What’s The Difference? Share Your Side By Side (2024)

And I thank you for doing so. And I hope you have at least half as much fun reading as I do writing them

 

I think you know the answer.

 

Not a real scientific side by side but I did pour myself an Anchor Old Foghorn from 2017 alongside one from 2020 tonight while I was cooking dinner. The 2017 bottle had some brighter flavors and was more fruity while the 2020 bottle was deeper toffee and dark fruit.

Both were delicious. I have one bottle left from 2020. I'm not in a hurry to drink it and I'd really like confirmation that a new owner has plans to brew more before I Crack it.

Drinking a 2019 Bigfoot now and it's wild how sharp the hop bitterness feels is contrast to those smooth and malty sweet Anchor beers

 

The always generous Advocate @JayORear sent me a box and it included two Hefeweizens: Hawley Hefeweizen by Wallenpaupack Brewing and Rules of Measure by Fidens.



I made posts in NBW for each.

Hawley Hefeweizen

Rules of Measure

Both beers were fairly faithful Hefeweizens, but there were a few differences:

• A slight difference in body color
• Fiden’s mouthfeel is very soft - exceptionally soft for a Hefe in my experience
• Hawley's nose is more pronounced: more clove and banana
• Better lacing in Hawley - a good looking beer
• Hawley had a hop presence that was welcome and the Fidens beer had more wheat flavor.

I'd drink either again, but I preferred Hawley Hefeweizen.

 

Happy Easter, all!
You've probably heard it said that the catcher's mitt, mask, shin guards, and chest protector are the tools of ignorance. I'd say rather that the tools of ignorance are a propane torch, a steel rod, a bottle of beer, and two steins. I've been wanting to "poke" a beer for a while now after reading about the process here. I dug around in the cellar and found a Schell's Bock (bottled some time during the current millennium, and that's all I'm sayin') and found what looked like a suitable tool at the thrift store for 50c. Let's get right to it. Here's the beer, divided equally among two identical steins.



First impressions: malty and a little sweet, with huge notes of caramel, dark bread, prune, and raisin. Medium bodied, good carbonation. Now on with the process. I heated the tool with a torch until it glowed red, then plunged it into the stein on the right.



The results were amazing. The creamy foam almost immediately overflowed the stein, making it look like one of those Czech pours. The caramelization of the sugars and release of carbonation made the beer much sweeter and silkier, with a noticeable increase in the depth of dark caramel flavor. It's almost as if I turned beer into candy! Was it worth the effort? Absolutely. I wasn't expecting that much of a difference, but the proof is in the (bock) pudding. Prost!

@JackHorzempa

 

Well, this is the most original post in this thread in a while. Kudos!

Let's see if it starts a trend

 

DIY Poked Beer Appreciation Thread coming soon

 

Untappd has a listing for "Bock Poked," with the description "Schell's Bock POKED with a hot iron." It didn't say it had to be done at the brewery, so I checked mine in. (Didn't get no steenkin' badge, though. )

 

To be honest, I didn't plan on this side-by-side, but I have a couple of cans of each left and figured this could knock out two of them to make room for other beer. Bell's Hopslam is a bit old, and Stone's Ruination is midway through its can's proclaimed freshness lifespan. I also expect these to be different in appreciable ways, with a few similarities since they are both IPAs that have been made for a while.


First off, Hopslam is more hazy than I expected, with an orange hue to it. It's head built up a little more and had a dirtier look to it than Ruination's, but both held up well. Hopslam's aroma is a bit sweeter, with a lean towards citrus versus Ruination's more herbal to even catty. I'm a little surprise that the older Hopslam is a bit more expressive in the nose.

Taste pretty much follows suit, with Hopslam being sweeter and more "juicy" with a little spice tagging along. The end of the taste is a slow build of pine bitterness that reaches into the aftertaste. Ruination has a more balanced opening, with a level of malt sweetness that starts losing ground almost immediately to a catty / piney bitterness. Bitterness starts earlier in Ruination than in Hopslam, but both have an extended linger.

Well, this is a case where both the differences and similarities were almost exactly as expected. So a bit more confirming than learning, with a definite success of getting two aging IPAs are out of the fridge.

 

Well, I still have some Hopslam to get rid of, and today's purchase of Waldo's Special Ale seemed like a good comparison that the GF and I will try and manage today. I am anticipating Waldo's to fall in between Hopslam and Ruination on the sweet / bitter scale, but behave similar with a sweeter/maltier opening and a pretty bitter finish.

Like yesterday, Hopslam is the hazy of the combatants, though Waldo's does have a slight haze, but seems about the same color as yesterday's Ruination. Hopslam's head repeats its performance and Waldo's keeps pace with Ruination a half step behind the Bell's beer.


Hopslam's aroma is a little more ruby red grapefruit today than the mix of sweeter citrus notes I got yesterday; not a huge difference, but just different enough. A bit more notable a difference is the inclusion of nectarine leaning peach that I didn't pick up yesterday. I think this is probably as much a difference in my attention to detail from day-to-day than environment or can variation.

