JK (2955), Richfield, Minnesota, USA
| 1.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 2/5 | 3/10 | 3/5 | 7/20 | Nov 20, 2004 The rep told me they make this with "dark crystals." I asked what a dark crystal, and she didn’t know either. Some malt in the aroma. Taste of a low end bock. An ok, smooth beer. heemer77 (4304), Savannah, Missouri, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 | Nov 11, 2004 The body is a farily dark and slightly cloudy amber. Nice malty caramel aroma. The taste has some coffee, some mint and bread. An ok beer, but very light. rkell (7), Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada does not count | 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 8/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Oct 25, 2004 I’m surprised at the low ratings. For the past two months Sleeman’s Original Dark has been my "pick up a six-pack on the way home beer" and I’m really enjoying it. It’s a very refreshing dark ale and has a great taste almost like you’re taking a bite out of it. There’s just not enough in one bottle. You have to go back for at least one more. No bitterness. Hard to find in local gov’t run liquor stores, but many Beer stores have it. Best "cold". Very refreshing. darkerdabetter (255), Michigan, USA
| 2.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Oct 21, 2004 Wasn’t bad, but wasn’t really good either. These Sleeman beers just seem to exist and not much more. Aroma was somewhat promising, but not much there to back it up. Gusler (2655), Tucson, Arizona, USA
| 3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Oct 4, 2004 The beer after its dispatch from the 330ml clear bottle set in the class a clear deep copper color with a modest size frothy light tan head after its decomposition the lace forms a thin seal upon the glass. Nose is the prototypical crisp and fresh lager that is sweet as is the start; the top is light to moderate in its feel. Finish is middling in acidity and the hops standard for this style, a typical lager, drinkable and refreshing. dirkules (613), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| 1.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 2/5 | 4/10 | 1/5 | 8/20 | Sep 11, 2004 The blue label is certainly not as good as the cream ale or the amber. It’s pretty weak as a matter of fact. obxdude10 (1559), Pottstown, Pennsylvania, USA
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 | Aug 27, 2004 Very surprised to actually enjoy this beer given all the bad comments made about this brewer regarding the take-over & what not, very enjoyable beer though, just about brown in color, nice soft & fluffy tan head, malty nose with a hint of nuts & a touch of hops, very smooth & palatable, mostly malty flavors with just a hint of malt, flavors & body not very well balanced at all, medium-light body, not a bad lager at all
Rockinout (945), Kent, Ohio, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Aug 20, 2004 Light brown color, light tan head, mild nutty nose. Very little hop presence(they claim it to be generously hopped), somewhat malty with a quick finish.
|