Macro Lagers: Refreshing when cold, but what am I missing?

Can't really say but I think "having alcohol" is the main criteria.

 

In a word...no. You nailed it when you said Budweiser is, "refreshing when cold".

This entire style is designed around refreshment...not 'sip-n-savor'. A quick look at how these beers are marketed to the consumer, the buzzwords are crisp, clean and refreshing. Not everybody wants to get slapped in the face with a hop bine or fusel alcohol every time they have a beer.

 

Bud is better the colder it is. Let it warm up compared to a craft beer, especially an IPA or Belgium beer, and you will taste it as the true swill it is. Bud is for the masses who just want something akin to beer with alcohol being the key ingredient. Cheap and effective at getting a buzz. For true "taste", craft and quality produced beer covers both the "taste" factor and the buzz factor. I drink beer for the enjoyment of a quality and tasty beverage, not so much the "I wanna get crap faced" reason. Therefore I do not mind spending a few extra dollars to enjoy the beer for what it is. Now if I were still 17 and poor then Bud or any of the other crap beers would be on my agenda as that was my primary reason for drinking them back then. I guess becoming an adult has made me appreciate beer a lot more.

 

Think about approaching beer as wine drinkers approach their tipple.

Lagers are like White Wine and most Ales are like Reds. Wine aficionados understand that a Chardonnay should be served colder than a deep, dark Syrah. The Chard is meant to be crisp and refreshing while the Syrah is for sipping / savoring / dissecting.

Wine folks don't talk disparagingly about lighter styles and take the time to appreciate their subtle qualities. Beer folk would be well advised to take a hint from our brethren who appreciate the grape.

 

The way I look at macro is that it's an inoffensive and cheap way to get drunk, and may be refreshing along the way. But not enjoyable, though you may fool yourself into thinking that during the first two.

 

You have to give credit where credit is due. Mass market beers are well-made pilsner-like beers, but so many craft lovers speak negatively of these beers because of their lack of flavor. You just have to understand that this is a style that just doesn't have much flavor. Many craft breweries have difficulty brewing a pilsner because it is a hard style to brew, although I'll admit there are some that do a better job because they are able to brew more flavor in their versions.

Hate on these beers if you want, but give them credit that they produce a beer every time that is exactly what they think their customer wants, and right now 80 percent (and declining) of American beer drinkers think they want this beer.

 

That is some solid advice right there. I'll be adjusting my attitude accordingly. Hopefully others will take your advice as well.

 

This is one of the best posts I have read on this site. Appreciation for delicacy is, sadly, lost on a great deal of beer drinkers.

 

Both go great with oysters.

 

A note on wine: Chard has gotten a bad rap mainly because of massive California winemakers who oak it to death and create a buttery mess. Which has become enormously popular in the US. Chardonnays can take on a huge range of characteristics, from rich and woody to bright and fruity. Bud is made to be as flavorless of possible in order to appeal to the average American, so if it can be compared to any wine it would be cheap table wines like Gallo.

 

Analogy is not intended to constitute identity.

 

I'd like to try some of these seltzers that people think are indistinguishable from beer.

 

I don't think anyone here would compare SN Nooner or any of the other beers you mentioned to Bud.

 

Blind tasting, pick out the seltzer, I got money to bet.