Deschutes Questions

Deschutes is one of the few reputable breweries that I have plenty of access to, yet never explore. I'll put them on the list, but it may take a while for me to get around to that.

 

Abyss is awesome, Obsidian Stout is my favorite regular stout, I think both should be put into barrels!

 

I guess I don't see "step up barrel aging" and "100% barrel aging" as synonymous concepts. Another brewer I really like--Boulevard--uses partial barrel aging to the advantage of their final product. So I have a hard time second-guessing the partial barrel-aging as long as I think the beers are awesome (which I do).

As far as adding another stout or porter, Deschutes makes one of the best standard American porters out there, and their stout is pretty good too. Not sure they really need another offering for either style.

 

yeah, compared to Bruery, FW, and Lost Abbey, Deschutes is behind for a major west coast brewery. But I suppose Lagunitas is as well, so go figure. That being said, I have enjoyed the offerings that Deschutes has brought out. There's something to be said for the subtle nature of their blending techniques vs. the more aggressive 100% aging that is done by competitors...

 

A little off topic, but how does a partially barrel aged beer work ? Do you brew a batch, throw it in a barrel and then say like 12 months later brew that exact same beer and blend them together ? Seems like it would be easier to just throw the whole batch in a barrel and bottle it when it's done.

With that said I like almost everything they do. Fresh Sqeezed was awesome and Black Butte Porter and Obsidian Stout are my favorite of each of their respective styles.

 

After drinking The Dissident, I think their barrel-aging is just fine. Love Deschutes.

 

Not a fan of Barrel-Aged beers; just not my style. I won't crap on anyones taste preferences though. Deschutes doesn't distribute to Wisconsin yet, although I hear that is changing in the next few months, so I don't get to try their beer with anu regularity. I do bring back a 6 pack or 2 of Inversion whenever I visit family down in Omaha though. I've enjoyed all their other offerings as well.

 

I'm a fan of Deschutes brews, their year round line-up is solid but I'm probably one of very few people who don't care for abyss. I like barrel aged stouts but abyss didn't do it for me. Not that it's a bad beer, or there's anything wrong with their barrel aging program because I liked mirror mirror.

I think that for some breweries they don't want %100 barrel aging to take away from the base beer and maybe also that it's a way for them to get as much beer to the masses as possible.

 

But let's spin this another way. Does anyone think Bruery or Lost Abbey should add some six packs of amazing everyday drinking beers at an affordable price? Where are the IPAs, the APAs, the IIPAs, the normal stouts and porters, german styles, ambers, etc? Don't they really need to step up their games? In comparison to Sierra Nevada, Deschuts, Lagunitas, even Green Flash, they're reallly behind! ;-)

I'm half joking here but I think it's interesting that we equate innovation and quality with the ability to do really expensive, arguably inconsistent, low quantity products as opposed to having an incredibly well balanced portfolio of products with quality at every point that matches or nearly matches the best of the genre. People complain about the price of Abyss, Not The Stoic, Mirror Mirror which I simply don't understand when you compare it on a quality and dollar scale to LA and Bruery beers. $16 - $18 for LA 375s?

Firestone I would argue is closer to the Deschutes end of the spectrum than to the Bruery / Lost Abbey end.

 

That's more or less how it works, though they may use a different beer for blending. However, even with 100% barrel-aged stuff, you can do blending as different barrels may impart different characteristics or may be different ages. Consider e.g. gueuze, some of Russian River's sours, or even the Firestone Walker anniversary beers which while not 100% barrel aged, contain blends of different barrel-aged beers.

 

Blending beers is a real art; check out the annual Firestone Walker anniversary beers for evidence. Beers are often blends of barrel-aged and non-barrel-aged to get the best of both worlds. Some flavors fade with aging; by blending presumably fresher vintages of a base beer with aged versions, one can (in theory) bring out more subtleties.

100% barrel aged Abyss may not be as good as blended. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that this is what led to blending Abyss in the first place.

 

This is a good point. I think an argument could be made that doing a partially-BA beer is more difficult in many ways than a 100% barrel-aged beer, because of the blending process. And the theory is that you are getting a "better" beer by refining it to taste exactly the way you want, rather than rolling the dice with whatever comes out of the barrels.

 

I trust the brewer more than a roll of the dice in a barrel, blending is the brewers art, what you end up with is a fine painting rather than a painted wall

 

You make some good points, and on the whole I agree with your sentiment from a consumer standard.

I guess the idea here is that each of these have different niche markets and different product offerings. I think the OP is valid in asking...if indeed we agree that deschutes and firestone are similar in their market niches, and we can agree that firestone's barrel program is superior, then I think we can agree that deschutes needs to step up their barrel game.

 

I think they need to step up their hoppy beers. Their Inversion IPA is not good, Fresh Squeezed is an improvement but still not that great, none of the bomber IPA's have appealed to me besides fresh hop Mirror Pond.

Obsidian, Black Butte, and the barrel aged stuff are the best beers they produce.

 

While I think it's reasonable to argue that Deschutes and Firestone occupy similar niches in the market, I disagree with the sentiment that you can determine that one or the other need to step up their game on a given front simply because there is, at the very least, one other brewer who is better on that front. I mean, you could make the case that Firestone has the best barrel-aging program in the country, or at the very least, that they are the best at barrel-aging out of breweries who also devote a significant amount of time/resources to a regular/standard lineup.

The argument is then essentially that Deschutes needs to step up because they are behind the leader. I'm not sure that's a fair argument.

 

Compared to Firestone, almost EVERYONE needs to step up their barrel program. ;-)

 

I'll just put it this way...if I was the running Deschutes, I'd want to compete in top form against my closest competitor in every area.