Home >

Oceanside Ale Works Up A Kriek

Serve in Snifter, Tulip, Tumbler


on tap

Regional Distribution

Add Distribution Data
RATINGS: 69   WEIGHTED AVG: 3.52/5   EST. CALORIES: 186   ABV: 6.2%
A barrel aged sour cherry Belgian blonde.

   AROMA 8/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 15/20
jredmond (6923) - New York, New York, USA - DEC 27, 2015
Bottle shared at the Lambic Cave, November 14th, 2015 - a real treat indeed. Pours a soft pink body. nose is Leudens cough syrup, sour candies and melted cherry slurpee. Itís definitley fake cherry, but not an awful acidic mess that I was anticipating.

   AROMA 2/10   APPEARANCE 2/5   TASTE 1/10   PALATE 1/5   OVERALL 2/20
MacBoost (1645) - Pouring Bus, New York, USA - DEC 20, 2015
Kriek? No. This beer is worse than the unwashed ass of Rush Limbaugh after a night of vicodins and sloppy seconds with Charlie Sheenís HIV+ hooker cadre. Drinking this makes me want to go to my cellar and open up a "growler" of Area 51 with a reused Bruery cap and chug the entire thing. This is the worst attempt at a "kriek" that I have ever had. You should be ashamed of yourself for marketing this as a "kriek", you fucking community college dropouts. Jesus, fuck. Just stop trying to brew beer already. You are never going to achieve your dream of being bought out by AB-InBev and retiring to your Italian villa, so please just give up now. You are worse than pathetic, with your attempts to capitalize on the "sour" beer fad and your continuance to market your "unblended lambic" as #1 on rate beer. Fuck you, you are not fooling anyone who possesses even the simplest of palates.

   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 9/20
solidfunk (6479) - Washington D.C., Washington DC, USA - DEC 16, 2015
Up a Kriek is a unique work of oaky fake cherry that builds on a false interplay of craft beer rhetoric. First of all, Iíd like to point out that nobody can build on the academic work of such illustrious ratings as Phillycraft (11/14/2015), Reynolds314 (10/9/2015) and AdNielsonís update (11/14/2015). But hopefully this humble author can combine meta-survey of present literature with new research. Method: Poured into a Chimay glass generously provided by distinguished (though sometimes grumpy on the topic of certain German asparagus varieties) D.C.-area rater Travlr. I canít comment directly on the specific detergent used in cleaning the glass, but based on previous uses of Travlrís well-provided kitchen, I can only assume the best quality. The bottle used in this tasting was provided, through Travlr (see rating at 12/6/2015) via bytemesis in the hopes of reaching an objective consensus in the scientific beer community. Discussion: The "UNBELIEVABLE CHEERY AROMA (sic.)" previously described by thegreat78 (05/22/2015) may rather be a stretch unless one is referring to certain breakfast cereal, in which case this humble reviewer doesnít know where to begin. The aroma is rather a little more artificial, as pointed out by bytemesis (08/29/2015) and GenDV138 (12/6/2015). Likewise, Iím not entirely sure the "artificial mammary glands" quoted in autonetics1969ís controversial update (11/15/2015) have much bearing in the taste of this beer, to be perfectly fair. Perhaps silicone mammary glands and cherries tend to be mutually exclusive? It isnít this humble authorís place to comment, but certainly popping open this cherry kriek seems more like the Phillycraftís eloquent summary about sluts "taking a whipping" (ibid.). In any case personal observation certainly shows a pink pour with some hazy coloring. Conclusion: This author concurs with with lime and acidic elements mentioned by distinguished rater nimbleprop (12/7/2015) but doesnít entirely agree with the drain pour analogy made by aforementioned Travlr (ibid.). Indeed, the beer is a little watery (Nimbleprop: ibid.) but retains some decent cherry despite the whipping and slut shaming (Phillycraft: ibid.). Future research suggestions: Iím looking forward to endeavours currently in the works by distinguished scholars like MrChopin and (a man can only dream) 2pac.

   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 1/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 12/20
nimbleprop (6653) - SouthWest, Washington, Washington DC, USA - DEC 7, 2015
750ml bottle, 2011 vintage, pours a muddy amber with no head. Looks terrible. Nose is interesting, a lot of fruit roll up, strawberry, bubblegum, a little acid. Flavor follows, strawberry soda, fruit roll up, a little lime/acid. I think this spent too much time in the bottle. Finishes watery.

   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 4/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 9/20
GenDV138 (4570) - Falls Church, Virginia, USA - DEC 6, 2015
Bottle at the RateBeer DC Mini Tasting. Thanks Travlr/bytemesis! Hazy orange with off-white bubbles. Aromas of medicinal strawberry, like strawberry cough drops. Tastes of artificial cherry, funk, sort of buttery. Light body with a dry finish.

   AROMA 6/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 5/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 10/20
Iphonephan (5277) - McLean, Virginia, USA - DEC 6, 2015
From a 75 cl bottle shared at the RateBeer mini tasting in Dec 2015. Pours a hazy gold with an off white head. Tart nose. Flavors of kerosene, Sour vinous finish.

   AROMA 3/10   APPEARANCE 2/5   TASTE 3/10   PALATE 2/5   OVERALL 3/20
Travlr (18623) - Washington, Washington DC, USA - DEC 6, 2015
Bottle courtesy of bytemesis, thank you sir! Cloudy golden color with a slight reddish tint, flat. Aroma of medicinal cherry. Taste is very tart, acetic, medicinal. Maybe this was a good beer at one point, hard to tell. But now itís a drain pour.

