Hop Trip (Bond Street Series) - Deschutes Brewery

dazdave

Ohio

2.43/5  rDev -41.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

So i'm reviewing this beer after looking over other reviews. They seem outrageously high. Poured from a bottle with the date good by 4 months after. Not sure if this beer needs to be insanely fresh. Perhaps it does.
Anyways yes the appearance looks lovely like i'd expect of a pale ale. One of my favorites is stone pale ale. It has a cloudyish copper color. Very little head. Very staid.
The smell gets some waffs of fruity orange and hints of grapefruit. Pleasant.
The taste is where i have some issues. I keep getting a very tea like astringency. From brewing i've found that seems to come from too high of a boil. Basically what i feel i'm drinking is a slightly sweet tea. Not what i'd expect from a well respected brewery.
Drinkability is fairly low since i'm not a fan. Hate to be the downer here but i really don't get it.

Serving type: bottle

04-15-2012 04:15:07 | More by dazdave

BucannonXC5

California

2.55/5  rDev -39%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a draft into a pint glass at San Diego Brewing Company at San Diego, Calif. Color was red amber. Maybe an inch of head. Light lacing on top. White film on the sides that was spider-webbed down.

Was non-descript of a smell. I had to work for it, but once I found it I found some butter and slight puke.

Tasted buttery with a slight bitter aftertaste. Fairly smooth.

Medium body. Average carbonation. Butter, creamy.

I really didn’t like this beer. Just way too buttery and creamy for me. Looking at the other reviews, maybe I got a wrong beer? Either way, this one was not good.

Serving type: on-tap

10-15-2011 08:00:49 | More by BucannonXC5

Vaylaus

Utah

2.7/5  rDev -35.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Best by date of 01/2010.

A: A nice pale orange. Another pretty pale so far.

S: Very little here. Muted hops, you really have to search for them.

T: Smooth, with the malt and hops combining to leave little to no impression. Not what I was expecting with a fresh hop pale ale.

M: Nice, smooth. Correctly carbonated and about the right weight for the style.

D: High, if this was your local brewers pale ale on special. As a special release, somewhat disappointing. Either way, goes down smooth and easy, until you consult your wallet.

The rumors of early hop harvest may be true, as this beer did not live up to its reputation. Hoping it's just an off year. May revisit next year after confirmation this year was a fluke.

Serving type: bottle

11-16-2009 00:23:58 | More by Vaylaus

SubpoenaDeuces

California

2.7/5  rDev -35.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Hop Trip Pale Ale 5.5% Deschutes

A: Deep orange hues, slight carbonation with very little head and no mid carbonation

S: some mild maltiness with sweetness, the floral hops are there, but its like they have been subjected to domestic abuse, they remain quiet and obsequious, falling in line, seen but not heard.

T: very thin mouthfeel, not malty, no real hop bite, just thin, remniscient of a pale ale with a bit of pine in the first taste that doesnt linger. This seems like a bit of a disappointing crossover, like when Robin Williams plays a menacing character. It isnt bad, but you expect this pseudo IPA to getting hit in the nuts and doing impersonations, not imitating an aggressively hoppy beer. The bottle has a truck full of hops on it, did they use that truck of hops outside the kettle as aromatics? I am not sure. Deschutes is usually on point and this isn't bad, per se, but it is a bit misleading. You anticipate a pinecone wafting through the house, choking out the Febreeze with some hop expedition. The hop expedition is a mild one two affair with a bit of pine a dash of citrus and the rest feeling like some English 2 row just phoning it in.

D: This is an exceptionally drinkable beer, through and through, very crips finish and the hybrid feel earns it high marks in this regard, however, the fact that it is 1) seasonal and 2) not comptetively price almost precludes this use. You will never find yourself cracking open a bomber of this casually while youre out gardening, why are you even gardening in the first place while drinking IPAs. Notwithstanding, the drinkability is not unoutstanding. The beer is a bit misguided in purpose but means well, like mormons in Strip Clubs.

M: Again, this is a mixed bag, if you like a malty IPA, look elsewhere, this has more of a crisp, grapefruit lager mouthfeel to it. Some bitterness and a finish that flees at the first sign of conflict. It doesnt stick around beyond the swallow and, that in part is what earned it stripes in above category, so I guess it is a bit above average in this regard. No one is going to fall out of their chair in amazement. It is a well done hybrid that is the jack of a few trades, master of none.

