I've been thinking a bit lately about blended beers like Firestone Walker's Anniversary brews, The Bruery's Melange series, et al. I have some nebulous thoughts - some of which are founded on perhaps erroneously romantic views of brewing - and I know I've garnered a reputation here for long-windedness, but bear with me as I'm hoping to stimulate some discussion on the matter - even if this may be as much about the philosophy of brewing as it is about the process. Here's my issue: something about the idea of blending a bunch of disparate beers together into one whole turns me off, and I can't quite put my finger on why. I think one part of it is that I (perhaps wrongly) view a bottle of beer as a result of a singular brewing effort; ostensibly, a group of brewers executed an idea for a beer (or an iteration thereof {i.e. a batch}) and the contents of a given bottle represent what emerged as a result of that - for better or for worse. The idea of a bunch of "blenders" converging on a warehouse to carefully select different beers to be mixed at specific mathematical percentages into a new product doesn't sit right with me (see http://www.firestonebeer.com/beers/products/eighteen ), perhaps because it violates a common quixotic (or even romantic) view of brewing: that the yeast makes the beer, and we only prepare the ingredients. To an extent, I think one could argue that it even removes the art from the brewing process. I like adhering to the idea that a beer is the expression of a singular vision (which, granted, may or may not be executed by a group of collaborators), and should ideally be gestalt. As willing and hopeful as I am that these blended beers will be good each time I try a new one, I often find that they never exceed the sum of their parts. Paradoxically, I have no such qualm with blended Oud Bruins, Flanders Red Ales, and Lambics - because, to borrow some whiskey terminology, the blend is of two different vintages of the same expression. That just seems more true to form than blending say, a quadrupel, a barleywine aged in brandy barrels, and an oatmeal stout. Anecdotally, I've heard New Belgium's blenders say of the vintage blending process as it concerns La Folie that "the beer tells us when its ready" (pretentious though that may sound). But the argument above falls apart when I think about Gueuzerie Tilquin - a blendery that doesn't use different vintages of the same expression - and yet produces gueuze that do seem gestalt. There are parallels to be drawn with the wine and coffee worlds - in which blends seem to have a tendency to be viewed as inferior by more competent producers. Those with more brewing knowledge will point out dire flaws in my thinking (which I welcome), and much of this is subjective, but: What are your thoughts on blending as it relates to brewing as an art form?
Great post. How so? In reference to the FW Anniversary beers, all of the individual beers and the art which goes into brewing and aging them has already been executed. The blending process is a separate art form unto itself which in no way detracts from the brewing process. I view them as two separate and complimentary art forms. I disagree on this. I was into wine for a while before I discovered the joys of beer and I found single grape varietals to be kind of boring. In my eyes anyone can take a bunch of one type of grape and turn it into wine and there isn't much art involved in that at all, you kind of just get what the grapes give you. The blending process and utilizing the individual characteristics of different grapes to work in harmony with one another is where the art of winemaking lies and that is what we see happening with the FW Anniversary beers. What a lot of people don't realize about wine is that many bottles that just say "Merlot"or "Cabernet Sauvignon" are still in fact blends. I think in CA a bottle of wine only needs to be either 75% or 85% of a certain type of grape for that bottle to be labeled that variety of wine. The wines of Bordeaux are almost all blended.
You say it is an art form, and I tend to agree. As with any art, to be successful, you need to be gifted and thus capable of predicting the outcome. If you are not gifted, then you've just wasted a lot of really good beers when trying to make them better. There are some brewers who can do it, but I don't think most can. Brewers have a lot more beer at their disposal that can be used for experimentation, but all of us have only a bottle or two that we can try experimenting with before giving up and moving on to other beers.
