8.6/10
—
Appearance 10
Aroma 8
Flavor 8
Texture 10
Overall 8.5
1994 bottle. tried this in 2001, amazing. the spices mixed well together, no carbonation, no hint of bacteria, just a well rounded smooth, evenly spiced beer that had sat very well. (4.5 rating) 2001 bottle(4.1 rating). Had this in 2003. This beer greatly benefited from cellaring. The flavor has evened out and it reminds me of oharas celtic just because it gets that wonderful, full body that is almost chalky smooth. Good even chocolate and roast notes with not too much on the licorice. Hardly any carbonation makes me love it that much more. 2000 bottle tried in 2000. Beer seems less spicy this year than 01 or 02. Less of a stout here, as there is not as much syrup texture. More in balance and an easier drink, but less adventurous than many other years (4.3 rating)
2001 bottle in Nov ’06 Absolutely sublime, with hardly any negative oxidative qualities. Still poured a large head, with light lacing. Spicy, but nowhere near the level it is now. Fruitiness and light caramel malt with vanilla and even some light hops. Impressive how well these beers hold up.
2001 bottle in Nov ’06 Absolutely sublime, with hardly any negative oxidative qualities. Still poured a large head, with light lacing. Spicy, but nowhere near the level it is now. Fruitiness and light caramel malt with vanilla and even some light hops. Impressive how well these beers hold up.
Tried
from Bottle
on 10 Jul 2002
at 08:38
8/10
—
Appearance 10
Aroma 7
Flavor 8
Texture 8
Overall 8
had the bottle. So sour and bitter. Like an extra dark roast coffee. I like it alot, takes some getting used to, but not many complaints about it. very very strong and dark beer.
Tried
from Bottle
on 10 Jul 2002
at 08:19
6.9/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 7
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 6.5
Bottles and tap from 2002 onwards. It is elegant in its simplicity. Round, floral/malty taste, with not too much hops. The aftertaste is amazing as well as the big, medium-full body. i would drink this beer on tap over most others. Plenty of warm malt, some chocolate, dark plums, plenty of raisins and some light vanilla. Dry cherries. Rerate. After trying harveys elizabethan and a few other barleys and trying this over and over, I still love it, but it just isnt that complex. . .at least not yet. Im going to cellar a few bottles for a long time and see what happens then.
Havent had this in a while, picked up a couple 2004 bottles to try. Don’t get too much different from what I’ve noted of old, but the feeling I get is that this is an overall lighter beer than I thought, body-wise, or maybe just an off-year. Seems to go down very easily, with somewhat of a short finish. Still a spectacular flavor profile, and I’m not asking for it to be a monster, but just needs a little more oomph and chewiness perhaps. Dropping the rating a few points overall.
’05-’06 draught Very underwhelming nose here is just a ubiquitous c-hop with deep, caramel and munich-like maltiness. Fairly strong, but unwaveringly monotonous. The flavor is again strong, forceful even, but it’s just thick, near-syrupy caramel/caramunich malts with bitter hops and an almost dry, salty toffee and peanut brittle sort of flavor. No elegance and barely, if at all, balanced. Dropping it a number of points. Appearance was even lacking, head was only moderately retained at best, no lacing. As Ernest says, who enjoys acid/astringency?
Havent had this in a while, picked up a couple 2004 bottles to try. Don’t get too much different from what I’ve noted of old, but the feeling I get is that this is an overall lighter beer than I thought, body-wise, or maybe just an off-year. Seems to go down very easily, with somewhat of a short finish. Still a spectacular flavor profile, and I’m not asking for it to be a monster, but just needs a little more oomph and chewiness perhaps. Dropping the rating a few points overall.
’05-’06 draught Very underwhelming nose here is just a ubiquitous c-hop with deep, caramel and munich-like maltiness. Fairly strong, but unwaveringly monotonous. The flavor is again strong, forceful even, but it’s just thick, near-syrupy caramel/caramunich malts with bitter hops and an almost dry, salty toffee and peanut brittle sort of flavor. No elegance and barely, if at all, balanced. Dropping it a number of points. Appearance was even lacking, head was only moderately retained at best, no lacing. As Ernest says, who enjoys acid/astringency?
Tried
from Bottle
on 10 Jul 2002
at 08:02
8.9/10
—
Appearance 10
Aroma 9
Flavor 9
Texture 8
Overall 8.5
Reddish brown. The first barley wine I came across. Citrusy aroma, very malty, chewy and fruity. Bitter finish. I liked it then and I love it still.
