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

I noticed this last year with some of the classic beers and called it out during my reviews that many aren't clear anymore and are hazy and taste softer than they used to. I am assuming that they are tweaking to be more inline with current trends and un-filtering/filtering less. And look @dcotom 's post above and Zombie Dust didn't look like that years ago.

 

Yep, this happened with one of my favorite regional wc ipas. They softened it up big time. It was such a disappointment. But, that beer along with a handful of other hazy/ juicy ipas they've put out remain local shelf staples so I guess it worked for them

 

2023 (batch 2) vs 2024 (batch 3) Dystopias from Free Will
Six of one half dozen of another edition.
This kind of dovetails nicely with the opening post I think!

This malt liquor/American strong ale is brewed utilizing a unique fermentation technique along the way, with multiple yeast strains and sugar additions. It is bottled still and is meant to be opened, sipped, corked up, and drank again at a later date.

They don't give much info on the these. This is what they say about batch 2, from 2023. Weighing in at 20.1% it was aged in 6 different barrels for over 2.5 years.

And batch 3 from 2024 is a new, intentional blend of stock aged for multiple years, in many types of barrels. This is 20.1% as well. C'mon guys give us something! Barrel types at least??



These are both freshly opened bottles. There is of course plenty of alcohol wafting out of the glass, no surprise at 20.1%, but it is surprisingly not all that hot. Layers of booze suggesting fruited liqueurs, Brandy, and brown liquors all come together well along with hints of caramel, raisin, and molasses. Just a wonderful pair of aromas. I truthfully can't tell a difference between the 2 batches.

And they taste even better. The booze is a bit less prominent on the palate, but it definitely isn't shy. Beyond all the barrels there are so many subtleties shining through. Honey roasted nuts, Belgian chocolate, tobacco, raisins, light smoke, honey, molasses, sweet cherries, and on and on and on... The only difference I noticed between the two batches is slightly more cherry in batch 2 and slightly more molasses in batch 3. They are incredibly similar overall. If someone had set this up for me as a blind tasting I would suspect that they had poured 2 glasses of the same batch in order to trick me.

The mouthfeel is the same on both. Nice viscosity as evidenced by a lovely legs sticking to the side of the glass and a full, oily texture on the tongue.

I just love this beer. The flavors are so rich and deep yet this is really approachable. I'm so glad this is bottled still so it can be enjoyed in small measures, a short pour is an enormously satisfying night cap.

Maybe I shouldn't even post this here, there just isn't much to parse. Ah well, I love batch 2 so I'm glad 3 is as good.

 

Double IPA Duel

Drake's Denogginizer and Sierra Nevada Hop Bullet Magnum Edition

As I hoped, both are pinnacle examples of the style. There was no loser here (including me drinking back to back 9%+ ABV beers for the "sake of science.")

Initial pour from SN is more floral and has that "brewery" smell. Outstanding. The floral aspect dissipates quickly though to then match Denogginizer of pine resin and fruity alcohol esters. The Denog has more of the alcohol aroma, but not off-putting whatsoever; both have significant pine.

Taste is quite similar; resinous, old school DIPAs right here. I originally thought Denog was going to be much sweeter than the Hop Bullet, but side by side, that didn't prove to be true.

Like I said upfront....no losers here. Hop Bullet is limited, though, so FOMO might have me purchase it more than Denogginizer in a funny way.

Cheers, BA's!

 

Finding similarities can be as important as finding differences, especially in verticals, I would be willing to argue.

 

Agreed. Anchor Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Ale is a great example. The recipe supposedly is different every single year (I'd be curious how true this actually is, but that's for another time), but if the beer was significantly different each year, that's be a tough purchase. I want a consistency and the base aspect similar so I know what I'm getting into.

 

As if on cue, I am going to do a side-by-side to find the similarities in two smoked Helles. I have had Schilling Beer Company's Glimmen within the past couple of weeks, and I had Elder Pine's Empyreumatic yesterday at the brewery.

I think they are both quite good, in roughly similar ways. So while I may be stretching it to say I am expecting similarities, I am at least as interested in them as I am the differences.
I'll note that Glimmen's can date looks like 1/4/24 and the Elder Pine Instagram release post is 1/25/24.

That said, the first thing I note is a difference in color, in both body and head. Glimmen's head is a little dingy relative to the bright white Empyreumatic top, which matches the difference in body with Glimmen being more golden and Empyreumatic being more pale gold to yellow.


