Trappist Westvleteren 12 (XII) - Brouwerij Westvleteren (Sint-Sixtusabdij van Westvleteren)

ErraticToast

Maryland

2.71/5  rDev -41.6%
look: 4.25 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.25 | overall: 1.75

A- copper/brown
S- Fruits
T- I didn't get much taste what so ever from this beer due to the carbonation
M- This is the part that I think completely ruined this beer for me. This beer was so heavily carbonated that it felt like it swelled in my mouth and made it hard to get down. Due to this fact I actually contemplated drain pouring, but I sucked it up and finished it.

I will try another bottle I have I don't know if this one was off or what. Once I try the other I will update my review.

Serving type: bottle

03-03-2013 05:48:25 | More by ErraticToast

dpnelson1978

Minnesota

2.78/5  rDev -40.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

330ml bottle into glass snifter.
55°F

$$$

A: Very Cloudy brown body with a small tan head. Very light lacing and only a small ring of bubbly cover. Significant grit on the bottom.

S: Brown sugar and raisins jump out immediately with a slightly hot and slightly solvent character. No hop aroma.

T: Slight cardboard... may be a bit oxidized. Slightly sweet raisin and maple flavors. Spicy yeast character (not much of a surprised based on the appearance) and just enough hops to balance the sweet body. No lingering aftertaste.

M: Medium to light body and light carbonation. Brief carbonic bite that caught me off guard.

D: This particular bottle is unimpressive and not particularly enjoyable. There is definite potential here, but I'll need to track down another bottle to realize.

O: I think I bought a defective bottle. Very disappointing. I'm sure that this one can perform better, but I'll need to come back and revise when I get a chance to sample the beer again. Hopefully for Christmas.

Serving type: bottle

11-06-2010 04:24:55 | More by dpnelson1978

pepsican

Iowa

2.95/5  rDev -36.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Pours dark brown head. Lots going on in the aroma. Dark fruits, sherry, candy, quite a bit going on here. Flavor is very complex, fruit, funk, alcohol, caramel, chocolate. Finishes highly carbonated, but doesn't get in the way of the beer. I could still use less carbonation on this one. Light alcohol notes which melded well with the beer without taking away from the flavors. Overall I can see why people would enjoy this if big boozy belgians are your thing. I personally don't have the want to drink this more than once a year at most.

Serving type: bottle

07-16-2009 23:20:27 | More by pepsican

davexisxrabid

California

3.15/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Poured into my Chimay goblet. It literally changed color in front of my eyes! Left the yeast floating in the bottom of the bottle. Golden brown (started off a lot lighter), no head, no lacing. Seemed flat and uncarbonated.

Aroma of cinammon, brown sugar, pungent hop aroma, caramel.

Very sweet caramel and brown sugar flavor. Alcohol well hidden. Couldn't help but notice it had a flat cola type of taste; I honestly wasn't impressed.

Medium bodied but lacking carbonation. Flavor does remain on the palate, along with a slight hop bitterness.

Decent drinkability, but I would find it infinitely more interesting if it were carbonated. I have one more bottle in my fridge and I really hope it's carbonated; if it is and it tastes a helluva lot better then I'll repost an edit on my review.

Serving type: bottle

10-07-2009 15:47:31 | More by davexisxrabid

digitalbullet

California

3.23/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Appearance: dark mahogany and... OH no! not a trace of a head!!!
Smell: Sweet candi sugar. Good malt in the nose. Minimal hops. Slight vanilla twang.
Taste: NOOO! this is supposed to be the holy grail!! It is overwhelmingly sweet. It has some redeeming qualities however. It is malty with some complex vanilla flavors.
unfortunately it tastes somewhat like the sweet unfermented mash.
Mouthfeel: thin, thin, thin, Not a trace of carbonation.
Drinkability: If this is the holy grail its one and done for me. I hope that I have been duped and I bought one of those counterfeit beers. I have one more in the cellar (my closet). Will edit my review if this was just a bad bottle.

