New Beer Weekend #26

Good point - I guess giving a barley wine credit for a 3 because it's neither jet black nor crystal golden pale is appropriate. But at what point do we give "below 'F'"? Is a completely unexpectedly flat amber ale to get at least a 3 because it "still" has a deep red hue?

I'll re-focus my discussion point on the "seriously flawed" point brought up by the original reviewer. Does "seriously" mean anything? Or was it internet bluster?

Again - I'm am more curious of the process/mentality of the rating than the ratings themselves - I've never had (yet) the beer that just happens to be the focus of my interest.

And because I'm aware how this might be perceived, I haven't had an issue with what @beergoot has said - I'm as much asking questions out loud I ask myself when reviewing beers.

 

The next one surprised me a bit as I think I was expecting more bells and whistles and what I got was solid DIPA, crisp, clean and nothing else.

The appearance was very similar to Centennial, aside from the head, which was oddly minimal. No matter to the aroma and flavor though, this drank much more like a 'modern' IPA with the hops in the brew all getting together and having a party in my mouth with the malty chaperones far outnumbered and not holding their own. Lovely drinker and at 10% a bit too easy to gulp. Unlike Centennial, I likely will be drinking a a few more of these down the road.
Now I have to wonder what other local standbys I've ignored for years. Hmmm.
Anyways, thanks again for reminding me that sometimes 'old' things can be first time new.
Cheers all, and good evening!

 

It's all in the eye of the beholder.

 

I will score a beer higher if it is in style and just not to my liking experience wise. Some times these are just notes to me, don't buy this again, because you hate X Y or Z.

 

Both Two Hearted and Centennial are 100% centennial hops. Might make a good side-by-side for the new thread. Also, it's a crime, as GR native, you've never had Hopslam before today. A crime.

 

Come on, now - beer holder, for chirssakes

Yeah - the combo of advocacy versus personal note can be interesting. But a good review will show that, no? And the review for the global BA is why this thread exists, isn't it?

 

Everyone has different preferences, I try not to be too personal in reviews though and just describe the beer as and for what it is. And yes, beer holder.

 

Agreed. Where do "preferences" belong in "objective reviews" that we strive (but cannot possibly achieve) here? Or are we Untappd, with more wordy subjective reviews?

 

That's the thing, every likes different things and perceives things differently, even like the rating scale, so it's all just personal and basically subjective. We should strive for objectivity, but there is always a difference in how we look at things like the score of ratings, how good something is for what it is, how something should be rated, etc. I personally don't think @beergoot's picture looks that bad, I would be fine giving the appearance a 4. It's a nice looking amber reddish orange color, semi transparent, not dirty looking or anything, even without a nice head. I don't view a head formation as that important in the looks of a beer, and don't have a problem giving something over a 4 if I think it looks good even if it has no head, others might disagree. I personally like the looks of a completely opaque NEIPA, others may not, etc. There is always some personal preference, that's why it's in the eye of the beerholder, and it kind of doesn't even matter. What matters is, what does it smell and taste like, feel like, overall, etc. What you think the rating should be is irrelevant, imo. The ratings just help you understand how much someone liked it, and together how much people tend to like it, aka how "good" the beer might be.

 

So the BA ratings are irrelevant? I can get on board with that.

 

Yeah, I don't want to imply ratings are meaningless or anything like that, they are helpful too and when combined produce the overall rating which can be helpful for seeking out "good" examples of a beer, but still doesn't mean that you'll always like high rated beers, or not like low rated beers, it's all just personal. I discovered through my beer journey there were many beers rated under a 4 that I thought were great easy drinking beers that I highly enjoyed and scored over a 4, and some beers that I didn't think were even that good with an over 4 avg rating, so it shows you that the ratings only mean so much because everyone views things different and enjoys different things, and even rate differently. What matters in a review is what the beer might actually look, smell, taste and feel like, and how you might think it all comes together and drinks. Some people may think it's a good thing to be more critical and personal, others may not, so I guess just do what you want.

Just try not to think so hard about them.
Or you could say, take it with a grain of salt.

 

Thank you! It takes me ages to finish writing a review, and it's all on-the-spot, stream of consciousness, so I always try to save a little beer to just sit with and enjoy after I finish writing, but I definitely enjoy when the effort is acknowledged by others. Thanks!

 

Th

That one is par excellence! I am happy to hear that the berry notes haven't gotten sloppy with age. (I think I still have a 2018- so your post reassured me-HAHA).

 

You're awful chatty tonight, @cjgiant. You going to drink something or just criticize other people's reviews? Sheesh. Edit: Almost forgot the little face to show I still love you.



Pours an opaque orangish color with a thin off-white head and thin lacing.

The smell is pine and citrus, mostly orange with a little lemon.

The taste is lemon, orange, and strong, bitter floral on the finish that's slightly chemical.

The mouthfeel is medium/thin with low carbonation.

Overall this one of unique. The smell is nice but the flavors are a bit muddled and the floral finish doesn't work for me.

 

You are right. Silly me for hoping for honest insight on BeerAdvocate versus needed some salt to help distinguish.

Your review sucks!

And yes, I am being irascible tonight - but just for you:

 

Well Hello Late Night NBW
I reached back into the generosity of @Buck89 . One of my few handshake ticks from NBS. We got to meet up at Bottle Logic and have a few. Him and his wife are great people, and I just love how one can meet people like this through a common love of beer, and participation on BA.

Thanks John! I finally hit this.
Winter Sweet Tooth by Souther Grist English Barleywine.

https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/44180/404198/

A stunningly deep burnished copper hue pushes a mocha toned fluff nearly 2 fingers high. But this cap quickly retreats to a slight film.When held up to the light, a ruby to amber shine glimmers on the edge.
Aroma is sweet but not overly so. Notes of caramel and toasty marshmallows start off. Undercurrents of date, cocoa, vanilla, and char follow.
More cocoa forward than caramel in flavor. I'm picking up smooth vanilla, marshmallow, dates, figs, a rich round charred wood akin to rye barrel. But it does come back to caramel after all. Hmm full circle.
Mouthfeel is slightly fuller than expected for style. But it's really nice. Carbonation is light.
Overall, when I first poured I was thinking this was an imperial stout, (I had not read the label in a while). For lovers of barleywine, this one has aged well but it is a tad hefty for the style. If one is not a stickler, this is one helluva nice ride.
4.06/5 rDev -3.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4