2.6 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
A blonde to gold ale with a thin white head. In aroma, light malts, with adjunct and mineral notes. In mouth, again, that lightly peated malt with light hops, light bodied. On tap at brewpub, August 27 2009.
2.6 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Tap at the brewpub. Pale gold with a slight white head. Near medium body. LIght citrus/floral aroma. Flavor is light malt with light hop. Clean finish.
2.3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
On tap at the brewery. This blonde ale poured with a decent white head and a floral aroma. There is a flat watery malt flavor and little else.
1.7 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 5/20
Name: El Ray Blonde Lager
Date: July 12, 2009
Mode: Draft
Source: Brewpub
Appearance: hazy gold, fine beige head, drippy lace
Aroma: light sweet malt aroma, light floral hops
Flavor: sweet malt flavor, faint bitterness
Aroma: 3/10; Appearance: 6/10; Flavor: 3/10; Palate: 5/10; Overall: 5/20
Rating: 1.7/5.0
Drinkability: 6/10
Score: 4
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
To be honest, this isn’t a poorly made beer. I mean, there aren’t any defects apparent (or at least that I could taste, aside from the astringent factor). The problem is...is that it’s a boring lager. Nothing outside the scale of Budweiser or Coors. Aroma is nil. Couldn’t get anything from the aroma, no matter how hard I tried. Appearance was a nice, clear golden color, nice head. Mouthfeel was thin, watery. Flavor was..again...nil. Almost waterlike in fact, but like the Wheat beer they make this too had a strange mouth puckinger astringency to it. According to the description, it’s supposed to be there. So that alone makes it different. Not better, necessarily. But different.
|