I rated the Elder Pine beer fairly high in smell at the taproom, and that holds up having it from a can. It exposes its smoke to my nose readily, while I have to make a little effort to find the smoke in Glimmen's aromas. Empyreumatic from the can has more of a cured smoked meat vibe than I got from a draft pour. Glimmen has a little more bread and it may be the smoke, but I get a hint of skunkiness digging deep to get a good comparison.

In taste, relatively, Glimmen is much more "beer-like" and the smoke is more of an accent. The smoke seems to be a "richer smoke" which might be the mesquite Schilling notes in their description of the beer. Empyreumatic notes using 100% smoked malts, as well as a smoked tea, all of which may be giving it the extra perceived and up front smokiness.

I'm a bit surprised the taste is so different in these - as it's where I kind of thought they might be pretty similar. Relative to what I recall and noted from yesterday, Elder Pine's taste has a bit more distinct smokiness. Trying to ignore its strength relative to its comparison beer, I see what my former self was thinking, but the smoke is still more prominent in today's pour.

I think I could only note this in a direct comparison, but Empyreumatic has a hint of fruity tang than the more bitter Glimmen, which has an ever so slightly heavier feel.

In the end, I do like the extra smokiness in the Elder Pine beer. While I could see having a second pour, a third might be out as I'd want a break from the smoke. On the other side, I am now wishing for a little more smoke in Glimmen that I didn't real miss having it in a vaccuum.

So, of course, a blend of equal parts was done. And, as is usually the case, it didn't really work; even though the smoke level was nice, the rest of the beer seemed a tad muddled and a little dull.

 

Would you happen to know which brand of smoked malt that Elder Pine used to make this beer?

The details of this beer from:

Untappd

“Smoked Pale Lager (Helles Rauchbier) brewed with 100% smoked malts and Lapsang Souchong, a special type of black tea that is smoked over a pine fire. The malts used in this beer are mildly smokey which present a very calm, gentle smoke character that plays wonderfully with the crisp graininess and subtle smoked pine notes from the Lapsang Souchong.”

BA

“Smoked Helles Lager with Lapsang Souchong (Smoked Black Tea). Grist: beech wood smoked barley, oak smoked wheat. Hops: Saaz.”

I have homebrewed with Weyermann beech wood smoked malt several times, most recently for a batch I brand as Smoky & Spicey (Rye) Brown Ale and I used this malt at 30% of the grist which provides a noticeable smokey flavor. I gotta believe that if I used this as 100% of the grain bill the beer would be very smoky.

Cheers!

P.S. I suspect that the “fruity twang” you picked up in Empyreumatic is from the Lapsang Souchong.

 

I do not, having no more information than what you looked up. The brewery did have information on each beer on their menu, but I didn't pay close enough attention know if they note anything different than what we have.

I will add what their Instagram post says, which is vague:

 

Sunday Stout Side By Side Showdown BA

Lagunitas Willitized 2022 (13.1 % ABV) vs 2023 (12.4% ABV)

Appearance wise it is apparent that the fresher bottle has a bit more lively carbonation to it. Very little to no lace is provided by either sample.

On the nose the older sample is slightly musty and muted in comparison. Both offer up some rich dark roast, barrel spice, black licorice and boozy chocolates.

Flavors follow a similar suit with the '23 delivering a more robust dark roast malt experience. Tastes fresher and intense with more sweetness to it. I even get some Vanilla likeness there. But mostly dark/dried fruits, bitter dark chocolate and some umami like complexity here. Only slightly boozy. The '22 has really melded out nicely and is drinking like a champ right now. Really great integration to all of the flavors and while it may score lower overall it is drinking better to me atm...If that makes sense.

Mouthfeel wise I find Lags Imperial Stouts have always been on the thinner side in regard to the style and Willitized is no different. The '22 is creamier and smoothened out with less prickly carbonation.

Willitized is big on those Maillard reactions but pretty light when it comes to actual coffee, barrel presence and Rye flavors in my opinion. So why do we love it so BA? Ahh the price of course...it is a very approachable and tasty Barrel Aged Imperial coffee stout on many levels.

Was this experiment anything ground breaking? No. Did I enjoy myself and have some fun with this little side by side comparison? Absolutely!!!

