Transatlantique Kriek (New Belgium Brewing Co.)

So I’m officially in charge of reviews of sour beers and I’m a bit of a slacker (It’s not like I don’t like sours but she’s so much better at describing them). If you could see the list of beers that we’ve drank that need to be reviewed and/or posted you’d notice that Austin gets things done and I tend to let them sit for a while. I’m going to tell myself it’s the perspective I take on beer and has something to do with my enjoyment of beers that require significant aging periods. You might have other ideas.

We cracked out Transatlantique Kriek over a week ago after I got back from defending my dissertation. It’s a blend of a lager produced by New Belgium and a spontaneously fermented beer with real Polish cherries made by Boon’s Brewery in Belgium. Yep, that’s right. Fruit beer. Good fruit beer.

This kriek almost glows red when light shines through it. It has just a touch of head that settles down to a skiff of tiny bubbles. It smells sour with a hint of cherry. It’s not as sour as I expected from the aroma and has an authentic cherry flavor, not a fake cherry flavoring flavor, a real cherries kind of flavor. It’s tart. Reminds me of a cherry Jolly Rancher. The carbonation makes it tingly crisp, . The flavor becomes more sour and less cherry as is warms.

Prost!

Hoptober Golden Ale (New Belgium Brewing Co.)

Breaking away from the pale ales briefly found me wandering into the New Belgium Brewing area of my fridge (I don’t really have them separated by brewer, but maybe I should).  He should. When you have an entire fridge with nothing but beer and your lunches, you need an organizational system. Hoptober Golden Ale was there like a shimmering light.  Something different and something that last year was borderline obsession.  Something about this beer was different and awesome.  The first sip I had reminded me of cool nights like being at a football game or sitting around a fire with friends.  It was really amazing.  This year, I didn’t get that feeling.  In fact, I feel like they changed up the recipe.  For some reason it just isn’t the same.

The head color was white and the body golden.  The aroma was lemony citrus, semi-sweet and crackery.  The lemony smell was the first thing that I noticed to be different (I really don’t remember the lemony smell from last year).  The taste was lemony, semi-dry, crisp, warming and crackery.  Ok, the lemony thing is really distracting.   The lemon smell and taste make me think of this beer as more of a summer beer than an Autumn beer.  I don’t remember thinking it was that lemony, but I don’t have tasting notes from any of the Hoptobers I’ve had this fall.

Normally I really like New Belgium Brewing Company’s beers but for some reason this year’s Hoptober is just lacking.  I believe last year was the first year of Hoptober so it is likely they changed the recipe but why the lemon smell and taste.

Prost!

Shandies & Radlers: Part 2

So I figured out what the problem was with radlers I made the other day.  Now that I like beer they actually need to taste remotely like beer for me to enjoy them.  The sugar in the lemonade overrides the malt flavors pretty consistently, but the hops balance that out. I just wasn’t going hoppy enough.

To resolve this problem I figured I’d try out a radler of a rather hoppy  beer. Since we had some Ranger in the fridge and it’s one of my all time favorites I figured I would give it a try.  A 75/25 try.  No sense in diluting it too much.

It smelled like lemony flowers.  The addition of lemonade overrides most of the malt character leaving the radler with a clean, sugar, sweetness, but brings out the citrus and floral tones. It’s like the bitch beer version of Ranger.  It tastes like you would hope a beautiful woman smells. Have I mentioned the fact that I want Ranger body wash?  Because I do. My husband would be all about that.

Conclusion: 25% lemonade, 75% Ranger, 100% freaking delicious.

Prost!

Ranger India Pale Ale (New Belgium Brewing Co.)

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! Be here for the fight of fights.  As Ranger takes on Ranger.  The title is on the line! Show up early for the ultimate showdown. Bottle versus Aluminum.  One man will be blindfolded and thrown into the mix.  Who will win? Be there Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!

So continuing the Can vs. Bottle debate I decided one of the best ways to do this was to pull out a can of beer and a bottle of the same beer and do a blind taste test.  Great plan, right?  He’s so smart.

Here is how it was setup.  First the glasses were labeled with scotch tape on the bottom with 1 and 2.  I thought of that so I guess I’m smart too. Only Amber knew which one beer was which.  I photographed the bottle and can.

Then I went somewhere where I could not see which one was which. I poured them into the glasses and came up with a little mnemonic to remember which was which. I could tell you what it was, but then you would know which was which before the read his notes and that wouldn’t really be fair, now would it? Next I photographed the beers in the glasses.

Pictured from left to right: Number 1 and Number 2

Then we went back inside (it was trying to rain and nobody likes a soggy beer).  The aroma for glass 1 was florally hopped with a hint of maltiness. Glass number 2 didn’t have the maltiness to but seemed to be very florraly hopped.  Number 2 seemed to be less harsh on the nose though. Based on the aroma I’m giving Glass 1 as the bottle and glass 2 as the can. The second glass had a better more rounded hop smell than glass 1.  Winner glass 2.

The color of glass 1 was  a white head with an amber body.  Glass number 2 was the same.  The head in glass 1 disippated very quickly.  The head from glass 2 was thicker and creamier looking.  Draw (sometimes the pour isn’t as good so it’s possible glass 1 just wasn’t as good of a pour). What?  Me?  A bad pour?

Finally the best part of the reviews, tasting.  Glass number 1 had a lot of hops.  It had a bitter body and a bitter finish.  Not much for maltiness or balance.  It really was a hoppy floral taste.    The mouthfeel was carbonated but smoothed out at the back of your throat.  I thought glass one was harsh on the hops.  If I had to guess as to what it reminded me of I would say Potpurri.   I then moved on to glass 2, but first I rinsed my mouth with water several times to cleanse my palatte so it wouldn’t be burnt out from glass 1.  I found glass 2 to be cleaner.  It was still very hoppy but seemed to be more balanced.  The mouthfeel was smoother and it didn’t feel as carbonated.  Glass 2 reminded me of a fresh bouquet of flowers.  For the record I think I came  up with the potpurri v. fresh bouquet analogy. I again rinsed and repeated with glass number 1 and glass number 2 (what? I had to be thorough).  He’s all about being thorough. I finally reached my decision that Glass 2 had the better taste therefore must be the can.  A little biased perhaps? This is why we needed it to be blind. Winner: glass 2.

Here’s what I noticed.  Glass number 2 seemed to have a fresher taste.  To me it was cleaner, crisper, and not as harsh on the hops.  Glass number 1 tasted like liquid hops (don’t get me wrong I love hops but in comparison glass 2 seemed more balanced).  So my choice is glass 2 was the canned Ranger IPA while glass 1 was the bottle.

Here’s Amber with how I did: He’s right.  Glass 2 was the can. The mnemonic should be super obvious at this point.  Just think about it.

To be fair it should be noted that the best by date on the can said August 28 while the bottle was good until November.  So it’s possible that the smoother not as harshly hopped can wasn’t as fresh (i.e. the hops mellow with time).  That would mean I might think the canned beer was equal to the bottle in terms of taste if they were equal in best by dates.  I personally don’t think that’s the case.  The can wins hands down. I think we need a rematch with a can and bottle of the same date. Or maybe I just want an excuse to drink more Ranger.  God, I love Ranger.

Prost!