Looking for trouble... [Archive] - Realbeer.com Beer Community

MrNate

07-16-2007, 06:11 PM

Ok, I know I'm going to get hell for this, but why does everyone think Bud and Coors are so terrible? Now I'm not saying that I would order them at a bar if there was anything else available, but with this heat I've been drinking coors light while I grill.

I'm really starting to feel like I don't fit in with either crowd. The beer snobs think less of me because I think that Bud has its place, and the macro brand loyalists think I'm a beer snob.

Is it just me?

(Mostly) Everyday Beers I Like:

Bud/Coors/Etc.
Hoegaarden
Fuller's ESB
Smithwick's
Paulaner Salvator
Sam Adams Boston Ale
Just about every Troegs I've tried

Beers I Dislike (and think are way overrated):

Pilsner Urquell
Stella Artois
Yuengling (what the hell is that flavor? It tastes like something between skunkiness and Brett.)
Sierra Nevada PA --Added to list, someone mentioned it in the comments below and I remembered I don't care for it.

BigEd

07-16-2007, 06:40 PM

If you like BMC that's fine but I surely wouldn't include them on that list if the implication is that all of those beers are on an equal plain. Perhaps many who would qualify as beer snobs as I'm sure I would have immense problems with the BMC producers and crowd touting the flavor and premium ingredients of those brews. Whatever flavor those beers may have had 100 years ago or more has been continually diminished over time in direct proportion to the increase in mass advertising to convince the public that they are "world class", "tastes great" or whatever the latest BS phrase might be. Honestly as a long time homebrewer I can appreciate the level of technical skill that is required to brew beers of the BMC ilk. Frankly, however, they are just tasteless ethanol delivery systems sold to mass consumers who for the most part just don't know any better. It's "The Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome of beer. ;)

barleyburps

07-16-2007, 07:03 PM

I don't hate them. I personally think they are bland bitter-sweet concotions with no body/mouthfeel.

Body and mouthfeel are very important to me . . . a beer put out by ANY brewery that doesn't have body and mouthfeel is in my opinion second rate at best. . .

hooky

07-16-2007, 09:19 PM

There's good beer and there's kayak beer.

As more micro's can instead of bottle, my kayak beer improves to to good.

I'll still drink a BMC when somebody offers me one. You won't find any at my house though, unless my dad is coming to town.

steveh

07-16-2007, 11:35 PM

Let's see, you wonder why everyone hates flavorless beer, and you think the original to the style is over rated...

I think that,
A. You need to educate your palate some more
and
B. You need to find fresh Urquell from a sealed container (no open 6 packs that have been sitting in direct light).

Since you like Salvator (an in-your-face sort of beer), look for the similarities -- though more subtle -- in the Urquell. Lots of malty, melanoidin goodness in both, with pronounced hoppiness in the Pils.

S.

cul8rv8

07-17-2007, 12:42 AM

I don't enjoy a bud, bud light, etc, but I am somewhat biased, as my father is retired from AB, so it put me through college, and not just the natty light. :)

To me, beers are kinda like cars. Everyone has a particular taste, but the big boys try to make something that fits more people. Ferrari makes wonderful cars, but a mother of 3 kids wouldn't be able to get by with one, she needs something that seats all 5 in the family. The father doesn't want a minivan, because what mans man wants to drive a minvan? So they settle for the SUV, which all of the manufacturers have multiple models that are all basically the same thing. Much like Bud, Bud Light, Michelob, Natural Light, etc. They all are of different qualities, but they are basically different versions of the same thing. Bud Light is watered down Bud, Natural Light is sub-standard Bud Light, etc. etc.

They basically take a taste that caters to more people, advertise the hell out of it, and BOOM they're making money.

What drives me crazy are the people at the local brewpub that order a bud light when the brewpub makes their own light lager. Or the guy who likes something better, orders a guiness when he could order the stout brewed in house, especially when the house beers are at a lower price.

ratman03

07-17-2007, 01:06 AM

Originally posted by MrNate
Ok, I know I'm going to get hell for this, but why does everyone think Bud and Coors are so terrible?

Answer: Because they are. And I'm being serious about that.

We've all been bombarded by BMC advertising for years, so it's tempting to think "hey, the BMC stuff isn't so bad really". But it is: The taste is uninspiring, the ingredients are bad, and the next-day recovery is worse than it should be (Ok, Coors Original isn't that bad, but Coors Light sucks).

There was a time when I tried to straddle that line too, thinking that there is place for the proverbial 'lawnmower beer". But really, can you tell me that a Sierra Nevada or a Sam Adams wouldn't taste great by the grill? Why drink watery crap when there are so many great choices?

I was at a restaurant recently and the choices were the typical BMC fare. My response was that I wouldn't water my lawn with it. Does that make me a snob? :eek:

steveh

07-17-2007, 01:25 AM

Originally posted by cul8rv8
To me, beers are kinda like cars. Everyone has a particular taste, but the big boys try to make something that fits more people.

It's not quite that cut and dried, black and white. Micros don't equate to $100K imports as BMC might to a Chevy or Ford. More like Micros equate to Tucker or Auburn/Cord of the past. Small enthusiatsts who want to make something for other enthusiasts who understand what the product can really be.

S.

MrNate

07-17-2007, 09:55 AM

I'm not trolling or anything, I swear. I just don't understand it is all.

If anyone wishes to satisfy my curiosity, I would be interested in knowing 3 things (assuming you believe BMC is swill):

1. When was the last time you drank a BMC?
2. Was it before or after you had gained what you consider to be a sophisticated beer palate?
3. Was it in a can or bottle?

Just to be clear, I am honestly not trolling, not looking for an argument, and not looking to convert anyone to BMC.

hooky

07-17-2007, 10:10 AM

I'll bite

1. July 1st with my dad.

2. I don't consider myself to have a sophisticated palate, but I don't consider BMC to be good beer.

3. Can into a cup.

darylM

07-17-2007, 10:16 AM

MeridianFC

07-17-2007, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by MrNate
Ok, I know I'm going to get hell for this, but why does everyone think Bud and Coors are so terrible?

