What’s The Difference? Share Your Side By Side (2024)

Nice to see the 2024 version of the thread kicking off in style! Also looks like this one basically confirmed your thoughts from way back last year

 

I've been meaning to do this comparison for a while, but now that @DoctorZombies has started the 2024 thread, I feel compelled. I have SN Celebration Ale in bottles and cans the bottles are dated 10/12 and the cans are dated 10/20. I poured to achieve the same look in each glass. The canned version looks better here



After a few mouthfuls, they look like same



They really taste just about the same, hop forward, bitter grapefruit/pine, with a solid backbone of malts. When I brought these beers in and started drinking, I had to refer to the picture to determine which was which. Surprisingly the can has a slightly more malt forward/hop fade taste despite being the fresher of the two, otherwise they're nearly identical. I give the nod to the bottled version, but this is definitely a photo finish. As a side note, I had the draft version on Saturday, and I wish I could have included that in the comparison, but honestly, I really like to drink draft beer anyway.

 

Did a blind side by side of Notch’s Černé Pivo and Černé Spezial. Both canned the same date if I recall (12/14), which would make them both 18 days old and super fresh. Pivo is a 4.5% ABV 10° P Czech Dark Lager. Spezial is a 5.8% ABV 15° P Czech Dark Lager.

Was able to immediately pick the two out. Spezial is fuller and sweeter which is what you would expect. Pivo is drier and less sweet, it’s the more drinkable of the two for sure. Both delicious in their own right.

Mixed the two at the end and didn’t prefer it. It produced an odd sour note I didn’t detect in the beers on their own.

The look is interesting due to the difference in head color.

@steveh

 

Dreary weather with a small chance of bad weather caused us to put off thought of heading out today. No big deal, since we have some beer at home. Kicking off 2024 with a side-by-side, one I came up with checking out what was in the fridge. I'm not sure what to expect comparing Bell's Expedition Stout to Stone's Imperial Stout.

In saying that, I am lying. I have expectations, but if they end up being right, I'm not sure what this comparison will prove other than my memory that formed these expectations isn't completely broken. So the more interesting outcome is that these beers are more similar than I expect them to be. The Stone is older - bought mid-last year and refrigerated the whole time; Expedition Stout was purchased about a month ago.

Both pours were spent motor oil frothing up to light brown fading to dark tan. It came to me that the head of Stone's Imperial Stout was a tad lighter in color. In my glasses, the canned beer's head fell noticeably quicker, but in the GF's glasses, they were more similar. Bell's Expedition Stout's head was a little more sticky.


Bell's initial aroma was dark roasted malt with a bit of a woodsy vibe. In the first surprise, Stone's beer had a slightly sweeter, somewhat fruity aroma (at least relatively). I expected Stone to show more bitterness. After sitting a few minutes, I swirled both and Stone had started exhibiting more of a root spice to sarsaparilla profile. Bell's proved its head to be a little more interesting and stuck mostly to its initial profile, but did have a hint of the same.

First sips, and Bell's nose was true to its taste - especially what I was getting right before sipping. My first impression of Stone's aroma was more similar to what I got in my first sip of that glass. Reversing the order, and Stone's Imperial Stout showed hints of dark fruit in the opening, and a firm but not overpowering dark roast bitterness in back. After that check, Bell's had a splash of that root spice to open, with a lightly charred wood finish.

Bell's brew felt a little more silky and slightly thicker, but also felt as though it had a little more alcohol in its volume. Looking it up, I see they are the same, but I also saw that Bell's IBU count was considerably higher, which plays out in my experience here.

So, as to my expectations going in - Bell's opening and perceived ABV is what I recalled from the beer more than the bitterness it is showing. Stone's evolution isn't as dramatic, but as I settle into each, I think I am enjoying it just a tad more in this sitting. As an indication as to how close my enjoyment is, I would've leaned slightly the other way after the first couple of sips.

The GF had exactly the same issue choosing one, but leaned opposite of me at the time I asked. She also indicated a relative fruitiness in the Stone beer. Too bad I don't have any Stone Imperial Stout left, because I think this would be a fun one to do again, as it did end up being quite interesting.

 

Wanted to do this one in 2023 but couldn't fit it in. In a place where I can down two bigger beers tonight so we'll give it a go with a couple Tree House beers: Green (IPA 7.5% abv) and Very Green (DIPA 8.3% abv).



Green-undated 500ml bottle (assuming bottled on a similar date to the Very Green)
Very Green-16oz can 11/14/23
Both into a 20oz "pint" glass

According to the Cambridge English Dictionary, "Very" is an adjective or adverb meaning "to a great degree or extremely" Let's see...

Appearance: Both pour a pale orangish yellow. Nearly identical. VG may be just a bit brighter in color and has better head retention. Both have excellent lacing.