Serving type: bottle

11-26-2009 22:19:13 | More by digitalbullet

rickyleepotts

Arizona

3.23/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Here it is… the best beer in the world. Not only is this supposed to be the best beer in the world, it is also one of the hardest beers in the world to obtain. Outside of scheduling an appointment with the brewery in Belgium, this beer is nearly impossible to get. We lucked out and got ours on eBay. We grabbed two bottles for $50. Cheaper than a plane ticket, that’s for sure! I do want to see the brewery, regardless of how good the beer is.

We are writing this review on 12/12/12 for a reason. Today, in most cities and states, this beer was released for sale in limited edition (VERY limited edition) gift sets. The set came with six bottles and two glasses for $84.99. The bottles have commemorative labels on them, making it the first time they have ever put labels on this beer. You see, the monks that make this beer are not allowed to take a profit from it. But the brewery needs some TLC and to help raise money they decided to release the beer for the first and what may be the last time. We didn’t buy a gift pack, but a LOT of my beer drinking buddies online did.

Some folks say that this recipe is similar to the St. Bernardus Abt 12. That beer is easy to get, and I am actually not a huge fan of that one. It has a tolerable flavor toward room temperature, but has a weak aroma and basically no flavor. That, and the amount of hype behind Westvleteren… my expectations are REALLY high. I am excited to try it, and to write about it. I am even more excited that we were able to get a bottle without much trouble and without spending an arm and a leg. So today, as many wait in line to spend $84.99 on this beer… we toast you and your first experience with the best beer in the world. Bottoms up, people!

In the Glass: The beer is VERY carbonated. More so than I expected. It had a soda pop sort of head when pouring it into the glass. The head settled quickly leading to a deep dark brown, nearly black color in the glass. There is a very nice lace on this beer, as well. A thin head sits on top of the glass begging me to take a sip.

Nose: It smells like a quad. It is somewhat sweet, and has a subtle fruit aroma. I am getting almost fig on the nose. It is not ice cold, but is chilled. I wanted to make sure we gave it time to warm up as we reviewed it. I love the bottle, too. No labels… just says TRAPPIST on the neck. The bottles that were released today (in Arizona at Total Wine & More) came in a commemorative box and had labels on them. But this bottle, straight from the monks, doesn’t have a label. The cap says what it is… but that’s it! Oh, and I smelled the beer once again. Still sweet, and might be getting sweeter as it sits. OK… here we go. I am about to drink the “best” beer in the world.

Flavor: Yeah, that’s a quad. It has a nice mouthfeel (which I will get to) and slides across the tongue coating your palate with that same sweetness that I was getting on the nose. Maybe it’s just me, but this beer isn’t that impressive. I am not sure why people would rate this the “best” beer in the world. I like Belgian beers, but this is nothing special. If you would do a blind taste test next to the St. Bernardus Abt 12, I wouldn’t be able to tell a difference. It’s good, but this is not the best beer in the world. I have beers in my fridge that are better than this!

Mouthfeel: The mouthfeel is really nice. It is thick and does a great job of coating your tongue with flavors that lead to a nice aftertaste. On a second sip, I swirled it around in my mouth for a minute. It really opens up the flavors when doing that. It also heats the beer up just a tad, providing more sweetness than before.

Aftertaste: The aftertaste is nice. The sweetness hangs around and some malty flavors start to come forward… but they are here and gone again just as fast. If you have had a Belgian quad before, it is a very similar flavor. We had some quads in Belgium a few months ago… and they do taste better over there. But still. The aftertaste here is nice, and seeing as how I like sweets, that makes sense.

Serving type: bottle

12-13-2012 19:16:21 | More by rickyleepotts

Erzengel

Germany

3.28/5  rDev -29.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Best before 16.06.2013
Bought 1½ years ago directly at the abbey and stored since then in my cellar. Reviewed in direct comparison to the Rochefort 10.