Narrative: Clint knew that quad-majoring was a stupid idea from its inception. Sure, San Diego State didn't offer a BioPoliticalHerbalosophy Major, so he tailored his own. But the strains of keeping his phylum straight with his Kantian dialectic, just seemed to earn him solid C's. It didn't help with the ladies either that he mixed up the Concordat of Worms with grassroots activism and his peet moss lectures. It was a jumbled mess without direction, his life seemed to be. He would be entertaining for a few moments, that old Clint, tell ya about Keynsian economics and make it relative to paleoethnobotany to boot, but, who really wants to talk to Clint? He is tiresome and wears forgettable solid shirts. Even his presence feels like a Spin Doctors song that you entirely forget the moment the tune starts to fade. Wait, who were we talking about again?

Serving type: bottle

05-12-2011 07:30:39 | More by SubpoenaDeuces

magnod

Hawaii

2.9/5  rDev -30.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Compared to last year's version, this Hop Trip was disappointing. For a fresh hopped beer it lacked a lot of the seasonal harvest characteristics that it once had. I've heard that there was a conflict with the timing of the hops harvest and they may have been collected a little earlier then normal.

A: Nice coloration with some light lacing. 22oz bottle poured into a pint glass.

S: Lacking the floral aroma I'd except from this type of beer. There are some notes of the fresh hops, but not very significant.

T: A layer of sweet malty backbone, with unexciting hops flavors at the end. There is a slight oily texture from the fresh hops, but overall, kind of a generic beer without the explosive hops characteristics that it once had in previous versions.

M: Medium to light body and feel on the tongue and ends with a slightly oily feel.

D: Ok- nothing special which is disappointing since the last year's version was very enjoyable. I'd drink it, but wouldn't go out of my way to get it.

Serving type: bottle

11-11-2009 22:28:17 | More by magnod

Vancer

Illinois

3.05/5  rDev -27%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Time for a trip, jumping on the Deschutes bus for a roady. And looky here, what a nice start – hazy amber orange with a ivory pillow-top.

Tons of citrus and pine in the aroma, and umm, a subtle soapy hint. It’s in the quaff too, darn it. Still, the floral kicks in and covers the soap by mid-bomber. Sharp, crisp and dry. I like it, just not overwhelmed or even impressed by it. Would not work hard to get another bomber of it.

Serving type: bottle

11-19-2006 21:31:40 | More by Vancer

KCHopHead

Missouri

3.1/5  rDev -25.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

A - Poured a dark orange, almost amber color with a decent 1-1/2 finger head that stuck. Lacing was thin, but expected with a small malt body.

S - I expected a hop bomb smell yet a taste of a crisp APA, but did not get this. I got a little bit of fruit but nothing that had a wow factor.

T - I was surprised by the lack of freshness. The bottle says drink by Jan 2010, but I thought I got this pretty close to after it was bottled. That burn that goes up the back of your nose when you have a skunk in your beer was there. I expected more grapefruit from hopfield to bottle to mouth (even with an APA). I really hate to rip on a Deschutes brew, but I don't think it traveled well. I will say it was nice and crisp. Everything is in place except for a fairly fresh beer that had the skunk.

M/D - Nice and crisp. Very good drinkability as expected from a 5.5% abv APA. I will try this again and edit my results if they change.

edit: I've been getting beermails... I would love to bump up my taste rating if I am able to get anymore of this.

Serving type: bottle

10-06-2009 13:43:15 | More by KCHopHead

troutmask96

Washington

3.15/5  rDev -24.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a gorgeous deep mahogany with a very big head. Smell is of hops - yep, there are hops in this brew. Taste...well, I'm disappointed. There's just no bottom end to this brew. The taste disappears as soon as it hits the back of my tongue. Easy to drink, but I'll continue my pursuit of world-class hoppy beers elsewhere...

Serving type: bottle

10-30-2005 04:33:47 | More by troutmask96

drabmuh

Maryland

3.2/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Best by 01/19/11...what's today's date? I guess that why you're an extra. Let's see how this holds up a few months past it's due date.

