RateBeer
Home >

Stone 9th Anniversary Ale

 (RETIRED)
overall
96
89
style
Serve in Snifter, Tulip

bottling
unknown

on tap
unknown

distribution
unknown

Add Distribution Data
RATINGS: 481   WEIGHTED AVG: 3.64   SEASONAL: Special   EST. CALORIES: 234   ABV: 7.8%
Share this beer with friends!
COMMERCIAL DESCRIPTION
As has been a tradition, we have “Anniversary-ized” a recipe from our history by cranking it up, making it stronger and more assertive. With this year’s Anniversary we decided to look back at a wheat beer that we released a couple of Spring/Summers a few years ago: Stone Heat Seeking Wheat. While it was a plenty tasty beer, we ultimately decided that it wasn’t that reflective of what Stone was all about, and we unceremoniously dropped it from our lineup. For the Stone 9th Anniversary Ale, we carried some of the characteristics from the Stone Heat Seeking Wheat --- clear, not hazy; hoppy, not yeasty; combining a delicious hop bitterness and wheat tartness --- and made some…well…adjustments.


3
   AROMA 4/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 6/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 14/20
pfhyde (56) - Davis, California, USA - DEC 27, 2005
This is a great buy--7.8% ABV for 1 Pt. 6 Fl. Oz. of consistently tasty, Belgium style ale. If you want the fizz of Belgium, but can’t afford the real deal, give this a shot. It comes across as subpar at first, but believe me, it’s worth a second (third, fourth) try. (Oh, and make sure you look up all the words on the bottle description in the Oxford English Dictionary--they’re great fun.)

3.3
   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 6/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 14/20
JohnnyFlake (53) - Henderson, Nevada, USA - OCT 27, 2005
22 oz Bomber - poured a cloudy Golden color with hints of orange. The white head disapates quickly. Aromas of astringent grapefruit, sticky pine sap and alcohol. Flavor was very hoppy with an aggressive bitterness, very astringent! I was very dissapointed with this beer! Far too hoppy and astringent, masking all other nuances, except for the alcohol which comes to the front more often than I like.

3.4
   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 4/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 13/20
beanwiggin (22) - California, USA - FEB 17, 2006
a good beer and a decent year but wasn’t really for me. appreciate the strength but the blend is not too pleasing for this palate. worth a try, though.

3.6
   AROMA 6/10   APPEARANCE 4/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 15/20
SDquaffer (18) - San Diego, California, USA - JUN 29, 2009
Cracked in 6/09 from my cellar which, because of gypsylike behavior, has not been consistently stored. I take some of the blame for the low rate. Aroma was diminished from what I fondly remember from the fresh version. Caramel notes unmistakeable but a bit of burnt corn too. Wheaty substantial head, not diminishing as the beer warms. leggy. A bit of a coppery finish too. again, probably due to bad cellaring. Hopefully some good samaratin will provide me a better kept bottle for a revised tasting (after I sufficiently self-flaggelate myself of course.)

4
   AROMA 8/10   APPEARANCE 5/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 16/20
Tycho (13) - USA - JAN 26, 2006
While this was a meal in and of itself, it was enjoyable, but I have higher expectations after some aging.

3.9
   AROMA 8/10   APPEARANCE 4/5   TASTE 7/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 16/20
RealAle (12) - USA - MAR 30, 2006
I enjoyed this well hopped up Stone ale on tap. I did’nt realize it was a wheat with the clear appearance. It was smooth and very drinkable for a beer of this caliber. Drink it up if you get the chance!

3.9
   AROMA 8/10   APPEARANCE 5/5   TASTE 8/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 14/20
Manetsdad (12) - USA - FEB 12, 2007
22 oz bomber. Reading the commerical description, it seems like a great idea. However, there is something not quite right with this one. Up front, there are all the right hop aromas but something doesn’t meld perfectly with the flavors. It is still a good beer and I appreciate the creativity, but I wish it went together a bit better.

4
   AROMA 8/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 8/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 17/20
HopalotCassidy (12) - Indiana, USA - SEP 9, 2005
Very similar in character to 3 Floyd’s Gumball Head. Fruit and Floral. Stong Alcohol notes that should mellow with just 6 months or so. Assertive aroma and Flavor. Far superior to last year’s but lacks the depth of their 7th. Got 2 for the cellar. Might get a third. Will be tasting one a year. Will report back then.

2.2
   AROMA 6/10   APPEARANCE 2/5   TASTE 2/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 8/20
Jeffsloane (10) - USA - OCT 26, 2005
Really a dissapointment. A refreshing aroma and a good clean and crisp palate, but there is really something very off about the flavor. Tastes like pine, or more accurately pine-sol. Way too strong for waht it is, i would stay on the safe side with their mainstays.

4.4
   AROMA 7/10   APPEARANCE 5/5   TASTE 10/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 18/20
bcasper (4) - bakersfield, California, USA - JAN 12, 2006 does not count
this is an awesome beer at first it seems alittle off but three drinks into it you will become quite impressed i would have to say as a newbie into the real beer wolrd this is a great beer


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 « 45 46 47  48  49


Tick this beer

for your profile
  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Copyright © 2000-2014,
RateBeer LLC. All rights
reserved.
about us
About RateBeer
FAQ
Contact/Feedback
New Beers
add
Advanced Search
Add A Beer
Add A Brewer
Add A Place
Events
membership
Log In
Edit Personal Info
Buy Premium Membership
Your Messages
the best
RateBeer Best
100 Beer Club
The Top 50