7.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 9
Flavor 7
Texture 8
Overall 7
Bottle Poured a slightly hazy deep amber with a small head and only slight lacing. Similar heavy deep malty sweetness as its other Harves brethren. Lots of brown sugar and caramel sweetness and a nice alcohol warming feel that make you want to just sip it. Thanks to Chad for this one.
Tried
from Bottle
on 30 May 2006
at 23:39
7.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 9
Flavor 7
Texture 8
Overall 7
Bottle Pours a deep clear amber. Very viscous and heavy. Small traces of lacing. Very rich heavy sweet carmel and brown sugar flavors. The Calvados is I suppose what I sence in a bitter woody hint. The ABV is apparent but is complemented by the bold up front sweet maltiness. Nice flavors but a bit over the top for me.
Tried
from Bottle
on 30 May 2006
at 23:35
8/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 8
Flavor 8
Texture 8
Overall 8
3 year anniversary and 200th rating. Blind vertical of vintages 1998, 2001, 2002.
2001 dark copper, lots of sediment, slightly translucent at the bottom. Very strong malt aroma as well as baked cookies/burnt brownies. Taste is very sweet and very malty. A very rich beer with a heavy body. No bitterness.
2002 same color, aroma just a bit more subdued. Every aspect is just a bit more subdued. Leaves less aftertaste and a bit less complex.
1998 a bit darker/a bit less translucent. Similar aroma, body a bit lighter. A bit more alcohol in the taste and a bit more oily mouthfeel.
Overall all the vintages were pretty much that same. That pasteurization really does the trick. All beer was split in two and poured into small pilsner tasting glasses.
Rerate: 6/14/06 - small sample of a 1989 bottle. The biggest thing to pass on this is the body just went to crap. it became watery and weak. Really lost its malt appeal as well.
7/12/06 - Rerate again, 1988 bottle. Had the whole bottle not a small sample like the 89. Better actually, the aroma was freaking amazing, chocolate dominated with alcohol presence and licorice. The body again was weaker than I like, with some oxidation present. But did age better than I expected.
Rerate: 5/21/10, 1998 bottle, that is 12 years old. Not as good as the even older batches but it seems this beer gets better with age. Somehow less sweet, not sure if the oxidation changes the sweetness a bit but its just gets less sweet and a bit more drinkable.
Final though: So it still seems with over 15 years this beer is best.
2001 dark copper, lots of sediment, slightly translucent at the bottom. Very strong malt aroma as well as baked cookies/burnt brownies. Taste is very sweet and very malty. A very rich beer with a heavy body. No bitterness.
2002 same color, aroma just a bit more subdued. Every aspect is just a bit more subdued. Leaves less aftertaste and a bit less complex.
1998 a bit darker/a bit less translucent. Similar aroma, body a bit lighter. A bit more alcohol in the taste and a bit more oily mouthfeel.
Overall all the vintages were pretty much that same. That pasteurization really does the trick. All beer was split in two and poured into small pilsner tasting glasses.
Rerate: 6/14/06 - small sample of a 1989 bottle. The biggest thing to pass on this is the body just went to crap. it became watery and weak. Really lost its malt appeal as well.
7/12/06 - Rerate again, 1988 bottle. Had the whole bottle not a small sample like the 89. Better actually, the aroma was freaking amazing, chocolate dominated with alcohol presence and licorice. The body again was weaker than I like, with some oxidation present. But did age better than I expected.
Rerate: 5/21/10, 1998 bottle, that is 12 years old. Not as good as the even older batches but it seems this beer gets better with age. Somehow less sweet, not sure if the oxidation changes the sweetness a bit but its just gets less sweet and a bit more drinkable.
Final though: So it still seems with over 15 years this beer is best.
Tried
from Bottle
on 21 May 2006
at 09:45
8.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 9
Flavor 9
Texture 8
Overall 9
Bottle. 2003 vintage. Pours a clear amber colour with a very small head. Fruity vinous aroma and some spiciness. Sweet fruity flavor, lots of dark fruit, raisins. Thick mouthfeel. Leaves you with a long warming and fruity aftertaste. A lovely beer. Also had vintage 1999 at the same tasting session, but i liked 2003 better.
Tried
from Bottle
on 09 May 2006
at 14:36
6.9/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 6
Flavor 7
Texture 8
Overall 7.5
(Bottled, 2002 vintage, sampled at White Horse, Parson’s Green, London 21 Apr 2006) Dark brown colour with hints of ruby, almost no head. Nose is malty, slightly burnt, very sweet with dark cherries, prunes and hints of Madeira. Taste is sweet, syrupy with a burnt character and hints of brown sugar, marzipan, raisins, figs, prunes and ... maybe some raspberry jam. Rather nice bitterness in the finish. Very complex, really a bit too sweet for me, but I can’t help liking it.