Beer is reddish and clear with an offwhite head of small bubbles, lacing, moderate carbonation. Nice lacing.

Aroma is earthy and piny with a strong malt presence.

It tastes a bit off, I'm assuming, it does have that old hoppiness to it, oh well. The beer is medium in body and still pretty bitter. Nice finish in general, quite malty throughout though. Sweetness up front, malty body in the middle. Not my favorite. I'd love to try this again but really fresh.

Serving type: bottle

05-24-2011 02:16:46 | More by drabmuh

FtownThrowDown

Ohio

3.25/5  rDev -22.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Pours a dark amber in color with a nice quarter inch head. Smell is mostly malts with some piney hops to go with it. Taste is much the same with a nice hop kick in finish. This strikes me more as a subtly hopped red than anything else. Different, but I like it. Decent mouthfeel. I still think there are not enough hops to balance all the malt that was used. Good beer overall.

Serving type: bottle

02-28-2009 18:57:23 | More by FtownThrowDown

BevMoAndrew

California

3.3/5  rDev -21.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Poured into a Bruery Tulip glass at about 45 degrees.

Pours a golden honey color in the glass with a creamy, white froth. The nose of this particular beer is subtle with light citrus, pine, spices, and wet leaf with a caramel, honey, grainy malt. The mouthfeel of this beer is fantastic & the 5.5%abv allows for this to be a very drinkable beer. Overall, this beer is the definition of balance, but I was really looking for something more....just didn't happen.

Serving type: bottle

11-09-2009 01:39:10 | More by BevMoAndrew

zeledonia

Minnesota

3.43/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Bottle says best by 25 December 2012. Tasted 21 October 2012, reviewed from notes.

Pours a medium-dark amber, clear, with a touch of rust. 1.5 fingers of cream-colored head, thick and dense. Good retention and lacing.

Smell is all juicy hops. Heavy on the pine, backed by a bit of citrus. Malt base is fine, and basically undetectable, as I think it should be in a beer that showcases hops. Good - could be better with more dimensionality. But very solid for an almost-session beer.

Taste is pretty straightforward, and is in the vein of IPAs that I tend not to like. Bitter, and mostly a one-trick pony. Subdued malts, which let the potent bitterness rip through. Mostly resiny, but occasionally drifts into unpleasant aspirin-like bitter, especially in the finish. Meh. It's got flavor, I'll give it that, but I'm not loving it.

Medium-light body, tingly carbonation. Lasting bitter finish. I wish it weren't quite so lasting, actually.

Decent beer. Smell is the definite highlight. Wish the flavor had more to it than the bitter.

Serving type: bottle

11-17-2012 04:11:11 | More by zeledonia

mentor

Colorado

3.45/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 5 | overall: 3

Pours a one finger dark tan head over a cloudy copper liquid. Smells citrusy hops during the pour. To the nose, it's butterscotch, caramel, apricot, grapefruit pith, and some orange oil. Tastes malty, but dry. Like oodles of munich malt was used. Flat grassy, but I think not from the hops, I think it's the malt. Woody dry hops with a hint of oranges. No grapefruit or pith to be detected and hop bitter is mild at best. Huh, that description matches how Goldings taste to me and I don't see how Goldings would be used as the hops in an APA. No fruity esters. Instead I taste pot-roast beef, deep and flat, late in the taste. I'm not impressed. Nice body for an APA, it's md-thick with a chewy quality. Moderate carbonation that forms bubbles on the flat of the tongue, but that do not detract from the flavors. Towards the end, the hops do become apparent as a mild, but persistant chalky dryiness. Overall, I'm not fond of the taste of this beer, but the other qualities are quite good.

Serving type: bottle

11-28-2005 07:35:48 | More by mentor

SBPCGuru

Colorado

3.45/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Purchased this bomber and finishing a Great Divide Fresh Hop Ale. I was surpisingly disappointed. It poured a light caramel color with moderate carbonation. Nice mouthfeel and light lacing down my glass. Smell was decently citrusy and hoppy, but nothing like what I was expecting. The taste reminded me of a average pale ale with slight bitterness. I hate to say it, but I was let down by this beer. I was expecting a lot more from it.

