bindpmc (88) - San Diego, California, USA - MAY 29, 2006
2.9 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Iíve always thought of APAs as the Ale equivalent to amber lagers: just middle-of-the-road, non-inventive, stylistically inflexible beers. If youíve had one APA, youíve had them all. The orange-y start, the generic hops tone, the entirely indistinguishable malt finish. Just about the most neutral, safe pale ale one can seek. This one delivers in all categories. Fully undistinctive, pleasant but not memorable, and leaving not a single quality in the afterglow worth mentioning. Not a bad beer by any account. Instead, this is just a decent beer, and the thought of wasting any time describing the nose (none worthy of mention), the lacing (none), the downtake (same as any other of this kind), the aftertaste (same again)...you get the idea. Ballastís Yellowtail is about as popular on tap around here as this, and that one is a mystery to me. Maybe the guys at Stone should step up to the plate and make this one a little more distinctive and a little less generic. The local brewers around here hang their collective hats on their IPAs, as they should, since each SD brewer brings a personal touch to the IPAs they offer. This...this is just Stone Pale Ale, and I can walk around the corner right now and see a homeless dude drinking it outside the corner store. Seriously. Once again, a good beer. Once again, no better than any of the other starter "good beers", like Fat Tire or Yuengling Lager, or any other world of other middling slighty hoppy ales.
alexanderj (3320) - Branson, Missouri, USA - DEC 30, 2006
2.9 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Had a sample after the tour at Stone; didnít like it and something seemed off. So I had it again on draft, same reaction. Not much hops, some malt. Very disappointing. Used to better quality from Stone.
cathcacr (636) - Oregon, USA - JAN 27, 2007
2.9 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 11/20
This one deserves a good swift kick in the ass for its lack of Arrogance and oomph. The first Stone product that I wasnít much impressed by. Back to recruit training with this one! Címon, let me see your REAL beer face!
sstackho (249) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - JUN 9, 2007
2.9 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
12oz bottle. Decided to pick this one up instead of trying the Stone IPA since I needed to have some "calmer" beers for visitors. Pours a clear copper with medium head and carbonation. Aroma is a bit light and indistinct. And I have to say that the taste is also indistinct. Itís difficult to put in words, since thereís nothing that particularly stands out with this one. Iím a bit surprised at its relatively high ratings... (well, high overall, but a bit low for Stone.) Perhaps Stoneís reputation is responsible for this? I have to say Iím disappointed with this one - and thatís the first time Iíve ever had to say that about a Stone product. I wasnít expecting anything over the top from their APA, but was hoping for more than this.
muzzlehatch (4424) - Burlington, Vermont, USA - JUL 2, 2007
2.9 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Sample from 12 ounce bottle at the Mondial, Montreal (May 2007). Kind of surprising that Iíve never tried this before, but oh well....pours a nice dark amber-copper color, lightly hazy, with a smallish lasting head but no lacing to speak of ....slightly funky, floral, strongly hoppy aroma, touched by dogwood and overripe apricots, nice....unfortunately the pleasantries donít carry through all that well to the palate; itís watery, very light in character, dry and woody towards the finish and altogether pretty boring....Iím rather surprised; canít say Iím a huge Stone partisan, but I usually think theyíre decent; this is just dull as all getout.
posikyle (165) - Alabama, USA - AUG 11, 2007
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 11/20
Not my favorite stone, I was pretty disappointed. Too much of a fruity aftertaste for me, over seemed a little flat tasting.
lunaticharness (183) - Torrance, California, USA - JUL 20, 2003
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 10/20
nice beautiful fat thick head on a light amber colored body, kind of a soapy flavor, crisp, kind of wimpy... not as good as the rest of the brews...
Kinz (3307) - Glen Allen, Virginia, USA - FEB 13, 2005
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
They never send this out East it seems, even though it is their "flagship" beer. So I drug a bottle back from California with me. Now I can see why they donít bother sending it East. It just isnít all that good. I went out of my way when rating this not to compare it to the rest of the unbelievable Stone line up, but this beer really just did nothing for me. Nice appearance though, deep copper with ruby, good head. Vaguely caramel aroma with bitter hops. In the mouth, the medium body is caramel, with a muddled, bitter hop finish. No particular hop flavors jumped out, just a basic astringency that didnít even combine well with the caramel malt. Not so much.
ajm (1066) - Los Angeles, California, USA - NOV 11, 2007
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Unless youíre stuck at a Yard House in East Nowhere, I donít know why this would be your call (if youíre the type who pores over ratebeer ratings). Itís more of a starter beer - the one that gets your buddy to start drinking micro. Very clean, not hopped like an IPA. A good palette cleanser.
Cobra (1100) - Banned City, - JAN 17, 2008
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Overall, a decent pale ale. A bit too hoppy for the gravity, but still a decent beer. Plenty of hops, plenty of malty flavors. Decent mouthfeel, but a little over hopped for my tastes.