CaptKirk (175) - Hephzibah, Georgia, USA - OCT 22, 2005
2.2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
Amber color with a creamy head. Sweet floral aroma. First sip was blend and without much merit. Finished disappointing, but I had to try it for the name. This beer would be for those who donít "like" beer.
beerheart (237) - Erie, Colorado, USA - JAN 14, 2008
2.2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Thereís some hop here that isnít always present in an amber. Tastes of yeasty sweet malts and medium hops. Not a bad amber.
JoeM500 (1908) - Crown Point, Indiana, USA - NOV 22, 2004
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
On tap at RAM, Schaumburg,IL: Darker almond color with a thin fizzy head that disappears almost as soon as she puts the pint down. Graininess, as far as malts go, some bitter hints at the finish, but overall itís a bland and nearly tatsteless beer.
OldMrCrow (2340) - Seattle, Washington, USA - SEP 24, 2006
2.1 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 7/20
Tap at the Ram in Seattle.
A great amber ale is a great thing, but a decent amber ale is pretty boring -- and this isnít even a decent amber ale. On the positive side, aroma and flavor are straight ahead and not particularly offensive. The mouthfeel....well, letís just say that while one is tempted to mispronounce this beer as "butterface amber," that suggests a better body than the amber can provide.
Ultimately, itís just staggeringly boring, so much so that any of the other middle-of-the-road PacNW ambers seem interesting by comparison.
jazz88 (2650) - San Francisco, California, USA - NOV 13, 2006
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Tap @ Brewpub with Nuffield. Rating from 2004 notes. Light golden color. Smooth with a fair nice hop presence.
Ernest (7214) - Boulder, Colorado, USA - NOV 4, 2002
2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 7/20
Body is medium amber.
lightly malty (caramel),
trace hops (flowers).
moderately sweet, lightly acidic, lightly bitter.
lightly sweet, lightly acidic, lightly bitter.
Light to medium body, watery texture, lively carbonation.
hollardustin (327) - Indiana, USA - OCT 26, 2011
2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
Pours medium amber with small white head. Aroma is sweet caramel. Taste is malty with caramel and a hint of roasted malt. Not bad.
kp (10884) - Woodstock, Georgia, USA - SEP 1, 2007
1.9 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 6/20
UPDATED: MAR 8, 2009
Date: July 20, 2007
Source: Brewpub, Indianapolis
Appearance: hazy amber, wispy off white head
Aroma: sweet dark caramel malt aroma with very light earthy hops
Flavor: big sweet caramel malt flavor, nice bready quality, light bitterness offers complexity rather than bitterness
Aroma: 6/10; Appearance: 6/10; Flavor: 6/10; Palate: 6/10; Overall: 11/20
Name: Buttface Amber Ale
Date: February 22, 2009
Source: Brewpub, Arlington
Appearance: hazy amber, headless
Aroma: dry caramel malt aroma, light earthyness, a hint of sweaty butt
Flavor: rich caramel malt flavor, lots of earthy bitterness, a touch of astrengent nastyness that takes a very tart turn
Aroma: 3/10; Appearance: 5/10; Flavor: 2/10; Palate: 5/10; Overall: 4/20
vector (163) - Dallas, Texas, USA - AUG 8, 2003
1.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 4/20
Poured a medium reddish brown with a slightly off white head. Aroma was sour and slightly buttery(?). Flavor was very malty and very tangy, almost like vinegar. The flavor struck me as very unbalanced, overwhelmingly cidery. Maybe my bottle had gone bad? This beer became undrinkable about halfway through and became a sour feast for the drain. I'll try this again in the future and rerate if my rated sample was indeed spoiled.
DigitalMan (193) - Idaho, USA - JUN 20, 2009
1.7 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 7/20
Had this on tap at their restaurant. Pretty bland and uninteresting in all ways. Pass. Food was not very good, either.