doublebock (198), USA
| 4.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 9/10 | 4/5 | 19/20 | May 28, 2009 Red-brown hue. Musty sweet aroma. Champagne flavor with mellow tartness and subtle maltiness. Strong oak barrel flavor.Remeniscent of Rodenbach.
RHeastings (444), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| 3.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 15/20 | Jan 6, 2010 Enjoyed via draft at Monk’s Cafe in a hexagonal tumbler. The beer pours a very deep ruby color that borders on being a straight brown, with a thick off-white head. The nose carries a fair bit of residual malt sweetness, something not always seen in Belgian sours, along with the characteristic tart twang of Flemish Red/Browns. The aforementioned sweetness also carries over the to palate, masking the sourness in the approach, before softening and allowing a vinegary/acidic/lactic melange of flavors to come through. The former of these flavors was a touch on the strong side, perhaps from extended aging of the bottle, but not to such an extent that it was a real detractor. The finish was quite dry, and again showcased the beer’s sour character. Very well done. Peterlemonjelo (40), Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 4/5 | 6/10 | 4/5 | 12/20 | Jan 3, 2010 A - Very pretty beer. Pours a dark/rusty ruby color. Clear with nice carbonation. Thin head which remains during drinking. Nice lacing on glass.
S - Smells of sweet fruit with a touch of sour cider. Ever so slight touch of barnyard.
T - Tastes nice but a little sweet. Tastes of sweet cherries with a sour flavor present but just not enough to balance out the sweetness. I want to enjoy it more as it tastes very nice, but the sweetness just needs to be balances out with more sour or more barnyard which just isn’t there enough to balance.
M - Lovely mouthfeel with prickly carbonation. Not too think and not too think.
D - Tough for me rank higher on drinkability because of the sweetness. If more balanced or a drier finish, it would be a very good beer. pyromt30 (24), Lebanon, USA
| 2.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 4/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 | Jan 3, 2010 Pours a dark reddish brown with decent head. Smell is of vinegar and is off putting. Taste is mid upfront settling into a sour cherry finish which lingers long on the tounge. Seems to have a very malty aftertaste. alexanderj (2294), Chino Hills, California, USA
| 3.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 | Jan 2, 2010 Bottle (monks); poured an orange-auburn with a creamy off-white head. Aroma of vinegar, sour malt, caramel, fruit and yeast. Mildly sour, very minerally. Fruity and caramel. A little bit less than expected. BillWyce (100), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| 3.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 | Jan 2, 2010 Bottle under Monk’s label. Pours deep ruby-amber with a fluffy light tan head. Notably sour aroma...not citrus, couldn’t really place it. Palate was smooth and light. Tart, sour taste of cherries with a caramelly sweet undertone. Very nice. ET627 (2), Vermont, USA does not count | 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 5/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Jan 2, 2010 Aroma of cherry and malt vinegar. Tastes of sour cherries with some lactic like sour and it is quite sweet. A little bitter and metallic at the end. I HomeBrewHawk (289), De Soto, Kansas, USA
| 3.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 6/10 | 4/5 | 16/20 | Jan 1, 2010 Monk’s Cafe version. 11.2oz bottle served in the new style Boulevard Chalice. Poured a reddish brown with a thin tan head. Good lactic aroma of sour cherries. Starts off with nice and tart. A little sweetness and more fruit (cherries). A touch metallic in the finish to start, but this fades. Very refreshing and drinkable. Good price point as well.
|