Waldo's has what I'll dub a candied marijuana aroma to it. There's an underlying dankness in the herb with a hint of spring onion, but a thin veil of Juicy Fruit covers all of it. That old school gum tickles the opening of the taste, though it's mainly tangerine with a little grapefruit peel. The 10% brings a little heat in the middle as the beer's pine bitterness picks up. The bitterness doesn't seem to grow to the level I recall from either beers yesterday at first, but after a few consecutive sips, it closes the gap a bit.

Attempting to verify my thoughts by sipping the beer I had yesterday, I feel Waldo's transition starts in between where Ruination and Hopslam in the taste;s journey. I think Hopslam ends up more dry than Waldo's, and since (to me) dryness and bitterness can compliment / accentuate each other, I feel it gets more bitter - but I could argue to myself that the bitterness levels are about equal by the finish.

This comparison was probably a little more interesting given the experience of the very recent comparison of high ABV IPAs. I actually think Waldo's has the sweetest opening of the three, but has a less soft feel than Hopslam - more towards Ruination (granted, it is the "lightest" beer of the bunch).

Waldo's has a "brightness" about it that I wasn't expected to take specific note of despite knowing it is the freshest of the three beers. Though, could it be bottle vs can?

The GF had a hard time choosing her favorite of today's two, but eventually picked Waldo's. I think I agree, having an equally difficult time deciding.

 

”Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!”

 

Well, last weekend I opened one of my Lagunitas Willettized beers and mentioned that I was getting some coconut sweetness that I didn't recall getting in said beer before. My general impression, specifically with the extra perceived sweetness, was that it reminded me of Hardywood's Bourbon Barrel GBS . So, to end (?) my weekend of comparing higher ABV beers, I will check myself.

Heads built up similarly, and held better in the GF's thinner taster glasses than the ring I got pretty quickly in both. Lagunitas ring is noticeably darker, by at least a shade, which is probably giving the illusion of the body being a tad darker, but both are a typical stout black or near black.


It does not come as a shock that BBA GBS has a distinctive ginger aroma to it that Lagunitas does not. There's a little chocolate cake in the background, but the ginger pretty much dominates. Willettized gives me a nice dose of whiskey barrel, with a bit of coffee and chocolate in the background. So both have a scent that plays a big lead role with a light supporting cast, though Hardywood's beer has the stronger single note.

The impression of the taste is what I thought might be fairly similar, maybe that whiskey barrel in Willettized subs in for the ginger in GBS better than in the nose and in a way that led me to this impression. Let's see...

Starting with Willettized, and what I am getting doesn't remind me of what I got last week, so I'm now expecting this little experiment to not show the similarities I hypothesized going into this. There's a slight tang and some root spiciness (nothing near the ginger I expect from GBS) and a slight bitter lean to the Lagunitas beer today.

Ok, let's see if my palate just has things seeming a little bitter today...

Maybe? Bourbon Barrel GBS is definitely not as sweet as I was anticipating (to be clear, it's never seemed an overly sweet adjuncted stout to me, but the ginger and bourbon has given it a lean to the sweet side). The ginger spice definitely provides more of a palate tingle than the "root spiciness" I described in Willettized, and overall, it is a little sweeter, finishing more near balanced today.

Sipping them right after another, I get the coffee a little more clearly in Willetized. The beer and barrel influence - as far as I can separate them from the other flavors - seem somewhat similar. But that is not at all what I was claiming last week - where I was getting that sweet coconut note in Willetized (that I am not getting today) that I thought shifted the beer onto the sweet side of balanced, similar to what I get in GBS.

I actually like sipping them GBS before Willetized, as the coffee comes out more that way, so I think I will continue that route with the remainder of these pours.

The GF prefers GBS slightly, in a closer decision than I expected considering she's not a huge coffee stout fan. That might be a better data point for my original claim, so forget everything I wrote above and I will claim these beers are pretty close to the same

 

Random quick follow up to me previous post:

I was looking through some photos, cleaning up thigns from about a year ago, and I saw this post comparing Lagunitas Willettized and Hardywood's Kentucky Christmas Morning, which is a version of GBS with coffee. I found those beers more similar than I expected that day, and it makes sense, since I don't feel that KCM comes across as sweet as Bourbon Barrel GBS. Funny that I also mentioned the whiskey / booze of the Lagunitas' beer being the counter to the ginger in the Hardywood beer.

 

AAL grand blind tasting about to go down, and here's round 1:


The 'Big 3'

Winner of this round will advance to the finals in a couple of weeks. I'm planning 3 preliminary rounds with one winner for each.

To be continued...

 

Glasses have been randomized and turned around. I don't know which is which, but it looks like I'm starting on the right.


#1:
Classic aroma; if anything it's maltier than expected. Head retention is killer. Toasty corn underneath, very subtle grassy hops.

