Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Beer News & Releases' started by M-Fox24, Nov 7, 2019.
The Next Bulleit Barrel-Aged Beer From The Guinness Open Gate Brewery In Baltimore
Argh. So frustrating. I’d be salivating at the idea of them putting out the unaged barley wine without the entire barrel aging and stout blend idea for “complexity.”
Brewed in Baltimore...why is it in 11.2 oz. bottles?
So, just like every other brewery at the time - before glass-lined tanks, aluminum/steel/stainless steel/concrete tanks and kegs of aluminum, steel or stainless steel.
But, the wooden aging casks and trade kegs sure weren't previously used for storage of whiskey or other spirits... This concept that "aged in the wood" or "barrel aged" beer meant flavored with the previous contents of used barrels is nonsense.
Exactly! Since when did we go onto the metric system? Hell to all US brewers using 11.2 oz bottles
I'll give it a try...
My only guess is that all Guinness products that come in bottles come in 11.2 oz. bottles.
But I mean come on, how much money do they have? Get some 12 oz. bottles.
Saw this on an endcap display at my local grocery store and decided to give it a go. I'm a big fan of stout-barleywine blends, so I was very curious what a large brewer would produce using that concept.
It's about what I would have expected. Pretty thin compared to other blends like this I've had, and lighter in color, with very little fizzing on the pour. Doesn't betray the 10% ABV except for a slight twinge of bourbon heat on occasion. Nice roasted malt, raisin and caramel notes, pretty modest oak, dry finish. Tasty, very glad I tried it, but I won't be hunting for another 4-pack or anything once this one is gone.
It's... It's pretty good. The marketing is annoying and it's kinda disgusting how they're trying to play up a "BALTIMORE PRIDE GO BIRDS YO" feel when they've tried so hard to fuck over actual local brewers. But it's pretty good.
Can you elaborate on all of the above?
Thanks for the link. I respectfully think you should read that article again (and the 2017 one in the link at the beginning of the article). It doesn’t seem to support your statement.