The beer starts relatively bitter with hints of malt and dark fruit. Very sweet, nearly clammy, no sign of the 10,2%.
The aroma of dark dried plums get lost in the sugary sweetness, which makes the beer very drinkable, but also very monotone. It is in my opinion even boring in comparison to the blast of aroma of the Rochefort 10.

The aftertaste is dominated by the brown sugar and the hop-bitterness, which remind me of our German Oettinger Malz, only a bit richer. But nearly no sign of herbal flavours like the Rochefort 10.

--> If I'll be at the Belgium coast on vacation next year, I'll again buy a crate, but for me this beer is not worth any effort! Very disappointing and absolutely overrated!!

Serving type: bottle

12-25-2011 18:21:22 | More by Erzengel

SolomonGrundy

California

3.33/5  rDev -28.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Well, here it is: The World's Finest beer, as listed by both Beer Advocate and ratebeer...

Thanks to excellent trader MrKennedy for this - cheers mate!!

Pours a dark brown with amber hints at the edges. There is plenty of sediment as this was bottled March of 2009. I didn't pour it violently, and not really any head formed. I probably needed to pour a little more forcefully as I babied it too much. Lightly carbonated and little to no lacing...

Aromas are rich and complex. I get a lot of fig, raisin, some applesauce, A hint of brown sugar. The aroma profile is very robust, too. Maybe a hint of bubblegum, too. Overall a quite sweet and rich smelling beer.

Oh, yeah - the Basics: No idea on price and 10.2% ABV...

The beer lacks carbonation. That's too bad. It must simply be a case of storage. Very rich and malty upfront, and very sweet. I get a ton of caramel malt, brown sugar, and raisin flavors, just as was suggested by the aroma profile. Middle sees it round out somewhat and show off more of the yeast. I get a touch of bitterness from this and then it quickly morphs into the finish where the yeast character takes us to the finish line. I have to say that, even considering how hyped it was, and I certainly was expecting a lot, this is not nearly as good as even St. Bernardus ABT 12 or Pliny the Younger (I know, not a quad, but a better beer for sure). I'm not certain a better stored or fresher bottle would have made a huge difference. If the carbonation wasn't completely gone, I'm sure I'd like it more. As it is, the flavors don't burst and it is overall simply too sweet...bummer...

What I like most: The wonderful aroma profile.

What I like least: The complete lack of carbonation.

Verdict: Unfortunately, this doesn't pass even the second tier of quads I have had, and unfortunately it's not the Monks' fault as this is simply a question of poor storage...what a bummer.

Serving type: bottle

05-14-2011 22:29:49 | More by SolomonGrundy

Higravity

Michigan

3.4/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Opened this with a friend a fellow beer lover. 5 months before best of date. Cap off and into a chimay glass. Mmm tastes like hype. A brown body with red rimmed highlights and a decent white head of small bubbles. The smell is close to unappealing to me my friend really likes it but to me the alcohol pops out and there is a cooked raisin smell that sends this sideways. The taste is decent it has depth of flavor and the yeast adds some nice edges of phenol with lots of dried fruit and some caramel with even a touch of more mellow dark malt and then the alcohol comes through warming all it touches. Good mouthfeel full but not too dense. Something to have once in a while when you can find it but not my favorite, shrug, once again this is mostly hype.

Serving type: bottle

06-14-2007 12:08:29 | More by Higravity

DavidEddie

Illinois

3.43/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Thanks to Jasonjlewis for the trade.
06.12.09 printed on cap.
Dark cola appearance. Off-white head diminishes quickly. Smells of dark fruits, grape, red wine, and cotton candy. Very aromatic. Tastes sugary sweet, dark dried fruits, dark cherries, grapes, and a small bit of chocolate mixed in there. Kinda boozy, some alcohol warming as it goes down. Flavors linger in the finish. Mouth feel is mildly creamy at first then turns a bit syrupy. Good amount of carbonation.
Overall, the drinkability was not bad. ProbabIy won‘t be seeking it out again. Worth a try. Cheers!

