Should barrel-aged Quads be recategorized?

See my post #9 above- there is already long precedence of separating out "flavored" beers, whether it is spices, smoke, herbs, fruit added to the base beer. Bourbon is an added flavor, just like those. So is coffee, fwiw. Despite your admirable flight into the absurd, even more plainly absurd things are actually happening right now such as the top-rated Schwartzbier's being an espresso-schwartzbier .

As I also pointed out, wood- aged beers (such as an Oak-aged Pale Ale) are also currently a separate classification, so this would seem to be a sensible extension of that principle.

Anyway, we are not talking about 'features' here, we are addressing supplementary characteristics.

 

Barrel aging is almost "unfair" when it comes to comparing beers in the same style. It's like a beer that is on performance enhancing drugs.

 

Features = supplementary characteristics, etc. e.g., cask dispense is as much of a supplementary characteristic as barrel aging.

Yes in the BJCP for judging purposes there is a category of wood aged and that is a generic category that should include barrels that held all kinds of different prior liquids, new barrels, chips, all kinds of wooden tanks (lined with pitch or not), beechwood staves, etc., so the problem of finding barrel aged stouts would still exist much as there is confusion today between oak aged and barrel aged.

And I suggest that an equally good case can be made for fresh hop/wet hop versions of beers being different enough to justify their own category as well.

Edit: Just because an already flawed system allows for oddities doesn't thereby justify perpetuating and extending the flaws, potentially compounding them....

 

The first beer that was labeled as a Quadrupel (Quad) was La Trappe Quadrupel by De Koningshoeven Brewery. That sure sounds like a Belgian beer to me.

Cheers!

 

Ahh, linguistic confusion, a never ending problem. "Sounds like" can sometimes be a problem. De Koningshoeven is a Dutch Trappist brewery....

 

I think that we can agree that a Trappist Brewery located in Europe is not American: "A 'Quad' is a modern American 'style'."

Cheers!

 

Just because one brewery calls one of its beers a "quad" doesn't mean that they made it prescriptive and created a "style."

 

Since De Koningshoeven Brewery was the first brewery to label their beer as Quadrupel, that is pretty influential.

Cheers!

 

It does provide a precedent for someone who is interested in creating a prescriptive "style" out of their descriptive term, but it doesn't create a style just by labeling. If it did, then there's be literally tens of thousands of "styles" out there....

 

Jack- just to play devil's advocate for a second, it was so influential that none of the other Quads resemble it as much as they do BSDAs.

 

Unless, of course the term was already in use in the US before the Brewery named their beer and other examples of what are now called quads were brewed before the La Trappe Quad. Time for a history and date checking expedition.

Edit: Time for a bit of goggling here.

 

I would simply solve that by having a few sub-categories of "Wood Aged Beer"- separating those that only get their characteristics from the wood from those that also get character from what was stored in there previously.

I'm still seeing a difference between method of production (or dispense), even though they can lead to different experiences, and flavored beers, the whole purpose of which is to alter the base beer.

 

I shall await your research.

Cheers!

 

Don't hold your breath waiting. My curiosity isn't strong enough to over-ride the "honey-do" list.

 

The result of my google search was that the first Quadrupel was produced by De Koningshoeven Brewery but maybe you will find other information?

Cheers!

 

The first beer using Quadrupel in the name was the La Trappe. But since the Belgians and Dutch are often quite casual about "styles" and often not thinking of their beers that way, the issue is where/when/by whom was the category "quadrupel" first entered into a categorization scheme. The first beer using the name isn't necessarily the place where the category name originates. That's why its an interesting puzzle.

 

I would not classify either Belgian Strong Dark Ales or Quads as being American style beers.

Cheers!

 

On that point I'd be in total agreement, since the exemplars are always European in origin.

Personally, I'd just consider it a high gravity sub-style of BSDAs at this point here in the States, where the horse is out of the barn already.

 

FWIW, what I have posted previously:

“Quads are a subcategory of BSDA's.

When I purchase a Quad I have an expectation it will be in the upper alcohol range of a BSDA (which is 8-11% ABV per the BJCP). So, I personally expect a Quad to be around 10-11% ABV. If somebody brewed a dark Belgian beer with something like 8-10% ABV I would expect that to be classified as a BSDA. If the brewer wants to make a dark Belgian beer with something like 10-11% ABV and call it a BSDA that would be OK with me as well. Just don’t call an 8% ABV beer a Quad.”

My expectations as detailed above apply to beers brewed in Europe and elsewhere.

Cheers!