They taste bad.

If you like 'em knock yourself out. No one is a hypocrite in their pleasure.

FWIW there are plenty of nasty micros too.

DecoJuicer

07-17-2007, 11:27 AM

I drank some Bud Light less than a month ago.

It was from a can.

I don't find BMC products offensive, I just find them flavorless. If I wanted water from a mountain stream, I would grab a bottle of water, not a beer.

I agree with hooky about canned beers being a good kayak/canoe beer. Unfortunatley for me, I can't get a good variety of canned beers here in Michigan.

MeridianFC

07-17-2007, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by MrNate
I'm not trolling or anything, I swear. I just don't understand it is all.

If anyone wishes to satisfy my curiosity, I would be interested in knowing 3 things (assuming you believe BMC is swill):

1. When was the last time you drank a BMC?
2. Was it before or after you had gained what you consider to be a sophisticated beer palate?
3. Was it in a can or bottle?

Just to be clear, I am honestly not trolling, not looking for an argument, and not looking to convert anyone to BMC.

No worries, you're asking a legitimate question (well questions)

1. I've drank plenty of BMC in my day. I know I've had one within the past year at an "event". I'm guessing you're trying to get at the idea that maybe not having had one in a while it's possible my taste memory is bad. I'd say that you can only bang your head into a brick wall for so long before realizing that, hey, bricks are hard. If all I'm presented with is BMC (or Yeungling, Heineken, Pabst, Widmer, Hops, etc.) I'll have a whiskey/whisky or do with out.

I will grant you that if you ice down a BMC it will at it's best taste like not much at all. Sure is wet. The second that a Bud or Genuine Draft or Pride of the Rockies gains any temperature it becomes undrinkable. My rule is any beer worth it's barley should be drinkable at room temp, better cold/cool but still drinkable.

2. Both. A lot less after though. I would say I don't have a sophisticated palate, just a nomal palete. I throw out there that many (not all) BMC loyalists who disdain craft brewing don't have much experience with beer. They try one or two or even a handful of other beers and just don't go any further. That's my supposition anyway.

3. I've had beer, including the macros, in every format known to man.

BTW a related subject came up a few years ago:

http://www.realbeer.com/discussions/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8366

and not to quote myself, but I'm going to quote myself

Like many things, especially foodstuffs, quantity and quality are rarely seen holding hands. Think about the difference between a McDonalds Big Mac and burger from your favorite local diner (or even made at home on your grill). For some a Big Mac might do the trick but you're not going to feel the need to wax philosophic on the subject. Now take it up a level and compare that Big Mac to an aged New York strip done at your favorite local, well now were getting to the sort of difference between micro v. macro.

As far as imports (some of which would be considered "macro" btw) I think there many here who express a lot of interest in products from overseas. Given the distance that have to be crossed it's not surprising that it may take a bit more for an import to be rated, though with minimal searching you'll find plenty of discussion, just check out the thread on Oktoberfest beers in the "Tasting Notes" section.

I would profer the idea that most folks here don't care too much (though most do care some) about how big a brewery is, but they do care about how good a they are.

To paraphrase the king of American micros Fritz Maytag, there comes a point when your size causes quality to suffer. It's difficult to say exactly where that point is but it does exist.

Welcome aboard. It's your round.

BTW I should also point out here that just because a brewery is small does not automatically make their beer good. The converse can hold true too.

CJ01

07-17-2007, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by DecoJuicer
I drank some Bud Light less than a month ago.

It was from a can.

I don't find BMC products offensive, I just find them flavorless. If I wanted water from a mountain stream, I would grab a bottle of water, not a beer.

I agree with hooky about canned beers being a good kayak/canoe beer. Unfortunatley for me, I can't get a good variety of canned beers here in Michigan.

I've been buying Warsteiner in cans for my beach beer (no bottles). It has some flavor and at $18/case it's cheap for Michigan.

As for BMC my family has always been big on AB products. I drink a Bud or Michelobe light when everything else is gone.
Sorry, it's crap.

But if you like it then drink it.

MeridianFC

07-17-2007, 12:04 PM

As a bit of an aside, I've been to a few events recently with limited beer options including a wedding this past weekend. The beers on offer were Sam Adams, Heineken, Becks Light, Bud Light, and Amstel Light. First beer they ran out of? Sam. I can't tell you how many times I've seen this scenario played out.

We held an open event at my office a couple of years back and I'm always the man that gets the hooch. I was ordered to make sure some BMC product was present, which I complied with. On offer were Brooklyn Pilsner, Grolsch, Dominion Lager & Ale, Bud & Bud Light, Yeungling, and some cider (wine too). At the end of the event the only thing left was the Bud & Bud Light (out of two cases only 4 bottles had been taken). I've not been given the BMC order since.

Anecdotal to be sure, but again I've seen this time and time again.

MrNate

07-17-2007, 12:23 PM

Thanks for the responses, guys. One of the things I'm wondering is if the neutral flavor profile allows or, in fact, encourages your perception of enjoyment to be influenced by outside factors to a much greater degree than other beers.

For example, I enjoy Budweiser in cans, but not bottles and not draft. Of course, the only time I drink the latter two is in a bar when there's nothing else available. So is it the atmosphere or the actual packaging that makes a difference? I'm not really sure, but I feel similarly about Guinness - Prefer draft or cans but can't stand bottles.

It seems so so counter-intuitive.

Anyway, interesting. Also I like this paragraph I found on uncyclopedia when I was poking around:

You have two beers: MillerBudCoors, and everything else.

MBC is cold filtered hot baseball piss cut with warm tap water, and called "draft" even though it is in a goddam bottle. Its proponents say that it tastes "cold", even though cold is not a flavour. MBC donates all of its profits to Xtian causes, as they enjoy making beverages for people who hate beer.

Geourge W. Bush drinks a gallon of MBC for breakfast every day because Laura Bush denies him sex, and if he didn't have a few coldies to take the edge off, he might have to go around blowing shit up for no reason.

