454. Jeffrey McElfresh Belgian Specialty Ale Orval clone

Stop. No really. Stop. Stop right there. Cease and desist. Back it up. Back it up, I said. Little bit more. Daaaaaaamn. Jeffrey, I know you’re not gonna be able to stop drinking this beer, but I’m here to tell you, you need to sack some of it away, like right now, because it is gonna get better. A whole lot better. Sure, it is good now. Really good. Really really good. But when George Clinton puts his hands all the way into this one, it’s gonna make panties fall off. So you better listen. Because if you’re down to your last bottle, and I hear any of that “Oh, I wish I’d saved more of this,” or “Why does it only get good when it is all gone?,” I’m gonna punch you right in the stomach. Straight up. And then I’ll tell you I told you so. Yes, potential disrespect for this beer is prone to create threats of and/or actual acts of violence from yours truly. And you’re gonna need to call me when that funk drops all the way in, because I’m not sure you can handle that much funk. Because it will blow your mind. Boom. There it goes.

World’s Creepiest Mustache

So where to start. Sure, this beer has color. And yes, there is head retention and lacing and all that other whatnot. But the nose. Damn, that nose is bewitching. Slight spicy with a touch of citrus, earthiness, and just the beginnings of some barnyard funk—that minerally, hay-like, estery, tongue-drying spritziness that is just creeping into the picture at this point. But creeping in enough to whisper seductively in my ear. And to tell me of things to come. The body finishes off what the nose started. There is just a tang more funkiness in the body than in the nose—having led me down the dark path, it is making sure it is going to guide my destiny. Spicy earthy and loamy flavors at the front before moving into a drier and more minerally middle. There is still a touch of dark fruit and raisin with the dryness, and the skin flavor of the raisin lingers on into the finish—it is almost a rum raisin effect with a slight tannic bite. The finish is lightly tart and bright which, coupled with the carbonation, gives a spritzy and zesty feel to the finish. It tingles on the back of throat on the way down, for crying-out-loud. A light alcohol warmth emerges out of the zesty tingle, creating a pleasant balance between the two. After that, all I’m left with is a light lingering dry mineral funkiness in the back of my mouth—the same one that was initially offering portents of things to come. Currently, Smokey Brown gets the nod for your best beer, but in six months this beer is gonna own Smokey Brown. Own it and make it do bad illegal things. For money.

If you don’t give me another bottle of this, Jeffrey, I’m erasing all my posts about your beer.

(2/10/2011)

453. Jeffrey McElfresh Dubbel

It is day three of America’s newest and most favorite national holiday, Jeffrey McElfresh Homebrew Drinking Week. Ahem. Part II. Today, the napkin tells me we are drinking McElfresh Dubbel, which pours a brilliant toffee with amber and garnet highlights—lush and rich with a thick creamy eggshell head that laces the glass and while still maintaining the bright carbonation in the glass. Ah, heaven. The nose is toffee and caramel malt along with some breadiness and smaller amounts of fruit including raisin and cherry—very malt forward. There might be a touch of spiciness in the nose as well, and/or a subtle perfumy character, but it low and buried in the back under a bunch of other things. Flavors in the beer match the nose; there is caramel and toffee malt in the front, lighter raisin and cherry fruit flavors in the middle, and some brown sugar sweetness before a finish that is clean and drier than I expected via the carbonation. Smooth, creamy, and rich mouthfeel with bright carbonation that balances the beer and lightens the body. There is no discernable alcohol warmth or flavor, although there might be a slight hop bitterness that emerges as the beer warms. This is a well-made beer, but the flavor profile is not as complex as I expected—for some reason it strikes as a bit of a lighter version of a dubbel, be it via the brighter carbonation or a lighter body. It may also be a bit young—three or four months may allow some of the fruit flavors to further develop across the palate. While it is my least favorite of the three thus far in this version of JMHDW, it is still a solid beer. And that creamy luscious head! It didn’t diminish the throughout the entire drinking of the whole 22 bottle. Damn!

P.S. That MGD 64 t-shirt is hot, Captain SexElfresh. Tighter! I want it tighter!

(2/9/2011)

452. Jeffrey McElfresh Table Saison

And the wonderfulness that is Jeffrey McElfresh Homebrew Drinking Week Part II continues. As the napkin informs me, this is Jeffrey’s Table Saison, a light, bright, and eminently drinkable version of the style. It’s even circled so I know I’ll like it. Listen to the napkin: the napkin knows all. Pouring a slightly hazy straw with a rich white head—and plenty of those tiny tiny white bubbles billowing up through the beer in the glass—McElfresh Table Saison has a dry crackery and spicy nose mixed with perfume-y and juicy yeast esters along with a slight hop tang. As it warms, the juiciness turns into a more discernable fruitiness. The beer starts dry and lightly sweet with a crackery follow through before the spiciness and bitterness of the middle asserts itself, finishing sharp and lightly tart. There is a spicy bitterness that also lingers on the palate, along with a touch of alcohol warmth at the back of the throat. The soft malt character mixed with higher carbonation gives this beer a refreshing mouthfeel. My complaints here are few: the finish is not as clean as I would like—there is a slight cider flavor that is off-putting in relation to the acidic tartness, and the slight alcohol warmth stands out a bit. Both are most likely products of the well attenuated body; the lack of residual malt character is not there to round the overall profile. Nonetheless, both of these concerns are pretty minimal to the overall beer, which is classic in both its simplicity and complexity—the traditional saison characteristics are superb. Damn straight. This one got nailed.

