WISEGUY572 (1246), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| 3.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 | Jul 7, 2003 A good enough amber ale. Beautifully clear golden appearance, with a good white head that fade too fast. Sort of a smallish tasting amber, in that it has nice balance but not much hops or caramel or malt. Nice balance also of floral aromatic hoppiness at the beginning and bitter hop finish, but nothing remarkable. My Ithaca friends say that there is high variability from month to month in Ithaca Beer Company's beers, so maybe this explains the greater enthusiasm of some of the earlier reviewers. xmandax (130), Astoria, New York, USA
| 1.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 2/10 | 2/5 | 7/20 | Jan 13, 2003 sweet, very sweet. not much hop in this, nor is there much aroma. it’s a "drink all night" beer, because it’s not very interesting and it won’t get you very drunk, and that’s the best that can be said about this one. jah noth (1017), Rochester, New York, USA
| 3.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 5/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 14/20 | Oct 1, 2002 Fairly decent amber ale with an outstanding appearance. Delicious caramel malt character with a moderate hop balance. I prefer their nut brown more. Jayb0 (752), Cherry Hill, New Jersey, USA
| 3.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 16/20 | Sep 23, 2002 Either this isn’t a chracteristic amber or I found an amber I actually like. Honey golden with great flavors balanced very well with a slighly oily mouth feel. The hop spice cuts through what I usually find to be a style too sweet with malt. Aurelius (2648), Tallahassee, Florida, USA
| 3.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 13/20 | Sep 20, 2002 Updated: Nov 7, 2003Malty/fruity/alcohol aroma. Hazy orange. Toffee or butterscotch in a sturdy bitterish ale. I had a very old bottle of this and it stood up very well to cellaring. Rerate with a fresh bottle: After sampling the other Ithacas, which weren't very stellar, I was shocked to see that I'd given this a 3.9 in the cellared bottle. Turns out not to be that far off -- Ithaca's strong point is their fruity aroma. Hops were more evident in the fresh bottle. I downgraded the flavor -1, the palate -1 and the overall -2, but it's still a good, balanced and drinkable brew. Holdwine (908), Beertimore, Maryland, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Sep 3, 2002 Pretty average amber ale. The bottle I tried was slightly watery. It had some decent malt work. Nice amber color. Flowery and fruity nose. But missing the wow appeal that the other raters found. Steak (124), New York, USA
| 3.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 8/10 | 4/5 | 16/20 | Jul 22, 2002 This was a surprising beer. For me it was the tremendous attention given to the malts. The caramel presence was huge and it was countered by a some hops and a fruity flavor. The combination of apples/caramel in foods is normally great, and it works as well in this beer. The hops are limited in the finish, a twist that works pretty well. Decent floral aroma and a pretty caramel-ish color. Pretty good. hennes (932), Fountain, Michigan, USA
| 4.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 8/10 | 4/5 | 8/10 | 4/5 | 18/20 | Jun 16, 2002 I’m one of those guys that likes to have milestone brews. I choose this one for number 600 in honor of a fine day with PsychProf, and in honor of a brewer not afraid to challenge what can be a bland, banal American amber style. PyschProf, brownalegirl, and I stood around in the kitchen trying to guess the fruit of this one’s fruitiness, which tells you what its main distinguishing characteristic is. ’cranberries!’ she said and I follow her, cranberries sweetened with apple, perhaps. There is a toastiness to the malt, too, and some delicate handling of spicy hops that works very well. A top notch amber, to be sure.
|