"Everything else" is OK, as long as it is made by a guy with lots of tribal tattoos, comes with a funny name, has tapioca or diouxin or some other wacky shit in it, and has a cool label. Most types of "everything else" are made in a garage by a couple of guys who failed high school chemistry but really like getting piss drunk. Most such brewers refer to their swill as "microbrew" because (supposedly) they make it in relatively small quantities. This is a lie—collectively, microbrewers produce roughly the same amount of beer as MillerBudCouours, but drink most of it before it leaves the garage.

hooky

07-17-2007, 12:35 PM

Obviously written by a liberal wine snob. :D

darylM

07-17-2007, 12:36 PM

You have two beers: MillerBudCoors, and everything else. <snip>

Funny, but I don't think the author likes beer or is uneducated about beer.

MeridianFC

07-17-2007, 12:58 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
I feel similarly about Guinness - Prefer draft or cans but can't stand bottles.

It seems so so counter-intuitive.

Some bottled Guinness is a different beer (Guinness Extra Stout). It's stronger, a bit more tangy.

Here's the sure way to tell if a beer is good. Does it taste good to you? If the answer is yes, it is good beer.

Please bear in mind that once upon a time most of us thought plastic toy soldiers/cat food/mud/keys/notebook paper/cheeze/McDonalds hamburgers/etc. tasted good but we learned better.

hooky

07-17-2007, 01:01 PM

Obviously you need to buy better cat food. Most of today's cat food choices are head and shoulders above McDonald's hamburgers.

MrNate

07-17-2007, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by MeridianFC
Some bottled Guinness is a different beer (Guinness Extra Stout). It's stronger, a bit more tangy.

No, like chocolate. Which one is that?

HarkJohnny

07-17-2007, 01:10 PM

back on the subject, my take is it's a bit of a revolt against the corporate giants. who doesn't like supporting the little guys?!

MrNate

07-17-2007, 01:40 PM

That's kind of my suspicion. It's not as if BMC is a poor attempt at a Pilsner, it's the defining beer of its style. The vitrol against it, then, seems to me as odd as a rant against Porter.

You wouldn't really expect such negative reactions to something that is almost universally described as 'dull', 'bland', and 'unremarkable' by its detractors unless there was some other motivation was my reasoning.

Anyway. I like the fast food analogy, only I don't see why you could only appreciate Filet Mignon to the exclusion of chili cheese fries.

Interesting perspectives. Definitely interesting.

hooky

07-17-2007, 01:49 PM

Chili cheese fries are to bland, unseasoned potatoes as (insert favorite craft beer here) is to BMC.

cul8rv8

07-17-2007, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by steveh
It's not quite that cut and dried, black and white. Micros don't equate to $100K imports as BMC might to a Chevy or Ford. More like Micros equate to Tucker or Auburn/Cord of the past. Small enthusiatsts who want to make something for other enthusiasts who understand what the product can really be.

S.

True, it was just a quick analogy. :)

A gentleman I met at a tapping party at the local brewpub put it well. The big corporations have taken one particular style and perfected it to what they intended, to reach a broad spectrum of beer drinkers, and they do it very well.

If you look at the history of beer in the US, these same companies were the ones trying to get their beer in every bar and saloon. Different people have different tastes, so to make it sell widespread, they need to make it agreable to as many people as possible. IMO, this is why BMC has very little taste. It enables nearly every beer drinker to drink it.

Myself, I last had Mich Ultra last Thursday at Buffalo Wild Wings. When I drink BMC swill, I usually drink the Ultra Amber as it seems to have a little better taste, both out of the bottle and on tap. I still prefer quality brews, but Thursdays at BW3's is 10 cents an ounce night on domestics, so it's cheap. I get what I pay for, even though I just have one or two with my wings.

Besides that, it's much more fun to make my own beer and drink that.

skahtboi

07-17-2007, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
It's not as if BMC is a poor attempt at a Pilsner, it's the defining beer of its style. The vitrol against it, then, seems to me as odd as a rant against Porter.

But BMC is a very poor attempt at a pilsner. I can't believe that you don't like PU, one of the definitive(literally) pils, but yet you call the tasteless, lifeless BMC crap a "defining beer of its style." I can't speak for others, but my consuming of "real" beer has nothing to do with the David v Goliath aspect of the corporate beer world. I would much prefer to have decent beer as readily available to me as the BMC product line is. My choice of real beer has to do with one simple thing, flavor. I never could stomach the BMC garbage and still can't. (I tried as recently as three months ago, also at an event with limited beer offerings.) A real Pils would be along the lines of PU and Czechvar. Victory's Prima Pils being my personal fav of the style.

steveh

07-17-2007, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by MrNate

1. When was the last time you drank a BMC?

Tasted a Miller Lite a few months ago just to be able to say I had (and also went through tha majority of a sixer of the new, "all malt" Michelob as a tasting notes experiment - to also say "I had").

http://www.realbeer.com/discussions/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14504&highlight=Michelob

2. Was it before or after you had gained what you consider to be a sophisticated beer palate?

After, but then I consumed a lot of swill in college when I didn't know and hadn't learned better.

3. Was it in a can or bottle?

Bottle to glass, though I often drink Spaten and Dinkel-Acker straight from the bottle, so don't tell me I'm some sort of beer snob for using a glass.

Though I'm not sure where this is headed, let me cut it off with a common comparison: When was the last time you had a McDonald's hamburger? Was it before or after you realized there were many better hamburgers with great flavor to be found -- even from your own grill?

S.

steveh

07-17-2007, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
No, like chocolate. Which one is that?

That's probably the Extra Stout - lots of coffee and chocolate flavors, completely different beer than the draught, draught cans, or draught bottles -- and since you enjoy Salvator, I'm surprised you don't enjoy the Extra Stout.

S.

steveh

07-17-2007, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
You wouldn't really expect such negative reactions to something that is almost universally described as 'dull', 'bland', and 'unremarkable' by its detractors unless there was some other motivation was my reasoning.

