I used https://deepai.org/ to generate images of an English brewery.
Showing posts with label beer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label beer. Show all posts
Wednesday, 28 February 2024
Wednesday, 10 February 2016
IPAs are dead (almost)
I have long been fond of the beers of Anchor Brewery.
Memories are vague, but I think I can trace my awareness of Anchor Steam Beer to Michael Jackson's Beer Hunter TV series of 1989. If I recall correctly, the beer was first imported to he UK in 1991. I don't remember when I first got my hands on a bottle of Steam, or any of the other Anchor beers, but I was certainly drinking them regularly before my first trip to California in 1998.
Being a beer geek was different then. Entertaining beer was rare. Feeding beer geekery necessitated a state of constant vigilance, and regular speculative outings to places where desired exotic beers may appear. Disappointment often ensued. Although the internet had arrived, beer coverage was spartan, and there was little opportunity to communicate with fellow beer lovers. Living in London, my beer geekery took the form of buying random bottles from Oddbins, Selfridges, Army & Navy Store*, Pitfield Street Beer Shop, Nelson's Wines in Merton, and of course, supermarkets. Other than the Anchor beers, US craft imports were then very sporadic.
I adored Anchor Liberty Ale. Although only modestly hopped by today's exuberant standards, then, in the nineties, it stood out for its exotic hoppiness. Such depth of flavour - such complexity - such intelligence to conceive of such a beer.
Liberty Ale introduced me to American IPAs. In the late nineties and into the new millennium, a passion for the style was one of the motivating factors behind my brother and me opening one of the earliest establishments in the UK to use the term "Craft Beer". We figured that it wasn't just us who could be thrilled by big new flavours. We were right.
But by 2005 US IPAs were losing their allure for me. In 2004 I judged at the Great American Beer Festival. This episode was pivotal for me. I was thoroughly blasted by hops. After one particular day judging, my tastebuds were knackered. That evening, in the Falling Rock Tap House, my tastebuds were dead. Only a particularly sweet perry managed to penetrate the hop deadness my mouth was experiencing. From that day on, my fondness for US IPAs declined. I had reached peak hop. On my second trip to GABF in 2005 I gave myself a no-IPAs rule and sought out delicacies such as Pilsners and Belgian wit beers. And by crikey, I enjoyed myself.
In the past decade I have watched the British IPA boom with fascination. It is flattering to have my prediction confirmed that large numbers of fellow Brits could get into big-flavour IPAs. At the same time, it is disheartening to listen to new-wave beer geeks obsessing about big hops while giving modestly-hopped beers the cold-shoulder. I'm not the first person to utter this heresy: big hops are the new boring brown bitter. These days I spurn invites to overtly craft-beer establishments because of the dominance of IPAs. Imagine turning on the radio and finding every station playing heavy metal, or country, jazz, or techno, or whatever your least favourite musical style may be – this is the feeling I get in many craft specialist places. IPAs are boring now.
Having firmly dissed IPAs, I'm going to tell you about my new beer infatuation. It's an IPA, quelle horreur! It's Anchor's new IPA, and it's a work of art. It won't be hoppy enough for johnny-come-lately beer geeks, but to expect it to be stridently hoppy would be to miss the point of this beer. This is a beer of subtely, depth and complexity - qualities that elude many modern IPAs. The malt background is of toffee. Yes, an IPA with a malt background, you did read that correctly. Anchor Brewery knows how to use malt. It may be the grand-daddy of all US microbreweries, which may suggest hop genius. But no, for me, Anchor Brewery is the malt master. Anchor does malt complexity like no one else. I have seen the future, and the future is malt.
Memories are vague, but I think I can trace my awareness of Anchor Steam Beer to Michael Jackson's Beer Hunter TV series of 1989. If I recall correctly, the beer was first imported to he UK in 1991. I don't remember when I first got my hands on a bottle of Steam, or any of the other Anchor beers, but I was certainly drinking them regularly before my first trip to California in 1998.