Aroma: Green is popping with pineapple and mango on the crack of the bottle. VG was a little disappointing in this respect. Same aromas on VG but weaker.

Taste: Both are wonderfully juicy with a nice bitter back end. More or less identical with VG being more juicy and more bitter. Guess that’s why it’s “Very”

Feel: This is the biggest difference for me. VG drinks a lot smoother and fuller, almost creamy. Green is a bit thinner with a slightly drier chalky feel.

O/A: Green is my favorite series from Tree House. I would give the edge to Very Green. That said, Green is a steal at $15/4pk of cans (the 500ml was $4 for the single). I think VG runs ~$20/4pk-which is also a steal for what you're getting. And IMHO Very Green is "Very" Green as dictionary definitions go.

 

Parish: Ghost In The Machine vs DDH Ghost In The Machine

Both beers are great. Beautiful haze and generous head. The aroma is where the DDH version dominates. It's so tropical and citrusy at the same time. Orders of magnitude better than the OG. But it's the flavor that the OG wins it for me. So balanced. No off flavors. Chewy too. It's my favorite hazy of all time possibly.

 

Are you able to buy those beers locally (Pennsylvania)?

Cheers!

 

Unfortunately no. I got both through Tavour.

 

For some stout fans, I made the ultimate bad decision: a side by side of… blueberry stouts

The stouts were imbibed alongside other beers during a long day of board games with a couple of friends. We played Pandemic and its many variants for more than ten hours. Interspersed were viewing of football games. This blathering is more detailed than my actual reviews, but such is drinking while gaming

The stouts: Lizard of Koz by Founders and Paisley Cave Complex by Bottle Logic. Thanks to @2beerdogs for the Bottle Logic stout via the BIF barleywine and stout edition.

The aromas featured different bourbons. Paisley had a lovely sweet bourbon nose though not complex. Koz has more going on in nose and taste: chocolate and vanilla added to the less full bourbon.

The use of blueberry was quite different. Paisley had a full, lush sweet flavor. The flavor in Koz was more earthy, sweet but not intense as Paisley. The added chocolate and vanilla made the flavor more complex, but not necessarily better.

Mouthfeel for paisley was super soft and moderate for Koz. Both hid ABV very well which was an impressive feat for the 15% Paisley. Light carbonation for both.

it should be clear that I preferred Paisley, another fine stout by Bottle Logic. I still enjoy Lizard of Koz, but it feels a level below.

 

While I have not had Koz, I seek out Paisley yearly. I remember the first time I had it, I was blown away. I kept the bottle cap on my nightstand for months just to sniff what remnants I could.

Glad you enjoyed it.

 

For today, I decided to do something you likely see every day. As boring as it might seem to compare two beers of this style, I just felt the desire to do it with a couple of local offerings. So here is my comparison of two English-style bitters - one from Bluejacket in DC and one from Ocelot, a bit outside of the US capital.

Love Language by Bluejacket clocks in at 4.8%, with the following makeup, according to the marketing:

Ocelot's Bliss Quest joins the fray at 4.2%, with this description:

Between the two, Love Language is a little older. In the glass, it appears a bit lighter due to a light diffusing haze in its body. The head of Love Language was a mild explosion as I poured it, and it cratered into sponge-like lacing before I started analyzing other attributes. Bliss Quest was a bit more boring, but has a lovely clarity in its penny-like coloring.

The aromas from Love Language include rich toasted bread, minerality, and a light cherry note. Bliss Quest is a little more rich with some caramel in its maltiness, and my focus is drawn to it more than the tea-like earthiness that I also get. I'd venture that Bliss Quest has a little lemon note as its accent where Love Language had that cherry hint.

As for tea, my first sip of Love Language actually presents as an unsweetened tea with floral notes and a little lemon with a bit of sweet spruce / pine in the finish. Comparatively, Bliss Quest is a bit more malty, with a toasted note and a bit of minerality. I recognize that the tasting notes I attribute here are similar to what I used for the nose, though they are somewhat flipped as to which beer they are attributed.

Bliss Quest is a little more straightforward, perhaps a little more simple. It does have a fair amount of bitterness, but in a fairly neutral form. Love Language has a bit of an evolution to it that Bliss Quest is missing. It starts sweeter before finding a bitterness level about the same as Bliss Quest. Love Language is a bit more interesting to me today, with the GF choosing Bliss Quest over it as I was debating my preference.

 

I did not find it boring at all. Thanks for doing this side-by-side tasting.

Cheers!

P.S. Plus I learned about a new (well, new to me) hop: Sonnet. I am 'traditional' in using East Kent Golding hops to brew my annual batch of English Bitter Ale but this new hop gets me thinking about my next batch.

 

My immediate thought as well. Thanks for doing this.