Serving type: bottle

11-05-2007 01:56:22 | More by DavidEddie

Naerhu

Japan

3.48/5  rDev -25%
look: 5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Deep red amber color offwhite head, very stubborn lacing.
Aroma of raisins and rum.
Dried fruit with lively acidity. Old citrus rind, old nuts, bread. Vinous, but thick and just does not get there. Complex and not very enjoyable.
Alcohol apparent on the palate. Thicker as it warms.
Excellent in its bitterness, but there is just too much alcohol (read lack of balance) and way too thick (any beer thicker thank heavy whipping cream is too thick).

Serving type: bottle

02-13-2004 14:35:15 | More by Naerhu

NorCalYeti

California

3.48/5  rDev -25%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

color- brown

taste- bourbon, toast, chocolate

aroma- floral, chocolate

appearance- opaque, suspended sediment

i bought this bottle in 2003 so it had some time on it, i was let down with this beer...could have been a variety of reasons...maybe held onto it too long. i would give it another try.

Serving type: bottle

06-13-2009 20:18:18 | More by NorCalYeti

dedrinker

Kansas

3.53/5  rDev -23.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

From a well kept bottle of 4 years age. Poured a dark cola brown, and had little head or aroma. Slight aroma of dark fruit and maple, and flavor was similar. No oxidative notes, or any hint of staleness/ skunkiness etc. so I am sure this beer was well kept. I just don't get what the big deal is. this is my second try from a different batch a couple years after I had my first one, and the impression it has on me is consistent. Of course I did like the mouthfeel and finish that I couldn't quite put my finger on, but these were not very enchanting or beguiling - just vaguely pleasant. I suspect people just hype it up in their minds because it is so rare, and expensive. Highly coveted due to to its scarcity. Sorry if you are an offended devotee, but the emperor wears no clothes on this one. Someone said they are better fresh - I suppose I should try that before the final judgement.

Serving type: bottle

02-07-2007 21:38:51 | More by dedrinker

trxxpaxxs

New York

3.55/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

MASSIVE thanks to Rempo for this bottle...

Cap date: 29.10.05

A: Pours a murky brown and tan with a thin ring of pure white head around the edges of the glass. The foam ring lingers for as long as the beer is in the glass. There is no lacing as it drinks.

S: The nose is quite interesting. I get alcohol burn, berry notes, malt, and sugar. To be perfectly honest... it smells like some sort of cough syrup.

T: This beer tastes like moldy berries, soaked pumpernickel bread, rock candy, and booze.

M: Full bodied beer. It's sweet to start and cloying.

O: I know this beer has a huge claim to fame, but I'm just not a fan. I have had this many times in the past year, in a bunch of different vintages, and I remain firm on my ranking. I just don't like it. I don't understand all the hype. I can only trust my taste-buds. What I will say, is that I like this beer much better when it is fresh. This particular bottle has 10+ years on it.

Serving type: bottle

01-11-2013 22:53:50 | More by trxxpaxxs

StephenRich

Ontario (Canada)

3.58/5  rDev -22.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

It is widely and arguably acknowledged as the best beer on the planet. It has had more heritage and prestige poured into its creation, more exclusivity surrounding its availability, and more debate about its worth than potentially any beer on earth. It is the Westvleteren 12. The bottles come exactly as shown here; no label, and nearly no branding wahtsoever. A thick bevel around the shoulder of the bottle claims Trappisten Bier, and the cap indicates that it is indeed a Westvleteren 12, at 10.2% abv, and thats it.

It is important to understand that this is not the best beer in the world, it is merely the highest rated beer on the planet. There is a difference.

This posses an interesting predicament that I have come by so many times since engulfing myself in the world of beer; that is trying a beer that has been so outrageously hyped with an untainted preconception of it. Its nearly impossible to ignore the hype and approach it with a clean slate and unbiased palate. It's true, I wanted to love the Westy, but I tried my very hardest to conduct an unobstructed tasting of it before I would relax and simply enjoy it.