But there is other motivation, a craving for good flavored beer.

And Skahtboi is right, BMC all began life as poor attempts at Pilsner. It's only been recently that the BJCP recognized American Lager as its own style: http://www.bjcp.org/styles04/Category1.html

S.

MrNate

07-17-2007, 03:05 PM

Well, the Paulaner tastes like malt. The Guiness tasted like hopped hot chocolate.

Also, it's interesting to note that I tried Michelob Ultra once, and decided that had absolutely no flavor.

darylM

07-17-2007, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
Well, the Paulaner tastes like malt. The Guiness tasted like hopped hot chocolate.

Also, it's interesting to note that I tried Michelob Ultra once, and decided that had absolutely no flavor.

that is the entire argument in one post.

MrNate

07-17-2007, 04:04 PM

er... how so?

I don't really feel like I'm making an argument so much as just voicing an unpopular opinion, by the way.

darylM

07-17-2007, 04:41 PM

I am seeing this from the flavor side of things. Maybe Paulaner and Guiness are considered "mega" brews but they have flavor. I see BMC beer as more of a tasteless brew swill that has been advertised as beer.(Yes, I can be against something because it is what everyone else does.) Bud, Miller, and Coors just make the most of this "cheap date beer." If there was any flavor, I would be drinking it instead of chipping in $2-$3 a bottle of something else.

The argument that I referred too was the case against BMC beers.

The ultimate beer for me would be bottle of something that offers up different nuances when I tried it. Something that is a little different everytime. It make take years to find all of them or to have the "perfect bottle" where every flavor that it has is offered but at least I would have fun doing it.

corysdad

07-17-2007, 05:13 PM

Why waste any time with tasteless BMC products when there is always somthing better, including water?

Richard English

07-17-2007, 06:12 PM

wortchillergoal

07-17-2007, 06:21 PM

I don't drink BMC as I do not like their taste or rather lack thereof. I would not even drink Coors back when i did drink BMC which is many years now.

My other problem with AB product is heir strong arm tatics against microbrewers. AB bought of Nightline backa t the start of the craft beer's rebirth. They went after contract brewing like it was a plague upon the earth. They have also done some things here in the Syr area that are below underhabded and low class.

The last time I drank a BMC, Labbatts IIRC, was last spring. I did so that I would not insult the hockey team I had just help win their beer league championship. The captain of the team is also my mechanic. This was after I had discovered my beer palate. I poured it from a bottle into the glass had brought with me for my beer.

I see you are from NJ. Have you tried Brooklyn Lager? I would suggest as well any of the Saranac lagers if you can fine them. they are from the FX Matts brewery best remebered for Utica Club.

steveh

07-17-2007, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
Well, the Paulaner tastes like malt. The Guiness tasted like hopped hot chocolate.

You ought to try Young's Double Chocolate Stout and then try the Guinness Extra.

Hmm, Mich Ultra had no flavor? There's a surprise. :rolleyes:

S.

bigben

07-17-2007, 09:34 PM

personally I drink coors extra gold when going to the races mainly because I can't have bottles and it is too much of a pain to bottle a few homebrews in plastic bottles.(ducks for cover) but when home I do not drink it. and the taste you are tasting in yuengling is the corn. I think there grain bill is 2/3 corn. I used to only drink yuengling when out at a bar but have since switched to others mainly because I can taste the corn in it now. now I try to only go to places that I know have micros on tap.

one question what does guiness taste like? I have tried lancasters milk stout before and liked it. definately a sippin beer. but allways wondered what it did taste like.

and another thing if someone offers a beer while bs'ing with them I generally say no thanks the first time they offer but if they say you sure? I say ok now that ya twisted my arm. I think that my buds feel rejected because i did not have a beer with them. most of em know that I drink micros and to them some off the wall stuff but it won't kill ya to drink a coors light when offered one.

wortchillergoal

07-17-2007, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by bigben
but it won't kill ya to drink a coors light when offered one.

No, but after the first sip you will wish you were dead.

Lee

07-17-2007, 11:16 PM

To me BMC is a different beverage than the good stuff. Yesterday I drank two Michelob Ultras. They were much better than water. They were much worse than Sierra Nevada PA.
To me it's like going into an ice scream parlor and ordering vanilla. Some people like vanilla. Most of us here would prefer Rocky Road or Goo Goo Cluster. As for myself I wouldn't turn down vanilla if it was the only thing available. Lee

MrNate

07-17-2007, 11:45 PM

Well, just to prove to myself that I'm not insane (and to my wife that I'm an alcoholic) I had a Coors Light tonight. Nope, not insane. It actually does have a flavor. It doesn't punch you in the face, but it's there. And it is in no way objectionable, even after warming up to cellar temp.

Mr. English, you are not one to be trifled with. Though I still maintain that draft budweiser is strangely worse than that from a can, or at the least should not be drunk indoors. Nor, apparently, by Englishmen. I will concede that point.

bigben, Guiness tastes nothing like a milk stout to me. I like milk stouts. Guiness is drier, roastier, more... acrid? But good nonetheless. It used to be my staple session beer. Also, if that flavor in Yuengling is corn then I'm a 50 foot weasel. It tastes more like corn (to borrow an expression) that's been filtered through a Clydesdale. And I have had bottles that didn't have the flavor, so I know it's an off flavor like skunk.

wortchiller, I've been meaning to try more of Brooklyn's offerings (as well as more Troegs and River Horse) but I haven't gotten to it yet. I like their brown ale, though.

On a completely unrelated note, does anyone know what temperature Samichlaus should be served at?

Richard English

07-18-2007, 02:56 AM

Originally posted by MrNate

bigben, Guiness tastes nothing like a milk stout to me. I like milk stouts. Guiness is drier, roastier, more... acrid?

Guinness tastes nothing like a milk stout for the very simple reason that it is not a milk stout.