Cheers

 

Deschutes The Abyss: 2014 vs 2022



Tonight’s Cellaruary pull is also a side by side. I’ve had the 2014 vintage for almost a year and forgot about it until I recently got the 2022 vintage from Tavour. That made me remember the 2014 and made me realize Cellaruary is the perfect time for this vertical tasting (which will leave me destroyed for the night after drinking all of this). I’ve never had any vintage of this beer before, but it should be interesting to see the difference 8 years makes in this beer.

2014: Pours completely pitch black with a finger of soapy light tan head that quickly fades to a ring and leaves decent lacing (4.25)
2022: The exact same as the 2014, but leaves just a bit less lacing behind (4)

2014: There’s a bit of a funk in the nose here, but I’m not complaining. I’m picking up on aromas of molasses, tannic red wine, cherry pit, cocoa powder, medium roast coffee, aged hops, sharp oak, smoky tobacco, and leather (4.5)
2022: This one is way more hoppy and bitter as expected, but I can see how the aromas here can evolve into the funkier aromas in the older beer. I’m picking up on aromas of leafy hops, molasses, cacao nib, medium roast coffee, burnt sugar, orange marmalade, toasted oak, smoky tobacco, vanilla bean, and light caramel (4.5)

2014: There’s less to it in taste unfortunately, but I still dig it. On the front end of the sip I’m tasting molasses, burnt sugar, smooth oak, vanilla bean, licorice, smoky tobacco, cocoa powder, raisin, and light coffee. The swallow brings notes of cherry pit, molasses, aged hops, smoky tobacco, cacao nib, leather, raisin, and medium roast coffee (4.25)
2022: Similarly here it just tastes like a watered down version of what the nose had promised, but again, still good. On the front end of the sip I’m tasting leafy hops, burnt sugar, golden raisin, caramel, toasted oak, vanilla bean, light roast coffee, and cacao nib. The swallow brings notes of leafy hops, cacao nib, vanilla bean, cherry pit, burnt sugar, smoky tobacco, medium roast coffee, chicory, and light caramel (4.25)

2014: A medium full body pairs with gentle carbonation, resulting in a slick and chewy beer. Finishes a tad sticky but dries out over time (4)
2022: A medium body pairs with gentle carbonation, resulting in a slick beer. Finishes mostly dry and quite bitter (4.25)

It’s amazing how different these beers are yet are scored nearly the same. They’re both damn good in their own ways. My official review will use the scores of the fresher bottle

2014:
4.29/5 rDev -4%
look: 4.25 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.25

2022:
4.3/5 rDev -3.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4.25 | overall: 4.25

 

Wow! It was a month and a half ago since I compared two of these beers that everyone* enjoyed. I found another local English bitter - an "extra special" one - to throw into the mix in a quick follow up to my mid-January post.


Yes, I didn't want the new Elder Pine Bitter Geezer ESB to have any home field advantage, so I didn't put it in a glass from the brewery (which the left, obviously, and right, not so much, beers are in).

The Ocelot Bliss Quest is the only clear beer, and I think Bluejacket's Love Language is the foggiest, though the slightly darker and definitely more ruby coloring on Bitter Geezer makes it seem a little harder to see through.

Was going to try to stay focused and succinct, but as you guys may know, that isn't my forte and there are 50% more beers in this post than normal. So here is what I came up with...

Looking back at my previous comparison, I think the Ocelot and Bluejacket comparison notes aren't far off from what I find today, even if the beers have faded slightly with 45 more days in the can. I think Ocelot's beer has a nice malt note that has stood up a little more than Love Language.

Throwing in a, likely fresher, Elder Pine ESB and...
I'm surprised by the baker's chocolate note I get from the nose, versus toasted malt from Bliss Quest and floral/fruity notes from Love Language. There is also a bit of dark grain bread behind or paired with this chocolate. I like Bliss Quest's nose among these, by a small amount.

The opening of the Bluejacket beer is better than the Ocelot beer - which seems watery, and Elder Pine sits between these right up front. But the taste of Bitter Geezer does get a toasted bread, dark nut, and earthy spice bitterness infusion, vaulting it into the lead over the others for me.

