What’s the Difference? Share your Side-by-Side (2021)

I enjoyed the "research" for these posts!

 

Impressive. I’d go just for the snackage

 

I agree. The only exception I can think of is a beer by R. Shea in Akron - Polymer. The base is a big sweet caramel and coffee stout. The beer loses nothing when tapped on nitro. In fact, the coffee seems enhanced. It’s my favorite of their beers. Unfortunately, it is not canned.

 

Nope, not another glass vs. can comparison. This is 2020 vs. 2021.

I’m of the belief that Centennial hops hold their own against Father Time much better than others, and that Celebration Ale — quite possibly the greatest American beer ever brewed — tastes just fine with a little age on it.

Last year, I decided to put my theory to the test by squirreling away a 2020 bottle to compare side-by-side with a fresher counterpoint this Christmas season. Today is the day to give it a try.

I think they used the same spices this year as last, so we should be good to go.

Both vintages pour dark amber with a large, dense, light-tan head. The older beer is slightly darker in color, but only very slightly so. The older’s head has much better retention. Both leave thick lacing.

They both smell of sweet malt with hints of cherry. The older beer is much more intensely malty, though — borderline West Coast TIPA / American Barleywine territory. Not unlike Double Two Hearted in some respects. The newer beer has a hint of pine.

The tastes are very different. Piney bitterness dominates the taste of the newer beer, with a firm malt backbone behind. Those two elements are reversed in the older beer. Malty sweetness with clear cherry shows strong up front, with some firm bitterness in the finish.

The older’s mouthfeel is medium to full bodied with light creaminess and a nice zip to the carbonation. The newer is maybe a hair lighter feeling with the same zippiness.

I’d be hard pressed to tell these apart by looks alone, but the 2020 bottle definitely tastes old at a year, two months and nine days. It’s not undrinkable, but the balance isn’t to my liking. The 2021 can, which is currently eight days shy of three months old, is much more to my liking.

Pretty obvious results, but science demanded it be tested. The next test is to get a twelve pack and have a can a month and see when I really notice a drop off. I’ll probably save that idea for next year though.

Merry Christmas, BAs.

 

I finally was able to get some last week, and the cans I had were so vibrant and fresh tasting that I went out the next day for another sixer. It wasn't until then that I even thought to look at the date, which turns out to be second week of October. These will definitely keep me happy through the holiday season and then some.

 

How was that beer stored for the past year? Was it continually stored cold (e.g., in your refrigerator)?

Cheers!

 

It was in a closed cabinet in the cellar -- so dark and fairly cool, but not refrigerated.

 

It likely would have been better tasting if you had stored it cold for the year.

I do appreciate your side-by-side. I am of the opinion that since Celebration Ale is a more balanced IPA (i.e., it is not just a hop bomb) it does hold up well over time (e.g., up to 5 months of age) but as you demonstrated a year is too old.

Cheers!

P.S. If you have an interest in reading an article on the topic of Beer Freshness:

https://www.morebeer.com/articles/Beer_Freshness

 

Great post

 

This sounds like a lot of fun. Maybe I'll give it a go, but sub-in Coors Banquet for Rainier.

May also be fun to include Boulevard's KC Pils.

FWIW, I lined up a big AAL tasting with my friends group. They're not big into beer, but often debate which of their go-to's lagers is the "best". As fate would have it, I didn't get to participate, as someone else decided they wanted to participate last minute. We did Miller Lite, Coors Light, Busch Light, PBR, and Bud Light. I used an online number generator to set the order, then poured everyone a ~4oz fill of each beer. Miller Lite was scored #1 by something like 6 of the 9 participants. Funny enough, the crowd favorite Coors Light median score landed in the lower half of the results.

They've mentioned wanting to try it again, and if they do, I'll be sure to order extra cups so I can participate this time.

 

It was a lot of fun! It emphasized three things I already knew: (1) I don't have a particularly sensitive palate, (2) Mass produced AALs have a lot of similarities, and (3) Knowing what you're drinking has a big impact on how you experience what you're drinking.

