McNeill's Brewery

Microbrewery in Brattleboro, Vermont, United States 🇺🇸
Associated Venue: McNeill's Brewery - Out of business

Established in 1992

Closed in 2022

Contact
90 Elliot St, Brattleboro, VT, 05301, United States
Description
Since 1992, McNeill’s brewery has consistently offered some of the Northeast’s finest beers. Brewmaster Ray McNeill has won accolades far and wide, including thirteen national and international awards.

Critics and food writers alike have praised McNeill’s products, including the Albany Times Union, “McNeill may be the best brewer in America,” or All About Beer Magazine, “The jewel in the crown of Vermont’s many fine beers.”

In 2008 McNeill opened the long rumored packaging facility just north of the venerable brewpub.

Today, McNeill’s packages ten different beers plus seasonals.

The brewery, closed since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, burnt down and was demolished in 2022.

     Show


7
Appearance - 6 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7

2005 bottle aged some 5 or 6 months and shared with OldGrowth on 3/14/06
A settled bomber yields a muddy caramel body, even from the top of the bottle, with a beige-almond head that slowly recedes to cover and then a light ring. Tiny, bottle conditioned bubbles burst vibrantly at the surface, creating a sparkling appearance.
Fruity (apples, pears, peaches) yeast notes combine with soft, authentic caramel notes, with a drying nuttiness and a touch of bread. Soft and surprisingly mild, but yet deep fruit flavors and a gentle sweetness from the caramel malt, really soothe the nostrils.
Flavor begins, again, fruity (cherries, apples, dates, raisins) though the malt really intertwines here to produce a caramelized, sugary-sweet fruitiness that slowly gives way (and not ever completely) to light earthy vienna-like malts. Kind of like an English dark mild, though far less roasty/toasty character. Extremely soft and round texure, one of the prime examples I have seen. Yet it does no lack for carbonation, though that is certainly low. Malty, overall, but bitter enough up front from the, now old, hops. Yeasty with some breadiness growing as it warms with dry, soily and crusty flavors emerging regularly. No alcohol apparency. Different than what was probably intended fresh, but interesting in its own right now, and further proof that McNeills beers are not infected bombs waiting to happen.

Tried from Bottle on 17 Mar 2006 at 15:25


7
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 6 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 7

Bottle from City Market, consumed on 3/11/06. Hazy, golden-honey colored beer with plenty of white head that steadily fizzles to a small cover, providing little to no lacing, quite bubbly. The aroma smells yeasty, typical McNeills house character, with flowers, moss, hay and light honey grains all creating a soft and approachable nose. However, the more it warms, the more a sourdough-like note seems to creep in. Decidedly dry and bland, and working against the otherwise grassy, almost fruity hop crispness.
The flavor is very yeasty, though it’s just a dry, nutty yeast, with plenty of flowery hops, some straw, hay, damp moss and bits of lime and lemon adding a silght poignancy. Very grainy, almost a gritty texture were it not for the vigorous carbonation at first. A slight toastiness is apparent, on the back of the throat as the beer finishes, with some sweet, round honey notes balancing this well. Not overly bitter, but enough so to be refreshing and complement the malt. After the carbonation dies off, somewhat, the texture becomes rather chewy and yet lightly slick on the end. No alcohol apparency.

Tried from Bottle on 15 Mar 2006 at 12:38


7.1
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 7.5

On draught at McNeill’s 8/5/2005 (with Eyedrinkale) and 2/18/2006 (with Muzzlehatch).
Dark pumpernickel brown body, opaque, even upon settling, with faint, deep violet tinges on the edges when held to the light. No visible carbonation beneath the surface, and a small, dark tan head that is well-retained without providing much lacing.
Light buttercream in the nose with a well-rounded, sticky caramel note, light brown sugar and a lasting roastiness on the end, that serves to dry out the sweet notes up front. Little to no yeast apparency in the nose, nor is there much in the way of hops, just a simple floral, mildly bitter greenness.
The flavor begins with a deep vinousness that is only lightly hinted at in the nose. Strong prune and fig notes, swiftly transitioning in to a crunchy, dark roast coffee that really awakens the palate and complements the creamy-sweet choco-caramel maltiness through the middle. All the while, the slippery, oily texture and low amount of loose carbonation allow the flavors to really build up on the palate. Light wateriness on the end, with a mix of minty, lightly bitter hops and dry, moderately bitter roast prevent it from ever getting too sweet. I’ve always found the oatmeal stout to be a difficult style in which to achieve proper attenuation and especially, flavor balance. In this case, I think the coffee-roast malt level is tastefully and authentically done, with proper hop levels (noticeable and lightly flavorful, but still allowing the malts most of the sway) and a fair amount of sweetness. But the texture and overall balance could be improved, perhaps, with more caramel maltiness and/or pale malts. Roasted barley and chocolate malt really dry this out, and with the added vinousness, coupled with McNeill’s low carbonation levels, a firmer texture could do it good. I’m certainly not asking for a sugary-sweet, bubbly stout, and if this were served on cask, you’d hear no complaints, but as is, I think it has room for improvement. Little to no yeast apparency and no alcohol apparency.

