For those who notice many different smells from a beer

This applies to some beer reviews as well...

http://io9.com/wine-tasting-is-bullshit-heres-why-496098276

 

That article is awesome. I too am amazed and skeptical when I read reviews on here with a whole laundry list of separate tastes and smells people rattle off. I've only occasionally been able to get more than one or two different things from one beer.

 

have you ever sniffed a stout at room temp out of a tulip? then youll see how people could do it


personally though, im a lot better at identifying wines

 

I just had my first Bourbon County Brand Stout (4.75) and smelled banana, walnut, and airplane glue.
Otherwise I have no special talents for smelling non-beer things.

 

I can pick out a lot of different aromas from most beers, but only when I'm looking for them (competition judging, etc.). I don't tend to look for complex aromas in other drinks/foods, so I don't notice them. I would say it takes training and practice to consistently pick out subtle aromas in a beer, but for those that have the training/experience, I absolutely believe it's possible to identify complex aromas.

 

Even as a novice beer drinker (far more experienced wine drinker), I'd say that there are definitely many perceptible aroma notes in beer, wine, and just about anything else for that matter. It's just a matter of experience and training, perhaps amplified by natural ability.

That being said, if someone can pick out notes of "overripe yuzu fruit, opulent rose petals, wet pencil shavings, and musty cigar box", more power to them; however, I'm going to say those kinds of descriptions venture into ostentation and pretentiousness, and tow the line of utter BS. I wouldn't use intensely specific descriptors unless I was damn sure that's what I was picking up on, or I was at least trying to be funny.

Personally, I prefer more indefinite descriptors that give a general sense of what you're actually experiencing, so as to not seem like a pretentious douche; for example, the above description would turn into "sweet citrus character, floral, a metallic and earthy flavor is also noticeable". Anything too far past that I find hard to take seriously.

 

Isn't that a bit like saying "I can't run a mile in under 4 minutes so nobody else is able to do it?"

 

No, plus I was responding to the article that listed all the reasons to be skeptical. Read what I said again. "Amazed and skeptical" is in no way saying "I can't so no one else can."

 

You are "amazed and skeptical" and then go on to say: "I've only occasionally been able to get more than one or two different things from one beer." So isn't that the reason you are "amazed and skeptical" ?

 

Ok, how about "amazed YET skeptical?" would that wording be more to your liking? I didn't realize I'm not allowed to think it's "amazing"if someone can smell/taste grapefruit, mango, clove, tobacco, metal, licorice, cat piss, rye bread ALL in the same beer YET be "skeptical" they can do it. Now I know drtth is the opinion police. Next time I'll try to give only opinions you approve of.

Oh, and by the way, you can prove that you can run a four minute mile. You can't prove that a beer has all those smells/tastes.

 

I mean if you read about a beer it says what all goes into it, all the fruits, barrels, hops whatever.. if you read what is it in and then smell the beer it may be easier to pick those smells out when actually taking whiffs of it.

People probably train to start by doing this… reading whats in it then trying to pick those smells out..

After years of experience it comes natural and people can focus and pinpoint different aromas… and again those aromas are going to be weak when the beer is colder and more and more smells come out as it warms.. same goes for taste..

In my minimal amount of time drinking beers (650 unique) plus i'm very young for a BA… I've started to do this reading what goes into it and smelling it throughout as it warms and try to pick out different fruits, malts, hops, aromas

Most of these people that have had 3-5000 beers tend to be much better due to experience and training when it comes to picking out aromas.. Also if your stuffy or sick your smell and taste will be hindered.

 

A beer can be evocative and reminiscent of aromas and flavors in any number of ways- they don't have to be dead ringers, though sometimes that happens. That's the beauty of manipulating the basic ingredients that make up any number of styles.

Take what you listed above- at first blush I'd say it's not at all that unreasonable of a list. It may even conjure up a number of beers that I have had before. Some of them might be redundant- raisins and figs strikes me as being that way- but you never know how something will develop in the glass. Personally, if I am getting something vaguely like either one, I'd just go with 'dried fruits' as a descriptor; sometimes I am reminded of something specific, and if so I'll use the more specific term. It definitely goes both ways.

I do think there is a line where it gets ridiculous, though, but what you listed doesn't cross it.

 

Oh, "opinion police" is it? My goodness you do get defensive and accusatory at a couple of questions.

 

You can train your sense of smell to cue into certain aromas that one would expect on the basis of malts, hops, yeast, and other parameters. If you know what you are looking for and practice improving your accuracy via test trials and then comparing your results to expert notes, you can calibrate your sniffer quite well, detecting what's there but also what's missing on the basis of style guidelines and other people's impressions. Of course there is an art to this ... Some of it is olfactory receptors firing in unique combinations in response to certain smells and some of it is learned, idiosyncratic associations on the basis of memories (gee, this beer smells doughy but kinda solventy ... Like being a kid in art class ... GLUE!). Either way, beer smelling and tasting are legit crafts, part science and part art. I am sure I smell some odd shit in beer from time to time but I also tend to converge on other people's impressions, a marker of accurate performance to the extent that the latter is possible.

 

Actually it is provable given the appropriate testing conditions.

 

I routinely make up the smells I get in a beer. Usually I do it to be comical, sometimes I do it just to make myself feel more important, like I can do things others cannot. I have a list of smells I use and sometimes I don't even bother to sniff a beer, I just write my review and randomly copy off that list.

When you read there are more than 350 different aromatic compounds in hops, and that yeast/bugs routinely produce a laundry list of aromas that can change with time and fermentation temperature, and that the malting technique and roast of a malt can produce a wide range of scents, that is all bullshit.

Don't bother trying to improve your smell identifying, cause those smells you read in the reviews of others are just as bullshit as those written in mine.

 

Ok, great. I read the wine article posted, lightheartedly put my two cents in, and now have been argued and nick picked by you into leaving the thread. Congrats!