The Reverend - Avery Brewing Company

AdamHart22

Massachusetts

2.8/5  rDev -27.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured into tulip.

Asolutely no head at all. Poured aggressively. Possibly bad bottle? Color is a mahogany red.

Smells like fig newtons crossed with brown sugar. Nice.

The taste is quite mellow. For a 10 percent abv it drinks like a 5. I get figs, honey, and a touch of sweat tea.

Mouth is normal, leaves a sweet taste and is probly my favorite part of the beer.

Overall, I expected more taste from a quadrupel. It is possible my bottle was bad, but for the price I expected more.

Serving type: bottle

08-19-2012 00:40:16 | More by AdamHart22

DaveJanssen

British Columbia (Canada)

2.78/5  rDev -27.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Split a 22 two ways. Poured into chouffe tulips. Reviewed 6/24/2009.

Ar: Tart and sour fruit, similar to the Avery golden strong, rummy, alcohol, earth, light powdery floral, alcohol, toffee and caramel, spice, hints of solvent, caramel and coffee

Ap: Clear red copper, medium light tan creamy head, good retention, light lace

F: Dark syrupy sweet, heavy, dark fruit, nutty, plum, dark overripe cherries, chocolate cherries, dark funk, very sweet balanced, burn and molasses hints, minimal hop bitterness, prune, too candy/fake sweet, reasonably good fruitiness, definitely not a belgian, raisin

M: warming/hot alcohol in stomach, heavy with mid/low carbonation, lightly syrupy

O:does not come close to other quads, don't like their yeast too sickly sweet

Serving type: bottle

01-31-2010 03:44:16 | More by DaveJanssen

nichols8241

Ohio

2.75/5  rDev -28.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

I am big fan of the Avery IPA so I thought I would give the Reverend a try.

I poured the beer into a pint glass. The beer had a copper color, very clear and clean. The head was white and thin - dissipated very quickly.

The beer had an unusual smell - hints of nutmeg and clove.

The first sip was crisp and clean. I could taste the alcohol but it was not overly apparent. After a few more sips, I noticed the beer tasted exactly as it smelled. Somewhere towards the middle of the glass, the sweetness became overpowering - akin to drinking a glass of honey. As the beer warmed, the smell and taste of alcohol became more pronounced and the mouthfeel became thicker.

(Time for a refill - 22oz bottle) I poured the remaining beer in my glass. The beer got even heavier and sweeter as I continued drinking. I found it increasingly hard to finish...But, I gutted it out. It felt like it was sticking to my tongue and teeth. There was no way I was going to get beat by a 'Quad'. I have to admit though, I couldn't drink two Reverends.

Serving type: bottle

02-07-2009 03:12:24 | More by nichols8241

mwa423

Ohio

2.75/5  rDev -28.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A - Poured from bottle, about a finger of head, perfect color and haziness for the style. Light red/brown and very opaque.

S - Not pleasant, very thick in the nose with sour notes and a syrupy sweetness

T - Lots of yeast, banana esters, honey, very thick on the tongue with a sour aftertaste.

M/D - The mouthfeel is slightly short of bar syrup. Very thick and cloying and not bad for style. Overall this is exceptionally boozy and hard to drink, this my mouthfeel score.

Serving type: bottle

07-17-2009 02:53:12 | More by mwa423

Ryan011235

Ohio

2.73/5  rDev -29.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Deep caramel brown with tobacco and copper highlights. One finger head thickens briefly before dissipating to a washy skim and a clumping of loose bubbles. Impressive lace.

Molasses, raisins, figs, plums, toasted bread and mild yeast spice make for a balanced, even-keeled aroma that leans toward the earthy end of the spectrum. The flavor is even more earthy and bready. Dark fruits are minimal, as are the spices. Notions of alcohol are readily available. The breadiness works pretty well with the rather full body and moderate carbonation. The finish has a coating feel, but I don't mind it much in this case.

