Founders Harvest Ale on tap--was it fresh?

If they kept the Hopslam keg cold from day one, then I think it'll be pretty solid. DIPAs sit better longer in colder storage than a wet hopped IPA.

 

$13.99 4/pk in Ohio that's Barton Baton price. & its always gone in my Michigan stores / Indiana I don't believe gets it & if they did I'd say it would cost even more .
It's very good stuff tho
I'm very price minded do to the fact I can drink 2heart for about a dollar per 12oz on tap ,at home & I don't need be driving & searching all the time.
I will try to get a keg / with about 0% chance

Cheers

 

That's a shame...Harvest beers should be poured as fresh as possible.

 

True. Guess I got scared off after going to a Bell's tap takeover in June that had Hopslam, and finding it to be very malty with only a subtle hop presence. Didn't taste bad, just not what I look for in Hopslam.

 

We definitely get it in Indiana. I usually see it between 9.99-11.99. Looking forward to this year's batch.

 

The fact is it shouldn't have set at all. This is a beer that is made to be drank fresh. Cold or not 9 months is still way too long to keep a keg of hopslam.

 

And it sounds like it was intentional, this is the sad part. Who in their right mind ages and IIpa 9 months on purpose? Crazy people thats who! lol

 

Well, I guess we're crazy because we had 2009 or 2010 (memory is fuzzy) Liberator at our Anny party this year and it was delicious.

 

Sounds more like opinion than fact.

 

Well a bar or restaurant should never age an IPA. If the end consumer wants to that's his choice. IPA's are made to drink fresh. When the hops fade, what's left are shitty malts that were never meant to be tasted in the first place.

 

99% of the time I'd agree that beers meant to accentuate the hop profile should be drank within a few months (some within a few weeks). But the past 2 years I have found Hopslam not very hop-forward when fresh and more honey-forward and sweet to a displeasing degree. Granted I am in Chicago which unfortunately has been getting its Hopslam about 4-6 weeks after release. Anyway, in June I visited Bells and they had 6 month old Hopslam on tap. I almost didn't get one b/c we had a big drinking day in Grand Rapids ahead of us and I assumed Hopslam would be well below its prime. But in fact it was the best and hoppiest it tasted since the first time I had it several years ago. It had dried out and the honey subsided, making the hop flavors more prominent (though the nose was subtle). So, it is possible that a beer like Hopslam (i.e., sweetened with honey) could age in a non-linear way, such that the hop nose dies very quickly within several weeks leaving lots of honey, but then after several months the beer dries out and more hop flavors come through. Or maybe it was just a fluke of the day and my taste buds and what I had eaten and drank before it. When it comes to hoppy beers, bottles from the same six pack can taste notably different from one day to the next (Zombie Dust is really subject to this IMO). That is obviously due to the massive contextual influence on subjective taste experience than any variation in the properties of the beer itself.

As for the OP about Harvest Ale, almost no Harvest Ale is fresh outside of October and November, because the hop harvest is in September. The exception is when southern hemisphere hops are used (harvested in April?), but unless they brew it down there or fly the hops up here immediately, then even those are arguably not a "Harvest" ale. Note that Sierra flies (rather than ships) their New Zealand hops direct to Chico and brew within a week of harvest.

 

I understand the concepts, but it is still opinion that a beer is better sooner than later, not fact. Even when a brewery states you should drink a beer fresh, that is still just their opinion.

 

Dont really worry about it. It's what he does.

 

Technically, you are correct. I just think that anyone who states he/she enjoys an "aged" IPA, it threatens to discredit every other beer related (and possibly more) opinion because I assume that person operates under a lot of delusion (more than most of us anyway).

 

It is opinion as to whether any fresh or old beer is "better". However, it is a fact that the category of "Harvest ale" was created to refer to a beer which accentuates the subtle aromatics of fresh hops. Thus, it is a fact that anything done to a beer (whether in brewing or afterwards like aging) which makes it no longer accentuate freshly harvested hop flavor is, by definition, not a Harvest Ale. Just like it is a fact that a beer brewed with Lager yeast and all Pale malts is not a Stout Ale, no matter what label is on the bottle.

 

I want to believe that but I can't help but be a bit of a snob when it comes to IPA freshness. I don't understand it at all. There are tons of beers out there that do much better with age and have malt bills more suited to less hop character. You're right and so is Sarcastro. I'm just saying what I think when I hear someone likes old IPAs. I don't trust that person's beer opinions much after that. If a bar serves old IPA, I don't go to that bar.

 

So what you are saying is, depending on how a "Harvest Ale" is handled after packaging, the style changes. That is an interesting theory. I have never heard of a beer style changing after the beer is packaged. I always thought of an harvest ale as a hoppy beer that uses freshly harvested hop. I didnt know it was so complicated.

 

That Hopslam was probably a fresh batch you had at the pub Tbone.

 

So you have never had an aged British IPA? Read "Hops and Glory" by Pete Brown and see what age and travel does for one of these. I have homebrewed several of these beers, and they do get better with age.