March 2016 Archives

For a long time, I kept a running diary of quicky notes for every Tired Hands beer I drank, resulting in epic recaps of hundreds of beers. Given that they put out a few new beers every week, this was obviously not sustainable, especially once they opened the Fermentaria (their new production facility). However, I am a part of the Believer's Club, so I've kept up with the bottle releases pretty well (the cans, uh, not so much, since those releases are during the week and, you know, I have a job and all that). As a result, I've had some notes piling up for a while now, and I thought it was time to do a quick recap of the past half a year or so's worth of releases, starting with one of my favorite Tired Hands beers (and definitely the best thing to come out of the Fermentaria yet):

Freedom From the Known - This beer was a revelation when it appeared on tap, like pure sour cherry juice mixed in with Tired Hands' house saison style, it was brilliant. After bottle conditioning for a few months, it loses some of that fresh fruit juice feel, but it's still phenomenally delicious. Pours a striking pinkish hued orange color with a finger of white head. Smells great, oak and vanilla, saison spice, and of course, those cherries, though perhaps not quite as powerful as when this was fresh. Taste starts off with that saison spice, gathers some richness from the oak and vanilla, finishing off with sour cherries. Again, though, the cherries aren't quite as intense as they were when this was fresh. When it was fresh, it felt a lot like straight up cherry juice with some saison mixed in. This actually feels more balanced though, and the cherries still come through very strong right now, actually moreso than most cherry beers. I suspect further aging will reduce their impact, but this is still great. Mouthfeel is well carbonated, medium bodied, a pleasant acidity towards the finish. Overall, this is different than it was when fresh, but it's no less delicious, and it's the best beer they've released out of the foudre so far. A

Beer Nerd Details: 7.2% ABV bottled (500 ml). Drank out of a flute on 10/24/15.

Sticky Drippy Crystals - An oak fermented honey saison. Pours a bright golden yellow color, maybe hints of peach peeking through in the right light, with a half finger of slow-forming white head (nice looking carbonation when you swirl) that quickly resolves down into a cap that then sticks around for a bit. Smells very nice, vinous fruit, oak, yep there's that honey, definitely some Tired Hands house saison character, spicy with some funky earth. Taste starts off very sweet, lots of vinous fruit and honey, just a bit of that spicy saison yeast, with a tart, lemony finish. Mouthfeel falls down a bit in the carbonation arena; there's enough that it's still quite good and drinkable, but perhaps with some age, the carbonation will perk up a bit. I am, as always, overly sensitive to this sort of thing, so make of this what you will. Otherwise, it's quite bright and medium bodied, a little too sticky (though again, that's probably a carbonation thing). Overall, this is a pretty solid saison, reminds me of hanging out at the brew cafe (though I guess why wouldn't it?), and it's quite tasty. I'm thinking this could be fantastic with some age on it. For right now, B+

Beer Nerd Details: ? ABV bottled (500 ml). Drank out of a wine glass on 11/7/15.

Pourison - So Tired Hands takes their standard SaisonHands, bottle conditions it in green bottles and calls it Ourison (see below). This beer is SaisonHands conditioned atop Peaches and then bottled in their more standard 500 ml brown bottles. Pours a hazy but radiant straw yellow color with a finger of white head. Smell has that Tired Hands foudre character, oak and funk, some stone fruit too. Taste has a light funk and fruit feel to it, breezy and tart, vinous fruit pitching in here too, finishing off with those peaches. Mouthfeel is light bodied, crisp, mild but pleasant acidity, quaffable. Overall, this is a nice little number, perhaps not quite Emptiness levels awesome, but still worth the stretch. B+

Beer Nerd Details: 4.8% ABV bottled (500 ml). Drank out of a flute on 11/29/15.

Corallet - Pretty standard foudred saison setup here, with some rye and wheat. Pours a pale straw yellow color with a finger of white head. Smells funky, a little saison spice and earth. Taste has some tart fruit going on here, maybe sour cherry, but very light, hints of funky earth and maybe a bit of oak. Mouthfeel is crisp and light bodied, very slight acidity, quaffable. Overall, a solid little foudred saison, but not much to separate it from the pack. B+

Beer Nerd Details: 5.3% ABV bottled (500 ml). Drank out of a flute on 12/25/15.

Ourison - Basically bottle conditioned SaisonHands. Pours a hazy yellow color with a finger of white head and a little lacing. Smell has a strange, almost skunky aroma going on along with the more typical saison spice and tart fruit. The skunkiness fades a bit as I drink, but it was there. Not sure if this was intentional or not (it's bottled in green glass), but I'll have to check out another batch or something as most reviews don't seem to mention this. Taste is sweet with a little yeasty spice, and a nice, light tartness (no skunky character here). Mouthfeel is medium to low carbonation, very light, quaffable, and dry. Overall, not sure about that skunky note, but otherwise this is good. B- or B?

Beer Nerd Details: 4.8% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a teku on 1/1/16.

