Tripel Tasting Thread (March 25-27, 2022)

So since the bottles are dated with only a best by date, do you know how many years out the brewery is dating this beer?

 

Starting off the night with the most readily available tripel in my market. The 750ml corked version is always on the shelves, but this is a 341ml from the variety pack that appears from time to time. Tasting great like always and I’ve I return to time and time again. Cheers!

 

So in the planning thread, I started some discussion about how much real difference there is between beers categorized as "Tripel" vs. "Belgian Strong Blonde/Pale" (vs. just differences between individual beers). @zid

I wanted to do a blind side-by-side with two prime examples that I had on hand - Westmalle Tripel and Delirium Tremens. I had my wife pour these blind, I didn't know which was A or B.

These look damn near identical. Same color, same clarity, same thick creamy layer of head. Same excellent head retention and lacing as I drink. Both A and B aromas are grainy, mildly fruity esters, but B has just a bit of peppery spice. A's taste starts slightly sweet with bready malt, but with an earthy dry finish. B taste is very similar, just a touch more minerally. A and B are both thinner bodied, high carbonation, but a touch of creaminess from the head. Overall these beers are extremely similar, but if I had to guess I would guess B might be the Westmalle due to slightly more phenols...

I ended up being right, but in this case I would say the difference between these beers is pretty minor say compared to difference between two random IPAs (or really any other style). So not really any change in my opinion.

You can see the excellent head retention after drinking most of the glasses over the course of an hour or so and revealing which beer was which.

 

Finishing up the evening with a can of Golden Monkey.

An attractive clear orange amber color. Right out of the gate, you get banana verging on solvent. But in a good way? Honey in the aftertaste with banana peeking through.

Mouth feel is a bit slick. Fizz works well in a supporting role. Sweet but not too sweet, a good backbone for that banana solvent. Wears its booze on its sleeve.

What to say? It's almost not on the same planet as the other Tripels I've tasted yesterday and today. Loud, brash, unsubtle. But I do like it a lot. Especially when a 12-pack of 12oz is less than $20.

 

My bottle had the same date. I assumed it was a 2 year date, but I can't seem to find anything on the internet to back that up.

And yes, the 6, 8, and 10 are 5 year dates.

 

I had similar expectations, but did not believe they would be as pronounced as experienced. Freshness or lack-thereof is the primary reason I don't purchase these great European beers as often as I would like (higher costs due to tarriffs + the "fourth tier/importers" the second reason). The majority of my consumption is primarily draft servings, with the beer typically fresher in the handful of places I know will purchase and serve beer properly.

Yes, Tripels best serve my taste preference which balance a nice fresh hop profile with the yeast flavors. To date, La Fin du Monde and the fresh Chimay stand above the several others I've tried, though I'm hoping one breaks through tomorrow. I also agree the only style which may benefit from aging are lambics, and then beers which weren't the best at release (BA Stouts too hot out of the gate, or perhaps the adjuncts are too strong/unbalanced).

Loved hitting Monk's for a beer or two in my downtown working career, followed by a walk to Metra. Haven't been there since pre-COVID, definitely want to go there this year.

Thanks for the heads up regarding the Triple Extra yeast sediment. I notice it holding against a strong light, but didn't in normal light. Hoping I enjoy it, but had very high expectations with their 8 and 10 still in my Top 5/10 beers of all time.

 

My next tripel for the weekend. One of my favorite brews. i love the carbonation in this one and the added fruit flavors and spices make it one of a kind...i feel like almost everyone has posted this one so that says something

 

OK, I popped open the Trappistes Rochefort Triple Extra, and ran into the same issues as Frank.



Full review in the New Beer Sunday thread.

Tried to catch the yeast sediment, but didn't do a good job as you can see above. This beer tastes about the same as the old Chimay, which was close to a year older than this beer (Q4 2019 vs. Q3 2020).

Bottom line, this was a disappointment, since I was excited buying this beer from one of my favorite breweries. Their 8 (Strong Dark Ale) and 10 (Quad) are two of my favorite beers in any style. Oh well, glad I bought a single . In the event they ever release and send a fresh shipment here, I would give it a second chance, but will not purchase another bottle from this batch.

I am glad most others have enjoyed their beers. Perhaps there was an issue with the beers sent (or stored) in Chicago, though Glunz typically does a great job distributing their beers here.

I will return later today with my last Tripel on hand, this one local and brewed in 2022, so I'm hoping I end my tasting with a bang!

 

When this tasting was announced, I was really tempted to do a blind side by side of my favorite North American tripels. Isn't it funny that the only time people on BA talk about "North America" as an area for favorite beers, it's in the context of tripels? People in the US just really love La Fin du Monde and seem to modify parameters to accommodate it. Anyway, I pretty much abandoned that tasting idea after @jmdrpi posted in the planning thread about the dividing line between a tripel and a Belgian strong pale ale (or lack thereof). After I mentioned that one should use multiple beers to examine this division (rather than, let's say, just Duvel and Westmalle), I felt like I had to go down this road rather than just talk about it.

