bitbucket (2031), Kirkland, Washington, USA
| 2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 4/5 | 3/10 | 2/5 | 8/20 | Aug 9, 2006 Bottled. Pours a clear light amber with a surprisingly lasting white head. The aroma is floral, but off slightly. Not exactly skunked, but not first rate either. The body is light with medium carbonation. The taste does have a bit of caramel, along with some fruit and corn. The lack of alcohol makes the taste a bit empty, but there’s also an almost metalic quality to it. The finish is prettly close to nothing. Seems OK given the constraints of the style. JK (2949), Richfield, Minnesota, USA
| 1.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 1/5 | 3/10 | 1/5 | 4/20 | Aug 4, 2006 Light red color. A hint of sweet malt in the flavor. But this one tastes cold and is very light and somewhat refreshing. Phatz (225), Paradise, Pennsylvania, USA
| 1.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 4/5 | 1/10 | 2/5 | 4/20 | Aug 2, 2006 This beer pours a very light yellow/Amber, clear. The head was a very small white fizzy (blink of an eye and it was gone) head. So it is not impressive but it is not repulsive yet. I am afraid it only goes down hill from there. The smell is actually BAD! It makes me pull away like I smelled dirty socks. Is there a rating below 1? like a zero or something. The taste is bad two. Tastes very sour and skunked, not at all like beer. There are no hop or malt characteristics at all. There is some sort of artificial syrup flavor trying to make this sweet enough to get past the sour skunkiness. It fails at making this a drinkable beer. I could hardly keep it in my mouth long enough to think about the mouthfeel it seriously made me shudder. I have never dumped out an unfinished beer before, even if it was bad. This was a first. I have also never had a beer this bad before. This is my first time drinking a NA beer. I don’t know if they are all like this or not. I certainly can see NO redeeming characteristics that would justify buying O’Doul’s Amber. It may suffice for cooking but I don’t think I’ll personally risk it. That is just my opinion.
Hope this is helpful.
Cheers!
---
EDIT
I have since had other N/A beers and the truth is it can be done a heck of a lot better than O’Doul’s Amber. I may have had a skunked bottle because another BA described it to me as sweet but, I am in no hurry to find out.
--- unibaren (145), 8000 Århus C, Denmark
| 1.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 2/5 | 3/10 | 1/5 | 4/20 | Jun 15, 2006 Aroma is fresh, with some caramel and sweet malt. Amber colour, (almost) no head and (almost) no carbonation. Palate is like that of a mineral water. Very non-descriptive and I my eyes (or mouth) even worst then the regular O’Doul’s. 1FastSTi (2557), Glendale, Wisconsin, USA
| 2.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 2/5 | 9/20 | Jun 13, 2006 Finally tried this mysterious style. Pours to a transparent light amber body with a fluffy white head. The aroma is grainy corn. The flavor is grainy corn silage. The palate is vacuous, very drying, decently carbonated. Bonus points overall for making a beer with such little alcohol not suck too much. jrohn92 (105), USA
| 1.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 2/5 | 1/10 | 2/5 | 4/20 | Jun 6, 2006 This beer has a very sweet taste and aroma. There is definetely some sort of caramel or maple flavoring. dp (512), uniontown, Ohio, USA
| 1.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 2/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 8/20 | Apr 22, 2006 michelob ultra amber without alcohol. not bad at all, wasn’t sure what to expect, would probably drink again as low/no alco. bitter (1137), Henderson, Nevada, USA
| 1.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 3/5 | 3/10 | 3/5 | 5/20 | Apr 12, 2006 take the normal odouls add some color of amber and here it is. actually it has a bit more toasted oat flavor to the beer, no hops to be found.
|