All in all, this isn't a bad beer, but it is far from an impressive quad. While I'll certainly finish the bottle, this is a good reason to stick with the tried and true.

Serving type: bottle

12-17-2012 02:42:53 | More by Ryan011235

sulldaddy

Connecticut

2.7/5  rDev -29.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This beer pours a clear copper color with tints of red. Very small tight slightly pink head foams up. ONly a very mild aroma present, some malt but dominated by alcohol scents. SOme general spiciness present as well. First sip reveals weak carbonation and a rather thin mouthfeel.
There are hints of sugar sweetness with no hop presence whatsover. The dominant flavor is alcohol bitterness all the way through down to the warming in my belly. The alcohol flavors impart an almost medicinal quality to the brew. This is not yummy.

Overall the beer is mush less complex than I expected and is not very drinkable due to the overwhelming strength of alcohol flavor present.

Serving type: bottle

12-19-2003 04:39:37 | More by sulldaddy

Overlord

California

2.68/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Wow. The collective wisdom here at beeradvocate usually doesn't lead me astray, but this was a truly uninspired quadrupel.

The attractive price tag (for a supposedly belgian style quad) and the high reviews tempted me into trying this one. The smell was an immediate turn-off, as it was muddled and unappealing. The taste was a jumbled mash of sweetness and competing flavors that did not blend well at all. The alcohol taste was apparent, and raw. Not enjoyable, will not be returning.

I would take an Allagash 4 in a heartbeat over this when it come to U.S. quadrupels.

Serving type: bottle

07-15-2007 07:49:41 | More by Overlord

mojopilot

Arizona

2.65/5  rDev -31.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

I am a huge fan of The Reverend. I can't say its the best quad, but for its price, it really can't be beat.

I am reviewing a bottle I have set aside for about a year, I really thought it would mellow out and become a much better beer. unfortunately, that was not the case. The look and smell are good, a deep amber color and a smooth smell of some sort of fruit I can't put my finger on. The color and look has not changed much, maybe its a little lighter, but I don't recall much of a difference. the smell seems a bit smoother than a new bottle, there might be a bit more alcohol note but nothing significantly different.

The first taste is tremendously disappointing. I remember my first sip of Reverend, it was just how a quad should taste. After a year in a basement closet, everything good is lost. it has a very "musky," old taste. The alcohol seems much stronger, the burn on your tongue and throat are more pronounced, and I feel pretty good after just one bottle.

This is a good beer for the money, I suggest it to anyone who wants a decent quad, at half the price of a good Trappist. I would not suggest storing this beer in hopes of making it better. Crack it open right away and enjoy!

Serving type: bottle

06-22-2008 06:07:09 | More by mojopilot

cosmicevan

New York

2.65/5  rDev -31.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Poured into Chimay chalice.

A - wow, almost looks like raspberry soda. Soft read with a crazy school of bubbles jumping to the top of the glass. Head was minimal and gone quick leaving a thin layer of bubbles along the edges of the surface. Not really very Quad looking.

S - Much subtler than most other Quads I've had. Almost a watered down version of what I expected. With a strong olfactory pull I get a nice mix of alc, soft fruit punch, cherry with mouth watering sweetness. Smells pretty nice just not that strong and certainly not as dark and creamy as I had expected.

T - Mostly alcohol. Once I got over the alcohol and my taste buds opened up seemed pretty spicey without much else. There are some subtle grapes but overall more like a flavored vodka than a beer to me. Pretty uninspiring for a Quad.

M/D - I was really looking forward to trying this one and now that the mystery is over this isn't one I'll be looking for again. Don't get me wrong, not a bad beer, but not a great Quad. Found it mostly too hot and not well balanced and frankly not a Quad.

Serving type: bottle

11-13-2010 02:11:23 | More by cosmicevan

abcsofbeer

Virginia

2.63/5  rDev -31.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Poured from a 22oz bottle with no freshness date. The color is a dark cherry red mixed in with some orange hues. The beverage is cloudy with some bubbles. The head is pretty thin and settles down to only a white crown.

