Attempted Redrum

bottle size: 375ml

bottle count: 950

what would it take to get one: varies, especially since we NEBCO fanboys really love our NEBCO. that said, it was a 6 bottle limit, and NEBCO has enough history and buzz that there must have been some speculators who snagged the limit during the day or two redrum was there.

it's an amazing beer, but given how big trading is now, i think bottle limits are the major decider in the absence of giant pre-existing demand. shouldn't be too hard, but i'd be surprised if things like heady or KBS or bruery shelf beers get it done (i'd also be surprised if a couple of the FT: redrums i saw over the last weeks get done).

edit: in a perfect world, the only reason redrum would be traded would be generosity / sharing. it's too good to give up for what people will offer, but it's too unproven / obscure for people to reasonably ask that much for it. helpful(:?

 

Good luck, absolutely stunning beer, I would put up a nice offer to get to taste it again if I was still trading (first one was at a tasting)

 

I traded a beat b5 for one. I had no idea what to offer at the time but figured that should do the trick. It did.

 

I'm sending a Cantillon BIO 750ml out for one on Monday.

 

Wasn't it 850?

 

Yes, 850 - at least if the numbering on the bottles is to be believed.

As far as how it trades, I wouldn't know. I got my limit, sent a couple to regular trading partners with nothing specific in mind, drank one, and given how delicious it is I plan on drinking/sharing the rest over the next couple years.

 

Same situation. I planned to try to share the love, I really did. But once I had one that plan went out the window. Sorry rest of the world.

 

given the way the guys at NEBCO are and the general attitude of NEBCO fans, this doesn't surprise me(:. hope you enjoy it.

 

This exactly. One of my best traders if from CT and has shared the NEBCO love big time.

 

Is it widely acknowledged at this point that there's something wrong with a portion of these bottles? The reviews seem to pretty clearly suggest that some of the bottles are off. (The bottle we opened last night had perhaps the worst medicinal phenol profile I've ever encountered in a beer.) Please understand that I'm not questioning that the good bottles are good, as I can't see any amount of homer-ism or other bias leading to someone giving a 4.5 review to the same beer I had. But, I'm wondering if the brewery has admitted any problems with some of the bottles? At a minimum, it seems like anyone trading for this ought to know that it's a bit of a crap shoot.

 

that sucks. i haven't heard of any such acknowledgment, and my homebrewing knowledge isn't great enough to say what would cause a flavor like that (not infection).

however, that different bottles had it, and also that > 3 people at one tasting tasted it, i think means there's definitely off bottles. my first guess was that some people subjectively taste rum flavors and booziness differently, but if there's a "weird way" to taste the beer, i don't see 3 people in the same room all being outliers. and as for power of suggestion, i would think all the gushing reviews would be more suggestive.

maybe some BA will send another and hope you can taste it in its best light. i was slightly worried it was some slow acting infection kind of thing, but my 2nd bottle was as fantastic as my first. my 3rd (that i gave to my brewing partner) was reportedly equally good. don't have a 4th :'-(

edit: i also don't think the bad reviews are people trying to drive down value so they can trade for more, since (again) i think 6 bottle limit = not gonna trade *that* high unless every BA in the country wants it.

 

To answer your question directly: no, as far as I know, it is not acknowledged. That being said, it certainly seems to be the case. I'm curious if they blended the barrels before bottling - given that it was a relatively small run (three barrels, iirc?) it seems believable that perhaps they did not (granted: I do not know brewery production techniques, and perhaps the idea of not blending barrels for a single release is ridiculous), but even if so, I can't imagine they wouldn't have TASTED one of the barrels and noticed it was off. If that's not the case (and that's a wild ass guess that in all likelihood is wrong), I am very confused as to what could have caused this incredibly noticeable bottle variation, because the beer some people are reviewing does not seem to be simply a bad bottle, but almost an entirely different beer.

Maybe somebody wants to call NEBCO and pick Matt's brain about it, because I'm baffled.

FWIW: I have two remaining bottles, and I will update my review as needed as I drink them, but the one bottle I had was (homerism or not), one of, if not the best, barrel aged non-sour I've ever had. Simply incredible. Wish everyone could have tasted that. Hoping my last 2 are also solid.

 

Could the "bad bottles" be attributed to the high level of rum present in the beer? I had one the day of the release and it was almost like drinking a glass of rum. Very little beer profile at all if I remember correctly. Some people wouldn't like it at all I am sure if you didn't like rum.

 

I like rum. Some rums very much. If I encountered a rum that tasted like the bottle of Attempted Redrum we opened, however, I would fear for my sight.

 

Not likely, unless the rum barrels used had stored something else in between. The flavors were unlike any rum or rum barrel aged beers I have tasted. Whatever happened to this beer, I can't see how it could have been intentional.

 

I had one yesterday and I can tell you it was probably the scariest beer I've ever opened because I didn't know how it'd taste.
Luckily, I got a good bottle and it was fantastic. Boozy, but not overly so. Rum on the front, then it gives way to beer, then rum heat on the end with perfect amount of heat. Definitely a fantastic beer. The 3 other guys I was with loved it too. It's a shame the bottle variation is so crazy because while I want more of it, I would have a hard time pulling the trigger on a trade because of the risk of a shitty bottle.
But thank you DaveHack for including this in a box, amazing beer.

 

I'm writing to inform folks that bottle # 773/850 was a winner. Wish I had more if they taste like that one did.

 

Had 1 recently (and a few in the past), and have never had anything other than great bottles. Haven't had any experiences with any infected bottles.

 

Sorry for bumping this old thread. Had bottle #752 last night. I can now report I'm someone who has had a winner, and someone who has had a not winner. Probably the worst/most undrinkable beer I've ever had. Probably drank 0.5 oz and drainpoured the rest, and still got a headache (although that was probably psychosomatic).

I have no idea how this happened to this beer, and it's a god damn shame. The good bottle was one of the best 10 beers I've ever had, and the bad bottle was unequivocally the worst beer I've ever had. One bottle left...