What’s The Difference? Share Your Side By Side (2024)

Side-by-side of Tree House beers: Green and The Greenest Green. I did Green and Very Green either late last year or early this year. The differences weren't huge in those two. Let's see about these guys...





Green is far and away my favorite series from Tree House.

Stats
Green: Canned 7/8/24
Greenest: Canned 6/18/24
Maybe a little long in the tooth by NEIPA standards...

Appearance
Green: Yellowish orange one finger head
Greenest: Slightly darker, same head. Thicker looking.

Aroma
Green: Pretty pungent pineapple, citrus and earth.
Greenest: Pineapple, berry, citrus, earth. Not quite as strong smelling

Taste
Green: Pineapple and citrus, nice bitterness on the back.
Greenest: Juicier, but similar. Not quite as bitter.

Feel
Green: Soft, full bodied. Dry, chalky finish.
Greenest: Softer, fuller, thicker. Really easy to drink. Not as dry a finish. Wetter/coating feel.

Overall
-Green is my desert island beer and will remain such.
-The drinkability on Greenest is almost a little frightening for the abv.

Though similar these are very different beers, especially in the mouthfeel. I'm going with Green. Greenest is an amazing beer but Green just does it for me. A little more character in the mouthfeel.

 

Guess I'll go back-to-back here with a 10-ish day lag. Sometimes a side-by-side is just begging to be done. Troegs Perpetual and Double Perpetual.



Here we go (tl;dr at the bottom if you want to skip ahead)

Perpetual

Canned 8/12/24, 19.2oz stovepipe

Ever so slightly hazy but essentially translucent. Golden/pale yellow. Three fingers off-white head. Much better retention and lacing.

Piney aroma dominates.

Piney and bitter taste. There is an ever-so-slight sweetness that creeps in when the beer warms.

Medium to full-bodied with a markedly dry, sticky finish. Bitter aftertaste that lingers. Medium carbonation.

Double Perpetual

Canned 7/12/24, 16oz can

Translucent bright gold. Much brighter color. One finger white head. Good retention and lacing.

Piney/resin aroma but with a sweet maltiness.

Piney bitterness balanced by sweet maltiness. Alcohol noticeable but not off-putting.

Medium to full-bodied with more of a coating mouthfeel. Some stickiness, not as dry.

tl;dr…Double Perpetual is a worthy beer but it’s not unseating the OG. Can’t beat that piney, bitter dryness. Double is, not surprisingly, sweeter that Perpetual. Was surprised by how dry Perpetual was in comparison. Pretty marked differences in appearance, taste and mouthfeel.

 

Some nice IPAs to start this page of this thread - well done, @DavetotheB

Well, I saw a couple weeks ago when I noticed I missed out on this year's Hoptimum that I somehow missed out on grabbing last year's version of Narwhal, as well. Coincidentally, I saw the 2024 release in the stores this week, so I grabbed one. I have one each of 2020 and 2021, but a handful of 2022. So I decided today that I'd try to get the stash of the more abundant releases closer to the scarce with a quick mini-vertical side-by-side.


The first thing I noted is that the bottle caps were of different colors. Not sure how that affects the other differences between the vintages, but let's start by finding out what those are.

Little more head prduction and stickiness from the newer Narwhal, but not by a lot given the two year difference. I think the 2024's head is a little deeper brown it's ancestor. In the nose, the newer beer has a more spicy vibe that I am actually going to attribute to how the freshness of the hops is presenting itself. There's a chocolate and menthol thing in the 2022, an unsweetened root-based cola and mostly spent pine-shaped car air freshener in the 2024.

The first 2024 sip brings the resinous pine notes of hops much more obviously than the coy aromas the nose was playing around with. The first sip of 2022 actually brings more of the spiced cola, as if it had jumped ship from the 2024's aroma into the 2022's flavor. It's a little less of a biting spice, and the roasted malt is playing the biggest part of the subsequent sips.

Back to the 2024, and there is a bit more warming feel I get from it, almost like a young bourbon or wine that hasn't had its edges smoothed out, especially compared to the more approachable feel of the 2022. Relatively, the 2024 has more of a Cascadian dark ale, and I am enjoying the aged version a little more than the month old beer sitting next to it.

