sliffy (1967), Columbus, Ohio, USA
| 4.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 8/10 | 4/5 | 17/20 | Dec 15, 2006 Bottle shared by mikemac: Clear gold in color. Aroma of honey, some wheat. Flavor, thick honey flavor, some spice to it, maybe a bit floral. Really sweet. My first mead, and I think I need to try more because I loved this stuff. StueyD (590), King’s Lynn, Norfolk, Norfolk, England
| 3.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 | Dec 12, 2006 Tried alongside the Moniack Mead. A golden yellow coloured mead, with a strong honey sweet nose. This one was very sweet in comparison, lots of legs clung to the glass. Slightly floral in flavour, the sweetness lasted long after the final gulp!! TheOrange (405), Kent, Ohio, USA
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 5/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 | Dec 7, 2006 Cyrstal clear honey yelllow, no head as expected. Aroma is a very pungent honey. Sweet floral taste with a lingering finish. Pretty much a standard mead. Probably one of the better meads I’ve had. aarossell (151), Grandville, Michigan, USA
| 4.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 10/10 | 5/5 | 9/10 | 5/5 | 19/20 | Oct 21, 2006 Updated: Dec 6, 2006Ok....rating mead without knowing mead is dumb. Take for example crazyvin below. Aromatic traits seemed to bleed through on the flavor?? Isn’t that supposed to happen? Is your nose not responsible for 90 percent of "taste"?
Anyway...this is an excellent traditional mead. That being a drink made with ONLY honey, water, yeast.
Wonderfully present honey aroma and flavor, and warm alcoholic sting. You can tell it was sweetened with honey before bottling.
....That’s what you get with high gravity and low ingredient.
This is so far one of the best traditional meads I’ve had. Smooth, honey-like, tasty. crazyvin (1251), New York, USA
| 2.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 2/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 9/20 | Aug 13, 2006 my first mead. I really dont know what to say about this one, i really have nothing to compare too. Basically it was alcohoic honey. It poured a light yellow hue. Aroma was partly honey like, partly alchol and partly dirty. I really cant elobrate on dirty, i just seemed unpleasant. All the aromatic traits seemed to bleed through on the flavor too. Something seemed like it was missing. like i said it mainly seemed like alcoholic honey. beastiefan2k (1597), Lawrence (formely NYC), Kansas, USA
| 2.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 2/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 11/20 | Jun 28, 2006 375 ml bottle poured into a port glass. Color is a clear Bud Light shade. Aroma is strong but not too pleasant. A slight paint thinner-like aroma dominates. Not promising. Taste is thin and watery, flat soda mixed with some sort of chemical/medicinal stuff. Its good to know a bad mead for future reference. eaglefan538 (2360), Wilmington, Delaware, USA
| 1.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 2/5 | 3/10 | 2/5 | 4/20 | Jun 9, 2006 Well, talk about a let down, geez. This one wasn’t rated highly in the first place, but boy.... Aroma was the highlight, honey and a lavendar or clover floral touch. The pour was very light golden in color and water-like, nothing thick about this one (yea, it’s not a 3:1 Jadwiga!). The flavor was watery, honey, and some funky aftertaste. Pretty vinous, drank more like wine (bad wine) than anything else (grapes come out a bit as it warms). Maybe I started with the best (Jadwiga) and can’t relate to this.... Or, maybe this is just plain old bad. Either way, I’d NEVER return to this one, and will only seak out meads in the future that are more highly regarded. I may even pour the rest of this one. Ouch. brunnsbe (55), Helsinki, Finland
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 11/20 | May 23, 2006 No head but a nice golden colour. The flavor is sweet with a lot of alcohol.
|