What's the Difference? Share your side-by-side (2023)

Discussion in 'The Bar' started by cjgiant, Jan 21, 2023.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cjgiant

    cjgiant Grand High Pooh-Bah (6,560) Jul 13, 2013 District of Columbia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Yeah, I thought I had more vintages available in the cellar to compare to the more recent batch, but apparently I found them enjoyable enough to finish off before that last 2019.
     
    beergoot and ChicagoJ like this.
  2. JackHorzempa

    JackHorzempa Grand Pooh-Bah (3,181) Dec 15, 2005 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Dave Green (@telejunkie) traveled to The Alchemist a number of years ago and discussed the beers in a BYO article. There are six hops used to brew Heady Topper with a complex hop schedule; Dave provided a clone recipe in his article. I homebrewed a batch in 2016 and one example of hopping is what I used for the dry hop addition, a combination of Columbus (CTZ), Apollo, Simcoe and Centennial. Simcoe is indeed used but as you can see from the example for dry hopping so are a number of other hop varieties.

    Cheers!
     
    beergoot, BJB13, ChicagoJ and 4 others like this.
  3. JackHorzempa

    JackHorzempa Grand Pooh-Bah (3,181) Dec 15, 2005 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Since there was a discussion about beers from The Alchemist (Focal Banger, Heady Topper) I figured I would re-post the below which I originally posted in 2018 in a NBS thread:

    Serendipity!!

    Today’s New Beer Sunday tasting has a backstory:

    My wife has a good friend Marilyn who is a hop head. Whenever I homebrew hoppy beers (e.g., IPAs) I send some of my beers Marilyn’s way. My most recent IPA was my version of Alchemist Focal Banger which was based upon a clone recipe in Brew Your Own (BYO) magazine. I have never tasted Focal Banger before so this was very much uncharted waters for me.

    So, my wife gave Marilyn my homebrewed IPA and the next day when I saw Marilyn I emphasized to her that it was my attempt to brew a Focal Banger but I had no idea how close I came since I never had this beer. Ironically she was in Vermont a few weeks prior and she bought a can of Focal Banger for me. How is that for serendipity!?!:slight_smile:

    Below is a short write-up on Focal Banger:

    The Alchemist co-owner Jen Kimmich on Focal Banger, the brewery’s other knockout American IPA:

    “Focal Banger is more hop-forward than Heady [Topper]. While Heady has a more complex hop profile and a stronger malt backbone, Focal is all about the Citra and Mosaic hops. At 7% and with all pale malt, it is much easier to drink two of these than it is with Heady Topper. The tropical fruit in the Focal is delicious. We currently brew 15 barrels of Focal Banger one time per week. It’s all distributed to local bars and restaurants; no retail sales. It was first brewed at our brewpub in 2007, draft only. It was first canned in January 2013.”

    http://draftmag.com/ratebeer-best-the-alchemist-focal-banger/

    When I brewed my version of Alchemist Focal Banger I decided to make a few tweaks:

    · Grain bill: Focal Banger base malt is Thomas Fawcett Pearl Malt. Since I had some Pilsner Malt that I wanted to use up I decided to use a 50/50 split of Pilsner Malt and Thomas Fawcett Pearl Malt.

    · Yeast: The Alchemist house yeast strain is euphemistically called the ‘Conan’ yeast strain by us homebrewers. For my batch I decided to use a yeast blend of the ‘Conan’ yeast and Sacch Trois yeast.

    I decided to call my batch of beer Jack’s Focal Point IPA.

    So, let’s see how close Jack’s Focal Point IPA is to Alchemist Focal Banger; my wife will be joining me in today’s tasting.

    Beers served in small tulip glasses:

    Appearance

    Alchemist Focal Banger: Yellow colored with floaties. A firm white head.

    Jack’s Focal Point: Light golden colored with a fluffy white head. This beer has excellent head retention as the beer is consumed.

    Aroma

    Alchemist Focal Banger: There is mostly a fruity (tropical fruit) nose but in the background there is some dank.

