Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Beer News & Releases' started by Bitterbill, Jan 25, 2019.
Not a fan of this white stout thing
This beer is interesting though. At 6% if it has the stout feel and taste and a nice barrel it could be the “new” thing.
Price wise the regular DS in bottled 4 packs is around $16-18, what will this 6 pack of 6% cost?
I look forward to trying this, mainly due to it being a low-ABV BA stout. Pretty much all of my cellar beers are BA stouts/porters, and they're typically 9-18% ABV. If White Dragon is decent tasting, I'll get this by the case.
I had a Zipline White Stout the other day, but not BBA. It was OKish. It had a tangy flavor that I attribute to the espresso, though not sure why espresso would be tangy. Sure wasn't the chocolate.
My two cents:
Here in the U.S. we naturally think of Stout-style beers as dark in color, given that's what the style "Stout" has essentially always been in this country (as far as I know), e.g., Guinness.
That said, historically speaking, the word - stout - originally referred not to the beer's color or style, but rather to the strength (ABV) of the beer. Therefore, in old Europe (mainly Britain), a stout beer was a strong beer of any color.
So, historically speaking, a pale stout (AKA white stout in today's vernacular) is not a new invention. And by most people's standards, including in context of "session beers," 6% ABV+ is a strong beer.
Goofy, gimmicky, fun, whatever. I've had some in this "style" that have been quite good. I'll certainly give this a shot when I see it in my area. Lighten up, Francis.
Wasn't just Europe or the UK, nor that long ago :
Minnesota's Gluek Stite (one of the earliest high-ABV malt liquors and one of the infamous "Green Death" nicknamed beers) was originally called Gluek Stout, until the Feds objected.
This is awesome, Im young so I didnt start drinking till 2011 and wasnt around drinking a lot. When did Malt liqour ceased to be called be Stout? 90s-2000s?
Well, I wouldn't phrase it that way - it was more that malt liquors were described as being "stout", meaning "strong" - the latter term the then-BATF and currently the TTB doesn't allow on beer labels.
Seems to have ended by the late 1970s and it was most prevalent in California, which after Repeal into that era has some rather strict laws on beer. Draught beer over 3.2% abw (4% abv) was not allowed until the mid-1950s, anything labeled "Beer" had to be 5% or under, etc. I used to think that maybe the "stout" signified the higher abv malt liquors until I bought that bottle of Schlitz Stout Malt Liquor - the label says "Not greater than 4% by weight".
Many malt liquors were sold in CA and other states labeled or advertised as being "Stout Malt Liquor" - including Country Club, Colt 45, (the two largest sellers) as well as University Club (Miller), Brew 102, Olde English, Edelweiss, Foxhead Winchester, Wellington, Astro and Bull Dog.
The latter brand, originally from the one-time largest California brewer, Acme (and, later, brewed by Grace Bros.) noted this in ads:
"It's (was?) the greatest!"
Ok, so back to the beer:
I'm drinking one right now and I get next to no coffee. I was under the impression that, even though it's not an official style, that coffee and/or chocolate were a necessary requirement to give the beer its Stout-like qualities. This is basically just a generic Bourbon-barrel aged ale (somewhere between amber and golden) with what I perceive as some lactose sweetness but it's anyone's guess because New Holland doesn't list the ingredients - just some tasting notes and that it's barrel aged. Meanwhile the majority of the reviews mention the coffee presence like it's so obvious that it's an ingredient in the beer. I get literally none. If anything, this is a multi-dimensional example of how perception really is everything. If there is no coffee in this beer and people are assuming it's a necessary requirement of the "style" then they're tricking themselves into perceiving it when it's really not there. Just like when a "true" white stout actually does have coffee and tricks the drinker into thinking it's a dark beer. I know, I just blew your mind.
Just curious, did you have it on draft or out of the can? How cold was it? Not suggesting that you're wrong just wondering if there were any other contributing factors. I've had it and can say that it tasted of coffee, not quite as much as I wanted as a coffee and stout drinker but it was there.
At the risk of going into too much detail, I keep my beers on the porch this time of year to save space in the fridge because I have roommates...It's freezing temps right now. And yes, now that I'm drinking one that was brought closer to 55 degrees, there is a decent amount of coffee in the flavor but still very little in the aroma. Definitely getting more chocolate now though...and yes, at this temp it is certainly more enjoyable. But my queries remain the same: are chocolate and/or coffee necessities in the style and can anyone confirm there is actually coffee and/or chocolate in this beer? If anything, it just seems like sweetness along with vanilla and some milk chocolate are the main factors contributing to this beer having "Stout" characteristics. All the same, thank you for pointing out my misstep in judging this beer @Beer_Stan
Hmmm...of all the times I had a "Golden Stout" or "Blond Stout" I never really realized that they are essentially heavy cream ales. Strong vanilla presence with a bigger body and abv which I'm sure is how they are putting on the "stout" distinction. Maybe having more to do with the older definition of Stout with regards to beer rather than the colloquial expression we use now, synonymous with strong dark beer. @jesskidden might know more if he cares to tag in on this curiosity. Also I didn't think you had misjudged the beer, but I love playing detective when people aren't tasting/smelling something that should be there by all accounts. All palates are different with which flavors they taste and to what extremes.