mrant (330) - New York, USA - OCT 23, 2007
Smells spicy. Pours a crystal clear amber with no head. This is the second sorghum beer i’ve tasted and its the last. The taste is awful. Reminds me of a dirty sock or something. Bigsilky (327) - Charleston, USA - MAR 3, 2006
I don’t get the "Ale" listing either, it’s labeled a lager. In any event, this beer, compared with wheat based beers doesn’t fare very well. THe color and carbonation is spot on, the aromas are odd combining a slighty grassy hop with an odd malt fruitiness. This beer is not pasteurized, this is important b/c I have had good bottles and bad depending on the storage conditions, so if it tastes that disgusting, maybe it’s worth another try.
The bottom line is that if you are gluten-intolerant you probably haven’t had a beer is some number of years. If that be the case, rejoice. While this is not the beer of choice, esp. for the price, for those of us lucky enough to enjoy wheat products, those who have had to obstain and watch the rest of the beer world run around them this beer is a blessing. Homebrewerguy (320) - Oil City, Pennsylvania, USA - JAN 15, 2007
UPDATED: JAN 16, 2007 My first sorghum beer. The bottle says it was brewed on 7/25/06.. So this is what they’re drinking in China...the poor saps. Sorghum certainly ain’t barley and the difference is in the beer. Still I could understand a cult following for the sharp taste of sorghum. Not me though. Veeve (312) - Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA - AUG 20, 2005
a very light and crisp lager. very pale clear yellow hue. highly carbonated, fizzy. small white head that doesn’t last. little aroma of corn. taste begins of faint corn fructose. but then the aftertaste is sour and fruity like apples. it also dries out your mouth. while it goes down light and refreshing on the palate, the dryness is unpleasant. I rated this beer higher than I would if it were based on my personal like/dislike of the beer. This is the only beer that individuals with Celiac ( a wheat allergy) can drink. It is impressive what the brewer was able to create, a very average-good and very drinkable beer which such limited ingredients.b burgerlicious (308) - Indianapolis, Indiana, USA - JUL 30, 2005
Reading the commericial description, what kind of brewer would intentionally try to appeal to those who prefer Coors, Miller, etc? I guess they succeeded, because I find this just as rancid/repulsing/awful as the macros.
redgold07 (308) - Irving, Texas, USA - JUL 27, 2008
Pours a nice bronze color with very little white head. Smell is sour. Flavor is very sour and tastes like it has gone bad. REALLY BAD. Maybe I got a bad bottle. It says it was bottled in February though... weird. Yuk.
12 oz. bottle. BrianHagmeier (299) - Coralville, Iowa, USA - FEB 5, 2008
Pours a light golden with a large frothy white head. The head rapidly diminished. Taste is slightly coffee bitter with a nice balance of caramel, roasted malt and sorghum. I thought the label was tacky so I was surprised what a great beer this is. Yes, I know, Don’t rate a beer by its cover. whitecap (289) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - DEC 8, 2012
bottle. "Bard*s". clear yellow with a small white head. aroma of grain. some, hay and caramel and of course sorgham. not bad. one of the better sorgham beers I’ve had. lumpsowers (288) - Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA - NOV 24, 2009
Light copper pour, light head and lace. Sour grainy aroma. (Drunk at this point…) Rumple straw (?) is the dominate flavor, tastes like a real beer. A bit beery for my tastes (?). Some bad bitter aftertaste.
dionysian_son (277) - Colorado, USA - JUL 13, 2011
Pours a pale gold with hints of brown. Head is thin with no lace and disperses immediately. Nose is thin with slight tart notes. Thin on the tongue, almost like a light American lager. Smooth and watery with minimal hop and some thin light roasted malt moving into a tangy, soapy finish with subtle cane sugar. Not that interesting.