Theobroma - Dogfish Head Brewery

deapokid

Pennsylvania

2.53/5  rDev -33.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

As I poured this Aztec influenced ale, I was quiet surprised to find a golden and crisp liquid, instead of the jet black behemoth I expected.

Head is firm and sticky, if slight, and carbonation is lively. I'm reminded of a Helles or American Adjunct Lager, which is an odd look for a beer that supposedly tastes like cocoa and chili peppers.

Smell is a bit sweaty, featuring mild chocolate aroma, a hint of honey and some ground pepper. It's not necessarily unpleasant, but the onion notes are off-putting.

Flavor is rather one-dimensional, focusing all of its attention on the sweetness of the honey. It reminds me of a mead, carrying on that beverage's warming characteristics and alcoholic back end. I'm really struggling to locate any spice and I was hoping for a big blast of chili goodness to scorch my palate. Cocoa peaks out subtly at the conclusion, but the honey's cloying sweetness dominates the flavor profile.

Liquid is smooth initially, but the medicinal quality of the honey and the utter lack of balance make this stand out in a negative way.

I'd say that the untraditional aspects of this beer will be hard to take for most. I understand brewer intention and innovation, but I still think this is too focused on one ingredient to truly reflect the original nature of this beer. It would be much easier to take in a 12 oz. bottle, but, at 750 ml., it's hard to choke down.

Serving type: bottle

08-29-2010 16:23:51 | More by deapokid

claspada

New Jersey

2.55/5  rDev -33.4%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Pours a clear golden amber color with an amber/burnt orange flair when held to the light. One finger frothy off white head that quickly fades into a lasting ring with typical high alcohol minimal lacing.
Smell is kinda spicy and peppery with a decent amount of chocolate maltiness, small amounts of chili pepper, and earthy hops. Contradicting smells and aromas make this seem more/less desireable depending on your tastes.
Medium bodied with an unpleasant peppery spice characteristic which is not balanced particularly well by a silky chocolate maltiness. There's also hints of nuttiness, earthy hops, cloying alcohol sweetness, which creates a strong warmth in the finish. Tastes and flavors do not improve as the beer warms. I wish the chocolate and chilies flavors were stronger and that the beer overall was better balanced. Not worth the inflated price tag, if someone allows you to sample theirs, its worth tasting but no need to seek out on your own.

Serving type: bottle

07-28-2010 19:24:14 | More by claspada

popery

California

2.58/5  rDev -32.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Draft, City Beer Store. The second of a pair of way too sweet DFH beers from tonight's stop at CBS. The beer looks thick and odd, mustily golden in color with no head to speak of. The aroma is oddly light and off. The malt smells musty with, maybe, an aluminum touch. There's a light chili pepper note and an extremely faint shade of cocoa that I might be projecting given expectations. The flavor is unapologetically sweet. There's a blandly sweet honey note, a bit of chili pepper in the finish and not much else besides so-so malt. Mouthfeel is unfortunately oily and thick. There isn't much alcohol, for what it's worth. I had trouble getting through a 5 ounce pour and can only imagine that a solo attempt on a full bottle would have ended with a trip to the sink. Sorry, Dogfish. I really wanted to like this one.

Serving type: bottle

03-05-2010 06:30:41 | More by popery

jneiswender

Massachusetts

2.58/5  rDev -32.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Served from a wine-like bottle into a pils glass. Cool.

A-strawberry roan, gold, with an off white head.

S-candy, m+m's

T-candy, milk chocolate, corn chip, boozy finish

M-medium,

D-I tried this beer all sorts of ways. Cool, warm, cold and none of them gave me much in the area of flavors advertised. Maybe the annatto more than any of the advertised additions. It doesn't taste bad, just not as advertised.

Serving type: bottle

12-23-2010 17:02:53 | More by jneiswender

originalsin

California

2.6/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

From Notes nearly 6 weeks old. Man have I been busy...

Had on tap at the Shep.

When I saw this classified as a chile beer my stomach sort of retracted. I've never ventured into such unfamiliar territory. The beer that founds its way to me on the bar wasn't frightening, though.

Pour is a nice light amber with a small foamy white head capping the brew. This beer smells and tastes very interesting...

It's sweet and spicy all at once. Smells of honey and spices come through. The taste, while interesting, wasn't enjoyable for me. I struggled to finish my glass. The cocoa makes its presence known, as does a little bit of a kick from the chile. There's a sweet honey presence as well.