Being a beer geek was different then. Entertaining beer was rare. Feeding beer geekery necessitated a state of constant vigilance, and regular speculative outings to places where desired exotic beers may appear. Disappointment often ensued. Although the internet had arrived, beer coverage was spartan, and there was little opportunity to communicate with fellow beer lovers. Living in London, my beer geekery took the form of buying random bottles from Oddbins, Selfridges, Army & Navy Store*, Pitfield Street Beer Shop, Nelson's Wines in Merton, and of course, supermarkets. Other than the Anchor beers, US craft imports were then very sporadic.
I adored Anchor Liberty Ale. Although only modestly hopped by today's exuberant standards, then, in the nineties, it stood out for its exotic hoppiness. Such depth of flavour - such complexity - such intelligence to conceive of such a beer.
Liberty Ale introduced me to American IPAs. In the late nineties and into the new millennium, a passion for the style was one of the motivating factors behind my brother and me opening one of the earliest establishments in the UK to use the term "Craft Beer". We figured that it wasn't just us who could be thrilled by big new flavours. We were right.
But by 2005 US IPAs were losing their allure for me. In 2004 I judged at the Great American Beer Festival. This episode was pivotal for me. I was thoroughly blasted by hops. After one particular day judging, my tastebuds were knackered. That evening, in the Falling Rock Tap House, my tastebuds were dead. Only a particularly sweet perry managed to penetrate the hop deadness my mouth was experiencing. From that day on, my fondness for US IPAs declined. I had reached peak hop. On my second trip to GABF in 2005 I gave myself a no-IPAs rule and sought out delicacies such as Pilsners and Belgian wit beers. And by crikey, I enjoyed myself.
In the past decade I have watched the British IPA boom with fascination. It is flattering to have my prediction confirmed that large numbers of fellow Brits could get into big-flavour IPAs. At the same time, it is disheartening to listen to new-wave beer geeks obsessing about big hops while giving modestly-hopped beers the cold-shoulder. I'm not the first person to utter this heresy: big hops are the new boring brown bitter. These days I spurn invites to overtly craft-beer establishments because of the dominance of IPAs. Imagine turning on the radio and finding every station playing heavy metal, or country, jazz, or techno, or whatever your least favourite musical style may be – this is the feeling I get in many craft specialist places. IPAs are boring now.
Having firmly dissed IPAs, I'm going to tell you about my new beer infatuation. It's an IPA, quelle horreur! It's Anchor's new IPA, and it's a work of art. It won't be hoppy enough for johnny-come-lately beer geeks, but to expect it to be stridently hoppy would be to miss the point of this beer. This is a beer of subtely, depth and complexity - qualities that elude many modern IPAs. The malt background is of toffee. Yes, an IPA with a malt background, you did read that correctly. Anchor Brewery knows how to use malt. It may be the grand-daddy of all US microbreweries, which may suggest hop genius. But no, for me, Anchor Brewery is the malt master. Anchor does malt complexity like no one else. I have seen the future, and the future is malt.
* The Army and Navy flagship store in Victoria had a good beer selection.
Tuesday, 10 November 2015
Craft Beer Calling
A picture paints a thousand words - so here are 24,000 words on Craft Beer Calling, Newcastle upon Tyne's answer to the inferior Indy Man Beer Con.
Monday, 27 July 2015
Vinegar Ectoplasm
I had lunch with a couple of friends yesterday. It was a good pub: a decent turnover of cask ales and real food made from scratch. My friend asked for vinegar for his chips.
"Sorry, we don't do vinegar - this is a real ale pub" came the reply.
A few weeks ago, in another pub a few miles away, the people at the next table were ordering food. They asked for chips:"Sorry, we don't do chips. Too many people ask for vinegar and we can't do vinegar because this is a real ale pub".