P.S. Jeffrey, is this White Labs WLP565 or Wyeast 3724?

(2/8/2011)

451. Jeffrey McElfresh Bière de Garde

Oh snap! That moment of transcendent magic we’ve all been waiting for is finally here: Jeffrey McElfresh Homebrew Drinking Week Part II. This is the best sequel in the history of forever, or at least since humanity emerged from caves and abandoned hunting and gathering for the joys of agrarian life. The downside, of course, is that that particular part two was also on the way to humans eating paint chips, but that’s a different story, and not so good an example of the vision of a triumphant sequel that I am trying to sell here. As well, it is possible that the next installment of JMHDW will be ever better (not to be confused with WWJD II)—it could be in the reciprocally sequel-appropriate 3D—but the possibilities are just too fantabulously awesome to even contemplate, so I’ll stick with the here and now of JMHDW II. My lord, I’m giddy with excitement, so let’s get down to brass tacks...

Highlights!

McElfresh Bière de Garde pours a delicate tannish caramel brown with delightful orange highlights that are the color of Johnny Rotten’s Public Image Ltd.-era hair. The head is made up of miniscule white bubbles that quickly reduce to a ring, while the nose is a complex mixture of toasty and caramel malt sweetness with creamy and bready components as well, but stops just short of having dark fruit notes (malt, not ester derived). Really, the nose is quite divine. Flavors open with toasty and toffee malt sweetness; the middle is creamy but also a bit drier on the palate, with no discernable hop bitterness—if it is there, it is very light. The finish features a touch of Belgian candy sweetness and smaller hints of darker fruits like plum and fig, but it is also dry with a touch of bitterness and/or alcohol flavor that lightly lingers. The medium body is slightly undercarbonated, which would be my only real complaint about the beer, leaving it a bit soft on the mouth (although it does reciprocally enhance the soft toasty malt components of the beer). While I am unsure of the exact strength of the beer, the alcohol is well hidden—it is most certainly a malt forward beer. The strength is the malt complexity coupled with the cleaner finish. As the beer warms, there is an increase in caramel flavors across the profile as well as a larger manifestation of the darker fruit flavors in the middle and end of the beer (I mean, hell, I got a 22 of this beer, so it took me some time to work through it). While certainly delicious now, I’d be interested in seeing the long-term effects of some additional garde-ing—I think the malt complexity would get richer and more complex even though this is a lighter version of a Bière de Garde. Nice work, Jeffrey. You’re in effect like alternate side of the street parking rules.

P.S. I’m officially skipping work tomorrow as part of my secret silent plan to make JMHDW an officially recognized national holiday. Who is with me? Come on, where’s your faux indignation and half-assed civil disobedience now? All y’all are a bunch of Western Marxists, aren’t you?

(2/7/2011)

The Session #48: Cask, Keg, Can, or Bottle

The Session is a first Friday beer blogging adventure begun by the likes of Jay Brooks of Brookston Beer Bulletin and Stan Hieronymus of Appellation Beer. The idea is to get a body of like-minded individuals all writing about the same topic, so I figured I’d toss my proverbial hat in the ring and see what happened. Can’t hurt too bad, can it? This month’s host is Simon Johnson at Reluctant Scooper. Kudos, my man.

So, Cask, Keg, Can, or Bottle, hmmm? My answer revolves mostly around the location of consumption: bottles for at home or at a friend’s house and casks/kegs for those nights when I’m stepping out on the town. I will confess that my greatest attachment is to bottle-conditioned beer, mostly because of the license it provides to store beer that I can pull out and drink at my leisure over a longer period of time. Sure, bottles can have problems with oxidation in the long run, but let’s be honest: who has the cash to store whole kegs? And who regularly pulls out a keg and invites over the appropriate number of people to drink it? Although if you are the type of person who ages kegs, and you need help with them, please call me. I’d be happy to do my part. After all, when at home, bottles do provide a greater diversity of options, albeit in the exact same manner that kegs do when out on the town. Given the current rise of canning, I could be easily convinced to embrace cans for the same reason, although I am not sure if a bottle-conditioned/live-beer-in-a-can is a possibility—anyone know?