Tried
from Bottle
on 25 Apr 2006
at 14:32
5.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 5
Texture 6
Overall 6
Cask gravity at The George, Bethersden. Copper colour with thin white head. Grassy almost farmyard aroma. Earthy. Some caramel/hop/spice finish. Odd. Some juicy malt but a bit muddy overall
Tried
from Cask
on 23 Apr 2006
at 01:34
5/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 4
Flavor 5
Texture 4
Overall 5
500ml Bottle from Sainsbury’s 14-04-06. Amber with a large head, some toffee flavour and bit too sweet reasonabl bitter finish.
Tried
from Bottle
on 16 Apr 2006
at 02:13
4.4/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 4
Texture 4
Overall 3.5
500ml bottle from Sainsburys. Why do brewers do this? They take what on the face of it is a perfectly acceptable bitter and then ruin it when they pasteurise it and put it in a bottle. What do they think we are, hard of taste or something? Please, please, please stop doing this and stop ruining your beers. Amber in colour with thin white head. Biscuity aroma with some hop. But then everything goes wrong. My teeth still ache from the metallic dead taste in the mouth. Stale flavours before a hint of hop bitterness on the end. Aaargh. Please stop killing your beers, I beg every UK brewer who bottles their product, take the risk and bottle condition.
Tried
from Bottle
on 13 Apr 2006
at 15:52
6.9/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 7
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 7.5
Wooden cask at the Hop Devil Grill. Eyedrinkale hooked me up with a large mug full of this fine brew. Poured with just a little bit of head. Dark bar so it is hard to describe the color. A syrupy yellow is best I could do. The smell is all sweet and honey-like. The beer itself was amazingly thick, one of the heaviest bodies I have ever drank. Again, very sweet honey-like flavor. Still felt the alcohol though, very strong. Goes down with little bitterness. 8/5/9/4/18
Rerate: 2004 on 5/29/06, 2 year old bottle. Pours copper colored, almost completely lucid. Alcohol is strong, very alcoholic, honey sweetness. The alcohol smell is reminiscent of cognac or scotch. Too strong. The taste is alcohol heavy as well. That calvados alcohol is coming though. I need to sip it slowly. The consistency is very syrupy. Burns the throat. In general I see the pasteurization and filtering. It leaves some of the aspects that made the cask so damn good but overly becomes to alcoholic and too one dimensional. Maybe if it sat a bit something better may come out (I’ll tell you in a few years). 7/2/7/3/14
Time to taste the older bottle. 2003 bottle consumed on 5/21/10, so 7 years old. This is an interesting beer. As far as age there is no sign of oxidation, pretty good for an pasteurized and filtered brew. However, its also sweet as hell. Also, its nowhere as hot as I experienced the bottle the first time. Sweet is the main thing. As far as calvados, I pick out light aspects of an apple brandy but nothing too strong. 7/3/7/3/14
Rerate: 2004 on 5/29/06, 2 year old bottle. Pours copper colored, almost completely lucid. Alcohol is strong, very alcoholic, honey sweetness. The alcohol smell is reminiscent of cognac or scotch. Too strong. The taste is alcohol heavy as well. That calvados alcohol is coming though. I need to sip it slowly. The consistency is very syrupy. Burns the throat. In general I see the pasteurization and filtering. It leaves some of the aspects that made the cask so damn good but overly becomes to alcoholic and too one dimensional. Maybe if it sat a bit something better may come out (I’ll tell you in a few years). 7/2/7/3/14
Time to taste the older bottle. 2003 bottle consumed on 5/21/10, so 7 years old. This is an interesting beer. As far as age there is no sign of oxidation, pretty good for an pasteurized and filtered brew. However, its also sweet as hell. Also, its nowhere as hot as I experienced the bottle the first time. Sweet is the main thing. As far as calvados, I pick out light aspects of an apple brandy but nothing too strong. 7/3/7/3/14
Tried
from Cask
on 09 Apr 2006
at 18:20
7.4/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 8
Flavor 8
Texture 6
Overall 7.5
Bottle (2004 vintage – drank in 2006): Poured a deep amber color ale with a small off-white bubbly head with minimal retention. Aroma of sweet figs with some very sweet caramel malt. Noticeable trace of dry figs and raisins are discernable in the taste but the overall sweetness is personally just too much for my liking. Body is full but could be fuller. Would definitely improved with a lower level of sweetness.
Tried
from Bottle
on 28 Mar 2006
at 12:15