    Jack’s Focal Point: The nose is predominantly fruity (tropical fruit) but I am picking up a hint of citrus as well.

    Taste:

    Alchemist Focal Banger: The flavor is predominantly fruity but the dank aspect is more notable here. It has a firm bitterness.

    Jack’s Focal Point: The flavor follows the nose with fruity. It has a firm bitterness.

    Mouthfeel

    Alchemist Focal Banger: Medium bodied with an aspect of crispness.

    Jack’s Focal Point: Medium bodied with a soft-ish mouthfeel.

    Overall

    Alchemist Focal Banger: This beer is very good. A combination of mostly fruity but a notable aspect of dank on the flavor profile as well. I am personally not a fan of floaties in my beer but…

    Jack’s Focal Point: This beer is very good too! A good friend described this beer using the terminology of “fruit bomb”; I agree with that. I personally enjoyed the soft-ish mouthfeel of this beer.


    My wife expressed a preference for Jack’s Focal Point. When she was drinking the Alchemist Focal Banger she made mention of the beer having a “harsh” aspect to it; I personally did not perceive this aspect.

    Cheers!

    [​IMG]
     
    MutuelsMark, beergoot, BJB13 and 11 others like this.
  4. micada

    micada Grand Pooh-Bah (3,326) Jul 13, 2015 New York
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    Ok, tomorrow night I will try to compare Other Half ‘23 Quiet Space against Moksa Duplexity PVW 23. Both aged in 23 year Pappy barrels.
     
  5. ESHBG

    ESHBG Pooh-Bah (2,099) Jul 30, 2011 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    I haven't had either yet but your description of Focal tells me that I won't particularly care for it and will prefer Heady.
     
    beergoot, AZgman and ChicagoJ like this.
  6. defunksta

    defunksta Pooh-Bah (2,980) Jan 18, 2019 Wisconsin
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    [​IMG]
    1) Utepils Muni Franconian Landbier (5.4%): A Euro Dark Lager from Minnesota that is unfiltered with flavors of dark grains, caramel, wheat, yeast.
    versus
    2) Badger State SKI-BRW (5.6%): A Czech Dark Lager from Wisconsin with flavors of chocolate, caramel, smooth bread, with some floral notes. (Mismatched these two blind)

    Winner:
    1) Utepils Muni Franconian Landbier:
    Both of these were surprisingly similar. SKI BRW is a more traditional Dark Lager with flavors of chocolate, caramel, smooth malts. I really enjoyed this unique one from Utepils. Some brown bread, caramel, and almost notes of peanut butter. Yet dry and yeasty like a zwickel. A true Dark Wheat Beer.
     
    beergoot, BJB13, o29 and 12 others like this.
  7. cjgiant

    cjgiant Grand High Pooh-Bah (6,560) Jul 13, 2013 District of Columbia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    A little impromptu side-by-side today (sans picture). Started by drinking a Brasserie de Blaugies / Hill Farmstead collaboration called La Vermontoise, and though it had some farmhouse funk in the nose to go with a grassy hop profile, the taste was a dry pale ale. It reminded me a little bit of Duvel, with that beer fairly fresh in my mind from the Duvel tasting earlier this year.

    Now, La Vermontoise didn't have much in the way of Belgian yeast in my experience, so I am expecting that to be one difference. But I'm curious how far off my thought of similarities are, so I poured a lighter straw and clearer Duvel into another glass for comparison.

    As I typed this, the GF is saying they are less alike than she was originally thinking, but they are similar. She specifically mentioned Duvel being more aggressively carbonated, which is interesting b/c I found La Vermontoise to be quite prickly.

    On the nose, Duvel (12/2023 BB date) is muted compared to the barnyard and pithy/grassy hops coming from La Vermontoise. There is a little more honey bread sweetness and a bit of Belgian yeast in Duvel.

    Duvel is more dry than bitter when compared to La Vermontoise, especially late in the taste and the linger. I think La Vermontoise is a bit softer, but not by much (and I'd guess less so than the GF thinks). Tasting them together, I am getting a little citrus from the La Vermontoise that I wasn't getting having it alone; Duvel is a bit more bready, relatively, and I start noticing some black peppery notes as I shift back and forth.

