Do breweries reguarly tweak their flagship offerings?

It's only a matter of time before Sublimely Self Righteous is brought back to us again =D

 

NEBCO does. not sure about too many others. i don't believe it's enormously common but who knows.

 

I have spoken with brewery employees, and the answer is a definite yes.

 

excellent observation (as usual)

Also look at the number of brands that Pabst owns: http://pabstbrewingco.com/portfolio/

Natty Bo, Schlitz, Rainier, PBR, Schaefer, Lone Star, Blatz, Ballantines, etc. goes on and on and on!

All of these brands stopped innovating a long time ago - and are pure nostalgia at this point.

If you're not evolving - you are slowly dying!

 

Slight tweaks and changing "trends" come into play i find.
Water alterations, grist alterations ( minimal additions or subtractions), hop contracts/availability, and brewer all come into play.
Like @Sixpoint said "if you're never evolving- you are slowly dying" and i highly doubt you've made something the first time and said " you know what? i wouldn't change one little thing."
Its an ever renewing search for perfection that might never be accomplished; yet that is half the fun.

 

The ingredients that are used to make beer will change based upon a number of variables; for example:

· Crop year changes

· Which farm the ingredient is grown

· The particular lot of malted barley

· Etc.

Breweries need to account for these variations and implement ‘tweaks’ accordingly.

These ‘tweaks’ could be for the process of continuing product improvement like the folks at Sixpoint Brewing.

There ‘tweaks’ could be for the process of maintaining consistency of the product like the folks at Anheuser Busch who take painstaking steps to optimize consistency of their beers from batch to batch and over the dimension of numerous locations. There is a great thread that has a link to an article which discusses that one of the principle roles of the AB Research Pilot Brewery in St. Louis is to evaluate ingredient batches to ensure how best to use them in the brewing process.

http://www.beeradvocate.com/communi...budweiser-a-bs-research-pilot-brewery.289611/

Cheers!

 

New Holland just did it with Mad Hatter:

http://newhollandbrew.com/new-holland-brewing-announces-reimagined-flagship-beer-mad-hatter-i-p-a/

I've now had fresh versions of both side-by-side, and personally, I don't think it's a change for the better. However, I wasn't buying a lot of Mad Hatter in the first place, which is the problem that New Holland was likely facing. Even if the recipe change is a small step back (which it arguably isn't), if it gets new Hatter drinkers then that's a win for the brewery.

 

Oskar Blues just changed the hop bill of Gubna recently, hops and malt will not always be consistent.

So, yes.

 

i had a Lagunitas IPA the other day for the first time in a very long time-at least 2 years--and thought it had moved significantly Sucks-ward in the hop profile. I am almost positive (almost, because a. I don 't have any illusions about the precision of my palate, and b. I also don't have any illusions about the accuracy of my sensory memory, either) that this has changed significantly.

I believe it's more than just adjusting for difference in malt analysis from different lots, or alpha acid or cohumulone percentage or whatever in a shipment of hops from the previous one. I think to answer the OPs question that numerous breweries are changing/have changed the recipes of their flagships to reflect current tastes rather than strictly adhering to what they came up with in 1993 or 2002 or whenever the flagship first appeared.

 

Since brewing is an art, it follows that brewers are artists. When an artist has the freedom and ability and feels he or she can improve their art, they do so. Sometimes it's appreciated, sometimes it's not.
But there is a catch. If you, as the consumer, believes something has been tweaked, your mind follows your belief and whether it's been changed or not, you think it has. There is also the palate bias which depends on what you ate or drank just before you had the beer [or other consumable] you are thinking was tweaked.
Conclusion - yes, beers are tweaked but it's damn near impossible for the average drinker to figure out just how, oftentimes making the belief that it was tweaked an illusion.

 

And oh yeah, sometimes breweries come out with a new version or a new beer in the same style with the same or close ABV and IBUs instead of tweaking the older ones. Stone Ruination 2.0 comes to mind.

 

In at least one aspect it's out of the brewers' hands. Hops are constantly changing their profile from one growing season to the next.

 

But the variation of hops from crop year to crop year (and hop farm to hop farm, etc.) is where the skill of the brewer comes into play.

There is a great discussion on pages 239 – 240 of For the Love of Hops by Stan Hieronymus where the headbrewer of Bear Republic (Richard Norgrove) mentions how he makes a consistent beer of Racer 5 IPA given that hops vary with the location they are grown, the particular year’s crop, and other variables. His last quote is revealing: “So, how do I make Racer taste the same when hops change? That’s what makes it craft.”

Cheers!

 

Yes! Most of the answers in this thread are pretty spot on. Smaller shops and breweries usually STRIVE to keep their flavors consistent throughout the year, but it's not always entirely possible depending on geographical factors.

Some welcome this, some don't. I love it nonetheless.

 

Don't take your ever changing/expanding palate out of account..

 

OK, but going with your analogy, in the case of Apple, I prefer certain pieces of hardware and software that came before the current iterations on the market. The evolution of a beer can be embraced by some, but others might mourn the passing of something wonderful. Clearly, not all change can be easily characterized as improvement.

 

I've been told becks changed their recipe years ago and it was better back then. Was too young to know but would be cool to have ever found out.

 

I think there's a slight difference in what Stone did and the breweries having to tweak their recipes a bit due to elements beyond their control. I think Stone saw their recipes as a little out dated so they totally revamped them and did very well in doing so.

They're open with the fact the beer is totally different.

 

I'd say probably so, but most likely unintended. Things vary, components change, consistency on some styles must be incredibly difficult to duplicate.

 

All the time. Sometimes to stay same and sometimes to get better. Sometimes to get faster too.