rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn) (05/31/85)
(If the title makes you wonder if I hit the wrong newsgroup, you're too
much in touch with the entertainment world or (gasp) too little in touch
with the world of beer. We call the kid with one glove "the OTHER Michael
Jackson.)
As part of the week-long conference of the American Homebrewer's
Association, an evening beer tasting featured Michael Jackson--author of
_The_World_Guide_to_Beer_ and _The_Pocket_Guide_to_Beer_ and perhaps the
foremost authority on beer styles through the world. The tasting was a
wide-spectrum style, aimed more at putting various styles in perspective in
the beer world (as opposed to a more formal tasting studying a single
style).
The beers tasted were the following, in approximately the order given:
South Seas Lager
Henninger Dark
Paulaner Ur-Bock
Celebrator
Hoegarden White
Lindeman Kriek
Belhaven Scottish Ale
Dempsey's Irish Ale
Theakston's Old Peculier
Chimay Grande Reserve (==Chimay "Blue")
Mackeson Stout
Not surprisingly, the Hoegarden White and the Kriek produced the most
commentary--both are wheat beers at heart, and the Hoegarden is flavored
with coriander and curacao while the Kriek is brewed with a large quantity
of cherries.
One of the unfortunate results of the evening was that several of the beers
were noticeably spoiled--and spoiled to an extent that a large part of the
audience (not just the commercial brewers and serious tasters) noticed the
spoilage:
- South Seas Lager: Seemed to lose character quickly out of
bottle; may be handling problem or may be just a weakness in the
beer.
- Henninger Dark: Strong metallic odor and taste; many people
didn't even finish their small tastes.
- Paulaner Ur-Bock: Slight oxidation--not seriously objectionable
and masked by the malt character, but seems to have affected the
hops.
The worst problem was with the Belhaven. A Scottish Ale is supposed to
have a malty richness--different people will describe it as butterscotch,
caramel, or nut-like. Belhaven on a good day is wonderful; this stuff was
so badly spoiled that it was not in the least identifiable as a Scottish Ale!
(Time for a little ranting and raving of my own...)
Jackson began his talk for the evening by noting that the U.S. almost
certainly has the widest selection of beers available (at least in larger
cities or college towns) of any country. Why is it that so often they are
so badly handled? Why don't people complain when they get bad beer? (It
might be that they don't know what to expect, so they try something new,
find they don't like it, and never try it again.) Worse yet, why do so few
distributors give a damn about their beer? Don't the brewers make any
effort to find out if their beer is being treated properly?
The U.S. is undergoing a serious renaissance in quality beer--but to make
the transition from where 5% of beer drinkers understand to where say 25%
understand what they're drinking is going to take a lot of education. How
the hell are people going to understand the difference between good and bad
beer if they can't get consistent quality? And it's particularly sad that
the taste faults in commercial beers (in my experience) are seldom the
brewer's fault--they're 90% poor handling (heat, light, age).
A number of the beers were familiar to the audience, and some changes in
recent times were noted. Most people who had tasted the Lindeman Kriek in
the past found the current style dominated by fruit and sweeter; the older
brew had a much stronger lambic character. There was some comment that
Theakston's used to be a little darker and heavier; this was not generally
agreed. Some noticed that the Mackeson seemed drier--I certainly felt it
was different. (I haven't liked it in the past; it was too sweet for my
tastes. In the tasting last night, I felt that the bitter roasted
character was up to the level of a proper balance against the sweetness. I
don't know whether this is a change in their recipe or my tastes, though.)
--
Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086
...Nothing left to do but smile, smile, smile.