It's high time that we update Beer Styles!

That speaks to nothing of the differences the quoted poster made.

 

You've more faith than I do, based on current descriptions that often are so broad as to sound the same.

 

So which do I choose?? What does "sharp" mean versus "perceived"??

(sorta just being an asshole, but also asking questions)

 

Not 100% sure I follow as I’m on my 2nd Knob Creek Bourbon, (yeah I know it’s not beer but sometimes I like to switch it up ) but I’ll try. Are you saying how does the average beer drinker differentiate between English Pale Ale and English Golden Ale? Personally I think that if an average Joe sitting at a bar had to make a choice between Bass Pale Ale or an example of this emerging English Golden Ale style, they would just go for the Bass. Not knocking them at all, just pointing out that most people are not beer geeks, like us BA people, and most people just go for what they’re familiar with.

 

I'm agreeing with you, which is why I said "in your defense" - and would further argue that the difference "us geeks" make is somewhat arbitrary especially with regards to the masses. Yes, some things fit into a style. Yes, that style [likely] has a history. Yes, one hoping to be a beer geek should understand that history.

But if your're not a beer geek? Well, then, choosing from 150 styles is totally easier than choosing from 110. Especially considering they are really quite distinctive.

Did I use the irony font correctly?

 

I definitely like the first nine, ten would be the grisette (I think fruited kettle sour is redundant since they all seem to have fruit). Next for me would be the stein beer...

 

This will be a long post. Please take it as an attempt at constructive feedback. I didn't chime in on the previous thread even though I had many opinions on the matter. Back then I thought it would be better to just see how things were in time after they took their course.

I think that if BeerAdvocate wants to add a number of beer styles, things could work out better if a macro perspective is used in addition to focusing on if a given style is simply "in" or not. I will add my 2 cents on the former since most are focused on the latter.

The first thing is asking what BeerAdvocate is primarily hoping to achieve by adding more styles. Is the goal to better reflect the current marketplace or to present a wider picture of beer throughout time? Milkshake IPA speaks more to the first goal while Steinbier speaks more to the second. Either approach could result in lots more to add than what's already been discussed - such as "lo-cal" IPA for the first, and Broyhan for the second. So, the question is where to draw the line - and having a clear goal will help to determine that.

Personally, I think that a major factor should be whether the addition of a style will likely increase your audience's understanding or cause confusion. Some examples of how it's not an easy answer:

- In looking at the beers categorized as pale milds not too long ago, it became clear that a huge amount of them were actually what their brewers considered "golden ales." The breaking down of mild into both pale and dark seemed to cause more confusion than clarity. Will the addition of an "English golden ale" category provide that needed clarity?

- Do the terms "international ale," "Kentucky common," or "French saison" provide less or more clarity?

- Does the inclusion of a "smoke/d beer" category with a description that includes the terms Rauchbier, Märzen, and Bock cause confusion if there's also a separate Rauchbier category?

- If there's a Festbier category and a Märzen category, will that only reinforce people's misunderstandings of those terms?


I would imagine that adding those "historical" German styles will result in some styles with only about 20 beers categorized as such (if done properly). Does this work with the goals? Consider the possibility of including (new) styles without including them as separate styles.

For example: the "smoke beer" category can explicitly state that "as two styles of smoke beer, Lichtenhainer and grodziskie beers should be included here." The description for saison can clearly state that all grisette beers should be entered here. Etc. This isn't a change from how a bunch of the categories already work... the difference would be that it would be definitively stated and clearly outlined. The concept makes me wince a bit, but you can add/revamp a category... just call it "historical beers"... and then have the description include a list of some beer types that should be included as such (like the German ones in the OP, gruit beer, etc.)

The inclusion of more styles should work within the way that styles themselves are organized here. I wouldn't mind seeing the existing framework re-evaluated to optimize any new additions. After the last shuffle, I found the list to be much less intuitive. I don't think the addition of pale/dark works well. Being forced to pick one, Oktoberfest is in the dark lagers section even though current authentic Oktoberfests aren't. Smoke beer is a "specialty beer" but Rauchbier is in the dark lager section... even though there could be a Helles Rauchbier. Cream ale is a "hybrid" and Kolsch is a "pale ale." If you wanted to find German Roggenbier, would you instantly know to go to the "dark ales" section? Is Weizenbock in the wheat or Bock category? The list needs another look and this would be the moment for it.