I guess this is simply a case of "one mans trash is..." I'm a big DFH fan but this one won't be passing my lips again anytime soon.

Serving type: on-tap

08-21-2009 00:59:08 | More by originalsin

Bravo4

Kentucky

2.6/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured from the bottle into a Duvel glass.

A-Deep golden color with extremely small white head. The head dissipated very quickly and left no lacing. Highly carbonated and opaque.

S- The smell isn't very strong but I definately detect honey and chilies. Upon second sniff, it smells a lot like pineapple. My sense of smell isn't very good though.

T- It almost has a wheaty taste with strong hints of honey and cocoa. It follows up with the flavor and warmth of the chilies. Alcohol is almost undetectable.

M- Very fizzy mouthfeel due to the high carbonation. It's pretty light and slick with some warmth from the chilies and alcohol.

D- I would rate this as decently drinkable if not for the ABV. This one could sneak up on you. The alcohol is almost undetectable. This one ended up making me sick to my stomach by the end of the bottle. I'm sure that isn't everyone's experience but I didn't like it.

Serving type: bottle

07-19-2010 21:13:39 | More by Bravo4

drowninginhops

South Carolina

2.63/5  rDev -31.3%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Hazy orange with thin quickly disspearing white head
S: Chocolate and a few other smells i cant destinguish.
T: Chocolate, faint chili (I eat a lot of hot things so it would not register with me) and some others that are indistinguished.
M: thin in feel and carbonation.
D: meh. Not one i will be revisiting on my own accord.

Serving type: bottle

04-05-2011 01:12:51 | More by drowninginhops

jbriggs7036

Maryland

2.65/5  rDev -30.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Sorry DFH, but you can stop brewing this now.

A- Average...kinda thinking it would be darker but hey.

S- Not a bad smell, got a lot of quaint cocoa sniffs mixed with watered down honey, maybe slight chile burn, nothing awesome but certainly not bad.

T- AH! How did you do this to me DFH?!?!?!? Very sweet, but not the good kind of 120 minute sweet. It was like stale chocolate from grandmom's cupboard. Very slight honey and maybe a touch of chile. Extremely plain though, thats what got me, from what I was expecting i was let down.

M- Well, I do love the feelof beer in my mouth. Decent carbonation and no terrible burn.

D- No bueno

Serving type: bottle

02-11-2011 21:47:55 | More by jbriggs7036

pokesbeerdude

Colorado

2.68/5  rDev -30%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

$14 for a 750ml, purchased from Supermarket Liquors in Ft. Collins, CO. Into my DFH Signature glass, split with my girlfriend.

A: Pours a light amber/honey color with a white head, not much retention, and a fair amount of bubbles moving from the nucleation point. A few gobs of lacing here and there. Nothing impressive.

S: Right up front I'm hit with a huge nose of wet dog. Under that are some sweet honey notes and some spicy notes of chili peppers as well. Maybe just a hint of chocolate way in the back, and some booze as well. Maybe a hint of grainy malt. Pretty tame in the nose.

T: Hugely disappointed here, I can taste the honey, and there is just a taste of chocolate, and I'm not getting any spice or pepper notes here at all. So far the only thing on the label coming through is honey. Everything else is practically gone. Tastes similar to Midas Touch. No noticeable hops, but I figured as much. Maybe just a hint of spice comes through but definitely no flavors of Ancho's. Bummer.

M: Fairly light, with a medium body, remarkably dry and just a bit warm and boozey. Meh.

D: I can't say that I like this, the flavors that the bottle advertises are not there and are insanely subtle, or non-existent. I had pretty high hopes for this beer, like i do the other "historic" beers, but once again, I'm a bit disappointed. Price tag is steep, and this just is disappointing.

Serving type: bottle

08-07-2010 22:33:34 | More by pokesbeerdude

Crosling

Colorado

2.7/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Light golden colored ale with a long lasting white head of cream. Nose isn't lacking in its vibrancy, but doesn't have a lot of complexity. Flavor is very sweet, with a honeyed fruit character. Mead-like. Not a complex beer, but interesting and pleasant tasting.

Serving type: bottle

11-15-2008 04:30:25 | More by Crosling

BuckeyeNation

Iowa

2.7/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Sunny Sunkist tangerine with light showers of fine yeast. With cocoa powder and cocoa nibs as ingredients, I was expecting the beer to be much darker. The ecru-ivory colored cap is on the crackly side and isn't very sticky. A few sorry scraps of melty foam are all that make it to the glass.