As an experiment, I think it would be interesting to trick a group of friends. Pick X number of beers, and buy enough for two tastes of each for everyone involved. Have the group rank / review them blind, and then again "sighted," possibly telling them it's a different group of beers. Compare the sighted / blind results.

 

My palate isn't super sensitive either, but those AALs are all so darn similar. My friends kept commenting that I poured the 'same' beer into each of their 5-6 glasses, so our experiences are not abnormal.

That does sound like a very fun experiment. You've got me jonesing to try some blind tastings. I have the BKS vs. Monkish TIPA planned for the holidays, and a possible BA barleywine vs. it's cuvee blend, but need to think of something else fun. I have BBT and Maman for the first time, and it's tempting to tape them up, and pour them blind side-by-side.

 

I don't think I've had a hard time picking differences between AALs whenever I've done this, but then again I'm usually self selecting beers that I think I'll enjoy and show some character.

The only one that I remember being so bland and inoffensive was a Corona Light that I appropriated from the younger generation over the summer. I suppose if you had a grouping like that it would be tough.

I actually have a few cans in the fridge ready to go, so hopefully I can get #1 son to join in when he's home for the holidays.

 

So, as the last tasting thread ended, I had a couple beers I didn't try together that I wanted to compare next to each other. Time ran out over there, so I hopped over to this thread when I finally was ready to try Orkney's Skull Splitter aside Samuel Smith Winter Welcome Ale.

Separately, I thought they both had some extra tartness when cold, and a less malt sweetness than I expected overall. They both had a tea-like vibe to them, as well. But now is the time to see how similar they actually are or if my mind was playing tricks on me.

So, the Skull Splitter takes the darkness award that all the American beers won in the online tasting. Winter Welcome had a little larger head, but watching them settle, the difference could possibly be explained by varied pour strengths by yours' truly.

The fruity notes are appearing in both noses, with Winter Welcome coming to me as a fruited holiday bread - like a panettone. Skull Splitter is similar, but with an extra dose of dark fruit and some brown sugar.


I said I would do these with proper warmth, but I took a little sip of both right out of the fridge. They are both more bitter than expected, but not quite as fruity/tangy as I noted this past weekend. Now we wait for the room ambience to act on the beers.



Taking sips every five minutes or so, and I am noting that the higher ABV Skull Splitter had a little more heft and linger to flavors than Winter Welcome. It seems to have a little more going on, as well, but I'm going to hold off final judgement.



So, after warming the Winter Welcome has a light toast or even a thick multigrain grain cracker opening to it. Skull Splitter also starts with a toast/cracker aspect - though with darker grains. It brings a more sweetness - brown sugar with a drizzle of molasses being added as I move towards the middle.

In Winter Welcome, fruit is noticed but light up front, and the middle also seems to add sweetness. Flecks of earthy spices also join midway, ending with an impression of a light and subtle tea.

Skull Splitter also has some fruit, but there are dark fruits that come through more than the lighter fruits that accented the other. The bitterness is nicely balancing here as well, but the darker malts hide its nature a little better.

So, both beers followed similar trajectories, from slightly different starting points. I'd say a bunch of the difference can be attributed to darker malts and higher ABV, but not as much as one might think. Also of note, the warmer the beers got, the more the distinctions faded (and yes, I'm fairly sure it wasn't the user that was fading).

So, while these started out not quite as alike as I had hoped, they tried to find their way there. I'll argue that I found enough things to justify my impression that they might be fairly similar.

 

Good afternoon BA!

This is a side-by-side comparison I've been wanting to do for a while. Firestone Walker's Parabola is one of the best BBA Imperial Stouts I've had, and I (as I'm sure many of you have also) recently purchased their 25th Anniversary 3-Pack which came with Autumn Parabola: a version of their 2021 Parabola aged only in bourbon barrels, while the standard 2021 Parabola is aged in bourbon, rye whiskey, and wheated whiskey barrels.

Tonight I had both the free time and ambition to drink 24oz of this lovely stout, so here goes!



Editor's Note: I did try them both blind before taking notes and was able to identify them.

