Samuel Adams White Ale - Boston Beer Company (Samuel Adams)

Ricochet

Ohio

2.55/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Poured very cloudy, amber orange, with a bid head that stayed with the beer for a long while. Little light penetrated. Very welcome beer appearence wise. There was nothing to compare the scent of this beer too. Blue Moon was about the only other wit beer I've had and this smelled three levels higher. Mostly like a sweet orange juice and sour grapefruit juice scent, appetizing. That's where my praise ends. Mouth was creamy, buttery but there was an unpleasant feel at the end of the swallow, almost like the milk at the end of a bowl of Trix cerial. Of course, the first taste was of orange juice, then it became mostly about black licorace. There was a hop flavor that made this mildly bitter. The buttery taste, is just like Blue Moon, so that must go with the style? However, the fruitiness of this beer, it seemed like liquid Trix and licorace.

So, absolutely not. While Blue Moon is a mild beverage that is good every once in a while, this was drinkable, but nothing I'd get again.

Serving type: bottle

03-05-2006 05:34:23 | More by Ricochet

MuddyFeet

North Carolina

2.58/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I miss the old Sam Adams Spring Ale. Well, not really, but it is better than this beer. I poured my first bottle and poured it out because there were lots of floaties. Thinking the glass was really dirty I poured it out and got a clean glass. Poured a second glass and still lots of floaties. The color was a sick orange, with a thin head that receded to the edges. The aroma is slightly sour, but with hops and citrus present. The flavor is sour. Tones of wheat are also there. Hops are there and iI get the impression they threw in some extra spices... cinnamon, some nutmeg. The mouthfeel is very metallic and the carbonation feels like it is burning. Somehow, this beer is not undrinkable, but I have no intentions of buying any more after this six-pack.

Serving type: bottle

04-16-2005 19:49:24 | More by MuddyFeet

nortmand

Virginia

2.58/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Pours orange with a fluffy white head.

Spicy nose with a strong yeast background, key lime, coriander, orange peel.

Wow! Incredibly boring flavor not at all reminiscent of a witbier. Basicallly a spiced american hefe. Uninspiring yeast flavors with some ending coriander notes. Not bad for an American wheat, but pretty poor for a witbier. No crazy banana clove esters, obviously not fermented with a Belgian strain.

Medium bodied and nicely carbonated, a very drinkable beer, but not a witbier as far as I'm concerned.

Serving type: bottle

02-15-2006 18:31:42 | More by nortmand

ryrust5301

Louisiana

2.58/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

2008 version poured from a 12oz. bottle.

Appearance - Pours a copper color with a 1 inch white head. Lite white lacing sticks to the sides of the glass

Smell - Little corriander, lemon, and a few other fruity smells are present, though I can't put my finger on them. Faint orange maybe?

Taste & Mouthfeel - Light and smooth. You can taste some lemon, and some wheat as well. A small spice in the middle, but doesn't have anywhere close to the taste of say a hoegaarden. A little dry and citrusy in the finish

As far as a white ale goes its not my cup of tea. I would even consider it a poor mans Blue Moon, and Blue Moon ain't exactly the best around.

Serving type: bottle

02-26-2008 05:29:32 | More by ryrust5301

TheycallmeTim

New York

2.58/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Had on-tap at a brewery tour at their Jamaica Plan location in a 7 oz. sample glass.

A--hard to judge because of the small glass, but a decent one finger fluffy white head popped up and lasted as skim throughout the tasting. Body is foggy rather than cloudy or hazy and more orange than yellow.

S--Lots of diacetyls--this smells like Pop-Secret. In the back I get spices more than citrus, namely peppery notes and a tiny whiff of coriander and fennel. A thick snotty mass of undifferentiated aromas, though, for the most part, masked by overwhelming buttery popcorn.

T--More snack bar at the movie theater flavors, as well as some sturdy malt which stands out as weird for the style. Not terribly refreshing, and so complex with its spicing as to be impenetrable. Kind of sloppy. A little lemon creeps through toward the front/middle of the profile, which brightens it a bit but nowhere near what the style requires.

M&D--Way too chewy and thick for the style, and if it were spring or summer I couldn't manage the humidity with one of these. A miss from this brewery in my opinion.

Serving type: on-tap

02-11-2009 19:33:31 | More by TheycallmeTim

epicness

New York

2.6/5  rDev -25.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

A(ppearance) - Hazy golden yellow color. Darker in comparison to other Witbiers.
Not much head nor lacing involved in this brew.
S(mell) - Spicy Hops. Not a real strong aroma.
T(aste) - Crisp Orange taste. Spicy tangy taste, stays true to the smell thats for sure. In all honesty, I think it's a bit too spicy and it floods out the other tastes.
M(outhfeel) - Very well carbonated. Could feel the bubbles all the way down. Almost has a borderline watery taste to it.
D(rinkability) - It's a pretty drinkable beer.. I'm just not crazy about it. It doesn't leave me hurrying for another sip.

