March 2016 Cellar Reviews

That is one full snifter. Did you actually sample the beer that way, or just fill it up all the way after for the sake of how you wanted the picture to come out?

 

12oz proper glass
12oz bottle of beer
It seemed like the right thing to do...

I dont like to think of it as "sampling" as much as "drinking" my favorite beer from one of my favorite breweries.

 

2 oz pours split between 6 or more people or get the fuck out

 

Maybe I should have said "savoring" or something along those lines. I don't want to turn this into a proper glassware discussion, and much less tell you how to drink your beer, but it seems to defeat the purpose of using a snifter if you can't put your nose into it (aka "sniffing"). I figure if you are going to drink your favorite beer from your favorite brewery you would want to take full advantage of the glass you have to get as much flavor out of the beer as you can.

PS: yes I am a terrible beer snob, begin the vilification.

 

#tickerz4lyf

 

I think I get what you are saying. Even with the glass completely full this is a bold enough beer that it offers up plenty of aromatics without having to stick your nose inside of it. But if it matters and you want to know, after 2-3 sips there was plenty of room in the glass for me to swirl and nose it up to my hearts delight.

To me, its more important to get all the goodness into your glass in 1 pour leaving the 5 years of sediment behind. (And while we are being honest here, ill admit that I drank that too directly from the bottle.)

 

Three year §ucaba vertical ('14, '15, '16). I don't get a ton of differences between the '15 and '16, though I think I have a slight preference for the '16, which was a touch sweeter (though nowhere near Stickee Monkee territory) and richer. The '14 was pretty strikingly different, however, with a lot more in the way of berry/dark chocolate. The '14 was probably my favorite overall—yet more evidence against the people who say FW doesn't age well. I'll be repeating this vertical (presumably alongside a '17) next year, so we'll see how another year treats these.

 

2012 vintage J.W. Lees Harvest Ale. It poured very nice orange color with nice carbonation. The aroma was subtle sweet
as was the flavor with a fruity taste - maybe apricot? It was very good, but definitely not a s sweet as the as fresher cask aged versions I've had.

 

Clown Shoes Hoppy Feet
Found this one in the back of the GF's fridge and figured it would be an interesting drink since, I believe, some black IPAs could be aged to turn into porters/stouts.

• Bottled on 9/12/2013
• Pours a black two finger head that lingers for quite a while.
• Smells like a really hoppy stout/porter. Really, no bitterness from the hops is present in the nose, at least that I can tell. Mostly a sweet nose, but I can't tell if that's all malt or some hops left.
• Tastes like a hoppy porter. Nice bit of roast present in the finish. Definitely at a weird in-between IPA and Porter phase.
• Really carbonated but smooth mouthfeel. Weird that it's stayed this carbonated this long after bottling.

Overall, I have to give it a 0.5 / 5 for the style, but a 4/5 for the back of fridge shelf life of the beer itself. Really, the beer was still drinkable after 2.5 years.

 

Ommegang Chocolate Indulgence

Bottled: 2007 | Cellared: 04/14/2010 | Enjoyed: 12/30/2015

I haven't been around the forum much lately, so this one is from a few months back... but it's the last cellared beer I've had nonetheless.

Thoughts:

This never had an overpowering amount of chocolate to begin with, but the traditional notes did fade further into the background. However, it evolved enough to add a very firm (and tasty) backbone to the former elder statesman of my cellar. The aroma is split perfectly between chocolate and burnt fruit, but stronger than I remember. Also, the cap went projectile upon opening. It's still got a decent amount of roastiness to pair with those Belgian subtleties, but things are definitely a bit subdued. This cellared quite well, but I'm thinking that 8 years might have been a bit too much.

3.5 / 5.

 

FW Barrelworks Agrestic batches 001 and 002.

Look: very similar, though 002 (on the left in the pic below) is a bit browner and has a much foamier head. (4.25/5 for both.)

Smell: very similar, of lemongrass, raspberry, parsley/thyme. 001 additionally has earthy notes. (4.25/5 for both.)

Taste: 002 is mildly tart, with raspberry, grapeskin, lemongrass. 001 is noticeably deeper/funkier; similarly tart and fruity, but with more barnyard. Both have a mild sweetness. (001: 4.5; 002: 4.25.)

Feel: outstanding feel on both. Soft, rounded, super drinkable. (5/5 for both.)

Overall: two really enjoyable unfruited sours here. I'd always gotten a really dank aspect from Agrestic previously, but didn't get that so much this time. 001 has the edge here because of the extra depth/complexity of flavor. (001: 4.25; 002: 4.5.)

 

couldnt agree more

 

Bourbon barrel aged Arrogant Bastard, 12oz bottle dated 3/31/15. This was one of my sleeper hits of 2015, and I've been having a bottle roughly once per month since it was released (and will continue to do so for at least another year, or until it starts to decline rapidly). It's definitely a somewhat different beer now than fresh. It's gotten a bit harsher and less blended, though my sense is that the bourbon is shining through a bit more. Still not much in the way of oxidation (though this bottle was stored at fridge temp the whole time; I've got other bottles that were at cellar temp and may be showing oxidation). My guess is in another 6–12 months this will be past its current slightly awkward phase, though I don't have the sense it'll ever be better than fresh, just different.

 

2013 North Coast Old Stock - Toffee, caramel, and figs for days. Smooth body, zero heat. Slight herbal/tea bitterness. A hint of cardboard oxidation. Very tasty.