Look: Both pour an opaque onyx black with a generous 2 finger khaki head that dissipates slowly over the next 10 minutes. Both have good to excellent lacing and retention for high ABV stouts, but the standard 2021 Parabola ultimately has noticeably better lacing and retention as shown in the next two pictures. Note that both Teku glasses are nucleated which likely aided in head retention. Autumn Parabola did have a shinier gold cap, for what it's worth (obviously a lot).



There was a heated game of Scrabble that took place during consumption.

Below the order is switched with standard Parabola on the left and Autumn Parabola on the right.



Smell: Autumn Parabola's aroma is predominated by the sweet bourbon barrel draped over Parabola's excellent base RIS. Standard Parabola is very similar but the mixture of bourbon, rye, and wheated whiskey barrels brings a complexity that the Autumn edition is lacking.

Taste: As usual the taste follows the nose with these two, but here Autumn Parabola's bourbon barrel treatment lends it pleasant smooth taste while the standard 2021 Parabola's palate is more complex due to the different barrels used, though the heat from the alcohol is also more detectable.

Mouthfeel: These were nearly identical; that is to say both were excellent since this is Parabola.

Overall: Both beers were a pleasure to drink. Given the better head retention, lacing, and additional complexity noted from the standard 2021 Parabola, I would likely give this beer the edge most of the time. That being said, Autumn Parabola did have a shinier gold cap, so....

Cheers BA!

 

@o29 Appreciated your write up. I am always interested when people discuss something “single” vs a mix, whether that is a group of different whiskey barrels (in this case) or a mix of distillery barrels (BCBS base) vs single (either bourbon only in this case, or single distillery barrels, like some of the BCBS reserve beers). The idea of it being a single variety always goes either way. Sometimes people get that it is more complex when it is single, and other times people feel the exact opposite. Ever seems to be any consensus. Always enjoy reading these reviews.

 

Now THAT would be super interesting...pouring the same beer into 5-6 glasses and telling them they're all different beers....then have them rank them.

 

Ok, lazy afternoon gives me time for the second pairing to try post "...Winter Warmer... Tasting" thread. I didn't review Anchor's Christmas Ale during the tasting, but I had one for enjoyment one evening. I didn't pay close attention, but I already had in mind comparing two California winter ales, pairing the aforementioned with 21st Amendment's Fireside Chat (which I did review).

Pours are both dark brown, though Anchor brings a little more browned head, making it slightly more attractive to today's reviewer. Christmas Ale brings a more composed aroma profile as well. The spices meld into the mildly sweet toasted and roasted notes. Fireside Chat has more bitterness and a lighter spice profile.


So, at this point, Fireside Chat seems more like a beer that might happen to have a few spices, whereas Anchor's beer seems more of a spiced beer.

Fireside Chat comes through with nutty, roasty malt and a hop bitterness. Oddly, the spice seemed muted and was much more obvious when compared to the Samuel Smith's Winter Welcome last weekend.

Anchor's Christmas Ale is also lighter on the spices than expected - though in this case the expectations came from a few seconds ago while nosing the beer. There's a similar bitter roast after having its current competitor. But while Fireside goes nutty and maybe slightly astringent to maybe fruity, Christmas Ale.goes root vegetable - neutral sweetness with more of a full flavor.

What I am calling a "mild astringency" in the middle of 21st Amendment tickles the edges of my palate in Anchor's. Initially, Fireside Chat seemed more bitter, from hops that give pine and some grapefruit while Christmas Ale seemed more straight evergreen in its hop influence. As I drink and they warm, I'm having troubles telling the difference.

I can now tell (with less liquid in my glasses) that the Anchor's beer is a little darker in body. I checked because my taste buds were indicating that the level of roasted malt might now be the main difference. Having them right after another yields only slight differences.

Well, this one turned out to be interesting because I had vague thoughts these might be similar and expected to find out how wrong I was. But in the end, I found them quite similar. Note: the GF (blind) said Anchor was slightly sweeter, had a hint of banana, and liked this "slightly darker one" better.

