Clarkvv (16523) reviewed Bigfoot from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 10 | Aroma - 8 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 7.5
1999 bottle sampled in 2002. The 99 was almost perfect. not too malty for a barley, good classic hops and amazingly not syrupy at all after 3 years of sitting. A wonderful beer with a smooth palette. 2003 sampled in 2003. Way too new. Tons of bitter hops flavors dominate the palate, there is some toffee sweet malt that needs to develop still. Alcohol not overpowering. Good clean flavor, just needs lots more cellaring. Another barley with super potential.
Fresh 2005 draughtPerhaps it’s just me, but this one seemed far less complex than I remembered, though maybe it’s just too young? Surprisingly, the hops didnt blow me away, and there was ample caramel malt and light residual sugar to balance. I much prefer this aged, but this 2005 is much better fresh than was the 2003. A bit thin towards the end. Dropping it a couple of points (1 in flavor and 1 in overall) but some more aged samples are always in order.
2006 bottle fresh. Rather straight-forward caramel toffee with good old pine/citrus hops. Quite a bit less body than I remember, seemingly somewhat more filtered. Gets a bit sweetish/syrupy and then peters out on the end. Flavors are true and good, if somewhat less complex than the best of the best, but the mouthfeel needs work.
Clarkvv (16523) reviewed Celebration from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7.5
01 in bottles and on tap (4.8 rating:8/5/10/5/20). Unbelievable. I remember thinking after my first sip. Was that really what i just tasted? I cant buy/drink enough of this. Just amazing complexity, good trailing bitterness, great reddish amber hue, wonderful balance. One of my favorites. 2002 bottle (02 rating: 7/5/6/2/11). Arg! theyve ruined it! Theyve added way too much hops this season and it has lost its complexity. I realize this is an IPA. But it is a winter/holiday beer and I have appreciated the more-than-onesided flavor of not just hops, that it had in previous years. I did not even enjoy drinking it, but that is probably due to my disappointment. Hopefully next season will be back to superb. ---------------------- 2003 bottle and draught Well it’s less than superb and still a far, far cry from 2001 and back (from what I’ve heard before 2001). On the positive side, it’s better than 02. They’ve added back some decent malt, but nowhere near as much, nor does it have the nice chewy texture. The complexity is still lacking and the beer seems thinner all around with the flavor nowhere near what it was. Better luck next year I guess (03: 7/5/7/4/14). 2004 bottle Ah, much better, we’ve gotten rid of the over-the-top and unbalanced bitterness. Much more easygoing, lower acidity, with a soft malt balance. Much more a traditional American IPA. Lots of bread notes (honey wheat) and some toffee and toastiness. 7/5/8/5/16
2005 draught Quite dry and very bitter and acidic this year compared to some other recent years. The malt complexity still hasnt returned to what it used to be. Seems to have that lackluster texture as well, gets a bit too watery on end. 7/4/7/3/13
Nov 2006 draught Nice, this is much improved. Good balance between hop bitterness and flavor, nearly-creamy mouthfeel shows light sugars. A tinge of crystal malt sourness/bittersweetness creeps in and is not too pleasant to my tastes, but there’s lots of big fruity/leafy hops and not so much pine. A very good year and I’ll be happy to drink more this year. Something like 7/5/8/4/15
Clarkvv (16523) reviewed Summerfest from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 10 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 8 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 8
2002 bottle. This was astonishing. who would have thought the boys on the west coast could make a classic German Kolsch. Wonderful light flaxen color with a bubbly head. Great hops aroma from the start and finishes pleasant. More distinct than many other lagers out there.
2003 Draught. Well it’s nowhere near what it was in 2002. No sharp, sour, hoppy head. Flavor was moderately interesting, slightly yeasty and sweet, with some tough, chewy hop flavor, but was ultimately too boring and one-sided to keep my attention that long. I got pretty angry half-way through the glass and yelled at the beer wondering what the hell I was drinking, but I was kinda drunk at that point.
2006 draught. Sorta been my beer of choice this summer, at a lot of bars that have a mediocre selection. Very crisp, dry and with plenty of aromatic and flavoring hops. It does have a little wetness/wateriness on the palate, but the beer is near flawless in its brewing. Perhaps a bit muted overall in flavor, as compared to some of the more munich/helles-oriented beers in this category. But still, as a sessionable beer, it’s top-notch.