With that in mind, I decided I should do a blind side by side with no less than 3 beers from each camp (as seen in the pics above). I had some hesitation though. Not only would this be expensive and involve a lot of alcohol, but I was also concerned with sensory overload with this style. I ended up doing this tasting in two parts. I used 2/3rds of each bottle for one tasting... waited a long time... and then did another tasting with the remaining third of each bottle. Since I think it's important to repeat tastings to get a better sense of the beers, this would suit me just fine. When I did the second tasting, I poured the sediment from the bottles into my glass. After pouring two beers like this, I immediately regretted it. I normally decant my beers. I felt like I made a silly mistake, but since I poured two bottles this way, the best move was to pour them all equally.

A note on my feelings about these two styles before doing this tasting - I'm a broken record about this, but I am of the opinion that things like the BJCP style guide are a somewhat artificial construction that are suited for beer competitions rather than decoding the brewing industry. Personally, I feel that golden tripels and strong golden/pale ales are two ways of marketing the same beer type more or less... and that "strong blond" is the most proper type/term even though style guides often don’t use it. It's cool if anybody feels differently. That's just my take on it. Would this tasting make me rethink this stance?

Here are my reactions to these 6 beers. Note that I didn't attempt to rank these beers according to my tastes. I was just attempting to get a take on them. Also note that my takes on certain beers might seem very idiosyncratic. These are just my reactions and others will react very differently. All descriptions below are relative to the other beers in the group.

Piraat - Beer dates from 1982/88 depending on your info source. 10.5% ABV. Note that I am of the opinion that this isn't a Belgian blond but a Belgian amber, and as such it's an outlier in the group even though it's categorization on this website would include it. BA has it listed in the "strong pale ale" category and Untappd has it as a "golden." I don't know why English style guides don't conform to typical Belgian categories. This beer was spicy, malty, dry, slightly fruity, heavy, high in alcohol. It tasted a bit old (an undated bottle). Color is slightly darker than the other beers (but note that I had the beers in opaque glasses when evaluating taste).

Westmalle Tripel - Beer dates from 1933/34. Made with candi sugar. Note that the brewer also calls it a "strong blonde." 37 IBUs. 9.5% ABV. Light bodied, spicy, rough and bitter finish, dry, fruity (apple).

Chimay Cent Cinquante (Green) - Beer dates from 2012. 10% ABV. Possibly made with wheat. Sold as a strong blond. This beer tastes of coriander, licorice, fruit (grape). It’s dry. I don't know if any spices were used but it tastes like a lot were used.

Delirium Tremens - Beer dates from 1988. Sold as a strong blond. 24.5 IBUs. 8.5% ABV. Light bodied, fruity (orange). Crisp w/o yeast, and dulled with yeast.

Rochefort Triple Extra - Beer dates from 2020. 22 IBUs. 8.1% ABV. Made with orange peel, spices and wheat. Tastes of coriander, citrus (lemon/lime aroma, orange taste). Note that the citrus flavors did not make the beer vibrant... the beer flavors were dull.

Tripel Karmeliet - Beer dates from 1996. Made with malted and unmalted barley, wheat and oats. Possibly 16 IBUs. 8.4% ABV. Tasted of tropical fruit gum/candy (lychee, grape, pineapple). Slight touch of acidity. Relatively lacking dryness. Beer gushed and lost carbonation... but this might have been an issue with the handling of my bottle rather than an issue with brewing/packaging. I have never had this beer gush on me before. The gushing coupled with pineapple notes, etc. made me wonder if there is brett in this beer... but I wouldn't bet on it.

So… did these beers create the impression that the 3 tripels were one style and the other 3 beers a different style? Not to me. Not only did these beers not conform to the distinctions outlined by the BJCP when taken as two groups (tripels supposedly/usually being darker, heavier bodied, less dry, less fruity, more spicy), but these 6 beers didn't seem to gel to create 2 distinctive styles.

As Belgian strong blonds, the only things uniting Delirium Tremens and Chimay Cent Cinquante were country of origin, strength and color (just as the style name literally describes). As drinking experiences within that category, they were night and day.

Note some of the similarities these tripels have with modern non-sour Witbier. One tripel had unmalted oats and wheat... one had orange peel, spices and wheat... and the most iconic one was only made with barley, hops, yeast, water and sugar. In my post yesterday, I mentioned that I view "tripel" as only a strength indicator strictly. Even though ingredient percentages/amounts paint a fuller picture than an ingredient list, the uniting of beers as a style with such disparate approaches to ingredient choice is still strange when considered alongside the thinking employed to distinguish the tripel category from the strong pale/golden one.

 

Chris,

Firstly thank you for your effort here. I am not being facetious here: it can be hard work drinking beer.

