Rockinout (966) - Kent, Ohio, USA - NOV 16, 2002
1.6 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 7/20
What the heck is this stuff? Has an artificial "butter" taste, earthy nose, only slight cranberry.
daalamar (405) - new albany, Indiana, USA - NOV 12, 2002
2.1 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 10/20
This is not a lambic and should not be labled as such. Overpoweringly sweet with a very subtle dry cranberry followup. Color is a yellow/pink with a small head. Aroma is about the only positive thing I could find with a sweet cranberry boquet. Bottom line "I didnít like it, you may, but itís still not a lambic"
Tom Servo (424) - Arlington, Virginia, USA - NOV 8, 2002
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Not that good. Severe presence of cranberry, and an almost sickeningly sweet smell. Has a hazy yellowish pink color to it. Small head.
HighGravity (926) - Baltimore, Maryland, USA - NOV 8, 2002
2.2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
(Best by 3/03) I am assuming a brettanomyces yeast culture is used to ferment this beer. The beer is a hazy pinkish/yellow. The nose has more maple syrup aromas than lambic aromas. The palate is medium in body and mildly acidic, but not acidic as a true lambic. I think this beer should be renamed maple lambic with cranberry. The maple flavors really over power the cranberries. Even with all the strange flavors in this beer, the pasteurization comes through fairly noticeable and contributes negatively to this ale.
freekyp (1449) - Thomasville, North Carolina, USA - NOV 5, 2002
1.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 4/20
UPDATED: DEC 28, 2007 A lame attempt at a Lambic and my least favorite of the Sam Adams line. Aroma is vegatal with a berry sweetness arriving late and in a sickly fashion. Pours a fizzy pink with a puny weak white head. The flavor is much the same with a long tart ending that turns sickly sweet like rotten fruit, and a light body. I would probably like it better if they never called it a Lambic (which itís not). Do yourself a favor and break out a Lindemanís Lambic.
Hopistotle420 (1178) - Amherst, Massachusetts, USA - OCT 29, 2002
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: APR 11, 2003 Hazy golden honey hue. Sweet hopped up aroma. Small white head. Obviously this isnt a lambic, its not spontaneously fermented, yet this beer is very enjoyable. Wheat is evident, and cranberry flavor is very enjoyable. Maple syrup notes are barely noticeable, but definately there. Ive enjoyed this brew for many years. A holiday classic.
Allseeingeye (223) - Vero Beach, Florida, USA - OCT 25, 2002
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Bleeeck! This is there interpretation of lambic. Itís definatly cranberry. Golden color with a decent head. Can taste some malt under all this fruit tartness. Doubt Iíll try this again.
Norton (327) - Southside, Richmond, Virginia, USA - OCT 23, 2002
1.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 6/20
Acrid tonguefeel made me cringe. Tangy sweet much like those Sweet Tarts you get for Halloween. Almost like a wine cooler on crack. I doubt I will ever drink this again.
Indra (2530) - Overland Park, Kansas, USA - SEP 12, 2002
1.8 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 7/20
Yep, itís cranberry, but itís certainly not a lambic. Bleah. Total lack of complexity or any Belgian character, this is just a cranberry wheat beer and not a good one at that.(And I can appreciate cranberry in beer, Beartooth made a good one.) Avoid.
morty99 (371) - Maryland, USA - SEP 12, 2002
1.9 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
Extremely tart, cranberries are overbearing. Always the beer that gets tossed from the christmas sampler. Iíll stick to Lindemannís for my lambics.