Trappistes Rochefort Triple Extra

I'm sorry for possibly (but unintentionally) striking a nerve. I agree with a lot of what you are stating. My tone is meant to be friendly.

"Tripel" is a reference to high strength. (I'm not trying to come across as a fool by typing that out... but I guess that's how I look.) Westmalle's strong blond beer from the '30s was called Superbier. They changed the name to Tripel in the '50s. According to Tim Webb, before Westmalle adopted the name, there were dark Belgian beers called tripel. Ron Pattinson has called Westmalle Tripel the first pale tripel. According to a Michael Jackson definition of the style (date unknown), tripels are "often" pale. In '93, Jackson also said Belgians "very often [associate it with] pale." According to Jeff Alworth, "there's no reason a brewery couldn't make a dark tripel."

All the usual talk of: evolution, marketing, definition, guidelines, history, popular usage, etc. isn't what I'm getting at. We're probably mostly sick of that conversation. Here's what I'm getting at:

When someone encounters a beer with a label that goes against their expectations, rather than automatically considering it "wrong," they can consider the possibility that perhaps it's really just unusual (even if extremely so). Be it a pale Doppelbock or a golden Märzen... a 3.5% ABV IPA or a 7.5% ABV barley wine. In my opinion, open-mindedness is even more important when the situation is someone from one country considering the legitimacy of a label on a beer from another country.

With regard to a label not being "true," it doesn't matter if almost every hypothetical or forgotten dark tripel has since fallen by the wayside... or if their numbers were always tiny. If Michael Jackson's travels in Belgium did not result in him being of the opinion that every modern tripel had to be blond, then perhaps we can just consider being open-minded and slowing down before acting as judge, jury and executioner by declaring a particular Belgian beer as not being "true."

 

That's quite a logical fallacy there, ending with the Michael Jackson appeal to authority. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

You're conflating your definition of that word's original use with its modern usage as a style descriptor. Yes, originally "tripel" (like "dubbel") was (roughly) a reference to the relative gravity of a wort (IIRC it's a reference to how many worts they'd blend from a particular mash), but it was not a style as we know it, today.

And to be clear, word definitions are mutable. So let's say I'm wrong and Tim Webb's reference to pre-1956 beers that were dark and "tripel" were indeed marketed as such, after the modern tripel was popularized, that meaning was lost and is now archaic, in the same way most words in our language have evolved from others or lost old meanings and gained new ones. There is no original, proper term that is more correct in our modern language. There is the one that people know and use now.

And today, tripels are blond, dubbels and quads are dark, stouts and porters are "different," IPA now means hazy IPAs AND west coast IPAs AND a million other styles of IPA...but it doesn't mean "black IPA" or "brut IPA." All of that may change in our lifetime, maybe it'll change this year thanks to your tireless effort to revive usage of the term that nobody, literally nobody, wants to revive in practice. But you're wrong, not just because you're misapplying a one-off reference from a reference guide that doesn't contain the original examples, but because you're incorrectly describing how language works.

But you're also wrong because you're suggesting that the producer of a thing has no obligation to their customers. That it must be up to all individuals to waste their time and attention and thought to consider how THEY must be wrong to have expected the thing that the brewer put on the label. That's fucking gaslighting, and it sucks.

So yes, let's embrace the "dark tripel" revival when it comes. But let's not parade logical fallacies, misapply anecdotes we read once, argue for the superiority of archaic definitions of things, conflate two separate meanings for single words, or gaslight each other, while we're having fun and being open-minded and slowing down and all.

 

Damn, the semantic discussions have been getting heated around here lately

 

It's an excellent beer, whatever you want to call it.

 

Oh no. Don't look or you'll get upset squared, because here's an image of the Gulden Draak "amber" Quadruple:

Is this brewer "gaslighting" their customers... or are they intentionally playing around with conventions... do they feel that color isn't a critical part of this classification for them... or are they just the worst brewery ever? Which is it? Do they have a right to any of the above? I once met the 6th or 7th family generation owner of the brewery (can't they figure this out?). He seemed nice... not the type who'd brew a beer to diabolically gaslight his audience, but what do I know. With respect to the brewery, I just opened a "Monk's Cafe Flemish Sour Ale." I swear it tastes like grape soda, but I really like it.

@errantnight , if you think my position is the pushing for a "dark tripel revival" then I'm not doing a good job communicating to you. I'd honestly like to have a beer with you someday. I dream of being able to return to DC to have an Antigoon from the tower at Brasserie Beck. I hope they survive everything that's going on.

 

Amber quads are dark, checks out. And this brewer is specifically using the term “dark” every time the word “tripel” appears precisely because it’s clear color is an important part of the classification.

but honestly, I would love to grab a beer. I don’t think you’re a bad or dumb or otherwise disingenuous person, in fact, quite the opposite. I just think you’re very wrong here. Look forward to the chance someday to clear the air over a glass of tripel, whatever shade it may be.

cheers

 

Call me naive but I didn´t see this thread before my Rochefort Triple review until now, but up to this point I want to think I didn´t make a total mess of it yet...

 

No Rochefort in town currently so I don't expect to see this. Who is the distributor?

Okay, MDV. I posted that remark before I read the whole thread.

 

In Wyoming? It looks like Teton Dist., with divisions all over the state.
https://www.merchantduvin.com/distributors-resellers.php#WY

 

Great but will the local retailers order it if I asked them to and would Teton oblige? I have been disappointed before when I asked for something. We shall see, I reckon. TY.

Edit: Here is Teton's portfolio on their website.

https://www.tetondistributors.com/portfolio/

No Ayinger, no Orval, no Warsteiner in sight. Ayinger was the last that I saw in town.

 

I was reminded recently that this beer exists and that I haven’t tried or seen it yet, so I wrote to Merchant du Vin about it. Received this reply today:

Rochefort Triple Extra is not in the US yet.

The brewery has had fantastic response to this beer in Europe, and they are stabilizing production and distribution there first.

We plan to bring it in, but it's still some months away: we'll have to get US Federal label approval, then register with the states that require that, then ship the beer and get it through customs - and that's all before we present it to distributors and retailers. We'll announce Rochefort Triple Extra when we have a somewhat firm ETA.

Thanks for the question, and thanks for your patience.

 

So... you'll have to follow the same procedure that the importer of every other imported beer and (save for getting it "through customs") every brewer and/or distributor of all the out-of-state domestic beer on the shelf?

 

Yes, but it does take time. The government does not act swiftly on many occasions.
Like, most of the time unless it's to it's benefit.

 

Yes please!
I'm open for samples.
I'll definitely check it out when/if it becomes available in Pennsyltucky.

 

I remember seeing this beer on the shelf (or at least beers with the Witkap label) some years ago and not bothering to ever pick it up, you see, Belgian imports were plentiful in those days, not so much now, at least not where I am, so many regrets. Is it just me/my area where the variety of imports seems to have contracted considerably?

 

Nope

 

Yeah, I didn’t figure it was

 

I can’t believe that of all people I (someone from the Midwest) would be the first person to post this:



Seen in Indiana.