The nose is different in a way that is hard to put into words. It's fruity and spicy, although none of the rather unconventional ingredients are appreciated per se. I'm probably talking myself into smelling the cocoa powder. In the end, the aroma isn't very interesting, which is the one thing that I thought this ale would have going for it.

The story behind Theobroma's inspiration and creation is available at the top of this page, so I won't recount it here. Suffice it to say that this is another one of those Dogfish Head historically-accurate brews that could have done anything from succeed admirably to fail miserably. It does neither, but it comes disappointingly closer to the latter.

Carob (or malted milk) is the first flavor that engages the taste buds. It's quite an odd vibe coming from such a lightly colored beverage. Honey contributes a light sweetness without adding much flavor. Ancho chile adds a modest amount of heat and possibly a little earthy flavor as well. Annatto is supposed to be slightly sweet and peppery, but then how would one know with honey and chile peppers in the house?

In the end, the flavors never really come together into a unified whole and simply aren't interesting enough to make me want to keep on keepin' on. Historical interest aside, this simply isn't very good beer. On a positive note, almost no alcohol is appreciated on the palate. The central nervous system is another matter entirely.

The mouthfeel is no great shakes either. It's medium in heft, is somewhat slick, and lacks bubbles, which leads to a lack of volume and a shortage of creaminess. It looks like 'look', also known as appearance, is the highlight.

Theobroma is not one of Dogfish Head's better efforts. I appreciate that Sam likes to push the envelope (and I applaud him for it), but good beer has to be the end result or nothing else matters. For my money, Chateau Jiahu is the much better 'ancient civilization pottery fragment residue recreation' beer.

Serving type: bottle

08-31-2009 21:03:06 | More by BuckeyeNation

magictrokini

California

2.7/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

An amazingly disappointing beer. Poured a clear yellow-gold with a flat white head that disappeared as rapidly as it appeared. No lacing. Nose was full of honey with hints of cocoa and earthy spice. Very, very faint chile aroma in the nose. Flat, kind of sticky mouthfeel with a long finish. Taste was lackluster. Lots of honey, as in I questioned whether this was a mead. The honey nearly drowned out the cocoa and earthy spice. No chile to speak of. No anchos, no spice. I want to say I could feel some "warmth" but think that was more wishful thinking that I could actually taste the chile.

Serving type: bottle

09-01-2009 19:40:02 | More by magictrokini

adamette

Ohio

2.73/5  rDev -28.7%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Live review. Poured from a 1 pint, 9.4 oz. bottle into my DFH pint glass. Purchased at Warehouse Beverage on Mayfield in Cleveland for $11.99 about two weeks ago. No "freshness" date or :"best by" date as was on the Sah'tea bottle that I purchased at the same time which stated it was bottled in 2009.

A Initially there was a nice head but this quickly dissipated and I do not see significant lacing over a rather pedestrian light brown/orange translucent body without significant carbonation rising up. 3.0

S Malt sweetness with some alcohol. I do not smell the chocolate that is mentioned in the brewing process on the label. This remains an inviting smell to me as I enjoy malt prominent beers. 4.0

T Now THIS is an odd beer. There is the malt sweetness and the alcohol kick but there is, in my opinion, a third unwelcome and seemingly out of place taste that I did not expect. I am not sure how to describe it. I will sip a few more times and try to formulate a description...I think that it might be some type of a barley or maybe a spice or pepper of some kind but it is something that I do not like. I just read the label and I think that I found what it is...the ancho chilies... Anyway I do not like this taste as it is harsh. I have to say that I am dissapointed that I do not taste much of any of the Soconusco Cocoa nibs or the cocoa powder. 2.5

M Well, a big beer for sure due to many factors: 1. big malt presence 2. big ABV 3. Ancho Chilies. The alcohol and the chilies provide a bite that is almost too much. 2.5

D Not that good. I will finish at least one pint but I am not sure that I will drink another. Several minutes after I wrote that I drain poured the rest of the bottle. 2.0

Notes: Ambitious DFH have went for it with this beer and I love that enthusiasm but this was a difficult beer for me to drink. The craft beer community is richer for DFH, though.