Serving type: bottle

04-04-2009 21:39:58 | More by epicness

chicagoabbot

Illinois

2.6/5  rDev -25.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12 oz into a snifter...Samuel Adams produces a fine lager and a fine pilsener, but once they get into ales, it seems like it is all fails. This white ale is no exception. The spicing is flat, the malt is kind of boring and there's not too much to it except a decent look. The yeast is wrong too. Was hard to finish the glass and I considered pouring it out but don't like to waste beer so finished it. Came as part of a sampler pack. Avoid this one, there are so many better white ales out there.

Serving type: bottle

03-07-2011 07:43:42 | More by chicagoabbot

Hunter

Arizona

2.63/5  rDev -24.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: Thick, pillowy, dense head on the pour, sitting atop a hazy golden brew with substantial carbonation. Some lacing effects. Not bad.

Aroma: Fresh wheat malt in the nose, supported by esters and a grassy hoppiness. Smells crisp.

Taste: Paper-thin mouthfeel accomodates an equally thin flavor profile. Citrusy, grassy notes compliment the wheat malt, but everything is insubstantial. This is a beer for mass consumption, and it shows in the fact that it takes no chances daring to show the drinker something new. Aftertaste is a bit soapy, but otherwise finishes with a whimper.

Drinkability: Certainly drinkable, and better than most domestic macro offerings out there, but why would the experienced beer drinker waste time with this when there's better representatives of the style out there? Use this to break your Bud Light swilling friends in gently to the world of different beer styles, but move on quickly.

Serving type: bottle

02-13-2005 22:36:36 | More by Hunter

micahgoldfus

New Jersey

2.63/5  rDev -24.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Light in color, an off-yellow transparent look to it. Very faint smell, wishit was stronger, but I could still sniff the citrus. Weiss-style taste, with various fruit flavors, including orange and some banana. Also a wheat taste to it. Overall, not too impressed with what I considered a weak taste, especially comparing this beer to other weiss beers. Drinkable, but still a bit too watery.

Serving type: on-tap

04-16-2007 15:49:53 | More by micahgoldfus

thirtysixbelow

Virginia

2.63/5  rDev -24.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

a - great looking hazy yellow/gold with a huge 3 finger head.

s - not much, a little citrus and hops i guess.

t - very light on flavor. A little citrus/sourness and very little hops to finish.

m - well carbonated, probably the most enjoyable part of the beer, other than the looks.

d - if it were not for the cherry wheat or cranberry lambic (maybe i have a thing against fruit beer) this would be the worst sam adams. It's not bad overall, but for a sam adams I expected more from the flavor category.

Serving type: bottle

02-03-2008 04:52:21 | More by thirtysixbelow

TagoMago

New York

2.68/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This is a very generic tasting Belgian Witber, very similar to Blue Moon. It's best to skip this one, though it is a decent beer nevertheless - there are just much better ones out there.

The beer pours a cloudy, yellowish-orange color.

The aroma is of a faint yeasty aroma with some spicy overtones of corriander.

The flavor is mildly spicy with overtones of corriander and orange rind. The body is very smooth and creamy, with moderate carbonation.

This is a very average Witber at best - not recommended.

Serving type: on-tap

06-26-2004 07:16:20 | More by TagoMago

n0315

Michigan

2.68/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a light golden color with about no head retention.

Smells of cloves and a hint of alcohol

Week taste. The best is a bit of spices that make it seem likes it a winter beer.

A decent beer, but not something I would buy if others were available.

Serving type: bottle

12-11-2010 03:27:24 | More by n0315

Lauthaha

Michigan

2.68/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 12 ounce bottle into a half-liter beer glass.

Appearance: True golden color, slightly cloudy in the glass. Medium-heavy carbonation is visible. Bubbles rise furiously towards the top of the glass where a foamy two-finger head recedes slowly. It dimples down around the edges of the glass and in the middle.

Smell: Very subtle, almost nothing there, according to my nose. Slight earthy/mushroom tone is noticeable within the maltiness. Maybe just a touch of citrus. A lot going on, but it's not all that great.

Taste/Mouthfeel: A lot of fusel alcohol in the taste. Light maltiness. More citrus here than in the nose. Still not very appealing. Goes down smooth.

Drinkability: You can drink it...but it's not a very good example of a Witbier. Too heavy, unnecessarily bitter.

Serving type: bottle

12-12-2010 01:41:14 | More by Lauthaha

wschmit

Illinois

2.68/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Bottle into a mini pint glass.