Similarly, I think the addition of country names to the majority of styles could use a second look as well. If a style is being broken up into various country associations, then that's one thing (such as the previously mentioned American IPA / English IPA example)... but if a style name is only used once on a list, then that's another thing. To go back to the IPA example, if there was (hypothetically) only one IPA category here (which could be a reasonable way to categorize things on a store shelf for example), then under the current convention, that category would be named "English IPA." Therefore, Two Hearted wouldn't be listed as just an IPA, it would be listed as an "English IPA." It creates the impression of a distinction that is inaccurate. To use a different example, if there was an "American Dunkelweizen" category here, then surely the American made Dunkelweizen with added coffee, chocolate, and orange should be classified as such... but instead, it's classified as a "German Dunkelweizen" since that's the only category. I realize it's the country of origin for the style, but in the land of terms like "New England IPA" it creates the impression of a more specific distinction than just the style name.

 

I've felt for a long time that there should only be 2 styles of Imperial Stouts, 1 Imperial Stout and 2 Flavored Imperial Stouts.

 

Glad to see Pilsner near the top.

 

I'm not sure I'm following you - are you saying these two styles aren't distinct enough from each other?

OK, then here's a take using BA rating categories

English Pale Ale:

• Look - amber
• Smell - bread crust, tea, yellow apples
• Taste - balanced between malt (toast, caramel) + hops (spice or marmalade)
• Feel - medium body, low carb

Golden Ale:

• Look - blonde, almost like a lager
• Smell - flowers, lemon, tropical
• Taste - hop forward (citrus, grass, herbal)
• Feel - light body, med-high carb

Picture an American Blonde with APA levels of hops, and that's close.

Never mind telling them apart, I'd say it's actually difficult to confuse them.
There a whole lot more difference between them than there is between American Amber vs American Imperial Red, for example.

This is why I think Golden Ale should be style - it's absolutely its own thing, and is unrepresented here now.

 

But how to handle a standard Imperial Stout w/ coffee vs something that tastes like Tiramisu? I feel a coffee one is still an Imperial Stout, while the Tiramisu is very much a Pastry Stout.

But then I admit that knowing where the dividing line is can be hard. What if it has coffee, chocolate and vanilla but is only a little sweet?

 

Thanks for doing this, it has long been tricky having to add american kettle sours as berliners or wild ales, which they aren't, so I welcome these changes! Great stuff!

 

Yes! Thanks for the info! I see De Ranke occasionally at more selective beer bars in my hometown NYC. I’ll be on the lookout for their Saison. Thanks for the article. It confirmed my original post that stated the Belgian Saison had fallen out of favor and has since been revived.

 

@rudzud - I assume you might not recognize it as such, but that's a contradiction.

 

I'd recommend and support additional styles of (because they are so plentiful now and yet very different animals):
1) American Fruited Kettle Sour (w/o Fruit, could it easily be either a Gose or Berlinner?)
2) Pastry Stouts - see other input/enough discussed on them
3) Milkshake IPAs - IPAs with vanilla and/or lactose need to be identified. Drastically different beer than either NEIPA or other American IPA subcats.
4) Radler/Shandy - there is enough out there to warrant their own style.

On the fence:
American IPL - If people feel that American Lager is too broad a catch-all style then sure add IPL for the heavily hopped American Lagers that aren't Euro classic styles/ingredients)

Soured American Saisons - I've had many American made saisons lunped into the "Belgian saison" style category but were quite sour/funky and most of the traditional saison characteristics were not present. American Wild Ale would have fit better for these beers even if they used Saison yeast. Many HF, Resident Culture, Suarez saisons would go here if this style were created.

Don't recommend:
American Pilsner - It's either "to style" as a German/Czech Pilsner or an American Lager or IPL.
Any further Euro style additions at this point.

Consolidate/Reduce catagories for the following:
Porters/Stouts - Only use styles that are easy to tell differences by most non-professional tasters. If there is alot of overlap / grey area, then its ripe for consolidation.

Lambic & Fruited Lambic really can just be under Lambic. Most all brewery labels will specific which type of fruit is added.

 

All for adding more styles. I'd also like to see place names removed from more styles. Especially, please don't add "american" to the front of new styles like pastry stout. If, in some dystopian future, some other country starts making lots of ridiculously sweet stouts that are also somehow totally distinct from.the.versions brewed now we can separate "american" and "other country" sub styles out then.