Can you handle this much chocolate? Kraig can.
Ahh beer…how I’ve missed reviewing you. Finally, I’ve got another beer review for you to savor. I’ve been fortunate enough to try a bunch of beers since my last review, so I’m pretty happy in terms of the beverage situation. Other than a few crappy beers I drank in Israel solely because they were dirt cheap, I’ve found a new favorite and now have a fridge full of great (supposedly) beer that’s just waiting for me to open. But let’s go one week at a time, okay? Calm down, spaz.
This week we’ll be looking at some winter beers since last time I checked, it’s still winter in Philadelphia. And the colder it gets, the more beer we should drink (is that bad justification for drinking?). This week’s beer article was inspired by one of my readers for The Triangle. Although he suggested only one beer, I figured I’d make a battle out of this one. Similar to the pumpkin battle, we’re comparing two beers. This time we’re talking chocolate. Buckle up, kids, we’ve got some rocky roads (ha, lame chocolate pun) ahead of us. Real quick note: DO NOT DRINK THESE BEERS FREEZING COLD. Both beers were definitely too cold at the start, which ruined the taste and smell. As they warmed up they progressively got better and swelled into better beers. Okay, now to the brewski.
The first beer that we’ll look at it is that one that was suggested by my reader, Jeff: Young’s Double Chocolate Stout. This brew is known as a milk/sweet stout. This style of beer can possess many typical characteristics of a stout: dark color, creamy/thicker consistency, roasted/burnt flavors, etc. However, what sets this style apart from other stouts is that unfermented sugars are intentially added during the brewing process. The addition of excess sugar, which can be in many forms, is done for the purpose of masking the roasted flavors with sugary goodness as well as creating a more full-bodied flavor of beer. This brew in particular has real chocolate dumped into each batch, which is where the chocolate/sugar ingredient derives from. Haha, I just thought about Charlie the Unicorn. “Candy Mountain! Candy Mountain! You fill me with sweet, sugary goodness!” Man…I love the internet.
When it’s poured out, this beer looks spectacular. Not gonna lie: this is definitely one of the better looking beers I’ve ever seen. With a dark chocolate body and mocha head that looks as comfortable as a Temperpedic bed on steroids that only make it softer, I wanted to jump in and close my eyes with a feeling of ecstacy (not the drug, lame-o). Aka, I was extremely impressed. Lacing smothered the sides of the glass in very peculiar ways, which only intrigued me more.
The aromas of this brew were very, very simple. So simple that I only need to take up two lines of words: Semi-sweet chocolate essense and malt closing up the rear. That’s it.
And the taste was identical to the smell with a hint of roasted flavoring. This beer is very blatantly uncomplicated and the brewers did this purposefully. You’re not meant to drink this beer and think about for too long – It’s meant to just be enjoyed (during desert would be ideal) for what it is. Additionally, the beer was creamy in its texture. This beer really wasn’t my style, and a bit hard to finish, but nonetheless, it was relatively enjoyable. Here’s my BA ranking:
B / 3.65
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | drink: 3.5
The second beer I decided to match up against Jeff’s was Brooklyn’s Black Chocolate Stout. Kraig’s been raving about this brewery for a while now, so I figured now’s a better time than ever. Just like Storm King, a beer I reviewed a few articles back, this beer is labled as a Russian Imperial Stout. Although I wasn’t a huge fan of this style last time I had a crack at it, every beer is different and I thought I’d get back on the horse. If you want to learn about this style, read the Storm King review or check out Beer Advocate’s website.
This beer has been named appropriately since the color is literally the same as crude oil. Furthermore, the consistency sort of looked like oil in the way it moved; there was some obvious viscosity. Still, it looked really good and was complimented with a thicker, pillow head. Bubbles were streaming up from the bottom of the glass – this one’s highly carbonated.
Unlike the first beer, this one was very complex. Hops, dark chocolate (from roasting the grains), espresso, and alcohol could be pointed out with only a few whiffs. Brooklyn has been known to make some complex beers, so this only goes with their trend.
The taste, though chocolately, was distinctly different from the Young’s. As you could assume from the style, roasted flavors were a key part of the overall taste. However, a malty, tart flavor was strong as well as the 10% ABV. The alcohol bled right through which was EXTREMELY disappointing. I definitely liked the taste but the alcohol killed it. Very, very frustrating. Imagine small beer elfs punching me in the taste buds – that’s what it was like. Okay, probably not at all like that…I need to go back on vacation to find my sanity. Maybe I got a bad batch or something, but I couldn’t finish my glass. Typical of the style, this beer was on the thicker side, which also hurt it’s drinkability rating. Here’s my BA ranking:
B+ / 3.9
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | drink: 2.5
In the end, it’s hard to compare this two beers since they’re so different. Even though I ranked the Brooklyn better, it’s only because of the fact that I like a complex beer. The Young’s is definitely great for the more amatuer drinker whereas the Brooklyn is better for the connoisseur/risk-taking type. It’s funny though, I really have come a long way since I started reviewing beers. I remember in the days when I would NEVER touch either of these beers. Guess you become more willing when it becomes a passion. Yeah, I don’t sound like a whore or anything…
Next week’s beer: Old Horizontal.
Yay for pictures!
-
- Can you handle this much chocolate? Kraig can.
And in case you want to read it, here’s the article I wrote in the Triangle: linkasaurus!