The aroma is sweet and fruity with hints of banana, grape and cherry.

The flavor is very sweet and fruity with a slight warming hint of alcohol. The sweetness is candy sweet, but, it also turns your mouth inside out from sourness. I could not finish this one and had to pour it out. It may be remincent of the style, but, I had to pour it out.

Serving type: bottle

03-25-2006 23:16:56 | More by abcsofbeer

instrumentality

California

2.55/5  rDev -33.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Poured a transparent amber with a creamy one inch white head that gradually settled to 1/4" and remained there. Very little carbonation was visible.

The odor was hard to place. The closest I can come to describing it is a mixture of sweet flowers and overripe fruit, although not as foul as that might sound.

The taste was very unusual. I could taste the alcohol almost immediately. Beyond that, it was a bit malty with a mixture of cloves, smoke, and that old fruit flavor (more unpleasant to taste than it was to smell). Hmm...clove cigarettes and old fruit? Well, maybe not that bad, but not really my style.

I bought this beer on a recommendation from the store owner when he saw that I was purchasing Avery's IPA (another unusual, fruity tasting beer that I didn't mind so much as long as I took long breaks between gulps). I don't think I've tried a quadrupel before, and now I'm a little bit apprehensive to try another. This worries me since, like half of the other people on this site, I'm still in search of the Westvleteren 12. I'm curious to see the opinions of people who have tried this one as well as the Westy 12 to see if the issue is with the style in general or specifically with Avery's effort. If you're one of those people, please shoot me an email.

This is not one I intend to try again.


UPDATE: It's come to my attention that I may be confusing "smokiness" with "cloves." I may be tasting cloves and thinking clove cigarettes. Either way, it's not a taste I enjoy, but I just don't want to mislead anyone.

Serving type: bottle

05-11-2006 01:59:51 | More by instrumentality

MVotter

New York

2.55/5  rDev -33.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

The Avery Reverend Quad pours into a tall pils glass a slighty foggy bronze, with a thin cream colored head.

The aroma after the pour is sweet malts, clove and yeast.

The taste is one which comes at you in distinct stages. The first stage has a chlorophenolic character. The second is clove and yeast. And, the final stage is black licorice and brown sugar/molasses malts.

The mouthfeel is heavy and oily; not overly carbonated.

This quad struggles to find a taste. But the taste can't make it through the wall of synthetic/chlorophenol flavor which greets you with the first sip. It's a big beer ... a sipper for sure, took a lonnng time to finish.

Serving type: bottle

07-09-2009 03:03:55 | More by MVotter

Hex92

Virginia

2.48/5  rDev -35.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

The beer looks like I poured a frothy glass of Juicy Juice. Kinda cloudy and not too much head. I'm color blind so I can't give you much more than that. Almost a sickly sweet smell. And taste is sickly sweet too. Too much sugar not enough carbonation. I guess the only thing going for it is its high alcohol content. I bought it because is was a quadruple. Should have realized that I like dubbels better than tripels. The quad is just that much further away from my style preference. I won't be buying another one of these.

Serving type: bottle

10-14-2003 01:36:17 | More by Hex92

oracle

Indiana

2.42/5  rDev -37.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Beer pour a rich deep redish mahogany with an initially abundant head that quickly disappeared entirely.

Nose was sweet and reeked of alcohol.

Taste was even more so. An abundance of sweet maltyness with a very very strong alcohol presence.

Mouthfeel was quite tingly, with heavy carbonation that clings to the tongue and get in the way of the flavor.

Maybe I haven't had enough of this style to appreciate it yet, but this is not a beer I will try again.

Serving type: bottle

04-25-2005 13:22:24 | More by oracle

Padron4KM

Arizona

2.42/5  rDev -37.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

22 oz bottle with a fancy red foil necker.

Poured half into a New Belgium globe half into a grottenbier goblet.
clear orangish red, thin orangish head minimal lacing.