 

I'm in a hotel next to the airport in Hamburg, because I start flying home tomorrow morning at 6:10 AM. I lost my phone earlier this trip, which makes me much less adventurous, and unwilling to take an unassisted non-zero-transfer train ride and multi-turn walk to interesting beer places that are 45-60 minutes away. Luckily, grocery stores around here are loaded with German lagers, and the airport has a grocery store. So, hell, why not pass the time with a fairly random side-by-side of two random German grocery store beers that say "Hell" on the label?
Chiemseer Hell and Holsten Edel Nordisch Hell.


Appearance: They are close enough in appearance that I wouldn't be able to look at them side-by-side and tell you for sure they were two different beers. Light gold, wispy head, moderate carbonation, super clear.

Smell: Chiemseer is brighter and lighter, not exactly emphasizing grassy and lemony notes but definitely featuring it. Holsten is mustier and dustier, more earthy and wet-grainy.

Taste: Mostly holds up that same impression.

Mouthfeel: Very similar. Very, very similar. Light, a little prickly, smooth.

Overall: Definitely a bigger fan of Chiemseer than Holsten. Recognizably similar beers, but one much more closely aligning to my preferences.

 

The GF brought these back from a trip a few hours south of us. I have had Alewerks Black Forest beer in the past, and don't recall being overly thrilled with it, though my rating was a 3.9 from 2017. I'm not sure if my significant other realized the regular was a 2022 version - cellared by the brewery, presumably. I have not had the barrel aged version, but do tend to like Alewerks barrel aged beers.

Mainly wanted to check out what barrel aging does to a beer, but I'm not sure it's a good pair to figure this out, given the age differences (I am assuming the BA version wasn't aged for 2 years).


On the pour, the newer (BA) beer grew a larger, slightly darker head. It holds a slightly thicker ring as they both settle quickly. There is a bit of a stale note to the older (regular) beer - but not in an off-putting way. It just seems like an aged stout - not a lot of chocolate or cherry. The newer, barrel aged beer is much more surprisingly devoid of aroma. A vague hint of potential sweetness is all I muster. It's a really weird experience.

At least the 2024 beer isn't devoid of taste. But it is somewhat bland. I'm still a tad perplexed.

Back to the 2022 beer, it is a decent aged stout, with a dark chocolate edge and a little tang that is likely the cherry still showing up after a couple years.

Back to the newer beer, and it definitely has a brighter feel - a little more carbonation and a tingle of a bite versus the older beer's more mellowed out vibe. It is also a bit sweeter, and I am now getting some barrel notes, including a little tang I sometimes get with barrel aged beers.

The newer Black Forest definitely improves as it warms, with sweetness forming a bit of a dark chocolate brownie vibe coming out. I'm not really getting anything resembling cherry, though. As I become accustomed to the vibe of the older beer, it is agreeing with me more and more, even if it isn't very complex. Then again, its paired beer isn't all that complex either.

I didn't start this trying to pick a favorite, but the aged beer shuffled forward to proclaim itself as such, regardless. The GF disagrees, but not with a lot of gusto.

Back to playoff baseball, which has been quite interesting for the middle games today.

 

Hellbent - Mid-Season Harvest Fresh Hop IPA (Sabro and Citra, 6.6%, 09/16/2024) and Late Harvest Fresh Hop IPA (Citra and El Dorado, 6.5%, 09/23/2024)

Late is clearer, darker, smaller head. Mid is hazier, more orange, medium sized head. Both have similar lacing and similarly low levels of carbonation.

Mid smells fruitier and brighter, but not a very traditional citrus or tropical profile. Lychee is a word I used in the review. Late is earthier, bitterer, darker.

Taste follows that trend. Late after mid is resinous, bitter, earthy; mid after late is almost cotton candy and fruit juice.

Mouthfeel on both is similar -- medium, dry, slightly gritty. Late's a bit more resinous.

Overall...definitely prefer the Mid to the Late. Both good, neither great.

 

If simcoe is the mother of bitterness, el dorado is the illegitimate child of Fruit Loops and Kool Aid.

 

Been a while since I’ve had a beer really highlighting it, but I recall candied orange or even something like orange-flavored Hubba Bubba.

 

I homebrewed with El Dorado hops once (with another hop variety) and all that I could think of is this beer tastes like candy.

I still have several ounces of that hop package left in the freezer which I thought I would someday brew with again but...At the point I should just throw that package out since those hops are so old at this point in time.

It was not a bad beer and I drank all of those beers (2 cases worth) but "candy" is not an alluring flavor aspect for me.

Cheers!