From my personal brewing experience a notable difference as regards Witbier and Tripel beers is the yeast. I have used a few different yeast strains to ferment my Witbiers and all of them were quite neutral in their yeast produced flavors; they permitted the spicing/fruit additions (i.e., coriander, curacao orange peel) to 'shine' in these beers. In contrast the yeast strain for fermenting my Tripels (I prefer the Westmalle yeast strain) is very expressive when fermented warm resulting in a quite different flavor profile.

Cheers!

 

Ok, back on Friday when I popped open the first regular Allagash Tripel from the 4px, I noticed some similarities with the pair of Curieux bottles I had consumed over the past two weeks. I wanted to explore that a little more closely in this post.

Going in, I know that I preferred Curieux at less chilled temps than my refrigerator keeps it at, so some warming is necessary for it to get to its optimal state. I also noted a nice rounding of the edges in the regular Tripel with warmth. However, since I am impatient, I will also give some chill opening thoughts.

On the pour, Curieux looked ever so slightly darker. The head of the barrel-aged beer produced larger bubbles in a more loosely packed head, with regular Tripel having a tight, creamy ring. Neither of the beers sported a tall cap for very long, and settled with pretty much only the aforementioned structural differences.


Chilled Out
Opening nose differences of the two has Tripel showing off more of the fruity phenols - apple, pear, even some red grape, where Curieux had more spice notes hitting my olfactory, seemingly carried to the fore by the obvious barrel influence.

Taking a sip of each, Tripel followed suit with more fruit than spice, some grain and banana, with a sprinkle of spice thrown in at the end. Curieux starts with bourbon and muted clove (yes, I am looking for it now), followed by a little bit of spiced banana bread.

So it comes to me that the bourbon replaces the fruit and accentuates the spice notes.

Intermission
At this point, I said to myself, "Self, are you sure that Curieux actually has Tripel as its base?"

I was pretty sure, and my own taste wasn't betraying my assumption, but I opened a new tab and found:

So, seven weeks of barrel aging on a light beer seems a decent amount of time based on my limited knowledge. The fact they blend some fresh Tripel back in was an unknown, but I appreciate that they do this. I assume the exact proportions are dependent on the batch, though would be curious about them in the approximate.

Before we continue, the GF seemed to finish her sample glasses quickly and didn't note much difference. Then again, how could she, considering she "chugged" them . After giving her another sip of mine, she agreed that one had more of a "woody" aspect - but not one of her favorite terms, "bitey." Unsurprisingly, she said she liked both about the same.

Warm and Cozy
After some time in the glass, the aromas on Tripel have faded a bit, which is not matched by Curieux where the bourbon influence has increased, adding a coconut edge to the nose. This addition seems to come at the expense of spice notes, as there's an evocation of the Harry Nilsson song; not that the fruity notes are specifically lime-like, but they have a slightly acidic edge to them. That said, the overwhelming aromas are from the barrel.

Tripel spice notes join the fray on the palate , but in balance with a slightly muted fruity opening. The balance is quite nice, and with the carbonation having spent some of its pent up energy, provides for a very smooth drinking experience.

Like the Tripel, Curieux flavors form a more cohesive package with some warmth, though Tripel ends up doing it a little better. Barrel still leads the charge, but some orchard fruit notes join in to share time with the back end spice notes.

Epilogue
So, overall, I feel both beers came together better with warmth, though I feel Tripel did more betterer in this respect. Curieux starts out and continues to be a bit of a bolder experience across temperatures. I obviously wouldn't say it's one of those beers where the barrel is just an accent, which is often my preference over being too forward. But I would say this falls under "an exception to my rule" even though I'm not sure I can explain why. My best guess beyond "the palate wants what it wants" is that said palate is similar to those who do that final blending of the beer.

Edit: I counted words, and excluding the quote, my post isn't as long as that of @zid - so I had to add this edit

 

I'm back with a Belgian version more to my liking. De Dolle Dulle Teve


11.2oz bottled Sept. 2020 poured into a chalice at 53° Fahrenheit 10% ABV. The beer pours opaque, honey colored amber with very light khaki head. The head recedes to a thin ring and single layer of varied sized bubbles leaving just a few small bits of lacing. The aroma is fairly sweet with pale malt, berry and peach. The taste is semisweet and a hint tart with well attenuated pale malt, hints of berry and melon before a mildly bitter, citrus like finish. The mouthfeel is thin to medium bodied with above average carbonation and a dry finish. No trace of the ABV in the aroma and just a touch in the taste. Overall, very good.

I had some concerns about this one as I've had a bottle of De Dolle Export Stout that went completely sour and I'm quite sensitive to that taste. This beer seemed well kept and I'm sure some bottle conditioning happened as it's quite dry, which I find refreshing. Two more to go...

Cheers all and thanks to @FBarber for the gentle nudge to increase my tripel ratings by 33% in one weekend after five years of active reviewing.