Rahr BBAWW $16 this year....what?

It was actually more like a curdled milk flavor. Almost like i had taken the beer and put milk in it, then warmed it up. And it had a pasty thickness(but the beer wasnt thick if that makes sense) that wouldnt go away. couldnt wash away the taste for 2 days.

what do you think would cause those flavors? (thanks for the clarification too, i knew i wasnt right on the name but was sure someone would tell me )

 

Soured milk flavors does sound like lactobacillus, which is a bacteria commonly found in yogurt. If you've ever had plain yogurt and it was anything like that, probably lactobacillus, which many people simply call 'lacto' for short.

 

Nice to know i was at least in the right church, even if it was the wrong pew.

 

I think it's worse than last year's version. It felt thinner in the mouthfeel which I didn't think was possible until I tried it. Last year's was thin, but this year's, even thinner. I was expecting more bourbon as well, and there just wasn't much, I mean there was a hint to let you know they sat in barrels, but nothing compared to what 2010 or 2011 were.

 

Much crappier than BCBS.

Note that I didn't say it was crappy, but compared to BCBS is not even close.

Is Troll?

15.99 price point puts it up there with the much better IMHO BBHellfighter. I think that beer is overpriced myself.

 

To complicate things more...even then it could be another bacteria. Lacto is common and well known, but there are countless others out there.

 

Yes but most of which can not survive in beer long enough to sour it. Pedio could be the other culprit but it is more sourness rather then tartness and without Brett there would be a lot of diacetyl.

 

I had a 2013 last night and it was just as boring as it has been in the past few years. With so many better options available now they may want to step it up and make this 100% barrel aged again. Or keep it in the barrels a bit longer...something.

 

It is 100% barrel aged, whoever doesn't think it is... can drive to the brewery and see for themselves and stop posting bullshit all over the internets like they know something.

Cheers to the worst thread full of bullshit on BA...
(that's saying a lot)

And cheers to all the Cicerphones... we're all experts now that we have smartphones.

 

Did you join just to post about this beer? Do you work for them? I don't like the beer but that's based solely on the fact that I don't like the taste. Is that ok?

 

you can like or dislike whatever you want, but bashing something with false facts... is not cool. Whenever I need to defend the innocent I put on a mask. I'm like a beer super hero...

 

sounds more like afraid to have your thoughts associated with you, unlike anyone who "bashed" a beer that doesn't taste barrel aged.

 

Not really buying the superhero thing. You didn't join in 2011 and hang out just waiting to use this account for the good of beer kind. You're a lurker that frequents the site and got annoyed at this thread so you decided "F this I'm finally gonna post". As a loooong time lurker that's cool with me sir :-)

Now I will say that the infection talk is probably incorrect. No offense to anyone involved but I think the I word is thrown around too much on BA. Just because something tastes bad it doesn't mean it's infected.

 

Several folks that work at the brewery have mentioned before, that the beer is blended with non-barrel aged Winter Warmer. I was told in years past, that the beer was 70% barrel aged, and 30% non-barrel aged Winter Warmer. I do not know what the ratio is today but I am certain it's a blended beer, and not 100% barrel aged product.

First, I realize this is all hearsay since I don't have a quotable source, and second, while I was typing this out I felt it was probably good measure to check my sources again. For what it's worth, I just spoke with 2 different people who worked at Rahr in the past, and they have also confirmed that it is not a 100% barrel aged product.

I don't mean this to say the beer isn't a good product, just clarifying how it's made and my only intent is to help shed a little light on the subject. I've been drinking it for years, and have always enjoyed it.

Cheers,
Chad

 

You... you mean the beer superhero might be wrong? That can't be! He's been sitting around since 2011 for this moment!

 

Just wanted to clarify, I had to edit my original post as I had the ratios backwards.

 

Greatness, how about I asked the head brewer at a festival very recently and he confirmed the finished product is blended and definitely not 100%. It's very hard to accept but maybe you'll recover one day.

 

I personally don't get the obsession with "100% barrel aged" in beer anyways. Some of my favorite beers have been blends. It can cut down on the "heat" of the final product and add extra flavor that might over wise have been lost in the aging process. Deschutes uses this to their advantage in greatest degree (BB Anniversary series, Abyss, etc...) as well as the Firestone Walker anniversary beers (to a lesser extent). Bishops Barrel 4 was a blend and was arguably the best of that series.

Uh, this doesn't seem to be the case in this case, however. Just an example, lol.

 

Could the price increase have something to do with the slick new screen printed bottle? It's a nice looking package fer sure.

 

FACTS?! Well I never, what are those???