    Before the end, the GF also noted that she found Duvel to be a "little more flowery" than La Vermontoise. I wouldn't use that term, but I think I get what she is saying. I think I wasn't too far off in tying these two beers in my mind. I'm also glad I had them together, as nuances came out a bit in both as I examined them for this post.
     
    beergoot, BJB13, o29 and 11 others like this.
  8. JackHorzempa

    JackHorzempa Grand Pooh-Bah (3,181) Dec 15, 2005 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    I am of the opinion that one of the benefits of a side-by-side drinking experience is that sometimes (often?) subtle aspects are noted which may not have been 'evident' if just drinking a beer standalone.

    Cheers!
     
    beergoot, BJB13, ATL6245 and 5 others like this.
  9. ChicagoJ

    ChicagoJ Grand Pooh-Bah (4,073) Feb 2, 2015 Illinois
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    My formal Duvel review was I believe in my first 30 days here, so pretty much vague on particulars, but I had the same experience as you in terms of the unexpected carbonation level for La Vermontoise.

    I have also avoided carbonation with the new to me craft beer appreciation (8 years vs. 45 years). I avoided pop throughout life, drank mostly whiskey neat or on rocks until eight years ago in preference over beer, Guinness nitro was my favorite beer over the decades. I guess this also explains in part my love of cask.

    I do appreciate reading and conducting side by side reviews across brands and even styles. It’s a fun experience and at times can be much more informative.

    The only side by sides I won’t conduct are pitting two favorite beers against each other. I understand there is natural wiggle room in terms of rating scores, so I don’t necessarily concede that I like one beer as scored slightly higher by me over another.

    I wouldn’t want definitive confirmation, even for one day, and have that influence future beer purchase decisions. I like having the “these beers are great” feeling over a broader range of beers, versus feeling I should always buy this one over others within the same style.

    This goes against my usual nature / inclination as a numbers / statistics oriented person. It’s why I wouldn’t join Untappd, even if Beer Advocate and Rate Beer didn’t exist. Would just go spreadsheet at that stage.

    Cheers!
     
  10. SLeffler27

    SLeffler27 Grand Pooh-Bah (3,822) Feb 24, 2008 New York
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    Well put.
     
    beergoot and ChicagoJ like this.
  11. augustgarage

    augustgarage Pooh-Bah (2,357) May 20, 2007 California
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    [​IMG]

    Figured this was appropriate for today's holiday:

    Guinness draught (nitro) vs. Societe "The Pugilist"

    The former was packaged on 10/13/22, the latter on 3/6/23. Both served at 60F.

    Appearance:
    • Guinness: Clear sienna body with half a finger of beige stiff peaks. Extremely fine, creamy lacing; superlative retention.
    • Societe: Clear bole body with a fizzy dun head receding rapidly to naught. Minimal lacing; poor retention.
    Very similar liquid, but a poor showing from The Pugilist regarding head development/retention. Nitro gives an obvious advantage visually, but there is really no comparison here.

    Aroma:
    • Guinness: Subtle but persistent roast barley, caramel, faint coffee and chocolate in the nose. Low vaguely fruity esters.
    • Societe: Hints of chocolate covered almonds, prunes, and medium-roast coffee in the nose, riding the line between subtle and weak. Vaguely floral perhaps.
    Guinness signature roast quality wins out by a quarter point.

    Flavor:
    • Guinness: Sharp yet flaccid palate entry with low but lasting bitterness balanced between roast barley and earthy/thyme-kissed hops. Creamy dry finish. Hints of stale herbs, cheap tobacco, instant coffee, and Lipton tea in the aftertaste.
    • Societe: Root-beer, decent milk chocolate, and vanilla flavors are offset by mild earthy hop notes. Dry finish, but with a faint returning sweetness. Roast barley is just perceptible. Low bitterness. Subtle yeast character. No off notes.
    Slight preference for The Pugilist - Draught has a sort of "Industrial" quality underneath it all. Surprisingly different.

