from batch to batch. I've had 4 different versions going back a few years. Too much of that oniony ammonia character.

 

Always great to see the polarized opinions on Enjoy By (and really Stone in general). I find a ton of value in the series...great beer and usually found at a fairly low bomber price (comparatively to the 'top' IPAs on my list). I think I had my first back in 2013...04-01 if I recall correctly.

 

Loved 2.14.15. One of my favorite, if not my favorite, batches of Enjoy By.

 

The 2.14.15 has been reminding me of Alpine Nelson (which I've had on tap at Alpine Beer Co.). It's probably just me, but I absolutely loved it.

 

Not sure, but my palate has not found much difference from each batch. They are all wonderful and congrats to all of you who have such amazing palates to pick them a part batch to batch. My thoughts is the beer is the same, but your taste buds are evolving over time.

 

Just to clarify-
Like @zid pointed out the recipe doesn't change, and I think it's right that people do keep this in mind. But that doesn't mean that there aren't slight differences from batch to batch, just as there are with other beers that rely on such a great deal of late/dry hopping. Hops are a variable, and sometimes yeast is as well; and in this case, a blend of hops are used which will offer another sort of variable. This can lead to how sometimes the final product hits the bullseye, and sometimes it is slightly off in any direction (or, the balance can be slightly skewed towards the citrus, tropical, dank, etc.). I am sure it also impacts the manner in which some batches will change over time.

My experience is that if you tracked a similar high gravity IIPA, it will do a lot of the same stuff, within reason. Much of this is blown way out of proportion on here, and a person who thinks a beer goes from 'mind-blowing' to 'drain-pour' is usually compounding things with other variables besides the beer, but just because it is exaggerated doesn't mean people aren't picking up on something.

Anyway, my answer is that Enjoy By isn't all that unique; I'm just not sure if that is the same point that @JackHorzempa was also making.

 

“Hops are a variable…”

“…a blend of hops are used which will offer another sort of variable.”

“This can lead to how sometimes the final product hits the bullseye, and sometimes it is slightly off in any direction…”

Michael in a recent past thread I posted:

The ‘challenge’ with hops (and hop forward beers) is that hop characteristics/qualities will vary on where the hops are grown (a terroir effect akin to wine grapes), the particular hop crop, the time they are harvested in a given crop year (early harvest, late harvest, etc.), … There is lots of great information in the book For the Love of Hops by Stan Hieronymus.

In a beer like Enjoy By which utilizes such a large number of hop varieties (vs. a beer like SNPA which uses just three varieties; Magnum & Perle for bittering and Cascades for finishing) the aspects detailed above can indeed have an noticeable impact on the aroma/flavor of a given release of Enjoy By beer.

I personally would not use the words “profound” or “major” to describe the differences from batch to batch but I do indeed notice a difference. As others have posted in this thread, the latest release of Enjoy By 12.26.14 was not a favorite of mine; I enjoyed prior releases much better.

So, you tell me whether: “I'm just not sure if that is the same point that JackHorzempa was also making.”

Cheers!

 

I'd say we're on the same page wrt Enjoy By; I just didn't know if you were also addressing the point of whether Enjoy By is unique in that respect, which is where the discussion seems to have been going.

I'm guessing you haven't had the 2-14-15 batch. That one did seem to favor the dankness, which is probably why it is getting a more favorable response. I had a draught growler of the 12-26-14, and really enjoyed it, but did notice slight differences with the latest one.

 

This reality seems to be lost on a fair number of posters here. Every (identical) release seems to bring the inane "i like this one more/less than the last batch" banter. Total nonsense. If there is a perceptible difference (IF) it is due to how the beer was handled in its journey between San Diego & your mouth.

 

Michael,

Above I did report that I have had a draft glass of the 2-14-15, I will repeat it again for you:

"...while I enjoyed this most recent release (2-14-15) I picked up some flavors that were reminiscent of petroleum that I have never experienced in prior releases; the level of petroleum flavor was low but perceptible."

I very much appreciate your statement of "I'd say we're on the same page wrt Enjoy By.."

I have posted my thoughts on the various batches of Enjoy By but I received 'push back' by both Zid and LambicPentameter. I very much appreciate that at least you understand and agree with me.

Cheers!

Jack

 

Well said @TongoRad
My gut tells me that if each release of Ruination was marked with a graphically dominant volume number (Ruination Vol 56, Ruination Vol 57, etc.), we'd see a massive spike in posts with declarations of good and bad batches. This is not to suggest that differences that are picked up by @JackHorzempa , yourself and many others are not actual. People can decide how much they want to buy into each individual perspective.

 

I believe this has just been good conversation. Hope you can see it like that too.

Cheers!

 

From top to bottom I think Stone is one of the best all around breweries

 

Agreed and cheers!

 

I check BA at work all the time, and I'm sure I am not alone. The constant alerts about this thread made me go and grab another bottle of 2/14/15, because while I enjoyed it, it wasn't blowing me away like it has been for so many. And I have to change my tune- really digging this one as much as any from last year. 4/20/14 is now legendary, but I loved 7/4/14 as well. It's fun to try to taste the subtle differences(or not so subtle sometimes, I didn't like 12/5/14 as much as most other dates). I may grab one more bottle of 2/14 and do a side by side with Pi when that hits just to see how much difference 35 days makes. Also, as a side note- local distributor(freaking PA) has EJ 12/26/14 for $60 a case. $5 a bottle. Worth it? @StoneBrewingCo- weigh in for me? It's 6 weeks past prime....

 

Somewhat related here...given all of the thoughts on which date was/is best, why are all of the Enjoy By series lumped into one beer posting for ratings and reviews?

Anchor's Christmas Ale comes to mind in terms of having a different beer created for each release.

 

2 14 15 smell was fantastic. For me taste didn't live up to aroma. Good. But I could take that aroma all day. Just my opinion

 

Because the recipe doesn't change from release to release. I'm pretty sure it has only changed once--the aforementioned switch from Nelson hops due to supply issues. Having a different entry for each year would be like having an entry for every batch of any individual beer.

As far as I'm aware, Anchor Christmas Ale actually changes recipe from year to year.

 

Reading some of these comments in this thread almost gives validity to the Bud Super Bowl commercial. I think some are trying too hard to find differences from batch to batch. When I start reading about people picking up "petroleum flavors" in certain batches, I have to scratch my head and wonder. How would anyone know what petroleum tastes like? Any difference I get from batch to batch of Enjoy By (or any other batch of any beer), I chalk up to what I am eating, how I feel that day, how it was stored, the temp it is served at, etc.