Controversial Beer Opinions Thread

Let's argue about that.

 

No need.

There's nothing more to be said.

 

I have not, but would certainly be open to trying them. Thanks for the recommendation.

Butter turns me off in chardonnay as well. It's the butter, sure, but it's also knowing that it could have been avoided. In case you wondered, it's not the wood that causes it. It's malolactic fermentation carried out in a solution that is high in citric acid. Some reading, if you're interested:

http://wineserver.ucdavis.edu/industry/enology/methods_and_techniques/reagents/citric_acid.html

 

Yes, there is!

 

Ok, I'll elaborate.

You said "everyone."

I know of at least three people who are not.

Hence, "everyone," is clearly wrong.

 

You know that I was joking, right?

 

Nope. Couldn't see any twinkle in your eye.

I think you may find this worth a read.

https://www.wired.com/2006/02/the-secret-cause-of-flame-wars/

Intent and interpretation of intent can be two different things when there are two or more people involved.

 

Most of the time, man, I'm really not actively trying to be douche-y. It's just how it write, believe it or not.

 

Nobody has brewed a "true IPA" for over a century. Perhaps because of a shortage of sailing ships.
But pretty well every variation of Pale Ale has been marketed as an IPA at some time or another.The only constant "true to type" factor has been low ABV.

 

Interesting. In the sake of Paris I'd think the buttery oak flavor would come from the wood. However it is aged in wine barrels and therefore is it possible the wine aged prior had malolactic fermentation carried out in a solution that is high in citric acid and then have residue of the wine left in the wood of the barrel to give the beer it's buttery oak flavor?

 

Ive had several of their beers at different bars and at the brewery. Controversial opinion: Hill Farmstead is just pretty good. Nothing special.

 

Is it a controversial opinion if I believe this thread doesn't need over 75 replies by the same person?

 

Sorry I’m not following - what do you mean?

 

Yeah... didn't explain myself that well on the initial post. I was making a comparison between hyped beer styles and hyped coffee purveyors. The folks that I see in Burlington at Maglianaro's sipping a single origin pour-over (decidedly not dark roast) are the same folks lining up for 2xIPA at Foam. Same goes for Tandem/Bissell in Portland. Or Blue Bottle/Other Half in NYC. I think Dark Roasts are like a legacy brand craft... Otter Creek, Saranac etc. Not super popular now but when well executed can be very good.

 

Oh for sure I agree with the above. If someone is drinking the single origin pour over that’s no guarantees of anything on beer choices. Definitely could be a case of drinking what’s cool. But I think if they (like the guy I responded to) say they love dark roasts, hearing they also like super hoppy / barrel aged beers is pretty unsurprising. If they said they were obsessed with cask milds then I would have been shocked

 

Yeah, I kept trying to figure that one out. I think it's backwards.

 

my initial post said belgian triple/monastery/trappist sucks.
I speak about these particular kind of beers with specific yeast. I still love lambic, gueuze, saison where you don't find these horrible (fore me) yeast

 

People who bring suitcases to releases are selfish and should be thrown out of the release.

Light beer is horrible, no matter how well crafted it is.

There are too many mediocre (and old) IPAs clogging the shelves. How many do we need?

Stop using stupid beer/hops puns and wacky tasteless labels.

The shaker pint needs to die.

MEAD IS NOT BEER.

 

Yeah, tried it, it improved greatly but not to the extent you describe. I'll stick with Narwhal and Bell's Expedition (which I found to be not as harsh fresh as some people say.)