 Silphium (2006), Lansing, Michigan, USA
Jul 20, 2003 Sometimes, you just have to try something for yourself. RT's Pale Ale was average but tasty. Their Porter was below average but drinkable. How, I asked myself, could a microbrewed Amber rate below a 2.0? The pour and the sip answered my question. The aroma on this thing is brutal: detergent, ammonia, lactic sourness, and a sickly sweet scent I've only noticed in cheap adjunct-laden macrobrews. The body is incredibly thin and sour with a bit of malt tang. This is like an inferior version of Michelob Amber Bock (seriously). At least the appearance is average. Part of my rating may be out of sheer disgust that this dreck is brewed in my hometown, but this is one shitty beer. If you're a masochist, you'll try it for yourself!
jskendzel (602), Washington DC, USA
May 21, 2003 Very poor example of the style. I really can't believe anyone would actually sell beer like this for other people to drink. I am just going to get rid of the beer in these bottles and fill it with homebrew.
daboskabouter (1468), Fergus, Ontario, Canada
Dec 21, 2002 Bright copper appearance. Fresh malty aroma with a touch of hops. Body is malty with a pleasant candied hop presence. Finishes nicely balance. This beer has a bad rap here, but this was one of the more balanced beers I had all day. Compared to other ambers, this was not nearly as sickly sweet, at least this was balanced.
brownalegirl (199), Fountain, Michigan, USA
Dec 16, 2002 Yow. This is gross. The only thing salvageable in this mess is the medium body on the thing, otherwise its aggressive malt comes on like fermenting compost.
bubslang (435), Kentwood, Michigan, USA
Jun 18, 2002 Horrible, over malted, buttery, just doesn’t taste right. Robert Thomas needs to stop worrying bout what the packaging looks like, and start concentrating on whats inside it. Yecch!
|