 

Time for a little flashback, as I have had these beers in the fridge since the 2022 winter beer tasting. At that time, I did a comparison of the bottle and can versions of St. Bernardus Christmas Ale. I put in a half day's work today, so I'm debating taking the extra effort to see what I said back then.


So, first thing to note was the cloudburst of head that emanated from the pour from the bottle. The agitation of flowing over the lip generated a decent foam on the can version, but nothing like the bottle pour. After sitting, the bottle's head is kind of fuzzy and creamy, while the can is thinner, but has a bit of a creamy look to it, as well.

Nose on the can is bitter figs and a little bit of spice. The bottle's nose leans a bit more into the spice, covering up the date and almost turning it a bit cola-like. The feels are pretty similar, though I might give a slightly more rounded, perhaps softer feel to the bottle.

There is a slight bit of oxidation in the bottle, it seems. On this point and the feel, I am splitting hairs - the experience is pretty similar. The bottle seems to have a little more of a tangy fruit vibe than the can, which seems to showcase the malt and relative dark fruit sweetness a little more. The more I sip, I start to think its feel is a little richer, adjusting my thoughts from the initial sips.

Comparing notes from my online tasting post:

• I noted a minor clarity difference, but I don't really notice one today
• I noted the bottle seemed to have more spice both times (and I would argue after the fact more yeast influence in both cases)
• the bottle seemed more fruity both times
• the can seemed smoother than I described a year ago, though I wasn't getting as much earthiness

Overall, I keep going back and forth noting how similar the beers are before picking out something minor before judging the wholes as fairly similar yet again. The odd thing I found trying to determine if I like one better - I generally preferred whichever I sipped second. As such, even though I think there are some minor differences in these year-plus beers, they seem to be similar to the differences I got when they were fresher, at least relatively.

 

Blustery day out there, so sitting in and watching sports seems the way to go. Was going to do a Bigfoot vertical, but a quick check of the fridge had me pivot for this tasting. I figured the Bell's Third Coast Old Ale was from last year, so I grabbed a 2023 Sierra Nevada Bigfoot to use as a comparison.

I've grown to appreciate Bigfoot over the years, but still am not in love with it fresh. Conversely, I found that I do enjoy Third Coast after giving it a try sometime last year (or late the year before). So, I was wondering if I would actually like the barley wine from Bell's more than Sierra Nevada, and decided to try versions with approximately the same age (Bigfoot is just over a year old, with Third Coast being 3 months older). I think Third Coast spent a brief period sitting outside the fridge in which the Bigfoot spent almost, if not, its life with me.


On the pour, Bigfoot is considerably more attractive. A nice rusty cream head of hair sprouts from the clear copper complexion. Third Coast poured a little darker, and did suffer from some sediment that dropped into the glass near the end of the pour. The metaphoric locks of Bell's beer is lighter and not as thick as its competitor.

On the nose, Third Coast has a fall spice thing going on which, when paired with the malts, gives the impression of a savory holiday pie. The hops provide a bit of herbal accent to this - and the combo is really enticing to me. Shifting gear, I note that Bigfoot seems somewhat tame on the nose. It has a boozy amber IPA vibe that I will go so far to say it's reading more as a high ABV / triple IPA than a barley wine, accentuated by its difference from the nose of Third Coast.


Bigfoot is still the pine forest hoppy beast it has always been to me. From the first taste bud it comes it contact to, my palate wonders what it did to me. The flavors expand and turn a bit from the trunk of the pine to the needles. There is a metallic note I get in amber beers underneath, one that turns earthy and in some sips, I even get a little bitter chocolate note in the mid-late taste.

Third Coast, in contrast, starts with a brown sugar and spiced bread flavor. It's not sugary sweet, but malty and fig sweet, though this seems another aspect that might be highlighted by this act of comparison. A similar earthy pine comes on before the middle of the taste, where an orange zest accent note joins in. The piney hops linger, paired with and slightly outlasting the malt notes that thread through each sip.

Third Coast is stickier and a bit more weighty of a beer in comparison to the cleaner, and relatively lighter feel of Bigfoot (another thing that to me acts as a barley wine vs triple IPA vibe). Bigfoot is bolder overall in the sense that its flavors are aggressive, where Third Coast seems to show a bit of hospitality when addressing my palate.

As far as enjoyment, this one was easy for me. I like Third Coast more as the malts play a larger part of the beer's profile, in my opinion. The GF agrees on that as a favorite, without much hesitance or explanation.

 

So how long do you think it will take you to finish the 2023 version?

 

Are you not able to order straight from Parish?

 

I don't order beers, I refuse to pay for shipping.

Cheers!

 

Tavour does not charge for shipping? I am jealous! They don't service Kentucky yet!!!!