    Mouth-feel:
    • Guinness: Brisk, slightly astringent, and light-bodied - but simultaneously creamy, smooth, and luxurious thanks to the nitro.
    • Societe: Fairly thin, soda-like mouth-feel.
    Societe dropped the ball here.

    Overall:
    • While nearly style-defining, this flattens out what little character "Extra" still had.
    • Flavor is to style, yet novel - more fruit/chocolate than roast barley/coffee. Execution seems a little off though.
    Scores:
    • Guinness: 3.5/5 rDev -2.8%
      look: 4.75 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.5
    • Societe: 3.36/5 rDev -11.3%
      look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
    Not surprisingly, while these are adequate, I wish I had ready access to some better examples of the style (or Foreign Export Stout) to celebrate my Irish heritage, but these will both go into my stew today, so nothing wasted. Would be happy to try The Pugilist again if I saw it on cask. Cheers!
     
    beergoot, BJB13, o29 and 15 others like this.
  12. DavetotheB

    DavetotheB Grand Pooh-Bah (3,617) Sep 30, 2017 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    West coast from the east coast tonight: Stone IPA and Stone Ruination

    [​IMG]

    tl;dr...biggest difference I noticed was mouthfeel. Ruination was more full-bodied and had looooong lasting bitterness in the aftertaste.

    Notes:
    IPA: Packaged 12/29/22, Best by 4/28/22
    Smell: Pine/garlic/earth
    Visual: Translucent gold amber, white head, better lacing than Ruination, good retention
    Taste: Piney, resiny bitterness
    Feel: Sticky mouthfeel, dry finish, bitter aftertaste
    Becomes a little more mellow on warming

    Ruination: Packaged 12/27/22, Best by 4/26/22
    Smell: Fainter aroma pine, earth, citrus rind, hint of citrus juice
    Visual: Maybe slightly less translucent, more orange in color, white head, good retention
    Taste: Piney, bitter, alcohol is a little more noticeable
    Feel: Sticky mouthfeel, thicker than IPA, bitter aftertaste lingers forever
    More aggressive bitterness on warming.

    Al things being equal (price, availability), I would pick Ruination over the IPA but since I usually can't pick Ruination, I'm more than happy with IPA. Cheers!
     
    beergoot, BJB13, o29 and 16 others like this.
  13. cjgiant

    cjgiant Grand High Pooh-Bah (6,560) Jul 13, 2013 District of Columbia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Ok, I have my butt plopped down in front of the TV presently watching to see if UVa's lacrosse team can stay undefeated by beating a team that crushed them twice last year (but lost a bit of their championship team). Then there's more NCAA basketball, so taking the opportunity to try out a Dogfish Head side-by-side of beers that are about a half an hour apart:

    [​IMG]
    Dogfish Head 120 Minute is a darker amber colored beer, and it has less clarity beyond coloring. DFH's 90 Minute had a bit more head, but as the sit, the two beers have fairly creamy heads. I'll note the 120 Minute is a bit older, bought I think about the middle of last year, whereas the 90 Minute was bought a couple days ago.

    120 Minute has a sweeter and more bread-like (toasted) aroma that 90 Minute, which does have a malty side to its aroma but a more bright and fresh citrus hop scent. There's a very slight impression of wet grain in both, with 90 Minute erasing it with grapefruit pith and 120 Minute with caramel, spice (alcohol), and a light pine.

    Sipping, 90 Minute is unsurprisingly lighter and has the hop notes right up front. In total makeup, it is more bitter front to back, with the extra malt in 120 Minute bringing a caramel note 90 Minute doesn't have. To balance this, there is a strong bitter note to 120 Minute, more piney than citrusy, but these hops have a stronger opponent than those in 90 Minute, leaving 120 Minute as the more balanced beer overall.

    The GF is easily enjoying the 90 Minute more, noting the increased alcohol in the 120 Minute. She also thought the 120 Minute might be older (which is true, but she was thinking more along the line of being cellared).

