O'Doul's Amber - Anheuser-Busch

rings

Michigan

2.2/5  rDev -1.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

In an effort to just make sure I can, I usually take at least a week or two in February off, which means I have to find something non-alcoholic to drink. As I'm not much for sodas - or the sugar that comes with it - I've tried a few N/A beers out there.

This does taste surprisingly like beer, for an N/A. It's certainly waaay better than most - and a nice attempt to get a little character & flavor into an alcohol free brew - but that doesn't mean it's "good" compared to actual beer.

It looks and smells pretty good, but the body is, of course, very thin with nary a hint of mouthfeel. At least it's drinkable.

Serving type: bottle

03-13-2011 20:44:24 | More by rings

biboergosum

Alberta (Canada)

2.1/5  rDev -6.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

A leftover from a previous tenant at a time-share ski chalet - why the hell not - got to be on my game tonight...

This erm, beer, pours a clear medium golden amber, with a surprising amount of foamy, puffy off-white head, which leaves some fragmented lace around the glass as it duly settles. It smells of sweet barley and corn cereal malt, and some very mild off-putting florals. The taste is very thin, slightly astringent caramelized grain. That's it - the 'flavour' comes and goes so quickly, it's hard to get a bead on it. The carbonation is average, the body light, watery, and bereft of character. It finishes off-dry, I suppose, the echo of the neutered malt whimpering to the end.

I get the close-to-nil-alcohol idea for beer, but why the taste and body has to suffer so much, I have to wonder, and another thing - this thing still has 90 calories? Cripes. I can't believe that I'm suggesting that one should opt for a Coors Light or Michelob Ultra in its place.

Serving type: bottle

03-06-2011 01:05:52 | More by biboergosum

mikesgroove

South Carolina

1.68/5  rDev -25%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured a dull straw yellow with a big white fizzy head. Lots of visible carbonation, but the fizzy yellow water type, no lace. The smell was very faint, if there at all. What I could pick up was maybe a hay, or wheat smell. Again very very faint, and hardly there at all. The taste was very light and non descript, but that is about what one would expect from a light lager. A light grain, just enough of a taste to know I was not drinking water would be the best way to describe it. Decent feel, again just the cold well carbonated. Crisp, and a clean finish, no aftertaste. Overall this was totally forgettable, as I imagined it would be.

Serving type: bottle

03-05-2011 18:58:51 | More by mikesgroove

beerwolf77

Wisconsin

2/5  rDev -10.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Another style tick under the belt. Not looking forward to this one all that much. Poured from a bottle into a pint glass.

A: Crystal clear golden amber. Solid two fingers of off white head. Fast fading leaving no lace.

S: Sweet malt and hints of corn like grain. Not exactly a show stopper in the nose. No surprise.

T: Wow. Amazing how little flavor this has. Just a light hint of tart malt. That's it. Nothing offensive just nothing period.

M: Very light and crisp. Plenty of carbonation.

D: Well there is simply nothing horrible about this beer but nothing good either. This will be my first and last NA beer for sure.

Serving type: bottle

02-15-2011 00:56:50 | More by beerwolf77

scottfrie

California

2.4/5  rDev +7.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

12oz bottle poured into Old Rasputin nonic pint. Bought on sale for 79cents.

A: Pours a light amber with two fingers of bubbly off-white head that quickly fizzed away into a faint film. No lacing.
S: Light notes of grains with a slight metallic twinge mixed in with some sweet notes.
T: Slight notes of roasted grains and a synthetic blast of artificial sweetener and caramel syrup.
M: Not as water as I was expecting, but still, pretty thin. Carbonation is tingly but fairly low.
D: This is my first nonalcoholic beer, but I've actually had alcoholic beers that taste worse than this. Still, this is by no means something I would like to drink again.

Serving type: bottle

01-08-2011 21:59:37 | More by scottfrie

Thorpe429

Illinois

2.05/5  rDev -8.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a medium amber color without head or lacing. Nose brings forth some light grain. Somewhat of a grain husk nose. Taste confirms this with some general bread flavors. Feel is light with too much carbonation. Drinks much like the overall experience--in an unimpressive manner.

Serving type: bottle

10-08-2010 00:50:23 | More by Thorpe429

allforbetterbeer

Colorado

2.65/5  rDev +18.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Well I had to try it. The whole sixer costs less than most single 12 oz bottles I drink. Keep in mind I am reviewing this to style, and the bar is pretty low. Interestingly, this is my 100th bottled beer reviewed (not 100th review total). I don't think I could have picked a more anticlimactic choice. Oh well.