In a third pub, a regular grumbled to me: "We asked for a big jar of cockles on the bar but the boss won't do it because of the vinegar. The same with pickled eggs".
I've been aware of this no-vinegar thing for some years. The idea seems to be that the mere presence of vinegar in the pub somehow adversely effects the beer.
This is vinegar that smells of bullshit.
By what means does the vinegar allegedly adversely effect the beer? I asked one of my lunch friends, who is a very sciencey person, with a PhD in organic chemistry to prove it. "Vinegar ectoplasm" he explained.
Adding to my suspicion that this is mumbo-jumbo, each of the pubs concerned is quite happy to serve other condiments that contain vinegar – tomato ketchup and brown sauce for instance. Indeed, one of them prides itself on making its own chutneys and pickles. Joined-up thinking is not in evidence.
My conclusion is that the vinegar-adversely-effects-beer thing is magical thinking. It is an idea - a meme - that is passed between people who don't question it.
Has anyone else spotted this? Can anyone defend the no-vinegar rule?
*Update: The Beercast has also covered this subject. Interestingly, the pub they mention is is no more than 15 miles or so from the ones I mentioned. Could the no-vinegar rule be a local South Cumbrian thing? http://thebeercast.com/2012/08/keep-our-pubs-vinegar-free.html
"Sorry, we don't do vinegar - this is a real ale pub" came the reply.
A few weeks ago, in another pub a few miles away, the people at the next table were ordering food. They asked for chips:"Sorry, we don't do chips. Too many people ask for vinegar and we can't do vinegar because this is a real ale pub".
In a third pub, a regular grumbled to me: "We asked for a big jar of cockles on the bar but the boss won't do it because of the vinegar. The same with pickled eggs".
I've been aware of this no-vinegar thing for some years. The idea seems to be that the mere presence of vinegar in the pub somehow adversely effects the beer.
This is vinegar that smells of bullshit.
By what means does the vinegar allegedly adversely effect the beer? I asked one of my lunch friends, who is a very sciencey person, with a PhD in organic chemistry to prove it. "Vinegar ectoplasm" he explained.
Adding to my suspicion that this is mumbo-jumbo, each of the pubs concerned is quite happy to serve other condiments that contain vinegar – tomato ketchup and brown sauce for instance. Indeed, one of them prides itself on making its own chutneys and pickles. Joined-up thinking is not in evidence.
My conclusion is that the vinegar-adversely-effects-beer thing is magical thinking. It is an idea - a meme - that is passed between people who don't question it.
Has anyone else spotted this? Can anyone defend the no-vinegar rule?
*Update: The Beercast has also covered this subject. Interestingly, the pub they mention is is no more than 15 miles or so from the ones I mentioned. Could the no-vinegar rule be a local South Cumbrian thing? http://thebeercast.com/2012/08/keep-our-pubs-vinegar-free.html
Monday, 17 February 2014
Beer on the Telly
Here's a programme my Tivo picked up on one of the obscure channels nobody watches.
I recorded it off my telly with my digital camera – just like when we used to record songs on cassette recorders with a microphone to the radio. (Note to younger readers: ask your parents what a cassette recorder is. They've probably got an old one in the loft.)
Saturday, 7 April 2012
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
Your last chance to contribute to the greater beer wisdom
Way back in October (was it really that long ago?) I set the ball rolling on some original something-ological beer research
I'd really like to embark on some analysis. I was looking for a minimum of 100 responses to my survey. Currently we're on ninety-something. So, if you haven't done it already, take my survey, and please pass it on to your beer-drinking friends. The more responses I get, the better the overall data will be.
Here is the direct link to the survey.
Just shoot from the hip. Select responses that feel the least wrong to you. Don't dwell too much on the subjects of some of the questions - I'll explain it after I've closed the survey.
I'd really like to embark on some analysis. I was looking for a minimum of 100 responses to my survey. Currently we're on ninety-something. So, if you haven't done it already, take my survey, and please pass it on to your beer-drinking friends. The more responses I get, the better the overall data will be.
