Originally posted by shrubber85
I don’t think you have a blind spot; you’re pretty much in the norm. Most pale lagers (especially macros) are nearly indistinguishable. I had a friend who was a regular Bud drinker and swore he could tell it apart from any other pale lager so I bet him if we did a blind testing with about 10 other pale lagers that he wouldn’t be able to do it. (I threw in a Sam Adams Boston Lager for fun). We had about 10 people tasting - one person was even bragging that her father was an Anheuser Busch distributor and that she could tell which one was Bud any day of the week. The end results were that nobody was able to distinguish any of them from another (besides the Sam Adams which stood out like a sore thumb, and the Heineken because it was skunked). Old Style came out on top with Milwaukee’s Best in second.
I’ve seen this replicated over and over as well. People who say they are very brand loyal to Miller because they thought Coors and Bud were horrible could not tell the difference.
I think a part of this may have to do a little with the optimal serving temperatures for pale lagers being very low. People say the macro lager producers advise this to mask flavors, and while this is true, it also has to do with mouthfeel and taste. Warmer beer can’t hold as much CO2 and so a better mouthfeel of many pale lagers, one that relies on delivering a spritzy crispness and an acidic spike to aromas and flavor, relies on a lower serving temperature.
|
Originally posted by joet
I think pale lagers also have a relatively small window in their life cycle in which they’re wonderfully optimal, and they tend to be fairly sensitive to poor handling.
This is why the "country tick" is often unfair. It’s just another bland golden lager but gets to you in worse condition. There are crappy pale lagers, but amny of them are successfully hitting "barely adequate" if consumed fresh. |
As others have noted, the style doesn’t offer much depth or complexity 99% of the time. It’s tough to tease out little nuances. Some RBians ignore them altogether.
If you’re digging other styles and they’re rewarding and varied, don’t worry about pale lagers for a while.
If you can find some highly-rated non-macro pale lagers *at some point*, try to line up 5-7 of them and taste them all at once. When you’re dealing with subtle differences, a good-sized horizontal can be helpful. |
|
|
Did you mean blind spot or blood sport? |
Pale lagers are for drinking. If you’re sitting over your pale lager with a notebook, swirling and sniffing, you’re going to be sorely disappointed.
The times when I’ve most enjoyed a pale lager are those times when I’ve been hot and thirsty and have drunk a cold one. It was the experience I enjoyed, and the refreshment. If in the same circumstances I had drunk a warm 12% abv IPA or Imperial Stout, I probably would noyt have enjoyed the experience so much, but I could have written pages on the flavours.
Sometime, yeah, it’s not about the flavours. Sometimes it’s not about how much the beer makes an impact. Sometimes, just sometimes, its about quenching your thirst in a quiet, dignified, and pleasant manner. You don’t want corn or veggie notes. You want some crispness, some bite, some malt - not much, just a touch of golden biscuit, not too sweet, and a smattering of lemony, herby hops - not aggressive, just a little flavouring to finish the drink.
Pale lager is the world’s most popular drink for a reason. And that reason has got nothing to do with a complex range of flavours. It’s all to do with drinkability, some bite, some flavour (but not too much), the ability to refresh and at the same time to gently intoxicate. Attach to that the feel good factor of drinking a brand you associate with, and you’re good to go. (And we all have brands we associate with - many associate with the common touch and Americanism of Budweiser, but the folks here on RateBeer tend to prefer a more individual and radical brand like Three Floyds, Lost Abbey, Toppling Goliath or Cloudwater)
|
I have grown fond of Eastern European lagers. Taste them side by side with some UK or US macro lagers and you can taste a world of difference. |
I assume by pale lagers we do not mean hoppy pilsners? They are lagers, and they are usually pale, and I often enjoy them, especially in the summer.
But if it is beers that classed as pale lagers, my favorite so far is Anchor’s California Lager. It actually had the clean crisp refreshing attributes that defenders of Bud and similar claim for those beers. |
|
|
Originally posted by fly
Did you mean blind spot or blood sport?
Blood sport, of course - sorry! Must’ve been the autocorrect.
Originally posted by OnTheTrail
I assume by pale lagers we do not mean hoppy pilsners?
No, more along the lines of Helles, Märzen, "regular" european Pilsner and alike styles. Drinking them, I’m always just "Huh, that’s okay. Nice." or "Meh. I’ll just knock it down and order something else." But maybe "Nice" is all it takes.
Thanks for the input, guys. It’s not that I’m trying really hard to be a good lager-rater. But sometimes I almost feel like I should cut them some slack. As many of you said, and as I’ve learned over the last two years, it’s a whole different style and should be appreciated for what it is. The thing is that I’m always wandering if I really _get_ what it is, or if I’m going in with the wrong expectations, coming from other, bolder styles. Glad some of you know the feeling as well.
|
Originally posted by SilkTork
Pale lagers are for drinking. If you’re sitting over your pale lager with a notebook, swirling and sniffing, you’re going to be sorely disappointed.
The times when I’ve most enjoyed a pale lager are those times when I’ve been hot and thirsty and have drunk a cold one. It was the experience I enjoyed, and the refreshment. If in the same circumstances I had drunk a warm 12% abv IPA or Imperial Stout, I probably would noyt have enjoyed the experience so much, but I could have written pages on the flavours.
Sometime, yeah, it’s not about the flavours. Sometimes it’s not about how much the beer makes an impact. Sometimes, just sometimes, its about quenching your thirst in a quiet, dignified, and pleasant manner. You don’t want corn or veggie notes. You want some crispness, some bite, some malt - not much, just a touch of golden biscuit, not too sweet, and a smattering of lemony, herby hops - not aggressive, just a little flavouring to finish the drink.
Pale lager is the world’s most popular drink for a reason. And that reason has got nothing to do with a complex range of flavours. It’s all to do with drinkability, some bite, some flavour (but not too much), the ability to refresh and at the same time to gently intoxicate. Attach to that the feel good factor of drinking a brand you associate with, and you’re good to go. (And we all have brands we associate with - many associate with the common touch and Americanism of Budweiser, but the folks here on RateBeer tend to prefer a more individual and radical brand like Three Floyds, Lost Abbey, Toppling Goliath or Cloudwater)
SilkTork I miss your posts . That was like a fucken cultural thesis on pale lager . |
Originally posted by hawthorne00
Originally posted by joet
I think pale lagers also have a relatively small window in their life cycle in which they’re wonderfully optimal, and they tend to be fairly sensitive to poor handling.
This is why the "country tick" is often unfair. It’s just another bland golden lager but gets to you in worse condition. There are crappy pale lagers, but amny of them are successfully hitting "barely adequate" if consumed fresh.
sometimes the country tick pale lagers are pretty bad even when consumed fresh. This is definitely the case with almost all East and West African beers, where the breweries seem to like leaving hundreds of pallets of beer sitting out in the sun for a few months before selling them. it’s a sad sight |
