Revisiting "Drink From the Can!"

Right. That's pretty much what I was getting at with my comment, so we are in agreement.
(to which I will add the inevitable: "It's only beer").

 

It seems to me that it's marketing, but not necessarily to hide appearance... at the time of Heady's release in cans, the stigma of canned beers being lesser quality was held by the majority of craft beer fans. I think this was a way to appeal to drinkers by making it more approachable and to add a 'coolness factor' at the same time. If the cool looking can tells you to drink from it, and you keep reading it, you may subliminally have a mind change about canned beer and its consumption.

Around this time, the local's drink of choice was the VERY unfiltered Switchback and most drinkers here had gotten used to this cloudy appearance in beer. Given that Heady was only locally sold and wasn't well known, it seems unlikely to me that hiding the look of it was the goal.

 

Brewers of all stripes put recommendations on their packaging: suggested temperatures or food pairings, which type of glass to use. Why is this any different? As the producer, they are free to make suggestions; as the consumer I am free to follow or ignore these suggestions. Not sure why John's suggestions (or motives behind his suggestions) are more important or controversial than Vinnie saying I shouldn't use a shaker pint for Consecration or Matt Brynildson telling me to always keep Parabola refrigerated.

As a beginner, I'd appreciate the specificity for the Brewer's intentions. I feel comfortable going off-book now, though.

 

Like x 2.

 

As long as it taste good I could care less what it looks like.

 

Cans are for storage, glasses are for drinking. But as far as I'm concerned the reason John Kimmich endorses dirinking from the can remains a mystery.

 

I've always been dumbfounded by the fact that someone who brews a beer such as Heady Topper would then encourage consumers to drink it from the can. It makes no damn sense. Oxidation? Aeration? Really?? C'mon...

 

Heady Topper I find better from the can, the bitterness harshness you get from the can delivery plays well with it versus a more mellow glass experience. Focal Banger, which says drink from the can as well, is better from a glass. Crusher doesn't say anything but is phenomenal in a glass. I've tried a few others like this and 95% tend to be better in a glass since that's how they were quality/flavour tested by the brewers.

 

have you tried it side by side?

 

I have numerous times. Gimme a glass. Every time. Never tried it from a growler, though. John used to say he refused to fill a growler because it ruined his beer which should always be drank from a glass straight from the tap.

 

I'd prefer a can over a bottle any day. The beer seems to taste fresher and the hop aroma is much more prevalent.

 

Setting aside the question of motivations, I'd hazard a guess that the reason might invove the fact that while there are lots of illustrations in the adverts for mass market beers being consumed directly from bottle or can, Kimmich stands out among brewers of more flavorful beers for making a public recommendation that a flavorful beer be consumed directly from the container.

Cilurzo is not alone in recommending that shaker pints are not the best way to experience his beers. Similarly Brynildon is in no way unique in asking that one or more of his beers be kept refrigerated. At this point in time I'm not aware of many or any other brewers of flavorful beers making the same recommendation as does Kimmich in an era when many brewers of flavorful beers also recommend decanting of beers that may have sediment in the container.

Thus Kimmich seems to be standing pretty much alone in a very strong counter current. While that does not make him right or wrong, it does make his suggestion controversial to some and more interesting to some just as his beer has made him more important and/or recognizable to others.

 

Drink from the can so I don't have to hear about damn FLOATIES in the beer.

 

I'll be the first person to say "don't knock it 'til you try it" about something; but I cannot entertain the notion that drinking a big, delicious, hoppy IPA from a can is in anyway a better experience than pouring it into a snifter or tulip and getting to experience the wonderful array of aromas and flavors at their full potential. Just the taste of the aluminum can as you sip is grounds enough to not heed the instructions to drink it out of the can.

 

I've had from can and glass many times now and think it tastes great both ways.

IMO though, I still stick to my opinion that "Drink from the Can" was what got Heady Topper to a #1 world ranking a few years ago on Beer Advocate. The world of IPA drinkers at the time pretty much would have crushed it on the appearance rating as most of the IPAs made in the world were clear and not murky or had floaties. Now adays, the more turbid the higher the appearance rating by majority of BA reviews/tickers. Complete 180 degree turnaround from half a decade ago.

 

Can't oxygen sometimes enhance the flavor of a beer and produce subtle nuances over time? I'm referring to cask beer, which I realize is different than exposing a beer to oxygen by pouring it in a glass.

Oxygen is the enemy beer, but only after a certain period of time. I don't know for a fact, but my guess would be that that period of time is longer than the length of time it takes one to drink a beer.

Although it would be a potential mess, TECHNICALLY you could have a friend (a very good friend) pour it into your mouth while blindfolded.

You know, after reading this thread topic multiple times over the years, there may have been one point in which I actually thought his name was John Gimmick.

Regarding the original post, I think appearance could have been one of the reasons for this slogan. But I don't think it was the main reason. So no, I don't think he needs to back track at this point because of the rise of the "New England IPA".

Perhaps he just likes not geeking out about beer, and drinking it casually from a can. And he wanted to attract customers that feel the same way. The beer is excellent. Beer geeks will buy it even if it said, "Here we go" or "America" on the can.

@surfcaster, you said you have about 12 - 16 cans per year, despite the slogan. But someone who's just a casual beer drinker may find it appealing, and makes it seem like less of a "snobby" drink.

It was just another way, aside from the flavor itself, to separate this beer from the pack in my opinion. And it was during a time when cans weren't as prevalent (for craft beer anyways). Maybe this slogan wouldn't make as much sense in 2016.

 

I have also read where beer drinkers have opined that they prefer cask beers a day or two after tapping. I have yet to read any scientific studies using trained beer drinkers to study this aspect. Do you have some scientific papers that you can reference here?

Again, do you have any references to scientific paper with analytical results and/or using trained beer tasters here? If you do, I would like to read that as well.

Cheers!

 

I'd suspect that Marquis (and or some other long time CAMRA member) cold point you to something relevant to the first question. They represent those making the claim.

For your second question you could turn it around also and ask Kimmich what data there are to support his claim of his beer being better from the can as a result of lower oxidation. He is the one making that claim.

 

Agreed. I think John Kimmich cares a lot more about people buying his beer than how they choose to drink his beer.

 

Tom, I personally do not care who the person is that provides the link to scientific papers. I am just interested in seeing some data.

I have read numerous papers about the effects of oxidation of beer but they have all been in the context of longer term durations.

Do you have any technical papers on the short term effects of oxidation on beer?

Cheers!

P.S. Another good source of technical information is Brewers Association publications (magazine, CBC presentations, etc.) Unfortunately I am not a member of the Brewers Association so this data is not readily available to me.