Oat Potion - Saison brewed with oats and NY wildflower honey, a collaboration with NY's Other Half. Pours a cloudy straw yellow color with finger of white head that leaves a bit of lacing. Smells of vinous fruit, white wine, oak, and funk. Taste starts off sweet, hits those vinous fruit notes hard, then oak, followed by some earthy funk and finishing with a tart note. Mouthfeel is crisp, light, well carbonated, very light acidity. Overall, this is actually the best bottled Tired Hands beer in a while. A-

Beer Nerd Details: 6.3% ABV bottled (500 ml). Drank out of a flute on 1/24/16.

Parageusia47 - Typical trippy backstory for the Para series, but this is basically a Mosaic dry hopped saison/IPA hybrid aged in Vin Santo barrels with Para microflora. Pours a cloudy yellow color with tons of fluffy, bubbly head, good retention, and even a little lacing. Smells great, citrusy American hops are all over the nose, along with vinous fruit, sweet candi sugar, maybe hints of funk and oak. Taste feels oddly muted, but all the components are there. Sweet, fruity, with those citrus hops hitting pretty hard, but not as much in the way of oak as expected, a light tartness in the finish. Mouthfeel is light bodied, crisp, and dry, yet it retains a sizable acidity. Overall, I can never really seem to get on board the hoppy sour train, but this works ok enough. It just doesn't really stand up to the other Parageusia beers. B+

Beer Nerd Details: [unintelligible symbol from the future] ABV bottled (500 ml). Drank out of a flute on 1/24/16.

Phew, that just about covers it. I'm sure many good things to come from Tired Hands, so stay tuned. Also, if you're going to the Fermentaria Anniversary, give me a shout...

In the beer world, over 90% of the market is comprised of cheap, mass-market lagers (and the grand majority of that is produced by a small handful of companies like Bud, Miller, and Coors). With so much variety and meteoric growth, it's easy to forget that we're still a tiny minority, if a growing one. Similarly, the grand majority of Scotch that is produced are blends. Some of these are bottom-shelf turpentine nightmares, but think along the lines of Johnnie Walker or Compass Box. Only in the past few decades has "Single Malt" Scotch become a thing. Before that, distilleries basically didn't release their whisky, they just sold it to blenders, who blended their way to profit (near as I understand it, in the distant past, these were basically just spirits shops who bought whisky, bottled it, and slapped on their own house label. This became so successful that these houses became famous brands that we all know, like Cutty Sark, The Famous Grouse, etc...) Basically, Scotch was a commodity market, and the distilleries weren't very well known as they were kinda behind the scenes.

Enter Independent Bottlers, who would buy up whatever malts were available, and release them individually. This is basically the equivalent of Non-Distiller Producers in the USA, but with a lot more history and tradition. These independent bottlings can be a bit overwhelming at first. Sometimes you won't even recognize the distiller, whether that's because they've long been closed (which happens a surprising amount) or because the distiller just doesn't bottle their own malts. Other times, you'll recognize the producer, but it can be an unusual age (i.e. very young or very old), have a strange one-off finish, be bottled at cask-strength, and so on. Search the internets, and you usually won't find any notes of these suckers. Near as I can tell, the releases are wildly inconsistent, and pricier than similar offerings. Sometimes that pays off because you've found an unexpected gem, other times well, let's just say that perhaps there's a reason no one else wanted that barrel.

I'm not a Scotch expert, but I believe this 18 year old Caol Ila Scotch from Montgomerie's is one of the diamonds in the rough. It's an Islay malt, but Caol Ila doesn't seem to enjoy the rabid following that gloms on to the likes of Ardbeg (a Kaedrin favorite, to be sure), Lagavulin, and Laphroig. They're sorta famous for having a more mild peat smoke character than their Islay brethren, and as such, are favored for blends (they're a key component in Johnnie Walker Black and Compass Box Peat Monster, for example). They're a huge distillery, but most of their output goes to blends, though they do have some of their own bottlings (the standard 12 year offering is a great introduction to peat smoked whisky). I took a flier on this bottle last year, but didn't open it until recently. It was expensive, to be sure, but I'm really glad I bought this, as it's fantastic:

Caol Ila 18 Years - Montgomerie's Rare Select 1996 - Pours a very pale straw yellow color (can never get over how light a lot of Islay malts appear - it belies the intense flavors to come), pretty decent legs too. Smells great, peat smoke is there but it's not a peat bomb, it's actually quite sweet, vanilla and sugar cookies. Seems to open up over time too, getting sweeter and even less peaty. However, that peat is much more prominent in the taste, lots of smokey, ashy flavor here, a note of sweet honey, hints of vanilla and oak, maybe a little peppery spice, finishing on that ashy peat smoke. Not as medicinal or iodiney as some other Islay malts. Mouthfeel is rich and oily, but not especially hot (I guess all those cask strength whiskeys I've been drinking lately are adjusting me palate). Still pretty intense though and the finish lasts for a while, making for a nice slow sipper. Overall, this is fabulous, easily among the best Islay scotches I've ever had...