    From experience, I anticipated these to be different, but they were more different in this sitting than my memory indicated. The switch of the hop flavor profile from 90 Minute to 120 Minute was the most dramatic difference I didn't foresee. They're easily different enough I wouldn't substitute one temporally named beer for the other (even ignoring how the relative ABVs could play into that decision).

    The other thing this taught me is that I may be quite curious in trying a 120 Minute and Bigfoot comparison, across a couple vintages, perhaps. I fully expect Bigfoot to be more bitter and piney, but I could be surprised again.
     
    beergoot, BJB13, o29 and 17 others like this.
  14. ATL6245

    ATL6245 Grand Pooh-Bah (3,160) Aug 16, 2018 Georgia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    I do side by side comparisons quite a lot because, as @JackHorzempa pointed out, a lot more subtleties come out. This is one of the more lame ones I've done, but I've often what kind of differences, if any at all, I could discern between Big Beer AAL's and craft versions. I thought I would side by side by side two Big Beer and a local craft offering. Miller High Life, Hamm's & New Realm United Craft Lager.

    [​IMG]

    I was able too pick out each one. It surprised me that each had some distinctive feature.

    Hamm's:
    Appearance: Brilliant clear gold color. Pours to a frothy white head with moderate retention.

    Aroma: Very subtle, but has some floral and bread flour aroma. Clean otherwise.

    Taste: Grainy note, subtle spicy hops. Sweet start to finish. Restrained bitterness.

    Mouthfeel: Medium bodied, soft with high carbonation. Short clean finish.

    Miller High Life:
    Appearance: Brilliant clear gold color. Frothy white head with very good retention.

    Aroma: Very little. Some bread flour. Not much else.

    Taste: Light bread flour and grainy malt up front. Subtle spicy hops. Sweet start to finish. No bitterness.

    Mouthfeel: Light to medium bodied. Soft. High carbonation. Short clean finish.

    New Realm United Craft Lager:

    Appearance: Slightly cloudy, gold color. Thin white head with moderate retention.

    Aroma: Light lemon/lime and floral hops. Grainy malt.

    Taste: Similar to aroma. Grainy sweet malt with lemon/lime notes. Restrained but subtle bitterness.

    Mouthfeel: Medium bodied. Soft but notably more drying than the other beers. Moderate carbonation. Short clean finish.

    [​IMG]

    For anyone that read this far, the differences are probably obvious. The New Realm stood out because the hops they used gave it some extra aroma and flavor. Visually, it was not as clear nor did it have as good retention. But it was easy to pick it out.
    What surprised me was how great the MHL's head retention was and how much better than canned version was than the bottled. Between the MHL and Hamm's, the Hamm's had a hair better flavor but you could only tell much difference in a side by side.

    For the price, it's hard to beat the Hamm's at $4.49 per 4 pack of 16 oz cans. Overall, the New Realm United Craft Lager wins because it has more aroma and flavor but that was just a matter of hops selection.

    So, not a super compelling side by side, it was a good exercise for me in digging into subtleties of AAL lagers. I always learn something new drom these reviews. I still very much prefer craft & local over Big Beer. I did a German Pils side by side last year with locals & a couple of German "control" beers. That was fun and I want to revisit that one again sometime soon.

    One last side note. I remember way back when the first time I ever tried any of these AAL's (late 80's) and I remember how utterly bitter they seemed. Now none of them seem that way. I wonder if the bitterness has been lowered or if I have just become immune to it with age.

    Cheers!
     
    MutuelsMark, beergoot, BJB13 and 17 others like this.
  15. JackHorzempa

    JackHorzempa Grand Pooh-Bah (3,181) Dec 15, 2005 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    I think this is a great side-by-side on many levels!

    Firstly, there are some BAs who will claim that all AAL beers taste the same. As you pointed out there were indeed difference between Hamms and MHL (likely more recognizable in a side-by-side).