Very fruity aroma. Not very complex. Mostly cherries and candi sugar. Maybe a little caramel. Alcohol is obviously more apparent in the NB glass.

Flavor is again, not very complex. sugar, dark fruit, and prickly alcohol.

Finish is medium dry with a touch of spice.

High ABV combined with high sweetness and high price tag($6.99), makes this one a one and done.

Serving type: bottle

12-08-2005 06:05:41 | More by Padron4KM

timobkg

New Jersey

2.4/5  rDev -37.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

Poured into a Duvel tulip. This bottle had been sitting in my cellar for several months.

The appearance was good, a dark color shifting towards red on the outside, with a good head.

The aroma was strong, very fruity, but also had a noticible rust smell that detracted from the beer.

The taste was sweet and fruity. I like sweet and fruty beer, but this was slightly too sweet, and too fruity. It laked the depth and complexity of good belgians. There was also a flavor in the finish that I couldn't quite place, but found very off-putting. Maybe iron?

Overall, I found the beer to be too sweet and fruity, with not enough balance from the other components to pull off the sweetness. It wasn't cloying, but it wasn't complex either. In addition, the aroma of rust and possible taste of iron turned this into one of the worst quads I've had. It's possibly I had a bad bottle, but I'm hesitant to spring for another bomber to find out.

Serving type: bottle

09-26-2011 15:38:30 | More by timobkg

maximum12

Minnesota

2.38/5  rDev -38.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Avery was one of those breweries I used to pick up regularly ten years ago & more; I don't buy enough of them anymore. Too many choices? Dunno, just that I haven't had one in a long, long time. 22 oz. bomber split with my wife.

Pour is dark red with a handful of rich mud thrown in; impenetrable. I almost have to submerge my busted nose to get anything; spare sweetness, faint candy. Not much going on in the aroma realm.

The Reverned tastes a lot stronger than it smells. Bug zapper of alcohol hits one out the gate, along with a double handful of sweaty figs & raisins. Too much raisin, it makes me feel unclean. And I took a shower today. Residual sweetness isn't enough to drown out the sharp tang. Echoes of some dark fruit, but really, not much going on here.

Disappointed in this one. I know the raisins are a personal problem, but there's not much to set them off against. Sub-mediocre.

Serving type: bottle

06-03-2012 02:35:03 | More by maximum12

Arbitrator

California

2.2/5  rDev -42.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Chilled bomber into a glass.

A: Pours a clear amber color with amber highlights when held to a lamp. Has nice trails of bubbles up the side of the glass. Head is weak at best, pouring half a finger and receding immediately into the collar of death. No lacing down the glass.

S: A noticeable mustiness at first, but it recedes to the back after a few sniffs. Strongly dominated by fruit esters, such as orange, lemon, apricot, and maybe a light plum. The funky/musty yeast reappears at the end, as noted, but is complicated by a strong Belgian candy smell. A light alcohol nose.

T: Fruit lays down the groundwork, with a nice contrast between the tart acidity of orange/lemon and the light apricot sweetness. Musty yeast flavor defines the mid-palate, and it transitions into a spicy clove bite with strong Belgian candy sweetness at the end. Slight warming on the way down, but no burn. The aftertaste is a slick, musty yeastiness that really works against the beer.

M: Medium-bodied, even slightly toward the fuller side with a chewy texture. The carbonation is on the low side. The alcohol is well-masked.

D: I... don't know how to respond to this one. It's kind of like having a sandwich where the bread is on the inside and you have to eat the pepper separately. This has many of the right ingredients, and a lot of potential, but right now it's kind of just thrown together. With a little refinement, the rough edges on this beer could make it very good. Right now it's just decent. I won't buy this again soon, but if I hear the formula has been tweaked, I'll pick it up.

Serving type: bottle

03-24-2009 20:50:50 | More by Arbitrator

sweemzander

Illinois

2.1/5  rDev -45.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

22oz. sized bottle poured into a tulip. No bottled date.

