San Miguel

Brewed by San Miguel
Style: Pale Lager
Manila, Philippines

Quite mild aroma with notes of corn and malt. Malt and corn with fruity notes. Quite smooth and easy to drink, no bitterness. Not good, but I’ve had worse lagers than this one.

(br-btl gl-lbl, "Pale Pilsner", I think it’s also brewed in Indo where I got it)

gl-lct, ^co2, med body, full T1 bitter §diacetyl T2 bitter hoppy §spicy T3, not much pils taste.

Pale amber color; Light to medium body; Aroma of malt and some fruit; Flavor of light sweet malt, light hops, and some caramel; Aftertaste is slightly sour/acidic; Overall, it’s a little bland but not terrible.

30th July 2008. Bottle from the Philippines. This generally is poor from anywhere else! Pale gold lager. Light and crisp. Watery but in a refreshing spritzer sort of way. Refreshing. A beer close to my heart as I drank loads of it in the Philippines. Sometimes even had this for breakfast when the water was suspect.

This is Poor. And especially the one brewed in England not very tasty or flavoursome. 10 points for bubbles though.

Bottle, 1999-05-02, international that is nice to have when on spanish riviera

Years ago I had this beer, and it was a favorite of mine. It was creamy, with a very nice malt-hop balance. Maybe slightly more bitter than many lagers back then, but very good. Sad to say, time has not been kind to the San Miguel coming to our shores now a day. Not much nose to speak of. Slightly winey, almost like what you’d expect if a beer were produced with a wine yeast. Dull flavor, like a weak cream soda with hops in it. Not sure if the recipe has changed drastically, or if it’s simply a sign of the times and less expensive malt and hops are being used, but this is not a beer that would appear on my "wish list."

Draught. Clear gold no head. Little aroma: slightly vegetable with hint of wet dog. Light body with medium carbonation. Refreshing malty somewhat lemony start with reasonable bitter finish. OK beer, nothing special.