Milk stout (a somewhat neglected style in the UK) is thus called because is it sweetened with lactose (the sugar component of milk). Lactose, unlike most sugars, cannot be processed by yeast and thus remains in the wort and eventually the finished beer. Add any other kind of sugar to the wort and it will ferment and simply add to the strength of the beer.

So milk stout retains a degree of sweetness (hence its occasional alternative name of sweet stout) and this makes it more palatable to those who cannot manage the intense burnt bitterness of Guinness.

I would suspect that most sweet alcoholic drinks these days are sweetened by artificial sweeteners, such as saccharine, rather than with lactose - although that is only my guess.

steveh

07-18-2007, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by bigben
but it won't kill ya to drink a coors light when offered one.

There's a whole quote somewhere, by someone, about compromising your standards, but it sounds pretentious and beer-snobbish, so I'll defer to my tagline.

S.

steveh

07-18-2007, 08:34 AM

Originally posted by MrNate
On a completely unrelated note, does anyone know what temperature Samichlaus should be served at?

Well, I'd stick to about 45°F, and be sure to chase it with that Coors Light to cleanse your palate. :p

S.

surfadelic23

07-18-2007, 08:43 AM

"FWIW there are plenty of nasty micros too"
Thank GOD someone said it. Just because it's a small brewery, doesn't mean it can't SUCK! Think Gettysbrew...
It seems sometimes that micro/craft brewers get a pass b/c they're not "the man"

MeridianFC

07-18-2007, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by MrNate

I don't really feel like I'm making an argument so much as just voicing an unpopular opinion, by the way.

Well in the world at large your opinion is very popular as witnessed by the market share held by BMC.

Here it is certainly a less than popular opinion, but you knew that.

Again if this was a forum dedicated to food (fwiw I consider beer a foodstuff) you'd get the same response if you were stumping for Hardees in the face of fans of the local diner.

As far as the chili cheese fries, well there's chili cheese fries and there's chili cheese fries. I'd put those made by Ben's Chili Bowl up against any in this fine country of ours.

As I stated earlier and has been seconded above, there are plenty of sucky micros. Small doesn't equal good, though in general I find your odds are better with small.

To be fair it's not just BMC that is naff, I find all of your Pabsts, Schaeffer, Wiedemans, Olympia, Pearl, Lone Star, National Bohemian, etc. crap. I think many folks here have some soft spots for those names though the beers have not had anything to do with their locales or history for quite a while.

MrNate

07-18-2007, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by steveh
Well, I'd stick to about 45°F, and be sure to chase it with that Coors Light to cleanse your palate. :p

S.

No, no... you've got it all wrong. Coors Light first, THEN Samichlaus.

This whole thread started because we had a small get together and I had bought a bunch of beers to sample. Mostly old-world "classics" that I had always wanted to try. Anyway, after a Kolsch that tasted like blood (yes, really. Exactly like blood.) and a Helles that tasted like Rauchbier (I later learned that the brewery was famous for its rauchbier and their helles is fermented in the same tanks) I realized that I could really go for one of those Coors tallboys. Having thus cleansed my palate, I moved back into the Salvator. Never made it to the Tripel or the Samichlaus though, because I was the only one drinking the "good stuff".

I know it must offend every beer-loving bone in your body, but I'm telling you - they have their place at the table. If I found a micro that was the same style but "better" then I would probably drink it - but I don't think such a thing exists. Won't stop me from looking, though.

Xdredo

07-18-2007, 11:30 AM

The last time I had a BMC was 3 weeks ago. It was a Coors Light that someone brought to my house last summer for a pool party. Of course no one drank them, but they only cost about $10 for an 18-pack (the cheap f@#%!). I used it to make Beer Can- in - the - Butt Chicken on the grill and for that purpose it worked quite nicely. If Sam Adams canned their Boston Lager I would have used that instead...

Xdredo

07-18-2007, 11:47 AM

...And for what it's worth (I know, not much), years ago (20?) I used to consider my self a "Bud Man". Then my local tavern started serving Guiness on tap and the clouds parted, angels sang, and all was right in the world. I haven't looked back since and will always order/buy/brew something new and different, something I haven't tried before. Sure, I've had some duds, but it's fun trying to find interesting food-beer pairings. Oh no, now I'm sounding like a Snob!

Richard English

07-18-2007, 11:59 AM

The reason why I hate Dudweiser and its clones is not that the drink they produce is not to my taste. I accept and agree that people have the right to drink whatever they wish and, if they prefer a bland drink with little character, well, that's their business.

But my objection is that the mock-pilsner manufacturers want everyone to drink their productions and will resort to any device to achieve that aim. The reason is, of course, that chemical fizz is cheap to produce and can be sold at an inflated price - which is why Dudweiser, Swiller and Curse make so much money.

By the end of the 1970s the megas were well on their way to achieving their aim with the USA almost a beerless country, the UK well on the way towards beerlessness, and most other countries already beer deserts.

By drinking chemical fizz you are putting money into the pockets of those who seek to destroy drinkers' choice - and that to me is a good enough reason not to drink the stuff. Others will make up their own minds, of course.

HarkJohnny

07-18-2007, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by Richard English
...and that to me is a good enough reason not to drink the stuff. Others will make up their own minds, of course.

or they can have it made up for them based on the imagery of a clever marketing campaign. ;)

in the interest of full disclosure, I actually had a swiller lite at a party last weekend. it was that or SABL which I'm not terribly fond of either. It was about 90° out and I went with the lite. Can't say I enjoyed it much, but it was cold and wet. by the time i was about 1/2 through i'd had enough though.

steveh

07-18-2007, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
No, no... you've got it all wrong.

No, not really, I wouldn't have the Coors at all and head straight for the Sammi.

BTW -- Schlenkerla has a Helles Rauchbier, it's probably what you sampled. They use smoked barley, not one of my favorites, but their Märzen and Bock are much better.

The astringent Kölsch was stale, find something more fresh and you may swear off tallboys forever.

S.

chazwicke

07-18-2007, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
Anyway, after a Kolsch that tasted like blood (yes, really. Exactly like blood.)