Whisky Nerd Details: 46% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a Glencairn glass on 3/21/16. Distilled: 23 February 1996. Bottled: November 2014. Bottle No. 106. Cask No. 3074.

Beer Nerd Musings: Believe it or not, the first time I ever heard of Caol Ila was when I went to a local watering hole and the proprietor told me I had to try De Struise's Black Damnation III, a big imperial stout aged on Caol Ila barrels. I had no idea what that meant at the time, and truth be told? That wasn't the best beer in the world. Islay malts tend to overpower beer, and despite Caol Ila being more mild than something like Ardbeg, this beer was no exception. That being said, now that I have more of a taste for peat smoke, I might appreciate it more these days. If I see this beer again, I will almost certainly try it again. Even if it wasn't my favorite beer, it was an interesting beer. Regardless, I don't think I'd play around with this for homebrew. Not only is it too expensive to use that way, I doubt my oak cube aging skills would be good enough to yield a good result.

Phew, this pretty much wraps up the quasi-hiatus. Beer blogging will return next week, though things will probably remain a little slow until I build up that backlog of reviews. Until then, have a great Easter.

Amongst whiskey nerds, George T. Stagg appears to rival the vaunted Pappy Van Winkle line as the most lauded bourbon around. Stagg is basically standard Buffalo Trace that is aged extra long and then bottled at cask strength (usually with eye-popping, hazmat range proofs). It hasn't quite captured the mainstream as much as Pappy (I don't think I saw it on Justified, for instance), and thank goodness for that, but it's usually mentioned in the same breath as Pappy and as such, it's apparently just as difficult to land as any other whiskey out there.

I managed to get a bottle purely by luck. I complain a lot about the PLCB, but last year they instituted a lottery system for limited release spirits like the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection (which Stagg is part of), and I was lucky enough to win a bottle. The stats for the full BTAC lottery are pretty interesting, as not a single bar got a bottle of Stagg because it was picked last in the lottery and thus all of the bars had already won something else. More for us consumers, I guess. There were about 3,500 eligible entries for Stagg, and 186 winners (of which I was one). Also of note? The bottles were priced at $59.99 (As I understand this, the bottle normally retails for $79.99 and will go for 10 times that on the secondary market, easily). Hard not to be pretty pleased with the PLCB in this scenario, I must admit, and when I got my grubby hands on the bottle, I immediately went into the Gollum pose and started referring to it as "my precious". Seemed appropriate.

The 2015 iteration of Stagg was distilled in the spring of 2000 and released in the fall of 2015, making it about 15 years, 1 month old. It is comprised of 128 different barrels (#4 char), which sounds like a lot of whiskey considering a barrel is 53 gallons, but according to Buffalo Trace, 84.46% of the original whiskey was lost due to evaporation. Those angels were mighty thirsty! And it appears they soaked up mostly water in the process too, raising it to a nice and flammable level of 138.2 proof. Let's take a closer look:

George T. Stagg - Pours a deep, dark golden amber, almost brown color, nice legs. Smells fabulous, rich caramel, vanilla, oak, notes of spice but this is clearly the low rye recipe. Not that it matters, as this nose just keeps opening up, the sort of bourbon that you can savor for hours on end. After a little water, the caramel softens a bit, feels more molassesey or something, still amazing. Taste hits the rich caramel, oak, and vanilla up front, some spicy, earthy notes too, lots of booze. Water mellows it out some, brings out some sweet notes. Mouthfeel is rich and full bodied, coats your mouth with a long finish, is naturally very boozy, but somehow not as harsh as some bourbons that are much lower in ABV. A little watter smooths it out some, at the cost of a little intensity (though you kinda have to at some point, and it's still pretty amazing). Overall, this is pretty spectacular stuff, definitely in the running for best whiskey I've ever had and probably takes that crown. A

Whiskey Nerd Details: 138.2 Proof, 69.1% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a glencairn glass on 3/11/16. Vintage: 2015.

Beer Nerd Musings: For all the hype about Pappy barrel aged beer, I don't think I've ever seen a Stagg barrel aged beer. They exist, of course, but they seem few and far between. Evil Twin made a Stagg barrel aged Belgian Pale Ale, which seems like a tremendous waste. In fact, I can't seem to find any of the more prized BA styles like stout or barleywine, but it does seem like a ripe market for the taking. I guess you could say these are just "Buffalo Trace" barrels, which might work. These are definitely used a lot with beer, and usually turn out quite good, as evidenced by the win in the FiftyFifty Eclipse horizontal tasting. Also pretty tough to beat Buffalo Trace Barrel Aged Black Magick (though the Pappy Black Magick did, I think). Personally, I don't think I'd use this for homebrew. Seems like a crime to do anything but drink this whole bottle, neat (and, you know, with a little water).