Appearance is light orange watery body that pours with head but acts like flat diet soda... the head goes away and is never seen again.

I don't smell anything. Wait, a faint hint of something like malt. No, never mind. At least there is nothing offensive.

Yea, don't really taste much either. The label says this is rich and flavorful. Now, if it were labeled as WATER I would be impressed. It is however, not labeled as water and thus I am not impressed.

Mouthfeel reminds me of half/half seltzer water and a bad beer left out all day.

Conclusion: I have had ultra-low ABV beers before that were actually pretty good. This 'beer' is sad. enough said. On to better things.

Serving type: bottle

09-10-2010 21:04:55 | More by allforbetterbeer

industrialswill

Washington

3/5  rDev +33.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

My curiosity got the best of me, so I had to try this here near beer.

I think it's got a nice, crisp, clean taste.
It ressembles beer.
There isn't anything here that would make me want to buy it again, but for anyone who is in search of a good NA beer, this one has to be at least a decent place to start.

Serving type: bottle

04-12-2010 23:05:23 | More by industrialswill

Beerandraiderfan

Nevada

1.86/5  rDev -17%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.75

Its all downhill from here.

Looks and smells like a standard beer. No problems, standard amber ale no? But then the taste, I don't like too much alcohol, but if there's almost none, maybe its psychosomatic or whatnot, but I just can't get into it.

Mouthfeel indicates that the beer is much thinner than its appearance. Becomes watery, loses any wood and malt feel it had. No hops at any point. Can't stand to finish even one, and can't believe the price of this.

Serving type: bottle

03-12-2010 17:22:11 | More by Beerandraiderfan

womencantsail

California

2.42/5  rDev +8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I felt it the responsible thing to do, bringing this to a tasting. You don't everyone to get drunk, now do you?!

A: The pour is a clear light amber color with plenty of carbonation and a short lived head.

S: The nose is very mild, not giving off too much of an aroma. What is there is a light grainy sweetness and a touch of skunk.

T: Like the nose before it, there really isn't much going on in the flavor department. The only real flavor is a slight bready quality and some sweetness.

M: The body is thin and watery with a fairly plentiful carbonation.

D: I suppose there is a point for some to drink non-alcoholic beer, but I just don't see it. I'd rather drink a soda if I wanted some empty calories, because at least that tastes good.

Serving type: bottle

03-12-2010 16:29:55 | More by womencantsail

cjgator3

Florida

1.93/5  rDev -13.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12oz bottle

A- Pours a light amber color with an off-white head with decent retention and lacing.

S- The aroma is pretty bland to say the least. There is just a hint of grain and caramel. Not much else.

T- The taste starts out with a grainy sweetness with a touch of caramel. Could definitely use some bitterness from the hops in the finish to balance out the sweetness. As it is, I find it to be a sweet watery mess.

M- The mouthfeel is light bodied with a high amount of carbonation.

D- Overall, I would recommend avoiding this one. The regular O'Doul's is much more palatable compared to the Amber.

Serving type: bottle

03-03-2010 00:16:17 | More by cjgator3

drizzam

Wisconsin

1.58/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

Given to me by my good BA buddy cdkrenz...thanks (I think). This must be revenge for the Wild Blue I gave you.

A - An aggressive pour yielded a clear orange/amber body topped by a white foamy one finger head. The head dissipated to a foamy cap...the head is actually better than I thought it would be, leaving a little spotty lacing down the inside of my pint glass. Maybe it was a result of my aggressive pour.

S - Light sweet malt...not much else in the nose.

T & M - Wow...this stuff is watery! I drank a porter before this and this stuff pales greatly in comparison. I'm getting a metallic taste, maybe a little caramelized malt. Not much going on here. High carbonation lends to a rough mouthfeel.

D - I guess if you're forced to drink a NA beer, this may be a good one. I'm not one that is willing to sacrifice taste just to pretend to drink a beer though. I would rather drink water or soda if I'm a DD.

Serving type: can

12-24-2009 00:26:20 | More by drizzam

wagenvolks

Texas

1.43/5  rDev -36.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

12oz bottle (on sale at the local grocery store for $0.50 per bottle) into a Michelob pilsner glass.