Serving type: bottle

08-09-2009 06:10:44 | More by adamette

lacqueredmouse

Australia

2.73/5  rDev -28.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Purchased in the USA at the wishes of @LaitueGonflable and brought back to share with him.

Pours a surprisingly light coloured orange yellow, with a fine bubbled head of white. Some sudsy lacing, and a moderately heavy, but not outrageous body. It looks rather tame, considering I know what's in it.

Really very little on the nose, almost nothing in fact. Perhaps a little capsicum, mixed with a bit of ass. Certainly something a little feral and organic. Meh.

Taste is also very thin and not very interesting. Some astringent booze characters, with a very light spice and a twang of crushed organics on the back. Not a lot of cocoa hints, although the organics may be attributable to unroasted raw nibs. Feel is wickedly thin.

Wow, it's not even that interesting, when I expected it to be challenging and perhaps a little disturbing. It ends up tasting more like malt liquor than anything else. Minimal character from the chilli, the cocoa nibs, or anything, leaves it coming out rather thin and insipid, with just a big alcohol burn for your troubles.

Serving type: bottle

01-29-2011 03:34:32 | More by lacqueredmouse

laituegonflable

Australia

2.75/5  rDev -28.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a metallic golden colour with slight dull haze in the body. Head is unimpressive, thin rim of foam but lace is beautifully sticky and dense. Yeah, looks alright.

Nose is quite nutty and grainy, sweet with some stone fruit esters and some brown bread grain. Touch of chestnut on there as well, slightly caramelised, and a slight phenolic note hidden at the back (maybe Belgian?) Can't really fault it, except that I can't find any of the characters I was expecting either.

Taste has a sweetness for the most part, quite grainy especially on the mid, with slight caramel malt notes on the front becoming slightly bready with sourdough character as well. Finishes quite phenolic with a cough syrup hint and a touch of white peppery yeast as well. Not really bad, but not really very flavoursome either, and moreover, where's my cocksucking chilli? (Little nod to our mate Don Russell there) Some nice notes, but all lacking.

A bit lacking on the feel, allows the carbonation to show through too prominently. Don't love it.

Yeah, not a bad drop as a beer, but I find myself very uninspired by this.

Serving type: bottle

02-03-2011 01:23:51 | More by laituegonflable

OakedCanuck

Washington

2.78/5  rDev -27.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

750ml poured into cervoise.

A - Pours a dark golden colour with bubbly white head. Head dissipated quickly and slippery lacing.

S - Chocolate, grains, caramel, hay, peppercorn

T - This beer was heavy on the chilis. It was too hot from the peppers (not alcohol hot) to really be enjoyable. I did pick up on some chocolate but it was pushed too far back behind the chilis to be enjoyable. There was a nice honey caramel sweetness

M - Effervescent, thin, heat

O - I personally did not like this one. An interesting beer to say the least, but just not my cup of tea.

Serving type: bottle

06-08-2011 21:19:19 | More by OakedCanuck

yesyouam

New York

2.78/5  rDev -27.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

Theobroma is a crystal clear, deep golden brew with a head that vanishes instantly. It smells a little sweet, floral and wooden with notes of honey and herbal tea. It's pretty full bodied, quite smooth and slick. The finish is a little slippery. It's not really sweet at all. It's pretty warming and a little resiny. There is something kind of malt liquorish going on early in the taste. There may be a little DMS in there as well. Bitterness comes at the end in the form of raw chocolate. It's pretty unusual. Yeah, it tastes pretty strange. This is a very bizarre beverage and I'm not really into it... but it was worth a try.

Serving type: bottle

09-07-2011 18:48:40 | More by yesyouam

BatsforBeer

Delaware

2.8/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A: Straw colored very cloudy body, frothy egg shell 1 finger head, lingers and disperses into a small layer.

S: Honey, earthy, spicy

T: Sweet honey with chocolate hints and spicy finish

M: Medium bodied frothy, spicy

D: Not very drinkable, the flavors just don't work well in my opinion, don't get me wrong, I love what DFH is doing, this beer is defiantly off centered, just not to my liking.

Serving type: bottle

09-12-2009 15:24:58 | More by BatsforBeer

scottfrie

California

2.8/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

750ml bottle into snifter. Split with a friend.