Here is the direct link to the survey.
Just shoot from the hip. Select responses that feel the least wrong to you. Don't dwell too much on the subjects of some of the questions - I'll explain it after I've closed the survey.
Monday, 17 October 2011
Clutching At Straws For A Silver Lining
I've signed the beer tax e-petition. I hope you have too.
I don't suppose that it will have any impact whatsoever, but, what the hell, we've got nothing to lose have we?
The trouble is, strong beer is a soft target. The bigger problem is that governments want to keep on being governments rather than shadow governments. In order to do so they must keep their voters on side by being seen to punish those core voters' "out groups" (psychology speak for subjects of bigotry or prejudice).
The core voters for the current government are Daily Mail readers (well, not for the Lib Dems, but let's forget about them, everybody else does). They're not a constituency known for letting facts get in their way of their opinions. Strong beer has no hope of gaining favour with these people; and it is these people to whom the government would have to justify a drop in duty on stronger beer. The Daily Mail would stir up a storm of wrong-headed indignation.
The problem is multi-faceted:
1) It's beer – this voter demographic is keen to be regarded as middle-class. They regard beer as a working-class drink and binge-drinking as a working-class habit.
2) It's strong – Binge drinking is spiralling out of control, is it not? (remember what I said about not letting facts get in the way of opinions?).
3) Al fresco drinkers are the public face of strong beer.
4) Much strong beer is foreign. The voter demographic is notoriously xenophobic.
Our defence has two facets, neither of which I fear will have much impact :
a) The duty rise affects beers favoured by connoisseurs who generally go home quietly, failing to trouble the emergency services.
This is not likely to have much impact as connoisseurship is a euphemism for snobbery. In Daily Mail land snobbery is a very bad thing.
b) The new beer duty has a negative impact on Britain's new wave of craft breweries and pubs and bars.
This is not going to create sympathy amongst Daily Mail readers. When the Daily Mail reports on binge drinking the comments sections fill up with suggestions that the breweries should be clamped down upon. Mired in a model that is at least thirty years out of date, the DM reader uses "breweries" to mean all producers and retailers of alcohol, any alcohol. Binge drinking is increasing so "breweries" must be punished.
All in all, I fear we are stuck with this stupid tax rise. The best we can do is to gird our collective loins for action about any further duty increases.
The only silver lining I can see is that higher priced stronger craft beer may induce the higher price = higher quality perception in more people.
This was the principal used so cleverly by the marketers of Stella Artois in their "reassuringly expensive" slogan. Psychologists and economists have repeatedly demonstrated that people prefer wine they are told is expensive to wine they are told is cheap, even if it is identical – or inferior. People want to be seen as demonstrating taste and discernment, and higher price is the biggest clue available that an item is superior.
This can only be good for beer. It may even draw more people into sharing our pleasure in beer. Beer may shake off some of its downmarket reputation.
I don't suppose that it will have any impact whatsoever, but, what the hell, we've got nothing to lose have we?
The trouble is, strong beer is a soft target. The bigger problem is that governments want to keep on being governments rather than shadow governments. In order to do so they must keep their voters on side by being seen to punish those core voters' "out groups" (psychology speak for subjects of bigotry or prejudice).
The core voters for the current government are Daily Mail readers (well, not for the Lib Dems, but let's forget about them, everybody else does). They're not a constituency known for letting facts get in their way of their opinions. Strong beer has no hope of gaining favour with these people; and it is these people to whom the government would have to justify a drop in duty on stronger beer. The Daily Mail would stir up a storm of wrong-headed indignation.
The problem is multi-faceted:
1) It's beer – this voter demographic is keen to be regarded as middle-class. They regard beer as a working-class drink and binge-drinking as a working-class habit.
2) It's strong – Binge drinking is spiralling out of control, is it not? (remember what I said about not letting facts get in the way of opinions?).
