Hoegaarden introduced me to a whole new beer style in the mid 1990s, when from memory it was a pale cloudy yellow with a brilliant white head and great spicing. This rating is based on my last drink of it - on tap. The colour has changed, replaced by a dirty hue which recalls several days old slush. The aroma was a mess of coriander, lemon and indeterminate chemicals. The flavour was subdued with some citrus and a sour aftertaste. A huge disappointment.

Aroma of yeast, citrus, and old fashioned linoleum adhesive (just a hint). Or maybe it’s just more yeast. Hazy light gold color with a large white head that went away, leaving bits of lace. Starts with strong citrus oil, and coriander. Suggestions of banana. Something of clove came next. Medium to full mouthfeel. The long finish is light clove mouthcoat and a little bitter, very little. Good ale. Clean and refreshing.

Bottle. Had a little vertical test on this one, with a 1993-bottle (9% ABV) from de Kluis and a 2006-bottle (8,5% ABV) from InBev. I know it has been cellared nice since 1995, but uncertain what it experienced until I got it. First of all, it cellars very well, and the 1993 was better than the 2006, but the 2006 was more drinkable. The 1993 poured almost clear, but there’s sediments in the bottle, so I poured it rather gently. Both had a copper-golden color, but only the fresh bottle had a small, dense, beige head. There was lots of sediments in the 2006 as well, but they didn’t stick to the bottom in the same manner. While the older bottle was quite complex, with raisins, sherry, sugar, malt and obious signs of aging, the fresh one was a bit more straigh-forward. Sweetness, malt and some dried fruits was present. Malt, sugar, raisins, prunes, caramel and alcohol made the flavor in the cellared one, and the new one had sugar, caramel and some hops. There were no signs of hops in the cellared version. They both had afull body and a long finish. The old one with alcohol and raisins, and the 2006 had a lightly spiced and sweet finish. I loved the wonderfully aged Verboden Vrucht, it was a real treat, but the fresh one was lovely as well, but in another way. I chose to rate the fresh bottle, as that’s what is available, but I would definately buy a lagered one if I ever find one. Rating 1993-bottle: 8-4-8-4-17-4.1. (070430)

Hazy blonde with a nice medium white head. Pleasant aroma of wheat, spice, yeast, clove, and banana. Body is a bit thin, but adds to its refreshing charecter. Flavor is very nice, but a little light. Orange, yeast, spice, coriander, and a bit of sweet fruit. Not too much of a finish, but whats there is slightly sour and spicey. Crisp and refreshing. Will do again.

A very hazy, light yellow beer, a head is white and medium Aroma is balanced, wheat, fruitness of lemon, spicyness of coriander. Taste has wheat and lemon, corinader and spicyness that makes tha taste more interesting. A light bodied with medium carbonation makes this beer a very easy to drink. Good witbier with spicyness gives more interesting notes.

Draught. Cloudy yellow orange appearance, some orange notes in the taste but not overwhelming, balanced with the alcohol held in check, smooth and very refreshing. nice but not too complex.

Tap. Pours a pale unfiltered yellow with a huge white head. Aroma is wheat, yeast and coriander. Flavour is dominated by coriander but surely also has the yeast and wheat notes. Overall refreshing. This was my first belgian beer ever, tasted at Hoegaarden brewery in 1994 first time. Didn’t pay much attention to this as I saw it as a womens beer as Verboten Vrucht was also served....

Bottle: Poured a yellow amber with white foam head. The aroma is wheatie and some what skunk. Soft wheat flavor with a slight bitter finish.

light brown, light malt, slightly clawing malt with a little blackcurrent with drying bitterness TK2 Light brown/red ... fruity yeast malt ... fruity bready yeasty malts little blackcurrent ... little alcohol shows little peppery ... definitly candi sugers ... up 2.8->3.2