Eyedrinkale (3213) - Astoria, New York, USA - JAN 6, 2004
3.6 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Pours a nice gold with minimal head. Nice aromas of pine and mellow hops. A very nice session brew. Well done.
21iceman40 (1735) - Grafton, Wisconsin, USA - OCT 20, 2002
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
UPDATED: MAR 2, 2003 A little light for me, but this was still a qaulity brew. A good beer to enjoy while chillin.
DrunkAsASkunk (847) - Lynnwood, Washington, USA - SEP 2, 2002
3.7 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
When i popped open the bottle its aroma just smacked me in the face..and cried drink me..drink me. But yes, the taste was not as strong as the aroma would entail. A subtle tangy taste is in order with the Alesmith Anvil, but i failed to see how this was the thirst quencher it is so advertised as. Trust me, I was putting down some Anvil at 1am with 95F weather and it wasnt helping. Still a very good beer that puts all domestic staples to shame. A little hoppy, but no comparison to a Stone.
CE619 (81) - san diego, California, USA - AUG 9, 2002
3.3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
a pleasant drink for a hot afternoon, one whose quality varies from sample to sample depending on the surrounding conditions and circumstances
akinm (282) - San Diego, California, USA - AUG 1, 2002
3.5 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
This beer is missing something that can normally be found in alesmith products but it is still definitely a good beer. Golden, clear color and a light hop aroma. the flavor is a little weak, the hops do not come out very much and as i think that neither does the malt flavor. A little watery for the alesmith crew but that does not make it a bad beer.
Blake (396) - Orange, California, USA - JUL 23, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
An easy to drink beer, but lacking the flavor that I had expected from Alesmith.
Radek Kliber (7165) - Toronto (Can) Krotoszyn (Pol), POLAND - JUL 21, 2002
3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Nice aroma that outscored flavor. Mouth feel was watery and taste was boring. I was disappointed.
papajohn (1249) - San Diego (Mira Mesa), California, USA - JUN 3, 2002
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
UPDATED: SEP 21, 2005 A nice light, change of pace session brew.
DaSilky1 (2606) - San Diego, California, USA - APR 21, 2002
3.5 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: FEB 23, 2003 creamy, very floral character, very good
Gusler (2653) - Tucson, Arizona, USA - APR 4, 2002
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 15/20
Deep amber, or more like a brown to these old eyes, beige head that is generous and relatively long lasting, also the lace is in sheets that cling snuggly to the glass. Malt dominates the nose, some yeast and hop tones noted. Start is malt sweet, the top is light to medium, the finish hop spicy, dry, lightly acidic and light to moderate carbonation.