Dark Lord vs. Darkness

I have only had Dark Lord, so far, 2012 and it was amazing. I love Three Floyds, but Surly is underrated, looking forward to sampling Darkness, one day.

 

Qualifier: do you like Black Tuesday? Do you like aspartame?

 

I was going to do that on December 22 for a we survived the end of the world party, but all my beer geek friends were busy. I would be interested to hear how you think they compare side by side.

 

http://beeradvocate.com/community/threads/rank-these-stouts.41539/#post-521671

Oh...wait....this has a poll....

 

I just did a 2008-2012 vertical with a couple of friends last month. We all thought 2008 was too sweet, but it was also too sweet in 2008. 2009 and 2010 were great. Then we opened 2011, and while it didn't seem like a bad beer, we all found it challenging to drink. We figured it was palate fatigue, but we opened the 2012 anyway, and thought it was fantastic. Back to 2011, and nobody could finish it.

I couldn't really put a finger on the problem. All I know is none of us enjoyed 2011 anywhere near as much as the others. Even 2008 was easy to finish.

 

I say Darkness. Dark Lord is too sweet IMO.

 

Not even a contest for me. Darkness by a billion miles.

 

Many off the shelf Imperial Stouts > Darkness >>> Dark Lord.

As far as I am concerned Dark Lord is an awful beer.

 

I think it's because every year the continue to grow the production and its not a simple task to do so. I've only had 12 Darklord and even though I like it I can see why others do not. It's overly sweet, it does have a soy sauce smell and taste like some say. And hopefully I can get to the rest of my bottles soon.

 

I thought Darklord was pretty terrible. I'd rather drink 90% of Imperial Stouts from my local store than it. Sam Adams Imperial Stout > Darklord

 

Darklord is trash.

 

Fresh Darkness wins over fresh Dark Lord. Though a well aged Dark Lord, paired with the likes of a grilled steak and smoked blue cheese, is a much finer treat than any Darkness I've ever had ('10-'12)

 

I loved Pappy Dark Lord, but if you have to fix a broken base beer by aging it on an excellent bourbon, I have my reservations. Although the 2011 Darkness I had was excellent, I wouldn't say it was memorable. It did make some mean beer pancakes the morning after!

 

Is that what you call the beer shits in Belgium?

 

Rarely have I laughed out loud at a forum post. No, literal pancakes, they were gorgeous but they sure did stick to the pan and make a mess.

Here's to hoping "pan" isn't slang for toilet anywhere in the world.

 

Threads like this confuse the shit out of me. Every other person is bashing dark lord like it's going out of style, yet it has a 96 rating? Does bashing good beer make you cool or something?

 

All the old timers rated it 5+ years ago when it was good and all the noobs don't know what they're doing.

 

This thread is ridiculous. As a loyal and local fan of FFFs, I would admit last 3 years that Darkness may be a slightly more attractive taste profile thanDL. I even went to Surlys Darkness release and marveled at how it played out. But to say DL is trash and a drain pour, is due to either unsophisticated palates or unfiltered jealousy at not really having access to FFFs.

 

I'm doing the same vertical tomorrow!

 

If anything, claiming Dark Lord is still good is the mark of an unsophisticated palate. I don't know of any reputable person who would say 2012 Dark Lord is a good beer. Can you not pick up all the soy sauce and green apple off-flavors?