Reid (2178) - Salem, Oregon, USA - NOV 30, 2003
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
The beer looks pretty good..nothing spectacular but still invitng.
Its a very light brown..almost burnished brass colour with a small head , which soon fades to a good sized lace.
Smell is muted yet i do pick up on a little malt..thats about it..average aroma.
For such a weak aroma the taste is actually quite nice..nice maltry taste right at the start but as it reaches the back of the tongue a nice hop bitterness takes over..very balanced.
Fells pretty nice in the mouth , the carbonation is not too high just right.
Overall a drinkable amber..but with the market so saturated with these I doubt i will find a reason to return to this.
dukefan (214) - Dallas, Texas, USA - OCT 24, 2003
2.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
While not a fan of Widmer beers, this had a clean, refreshing caramelly flavor that you come to expect from a good amber.
BarePaw (148) - Pullman, Washington, USA - OCT 13, 2003
4.2 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
This is a good amber. It pours a nice thick offwhite head. It has a lighter amber color. It has a smooth carmel flavor that is very pleasant.
jazz88 (2638) - San Francisco, California, USA - OCT 11, 2003
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Tap @ Old Pro. Amber color with an off-white head head. Smooth butterscotch and light malt flavor. Not much aroma, but it was an identifiable amber ale. I was surprised at how easy drinkin' this beer was.
elnadeau (786) - Laguna Niguel, California, USA - SEP 16, 2003
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Misty Amber appearance with a decent sized head, sweet caramel malt aroma. Not a bad example of the style, probably redundant to call it drinkable. Nothing real distinctive here, it falls in the middle of the beer spectrum for me - would not turn one down but I'm not seeking it out either.
weusebio (69) - Portland, Oregon, USA - AUG 28, 2003
3.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
No, not as bad as people say. Not exceptional, but when drinking it at the brewery, especially with late night $7 pitchers, there's nothing better to get yourself pounded on. A good beer that goes down smooth. When you don't want to think about all the high and low points of a beer and just drink one, grab a pint of this...
Murphy (1759) - Fort Collins, Colorado, USA - AUG 9, 2003
3.3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Not as bad as people say. Consistent maltyness, with not much hops. This is probably better than most widmer beers. Good color. Tastes good off a fat keg at a UP party.
BückDich (5464) - McCall, Idaho, USA - JUL 15, 2003
3.1 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
A decent amber ale with more than average hop content. A malty floral aroma and a musky finish, semisweet mouthfeel. Not too bad, but very average.
harlequinn (2744) - Tacoma, Washington, USA - JUL 15, 2003
2.4 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
I was not terribly impressed here, just like every other average amber ale out on the market. Quickly diminishing head, with a very opaque amber coloring and no lacing. Off balance and acidic, astringent and piney. It could have once again been a bad bottle, but not something I would be inclined to try again.
Ernest (7029) - Boulder, Colorado, USA - JUL 9, 2003
2.4 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 9/20
Head is initially small, frothy, off-white, mostly diminishing. Body is clear medium amber. Aroma is moderately yeasty (dough, sweat), lightly malty (cookie), lightly hoppy (flowers), with a light note of orange. Flavor is moderately sweet, moderately acidic, lightly bitter. Finish is lightly sweet, moderately acidic, moderately bitter. Medium body, watery texture, lively carbonation. Very yeasty smelling, and the citric quality doesn't suit my tastes. Sleep inducing, much like my rating style.