Tried
on 20 Jun 2002
at 00:09
7.8/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 8
Flavor 8
Texture 8
Overall 8
Smooth, hoppy, great malts - a little sticky/resiny but well-balanced, luscious brew.
Tried
on 19 Jun 2002
at 20:29
8.2/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 8
Flavor 8
Texture 8
Overall 9
Full-bodied with a tasty, fruity bitterness.................................
Tried
on 17 Jun 2002
at 23:29
8.9/10
—
Appearance 10
Aroma 9
Flavor 8
Texture 10
Overall 8.5
2024-08-20, best before 03/2004, possibly 22 years old, 6-3-6-2-12=29
With the bitterness gone, this one shows how it can't reach the malt depth of classic Barley Wines; additionally, there's a bitter nut flavour in the finish. Not good.
2013-11-10, bottle, bb May 2002, possibly 13 years old, 7-3-7-3-14=34
Brown color with no head, just a thin collar. Malt and caramel aroma, not strong, no hops. Malt flavor with light residual sweetness and low carbonation; it has some alcohol perception and very low bitterness, that leads to a weak final; traces of liquorice.
Definitively declining.
2013-02-12, bottle, bb Mar 2004, possibly 11 years old, 8.8% ABV, 8-4-7-3-15=37
Dark brown color, with minimal head. Good aroma of malt, caramel, hops, with a hint of bitter oranges. Lean body; good caramel flavor, a touch of fudge, with still quite strong bitterness. No real signs of age (oxidisation), but it lost some character.
2012-01-24, bottle from Brewberry, Paris, bb June 2013, 7-5-7-4-15=38
It pours a clear dark red-mahogany color, with a majestic beige head, creamy, reducing rapidly to a thin layer. The aroma reveals the malt and pungent hop of American Barley Wines. The mouthfeel is very smooth, but the body is too lean for the style; good malt and caramel flavor, some fudge and toffee, with respectable bitterness; moderate sweetness. Fresh, which is unexpected in a Barley Wine, but pleasant.
Good, but very immature.
2011-09-30, bottle, bb May 2002, purchased Jan 2002, possibly 10 years old, 8-4-8-4-17=41
The bottle seems to hold little carbonation, it pours a brown color and some deposit; the head is very small, almost absent. The malt and caramel aroma is aged, deep, permeates the room, with notes of nuts and oxidization, fruits and feet; interesting. Good malt flavor, some caramel, correct sweetness; the bitterness is really faded after these years, just the bare minimum; mellow and nutty, with some more roasted nuttiness later; there are traces of oxidization. Good, but it won't get better with more aging.
2011-09-30, draught at Mikkeller Bar, Copenhagen, 7-5-7-3-14=36
Cloudy dark amber color with red hue; creamy head. Aroma of caramel and malt, light oxidization, some alcohol. The carbonation is too high, compromising the mouthfeel; malt flavor, with medium sweetness, and a candy-like fruity touch; ordinary bitterness. Quite boring if compared to expectations.
2003-05-15, bottle, 9-5-8-5-17=44
Ruby amber color. Deep aroma, malt; a light fruitiness. Very complex, wonderful. Taste more on the caramel and malty side, with just the necessary bitterness.
2002-06-03, bottle, 9-5-8-4-18=44
Beautiful deep amber color. Wonderful malt aroma, very rich, sweet. Classic style Barley Wine. Rich flavor, malty, caramel, winy, a bit alcoholic, balanced by a correct bitterness. Very good palate, sweet and bitter, enough aromatic.
Tried
from Can
on 03 Jun 2002
at 04:29
6.9/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 7
Flavor 7
Texture 8
Overall 6.5
Very orange color, medium head. This was passable but Anchor's Porter is much better. On the scale of APAs this was not as hoppy as I would have liked, but the mellowness in that area wasn't too bad. Very clean and refreshing but overall there are much better Pales out there.
Tried
on 01 May 2002
at 09:12
7.6/10
—
Appearance 10
Aroma 7
Flavor 7
Texture 8
Overall 7.5
This is a good Porter and is one of the best that you can get readily and at a good price. I like Great Lakes Edmund Fitzgerald Porter more but not much. Great coffee flavor and dry roasted chocolate bean impression. I will definitely get this again.
Tried
from Can
on 22 Apr 2002
at 11:56
5.9/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 6
Texture 6
Overall 6.5
Short-lived head and average color. Crisp and not overly bitter, but not much to the finish. Slightly better-than-ordinary overall.
Tried
on 16 Feb 2002
at 23:24