3) Al fresco drinkers are the public face of strong beer.
4) Much strong beer is foreign. The voter demographic is notoriously xenophobic.
Our defence has two facets, neither of which I fear will have much impact :
a) The duty rise affects beers favoured by connoisseurs who generally go home quietly, failing to trouble the emergency services.
This is not likely to have much impact as connoisseurship is a euphemism for snobbery. In Daily Mail land snobbery is a very bad thing.
b) The new beer duty has a negative impact on Britain's new wave of craft breweries and pubs and bars.
This is not going to create sympathy amongst Daily Mail readers. When the Daily Mail reports on binge drinking the comments sections fill up with suggestions that the breweries should be clamped down upon. Mired in a model that is at least thirty years out of date, the DM reader uses "breweries" to mean all producers and retailers of alcohol, any alcohol. Binge drinking is increasing so "breweries" must be punished.
All in all, I fear we are stuck with this stupid tax rise. The best we can do is to gird our collective loins for action about any further duty increases.
The only silver lining I can see is that higher priced stronger craft beer may induce the higher price = higher quality perception in more people.
This was the principal used so cleverly by the marketers of Stella Artois in their "reassuringly expensive" slogan. Psychologists and economists have repeatedly demonstrated that people prefer wine they are told is expensive to wine they are told is cheap, even if it is identical – or inferior. People want to be seen as demonstrating taste and discernment, and higher price is the biggest clue available that an item is superior.
This can only be good for beer. It may even draw more people into sharing our pleasure in beer. Beer may shake off some of its downmarket reputation.
Thursday, 24 December 2009
Thursday, 26 June 2008
Sublime beer and food matching moment
Bearing in that beer and food matching is quite the thing these days my tastebuds are always alert to combinations that have the 2+2=5 effect: the whole taste experience is greater than the sum of the parts.I'd met a couple of friends at the Harp (by Charing Cross Police station just along from the Chandos).
For the past 2 or 3 years this has been my favourite West End pub - the theme is "proper pub" and a high turnover of cask ale guarantees a decent pint.
The bar offered Harvey's Bitter, a Mordue (can't remember which), TT's Landlord and another that escapes me completely.
We ordered our beers and some nibbles.
Where most salty snacks dutifully do their job of satisfying humankind's universal base craving for salt, fat and carbohydrate, Smith's Scampi Fries possess gustatory qualities above the norm.
In an impromptu tasting session our panel of three instantly recognised that Harvey's Sussex Best Bitter and Smith's Scampi Fries are made for each other.
(The Mordue was excellent but the Landord was past its best b.t.w.)
HOT NEWS: In my "research" for this entry I've discovered that arch-rival Golden Wonder Scampi and Lemon Nik Naks are back on the market. Let the good times roll!
Monday, 9 June 2008
Cyclops - Why?
I notice that the world of real ale often demonstrates an inability to appreciate what the "outside world" may think of it.
Real ale is already saddled with an unappealing "brand image" - bushy beards, woolly jumpers, sandals - need we go on? - yet CAMRA is willing to add to the roster of inelegent and unappealing imagery.
For example: the promotion of "Cyclops" (Ho, ho, ho it's only a larf innit?) - a system of noting an individual beer's colour and appearance, aroma and flavour invented by Everards (if I recall correctly).
Entirely needlessly, the visual representation of this system is an eye, a nose, a mouth.
NOTE - it's one eye. WHY, when most of us have two?
The choice has been made in order to giver it a jokey name - "Cyclops". Although the legend of Cyclops is not known for having any direct relevance to beer, it has been decided to plonk it into real ale imagery.
It wouldn't be so bad if they'd actually employed a decent graphic designer to create the Cyclops image rather than the inept "design" obviously knocked up in a word processor using clip-art.
I can fully understand the need to reduce the amount of guesswork in the selection of a beer by those of us not gifted with encyclopedic knowledge and photographic memory but is this the best they can do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)