AlchemistZ (493) - Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA - SEP 4, 2004
3.3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 12/20
Big, bubblegummy ale yeast fruit in the nose with toasty malt, resiny hops, and underpinnings of milk, straight-forward caramel, clove, citrus, smoke, and chlorine. Malt character is toasty/grainy. The profile is big malt up front with acidity coming in after a few seconds, big malt at mid-palate, then acidity and malt sweetness vying for supremecy in the finish. Overall, a more toasty/grainy and full-bodied (though less sweet) version of Sierra Pale. Well done but not for me.
skaughty (642) - Marietta, Georgia, USA - AUG 13, 2004
3.3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Malty and sweet for an American Pale - which translates to tasty in my book. The palate is left a little flat (as opposed to crisp), but the finish is smooth. This beer almost seems as if it were brewed to wean the hophead into the Kashmir IPA, as all elements are less offensive/less interesting.
Sassy (217) - Mullet Capital of the World, Georgia, USA - AUG 4, 2004
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Only had 3 beers from Highland (gaelic ale and oatmeal porter -- which were great), and this is my least favorite. Drinkable -- starts off okay, but quickly turns weak and watery. Absolutely no character.
Falconseye8 (542) - Evans, Colorado, USA - AUG 1, 2004
3.7 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
APA #2. St. Tereses Pale Ale. Another beer courtesy of Ross. Strong sweet tea presense in this. Hops not as strong as in the Charleston. Regardless this is another very good Pale Ale. I’d say this is a wee bit more malty too. Very drinkable and perfect for this time of year. Another very good beer that’s really underrated.
drewdogg (62) - USA - JUL 30, 2004
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Let me preface this by saying that I am not always the biggest fan of pale ales. However, my dislike of this beer stems more from my disappointment in the relative quality of this beer compared to Highland’s other offerings. I have been to their brewery and tried all of their beers. I know they are capable of so much more. Do not judge the whole brewery by this one beer.
Murphy (1759) - Fort Collins, Colorado, USA - JUL 23, 2004
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
Nice peach color, but the aroma is not good, smells slightly off and sour. Palate is malty, but needs more hops. Finish is funky and metallic.
Eyedrinkale (3213) - Astoria, New York, USA - JUL 5, 2004
2.6 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 11/20
Gold color with nice sized head, if you work it. Mellow hop taste and a bit on the sweet side. Nothing too special.
5000 (5980) - Hardened Liver, Washington, USA - JUN 30, 2004
3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Bottle pours slightly hazy golden, small creamy white head, respectable lacing, with almost no carbonation. Quite malty on the nose. Light hops, maybe a little biscuit as well. Slight bitterness up front, but a quasi butterscotch/caramel hint as well. Light to medium body, decent mouthfeel. Finishes very muttled, somewhat dirty, not clean or crisp. Not great, not bad, but that finish needs some work.
belgianhomebrew (646) - Acworth, Georgia, USA - JUN 19, 2004
2.9 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Not much in the way of aroma. A good hop bite and decent balance throughout.
Union (22) - Horse Shoe, North Carolina, USA - MAY 30, 2004
0.8 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 2/20
Well, this is new, rank, but new. First off, the smell. Burned my nose and eyes. Small thin head, pale color. But then, the taste. This is bad, really bad.
I’d rather eat a shoe than drink this. The aftertaste lastes and lastes, 20 min later it was still there. I have no faith in the mountains of NC. This your typical crap micro brewed funky tasting stuff. Enough of being trendy lets nail a few Buds instead. Go ahead hippies, get some!