Bell's Third Coast - Old Ale or Barleywine?

I always thought that "Barleywine" IS Old Ale.
@Ron Pattinson...can you comment on this???

 

Old Ale, Strong Ale, Barleywine, Russian Imperial Stouts....you millenial kiddies drinking OJ IPAs, you drink these styles of beers and they'll put hair on your chest like a real man (say's the Old Curmuggeon man hollering at kids to get off his lawn).

 

Traditionally, an Old Ale was more of a process than a style. They could run the gamut in terms of gravity, color, all malt or with sugars, etc., as long as it had the characteristics of an aged beer. Consider Theakston's Old Peculier, at only 5.6% and dark brown in hue.

There is no doubt some overlap in the higher gravity range, though.

 

I get the feeling that you're a thoughtful guy, so I'm gonna get long-winded and I apologize in advance. "Pale" might be an exaggeration on my part depending on one's point of view, but certainly lighter than those considered the standard bearers. Victory Hoppy Quad is the most extreme I've seen. It's gold. Their V-12 is sort of in the middle of the extremes as a deep amber. I haven't had Schlafly's but it also seems relatively amber. On the Belgian side, Gulden Draak 9000 is more of the same:

Of course Gulden Draak also calls their darker flagship a "dark tripel" (and more directly related to the thread topic, they've called that beer a barley wine too). Are they purposely playing around with convention or do they simply not feel that these aspects are part of convention?

I believe you judge right? I'm gonna look at some guidelines for competitions: GABF has separate categories for quad and "Belgian-style dark strong ale." Their color notes allow quads to get slightly lighter than the BSDSA. BJCP only has the "Belgian dark strong ale" category and states that these are synonymous with quads.

I don't know if it makes much sense to assign much to the notion of what a quad is beyond strength and a Belgian connection. Victory's Hoppy Quad was so pale that I was shocked when I poured it. It defied my expectations. I wouldn't say that it wasn't traditional or accurate... I'd say it goes against convention - and by convention, I mean typical craft beer labeling. It was a gutsy beer but I didn't think it worked. The high ABV, plus the hops, minus the malt character or richness one usually gets in a quad was a bad combo for me. The less extreme Victory V-12 on the other hand was more successful, but still light for the style and really easy for the ABV. That combo worked well. (I'm trying to remember beers I had years ago.)

I believe Gulden Draak 9000 was listed here as a "Belgian strong pale ale" years ago. It's funny that we'll think that we know better than the brewer. On Sunday I had a Kolsch from Harpoon that was dark brown. The brewer calls it a Kolsch... it's listed here as a Kolsch... but I can't get behind the idea. To me, it's just not a Kolsch. What gives me the right to judge? Are these pale quads more of the same? An exception that reinforces what a quad should be rather than expanding the boundaries? I don't know, but I don't put nearly as much stock in quads as a thing when compared to Kolsch... but if it says quad on a bottle, then I guess it surely means something, and that's why the Victory beer surprised me.

My apologies to the two people who'll bother to read my rambling.

 

@zid Interesting examples. Even more interesting based on the fact that I've had the Victory Hoppy Quad before and have had the Gulden Draak 9000 multiple times and didn't remember either one as being a pale quad. I've liked the Gulden Draak 9000 quite well each time I've had it, though its been over 3 years since I last had it. Maybe I'll have to give it another try soon in honor of this conversation.

I'd say you're on to something though with your distinction between Kolsch and Quads. Some styles are very narrowly and distinctly defined, others are quite broad. The entire gamut of Belgian beers, especially the trappists, are fairly broad and none so much as the quad. Kolsch on the other hand is very narrowly defined and even using a non-German noble hop, even if it had a similar character, would kick you out of the style.

 

Chris (@zid), the challenge of beer style discussions is that unless there is a universally agreed upon beer style definition there will indeed be confusion/disagreement.

I am personally not a fan of Wikipedia as a source of information but in this instance I think they have it correct:

“A quadrupel is a type of beer, with an alcohol by volume of 10% or more. There is little agreement on the status of Quadrupel as a style.[1]”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrupel

Craftbeer.com on their website provides their definition of a Quad:

“The Belgian-style Quadrupel is amber to dark brown in color. Caramel, dark sugar and malty sweet flavors dominate, with medium-low to medium-high hop bitterness. Quads have a relatively light body compared to their alcoholic strength. If aged, oxidative qualities should be mild and not distracting. Sometimes referred to as Belgian strong dark.”

https://www.craftbeer.com/styles/belgian-style-quadrupel

Needless to say but Victory Hoppy Quad is not consistent with the Craftbeer.com definition since it is so light in color.

Classically Belgian brewers were (and are) creative in their brewing approaches and brewing to a prescribed set of definitions was (and is) not a high priority. Given this context perhaps the folks at Victory should be applauded for their creativity in producing their Hoppy Quad?

FWIW I personally view a Quad as being a subset of the BJCP definition of a BDSA. A BDSA can be anywhere between 8 -12% ABV but IMO a Quad should be ≥ 10% ABV.

Cheers!

Edit: The Craftbeer.com definition is apparently the Brewers Association definition.

 

It is illustrative to look at where the names came from. Barley wine was the name of one specific beer from Bass. Just as Wee Heavy and ESB were names of single beers, with no pretensions of being styles at all.Just marketing tools.
Names were just that-handles. The Bass brewer once described his product as a Bitter, a Pale Ale and an IPA in the same conversation , they were not cast in stone.
And things change. Nobody brews an IPA or a Mild anymore if we wish to stay true to style.
I recommend Martyn Cornell's article on the subject
http://zythophile.co.uk/2010/09/14/so-what-is-the-difference-between-barley-wine-and-old-ale/

 

When I first made this ale, the BATF had just made Sierra Nevada add the word”style” after barleywine for their label. I found this to be terminology I wanted to avoid, so I named it Old Ale instead of Barleywine Style Ale. This was a very long time ago. 1988? Sorry for the confusion.

 

Thanks for the beer.

 

It's OK. It's a good reminder that regulatory compliance should be added to the list of reasons why beer styles can be very fluid. British beer drinkers are used to this concept, but it's less apparent to most American craft beer drinkers.

 

And for finally sending it to NY .

 

Of all the breweries that expanded (or returned) into NY in the last few years... it seems like so many just peter out here or survive by being sporadic. I'm so glad that Bell's is an exception to that in my area.

 

Were there any beers that inspired you when you conceived this beer?

 

https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/63/71654/?ba=mudbug#review
This might fit the description, had a lighter than average body.

 

An old ale or stock ale is an ale that historically aged. For obvious reasons, they tended to be on the stronger side. It's not really a valid style as the term is defined in modern times.

 

Absolutely. There was just Ale. If sold fresh it was Mild Ale. If aged is was Old Ale but as you say ales for keeping would be stronger.
Porter and Stout were Beers. There has been much misinformation and misunderstanding caused by writers who did not know the difference.

 

Please! I'll definitely vote for:

"what's the difference between a porter and a stout?"

damnit @marquis beat me to it!

 

And Total Wine In FL

 

There's no way historically to pick apart Old Ale and Barley Wine. The terms were used pretty randomly by brewers. About the only consistent element is that a beer under 7% ABV wouldn't be called a Barley Wine. I used to think it was about colour: Old Ale dark, Barley Wine pale. Then I discovered Barley Wines were dark until the 1950's. And that Old Ales had been pale in the 19th century.