Kegs and casks are always enjoyable, but I more connect them with being out on the town, with kegs as a stand in for the normal evening out, and casks representing special one-off events. While beer culture is on the rise in Dayton, OH, there are only about four or five locations that have an extensive tap selection, and casks are few and far between. For example, I know that there is a firkin of Hopslam that is going to be tapped locally next week, which I will undoubtedly attend. And I most decidedly enjoyed the Heavy Seas Loose Cannon 420 Cask that made an appearance last April 20th. I’d certainly love to see more casks, but since I live in Dayton, I also need to remain realistic. Until we get a brewpub of our own with cask events every Friday (or even once a month), casks are still strictly special event-grade material. As well, the growth of the craft beer world has reciprocally made some of these events less enjoyable to attend locally—at times overly-crowded and at others a bit too aggressively uber-masculine. While such growth may be good for beer, it is not necessarily so good for me. Remember, kids, beer is not a contest.

Having said that, I do wish, however, I was attending the Bruery’s First Firkin Friday, which represents the type of experimentation and possibility that such an event should embody. They’ll be pouring five different versions of their Saison de Lente: a cask of Saison de Lente 2011, while on draft will be Saison de Lente 2010, Saison de Lente 2011, 100% Brett Saison de Lente 2011, and 0% Brett Saison de Lente 2011. Oh, the possibilities. Think of all the variables to taste that are represented in that line-up. While beer may not be a contest, I still can have beer envy, can’t I?

(2/4/2011)

450. North Peak Diabolical India Pale Ale

That’s right, I’m officially back. Sorry for January. But I was having so much fun. Anyway, two in almost as many days from North Peak. And that’s nothing to sneeze at. If you missed it, which I’m not sure is possible, our last one from North Peak was Vicious. Grrrrr!!!!

Pouring a rich, dark copper, Diabolical is clear with an eggshell-colored head and a spicy herbal and citrus hop nose. I didn’t get much else in the nose, although Elli thought the malt character was a bit too juicy in relation to the hops—she called it “plump,” which I liked, so I put it in quotation marks to call attention to it. Flavors start with a light, dry malt sweetness that is quickly taken over by hop bitterness. The middle does have some biscuit dryness along with a bit of spicy and citrus hop flavor, but it all bows before the bitterness, which is the primary presence in the middle. The finish has a brief rise of caramel candy sweetness—brighter and sweeter than the opening, in fact—along with more of the bitterness from the middle, although it is a bit more subdued in the finish even as it lingers pleasantly on the palate. The mouthfeel is better than Vicious—it is more full-bodied and rounded—but the hop flavor is better in Vicious. The carbonation lends a creamy element to the body as well, and tames some of the sharpness from the hops. Again, a good beer, but nothing that really stands out. Although the label has a rabbit with horns on it that is totally awesome. That’s an easy Top 10 Best contender—behold the jackalope, my minions!

From the North Peak website: “The devil made us do it. From the ABV and IBU figures to the fiendish use of Cascade, Perle, and Willamette hops, Lucifer was whispering in our ears the entire time. Citrus and pine scents greet you and are followed by the sharp bitterness expected of an IPA. The beer’s true wickedness is revealed in the smooth Pale, Crystal 30, and wheat malts that surreptitiously broaden the beer’s appeal to more than just hopheads.”

ABV: 6.6%
IBU: 66.6%

(2/3/2011)

449. North Peak Vicious American Wheat IPA

Located in Traverse City, Michigan, North Peak Brewing Company is a side project of Ron Jeffries. Yes, I know other brewers are involved (Jon Carlson, Greg Lobdell, and Mike Hall—I can read the website). But I’m here for the Jeffries. I’m just sayin’. They do get an extra-special shout-out for using old school stubby bottles—reminds me of the days of Lucky and Rheinlander. We had Vicious with some Reypenaer 2-year gouda—not because we thought they’d be a match, or because we’re overly excited about food and beer pairings, but mainly because aged gouda is awesome, and we had just bought some. And it couldn’t wait.

Vicious pours a burnished copper with a thin white head; the nose is caramel and wheat—more caramel than wheat—coupled with spicy and resin hop aromas. There’s a touch of pine hiding in the back as well. It’s rather a pleasant nose, actually; the malt and caramel are well-balanced. Flavors start with a caramel malt flavor before moving into hop flavor in the middle—there is pine and citrus along with the spicy resin components of the nose. The finish has a bit of a gummy wheat flavor along with a healthy dose of bitterness that lingers, along with a touch of caramel sweetness. The body is a bit soft and flabby, although that could just be the wheat talking—but it does feel a bit uneven in relation to the hop profile. While Vicious avoids the slight sourness found at the end of other American wheat beers, it is not as balanced in the body as Gumballhead, for example. The carbonation does help give the beer a creamy mouthfeel. Overall, I like it, but it is not stupendous.

From the North Peak website: “Beware of beer. There, we warned you. The frothy head, and pungent, piney dryhopped scent (from Cascade and Amarillo hops) should alert you to the brew’s imminent attack on your senses. Next, Cascade, Perle, and Willamette hops will batter your palette [sic] with bitter ferocity. Finally, pale, Crystal (30 and 75), and wheat malts converge in a cloudy, thick body and give you a smooth kiss of sweet death—and leave you howling for more!”

ABV: 6.7%
IBU: 66.7

Why does this beer attack my painting tablet with bitter ferocity? What did it do? What’s next, my pets?

(2/1/2011)