@cjgiant

 

Okay, baseball playoffs are on and I want to Fest!
(Too bad I pretty much don't care for any of the remaining NL teams, but tonight involves AL games)

Helps that I am taking off tomorrow, so I am going ultra-local SDE vs. expansion-local-ish-ish SN in this Atlantic Coast produced Festbier matchup.


I posted a Settle Down Easy beer in the smoked beer appreciation thread the other day. This is the Festbier they had a special on due to perceived excessive stock at the end of the actual festival. I drank a couple of these Oktoberfest Festbiers while watching rain delay the Sunday night football game with a friend who likes the wrong team.

I posted in this site's Oktoberfest tasting thread my thoughts on Sierra Nevada's Oktoberfest Festbier the one day during the festival that I drank one. The SDE beer seemed fine, but bland when I had it Sunday, and the SN seemed a little bitter, but had a malt presence in a way that worked well enough to my liking.

Today...

The Settle Down Easy has a fairly grassy overall impression to it. It's pretty clean, but lacking some body, or at least roundedness, that I feel a beer that respects the malts can bring. I'm not saying there's a science to this, just an impression I have. Overall, my initial impressions from Sunday are holding.

Without thinking about it until now, this does vaguely parallel my initial thoughts on the SN collaboration this year.

However, it is immediately clear that the older brewery has produced a beer that meets my criteria for a "malt-respected" brew. The difference in feel, within context, are almost night and day. SDE's brew lacks body, flavor, and (yes) a bit of sweetness that Sierra's Festbier brings. Their finishing bitterness and hop profile aren't too divergent, at least if I pretend I can exclude the malt influence from the better brew (yes, I'll call the "winner" early here).

Thankfully, much like my thoughts on SN's beer in the Oktoberfest thread, SDE's beer balances out as I drink, but it started behind and didn't really evolve all that much.

In the end, I think I could argue that SN is the coffee / tea that was steeped in fresh grounds. The SDE is a second run from the original ingredients, with the bitterness turning a bit from pine forest to grassy plains.

 

Ok, so revisiting a comparison I did just over three years ago, when we were within a half hour drive of the brewery. Lawson's Finest Liquids sent a couple of their beers down our way, recently, and the GF has been grabbing four packs as she has been shopping. We got some of both these two beers last year around Snallygaster, but I didn't record a comparison then - as far as the search results indicate.

So, Lawson't classic Sip of Sunshine and it's less alcoholic brother Little Sip of Sunshine both pour with a medium haze. The colorings are similar to my pics from Vermont in that previous review, with the 8% Sip being more orange and Little Sip being more pale golden. Little Sip (just over a week older than Sip, which itself is just over two weeks old) had a little better head build up.


Little Sip has a husky grain to young wood and earthy herbal notes on first sniff. Regular Sip has a slightly sweeter olfactory impression with a little citrus in the nose. These beers' aromas seem to fit into the mold one would expect given their ABVs.

Little Sip isn't bringing a lot of malt sweetness when I tip the glass for a... sip. It is bitter-forward, but isn't overwhelmingly bitter and this is likely more a result of a low malt profile than a bitter hop profile. Regular Sip is pretty similar, actually. It has a little more malt in the opening, but not as much as I expected from the nose. The bitterness is a little more citrus pithy than the reed-like wild grass to earthy notes of Little Sip.

At this point, I am going to actually re-read my old comparison (the first half).

• I said almost exactly the same thing about the looks of the beers - ha!
• I used different words, but the aroma description is vaguely the same
• I specifically mentioned ripe fruit and bite in Sip as a differentiator in my previous review, in a way that seemed more obvious then than it does to me now

As the beers warm up a bit, Little Sip aromas are working their way towards the bigger beer next to it, with pithy citrus coming out along with a little more fructose-reminiscent sweetness. Regular Sip seems to be gaining a little spiciness in the aromas as it warms.

Both beers finishes are getting more and more resinous and piney as I drink them, but neither is bringing much else different than I originally noted. I just read the rest of my previous review and see that I ended up liking Little Sip a little more that day in the Green Mountain State.

Today, I'm not finding a key difference that forces me in one direction or another. The GF also thinks the beers are quite similar, and she's not doubling down on her statement from three years ago that Sip of Sunshine "has more flavor." Last comparison, I got some overripe tropical notes in Sip of Sunshine that I wasn't digging then and am not getting today.

So, have these two beers become more similar over the years?