I like the subtle malt and bitterness Bliss Quest drags in by mid-taste, though there isn't too much evolution after that. Love Language's evolution is much more subtle, as if it was resting on its early lead like the proverbial hare. Elder Pine's beer has the benefit of a higher ABV (5.5% versus the sub-5% competitors) and, again, supposed freshness. These give it the edge for this sitting, pretty easily. I've flipped Ocelot's beer over Bluejacket's from the earlier comparison, though I'm not sure if Elder Pine might not be acting as a catalyst for this.

The GF thinks she likes Ocelot more (consistent with last post), but noted that Elder Pine was the outlier of the group without caring as much about the details of the beers as I, and many of us, do.


* I'm sure that the two people who weighed in are representative of all of humanity. Hope the world enjoyed this update

 

Tap 6: Mein Aventinus on the right
https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/72/224/

Aventinus Eisbock on the left
https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/72/1934/

I have wanted to do this side by side for a while. An interesting pair, as one is a more concentrated version of the other. A couple of my favourite beers, unfortunately, my local bottle shop (LCBO) tends to carry either one but not both at the same time, but after a bit of a pilgrimage I got some of each recently.

Focusing on the differences:
Appearance: Eisbock - a clear amber brown. Weizenbock - somewhat clearer
Smell: Eisbock – spicy caramel malts. Weizenbock – similar but somewhat attenuated. A bit sharper.
Taste: Eisbock - Banana bread, figs, raisin and molasses. Weizenbock - Molasses and licorice. A very slight hint of smoke. A fruity dry finish.
Mouthfeel: perhaps the biggest difference here – Eisbock – smoother, fuller and creamier. The ABV very apparent. Weizenbock – lighter body, slightly more carbonation.
Overall: Basically, the Eisbock is a stronger, smoother Weizenbock, as you would expect as one is concentrated version of the other.

They are both top example of their styles and well worth a try.

Be careful if you try this at home at 12% and 8% respectively that’s quite an alcohol punch to start the day.

X-posted to the Bock thread

 

Ok, I have a little time watching the earlier evening March Madness games before the game I care about. Figured I'd take the effort to get in a comparison, and perhaps numb myself just a little to the possible disappointment.

I reviewed Double Nugget Nectar about a couple weeks ago, and I wanted to take the opportunity to compare it to the regular Nugget Nectar before they got too old. These are actually both best by May, it seems to be about a week apart, so it's a fair fight in that sense.


Double Nugget (DNN) is darker, a case where the photo seems to portray the difference fairly accurately. Even after settling, the head volume is fairly accurate, too - noting that I poured Double first. The clarity of regular Nugget Nectar (NN) is pretty appealing, but overall, I think DNN edges out this category.

I noted a pine note upon cracking DNN, which holds up now that I am actually analyzing. In comparison, NN has more of a citrus vibe on first sniff. Going back to DNN, I pick up a decent dose of grapefruit I missed or skimmed over initially. My initial thoughts hold up better for NN, where it's more a mix of grapefruit and orange citrus, with a bit of toasted malt sneaking in, as well. Double scores another point. But there's still time on the clock...

First sips...
Regular Nugget starts off with cereal grain and a hint of honey and pauses there before the orange/grapefruit rinds come on. These lead to a methodical evolution to a light pith and definitely piney finish.

Double Nugget definitely starts sweeter, bringing a dash of light brown sugar to the malt and honey. It definitely feels the bigger beer right away. Where NN almost felt a little timid right up front, DNN was a bit aggressive. After a couple more sips of each, and I want to say DNN has a slight floral aspect to the late open, as well. The finish is pith and pine, but not as strong as I expected from the nose, perhaps due to having to work through the opening notes.

As stated, I have some time, so going to gather the rest of the thoughts over some time and report back...

After sipping through about half of each beer, the relative notes hold up. DNN starts a bit sweeter, and counter nicely with more classic hop bitter notes. Its journey a bit more of a moderate mountain hike than regular NN, which is more of a nice nature walk.

I wish both were a little closer to the other at the beginning of each sip. I sort of like the contrast of sweet and bitter in DNN, but feel the journey to achieve it each trip is a bit much given NN ends up at about the same place without the effort.

So, if there were a straight point-for-pint thing, I think I'd give the added up points to Double Nugget Nectar. However, in the sum of the parts, I think I'd give a slight edge to regular Nugget Nectar. So, my mood would drive which I picked first, I guess, now that I better understand the differences in the two Tröegs offerings.

