Why do craft lagers look "gorgeous" while macro lagers look like "piss"?

It's not that they *look* like piss.

 

Bock
Marzen
Vienna
Baltic Porter
Pilsner

 

With most macro lagers, the Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem had them pegged, "Water is alright in Tay (Tea) and fish and things which swim in rivers". Watery beer is like MP3, when you could have had good beer which is Vinyl. Nuff said!

 

google some pictures of maco light lagers in glasses and craft pilsners in glasses. Maybe you can notice a difference in person, but in pictures you can't tell which one will taste bad.

 

I think its just a matter of there are so few craft lagers that seeing one is kind of like seeing a unicorn.
We see the IPAs the Stouts the Ales shine everyday, Well made Lagers are the rareity (sadly) and seeing one that is not an AAL ( not that they cannot be well crafted and tasty) makes some of us feel like child on his/her birthday.

 

To me, it's because of head retention and lacing. Stone IPA is almost the same color as an AAL, but produces a good head of sticky foam with lacing, which makes it look instantly more appealing, imo. AALs are like bad soda--thin, fizzy, and watery.

 

Well I think many big brewery ('macro') lagers look fine, and they taste good, too.

 

It does have elements of beauty...there is something about the complete package (bottle)...nice that someone else thinks the same...

 

I don't find that all macros look that bad. Peroni in the proper glass looks a picture, pity about the taste or lack of it.And the price is ridiculous.