Fellow Travelers: As a highly sought after bourbon, lots of folks more qualified than myself have written about this, so here's a few other opinions:

• Don't Drink Beer did a George T. Stagg versus Stagg Jr. (like Stagg, but much younger bourbon) shootout, and "NO SHIT GTS WON THIS CONTEST WOW SUCH SOLID SCIENCE HERE."
• Josh Peters at The Whiskey Jug also drank this year's Stagg and claims that of the years he's tried, this is the best. *Mr Burns finger steeple* Excellent.
• Josh at Red, White, & Bourbon has a review of the 2013 Stagg, which happens to be the lowest proof vintage ever, "only" 128.2. Apparently still greatthough.
• Sku thought the 2012 was good, but not as good as other vintages. And he doesn't review the BTAC anymore because he can't get it, you can't get it, and it's basically the same thing every year.

Well, that was an impressive bit of bourbon. Someday, I may even try some of the other BTAC bourbons. I'm particularly interested in William Larue Weller, but I'm betting that this will not happen anytime soon. I got lucky in the lottery last year, I'm doubting it will work out again (it certainly didn't in the Pappy lottery!) I'll probably take a flier on Stagg Jr. someday too, and will be sure to post about that when I get a chance. But for now, I think that wraps up the Bourbon reviews for this hiatus. However, we still have one whisky to go, a very nice, well aged Islay single malt. Look for that sometime next week...

If you'll permit a little meta-blogging/navel-gazing, sometimes I don't know what to write about when it comes to something I'm reviewing and I don't want to just post the tasting notes because their value is dubious. So I do a little research, by which I mean that I go to the library, read primary sources, consult with experts at various local universities, and other such activities. Either that, or I just spend a few minutes Googling around. Never mind which method is used more frequently! The point is that sometimes I uncover weird things. Things I wish I didn't discover.

Take, for instance, this little news item about Singlijan Tea Estate in India.

Singlijan Tea Estate in Upper Assam's Dibrugarh district has become the first tea estate in Assam to achieve "open defecation-free" status under Swachh Bharat Mission.

Open defecation is rampant in the tea estates of Assam.

I... kinda just stopped reading there. I mean, yeah, sure, manure is used for fertilizer, but I don't think that's quite what they're getting on about here. Talk about terroir! Eat your heart out wine! Anywho, at least this Estate looks on the up and up, so let's see what this open defication-free tea tastes like:

Singlijan Estate GTGFOP - Has a dark (uh, for tea) brown appearance, maybe some amber or orange highlights to it. Smells nice, typical black tea maltiness with hints of something sweeter. Taste again hits that malty black tea character, but it's got a nice natural sweetness to it that lightens the load a bit. Upton says molasses, which might be it, but I guess my mostly untrained tea palate can't be that specific. Whatever it is, it works! Mouthfeel is full bodied and chewy, quite nice. Overall, a very nice breakfast cup, and would probably rank very high amongst Single Estate Assams that I've tried. Who knows, they may be onto something with this whole defication-free setup.

Tea Nerd Details: 1 tsp for an 8 ounce cup, infused at 212° for 4.5 minutes.

Beer Nerd Musings: Fortunately, I'm pretty sure that most barley/hop farms are open defecation-free. On the other hand, it's not something I ever really even thought to look into. Frankly, I'm not exactly getting all charged up to do so either. Otherwise, I guess this tea could make for a nice ingredient were I to try a tea-infused brew again sometime. Strong, malty, with a nice sweet note, that could work well if given the right platform. Or something. Alright, I'm talking out of my ass. Which I use to defecate. Jeeze, sorry to keep fixating on that, it was just unexpected.

In other news, we're coming down the quasi-hiatus homestretch, in less that two weeks, we should be getting back to beer. I'm sure you're all relieved. In other news, we got a couple of fantastic whiskeys coming up in these remaining two weeks, and who knows? I might swing something else beer related, like that post on Northeast IPAs...

The beer nerd world is all aflutter about the so-called "Northeast IPA" (aka "Milkshake IPA", which we'll get to... er, later in this post), exemplified by the juicy, unfiltered, cloudy looking wares of The Alchemist, Hill Farmstead, Treehouse, Trillium, and I'll include local favorite Tired Hands too. This isn't really a new observation, but the current kerfluffle kicked off a few weeks ago with an article in Willamette Week called IPA Is Dead, Long Live IPA in which the author cites Northeast influence on the famed Portland, Oregon brewery scene:

When Portland beer geeks sampled the beers blind, it turned out they preferred brighter, juicier versions like those in the Northeast, which have only recently popped up in Portland. The five best IPAs in the city come from brand-new breweries, and most of those have been influenced by Heady Topper, Julius and Sculpin, beers that present hops as a reward rather than a challenge.