Obviously two comparisons three years apart can tell that, but perhaps others that have these beers more regularly can weigh in. Lastly, for some odd reason, I really want to compare Little Sip of Sunshine versus Pliny the Elder. Maybe Vinnie can coordinate sending his beers this way at the same time as Sean and I can make that happen

 

Three straight posts - something I hope the one World Series team can claim in the near future...


Pumpkin Ales from Schlafly on All Hallow's Eve Eve. Does the Vanilla version differ much from the original?

It doesn't hold its head as well, and seems a tad bit darker - the extract adding color?

I hate that Schlafly makes their Pumpkin Ale around Independence Day. Didn't check the bottle date of either of the bottles the GF bought, but the nose on the regular is still very nice. The Vanilla variant is dull in comparison, definitely less spice-y, and not particularly vanilla-y. It is a bit more carrot cake than pumpkin pie in the allusion-to-dessert realm.

The Vanilla variant is a bit more tangy than expected, and a cream cheese icing with less sugar than ideal on a carrot cake vibe plays out. More earthy and, again, tangy, than I expect from a vanilla addition, which usually brings an impression of sweetness with it, in my experience.

The regular has a bit of tang, too, but the spices lift it from tha palate more than the surprisingly more earthy variant. The regular seems more sweet initially, but as they warm, the Vanilla does sneak in a little bit of a "darker" sweetness - like turbinado or even molasses compared to the relative refined sugar of the regular.

(To be clear, neither is overly sweet - both are decently balanced for the style)

I'm not really seeing the need for the Vanilla variant here. It's a bit different, but not in a way that is an improvement. I didn't expect it to be better - maybe different and on par with, but not better. Mainly I expected a decent dose of vanilla, which I didn't get, so I go back to - was it necessary?

But we bought it, so there is that...

 

For my fourth post in a row, I'm going to do a 4-way comparison...

Nah. Just kidding. Though as I typed the words, I did start thinking of whether I had two more beers I could add to this regular ol' side-by-side. Based on what's on hand, it would have to be an American or Russian imperial stout, but that'd be a bit much.

Anyhow, I am doing a black IPA side-by-side today. Port City's annual release of Long Black Veil happens to coincide with the latest drop of Wookey Jack from Firestone Walker that I saw.


On the pours, Long Black Veil seemed to have a darker head, though as they settled, any difference left, so maybe Wookey (poured first) looked darker on the pour as well. Sitting a bit later, and I'm actually a little surprised to note there is actually a difference in shades of black in the body of these beers - with the local Port City being darker, and Wookey Jack having a brown hue to it, relatively.

I adored Wookey Jack last year, and I wasn't as gung ho for what I got in my first can of it this year. It was still damn good, but it seemed a little more dull compared to my expectations - however realistic they were. On first sips of these, I am finding something similar.

First off, Long Black Veil is more stout-like roasty, paying off the darker body, perhaps. Wookey Jack is more earthy (which I noted in the first can), though the rye is a bit more obvious to me in this sitting. It definitely brings some spiciness to the mid-late palate and the finish. In the same part of the taste, Port City's beer it bringing more char and somewhat of a wood tannin bitterness paired with a hint of citrus peel.

Going back to the nose, I note similar things, though the translation is more direct in Wookey Jack, especially the rye spice. The looks of the two beers has continued to be quite similar - Port City's beer had a little more lacing, but neither head has faded and both form a creamy, medium collar in their respective glasses.

---

I initially was enjoying Long Black Veil better in this comparison. But, sipping these a bit, Wookey Jack grew on me. I like rye beers and rye whiskey, and I guess these proclivities started to take over as the beer warms. They actually came closer together in profile as they warmed, but the rye was a differentiator. I don't think you can go wrong with either of these if you come along them, though you're probably more likely to find one of them than the other.

 

We have a beer fridge. It's in the basement. Occasionally, we throw beers in the kitchen fridge when we bring them home because we're lazy. Often, they make their way to the basement, but sometimes the reverse happens - we bring a beer up and don't drink it and throw it in the kitchen fridge.

Today's side-by-side is comparing two beers from the kitchen firdge - one of which was placed there out of laziness, and on of which I brought up to share with a neighbor who had brought over his own drink and we never got to opening the one I had for him.

If this seems like an odd thing to do a comparison on, consider that, in this case, both beers happen to be Oktoberfest. One is Paulaner's Oktoberfest Märzen and the other I recently reviewed in NBW - Tonewood's Biergarten Märzen-style beer.


