Subsidiaries
7/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 6
Flavor 7
Texture 8
Overall 7
Confirm that the head does disappear fast. Nice spicy nose, nots of curacao, some maderisation (like a porto), in the mouth, the alcohol is very present, with candy sugar, some bitterness in after taste...enjoyable
Tried
from Can
on 29 Sep 2003
at 23:12
7.4/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 7
Flavor 8
Texture 8
Overall 7.5
Opening of the bottle releases a whiff of yeasty tartness. Citric, sweet banana and a bit bitter nose. Hazy white-yellow, creamy white head is not as impressive as with other wit. Subtle fruity flavors (citrus, banana). Pleasant velvet mouthfeel. Crisp aftertaste.
Tried
from Bottle
on 23 Sep 2003
at 13:19
6.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 7
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 6
Amber fairly flat beer with a very storng alcoholic fruity aroma. Fairly watery and slightly soapy flavour, and very strong. Overall there are better Belgian strong ales about.
Tried
on 22 Sep 2003
at 17:18
7.5/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 8
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 8
Yellow-brown head, not very stable. Deep dark coffee brown. Nose: cookies, sweet malts, seaweed, nutty - some oxidation however young the sample. Roasted malt taste, very much like a (strong and good) English mild. I'd like to taste this next to Sarah Hughes Ruby mild. Some chocolate, mainly sweet, but nothing cloying, nothing to much. Nose keeps giving oxidation in the mean time, which remains hidden in the retronasal flavours. Medium-bodied, slightly oily and meaty. The red of shame is on my cheeks. I've been disdaining for ages a beer which is actually very nice, just for its origin. SHAME
Tried
on 02 Sep 2003
at 12:55
7.3/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 8
Flavor 6
Texture 8
Overall 7
Thick yellowish head, gone in seconds, but leaving the flimsiest of lace all over the glass. Deep brown beer with orange shine. Nose gives both portwine and perfume. Smells really like a (decent) fortified wine. Roasted and burnt malts in the taste. Licorice in abundance and burnt sugar. Some fruity esters too, but the above sugarmass doesn't leave it much chances. For all its body and oily feel, it has a rather thinnish texture. Alcoholburn prominent. The port flavour returns retronasal. If the bottle would bear the label "Trappist Ultimo Bruno", we'ld be all in ashes about "them going down". With the label Grimbergen the feeling is more as in "as expected". The portflavour (seen the BBd, unlinked to any ageing) is a really nice touch, however.
Tried
from Bottle
on 30 Aug 2003
at 12:44
7.4/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 8
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 7.5
Slightly hazy golden color with a thick white head. Aroma is sweet from honey, bit citrus, apple, spicy and hoppy. Taste is sweet and bitter. Sticky sweet palate. Postel brews definitely are one of my favorites!
Tried
on 19 Aug 2003
at 14:32
3.6/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 2
Flavor 4
Texture 6
Overall 3.5
Blond color. Very poor aroma, sweetish. Strong body, not the worst in the category, quite strong bitterness in the final.
Tried
on 19 Aug 2003
at 06:36
5.8/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 5
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 6
Pale lager style beer with little head and an airy lightly hopped aroma. Fairly malty flavour with hardly any dry finish. Overall a fairly average continental lager.
Tried
on 14 Aug 2003
at 14:11
6.3/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 6
Flavor 6
Texture 6
Overall 6
Yellow-golden beer, clear; thick head, fast gone but lacey. Hoppy, herbal nose. Vaguely crystal malt. Sweet, candi sugar taste. Sweetness fades, lots of malts remain. Again corn syrup? Dry mouthfeel, carbonation gives a mineral water effect. Reasonably refreshing. A bit bland, but not necessarily bad beer. Unexciting.
Tried
from Can
on 12 Aug 2003
at 14:14
6.3/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 7
Flavor 5
Texture 6
Overall 6
Yellow with amber shine. Creamy white head. Champenoise pearling, lacey. Nose with white sugar, grain, flowery, sugar syrup. Syrupy taste, scorched sugar with bitterish-metallic tang. Maize or corn-syrup? Very obvious carbonation, with sourish CO2-character. Medium-bodied. One of the lesser tripels. The metallic, schorched taste is unforgivable. Do they WANT a bad name?
Tried
on 12 Aug 2003
at 14:10