Taste follows the aroma. Squeaky clean in fermentation profile as well as water. Bitterness is really low and it really could use some pop with kind of a flabby finish.

Overall really tasty with unrealized potential to bring it to the next level. B- (3.3)

#2:
Interesting aroma- the malt and hops are incredibly subdued, and an idiosyncratic element is fairly prominent. It leans green apple, but also a twinge medicinal, maybe citronella. No corn or dms to speak of, even though I'm deliberately trying to parse it out. Weakest head retention of the three.

Super crisp feel. Malt comes out more in the flavor, though it's still really mild and generic. No real carry though, in fact it seems to fall off a cliff: malt, then swallow, then nothing but the faintgreen apple again. Very little hop flavor or bitterness, and what's there is amplified by a mineral quality.

Overall impression is actually better than all that sounds, but still not really wonderful. Still, nothing annoying, and it's a pleasant drink. Solid C (2.6)

#3:
Patiently waiting for me while retaining a nifty 1/8 inch of foam still. Aroma is toasted cornbread first, generic malt second, and faintly in the background a character that's more medicinal than hoppy. Unsure if that's actually coming from hops; and if so, it sure ain't "noble". Coarse overall, I suppose.

Ooh, I don't like this flavor. Simultaneously washed out and brawny. More washed out, though. Almost like they thought a big flavor element would compensate. It doesn't. Just begging for some bitterness and/or acid to give it interest. Literally defines "flabby". Lingering finish, though. I do wish that flavor was more front loaded. And that weird coarse herbal quality seems incongruent with the rest.

Not my thing, although I've had worse. C- (2.2)

If I had to guess, it's been:
Miller
Bud
Coors

Reveal to come.

 

Omg! 0 for 3

This is why my brother is the gambler in the family.

Bud
Coors
Miller

I stand by my impressions, but boy you could knock me over with a feather right now.

I'm going to enjoy the rest of this Bud Heavy, and try to think of what to do with the other Miller ponies.

 

Time to pony up!?!



Cheers!

P.S. I think an 'extra' challenge when it comes to blind tasting AAL beers is that since they are very subtle beers they likely are more sensitive to potential abuse of mishandling (both temperature and rough handling during transport).

 

That's certainly a part of it. But also, due to the subtlety you probably need to be really familiar with each one to pick any "tell" that they have.

 

Ok, not an AAL tasting, but I had this plan as I saw that my local spot had a beer on tap that I had bought a bottle of before grabbing a bite. I was going to do a blind tasting of Maine's Little Whaleboat from the bottle and from tap (via a growler).


I had to try to get the beers of similar temps, so I quick chilled the earlier purchased bottle after getting home, giving it about an hour and a half to even out. Then I got the GF to pour from the two containers while I watched a bit of the 76ers vs Heat game.

I heard her making mild exclamations and laughing and figured she spilled something or, les likely, something gushed a little. I say that noting the bottle's date is April 9th. However, as she told me my pours were ready to photo, she brought down her own and said, "Look what I got!"

Confused, she nudged me to look at her beers.

Well, these are my glasses, but you may be able to notice something seems quite amiss...

Maybe?

(okay, enough vertical space to maybe hide this from original scroll...)



The funny thing is, I'm not 100% convinced these aren't the same beer. I started 99% sure, but not 100%.

Here's why: only one other beer they had on tap seems to fit the color profile of the amber beer. The other Maine beer is Spring - a Kölsch, so not that mistake. There is an amber lager on, but the reviews don't mention much hop bitterness, which the iced tea-looking beer has. It doesn't look like an Other Half beer, and isn't hazy like the rest of the IPAs. Perhaps it could be Falcon Smash, by Triple Crossing, but that is listed as hazy, as well.

So maybe something is in the line that isn't the listed beer? I'll note the remaining beer indicator showed the keg was about 80% empty.

Anyhow, posting more for the joy of telling the story than the comparison, but what the hell.

The pale Little Whaleboat has a nose that is lemongrass and slightly weedy bitterness with a background of coconut and barely ripe tropical fruit. The amber version is a very dirty, watered down version of the bitter side of things and is missing the fruit. The nose doesn't completely rule out the same beer, in completely different conditions.

Amber Whaleboat has a more mineral, slightly toasty malt flavor, with grass and tropical fruit rind bitterness. There's a hint of coconut and the fruit notes aren't completely flat - though a tad dulled. Pale Whaleboat is much more vibrant, with a hint of fructose before the tropical flavor rolls up the fruit to the stem and into the leaves, ending with a woodiness (pine adjacent, but with some coconut). There's a little hemp vibe in the whole thing, as well.

So, is the amber beer a poorly made/handled version of Little Whaleboat? Is my mind trying to find ways it could be? I think both might be true. I'm just really surprised that it could work out this way. Given the store, I'd figure a mix-up more than poor handling on their part, but who knows? Maybe they had an unfinished keg from last Little Whaleboat release that suffered being partially emptied over a couple months?

Regardless, if it's not the same beer, I wonder what beer it is.