Flanders Reds & Oud Bruins

I remember a time when Red Poppy was a Brown ale until Tomme said that it was a red. Acetic acid is a characteristic of red ales which is only produced in the presence of oxygen. Since oxygen can get through the oak, red ales have to be barrel aged.

This is all what I remember, haven't read the book in quite a few years.

 

Not really. Though the category puts them together they are distinct sub categories with their own style guidelines. Trying to wrap your head around that is difficult.

Rodenbach prior to the takeover by Palm Breweries was a lot more characterful. It was 'dumbed down' quite a bit. They got rid of Alexander and the old Grand Cru was simply epic. I guess the best way to put it is that it is a shadow of it's former self. The process has been 'sped up' and in the process made more approachable by being 'sweeter' and thus less acidic.

Oud Bruin on the other has the 'typical phenolics', chocolate malt, dark candi syrup thing going on and tends to be on the restrained side of acidic.

 

Since the acidity in Oud Bruin is mostly lactic, I'd go for "yoghurt beer", just doesn't sound all that sexy does it? Probably would be best to avoid confusion with the whey beers cropping up in Europe lately.

I've contemplated the difference between Bruin and Rood quite a few times, I've heard various explanations from geography to addition of fruit to simply the color of it. I decided to give it a rest since they aren't really a style I love. I'll go for a mediocre lambic/geuze over any of the supposedly great oud bruins. The reason they throw me off is the same as with Berliner Weisse: too sharp and vinegary. They don't hold a candle to the depth and complexity that a good lambic offers, so pass.

That's not to say I won't try as much as I can of the stuff that people recommend to me in the style though. I adored Petrus Aged Pale, but that's really more of a Belgian pale ale with bretts than a clearly definable Flemish Red/Brown.

 

Yeah, or India Pale Ale.

 

It's not the same. IPA was originally brewed in England and shipped to India, therefore it was English IPA. The term IPA refered to it's destination, not it's origin. Now we have American(not America) IPA's, etc. If the country of India ever brewed an IPA, it would then be called an Indian India Pale Ale.

Thought you had me, didn't you? Don't mess with a retired teacher.

 

Just being facetious.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oud_bruin

"While some examples of an Oud Bruin may be aged in oak, typical beers in this style are not, and this is what helps Flanders Brown ales distinguish themselves from the more sour Flanders Red ales."

 

What's you're take on Vienna Lager? Viennese Lager?

 

Cities work differently. If a beer is identified with a city, it uses the formal name of the city, like Sam Adams Boston Lager or London Porter. The style Vienna Lager is also an Austrian beer.

Understand? - or do you need a homework assignment?

 

These are my favorite types of beers and I typically just lump them together.

Subjectively, I find beers labeled oud bruin tend to be a bit more rich, with more of the sweet & sour balsamic vinegar character, while flemish reds tend to be more earthy and mellow, sometimes more sour.

 

Taste-wise there is a clear distinction between the reds and browns in terms of acidity and funk and to a lesser extent in the malt flavors. The problem is that the labeling is really imprecise and there are beers with a lot of acetic character labeled oud bruins and beers with no acetic character labels reds. The appellations are mostly all marketing and beer people trying to categorize everything. Not really worth trying to overthink it.

 

Cuvee Des Jacobins for me please.