    You mentioned “how much better than canned version was than the bottled” for MHL. A fair number of BAs will post they have a strong preference for MHL in the bottle vs. cans but obviously you have a differing opinion here. We all have our own unique palates/preferences. It has been too long since I have had a MHL so I have no input here.

    How much did you pay for the New Realm beer? I did a quick web search and Total Wine lists $12.49 for a six-pack:

    https://www.totalwine.com/beer/lager/americanstyle-lager/new-realm-united-craft-lager/p/229051121

    I wonder how well this beer sells at that price point. I have not had the pleasure of drinking this beer but I suspect that at this price point I personally would opt buy a six-pack of a locally brewed Pilsner (e.g., Sterling Pig Shoats Pilsner) or a 12-pack of Yuengling Lord Chesterfield instead.

    Is New Realm United Craft Lager at $12.49 a six-pack something you would choose to regularly buy?

    Cheers!
     
    BJB13, PapaGoose03, ESHBG and 3 others like this.
  16. ATL6245

    ATL6245 Grand Pooh-Bah (3,160) Aug 16, 2018 Georgia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Hi @JackHorzempa, thanks for the feedback. I can find the New Realm under $11 per 6'er in many stores around me. So the answer is yes, when I am looking for this style beer I do buy it. New Realm is made in Atlanta and is local for me. So I would tend to default to local when purchasing anyway. Truthfully, I drink more Helles & German Pils in the pale lager group. If I am looking for a true pilsner, then I am going with a German style and wouldn't even look at the New Realm. But I am probably the wrong person to ask about price because I'm not too price conscious. I'll pay more for what I perceive as a well made local beer just to support a local business. I suspect the United Craft Lager does not sell real well because of the price but that is a good question. I may ask a local New Real sales rep I know how it's selling.
     
  17. ChicagoJ

    ChicagoJ Grand Pooh-Bah (4,073) Feb 2, 2015 Illinois
    Pooh-Bah Society Trader

    3 Floyds came out with an "Ice" version of one of my favorite beers. I really enjoyed Zombie Ice, and wanted to see how it lines up against Zombie Dust.

    Zombie Ice vs. Zombie Dust

    [​IMG]

    Tale of the Tape:

    • Zombie Ice - 12 oz canned 2/28/23 (Rookie Mint release), 8.5% ABV.
    • Zombie Dust - 19.2 oz canned 1/18/23, both sold at room temp and refrigerated thereafter. 6.5% ABV
    Appearance: Zombie Ice darker but clearer base with slightly more carbonation. Head same in terms of appearance, coverage and lacing. Zombie Dust slightly hazy and lighter caramel vs. brown bronze colour of Zombie Ice. Tie

    Aroma:
    Similar, with the strong pine presence of the Zombie Ice making me prefer this aspect vs. Zombie Dust, which may be suffering from the additional 40 days of aging. Advantage Zombie Dust

    Taste: Zombie Dust dank, beautiful citrus pine combo. Zombie Ice malt assertive, constrains the pine and citrus, though both are still present. Would say in the taste department, I prefer Zombie Ice's showcase of pine and dankness, but prefer Zombie Dust's absence of malt. If it could somehow capture that pine featured in the Ice, I would love Zombie Dust even more. Both excellent, comes down to personal preference, both deliver as promised.

    Mouthfeel: Zombie Dust light, crisp and refreshing. Dry and slightly bitter, though citrus sweetness stands its ground. Zombie Ice is sticky and resinous in terms of pine, malt assertive, citrus has been put in the corner. Zombie Dust drinks light and easy, Zombie Ice as expected is stronger, the alcohol feels much stronger, much more of a challenge in terms of wanting to gulp Zombie Dust vs. wanting to sip Zombie Ice. I believe both are well crafted and presented as expected, leaving this to one's personal choice. I prefer Zombie Dust, but objectively call this a tie due to both delivering well. Tie

    Overall: Much of the above may appear as a personal copout, in terms of the ties, but both of these beers are quite excellent for their respective styles, and I highly recommend both.

