POPS (6) - Malmoe, SWEDEN - JAN 16, 2002 does not count
4.5 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
A very good beer that’s gets better by time just like omhper said. I understand the disappointment that a friend of a friend had when he discovered that he put the 89 in the stew instead of the 98. Have tried 5 year old and I recommends that you try to put the beer in the cellar for some years before drinking it!
omhper (18329) - Stockholm, SWEDEN - JAN 3, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: JAN 18, 2003 This beer is IMO too sweet and unbalanced when consumed young. It has to be aged for at least three years (which used to be done for you by the brewery until 1989) to develope it"s full character.
Sampling of the 1989 version in January 2003:
Near black, very little head. Plum and raisin aroma. Clean, dry malt character, chocolate flavour. Vinuous, or rather sherry like. Very mature - probably peaks at this point. All the thick, sticky sugar is now gone. 9/4/8/4/15
Sampling of the 1993 version in January 2003:
Some raisin aroma, but less vinuous. Still slightly sweet with notes of licorice and madeira.
duff (5484) - Lund, SWEDEN - DEC 30, 2001
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Pretty good, but a bit sweet, and a tad bit syrupy, but still nice burnt coffee and sweet chocolate on the palate.
HansJM (358) - NORWAY - NOV 29, 2001
3.5 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
K-V-F-L (292) - LaVista, Nebraska, USA - OCT 15, 2001
4.1 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
Very good, and strong for a Scandinavian beer. ’I Have a Dream’ that someone will ’Gimme Gimme Gimme’ one soon. If not, I’ll be sending out an ’S.O.S.’ and will prepare to meet my ’Waterloo’. How Swede it is!
Indra (2531) - Overland Park, Kansas, USA - OCT 8, 2001
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Intense, burnt-malty aroma. Very, very dark beer. Filtered. Very minimal head and fine-to-non-existent carbonation. Very well-roasted malt dominates this brew’s flavor profile. There is also a raisiny, chocolatey character, with virtually no distinguishable hoppiness, even in the aftertaste. You better like dark, roasty beer, if you’re trying this one. I do, and I like it, mostly due to it’s somewhat unique qualities, but it’s not something I plan to buy on a regular basis. I believe this bottle is from 1997, label says ’argang 1997’ anyway...Stark (strong) porter. I’ll say. This stuff would honestly be a little better with 8.0%+ alcohol content. The warmth would go well with the rest of the flavors.
trappist12 (200) - Kansas City, Missouri, USA - SEP 19, 2001
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
VENOM (941) - Connecticut, USA - AUG 22, 2001
3.7 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 15/20
Overall I thought this was decent but it was thinner than expected and developed a watery taste at times. The huge roasted flavor and sherry like aroma was very unique and the roasted flavor lasted forever. A nice porter, but not one I’d search for. 1998 bottle.
booyaatribe (453) - Chicago, Illinois, USA - AUG 7, 2001
3.3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Supposed to be consumed at room temperature.
It just didn’t do it for me. Cool bottle, tho.
The Friar99 (222) - Wisconsin, USA - JUL 17, 2001
3.9 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20