There are a few different things to parse here. One is the transition from punishingly bitter IPAs to pleasantly bright and juicy takes on the style, which is unquestionably happening. Another is that this trend originated in the Northeast; an assertion that is more dubious, as Jeff Alworth points out:

The Northeast, like the rest of the country, is not a monolith. Martin seems to be talking about New England here, but New England was actually very late getting to the hops party. Heady Topper is a fascinating beer, but its influence was basically nil in the pubs and breweries of New England, which have largely tended toward English-inflected, balanced, and notably malty beers. (Its influence among the uber-geeks of BeerAdvocate is another matter.) Martin proves this pretty ably because in the three examples of Northeast IPAs he offers, one is from San Diego. It's not an old trend there. Those small New England breweries didn't even drive a palate shift in Portland, Maine, so I have a hard time believing they drove one in Portland, Oregon.

Certainly a fair point, and Alworth goes on to try and break down the trend to it's constituent parts: American Hops, Flavor, and IBUs. It's here that I think his argument doesn't really capture what's going on in the New Guard of Northeast, though his points are part of it and are also more widespread than just the Northeast (I left a comment on Jeff's blog that covers some of the below.)

That one time I poured Heady Topper into a glass, what a rebel I am

To my mind, the whole trend culminating with the likes of Heady Topper (et al.) started with Greg Noonan at the Vermont Pub and Brewery in the 1990s. It's true that the Northeast is not a monolith and Alworth accurately pins down the old-school Northeastern style as "English-inflected, balanced, and notably malty beers" (think Hop Devil). However, beers like Bombay Grab IPA were precursors to what we're seeing today. Noonan alone was quite influential in the brewing world, having authored several books and just plain helped lots of other brewers.

Yes, American hops, dry hopping, and less bittering hops are part of the shift, but what I associate with the Northeast beers is yeast - Conan and other English strains that aren't as clean fermenting (i.e. they accentuate the fruitiness and juiciness of the hops) as the Chico American Ale stuff that drove so much of the West Coast IPA craze. Where did this come from? Greg Noonan.

Looking at the Northeast breweries listed above, there's also a tendency to use other adjuncts in place of something like crystal malt, so you get oats, wheat, maybe rye, and so on. The hops change with what's available, and a lot of breweries experiment with new or experimental hops, but when I started drinking IPAs (turn of the century timeframe), things seemed very different from the new guard of Northeast IPAs.

I'm not claiming causality here and can't speak to the influence of these beers outside the Northeast, but there's clearly something going on here that is more than just hop-driven. Heady Topper didn't happen by accident; John Kimmich worked for Greg Noonan. That's where he got the Conan yeast from. Heady was available in 2004, but it remained somewhat obscure until they started canning it. After that? you get an explosion of new breweries with a similar core approach.

Do all the Northeast Breweries take this approach? Of course not! But that doesn't mean there isn't a trend. Do some folks take the approach too far? Ah, now this is the next part of the controversy. Witness Jamil Zainasheff on Twitter:

I'm sorry, you who think this is acceptable beer have lost your minds. This overly yeasty crap is offensive. pic.twitter.com/TTTrT3nbhi

— Jamil Zainasheff (@mrmalty) March 2, 2016

And now we come to what is termed the "Milkshake IPA"; beers that are so cloudy that they barely look like a beer (interestingly, the beer that so offended Zainasheff looks pretty middle of the road in this respect). Part of this is the old-school BJCP emphasis on clarity in beer. It's true, a clear beer sure looks pretty in the glass. But as a result of using low flocculation yeast, starchy adjuncts like wheat or oats, and excessive dry hopping, you get a beer whose flavors are great, but which can appear hazy or worse (Ed gets into it more here).

For some reason, this really gets on some people's nerves. Which is fine! No one is forcing you to drink all the Hill Farmstead and those of us who enjoy their generally limited beer will thank you for leaving more for us. Instead, we just get a lot of whining. A few months ago, one of the Alstrom Bros (of Beer Advocate fame) visited Tired Hands and gave this review to HopHands:

Not feeling it with this brew, extremely cloudy and a mess to say the least. Staff at the pub should not be pouring it. Milkshake beers are not a trend or acceptable with traditional or even modern styles... No excuses. Carbonation seemed off, a muddled mess.

Yikes! In typical Tired Handsian fashion, Jean responded by putting out a series of "Milkshake" beers. IPAs brewed in their typical style, but with added lactose and usually some sort of high-pectin fruit puree in order to really amp up the cloudiness factor. I'm not positive about all of the beers in the series, but I know the recently released canned variety, Strawberry Milkshake IPA, also used wheat flour(!) for that extra turbid look:

(Click to Embiggen)

Now, I can see why this particular pour might not be your thing, but it was absolutely delicious! Knowing the context, I think the appearance is perfectly cromulent (especially given how good it tastes). Most of the beers in question don't actually look like this, except maybe Hoof Hearted... and, um, look what they named their brewery! Those are clearly people who don't care what you think. But even standard Tired Hands IPAs can be pretty hazy, and this group of Northeast brewers all seem to have a taste for such beer. When visiting Tired Hands one time a couple years ago, Jean filled a couple of growlers and gave them to a customer who was making a trip to Hill Farmstead. Since Sean Hill apparently likes his beer cloudy, Jean renamed "Communication is the Key" to "Communication is the Murky" and "We Are All Infinite Energy Vibrating At The Same Frequency" to "We Are All Hazy As Hell Vibrating at the Same Cloudiness".