Not a half-bad pour; surprisingly good head retention to the creamy sawdust inch of foam, likely a result of the lager-like levels of carbonation rising up through the golden-copper body. Good lacing to boot. Pale & clear color, but a bit light to be called "Amber". Mineral crispness and a hint of cooked corn in the nose. Some sweetness from the malts and perhaps the tiniest hint of hops, but a rather unimpressive aroma.

Oh man, this is awful stuff. Sourish minerals all across the tongue with notes of over-cooked frozen vegetables. Like bad mineral water...no traces of the label-touted "Two-row and specialty caramel malts" or hops of any sort. Body is not as thin as one might think for a 0.5% ABV, and has some decent creaminess to the carbonation, but the off-flavors and sour crispness are equal parts distracting and disgusting. My excuses? I guess I was curious, and the price was right. After all, this is my first Low Alcohol Beer review. Never again though...I learned my lesson.

Serving type: bottle

12-16-2009 00:54:33 | More by wagenvolks

cdkrenz

Wisconsin

1.8/5  rDev -19.6%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

A - Clear, pale copper body with a thin very pale tan head that fades... faded very quickly.

S - Malty aroma with little to offer.

T - It has an odd aftertaste and that which comes first isn't much better.

M - The texture is coarse throughout with with much of the feel to the roof of my mouth.

~ The label reads, "Rich & Flavorful" but I beg to differ.

Serving type: can

09-30-2009 02:22:15 | More by cdkrenz

feloniousmonk

Minnesota

3.05/5  rDev +36.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

"Rich and Flavorful" it says. We will see about that.

Clear, faint amber color, big, creamy off-white head. Nice.

Wisps of grain and cereal...hardly any hops. But not bad. Just the barest of anything, I guess.

Taste: Hmmm. Smooth. Light tickle of hops, agreeable cereal mash flavor...good and moist...light bodied, to be sure.
I pull to my lips again, and am left not unsatisfied. If I couldn't have alcohol, and wanted to fit into a social situation where others where drinking, this wouldn't be bad.
I'm not sure why this gets such low marks, if anyone's reviewing to style. You really can't compare it to real beer. Heck, it's probably better than a lot of beer with alcohol.

It has flavor, not necessarily rich, better more than you expect. Long finish, malty, dry. It's missing something, but ... isn't that the reason it exists?

So, not a bad fill-in for those who need it.
(A little ashamed I'm praising an A-B product, but, hey, it is what it is. And it ain't bad, for that.)

Serving type: bottle

08-29-2009 08:21:50 | More by feloniousmonk

civilizedpsycho

Michigan

1.83/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Poured bottle into mug.

Appearance: Pale amber color with a fair head.

Smell: Not much there, but maybe some light hops lingering in the background.

Taste: Pretty bland, but smooth. Some hop bitterness at the end, but not much.

Mouthfeel: Very thin and watery.

Drinkability: This wasn't absolutely horrible or offensive, but with these Low Alcohol Beers, I just have to ask myself: What's the point?

Serving type: bottle

08-09-2009 19:41:57 | More by civilizedpsycho

akorsak

Pennsylvania

3.05/5  rDev +36.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A bottle poured into a plastic cup. It was around, so I grabbed it.

A: The beer is very amber, a caramel brown color with a finger of white head. The color is just dark enough to leave it opaque.

S: The aroma is loaded with bready malts and a semi-sweet caramel flavor. Not the most exciting but very unusual.

T: The maltiness is upfront, caramel and bread throw all they've got at you. Following them are, well, very little. Hops are an afterthought and any boozy warmth has been neutered. The result is a bready soda water with few redeeming qualities. I'd rather stick with Budweiser.

M: Malty, loaded with semi-sweet caramel. This beer isn't afraid to show off that side. The hoppiness is more muted with a 'nothing to see here' mentality.

D: One was enough. Yeah, I ticked the style, waddya want me to say? I'd prefer my beer with booze in it.

Serving type: bottle

07-19-2009 22:31:42 | More by akorsak

WJVII

Wisconsin

1.53/5  rDev -31.7%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

Have a few cans of this left over from a friend. Poured into a glass this is a light amber color with a cream colored head that was here, then gone! The aroma was mild with some hints of malt. The taste was very metallic and watery at the same time. There was not much taste of malt and maybe a syrupy sweetness that was out right gross. NA is not for me!