First off, I did like Tonewood's beer, but did feel it had an Americanized bitter lean to it. Secondly, I have not enjoyed Paulaner's version as much this year as others. It, like the Spaten I tried, had a bit of a sulfur note that detracted from it.

With that going in... The GF's pour of Paulaner (which I did first in a thinner glass) is quite clear, whereas my glass has a fair amount of haze - especially considered expectations and the same beer sitting across the table from me. Tonewood's offering is hazy in both of our glasses, seeming more amber in the GF's and nearing brwon in my glass. The pic doesn't show these differences very well, at all, I should say. Heads are similar.

The noses are, pretty surprisingly, quite similar. Tonewood's beer has a little bit of a cherry or cherry wood note that Paulaner's does not, but both have a malt tea, fresh and still steamingly moist baked bread aroma. I expected my recall of Tonewood's bitterness to show up as a difference here, but it does not.

Paulaner's starts off more bitter than I recall - clean and still mildly bitter, but bitterness jumped out in the first sip. The bready malt seemed an afterthought. Tonewood's beer once again appears to be copying its older relative... bitter with malt after, but it's not doing it with that clean feel I noted in the German brew.

(Anyone seen Multiplicity, if you think of Tonewood as the first clone, slowly getting fuzzier... maybe?)

I am not getting skunkiness in the Paulaner today. The malt pushes forward as the beer sits waiting for my next dive into it for notes. Tonewood's Märzen is more comfortable with the face it put forward in that first sip. As such, I start enjoying the Paulaner and its malt a bit more than Tonewood's Biergarten as this comparison moves along.

As I sit on the NJ beer for multiple sips, the malt shows up a little more, but with more of a husk-included way than Paualner's - evoking that "cleaner" vibe the older beer exhibited way back in the first sip. Side note: my Paulaner has cleared up wisually, as well, so a chill haze was definitely in effect.

The GF liked Tonewood's a little better, and thought Paulaner had a mass-produced vibe to it, to paraphrase. I think she showed a little surprised when she learned what she was drinking. So you got one vote, @jonphisher

In the end, I pretty much stand by my original thoughts on the Tonewood offering, with the malt being involved in the flavor profile, but not driving things. Paulaner's brew stumbled a bit out of the gate, perhaps, but came around to what I expected of it. That said, the opening similarities were fun to note.

 

Thanks for the tag @cjgiant, I enjoyed the read. I haven’t had their marzen since last year, it’s stil hanging on at a few places though. If the mood strikes me and the fridge clear out a bit I may just grab some.

I got a Tonewood coming up for this or next NBW…stay tuned

 

Barleywine(?) vs. fresh HopSlam

Many people claim that an old HopSlam becomes a barleywine, so upon discovery that I still had a HopSlam from last year in my fridge I decided to do a comparison.

Old HopSlam: Best-by date of 02Jan24 with a note on the can of a 3 month shelf life.
New HopSlam: Best-by date of 02Mar25 with no note of a shelf life.
Both cans list 10% abv.

Both beers refrigerated essentially their entire life.

Freshly opened:
Aroma:
Old HopSlam smelled like the inside of a brewery during brewing operations. Hops not prominent.
New HopSlam had a fresh, in-your-face hop aroma and not much else.

Taste:
OH had no honey taste, no malt character and all muted hops flavor.
NH had a powerful hops taste, very slight honey character.

Near Room Temp:
Aroma:
OH aroma was same as when cold.
NH aroma was also same as when cold. I think I got a little bit of celery too.

Taste:
OH tasted like an average, old, hop-forward DIPA, but certainly not like a barleywine.
NH has some alcohol taste, but no honey flavor.

In the end, the old one was not a barleywine, and the new one was just as tasty as it's supposed to be.

 

On deck and coming up soon in today's sudsy forecast. I've tried both and WOW! This is gonna be a tight comparison. Rating/reviewing beers of this quality is always a joy let alone finding them. So, I need to wait until a bit later in the day to drink them together due to the ABV vs my body weight. If you haven't got your hands on either of these resinous Black IPAs...well, just DeWitt! Thus far this is the best tasting beer I've had from NG. Its resinous qualities will compete evenly (I think) with the rye aspect of Woodland Jacobus.
New Glarus Black Top Black IPA 6.9%
Firestone Walker Wookey Jack Black Rye IPA 8.3%

 

I have a 12:00 reservation today for one at Klub Kalsarikännit to do the side by side....