(Click to Embiggen)

I think that's another thing worth noting about this whole Northeast phenomenon - these guys all know each other. They collaborate, they swap beers, they're clearly feeding off of one another. The Bros have rated some other beers with similar comments (one I noticed a while back was Trillium Vicinity), so they're clearly bugged by hazy beer. I guess it's possible to get a bad pour. I mean, according to Untappd, I've had well over 300 checkins at Tired Hands, and I've never gotten something that was unintentionally milkshakey. Very hazy? Certainly. But nothing like the Milkshake beers (which, again, were made with tongue firmly in cheek).

Incidentally, I have no idea what beer Jamil Zainasheff was talking about above. This is becoming a bit of a pet peeve for me. People like to whine about "bad breweries" and "offensive" beers, but it seems like they rarely ever actually name names. I mean, I'm sure these things exist, but it's hard to accept your hot take if you won't actually tell us what you're talking about. Strawman arguments are bad enough even when you name the strawman. At least the Bros are clear.

But I digress and I have rambled on for far too long. My ultimate points are that the Northeast IPA appears to be more than just hop-based (yeast and starchy adjuncts seem to play a big role), there is a long tradition with traceable influence, and you know, drink what you like. I happen to have no problem with this trend. If you do, more power to you, but maybe tone down the rhetoric a bit. As for a causal relationship with newfangled Oregon beer, I have no idea. Cloudy beer is certainly not a new thing, even in Oregon, but part of the point is that it's not necessarily the cloudiness that defines Northeast IPA. That's just a symptom of the way these folks are brewing.

Or maybe I'm full of it. As mentioned yesterday, comments are working again, so feel free to register your disgust (assuming you have a Google, Wordpress, etc... account). What say you? I made this post too long didn't I? None of you are actually reading this, are you? I'm the worst. Or the Würst. Are you still here or not? What's going on? Get off my lawn! Or no, wait, leave a comment. So it's getting late and I'm obviously getting loopy, so I'll stop now. Or will I? No, I will. I just haven't yet. Annnnd scene!

At least, I think they are, hence this test post which you can safely ignore.

I've confirmed that the two most popular login types are working, so Google OpenID and Wordpress users are free to fire away in the comments. It looks like the new version of Google ID (now that I've got it working) actually shows a relevant name and even links to Google+ (formerly, you got a username at best, and a weird string of characters at worst). Go forth, ye readers, and comment. Also, why are you reading this? I said to ignore this post. IGNORE ME!

One of the things I like to do during my annual and temporary semi-detour from beer is to drink some things that aren't alcohol. For shame! I know. But to paraphrase Immortan Joe: Do not, my friends, become addicted to alcohol. It will take hold of you, and you will resent its absence!

Monk's Blend is typically a blend of black teas flavored with grenadine and vanilla. My favored tea purveyor, Upton Tea Imports, seems to have a different take on the matter. Theirs is a blend of Ceylon-based Earl Grey with Chinese green tea and bourbon vanilla. Not your typical cup of tea, I'd say. I like the name though, it conjures the vision of Sri Lankan monks laboring away at a remote mountainside monastery, perfecting a blend of tea over the course of centuries. Instead, it's probably a hipster wearing a hoodie (close enough to a Monk's robe, I guess) sprinkling some green tea into an Earl Grey, chucking in some vanilla while they're at it. But I kid. I kid because I love. Upton has always treated me well, so let's take a closer look at this sucker:

Monk's Blend Tea - The tea leaves clearly show a mixture of green and black tea, but are otherwise nothing special. Liquor appears a very light brown color. The leaves smell intense, but once steeped, it calms down a bit, even if it still smells quite complex. You get vegetal green tea notes, but also something deeper, nuttier, maltier, with a little of that fruity Earl Grey character sneaking through. The taste trends more towards a malty black tea than the nose, and the bergamot is more apparent here as well, but the green tea softens the blow while adding complexity. I don't particularly get vanilla in the nose or taste, but maybe I'm not looking hard enough. Mouthfeel is light and bright and easy going. Overall, this is a very nice, complex but light cup of tea. I very much enjoy it!

Tea Nerd Details: 1 tsp for an 8 ounce cup, infused at 180° for 3 minutes.

Beer Nerd Musings: Blending is certainly a thing with beer. Gueuze is traditionally a blend of 3, 2, and 1 year old lambic, but the proportions are not set in stone and indeed, batch variation sometimes means the blend changes from batch to batch. They don't call Armand Debelder a master blender for nothing. Other examples are numerous. Firestone Walker's Anniversary beers are always a blend of barrel aged components; a collaboration with their winemaking neighbors (no strangers to blending, they). Most barrel aged beers are blended together, and indeed, some barrels can be wildly different from others (they don't call it wild yeast for nothing). Allagash once collaborated with local Philly institution Monk's Cafe (amongst others) on a sour blend, and they included all of the barrels they used in the finished product (even noting some barrels that should not be used). There are lots of other examples, but ironically, I don't think any of the famous Trappist Monks do noteworthy blending with their beer (Update: Those Monk's at Koningshoeven do a little blending with their oak aged La Trappe Quadrupel, so there's that)

Blogging might be light this week, though I have been wanting to comment on the whole cloudy IPA phenomenon. Tea blogging will probably continue at some point as well, maybe even hitting up some non-caffeinated varieties. I know, will the horrors ever cease?