And just how do you know how blood tastes?;)

I can sort of see where you're coming from regarding a place at the table for BMC. I mean the BJCP has created a catagory for it. But I'm not about to throw 30 ++ years of drinking good beer and seeking it out away. I'll not drink BMC at all. I'd rather not drink. I've had plenty of bad brews from small brewers and I acknowledge that small does not equate to better. But I lived through the 70s in this country and I'm not going back there. I have tried several brews that employ a percentage of corn in thier grainbill. DFH Liquor de Malt and New Glarus Spotted Cow and disliked both because they bring back the memories of those dark days in the American brewing scene. I'm certain there are brews with corn utilized in the brewing process that I do like. It is not as prevalent or as upfront in those though. There are other craft beers and indeed whole styles that I'm not all that fond of or enamered with. But I'm never going back to BMC - until or unless they start producing what I feel to be decent beer. And they may just do that some day. But for now - NO THANK YOU. Maybe I am snobbish for that but if so I don't apologize. My gripe is not so much with the size of these megabrewers as I do like plenty of beer made by large breweries. And It has been many, many years since I tasted one of BMC's standard offerings but if they have changed in that time period I'm certain it has been for the worse. Even though they have been "dummed down" so as not to offend anyone with any type of flavor I will concede that they probably taste of something however faint it might be. But I'm not sure it's beer.

MrNate

07-18-2007, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Richard English

But my objection is that the mock-pilsner manufacturers want everyone to drink their productions and will resort to any device to achieve that aim. The reason is, of course, that chemical fizz is cheap to produce and can be sold at an inflated price - which is why Dudweiser, Swiller and Curse make so much money.

...

By drinking chemical fizz you are putting money into the pockets of those who seek to destroy drinkers' choice - and that to me is a good enough reason not to drink the stuff. Others will make up their own minds, of course.

To the first point, I contend that it is so cheap to produce not because "rice is cheap" or "it's chemical fizz" but because they have streamlined all aspects of the business: supply chain, production, and distribution. If A-B suddenly decided to produce bitter on the same scale, I am fairly certain their margins would not suffer from the cost of ingredients.

To the second point, I do agree that as beer lovers in a capitalist society we would only be hurting ourselves by supporting the mega breweries, particularly A-B. Sometimes it is good to stand on principle.

That being said, however, it feels like a bit of a drop in the proverbial bucket. If our dollars made a difference, they would have done so already. In order for true change to manifest, a substantial portion of the market share would need to be "converted" to the appreciation of good beer. To this end, I believe that BMC bashing serves a counter-purpose. Elitism tends to alienate the masses rather than convert.

No, good beer should stand on its own merits without resorting to smear campaigns. There are those who have always drank Bud and will always drink Bud to the exclusion of all others. They are not the ones who will affect change. It's the swing voters we really need to woo, those that would try a Sam Adams and possibly like it enough to pick up a case for his next cookout. But try going into a bar and telling said Joe Sixpack that what he's drinking is swill and you'll never get that chance.

chazwicke

07-18-2007, 01:30 PM

MrNate

07-18-2007, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by chazwicke
And just how do you know how blood tastes?;)

Um... How do you NOT know how blood tastes?

Anyway, my point is not to bash Kolsch or swear it off entirely; ditto for the Schlenkerla (thanks Steve). Just pointing out that sometimes it IS good to cleanse the palate with a neutral flavor after hammering it with strong, distinctive beers. A dry white wine might suit the same purpose, but for my money I'd rather have the sex in a canoe.

BTW, from what I understand the Schlenkerla Helles doesn't actually use any smoke malt - check it out.

MeridianFC

07-18-2007, 01:37 PM

Michael Jackson made a similar comment a few years ago. I forget the exact wording, but he basically said you can't sell someone the beer their drinking is piss and expect them to listen to you.

I completely agree that good beer should stand on it's own merits.

I've mostly avoid referring to anything having to do with a company's business model, history, or policies since I think the above statement is what we're getting at. That said there are times when it is appropriate to address those issues.

There are acquaintances of mine who think BMC tastes fine (none actually will go so far as to say great) but then again I have some folks I know who think Applebees makes a reasonable dinner or that furniture from Ikea is sturdy.

BTW as a random bit, I had the Schenkerla Helles last night. I'm a big Helles fan and love the other Schenkerla products but I was taken aback a bit by that one. It is a good beer though.

Dry County Paul

07-18-2007, 01:48 PM

I'll drink, heck I'll even buy a cheap beer every now and then. But if I'm drinking a cheap beer, I want it really cheap. The problem with BMC is that they cost too much, and don't even get me started on Corona. I figure, a case of Miller would be a good value if it ran 10-11 bucks. It's called Old Milwaukee. If I wanted Miller light, I'd just add water to Old Milwaukee, and save even more money. I actually don't like the taste of Budweiser, so I don't think I'd ever buy that.

Are wine snobs the same as beer snobs? I've often found myself at events where you could get BMC or what I assume is its wine equivalent. I have no problem drinking the cheap macro wine, which I much prefer over the BMC. I should find some wine forum and post how much I enjoy Gallo.

MrNate

07-18-2007, 02:22 PM

I actually like that Schlenkerla Helles too. But it sure as hell (har har) wasn't what I was expecting. That's a good Schnitzel beer.

Also, for the record I am in the "It's fine" camp on BMC and Ikea and the "it's swill" camp on Applebee's. I really, really hate that place.

steveh

07-18-2007, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by MrNate

BTW, from what I understand the Schlenkerla Helles doesn't actually use any smoke malt - check it out.

Sorry, you are correct, probably the Weizen I was thinking about.

A golden-colored lager beer made without smokemalt. Brewed in the same vessels as the classic MÃ¤rzen-style and fermented by the same yeast, it none the less has a hint of smokiness.

Chaz, "blood" flavor is often used to describe astringency in all drink categories. And you never stuck a paper-cut finger into your mouth to try to stop the bleeding?

S.