A: Pours a dark honey amber with a touch of fizzy head that quickly vanished into nothing. No head, no lace.
S: I can smell the honey and what I think are the chilies, and there is also a weird spicy-fruit syrup scent to it that I can't place my finger on.
T: Initial taste is sweet, supposedly from the honey, slightly medicinal, with hints of the chilies and maybe bubblegum. The finish brings out the coca and a touch of nutmeg. Aftertaste is medicinal, peppery and spicy, and also has a faint residual burn from the chilies. After coming back to this beer after walking away for about ten minutes I'm picking up a lot more syrupy fruit, maybe exotic fruits or strawberries.
M: Unimpressive mouth with frothy carbonation and a medium body. Alcohol is hidden fairly well but there is a touch of viscous slickness in the finish.
D: Hmmmm... I'm not sure how to feel about this one. It's not bad, but I'm not sure I'd ever need to drink it again. Above average as a beer, but it's hard for me to rate this one to style.

Serving type: bottle

09-21-2010 03:11:31 | More by scottfrie

kkosmoski

New York

2.83/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Chilled in the fridge for about an hour and poured into an oversized Dogfish snifter. Pours bright orange with some very fine white bubbles that cover the top minimally. Fine particles dispersed through the beer. Herbal aroma, not sure exactly what, but kind of perfumy. Some honey, chile, corn, and a bit of a cardboard aroma (weird, I know). Aroma is not coming off to pleasant to me right now. Flavor starts with a honey sweetness, then moves into a bit of a chili bite. Light caramel flavor and some spices precede a finish of cocoa and cereal grain. Mouthfeel is pretty thin with a fairly high level of carbonation. The unconventional flavors in this beer and the high alcohol content do not make this very drinkable for me.

This beer was, lets just say, different. The aroma was very strange to me. I'm not sure if it was the spicing, or the chilies, but I did not find it very appealing. The flavor was much better than the aroma, but it was overly sweet, like many of the Dogfish beers. The aftertaste did have a very pleasant, grainy, almost cream ale flavor to it. I'm glad I tried it, but I will not be buying it again if it makes a return.

Serving type: bottle

02-13-2009 02:48:18 | More by kkosmoski

JohnQVegas

Tennessee

2.83/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Bottle into The Bruery tulip.

Pours a hazy apricot color, a few floaties, one-finger off-white head disappears rapidly, leaving just a few tiny, scattered patches of microscopic bubbles.

Nose is pretty unique; sweet pale(ish) malt/wheat notes hinting at honey lead into a smokey note from the peppers, as well as a bit of interesting spiciness - perhaps from the annato, resembling nutmeg. Alcohol is certainly there as well, blending in with some almost English-ale-like esters, and muting all the other ingredients as a result of its prominence. An odd conglomeration to say the least.

Taste is equally bizarre. Grainy sweetness carries a bit of a honey note perhaps, though the chocolate is pretty much imperceptible. Some spiciness in there, whether from the annato or the chilis is beyond me, though the heat is quite muted. The dull, lifeless mouthfeel and thick, slick body go a long way towards taking any real life out of the beer. Alcohol certainly lends a bit of a heaviness of its own, though it's far from boozey or overbearing. Dull, earthy note sits on the palate on the long finish. This tastes, to me, like a lackluster ESB/braggot hybrid where the hops have been replaced by spices and chilis and augmented with a bit of honey and made way, way too big.

Drinkability is actually decent. Whatever the other myriad flaws found in this beer, the alcohol is actual warming, pleasant, and well hidden, other than the heaviness it seems to add to the beer. Poor mouthfeel hurts the beer big time, and the taste, while offering a few moments of insight into what DFH was going for, largely falls short.

I've said before, I hate it when people call world-class lower-abv beers like pale ales, milds, bitters, etc. boring just because they aren't huge and "extreme". This is the other end of that spectrum: a giant beer incorporating a ton of crazy ingredients that is so dull and lifeless it ends up being, you guessed it, boring. I've had my share of big, crazy beers that worked, but this is not one of them.