Clarkvv (16523) reviewed Wheat from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 5 | Flavor - 5 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 6.5
Wow i can never find this beer, the two times ive had it, it has been an absolute pleasure. Maybe could use a bit more flavor. Goes down easy though, and has a great wheat taste. Pours with a rich golden yellow color, and has a low level of carbonation which was a plus. Rerate. After trying more wheats, this one just dosent impart enough flavor. It is too dry and could use more flavor, though I guess it's not trying to be a German wheat
Clarkvv (16523) reviewed Stout from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 6 | Flavor - 6 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7.5
2002 draught.Probably one of my least favorite Sierra Nevadas, but still a good stout. I was hoping for more of a body. I think Sierra Nevada characteristic hops detracts from this one. The sweet/light hoppy taste not being what i look for in a stout. 2003 bottle. I must say, I enjoyed this much more. This is a lighter stout, for sure, but still quite tastey with lots of barley malt showing through. There is a subtle light coffee flavor along with a roasted flavor that is almost hazlenut. The stout is quite sweet and has a medium body that has a soft honey-cream texture. Appearance is a nice light brown with some mahogany and black shades as well. Good caramel/white colored head. Muted nutty aroma. There is some bitterness on the aftertaste due to the cascades, but it is pleasant and adds some depth.
Clarkvv (16523) reviewed Porter from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 10 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7.5
Another top 10 for me. It’s no Taddy porter, but for some reason i love this beer. esp on draught. Mildly roasty and nutty, a bit too carbonated in the bottle, but does not kill you with malt, the usual Sierra Nevada Hops taste makes this a lighter porter, but its a nice change. Rerate. Still love this beer. Very smooth even flavor. Perhaps a bit light. Taste is not as complex as I would like, and after trying hundreds more beers, this is still a solid, well made beer, but nothing uniquely great. Hard to find too many faults with it though. Rerate. I’m always constantly rerating this beer, to be honest, but recently, after trying it against Bell’s Porter, it didnt quite live up to my expectation (or was Bells just that good?) Lighter flavor than I’d like, dominated just a bit too much by the oily roast. Too much on the hops as well. Still very well done.
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7
Wow, what to say about this one. Loads of fresh hops, none of that hop extract/hop pellets and it shows. Very bitter, exceptionally so for this style, but still manages to pull off a close to full bodied, round flavor. True the hops outdo the malt, but I enjoy that, and this beer was very original for its time. I have this beer periodically and though I am not blown away by it like I was the first time I tried it, I still find it to be just as good. I am still finding nuances about this beer that I didnt taste the first time i had it. I really enjoy the yeasty character towards the finish, this adds some more depth to the beer. It deserves all of the praise it gets, and I feel people giving it low ratings need to look at it again and consider if they are being cynical. 8/5/8/5/19
Rerate Well I figured it was time to just buy a bottle and start over with a fresh rating. Pour is golden-straw, light hints of rust, foamy white head, small bubbles, good retention and lacing. Aroma has notes of soft woody underbrush, faint hints of only moderately bitter grapefruit, some drying floral notes and a bit of spice and perfume. Flavor is full of pale malt, light hints of toasty caramel, and a mix of lightly herbal hops, green tea, some soft citrus, dry tangerine and a little woodiness. A faint hint of astringency detracts somewhat but it remains a well-made ale, IMHO, with nowhere near the flavor force of some modern APAs, but still flavorful and quenching, quality without force; finesse if you will. Balance is towards the hops, and that’s fine, it’s still got enough malt, I think. Low filtration gives a bit of yeast flavor that adds good depth. I still love this stuff. The rating above is for this experience.
Dogbrick (24210) reviewed Porter from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 10 | Aroma - 6 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7
On the usual scale, the more robust the beer, the more I like it. However, I liked Sierra Nevada's Stout more than the Porter. It didn't seem to have the body the Stout enjoys. Dark brown color and thick sea-foam head. Very subtle roasted aroma. Sweet malty, nutty flavor. Very good, but not the best of the SR line in my estimation.
Dogbrick (24210) reviewed Stout from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company 23 years ago
Appearance - 10 | Aroma - 8 | Flavor - 8 | Texture - 10 | Overall - 8.5
I found this to be an excellent Stout, pours almost black with a thin head. Nice dry roasted/coffee flavor and pleasant aftertaste. I enjoyed this one the entire glass. This is probably my favorite Sierra Nevada offering.
Appearance - 6 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 6 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 8
2003: Light gold with fizzy head, grassy hop aroma with a hop dominated palate. A bit light on the malt, but enough hops to make this a good dort style lager, IMO. 2002 Update: Very nice this year. A nice clean, hoppy lager. Reminds me of fresh Sam Adams Lager, but better. Nice tingly maybe somewhat citrusy hop aroma and flavor. Crisp, clean malt character. Smooth, if just a bit fizzy. Bright gold and large solid head. Much more balanced than my notes from last year indicate. I'm upping its numbers this year. 2001: A fairly clean lager with a medium body. Attractive golden color - light head, and very carbonated. Fairly strongly hopped. Plenty bitter, yet little in the way of hop flavor. Just enough malt to give it a little balance. On the whole though, I didn't like the strong bitterness and lack of depth.