turbothy (1123) - Bonn, GERMANY - AUG 6, 2006
1.4 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 4/20
Pours with an extreme amount of foam, requiring ½ hour to pour into a pint glass. When the foam subsides, a coat of brown sludge is left on top, making a rather disgusting first impression. The taste is bland but with an unpleasant earthy aftertaste. One for the sink.
duff (5484) - Copenhagen, DENMARK - AUG 1, 2006
2.2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Bottle@Københavnske Øldage. Quite dry, with pretty much zero flavour. The good ting is that it is innofensive, which is also to its detriment. Just like a stronger pale lager or something.
cphbeerking (154) - København K, DENMARK - JUN 28, 2006
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 10/20
A faintly hazy pilsner-golden greets the drinker, but alas, little else is forthcoming. Aroma is faint, taste likewise. What little there is spells weak citrus and flat hop taste. Naming this beer ’Klosterbryg’, abbey ale, also seems misleading -- at least it got me thinking about Belgians. An uneventful beer.
chriso (7428) - London, Greater London, ENGLAND - JUN 8, 2006
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Draught at Cockney Pub, Aarhus, August 2005. The very first brew from this new brewery, so I can make some allowances if things are not quite right. From the name and the colour (gold/amber), I was expecting something aiming at an Abbey tripel style but it certainly wasn’t that. And I’m not sure why it is on the site as a pale lager because I don’t think its that either. To be honest it was a bit difficult to tell because there was an unfortunate whiff of diacetyl on the nose and whatever other elements were in the aroma weren’t strong enough to break through. And whilst there was a little citrus and yeast on the palate, it wasn’t really full flavoured enough to get much of a handle on the flavour either. Not to say it was unpleasant, just not very distinctive. More work needed.
mds (2240) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - JUN 3, 2006
2.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Bottle. The body is a golden-yellow with a small head. The aroma is sweet and malty with grainy flower notes. Flavour is much of the same - average graininess, flowers, perfume. Passable, if anything.
Sampled at the Københavnske Øldage 2006 on May 20, 2006.
Christian (11317) - Odense, DENMARK - MAY 16, 2006
2.7 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Golden with a medium lasting white head. Aroma has a little flower and some malt. Flavour is also malt dominated and quite thing. Nothing special.
jonas (5882) - Garching b. München, GERMANY - APR 26, 2006
2.9 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Golden, fine bibbles, lowish head. Bready and light citric aromatic hop aroma. Surprisingly light body, a hint napkin. Nice subtle aromatic hop profile. Fresh english style IPA, bit light on the palate though - maybe a hint more butterscotch would give it the chewyness I am missing.
oli (108) - DENMARK - MAR 19, 2006
1.4 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
I was very dissapointed with this beer.I expected a "klosterbryg" to heve more body and taste.This was piss poor by comparison.Utter rubbish!
bager (2121) - Copenhagen N, DENMARK - MAR 19, 2006
1.9 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Bottle. Hmm I’m very confused. I know I’m new - well maybe that’s why :-)
I’m not sute what to say - very strange beer. Sour - citrus - hops - is it me or did I detect a bit of smoke - I’m not sure cos it also tastes a bit cemical. I will maybe re’rate this beer when I taste it again.
Skinnyviking (7294) - Copenhagen, DENMARK - FEB 11, 2006
1.8 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
Bottle. White lasting head. Unclear light yellow colour (reminds me of one of the human being’s bodily fluids, uf). Smoky malt aroma. Smoky flavor as well.