 

Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that this isn't the perfect side-by-side. It's less about the specific characteristics of each NE Triple IPA, and more about how the brewery's NE Triple IPA offerings compare in whole.

Background: After finally visiting Monkish brewing in Torrance, CA, I couldn't help but be reminded of BKS - the local to me NE IPA producer back home. It just so happened that I brought home a New England Triple IPA (hence forth TIPA) from Monkish the week after BKS made a TIPA. I wanted to see how the breweries work compares.

Method: I wrapped each of these cans in foil and tape earlier this week. It wasn't until tonight that they were labeled "1" and "2", after being shuffled around the fridge this past week. Each was poured into a matching 14oz stemless wine glass ~4oz at a time for the first photo, then another ~6oz for the individual photos.

Acknowledgements: I've had the BKS one before, but it was prior to my LA trip, meaning the one can was consumed approximately 12 days prior to this side-by-side. The Monkish beer is new-to-me.

Shall we? Family photo:



Let's drink.



Beer #1.

Pours a turbid, matte dark-ish orange with two fingers of white foam. Head retention is fair. Aroma is papaya, grapefruit, tangerine, and orange zest with an undercutting 'green' note. It's tropical fruit forward, but not necessarily sweet. Flavor profile is tangerine, grapefruit, mango, papaya, and orange zest. It's very tropical fruit forward, and carries a soothing sweetness throughout. That green note still hits at the onset, before tropical fruits take the stage for the rest of the show. Some hop burn seeps out towards the finish of the flavor profile, adding some hard edge to the last lingering tropical fruits. Mouth feel is pillowy, creamy, soft, and dense, landing at medium-thick consistency. Overall, dense, filling, and full of tropical fruits. It's a hop bomb that never relents, with some hard edged 'green' notes throughout.

Score: 4.25 | 4.25 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5



Beer #2.

Pours a milky opaque orange with two fingers of white foam. Head retention is great, forming a foamy pillow atop the beer awhile after the pour takes place. Aroma is soft yeast that's surrounded by papaya, tangerine, and orange zest. Some hop burn on the back, which works to sear off the tropical fruits from lingering. That hop burn carries a little alcohol heat too. Flavor profile is soothing tropical fruits, hitting notes of guava, tangerine, mango, papaya, and orange zest along the way. It's a smooth induction of tropical fruits, carrying sweetness from start to finish. Mouth feel is medium-thick with a creamy, pillowy texture. It's very soft, almost melting away as each sip drags along. Overall, despite a bit of bite in the nose, the flavor profile here is splendid and smooth. It's social hops from wall to wall without room for anything else.

Score: 4.5 | 4 | 4.75 | 4.5 | 4.5

Reveal:



(Alchemist/black glass is beer #1, Aslin/green glass is beer #2)
Beer #1 is Monkish's Future See Millennium, Beer #2 is BKS's Forgot to Forget.

Nitty gritty:
Can dates:
Monkish: 12/07/21
BKS: N/A (released 12/08/21)

BA score, my score, and rDev:
Monkish: 4.58 | 4.37 | -2.5%
BKS: N/A | 4.48 | N/A

Opinions: I really wouldn't be upset drinking either. The differences are minute in terms of overall hearty tropical fruit hops. Having drank BKS the last few years, I think I prefer the 'non-green' notes. They remind me of the last Treehouse I tried - very smooth and soft. The Monkish is still great, but that green note is more of an acquired taste for me. Whether this is a difference in hop'ing technique or allowing the can to 'settle' at the brewery is beyond my skillset, I just prefer the softer approach.

Hope this was scientific enough. I wanted to highlight and acknowledge my shortcomings with this, as the two beers are not identical. It's probably also controversial to compare a local brewery with a hype'd brewery such as Monkish, though I will say this - both breweries appear on Untappd's top United States brewery lists now, and I would not be upset in the least drinking either.

 

She's a keeper. I get banana as a fermentation signature throughout Anchor's range regardless of the yeast they are using. I've never seen anyone else mention this. It's one reason why I don't buy them much anymore.