 

Thanks for taking one for the team here! haha Great review. I've always felt like NN was a nice enough beer just over priced for what it was. For that reason I haven't purchased it for a few years. I prefer DNN but it has changed since it came out in 2022. My original review had the beer being pretty hazy and it's gone full-on translucent this year. I remember liking it more on the first run too but some of that may have been because of the hunt since DNN was hard to find then. And again, great comparison and review. This is the content I'm here for!

 

Thanks for that journey @cjgiant, glad I opened up this thread tonight. I really enjoyed reading this one.

 

Thanks for the compliments. I think if I knew I were having a beer to sit and savor or think about, I'd go with DNN. If I wanted a beer while doing other things or was thinking about more than one, I'd go with regular.

Additional content: the GF definitively chose regular, thinking DNN seemed too strong in the alcohol department. Then again, she's a big fan of the regular, so I didn't expect her to choose DNN.

Two happy customers in one night? My chances for employee of the month are looking good

 

Thought you side by side fans would enjoy this new one from Nate at Tree House, his videos are very enjoyable and educational. Pilsner Urquell, three ways...its like reading a post in this thread:

 

Ok, watching a little NCAA basketball, light day of work tomorrow, a thread about Dogfish Head fresh in my mind, let's do this "big" side-by-side:

Shown below, the regular 120 Minute IPA (120M) is the most recent batch, as is the Utopias Barrel Aged 120 Minute (U120) version (not sure there's been more than one). They are both from last year at some point, I'm just not sure how long ago. The regular has been outside the fridge until today, the U120 has been in the refrigerator for a good while now.

Mainly just curious what the Utopias might be bringing or hiding. The first and most obvious is carbonation that forms a solid head. U120 isn't still-looking, but it's nearing that. The high-ABV 120 Minute sad a decent head. Perhaps the head is affecting my analysis, but the 120M appears to be a little more cloudy (neither seems clear).


Ok, the nose is definitely different, too. I smelled U120 first, and found the classic DFH IPA vibe, but there was also definitely some port cask finishing. Switching to 120M, and the citrus notes jumped out. Back to U120 and a little more barrel came out - a bit of coconut and even a slight hint of whiskey. The malt and maybe a hint of oxidation comes out returning to 120M, though it's still citrus hoppiness that defines the nose.

Starting with 120M (which is likely a little warmer to start), and the opening brings a red wine and raisin bread. I notice these in the nose after sipping. The taste isn't as cirtusy... or at least it's less the flesh of the fruit and more the rind.

On to the U120, and I get similarities in raisin bread and maybe even some red wine, though the U120 wine is sweeter and richer, where the 120M is more tart and vibrant.

Slight aside: I've only had a small sample of Utopias over a decade ago, and recall enough to think it was somewhat like a tawny port. I see this past year's is aged in ruby port - not sure if that is always or what year's barrels the DFH 120 Minute was aged in. This is to say that I could see a ruby port influence in the U120, but definitely a semi-sweet red wine in general.

Other notes in U120 - definitely that coconut note I get in some whiskeys and barrel-aged beers. This does feel more like a mix between an English Barleywine and, perhaps oddly, a Belgian farmhouse as something that brings a little fruity tang.

Going back, the bitterness in 120M becomes much more obvious. Sure, it's still fighting a bit of an uphill battle against malts that yield 15% ABV or so, but a little spice and hint of pine temper everything nicely. By trying to find it in U120, I think it might work to turn the sweetness of the opening into a more bitter molasses from brown sugar and coconut.

For pure enjoyability, I started out on the side of the merger. I liked the barrel notes, even if it was a little sweet. Then I went to the old school, unmolested beer by the DE brewery, perhaps because it worked as a nice counter to the sweet / tang of its offspring.

Yet another case where mood might influence my choice, but I think 120M is a tad more refreshing - at least in a relative sense considering we're talking about two beers well on the heavier side of the spectrum. The GF disagreed with me in eventual choice, but also had to take some time to think about it.

 

I enjoy these videos he/they put out as a little aside, but do wonder on the sample size that forms an opinion (as I've seen others mention). Obviously, work can be done off-camera. Then the video is just meant as a much quicker show to put forth a more in depth analysis that "the public" might not want to watch in its entirety.

I guess it'd be like reading one of my posts in its entirety; who wants to do that?

But who knows?