A: Clear-ish, Hoegaarden-like golden body with medium effervescence below a white, medium head. The thin bubbling of the head dissipated into a thin ring about the glass, leaving fine sheets of webbing as I drank.

S: Adjunct-y, with a corn twinge and little hopping. Not good, sadly.

T: Much better than the nose, but still only okay. A bit of tart fruitiness, very pleasant, but otherwise a bit of residual cloying feeling. Not much bittering at all.

M: A good carbonation helps this go down. Mid-range, and inoffensive to the tongue, it feels pretty good.

D: Low. This is not very good at all. However, I could see its appeal to a mostly BMC crowd, which might excuse its inclusion in an otherwise great winter sampler pack.

Serving type: bottle

01-17-2011 06:49:02 | More by wschmit

twelvsies

Maine

2.7/5  rDev -22.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This isn't one of their best beers. I've recently been reiminded that Sam Adams in general is a very good brewery, despite being fairly mainstream. I've been trying or re-trying their beers and some I'd definately drink on a regular basis. This one is lacking though. Appears a very cloudy gold orange color with a head that shinks pretty face. Smell is odd, maybe even a bit metallic, but there's a strong wheat smell there, and a weird chemical scent. Taste is much the same. For some reason this reminds me of beer from a can, with a taste of tin and some strange chemical quiality to it. The bready yeasty wheat is there but it's not interesting enough to get the off tastes out of my mind. If you're gonna get Sam Adams go for something else, this really isn't a good example of the style or a good example of what the brewery is capable of producing.

Serving type: bottle

04-14-2005 21:24:25 | More by twelvsies

NiceGuyMike

New Jersey

2.7/5  rDev -22.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Looks: not much of a look. More of a murky pale ale than a white beer. Smells of sulfer (think burnt matchhead). Taste isn't bad hard to put my finger on it. Not what I expect from a white. Sour after taste which lingers like an annoying mother-in-law. Low alcohol makes this beer easy to drink, but tastes doesn't keep me coming back.

Overall I'd will drink it again if given to me and nothing better is available.

Serving type: bottle

04-23-2005 22:10:00 | More by NiceGuyMike

kimcgolf

Georgia

2.7/5  rDev -22.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

This beer was really disappointing. Sam Adams advertises this as a spicy wheat beer, obviously trying to copy Hoegaarden and other classics. The only problem is that they apparently forgot to actually include any of these ingredients.

The pour was hazy golden orange, with off-white head, as expected. However, I could not detect any dough, wheat, spice or any other aroma besides that of stale, wet cardboard. Taste, unfortunately, was the same...no real flavor, and the finish was dry and stale.

Leave the Witbier to the Belgians Mr. Koch.

Serving type: bottle

02-13-2007 02:09:02 | More by kimcgolf

whiplash3825

Georgia

2.7/5  rDev -22.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Hmmm... my first non-German wheat beer, and I'm not impressed. In a weitzen glass, the three finger head quickly dissipated to a thin lace. Smell was a crisp citrus; light but pleasant. Taste was about the same, very mild and with uncomplex flavors. Finishes nice. Not bad, but definitely not what I'm used to with wheat beers

Serving type: bottle

05-05-2007 23:35:34 | More by whiplash3825

beertaster13

Washington

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

The Samuel Adams White Ale pours a hazy orange color with sediment dropping falling in to the glass at end of pour (normal) the head is creamy and falls to a respectable froth. Smell is dull and uninviting, hints of hops and grains but nothing really there. The taste is what you would expect after the smell, rather dull with spice flavors with no pizazz in the hops. Feels rather light, drinkable for one but did not want to go back.

Serving type: bottle

05-30-2004 23:06:14 | More by beertaster13

icetraxx

Michigan

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

This is a live review:

A- The beer pours almost clear and is a strikingly strong gold hue for this style. The beer is topped with a big head that slowly dissipates into a foamy cap halfway through the beer. Head retention is better than most beers of this style. There is some noticeable lacing that is usually absent with this style. While the appearance is nice, it looses points for not adhering to the style in my book.

S- Musty malted wheat with a nose of an old spice cabinet. The bottle claims to have 10 spices, there are definitely enough here to confuse the nose. Overall not a very good smell.

T- Tastes like it smells to a degree. Slightly spicy and acidic. With so many spices in this beer, I expected more complexity. The flavor is a mediocre wheat beer that has been spiced with a bunch of flavorless mediocre spices, and it is hard to taste individual flavors in the beer. The yeasty characteristic with this style is completely missing with this beer, which is very disappointing. The finish is very uninteresting. I detect a hint of cherry in the aftertaste, which is actually very unpleasant and totally unexpected.