Serving type: bottle

12-23-2010 03:17:22 | More by JohnQVegas

DarthKostrizer

California

2.88/5  rDev -24.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 2.5

Look: Golden yellow with 1/4 head and no retention

Smell: Bready yeast hints of smokiness from the ancho's orange zest and earthy hops

Taste: this is a complete failure based on the ingrediants I do not pick up any cocoa nibs or cocoa powder and there is no damn smokiness from the chilis or any heat wasnt expecting any heat but I was expecting some smokiness

Mouthfeel: medium body medium carbonation and goes down clean and refreshing

Overall: Based on what the label says this beer is an absolute failure the flavor does not coincide with the ingredients total waste of money

Serving type: bottle

07-30-2011 00:06:22 | More by DarthKostrizer

Gueuzedude

Arizona

2.9/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

2009 release; Sampled August 2009
A vigorous pour into my 25cl tulip glass produces a four-finger thick, pale tan colored head. The beer is a rich copper color that shows a brilliantly clear, copper-gold color when held up to the light. The aroma has such a clean malt character to it that it smells like candied maltose; fairly sweet and a bit cloying in its simplicity, I seem to get this in a lot of Dogfish Heads stronger beers, a sort of house character. This has quite a bit of fruitiness to it, it reminds me of concentrated pears, green apple, a touch of honeydew melon and some green raisin notes. There is a touch of an artificial smell to the nose, not quite chemical like, but it is something that I can't quite place; perhaps it is a touch of herbal honey character mixed with some phenolic fermentation character. Despite the complex promise of the ingredients, the nose ends up being fairly simplistic and completely lacking in the interesting ingredient list.

Soft and creamy feeling up front, the beer picks up a light prickle of carbonation as it moves across the tongue. The cocoa nibs / powder are non-existent at first, but then a faint, white-chocolate like note starts to creep in towards the finish. The finish has that sort of phenolic, chemical like note to it that I noticed in the nose. A touch of bitterness is barely noticeable and doesn't do much to balance the sweetness. There is perhaps a hint of spice / chile heat to the finish; it isn't noticeable until a couple seconds after the beer has left my mouth, and it is incredibly subtle (though it might be more noticeable to someone that doesn't enjoy spicy food as much as I do). The sweetness reminds me of honey with an herbal bite, bad apple juice with a chemical aftertaste, and some sulfurous green raisins. While the sweetness isn't overly excessive here, the lack of balancing bitterness or spice in this beer tends to make this beer lean towards the cloying side of the spectrum.

I was really excited to try this beer as the promise of a mix of cocoa, ancho chiles and ground annatto sounds really exciting, unfortunately both the aroma and flavor are almost devoid of these. The flavor does have the cocoa, and there is a touch of spice in the finish, but both are pretty tame. My expectations of this beer were a bit too much I think, I still think these ingredients could come up with a much more interesting beer. Unfortunately I didn't really enjoy this beer all that much.

Serving type: bottle

08-23-2009 03:27:47 | More by Gueuzedude

4000qtrap

Missouri

2.9/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Source/Serving: Bottle (fresh)

Smell: Sweet honey with a fruity, almost cidery edge. Lightly musty/spicy. Slight, indistinct peppery/vegetal aroma with a faint sharpness of black pepper as it warms. No sign of chocolate.

Taste: Slightly marzen/saison-esque in my opinion. Leans toward sweetness up front, with a musty, earthy, mealy, apple/fruit/honey character. Thin bodied with prickly carbonation. Has a bit of a tang in the middle, somewhat mead-like, with more honey notes, with a deep, but fresh, earthy foundation and toasty malt character. I don't really get chocolate at all in this, but if its present at subliminal levels it, along with the cocao nib, come through here in a subtle way in an unusual spicy sort of way. No hint of the ABV at ALL, nor any hops to speak of. Totally hidden. Finish is quite peppery, more spicy than hot, and is quite dry. A vegetal spicy, roasty pepperyness lingers though it does get a little hot (pepper+alcohol) as it warms.

Overall: The flavors never really come together for me, though paired well with some food from the grill that accompanied this beer at one point. I've been wanting to try this beer for years and while I'm a huge DFH fan this one misses the mark. But, matching this beer to the taste buds of modern drinkers isn't so much what this beer is about and I do appreciate the intent of it. But for $13/bottle I'll look elsewhere in the future.

Serving type: bottle

12-22-2010 06:22:30 | More by 4000qtrap

shodrod

Illinois

2.9/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

(poured into a pint glass)
This beer pours a deep golden hue with a slight head that disappears rather quickly. I might be a little stuffed up but there is almost no smell to this beverage. A slight malt presence at the front with a nice honey finish. Pretty disappointed in this one just based on the description from the bottle. You would never know that there was any form of cocoa (let alone 2!) or chilies. Glad these guys continue to push the boundaries, but kind of missed on this one.

Serving type: bottle

11-03-2011 02:08:34 | More by shodrod