(A)- Pours a hazy copper color that produced a mediocre white head that dissipated quickly. If I am not mistaken, Quads are usually darker than this.

(S)- A super sweet, berry/apple cider-like fruits with tons of yeast.

(T)- There is so much yeast and sugar in this, that it is all I taste. Some banana is trying to make its presence known, but thats all this has to offer.

(M)- Good carbonation level, but way too sugary sweet and way too yeasty. Nothing about this causes me to think that it is a quad except for that essence of banana.

(D)- This was a very disappointing beer. I have thus far, enjoyed most of Avery's offerings, but this one falls very short; it really doesnt even fit the style at all. This was definitely not a bad bottle, its just not in the ballpark so to speak, let alone the same planet.

Serving type: bottle

11-07-2009 22:35:52 | More by sweemzander

Chrysostom

Ohio

1.98/5  rDev -48.6%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 1.25 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 1.75

EDIT: I tried another bottle of this, couldn't get past a few sips. Revised downward again. RE-EDIT: Yet another bottle. Ratings leveled off.

Bought this as a possible replacement for my standard $11-15 Trappist brews - Chimay, Rochefort, Westmalle, St Bernardus (not technically a Trappist...). The name was irresistible: "The Reverend" - I'm a Catholic seminarian. Thank you to Blacklick Wine & Spirits in Columbus, Ohio.

I had this essentially head-to-head with a St Bernardus Abt 12. Apologies for any errors in grammar forthcoming due to the above; I will attempt to keep my tenses and temporal clauses as precise and exacting as ever, being a theologian (of the Holy Trinity, not of beer, although I try).

Bomber poured in to a Duvel tulip.

A: Pours and excellent pure-red colour (not Wild I red, a good Irish red), but with no yeast or cloudiness whatsoever. The colour seems a bit off for a Trappist, although I may just be expecting the cloudiness. I expect yeast cloudiness from an Abbey ale or a Trappist. I mark it down a full point and then some for thus, and the lack of yeast may also impact my perception of the flavour negatively. However, lacing is superb.

S: Does not fit in category. It smells more like an alcohol Yuengling or Killian's Red with a little fruit or cherry in it than it smells like the exemplar of the Quadrupel style, which is to me the excellent Rochefort 10 or St Berny's 12. Does not smell as alcoholic as the 10% ABV would suggest. As it warms, it has a little more of a Belgian nose to it, but a wheat beer-reminiscent spicing or coriander smell also comes to the fore, and is unappetizing.

T: A strong malt predominates. As it warms, it acquires a bready characteristic, and a fruity characteristic, and a quite strong (to me, hater of wheat beers, pumpkin beers, and spiced beers, overwhelming) spiced characteristic, and begins to taste a little more Belgian (disregarding the spices). I can almost begin to believe it is "Belgian-style" at this point. (That sentence took me a good 30 seconds to type, so many typos it had.) I can, as it warms, see a glimpse of Belgian yeast. There's a bit of cherry present.

EDIT: Having this beer sober, it is OBVIOUSLY spiced with something, coriander and/or cinnamon, and it's not spiced subtly, leaving a reminiscence of wheat beer (I hate wheat beer) on the tongue. I was unable to finish my second bomber of this. I have revised my score downward accordingly: the taste is 2.5, generously. For style, compared to real Belgians, maybe a 1.75. Maybe.

M: The body is not nearly as thick or full as the St Bernardus Abbot 12 I had earlier, so I can not reliable judge if it is full-bodied or thin-bodied. (EDIT: It is of relatively weak body compared to other Belgians, and is quite acidic on the tongue due to heavy [over?] carbonation.) I've had St Berny Abt 12, Guinness Foreign Extra, and Duvel in a row, in that order, before this. Not one of those beers is known for its lack of body, but the body of this beer is more comparable to the pale Belgian Duvel than it is to either the Saint or to the Arthur (Guinness, Proprietor and Signer of Bottles). There is little alcohol presence. There is a little alcohol presence, but in no way does it come within a mile of the 10% on the label. It tastes less alcoholic than a BMC.