The Westy 12 was served to me at cellar temperature around 14C (57F) as a vintage Belgian Quadrupel should be. This allows all of the beer's flavors to stand forward without the cold numbing your palate or any sensations. The pour was easy and straight forward; nothing too elegant, thick or lush - rather uneventful actually. No head built until about halfway up the glass when a soft airy cream colored foam began to build. It showed a smattering of large bubbles scarcely scattered throughout the head eventually building to maybe an inch. It faded fast to a translucent film. The beer was dark and glowing. It was a rich burgundy red with deep ambers, golden browns, and pitches of black trapping any light that came near. It was not totally opaque though, and was crisply transparent. Very pretty, but not nearly as dense or as full as I had expected.

The nose is soft and aromatic in a classic Belgian style. Malted grain bring pale and caramelized flavors into your nose and plays with the range of sweet bread, biscuit, golden raisins, brown sugar, and nuts. Sweetness dominates the air with no hop aroma to be found. Leaning back in for more brings apple juice and cider to my senses and more raisin flavor. Touches of pear and cereal show up, then fresh baked sweet egg bread.

When going in for a sip I was madly excited and nervous. I wanted it to be good, but at the same time was trying not to expect anything. I let the first sip wash over my palate and swirl into ever inch of my mouth. My friends were starring at me in silence awaiting my approval or disapproval. I said nothing and went in for another taste before I made any premature conclusions.

My first impression was of the mouthfeel - it was not thin, but it was definitely not lush. It poured over me with a smooth and silky texture, but was relatively flat and uncarbonated. The years ageing in the bottle may have have stripped the beer of its effervescence faster than I would have assumed. Beyond the mouthfeel was a sweet and fruity wave of malts - big malts. Quick complexity caught my attention at the Westy showed me golden raisins, plums, pears, light golden sugar and grapes. It was richly fruity and a good balance of sweet pale and caramel malts.

No roast, bitter, or tart was apparent to me yet, and I started to wonder how this seemingly one sided beer had claimed the top spot among the beer world's best. The malt was soft but potent, digging deep into my taste buds bringing candy, and sweet molasses. It showed hints of nut and sweet cereal, but lacked the cocoa, earth, citrus or complex presence that I was expecting from a big Quad like this. Regardless of what I was expecting, a delicious soft sweet bread flavor was present. It was the unmistakable flavor of Challa - a sweet egg bread made for Shabot dinner. Soon then came based apples and a hint of tart cider. The sweet was wide and generous, and very delicious. But still, something was lacking; a spice, or herb, or balance... Something.

The finish mimicked everything about this beer so far; it was a short, plain finish with a sweet fruity sensation and little crackle.

Don't get me wrong, this was very delicious, but to me beer is graded by flavor, construction, and sensations. This beer just didn't peak where I had expected it to, and hence the problem with knowing the hype. I would still give the Westy very high grades, just not in the elite class. That being said, two of my friends satting at the table has each had a Westy 12 before, and they both claimed that this tasted different. So, will not make a conclusion on this beer until I have had another. And the hunt continues...

Serving type: bottle

09-14-2010 03:00:57 | More by StephenRich

nickfl

Florida

3.58/5  rDev -22.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A - pours with one and a half fingers of off white foam on top of a somewhat hazy, dark brown body. The head settles slowly and leaves nice lacing on the glass.

S - Spicy yeast with notes of molasses, brown sugar, and a bit of a boozy note. Kind of rum like really.

T - A bit of dark fruit up front which is quickly washed away by toasty brown malt. Lots of burnt sugar and toast in the middle with a spicy finish of clove, licorice, and some tea like herbal bitterness.

M - Medium body, moderately high carbonation, and a vey dry finish for such a strong beer.

D - Well, after years of wondering if I would ever have a chance to try this, here I am. You have to sort of expect that a beer with this much hype might fail, at least a little bit, to lie up to its reputation and as much as I hate to say it this is no exception. It is harshly toasty and kind of one dimensional, with a sickly sugary flavor that tastes like someone put too much sugar in their homebrew. It isn't as good as ABT 12 and its not even in the same building as Rochefort 10. I'm glad I only traded for one, I would guess this would fall off the top 100 rapidly if people could get it more easily.