   AROMA 8/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 8/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 17/20
marcus (8280) - Sacramento, California, USA - NOV 30, 2015
Bottle shared by bhensonb. Pours dirty blonde with no head and a malty cherry aroma. There is a pleasant candy-like cherry flavor with an oak finish. Tastes like a kriek, but doesnít look like it. Nice variation.

   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 4/5   TASTE 8/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 17/20
bhensonb (13209) - Woodland, California, USA - NOV 30, 2015
Waxed 750 from The Davis Beer Shoppe. Pours hazy gold with no head. Aroma is cherry, apparently sour. Med minus body. Flavor is cherry, almost getting chocolate! Itís arguably sour. Finishes woody/oaky. Flavors are not extra strong, but they are firm. Quite a pleasant drink.

   AROMA 10/10   APPEARANCE 5/5   TASTE 10/10   PALATE 5/5   OVERALL 20/20
Autonetics1969 (10) - - NOV 18, 2015
My brother shared this bottle of Kriek with me. It came in a 750 ml champagne bottle with a red wax top and a wine looking simple label. It was labeled a sour cherry Belgian blonde. My brother suggested I join this site as he is somewhat of an introvert and he mentioned the exchanges on this site, with ratings and all, were quite entertaining. He is an engineer and somewhat of a wallflower so I was hesitant. He immediately directed me to this brew and instructed me to review the ratings. I must admit it was entertaining to say the least. Phillycraft hit the nail on the head, this cherry slut is taking a beating. A beating behind the school yard by a bunch of nerds shellacking a cute cheerleader transferred from a private school for ruining the curve in AP calculus. This brew as huge in cherry aroma and big in cherry flavor. The theme from the aristocracy, it is artificial. I have enjoyed cherry NyQuil, cherry vodka, and Almanac brewery, Jolly Pumpkin and many others. Artificial is not a bad deScriptor as my girlfriend has artificial mammary glands, and I think they are wonderful, and a Miss June states that many others do too. So for the beer the so called artificial character, no wired medicinal character, mostly cherry sourness and some tartness. It was somewhat reminiscent of a cherry sweet tart that reminded me of childhood. I do believe that rates that gave this non deScript term were more offended that it was scoring better than some of their clique brews. For example Reynolds314 even had a neat 5 point business plan that he thought there was some money making hedge fund conspiracy. Some seem to be overly preoccupied with "fake" or "influenced" ratings than to give deScriptors of the brew. Just rate it! I thought it had some vinegar notes but not too out to f balance for style, and the crisp tartness really shined through. For Reynolds and you unsuspecting beer geeks, I feel slightly sorry for you. Not that you were duped but you have spent so much time rating beer, 2900 plus ratings, equivalent of approximately 10.2 days of your life. Those of you should have spent more time learning how to navigate web sites. Let me enlighten you. This sight has a tab called highest raters. Click on it and you may get a better synopsis of the rating you are hoping for. On the other hand, folks like me, new to site, would rather see what a newbie might like. I know Pliny is good. I want to see who took the time early on to rate something they enjoyed, not a bunch of dork lemmings explaining to me how they loved stone fruit and mango in their Pliney. I found this brew did have the deScriptor of manure, aromatic indols. I like it in lambics and other brews as long as it is not distracting. This brew did not have that distraction. A friend of mine loves Simcoe XXIPAs due to the typical cat piss character. She loves loves it, however I do not. This brew was earthy manure and barnyard, great. I really had to enjoy Adnielsen telling folks to fornicate with themselves. He does not seem to understand that sites like this earn revenue by getting traffic. Berating and chastising raters discourages the folks from revisiting. If only you, 10,000 plus raters, who wasted 35 days of your life, were the only credible sources, then this site would not exist, and you may have nothing to bitch about. Adnielsen, spend some time away from RB and spend some time learning English, so you can have a more extensive vocabulary. Then, you can come back and give some real constructive criticism. I do believe that the owners of this site love this brewery as it brings them traffic. As for manufactures pushing their product, why not? This brings more traffic and more raters. With the addition of raters we all get a better standard deviation. For those of you who that rate for 35 plus days, it is a measure used to quantify the amount of variation or dispersion of a set of data values. Back to beer, it does have a lean tart lactic sourness, with some wheat character complemented by the aforementioned barnyard aromatic indols. It has a light mouthfeel and body with nice prickling champagne like carbonation. Some oak is evident and the cherries dominate. For those "Hate Homers" "Shill Slashers" and "Troll Trackers", which I am none of, my rating will not count. The Bayesian statistic scale they use here works well, so do not fret. Side note: bantering about beer on sites like this and Yelp is like having sex without an orgasm. With that in mind, I will go have a few more Up a Krieks and appreciate the natural and artificial traits of greatness of both my girlfriend and the brew.

We Want To Hear From You

Join us! RateBeer is made by beer enthusiasts for the craft beer community. Your basic membership is free and allows you to read all beer ratings. Click here to create your account... and give your opinion!

Join Us »

Page    1  2 3 4 5 6 7

Tick this beer for your profile
  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Copyright © 2000-2016,
RateBeer LLC. All rights
about us
About RateBeer
New Beers
Advanced Search
Add A Beer
Add A Brewer
Add A Place
Log In
Edit Personal Info
Buy Premium Membership
Your Messages
the best
RateBeer Best
100 Beer Club
The Top 50