Tried from Cask on 24 Feb 2006 at 10:05


3.5
Appearance - 4 | Aroma - 4 | Flavor - 3 | Texture - 4 | Overall - 3

Draught pint at McNeill’s, 2/18/06 with Muzzlehatch. Dark, drab, olivine brown colored body with a small sandy to light tan colored head that immediately runs to the edges, providing no lacing. Fairly hazy body, though the longer it sits, it settles out and is not opaque. The nose smells of dark, dried plums, strong, wet straw that has begun to get moldy and light peanut skins. Notes of light cola sweetness (faint) and a rather dirty yeastiness, I don’t want to say lactobacillius, but then maybe I do. . .
The flavor, unfortunately, is almost fully attenuated, with dry, soily and moldy hay-like notes. The carbonation has not vanished, though, with still a low, tingling bit of bubbles remaining to bolster the sagging mouthfeel. Used tea leaf-like dryness/astringency, with a spreading grapiness that seems to eventually dominate. Some type of infection in the beginning to middle stages has caught on which is mildly lactic and beginning to hint at light balsamic vinegar notes. Did not finish my pint. Yay, my first infected draught from McNeill’s! I feel like a proud parent.

Tried on 23 Feb 2006 at 13:39


8
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 8 | Flavor - 8 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 8

On cask at McNeill’s, 2/18/06 with Muzzlehatch. Served bright with a foamy white head, fairly dense in the middle, leaving plenty of lace on the sides of the glass and having only moderate retention. A nectarine-dull golden colored beer, with some lighter straw tints. The nose comes alive with lightly citric hops, a very slight hard-water-like note of light minerals and plenty of flowery notes coupled with soft, grainy, dry malts. Dry, grapefruit skins and perfume, with a touch of honey-almond and very light cherries are also notable, as well as some mossy/leafy dry hop notes. Aroma strength is fairly weak overall, as others have mentioned, but relative to the style (and taking in to account quality, not quantity), it dosent strike me as a problem. As I take my first sip, I’m surprised by both the tingly carbonation and moderately bitter hop profile. More light lemon skins, unripened nectarines and touches of grapefruit. Hops are really well done, not over the top in either flavor or bitterness, but just soft and flavorful. The malt is a creamy, almost chewy honey and just baked biscuits, with a growing note of very light caramel on the finish that complements the bitterness up front. I found no wateriness in my sample, and while it was in wonderful condition and tremendously drinkable, I didn’t really get much of the effect of a burton ale. I mean, an American yeast dosent really seem fitting, the beer just seems too clean. But scoring it based on the yeast used, it is nearly flawless. No diacetyl detectable, soft carbonation, no alcohol. Hardly seems like a Strong ale to me. Could probably put back about 12 of these on a nice sunny day.

Tried from Cask on 23 Feb 2006 at 10:08


6.9
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 6.5

Ruby amber ale with a big bubbled off white head. Classy british hops and caramel malt aroma. Restrained malts and lightlly pungeant hops in mouth, with good citrus notes. Very classy. On tap Feb. 10, 2006.

Tried from Draft on 17 Feb 2006 at 19:58


6.2
Appearance - 6 | Aroma - 6 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 6

Hazy red amber ale with a thin off white head. Light malty and nutty aroma. Good malt, crisp german hops and light bodied, with light grassy notes. On tap Feb. 10, 2006.

Tried from Draft on 17 Feb 2006 at 19:55


7.1
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 7 | Flavor - 7 | Texture - 6 | Overall - 7.5

Deep black stout with a thin moka head. Good sweet chocolate aroma, nice chocolate malt, nice and bitter, with roasted toasts and light floral hops. Pleasant light stout. On tap Feb. 10, 2006.

Tried from Draft on 17 Feb 2006 at 19:49


5.8
Appearance - 6 | Aroma - 6 | Flavor - 6 | Texture - 4 | Overall - 6

Dark clear brown ale with a big bubbled white head. Faint malt aroma. Nice crisp malt with light diacetyl, thin and overall, boring. On tap Feb. 10, 2006.

Tried from Draft on 17 Feb 2006 at 19:45


8
Appearance - 8 | Aroma - 8 | Flavor - 8 | Texture - 8 | Overall - 8

Pours deep copper/amber into a pint. Well-formed head with nice lacing. Very well balanced -- caramel and bitter hop finish.

Tried on 04 Feb 2006 at 17:56