I've often noted my fondness for the openness Four Roses displays with their recipes. It makes the homebrewer inside of me all squishy. That being said, I've only ever had one recipe on hand. I was able to sample a regular single barrel (OBSV) with a cask strength private selection of the same recipe and that difference blew me away. This time around, I sought out something different, then lucked into another bottle that I'm guessing is as different as possible.

First up is a Private Selection from TalkBeer.com. Yes, you read that right, apparently a community of beer nerds can purchase their own barrel. In fact, this is the third time a group of beer nerds got together, traveled to Louisville, KY, met with Jim Rutledge, and sampled from about 10 barrels. You can get the background at the TalkBeer thread (needless to say, somebody chose their best man well!), but here's the barrel they chose:

(Click to Embiggen)

It's an OBSK, which is the high rye recipe with yeast that produces a light spiciness, light caramel, and full body bourbon. It's 10 years, 8 months, and 19 days old, and bottled at 113.2 proof (not quite the boozy monster that my OBSV pick was, but certainly enough to pack a punch). Sploosh.

Then last fall, during a trip to the Garden State, I decided to stop in at a liquor store to see if they had any Carton beer, and what did I stumble upon? Another Four Roses Private Selection, this one from White Horse Wine & Spirits in Absecon, NJ. I don't think it's possible for this bottle to be more different than the TalkBeer pick. It's an OESF, so it's lower rye with a yeast that trends towards herbal character (I kept calling it floral though, go figure). Oddly, it was also 10 years and 8 months old (doesn't list the days), but it's only 107.8 proof. Nothing to sneeze at, to be sure, but it's awfully close to the regularly available single barrel. While not my favorite bourbon, this did make for a truly fascinating double feature because these two bourbons are very different. Really happy I got both of these bottles though, and will certainly be looking to expand my collection in the future. Let's take a closer look at each:

Four Roses Private Selection Single Barrel Bourbon - TalkBeer OBSK - Pours a reddish orange brown (leather bound books and rich mahogany). Smells very nice, spicy rye, cinnamon candy, oak, caramel, and a beautiful wallop of vanilla, and that fruity bubblegum character that seems to wind its way through all the Four Roses expressions I've had (thanks to Kaedrin beverage compatriot Padraic's observation long ago, I can't not notice it now). Taste starts off with that spicebox character, cinnamon and the like, with a nice caramel, oak, and vanilla middle, then the spices strike back in force towards the finish. Very complex and layered, I'm picking up different pieces with each sip, and after some time, that caramel and vanilla character really opens up. Mouthfeel is full bodied, not quite syrupy, but it's got a nice coating factor, and the boozy heat is quite approachable (even to my baby-like beer palate). Overall, this is a fantastic, well rounded Bourbon, among my favorites ever. A-

Whiskey Nerd Details: 113.2 Proof, 56.6% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a glencairn glass on 2/26/16. Selected by TalkBeer. Four Roses Recipe Selected: OBSK. Aged 10 Years 8 Months 19 Days. Warehouse No.: QS. Barrel No.: 87-20.

Four Roses Private Selection Single Barrel Bourbon - White Horse Wine & Spirits OESF - Pours a bit lighter than the TalkBeer, a golden orange brown color (less Anchormany). Smells quite different, more sweet corn, less spice, more in the way of floral, vegetal, herbal aromas, actually even less of that fruity bubblegum (though it's still there). Taste follows the nose, sweeter, much less spice, much more of the floral, herbal character. Mouthfeel is lighter, less spicy, less hot. Overall, by itself, I find this a bit disappointing, but still quite nice. It is, however, fascinating to drink this beside other Four Roses recipes, as it's quite distinct. Personally, I tend to prefer the spicier, more caramelly recipes, but this is worth trying. I do wonder about the low-ish ABV though, and if it were higher, would that intensity win me over? I'll have to keep an eye out. In fact, a while ago, I might have had the 2014 Limited Edition Single Barrel at a bar, which was also an OESF, but I can't find the picture to confirm this, and I remember that sample to have a distinct minty character that was awesome. Alas, no such minty goodness here. B

Whiskey Nerd Details: 107.8 Proof, 53.9% ABV bottled (750 ml). Drank out of a glencairn glass on 2/26/16. Selected by White Horse Wine & Spirits. Four Roses Recipe Selected: OESF. Aged 10 Years 8 Months. Warehouse No.: GW. Barrel No.: 48-1U.