Serving type: bottle

12-21-2012 02:55:34 | More by nickfl

aaronh

Pennsylvania

3.6/5  rDev -22.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Deep brown body topped by a thin head that fades quickly. Aroma is a lot of dark fruits, brown sugar and some nice malt sweetness. In fact, the aroma is the best part of this beer. Tatse is a bit flat. Malt and fruit flavors seem muted. Yeast autolysis is noticeable. Mouthfeel is OK, buit it seems a bit off. Like there's oil and water both in the same drink. Drinakibility is OK, but for the price I'd expect a lot more.

I've been waiting to review this beer for a while (2 years since my first notes). I've tried 3 bottles from 3 locations - I guess I just don't like this beer as much as a lot of other beers!

Serving type: bottle

01-04-2008 00:58:05 | More by aaronh

NJpadreFan

New Jersey

3.63/5  rDev -21.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Westvleteren 12

Huge thanks to Pimpp for this 1!

A- Hazy murky red with a nice creamy head. Foamy lacing on the glass.
S- Raisins, prunes, figs, nutmeg, and pepper.
T- Big strong and sweet dried fruits; raisin, figs, and prunes dominate touch of spices like pepper, nutmeg, and clove. Strong rock candy sugar with a kick of alc. in the end.
M- Fruity and sweet yet creamy mild on the tongue. A touch of boozy alc. in the aftertaste.

Overall- A good cold evening or desert beer!

Serving type: bottle

11-27-2007 21:33:13 | More by NJpadreFan

seanyfo

United Kingdom (Scotland)

3.63/5  rDev -21.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 5 | overall: 3.5

33cl bottle poured into Grimbergen chalice

Best Before date 04 December 2010

A- Dark mahogany body with a lot of sediment. 2 finger creamy head with average retention and minimal lacing.

S- Toasted almonds, a little dark fruit, some rose petal sweetness and a touch of wholemeal bread. Overall aromas are subtle

T- Malt forward again. Wholemeal bread qualities come through again supported by a sweet malt backbone. No real suggestion of alcohol heat, very smooth.

M- Creamy with medium carbonation, full body. Very smooth considering abv

D- Appearance wise not amazing, Flavour/aromas are subdued i guess with age. Mouthfeel retains a lovely creaminess and full mouthfeel. Overall, not a beer i would say has enhanced with age. Certainly no developing complexties. Eventhough not drinking this beer before, i cant help but feel its lost some former glory. Would love to try fresh!

Serving type: bottle

08-13-2011 23:40:35 | More by seanyfo

youradhere

Arkansas

3.65/5  rDev -21.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

I've been holding off on this for a while to prepare myself for the hype, so lets see how this "famous" beer holds up to the lumpen proletarian sentiment.

Pours a murky amber-brown with a rocky off-white head. Smells of wine, peppery yeast, wheat spice, kind of like hopped up Bitburger. Taste is subdued, sweet but not in your face; I get some cola, toffee, white wine, hop bitterness on the very back that is barely there, some clove spice, mellow flavor for sure. I like the mellowness of this compared to similar brews with in-your-face spice that makes me wish I was drinking something else. Carbonation is high and mouthfeel isn't thick at all; very drinkable as the sugars aren't cloying, the pepper-clove character seems to cleans that 'sugar overload' from the palate. Drinkability was marked down to the exclusivity of this, if I could find it down the street I would sit through a sixer of it and crawl on my lips to my bed. A decent beer indeed, but nothing I'd trade something special out of my cellar for. Verdict: the best of the Belgian styles that I have tried thus far, but certainly not a game changer for me.

Serving type: bottle

12-30-2010 02:52:25 | More by youradhere

liamt07

Ontario (Canada)

3.68/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Bottle as part of Westy Wednesday at Volo, served in a flute. Anticipation is huge with this one, peensteen and I were drooling waiting to sample this one. Been waiting to get my lips on this one for a while.

