 BeerLimey (1873), California, USA
| 3.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 8/10 | 3/5 | 16/20 |
Sep 7, 2001 Updated: May 29, 2003There was a slight piney aroma, while the flavor offers a nice refreshing balance of tangy Cascade hops and a smooth malt backbone, giving this something of a Pacific Northwest feel.
DrunkAsASkunk (847), Lynnwood, Washington, USA
| 3.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 |
Sep 2, 2002 When i popped open the bottle its aroma just smacked me in the face..and cried drink me..drink me. But yes, the taste was not as strong as the aroma would entail. A subtle tangy taste is in order with the Alesmith Anvil, but i failed to see how this was the thirst quencher it is so advertised as. Trust me, I was putting down some Anvil at 1am with 95F weather and it wasnt helping. Still a very good beer that puts all domestic staples to shame. A little hoppy, but no comparison to a Stone.
Gusler (2655), Tucson, Arizona, USA
| 3.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 15/20 |
Apr 4, 2002 Deep amber, or more like a brown to these old eyes, beige head that is generous and relatively long lasting, also the lace is in sheets that cling snuggly to the glass. Malt dominates the nose, some yeast and hop tones noted. Start is malt sweet, the top is light to medium, the finish hop spicy, dry, lightly acidic and light to moderate carbonation.
Eyedrinkale (3209), Astoria, New York, USA
| 3.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 15/20 |
Jan 6, 2004 Pours a nice gold with minimal head. Nice aromas of pine and mellow hops. A very nice session brew. Well done.
TAR (2095), Boulder Co., Colorado, USA
| 3.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 5/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 |
Feb 16, 2002 Pours crystal clear amber liquid with the tiniest of bubbles that form a nice ring; bready and yeasty aromas; chewy mouthfeel with biscuit malts dominant from start to finish with the slightest hint of bitterness. A very sweet beer, indeed. I was surprised by this beer in that it had very few hops. For an over-the-top brewery like Alesmith, this surprised me. It has quality written all over it. However, it is an English style, of which I am not a fan. I figured the Northwest hops would be overbaring in this, but oh well. One of the few bottle conditioned ESB’s attempted by an American brewery.
21iceman40 (1731), vienna, West Virginia, USA
| 3.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 15/20 |
Oct 20, 2002 Updated: Mar 2, 2003A little light for me, but this was still a qaulity brew. A good beer to enjoy while chillin.
DaSilky1 (2031), San Diego, California, USA
| 3.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 13/20 |
Apr 21, 2002 Updated: Feb 23, 2003creamy, very floral character, very good
akinm (282), San Diego, California, USA
| 3.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 6/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 |
Aug 1, 2002 This beer is missing something that can normally be found in alesmith products but it is still definitely a good beer. Golden, clear color and a light hop aroma. the flavor is a little weak, the hops do not come out very much and as i think that neither does the malt flavor. A little watery for the alesmith crew but that does not make it a bad beer.
|
Find This Beer (Want/Have)