How much time to get over the "learning curve"?

It depends greatly on the brewers level of experience and skill, even a great brewer is going to take a couple of batches to adjust to a new system, though you can hedge your bets by sticking to forgiving styles for the first couple brews if you are smart. there is also sometimes an irresistible urge to put beer on tap ASAP when you first open that can result in beer getting tapped before it is ready. That sort of thing should resolve itself in short order if everything else is as it should be and the brewer knows what they are doing.

I'd try it again in a couple of months and see if things are better, if not then you may be dealing with someone who wasn't ready to open a brewery, which is the case more often than it should be. In that case it may take years to improve, if it ever does.

 

Did the beers shown above taste alright; was it the unfiltered nature of their appearance that put you off?

And, just to answer the question at hand, it varies: some are fine right out of the gate, others take a while to get into the swing of things. Frankly, it depends on how long you, the consumer, want to wait...

 

Most beers should clear naturally if well brewed.I feel that a lot of brewers have got away with substandard products by hiding behind the "unfiltered" notion , that somehow a cloudy beer is more "natural", if people believe that they will believe anything.
There are some styles which are intrinsically cloudy but simple ales do not need to be.

 

Brewing on such a small scale, I'm sure it's hard to keep up with demand. It's entirely possible that he's serving the beer before the yeast have fully floculated. How did the beers taste? Did any of them have any sort of a green apple or maybe pumpkin taste?

If they do, I'd definitely stay away. Id say eschewing quality for a few bucks is incredibly bad form.

Also: I expect that the first few batches for any brewery to be good sketches of what they're trying for. They're working on a new system that's usually MUCH bigger than what they're used to, and often making use of techniques that they've never used before. But I feel a good brewery will learn from their mistakes, and should be hitting their stride within their first year. In SD, Rip Current and Societe just had or are about have their fist anniversary, and they've been making phenomenal beers for months.

 

But were the beers good? Heady Topper can be consider a "yeast slurry" if you don't follow the "drink from the can" mantra on their packaging.

I've had beers that have looked like shit but tasted like gold in the past. I'm guessing from your last comment they looked like shit and tasted only slightly better than shit, however.

 

Appearance doesn’t really mater to me – the same goes probably for most on BA considering the Heady Topper scores – so if these taste good there is no issue. If they are not very good, I would check back in 1 to 2 years. By that time they will either have improved noticeably, increased qc & made better recipes or they will be just like you remembered them. In that case, no need to bother with them unless if they are your friends or something.

 

I can understand the attitude of wanting to get out of the gate business-wise, but if you're selling a mediocre product, it would be hard to keep up. Looking at your beer and saying, "wow, I can make money on this" is a pretty good incentive to start selling it. Whether or not the beer is ready is another question.

 

Going from a homebrew scale to a (say) 7 bbl system can take time. It depends on the brewer, though, how much that time that will take. I think it also depends on how honest the brewer is being with himself/herself. I usually know if one of my batches will do good in a competition or not. I sometimes wonder how some of these nano breweries are actually making money if they are just putting out forgettable, mediocre beers. Especially in a place like Portland where there is so many other choices.

 

Just like I don't go to a new restaurant when it first opens, I wouldn't go to a brewery when it first opens. In the case of a restaurant, I usually wait 2-3 months since that's how long it can take to work out the kinks. I have visited several restaurants before that time and for the most part, have been disappointed. However, I always give a place a 2nd or sometimes, a 3rd chance. So the same would be true for a brewery. As long as they brewed something that appealed to me, I would wait and always give it a 2nd chance.

 

There are too many breweries that get by being small and local, and drumming up support from local beer geeks/hipsters. Went through the same kind of thing at Earth Eagle in Portsmouth, NH. I thought the beers were mediocre in taste and flat out amateurish in body/smell/finish, but the tasting room gets packed and the guys brewing the beer just get patted on the back constantly and I think are planning to expand. If you can't brew a near perfect beer on a small set-up then I have very little hope that things will improve in a larger set-up. But the beer market is not efficient in that regard at the moment. It will be someday, but the old saying "a rising tide lifts all boats" is more indicative of the current craft beer market.

 

I was going to ask. Being hazy or containing sediment is simply a mark of being unflitered and/or unpasteurized, which is generally preferable. As to the original question, there is no concrete answer. Everyone learns at different paces, brewers included.

 

I suppose a lot of the length of waiting time for a brewery's improvement will depend on whether the brewer asks for and listens to feedback (if he/she is relatively inexperienced and doesn't already know), and takes steps to brew a new batch right away and dump the bad stuff (a difficult choice to make if you're starting a brewery on a limited budget) so that the improved new stuff gets on-line asap. If we consumers don't give any feedback then an inexperienced brewer may think everything is hunky dory and keep the bad stuff on tap, and keep right on brewing that same bad beer.

 

Another thought. One man's new brewery so-so beer is another man's Pliny. There are alot of beers out there that get low ratings that some people may thoroughly enjoy. There are some people who won't admit they don't like something when others around them are enjoying it. It seems as if everybody hates Rogue but they're still in business so somebody must be buying their beer. Everybody doesn't like spicy foods, but they're all over the place because enough people like their food spicy to make it worthwhile for producers to make spicy food.

 

I think Hill Farmstead's Susan is an average IPA. There, I said it. Huge weight off my chest.

 

I can't agree more with these sentiments.

 

Good for you. I hope you feel better.

 

Waited for a new brewery to open one town over from where I live. I actually drive past it every ride home from work. They came out with an American ale. dull, boring and flavorless. I tried their 5% coffee stout. it was ok but not my favorite style. I was so disappointed, i didn't go back. Then i saw they were coming out with a standard ipa. Cool, can't wait I thought. What a let down. grassy version of their American ale. They never heard of Hill Farmstead. They don't beer-travel. Its like they were told that breweries were the "next big thing". After i tried the ipa I asked if they liked beer. lol. On average, the place is filled with mock-hipsters and the beer ignorant. and thats the just the staff.

 

This seems appropriate. Just replace the word "woman" with "beer" every time it appears.