Poured a deep dark maroon, with some burgundy and deep blood red highlights at times. Great lace and creamy, dense head. Nose is of rich dark fruits, figs, rich plums, brown sugar and a vanilla. A sense of some subdued alcohol notes, rich and very pleasant overall. Taste is a cascade of raisin, plum and figs on the tongue, less brown sugar than the nose, some vanilla, light spicing. Long dry finish, and fairly dry throughout. Lingering mouthfeel with some warming alcohol. Begs for sip after sip, this was just fantastic. Best quad I've come across thusfar, absolutely delicious and worth every bit of hype. 5/45/5/5/45

Re-reviewed as this was shared among a variety of other quads as part of the QuadShowdown - amazingly, out of 13 quads, we ranked this the absolute lowest. 2010 vintage. Poured a dark brown, with a dark cream coloured head. Great retention and a bit of lace. Nose is really grape-y, sweet with a lot of Welch's grape juiciness. Some sugary notes and a bit of vanilla. Taste reflects the nose, more grape and Welch's, some balance but there's just a great amount of grape juice here. Some caramel, darker fruits and sugar, but not alot of complexity. Medium-medium heavy mouthfeel with a bit of creaminess, with some lingering saccharine and grape notes. Modest, but feels too young. 4/4/35/4/35

Serving type: bottle

02-27-2011 23:43:48 | More by liamt07

PDXHops

South Carolina

3.68/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 5 | overall: 4

Massive thanks to jsilva and Gatorbeernerd for these 2 bottles, which were shared and compared with Ryan011235.

# 1- Poured into a Chimay goblet. Bottled November 2008.
Murky brown with a ton of floaties, even with a pretty careful pour. Eventually this clears/settles into something somewhat resembling a strongly roasted tea. Modestly sized head, but pretty nice retention considering the age and the width of the glass opening. Nose is freshly baked bread smeared with apple butter, straw and yeast. Not nearly as fruity smelling as I’d guessed, and not as fruity tasting, either. Yeasty and bready with a pleasant, but light plummy taste. As warms, sorghum and toffee sweetness begin to emerge, along with a light grassiness. Brown sugar. Sourwood honey. The skim of foam is easily kept alive with a swirl now and then. Scattered speckly lace isn’t too bad at all considering how much I’ve swirled this stuff to study it. Without a doubt the highlight of this bottle is the incredibly soft and velvety mouthfeel, which leaves behind a lingering yeast/bread/honey combo in the finish.

# 2- Poured into a La Chouffe tulip. Bottled February 2009.
A shade darker, with active carbonation feeding a finger or so of beige foam. Comparatively tenacious retention. Perhaps a trick of the glassware, but the aromas are more lively with this one. The nose seems more fresh and yeasty, although not as bold as I'd like. A fruitier flavor, particularly with prune and raisin, but again, not as potent as expected. Light leafy and tobacco notes. Carbonation slightly more prickly, but in general the same seductive, slippery feel. This one seems to have a touch more warming alcohol, although neither is particularly boozy. Light cocoa and a sweetness that reminds me of straight liquid malt extract.

Overall impression: I was somewhat surprised about the differences between the batches bottled just 3 months apart, but even moreso by the subtlety of both bottles. I’d almost go so far as to call them tame, at least in the bold world of quads. Tasty, although somewhat underwhelming. Perhaps they go through something akin to the ‘awkward’ stage you often see in American barleywines. I’ll update my review if I get the chance to try fresher or older samples.

Serving type: bottle

12-29-2011 16:41:09 | More by PDXHops

deejaydan

Michigan

3.7/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Big thanks to numenor1 for the chance to try this one. Pours a beautiful amber deep copper color into my DFH chalace. At first, an impressive head that looked like a cooking pancake, with large bubbles rising to the surface. Then, the head vanishes. I pick up alchol and dates in the aroma. Interesting enough... but not shocking. Taste is that of rum mixed with ripe fruits, and then it dries out and leaves your palate clean. Almost too dry though to me. Mouthfeel is good, outside of the dry chalky taste that this leaves. It is drinkable given the ABV, but I've got to say, I don't think this is the "best beer in the world".