    I really wasn't surprised with any aspect of this side by side. I personally prefer a solid full flavored Pale Ale, or standard WCIPA over most Double / Imperial versions, primarily due my preferred showcase of hops with negligible to no malt presence of Zombie Dust, vs.the very high to me malt sweetness factor with the latter. I will still consider a Zombie Ice now and again, and the primary aspect I prefer Zombie Ice more is the heavier pine presence for the aroma and taste, but Zombie Dust is my true love. Bottom line, if you like stronger beers and a malt presence, pick Zombie Ice. If you like nice clean crisp hops front and center pale ales, Zombie Dust is for you.

    Kernkraft 400 Award Winner = Zombie Dust

     
    MutuelsMark, beergoot, BJB13 and 18 others like this.
  18. ESHBG

    ESHBG Pooh-Bah (2,099) Jul 30, 2011 Pennsylvania
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Not lame at all and my appreciation for some AALs has actually grown over the years and I enjoyed this.

    I come to the same conclusions when I review IPAs vs DIPAs and they end up being different enough where it's hard to pick a winner. But anymore I end up going with the part I put in bold/underline and IPAs are the more drinkable ones and I usually don't tire of them halfway through the glass like I do with DIPAs as they start to warm and when the sweetness starts to come out more and the flavors begin clashing a little too much for my preference.
     
  19. cjgiant

    cjgiant Grand High Pooh-Bah (6,560) Jul 13, 2013 District of Columbia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Ok, I have a doubly inspired side-by-side, doubled. The March Madness thread by @ChicagoJ made me realize I have not rated or reviewed many of the most popular beers that I’ve had many times. And the post by @ATL6245 had me wanting to revisit a macro lager comparison of the most often rated offerings that are missing such from me.

    [​IMG]
    So I decided to do this blind, and I’m shocked by one part of it - that I properly guessed each beer correctly. Note: the GF, as quickly as she could, tried each and chose the same favorite, but she had the two Buds as interchangeable and liked Miller Lite the least.

    My notes (copied below for easier reading):
    Beers 2 and 3 had sustained heads, 2 being more creamy. 3 is lightest in color, 1 and 2 looking similarly more tan than the others, and 4 being most “yellow.”

    2 had the best smell, with something beer-like and I might be excused thinking maybe hops, but might be something else (like maybe beechwood?). 3 and 4 are lightest, with 3 being a mix of corn and something floral.

    3 is almost tasteless, very light and quite corny, but soft. 2 is similarly near tasteless, but is more watery and gets a hint of toast. 1 and 4 easily hold my interest more than the other two.

    1 starts a bit sweeter than 4, but also has a light bitterness. 4 has the most carbonation, which helps, and finishes the driest, with at most a whiff of bitterness.

    As for enjoyment, my ranks highest to lowest were:
    1, 4, 2, 3
    And my guesses (I was only fairly confident of Bud Light):
    Corona, Bud, Lite, Bud Light (all correct!!)



    Replacing the numbers with beer names:
    Lite and BL had sustained heads, Lite being more creamy. BL is lightest in color, Corona and Lite looking similarly more tan than the others, and Bud being most “yellow.”

    Lite had the best smell, with something beer-like and I might be excused thinking maybe hops, but might be something else (like maybe beechwood?). Bud and BL are lightest, with BL being a mix of corn and something floral.

    BL is almost tasteless, very light and quite corny, but soft. Lite is similarly near tasteless, but is more watery and gets a hint of toast. Corona and Bud easily hold my interest more than the other two.

    Corona starts a bit sweeter than Bud, but also has a light bitterness. Bud has the most carbonation, which helps, and finishes the driest, with at most a whiff of bitterness.
     
    beergoot, BJB13, o29 and 13 others like this.
  20. ATL6245

    ATL6245 Grand Pooh-Bah (3,160) Aug 16, 2018 Georgia
    Pooh-Bah Society

    Great post. There really is something instructive about comparing these mass produced beers. The can of Corona is very interesting vs a bottled one. Bottled will have tha skunked aroma 99% of the time.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.