M- The carbonation gives the beer good body, but the beer lacks the yeast that gives many wheat beers that unique mouth feel. The mouth feel is one of the better aspects of this beer and that isn't saying much.

D- This is an easy to drink beer, but I think I could only drink one before my palate would demand something more interesting. Overall it is not as refreshing as I thought it would be.

Overall- Maybe my expectations were too high for this beer, because I find I was extremely disappointed. I have tried this beer twice and I find the wheat beer basis for this beer is mediocre at best, and the 10 spices are completely forgettable and musky. The beer does NOT adhere to the Witbier style and lacks the complexities that come with more suspended yeast, better malted wheat, and more interesting spices. I found this beer to be extremely over hyped. For the same price you can get Hoegaarden, which is a superior beer in every possible way and the standard for the style. I would also prefer Blue Moon to this beer as Blue Moon is more refreshing, has a cleaner wheat beer base (even if it contains more adjunct filler), and a better spice profile.

Serving type: bottle

03-18-2009 00:46:30 | More by icetraxx

DijonKetchup

California

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

It was really hot out today, and I saw this on sale for $6.99 / sixer, so I was really looking forward to trying this. I have been let down in the past with SA, but let's give this one a try.

Poured an odd dark yellow-orange, almost like the first pee in the morning. Foam dissipated fairly quickly which is odd for such a beer. Smells light citrusy, light malty, but not nearly enough aromas. Tastes very macro-ish. Label asks me "how many spices can you taste?" - well, not many. I'm getting a bit of bitterness on the back of the tongue which is the only flavor I'm getting. MAybe it's me. This tastes like a bad weissen beer. I would prefer a Blue Moon any day compared to this.

I'm stopping here. I am completely let down with this. I had true high hopes for this beer, as it works great in our hot weather here in CA. And at $6.99/sixer, I might have gone back and bought more, but this is close to a drain pour. Now what to do with the other five bottles...

Serving type: bottle

04-20-2009 23:57:01 | More by DijonKetchup

bbold

Illinois

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured into a pint glass. One finger of head that quickly disapated.

Appearance is moderately cloudy with a golden yellowish orange color. Carbonation is mild, rising from the bottom.

Smell is extremely faint, and therefore I only pick up a slight citrus aroma. As I drank it some wheat came through.

Taste is definitely on the bland side of the spectrum. Extremely diluted lemon peel flavor.

Mouthfeels is ok. Just kind of slides on down with nothing to brag about.

In terms of drinkability, there is absolutely no flavor to savor, so I wound up downing it like it like a college kid.

Samuel Adams White Ale thoroughly unimpressed me. Way to bland for my taste. Would not recommend or purchase again.

Serving type: bottle

02-11-2011 23:03:28 | More by bbold

negroobserver

New York

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Samuel Adams - While Ale
03/19/2011

C: 4.0 - Golden color with light hazy quality, similar to a blonde ale. It has pinkish hues which give it a pleasant color and attractiveness. Soft pour produces about a quarter inch of head, which dissipates quickly.

S: 3.0 - Lemon or Citrus. Light malts.

T: 2.5 - Flat and tasteless in the front. The middle produces a mild citrus flavor which lingers for about a second or two. The finish is also mostly flat but provides a very faint bitterness.

M: 3.0 - The beer has substantial carbonation which combined with the alcohold produces a strong tingling sensation in the mouth. It's not bad, but I am not a fan of this aspect of the beer.

D: 2.5 - Beer is mostly tasteless. I can think of at least a half dozen beers in this style that are better.

OVERALL GRADE: C-/C

Serving type: bottle

03-20-2011 23:31:07 | More by negroobserver

benclimbs

California

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

pours nice and blonde/opaque with a decent head and a bit of lacing

smell is quite typical to bad for a belgian wit - spice and sweet fruit, smells like blue moon.

tastes very fruity and sticky sweet...a slight bit of spice - just ok.

overall this is a barely less than average wit - i guess i'd compare it to blue moon or something to that affect...nothing special

Serving type: bottle

03-31-2011 04:01:28 | More by benclimbs

kangarooAdam59

Maine

2.73/5  rDev -22%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

At Appleby's, but the waitress thought it was their "winter ale:"

In a pint glass:

A: foggy, slightly golden colored body with a thin white head that only lasted about a couple seconds

S: some hops, lemon, orange, tangerine combined in an earthy sort of way

T: bittersweet through citrus and hops

M: medium, slightly sessionable, citrusy aftertaste, sticky finish

O: good for a witbier, uh . . . only decent to me, unsure if I'd come back to ....?

Serving type: on-tap

01-22-2012 01:27:11 | More by kangarooAdam59