Beer Nerd Musings: Plenty of beer has been aged in Four Roses barrels, but you know what? To my knowledge, no one has ever specified which Four Roses recipe they were using. Next level beer nerdery: a series of imperial stouts aged in all ten recipe barrels of Four Roses. FiftyFifty, you're up! Somehow, I doubt this will ever happen. However, I hold out hope that someday, I'll visit a really small brewery and they'll show me the barrel the beer is aging in, and I'll be able to see the stenciled recipe on the barrel. A man can dream. Or, um, not. This is getting pretty wonky. I'll stop now.

Fellow Travelers: Lots of people more knowledgeable than myself have tackled the different Four Roses recipes, often in a much more complete and detailed fashion:

• Josh at Red, White, & Bourbon has helped select a barrel ("unquestionably the best barrel of Four Roses every picked", an OBSO) and he's managed to collect samples of all 10 recipes. He's posted about the the OE set, as well as the Limited Edition Single Barrel 2013 (an OBSK, but with higher proof and more age than my bottle) and 2014 (an OESF that seemed very similar to the above in terms of stats). He seemed to like the OESF much more than me, but then, they were different barrels:P
• Sku also reviewed the 2013 Limited Edition Single Barrel and seemed to love it. He also reviewed the 2014 pick, and noted that it "doesn't jump out at me as particularly special", which goes along with my experience here (in your face, josh!)
• Josh at The Whiskey Jug has a review of an OBSK pick as well as a post about all 10 recipes. There, the OESF did better than the OBSK, go figure.
• Josh at Sipology (why are all you Bourbon drinkers named Josh?) has also partaken of the 2013 LESB and also had a similar experience comparing an OBSK with an OBSF (not quite what I did, but hey, close enough).

We've got at least one more doozy of a bourbon to go before this little beer quasi-hiatus concludes, so stay frosty folks, we'll be back to beer in no time (or, uh, a few weeks from now).

Vintage Port is generally a pricey proposition, but one of the few good things about the PLCB monopoly is that when the Chairman sets his sights on Port, you're in for a bargain or two. Most Vintage Ports I see sell for $70 or more, but currently in PA, this bottle can be had for $39.99. Still expensive, to be sure, but not a bad shake. I do enjoy the occasional nightcap of Port, though it's usually something more along the lines of a basic Reserve Port. However, since we're on a little quasi-hiatus from beer, I figure it's worth splurging on a bottle of Vintage Port.

Near as I can tell Barão de Vilar (the "Baron of Vilar"?) is a longstanding but somewhat obscure producer that has been attempting to expand their footprint. Vintage Ports aren't an every year thing, but 2011 appears to have been a particularly good year, referred to as a "Classic" that is drinkable now but which will also age well.

Barão de Vilar Vintage Port 2011 - Pours a beautiful, inky dark purple color. Smells amazingly good, ripe dark fruits, chocolate? A slightly earthy note? Taste is full of rich fruit and a surprisingly strong tannin character. I don't mean to imply that this is some sort of tannic monster, it's more of a relative thing. Tannic... for a port. It's not unpleasant and it certainly does make the wine distinctive, though I have to wonder about the implications. Does this make the bottle a particularly good candidate for aging? Perhaps! I mean, I don't really know, this is a beer blog, so take this with a giant asteroid of salt, but it seems worth a flier. Mouthfeel is full bodied, rich, and chewy. Not dry, but again, that tannic character does contribute more dryness than your typical port. Overall, this is drinking well right now, but I'm guessing it will age really well. B+

Wine Nerd Details: 20% ABV bottled (750 ml corked). Drank out of a copita glass on 2/28/16. Vintage: 2011.

Beer Nerd Musings: I've already speculated on the usage of port barrels to age beer, how a Vintage Port barrel would compare to, say, a Tawny Port barrel, and even the concept of fortified beer. This time around, I'd like to think on the concept of a "Vintage" year. I wonder how that concept could apply to beer. Interestingly enough, there are some examples of this sort of thing. Rodenbach does Vintage releases (in addition to their normal blended releases), but near as I can tell, they do them every year, so it's not as selective as Port. Drie Fonteinen does have a beer called Oude Geuze Vintage and this is, in fact, not released every year (though it is most years). But again, it's not quite a direct analog to Port. It is, in fact, the same beer as the "regular" Oude Geuze, but for whatever reason, the brewers decide that it needs more time to mature in the bottle. This could be because they think it has good aging potential, but it could also be because a portion of the current batch simply hasn't carbed up enough or developed enough such that it would be consistent with the typical release. Now, usually, the Vintage release is received rapturously, but that could simply be because it has had more time to age. Unlike most beer, Lambic appears to age remarkably well, so this beer has a built in rarity and desirability right from the start. It's probably the closest beer comes to something like a Vintage Port.

The PLCB also has bottles of Feuerheerd's 10 Year Old Tawny Port right now, and that's also worth picking up (not sure if I like it more than last year's Reserve Port, but I'll take it). Stay tuned folks, tomorrow we hit up some Bourbon.