MrNate

07-18-2007, 03:00 PM

Yeah, I was surprised by it not having any rauchmalt too. I would call it more than "a hint of smokiness"

And I didn't realize that was astringency. That's a damn good bit of information, because that's not at all what I would have called "astringent".

Richard English

07-18-2007, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by MrNate

In order for true change to manifest, a substantial portion of the market share would need to be "converted" to the appreciation of good beer. .
Never forget, from little acorns grow mighty oaks.

The Real Ale revival started with an idea of just four men, in a pub in Ireland. Rather than bemoaning the state of English beer and wishing it would change, they decided to change it themselves.

From that meeting grew CAMRA. The Real Ale revival in the UK, and indirectly the craft beer revival in the USA, came from that meeting.

Don't ever believe that one person's efforts can have no affect. Martin Luther King, Mahatma Ghandi and Nelson Mandela were each only one person.

MeridianFC

07-18-2007, 03:19 PM

Applebees is Miller Lite. With bad service.

chazwicke

07-18-2007, 03:20 PM

Interesting and apropos article in today's Washington Post Food Section:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/17/AR2007071700306.html

Why the Dark Glasses?
By Greg Kitsock
Wednesday, July 18, 2007; Page F07
A10-inch-tall fish in sunglasses stands out in a row of tap handles.
That's Anheuser-Busch's intention. The nation's largest brewery doesn't plan to support its latest release, the draft-only Skipjack Amber, with the sort of advertising blitz that would accompany a Budweiser line extension. Rather, it hopes to sell the new brand the way a microbrewery would, rolling it out slowly (Annapolis got it more than a month before Washington did) and counting on word of mouth -- and eye-catching bar gear -- to stir up a buzz
Skipjack Amber is a regional beer from a national brewery. It's produced at only one of Anheuser-Busch's 12 U.S. plants -- the Williamsburg brewery -- and is available from Maryland down through South Carolina, and inland as far as Tennessee. To create it, Wayne Adkins, senior assistant brew master in Williamsburg, captained an 11-member team of beer experts who canvassed area bars and restaurants, observing what beers people drank

"We wanted something that would go well with regional foods" such as barbecue, soft-shell crabs and broiled shrimp, said Adkins, who whipped up a recipe for an amber lager, a category of beer that includes Samuel Adams Boston Lager, Brooklyn Lager and Yuengling Traditional Lager.
Skipjack Amber is brewed from 100 percent barley malt (no corn or rice adjuncts) and measures 5.5 percent alcohol by volume, making it a little stronger than a Bud but still perfectly quaffable. It's named for the sailboats that Chesapeake Bay fishermen traditionally used for dredging oysters, but it would not be out of place in a German beer hall. A specially roasted grain called Munich malt contributes to the ruddy color and lends a lip-smacking, sweet maltiness with a nutty, slightly toasty finish
It's a pity the hops aren't more aggressive, because one of the four varieties used is Nelson Sauvin, an unusual strain from New Zealand. An experimental beer brewed exclusively with this hop, which Anheuser-Busch served at a press junket last year, had a pronounced tropical fruit flavor, with nuances of mango and coconut. "I've heard of people describing it as pineapple," notes Adkins. But that flavor is largely submerged here.
Anheuser-Busch has released five other regional beers made at single breweries, beginning last year with Demon's Hop Yard IPA from its Merrimack, N.H., plant. Originally, the company gave consumers in the target area a choice of three possible brands and had them vote via the Internet. But it has ended that experiment in beer democracy.
"By removing the voting component, we are able to get the products to market faster," said Bruce Eames, whose title at Anheuser-Busch is innovation manager.
Asked if Anheuser-Busch's other mid-Atlantic brewery (in Newark) would also be releasing a regional brand, Eames replied, "We don't have details to share right now on additional local specialty beers."
Why are the regional beers draft only? "Beer enthusiasts love to visit their favorite bar to check out what's on tap and discuss and share it with their friends," Eames replied. He wouldn't rule out a bottled version but said there are no immediate plans to market one.
A spokesman for Capital Eagle, Anheuser-Busch's Washington area distributor, said kegs of Skipjack Amber arrived the week of July 2 and are being placed in area bars and restaurants. (Consumers can call 800-342-5283 for information on availability.)
Anheuser-Busch would love to grab a larger share of the craft beer market, which grew 12 percent last year compared with about 0.5 percent for large domestic breweries. The St. Louis-based giant has had some successes (such as Michelob Amber Bock) but many more failures. Remember Red Wolf? Elk Mountain? The Anheuser Originals?
One lesson the marketing people have learned is that the name Anheuser-Busch scares away many of the consumers who patronize small independent breweries. Consequently, you won't find the company's stylized letter A and eagle logo anywhere on the Skipjack Amber tap handle. Asked where the beer came from, my server at Whitlow's on Wilson in Arlington answered simply, "Chesapeake, Virginia."
Greg Kitsock's Beer column appears every other week. He can be reached atfood@washpost.com.

chazwicke

07-18-2007, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by steveh

Chaz, "blood" flavor is often used to describe astringency in all drink categories. And you never stuck a paper-cut finger into your mouth to try to stop the bleeding?

S.

I know, I know, just trying to throw a little levity into the mix.

wortchillergoal

07-18-2007, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
To the first point, I contend that it is so cheap to produce not because "rice is cheap" or "it's chemical fizz" but because they have streamlined all aspects of the business: supply chain, production, and distribution. If A-B suddenly decided to produce bitter on the same scale, I am fairly certain their margins would not suffer from the cost of ingredients.

Rice being cheap is a part of the reason that their beer is sold at such a lower price pint than the micros. Yes, they have an practice great business skills.Their bitter margin would not suffer as they would use rice in the grain bill. Their brewers can also make good beers as I have had the opportunity to taste some. I was the goalie for the local AB brewery team here in the Syr area at one time.

It is also very hard to produce such quantities of beer and have it all taste the same. That shows that the brewers are worth their salt.

As I posted before and Richard as now expressed, much of my dislike for AB is their slanderous ad campaigns and underhanded dirty tricks against small brewers.

steveh

07-18-2007, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by chazwicke
I know, I know, just trying to throw a little levity into the mix.