Serving type: bottle

09-27-2005 21:30:14 | More by deejaydan

JoeySchlitz

California

3.7/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4

Reviewed a little while ago, from my notes. Cap reads: 17.10.10

A: A thick 2" of head forms from a gentle pour into my Hop Monk snifter. It slowly diminished and melds with the copper mahagony beer below which is a lighter golden at the edges.

S: Initially there's a bit of delicious yeasty funkiness and as it warms, a much stronger Belgian yeast aroma dominates. A rich, concentrated banana bread, soaked in rum with some dark cherries in the background.

T: The taste unfortunately doesn't follow the smell as closely as hoped, and a more medicinal alcohol laden flavor is present with a slight bitter aftertaste. Fairly smooth overall and as it warms is pretty dry and crisp. The Belgian yeast breadiness is in the background but is overpowered by the medicinal flavors unfortunately.

M: Very good carbonation - gives the beer levity. Medium to thick viscosity which is perfect for the style.

O: For the highest rated beer on BA, I was very disappointed. It is a good quad but when I can go to the corner-store and buy a Rochefort 10 or a St. Bernardus Abt 12 (both of which I think are better than this) for much, much cheaper, it makes this obsolete. Very glad to have tried this, but this is a 'one and done' given the logistics of obtaining more.

Serving type: bottle

04-20-2010 05:24:46 | More by JoeySchlitz

Ryan011235

Ohio

3.7/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4

Two vintages shared by PDXHops on 11/18/11.

# 1- Poured into a Chimay goblet. Bottled November 2008.
Deep brown in the middle but brighter around the edges. Thin, wispy head over half the beer with a thick-ish ring of retention holing well. A few drippy spots of lace, too.

The aroma started out incredibly bready - freshly baked, lightly buttered and grainy. Something akin to sugar-drizzled pecans. As it warms, fruit tones emerge - baked apples, tart and still green. Suggestions of black raspberry jam. Biscuit, toffee and candy corn. Very pleasant.

The flavors are much more integrated than the aromas, balanced and blended. Lots of lightly toasted bread; nicely grainy. Toffee and the faintest caramel. I'm shocked at how fruit this isn't; then again, that's probably the reason I like it. Not spicy, either.

The feel is full, though it has watery edges. Carbonation is low. While this isn't the smoothest, the feel is very fluid regardless in spite of a graininess.

~~~

# 2- Poured into a La Chouffe tulip. Bottled February 2009.
The appearance is is a swamp water bogged wooden brown; dulled and dense. It's an ugly color. Sediment is suspended throughout. Poured a 1/3rd inch head that hold 1/4th inch retention - quite impressive in that regard. One thick drip of lace.

The nose finds tart and tangy fruit notes - over-ripe apple, especially. Pear, too. Undertones of baked and toasted bread with spicy yeast tones. Buttered biscuit even deeper down. Sugary pastry notes. A vapid, dry aroma catches my attention from time to time. Faint banana. Smooth butter toffee as it warms.

The flavor has an overarching sense of dirt and earth, which turns to dry bread notes - simultaneously fluffy and yeasty. Surprisingly, fruit esters take a back seat. Toasted sugars on the back end aren't terribly sweet - more rounded than anything.

The body is a bit on the plump side of medium. Any smoothness is aggravated by a modest carbonation up top and sandy, granular underpinnings. Warming. Spicy finish with alcohol residuals.

~~~

Overall impression: Neither vintage was what I was expecting; I figured this would be a far more potent beer. These two bottles don't even seem like the same beer, they're so different. I like #1 better but, in terms of style, it's for all the wrong reasons.

Serving type: bottle

05-26-2012 00:00:57 | More by Ryan011235