 

Ta Dah! It's time for these two beauties to go on a date and make out. My brain says they won't be wildly different but there's truly only one way to find out and that means drinking them. Opting for these glasses over Willie Beckers. I do have more bottles/cans of each of these outstanding beers so if this set up ain't cuttin' it then a 2nd round could matter. From 2 posts back. Better late than never:
New Glarus Black Top IPA 6.9%
Firestone Walker Wookey Jack Black Rye IPA 8.3%
The NGBT is a bit lighter in color, Wookey head is slightly thicker, creamier, pock marked, and a is a wee bit darker than BT, aroma is similar that being slightly hoppy, WJ has rye for sure in the grain structure taste-wise where as BT is a tiny bit sweeter and softer with a bit less overall "bite" if you will. BT has wicked resinous pine on the back end that borders on spruce tip strength. WJ has bitter rye throughout, a more complex mouthfeel, and I would say that the level of bitterness btwx both beers is the same but is from different sources. Both are quite smooth drinking and dare I say BT drinks a little easier. WJ has a bit of an earthy, woody aroma and perhaps a trace of smoke in it as well. BT unrolls more toasted grains with warming but the Wookey has char. Both display notes of a few dark dried fruits. They have essentially the same body and length of finish. Both are fairly drying in the finish. These beers aren't so different but are more the same. Outstanding!!

 

Hoping everyone is enjoying the weekend. Today I am doing a side-by-side because I happened to buy these two beers yesterday. One is called Born Yesterday, though given what people have written, it was probably born about a month ago (I couldn't see a date stamp on this bottle). The other one was born about a week ago - the age I found Born Yesterday when it was first couple of years after it was introduced. Of course, Ocelot is considerably closer to me than Lagunitas, so getting Kings & Queens within a week isn't a shock.

I could not find which fresh hops Lagunitas used in this beer, but Ocelot has their ingredients on the side. I used to be able to read them more easily, but with some effort I see the first listed is Superdelic, then Simcoe and Mosaic.



Ocelot's Kings & Queens pours the brewery's typical pale yellow with a medium light haze. Lagunitas beer is more bruised nectarine and at least a medium on the haze scale. The heads are fairly equivalent.

Born Yesterday has a tropical and sweet peach with a note that I recognize could be foreshadowing a nice bitterness in the taste, but doesn't smell bitter. It's more an experience recall thing than something my olfactory sense is directly sensing. Kings & Queens is much lighter in aroma, but I am getting a mildly catty citrus pith. The makeup of the nose is evoking memories of some WC IPAs from about a decade ago, though the strength is lacking.

Kings and Queens follows up its aroma profile with the same in the taste. A light grain opening with a slight bight of carbonation gives way to a peel, zest, and even a spritz from a slim wedge of lemon. Herbs surround this and squeeze in to envelope the palate. As it does so, I get accents of coconut sweetness and a bit of the cattiness. Eventually, the bitterness does get a little grapefruit and piney, with a slightly woody finish and linger.

Born Yesterday is way more juicy and tropical. Honestly, I had the impression of a sweet and bitter Tiki cocktail. Pineapple, passion fruit, lemongrass, maybe a hint of Thai basil, and even a bit of funky Jamaican rum (sort of a vegetal decomposing banana peel). This beer is sort of thin, with a seltzer-like carbonation to my palate. The bitterness is like unripe fruit skins or pineapple fronds, somewhat herbal, with a little grapefruit pith in the linger.

I like the look of Kings & Queens and the nose of Born Yesterday. I like Ocelot's flavor and feel, though I'd argue taste is the most subjective winner of this mostly subjective ranking. The GF also chose Kings & Queens, by a little bit.

But wait, there''s more!

Not much. But since I had extra from the local brewery's 16oz can, I deceided to try it against the other local beer I bought [more of] yesterday - the DC Brau DIPA On the Wings of Armageddon. I figured, given how I was enjoying it recently, I'd compare it to Kings & Queens for a pure enjoyment in the moment reaction.

OTWOA has the added sweetness and malt profile that a DIPA that is using some toasted malt (based on body color) would bring. And OTWOA finishes with a firm bitterness. It's tasting great.

And yet, I am enjoying Kings & Queens a little more, right now.

That's it (finally). I'm glad to see my streak of posts broken up by a couple of good comparisons. Cheers, all!