Serving type: bottle

11-17-2006 21:43:48 | More by SBPCGuru

MinnesotaRIS

Minnesota

3.45/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

From a bottle. Drinking after the 'best before' date because the packie had a few left over. Pours with medium body. Thick head that collapses slowly. Top of the head is glossy from oil resins. Leaves quite a fair amt of lace. Dark amber, mildly cloudy. Some browns. This would be a rather dark pale ale, even more amber for an IPA.

Not a ton of nose to this beer which is disappointing. I thought it would be blow your hair back hops but it is more earthy with floral. Malt is there but not greatly balanced. Good mouthfeel and very drinkable. Not a lot of depth of malt character.

I expected a lot more out of this beer. Perhaps it is beyond the best by date but the one I had earlier this year wasn't exactly as much of a wet hop craft as I thought it was going to be. I will try it again next year fresh and most likely will amend.

Serving type: bottle

02-14-2011 03:13:22 | More by MinnesotaRIS

david18

New York

3.48/5  rDev -16.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

The term Hop Trip may be misleading and I for one initially thought this was an IPA. As an APA it is pretty good but not my favorite pale ale either. I love some of the beers from this brewery (The Abyss!!!) but some others can be a little disappointing. This is a little in between. I don't think i'll get it again.

Color is a deep orange, carbonation is good, smell and taste unremarkable.

Serving type: bottle

12-25-2009 02:57:38 | More by david18

chugalug06

Colorado

3.48/5  rDev -16.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Moderate, small, white head flows atop a blood red brew. Lacing is local and minute. Clarity is also in question.

A very plain, basic, light hopped iced tea aromatic brew. Nothing fancy or special.

Flavor is smooth pine, light caramel, not over bearing toffee, not bitter hopped, nor sweet and sugary. Carbonation is medium and not remarkable. Brew is medium viscosity and drinks like it smells.

Eh, this brew is slightly above average. Nothing stands out. It would be nice to drink from a can, but not remarkable from a glass. I really wanted more from Deschutes.

Serving type: bottle

11-05-2012 03:05:05 | More by chugalug06

JBogan

Nevada

3.5/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Medium honey color with a small head which left almost no lacing. Not really an impressive looking brew.

Smelled of fresh hops (big surprise huh?) and not much else. If you're looking for complexity you won't find it here.

Taste-wise, it is much the same. Fresh hops dominate things and there isn't a whole lot else going on. Actually there was a bit of a soapy taste in there as well. If hops is your thing, this is the place. If you like a little bit more going on, then I'd say go elsewhere.

Mouthfeel was good. Thin to medium bodied with a nice amount of carbonation to save things. Pretty smooth going down.

Honestly this beer seemed to me like a poor man's (somewhat watered down) Sierra Nevada. I'm glad I tried it, now I'll move on to other brews. I was hoping for better.

Serving type: bottle

10-25-2008 02:13:44 | More by JBogan

Wasatch

Utah

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

22oz. Bomber

Pours a hazy golden orange color, nice carbonation, nice small creamy off-white head, some sticky lacing follows. The nose is malty, hoppy, and lots of caramel. The taste is malty/hoppy, slightly bitter, and some caramel. Slightly dry/bitter finish. Medium body. Drinkable, a nice little APA from Deschutes, recommended.

Serving type: bottle

10-09-2007 23:31:28 | More by Wasatch

htomsirveaux

Texas

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

22 oz. bottle tried 2 Jan 2009.

Poured in 0.5 L Adambrau becker. Very big tight peachy colored head. Moderate carbonation. Clear dull copper color. Aroma of earth, muchrooms, sour apples, citrus, but overall light. Hops not quite as upfront as expected. Earthiness tends to dominate while resin and citrus fades into the background. Some honey and almond notes. Astringent finish and aftertaste. Medium body. Moderate ethanol.

Not sure if this was a stale or bad bottle, code is 266 08 0815 M, presumably bottled on 23 Sep 2008?

Serving type: bottle

02-12-2009 05:57:34 | More by htomsirveaux

pwoods

Ohio

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

22oz. brown bomber poured into an imperial pint. Notes.

A: Pours a rich golden amber, a bit of haze. Strong fluffy head forms and holds nicely. Lots of sticky lacing.