D: Poor. Too much spice/coriander/cinnamon character.

O: Based on style, compared to true Trappists, this is a poor beer with an off-putting spiced smell and taste which increases with warmth. Although it does not agree with my palate, some people like spiced beers: YMMV.

As I closed my review of Westmalle Dubbel with, "If this is in your glass, it is surely a special occasion, so drink it every day", I end this with saying, "This is a unworthy $7 replacement for $12 bottles of Trappist or St Bernardus; but let me drop the Reverend, and have the Pope". I'll stick to the real thing for $5 more per 750mL.

Or, "Let me have the Pope [St Berny Abt 12] and the other four Apostolic Patriarchs [Westmalle, Chimay, Rochefort, Orval]". (I've never had Westvleteren.)

I can not offer any specific recommendations on how to improve this brew, beyond DROP THE SPICING. I have heard rumors that Rochefort, etc. use spices in the production of their Quads: if they do, it is done with good balance, so that the beers do not taste spiced. The same can not be said here: the spice is loud and clear.

The "Nineteen" Tripel from Avery suffers the same spice problem, and was even more undrinkable. However, my friend, who is not a big beer drinker (although she has begun to like some craft beers, and I begin to find our tastes are opposed), absolutely loved both. I absolutely love Avery's Czar RIS. I've yet to see an American take on a Trappist which was worth drinking (although I've had only three, the aforementioned two and Brother Thelonious, which has an awesome label).

Serving type: bottle

02-03-2013 05:15:21 | More by Chrysostom

Phyl21ca

Quebec (Canada)

1.95/5  rDev -49.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Bottle: Poured (in a Chimay glass) a clear medium copper color ale with a small head with minimal retention. Aroma is quite hot with alcohol and very sweet cookie dough. Taste is also dominated by the sweet cookie dough and some strong alcohol traces. Definitely lacking complexity and the dry figs/prune character that I usually like to find in a quadruple. Too sweet for its own good, alcohol is way too apparent and body is too thin are all characteristics in beer that I usually don’t track down and that’s why I won’t be buying this again.

Serving type: bottle

05-15-2006 15:58:06 | More by Phyl21ca

drummermattie02

Texas

1.83/5  rDev -52.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured a somewhat clear amber brown, very little head; looks unlike most every quad I have had.

Smells like fruit punch, odd yeast aroma with what feels like some alcohol harshness.

Taste pretty much mimics the smell, weird fruit punch flavors and harshness. Carbonation is fine, but can't save the bad taste. This is a drainpour for me...

Note: I had two bottles in the cellar and the second was as bad as the first

Serving type: bottle

06-15-2011 15:50:59 | More by drummermattie02

mbunje

California

1.75/5  rDev -54.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

22oz bottle poured into a tulip

A - Rich copper color with almost no head

S - Like a tropical cocktail: Pineapple, Banana, and Coconut.

T - Even more of the same + a bit of funk and mushroom (if you can imagine)

MF - Didn't get this far

D - Not

I either got a bad bottle or this is not good.

Serving type: bottle

01-31-2009 08:00:42 | More by mbunje

ktrillionaire

Florida

1.75/5  rDev -54.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 1

On-tap at Ale and Witch, my favorite new bar.

A - The beer is brown, with a normal head and regular appearance for the style. Nothing at this point suggests anything amiss.

S - Uh oh.

T - Uh oh.

M - There is nothing too terrible about the feel, except that the actual beer is contacting my sensory faculties.

D - The smell and taste are astonishingly bad, so there is just no drinkability here. It is so bad that I do not have an inclination to commit not-critical elemental observations as to the experience. In the interest of summarizing my objection to this brew, however, I will pontificate on this matter of sheistiness. There is a nasty wet hay element in the malt and a horrendously foul mushy pea aroma from the hop 'contribution'; the essence of the beer is putrid.

Serving type: on-tap

02-09-2011 19:57:08 | More by ktrillionaire