Ohh, wise guy.

Now, considering I saw someone post something at Stonch's site comparing a cask ale to something filtered through a skunk's ass, I could see an apropriate wisecrack to that!

S.

hooky

07-18-2007, 03:36 PM

Wow, Chaz. Great link. Those proverbial drops in the bucket must be adding up to something.

steveh

07-18-2007, 03:47 PM

One lesson the marketing people have learned is that the name Anheuser-Busch scares away many of the consumers who patronize small independent breweries.

I gots news for 'em, it's more than just the name. I've given them chances on some of their new products, they still haven't made anything remarkable yet, IMHO.

S.

chazwicke

07-18-2007, 03:49 PM

Yep. AB certainly have taken notice. I think they were fairly clandestine in their organic beer line too. They are trying to surreptitiously attract us beer geeks. If I see this Skipjack I may give it a whirl for the team. Says its all malt.

wortchillergoal

07-18-2007, 04:15 PM

I tried a sample of one of the organic AB beers. It tasted like the fertilizer an organic farm would use.

steveh

07-18-2007, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by chazwicke
Says its all malt.

So does the new Mich -- yaaaaawn.

But yeah, I'll probably give it a chance too.

S.

Mill Rat

07-18-2007, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by MrNate
To the second point, I do agree that as beer lovers in a capitalist society we would only be hurting ourselves by supporting the mega breweries, particularly A-B. Sometimes it is good to stand on principle.

That being said, however, it feels like a bit of a drop in the proverbial bucket. If our dollars made a difference, they would have done so already.

You're right, the impact of one of the megas losing your custom is like a flea bite on an elephant. Conversely, though, the impact of acquiring your custom on your local micro is far more significant. It's more like the flea getting a whole meal out of the elephant.

To Richard's comment on the ethically borderline practices of the BMC brewers and their distros in acquiring and protecting market share, there's a fine line between actual evil and simple old mecantile cravenness.

Lee

07-18-2007, 09:25 PM

The way I see it. Why do I care what AB, Coors, or Miller is doing. I drink what I like despite them. When I do occasionally drink one the macros it's because it's the only thing available. I think it's better to drink water with a little essence of beer than to drink water alone. The macros have a right to exist. Like it or not. Lee

wortchillergoal

07-18-2007, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by Mill Rat
To Richard's comment on the ethically borderline practices of the BMC brewers and their distros in acquiring and protecting market share, there's a fine line between actual evil and simple old mecantile cravenness.

That statement is true. Yet I would call the following two examples evil. First, they threaten to pull funding from a charity event at the last hour to chase away a local brewery. Second, AB offers help to a committee that hosts a brew tasting event at our zoo by getting insurance and booth rentals so high that the small brewers can not attend. The funds from this event go to the zoo.

MeridianFC

07-19-2007, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by Lee

Why do I care what AB, Coors, or Miller is doing.

When I do occasionally drink one the macros it's because it's the only thing available.

Part one is answered by part two.

Richard English

07-19-2007, 03:16 AM

Originally posted by Mill Rat
You're right, the impact of one of the megas losing your custom is like a flea bite on an elephant. Conversely, though, the impact of acquiring your custom on your local micro is far more significant. It's more like the flea getting a whole meal out of the elephant.
Read my earlier posting. Just one person can make a difference. Two people make twice the difference. Never, ever, think that "my small contribution can't effect the issue". It's that sort of apathy that allows the bullies to get away with their evil practices.

History is littered with examples of bullies getting away with things because most people thought that their contribution wasn't worth making. History is also littered with examples of single men (and women) whose efforts have changed the world.

If each of us were to convert one swill-drinker to beer drinking every day, and if each of those were to do the same, the who population of the USA would be converted in less than a year!

Don't think about how little your contribution matters; think about how much it matters.

barleyburps

07-19-2007, 04:06 AM

If each of us were to convert one swill-drinker to beer drinking every day

takes too much time and effort out of my daily relationship with beer to help someone else develope their own relationship with beer. . .

. . . .I'll root you on from the sidelines though. . .

Richard English

07-19-2007, 05:41 AM

I have posted this previously but it's worth repeating: when you are at the bar ordering and there's another customer waiting to be served, simply take a swig of your drink as say something like, "...The Pride's drinking well today..."

Very often the customer, especially if he or she is a stranger and doesn't know about your local beers, will then try the Pride - rather than just choosing the chemical fizz that he or she has seen advertised.

It works in the UK - and it also works in the USA. On all three of my recent visits I have managed to convert one or more drinkers - and that was in Chicago, Kissimmee and on the Empire Builder.

steveh

07-19-2007, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by Lee
The way I see it. Why do I care what AB, Coors, or Miller is doing.

Because if you don't stay aware of current trends, all of the micros you see on shelves could soon be phantom BMC products with no shelf space for good beer.

S.

steveh

07-19-2007, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by barleyburps

. . . .I'll root you on from the sidelines though. . .

Spoken like a true apathetic. :rolleyes:

S.

Richard English

07-19-2007, 08:09 AM

Originally posted by steveh
Spoken like a true apathetic. :rolleyes:

S.

And of course, Stevah has seen me at my evangelistic best at Goose Island where one young lady was, by the time I had to leave for the airport, swigging pints of Goose Island Bitter as though she had been glugging them for years! It only takes a moment and a bit of nerve.

Quote: " The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

wortchillergoal

07-19-2007, 03:10 PM

Richard is right on the money. Last night I saw a woman pondering beers in the beer aisle. She would look at one or two micros, start for BMC and then head back to the micros. I simply said," tough to decide, right?" She said she wanted to try something different. She also said that she had tried the SA Cherry wheat and kije that beer. I hooked her up with Saranac Pomegranate Wheat for her and some Brooklyn Summer Ale for her gentleman friend. I was in civies too, not my work uniform.

I have also helped people while during work hours.

Sladek

07-20-2007, 04:10 PM