S: Nice balance between the hops and malts. Hops pop a bit more with the added resin. good citrus. Malts are rich and rather sweet.

T/M: Good bitterness level. citrus with light pine and a touch of fusel alcohol. Malts are sweet and a bit thicker than I'd like. I think I'm getting a bit of a medicinal quality. Body is a bit above medium with smooth carbonation.

D: Maybe some off flavors in there. Tasty but I don't know.

Serving type: bottle

10-30-2009 00:38:47 | More by pwoods

Gobzilla

California

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

A: Poured an amberish brown with orange highlights that had a half finger of head and great retention but left a little lacing asticking to the.

S: the nose is pretty big on the sweet malts alongside bready, slight pine, and faint hop notes. There also was some underlying citrus and spice character.

T: the taste was also quite malty with a very mild hop presence but did have citrus grassy and slight pine accents but had a little spice coming through on the tail end.

M: the brew was medium in body with a light amount of carbonation which had a sweet grainy, and malty finish.

D: it drank good but the hop profile and overall flavor of the beer was quite dissapointing. Id rather do hop henge or red chair as far as the bond series beers go.

Serving type: bottle

09-22-2010 07:00:45 | More by Gobzilla

beagle75

Iowa

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Draft pour into a shaker pint glass at Beachwood BBQ.
Additional comments are offered for the bottled product, but scoring reflects only the draft service.

A: Clear, medium amber color with one finger of persistent white foam head of fine bubbles. Moderate lacing remains. The bottled version appeared more red in color, the head diminished quickly, and no lacing remained.

S: Bready toasted malt with little detectable hop aroma, but a slight acidic tartness. The qualities of the bottled version were much more appealing, keeping the assertive malt but balancing with a perfume of intensely floral hops. The bottled smell suggests sweetness, rather than acidity.

T: Begins with lightly toasted malt and less assertive floral hop aromatics. Acidity increases in the middle with faint onion also detected. The finish is subtle, slightly mineral but only barely bitter. Floral aromatics linger on the palate. Barely off-dry flavors become dry by the finish. The bottled flavor is bigger and sweeter on the palate, overall: breadier, more floral, with assertive fruity esters, even a hint of butter, but lacking the acid and onion qualities. Bitterness lingers in the finish longer.

M: Thin viscosity, wet on the palate, with light carbonation. From the bottle this beer is similar to the draft service, but with slightly more texture and stickiness.

D: Delicious, in a somewhat uninteresting way when served on draft. The sensory qualities, particularly those delivered by the hops, were sadly under-represented at the tap (but appearance did count for something extra in that case). The bottled beer added much of what seemed to be missing from the draft experience, with a mostly floral hop presence. This beer changes every year, which is fine in an ephemeral and artisanal product such as a wet hop ale, but here the variance encountered in the different forms of packaging seemed noteworthy for their distinctness. I likely would have scored the bottled Hop Trip higher, but I feel that in this case the style should be at its best when served fresh, on draft.

Serving type: on-tap

10-18-2010 02:16:07 | More by beagle75

donkeyrunner

Massachusetts

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3.5

Picked this up on my recent trip to Vegas. Parsimmon color with a thick white head. Head dissolves into several bubbly puddles but leaves one big ring in it's wake.

Aroma is a combination of lemon and orange seltzer. Some leafy hop and hop spice. Malt, sweet malt.

Big, bold malt presence. Has some honey sweetness and an orange marmalade tinge, but it's mostly that malt tasting malt. I love that stuff. Way exceeds my perception of a 5.5% beer. Some marijuana hop stank with a snappy, spicy bitter. Vibrant carbonation plays up hop spice.

Serving type: bottle

01-15-2011 02:30:19 | More by donkeyrunner

joemcgrath27

Alberta (Canada)

3.53/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

from notes
A - hazy amber, foamy head retained very well with random lacing
S - sweet and nutty, light floral and citrus, light spice note
T - light citrus and piney hops, nutty malt with burnt sugar sweetness
M - light body, slightly bitter, finished thin
D - flavourful with a decent balance, but I was expecting more hop dominance based on the name, still enjoyable though

Serving type: bottle

03-18-2011 20:52:00 | More by joemcgrath27