Serving type: can

07-16-2009 23:22:53 | More by WJVII

Rollo

Wisconsin

3.75/5  rDev +67.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

I like this a lot, and regular ODouls as well. I had four of these today.

I usually prefer barley wine style, but let's face it- you don't always want to get lit or hungover. When you're a parent, that's more often than not.

This stuff is easily as good as any of the big lager swills like Bud, Milller, Pabst. You can drink all you like, which is tough to do with pop or beer usually.

Definitely not as bad as the rap it gets here. I wonder if you can legally drink it while driving?

Serving type: can

05-03-2009 02:01:12 | More by Rollo

Brad007

Vermont

2/5  rDev -10.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a mild amber color with a one-finger head into my glass. Seems normal.

Aroma is pretty sweet with a hint of brown sugar in the nose. Hmm, more than I can say for the other version of this beer.

Taste is full of caramel, sweet malt and an odd flavor overall in the middle. Hard to stomach.

Mouthfeel is thin and full of caramel and an otherwise undesirable aftertaste. Certainly not impressive.

Avoid unless you absolutely must drink a n/a beer. It has a bit more flavor than some n/a beers but not enough.

Serving type: bottle

03-28-2009 03:50:58 | More by Brad007

roddwolff

Mexico

2.17/5  rDev -3.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

With no doubt, this one is the tastiest non-alcoholic beer i ever tasted; with an amber golden color; smooth smell; in the taste there is an accentuated malt with an end of cereal, very good.

I know this is a not alcoholic beer, but... with the food, tastes like a real beer, truly.

Homever i can't give a good calification to a non-alcoholic beer.

Serving type: can

03-09-2009 19:29:23 | More by roddwolff

Brenden

Ohio

2.17/5  rDev -3.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I thought I should try this just because it was around. I probably shouldn't have.

Color is hazy amber with, to its credit, at least a little head but no lacing.

Smell is...artificial. Very fake. Malt and sugar and...maybe some grainy hops hidden.

The taste is the same. Possibly some graininess, at least there's that, but no balance.

It's quite thin. Poor finish and lingering garbage aftertaste.

Not quite the worst thing, but generally quite unpleasant.

Serving type: bottle

03-05-2009 17:26:17 | More by Brenden

deaconoflove

Pennsylvania

2.05/5  rDev -8.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Ap: golden amber color with one finger head
Sm: pale and thin
Ta: grainy, smooth, sweet
Mf: light
Dr: Actually tasted pretty okay at first, but by the time I finished, not so much. I can drink a beer (kind of) without screwing up the numbers in Turbo Tax. I'll have another when I forget how the first one tasted.

Serving type: bottle

02-11-2009 16:13:10 | More by deaconoflove

srandycarter

California

3.1/5  rDev +38.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Reviewed with the NA beer consideration. Numbers do not compare to regular beers, only other NAs.

A - Small read reduces to ring, then nothing. Some sudsy lacing. Straw with just a splash of red tint to it. Kinda like a slight concentrated macro.

S - Light malty and a little metallic.

T - Sweet malt, some hop note, but not much. Pretty dry finish.

M - Pretty thin, but good coating.

D - C'mon, it's pretty drinkable. Doesn't get you messed up, not filling at less than 100 cal per, and it doesn't taste too different than the malt tea I make.

I think it's jes fine!

Serving type: bottle

01-25-2009 06:05:36 | More by srandycarter

whiteskittlz

California

2.42/5  rDev +8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

for some reason, i decided to get a 6-pack. i think i drank 2, then the rest have been sitting on the back porch. then i got an idea: cook with it! wasn't bad to simmer some vegetales, but...

bottle at room temperature, poured into frosted pint glass. okay, so it gets a handicap

looks: nice colour, light carbonation, giant 3-inch head that dies down to thin cover. moderate lacing

nose: sweet maltiness. im actually hopeful.

taste: metal tinny fizz, then pleasant malt, then back to more metallic fizz. and like decaf coffee, there is that sense of emptiness when i drink it - tho this could be the placebo effect

mouthfeel: a bit dry, a bit of that sweet malt...not that bad

drinkability: light bodied, not so unpleasant...this is fairly drinkable. 2 problems: 1) too expensive to justify, and 2) who the hell would drink this in large quantities, unless you were on a post-atkins carb-binge??

Serving type: bottle

12-11-2008 23:46:55 | More by whiteskittlz